As Biblical Scholar Dan McClellan notes, the mores of the era are always changing, and so Christians of any era have to negotiate with scripture to recognize the mores of their time. Slavery is the common example, and slavery (yes, the lifelong forced-breeding and free sale slavery) is not just condoned but established in the old and new testaments, and so modern Christians have to find a justification to condemn it today.
But then they also have to find a justification why they don’t sell all their things and walk the earth preaching the gospel without concern for their own meals and shelter from the elements, as Jesus commanded. A big one, which comes not just from Christianity but from time immemorial and is consistent with ancient mores is the provision of hospitality to strangers and immigrants (on which the early United States was based). In fact, this was a principal sin against God that warranted the firebombing of Sodom and Gomorrah (The threat of rapine, of sexual assault as a means of public torture was the sin of sodomites against the angels. Buggery or Sodomy was actually a lesser wrongdoing, like an assassin parking in a disabled parking zone)
There are dozens of different commandments which disagree with modern interpretations of Christianity, with the ministry of James W. Fifield Jr. creating a lot of the interpretations that inform US conservatism and Christian Nationalism today, eventually steering so many ministries away from elevating the poor and hungry towards open judgement of undesirables and loud women, that even the Vatican focuses more effort today on restricting abortions and condemning LGBT+ folk than they do on feeding the hungry and enriching the poor. As one tweeter noted, Christianity now is all about licensed fucking.
Just because they find ways to adjust the texts to the times doesn’t mean the texts don’t say what they say. Yes I have heard that episode where Dan tries to contextualize the homophobic stuff away. Greco-Roman world had gay marriage and we are supposed to believe that Paul only understood gay sex in terms of dude raping his slave, when Paul specifically calls out lesbianism?
Stop apologizing, you know what the text says. The faster you can see what is literally on the page the faster you can leave religion
But sex was understood differently (as was gay marriage) in the classic age then as it is today. For instance consent wasn’t a thing.
And no, we can’t agree on what biblical text says, whether that’s about how it should be translated, which passages take priority over which others, what is parable versus what is literal and so on.
Yeah yeah consent wasn’t a thing. Which is why they had criminal and civil penalties for rape written on paper for over a thousand years prior. And which is why Cicero argued a rape case defense 8 decades prior to Paul. Stop making up stuff, you know they knew what rape was.
But sex was understood differently (as was gay marriage) in the classic age then as it is today.
Doesn’t matter. A slight difference in understanding doesn’t mean there are no laws.
And no, we can’t agree on what biblical text says,
I didn’t ask for your agreement.
whether that’s about how it should be translated, which passages take priority over which others, what is parable versus what is literal and so on.
All the games in the world won’t change what those passages say. Go ahead and try to square the circle
As Biblical Scholar Dan McClellan notes, the mores of the era are always changing, and so Christians of any era have to negotiate with scripture to recognize the mores of their time. Slavery is the common example, and slavery (yes, the lifelong forced-breeding and free sale slavery) is not just condoned but established in the old and new testaments, and so modern Christians have to find a justification to condemn it today.
But then they also have to find a justification why they don’t sell all their things and walk the earth preaching the gospel without concern for their own meals and shelter from the elements, as Jesus commanded. A big one, which comes not just from Christianity but from time immemorial and is consistent with ancient mores is the provision of hospitality to strangers and immigrants (on which the early United States was based). In fact, this was a principal sin against God that warranted the firebombing of Sodom and Gomorrah (The threat of rapine, of sexual assault as a means of public torture was the sin of sodomites against the angels. Buggery or Sodomy was actually a lesser wrongdoing, like an assassin parking in a disabled parking zone)
There are dozens of different commandments which disagree with modern interpretations of Christianity, with the ministry of James W. Fifield Jr. creating a lot of the interpretations that inform US conservatism and Christian Nationalism today, eventually steering so many ministries away from elevating the poor and hungry towards open judgement of undesirables and loud women, that even the Vatican focuses more effort today on restricting abortions and condemning LGBT+ folk than they do on feeding the hungry and enriching the poor. As one tweeter noted, Christianity now is all about licensed fucking.
Just because they find ways to adjust the texts to the times doesn’t mean the texts don’t say what they say. Yes I have heard that episode where Dan tries to contextualize the homophobic stuff away. Greco-Roman world had gay marriage and we are supposed to believe that Paul only understood gay sex in terms of dude raping his slave, when Paul specifically calls out lesbianism?
Stop apologizing, you know what the text says. The faster you can see what is literally on the page the faster you can leave religion
Religion isn’t an issue for me.
But sex was understood differently (as was gay marriage) in the classic age then as it is today. For instance consent wasn’t a thing.
And no, we can’t agree on what biblical text says, whether that’s about how it should be translated, which passages take priority over which others, what is parable versus what is literal and so on.
Yeah yeah consent wasn’t a thing. Which is why they had criminal and civil penalties for rape written on paper for over a thousand years prior. And which is why Cicero argued a rape case defense 8 decades prior to Paul. Stop making up stuff, you know they knew what rape was.
Doesn’t matter. A slight difference in understanding doesn’t mean there are no laws.
I didn’t ask for your agreement.
All the games in the world won’t change what those passages say. Go ahead and try to square the circle