About
A community for the most based memes from atheists, agnostics, antitheists, and skeptics.
Rules
No Pro-Religious or Anti-Atheist Content.
No Unrelated Content. All posts must be memes related to the topic of atheism and/or religion.
No bigotry.
Attack ideas not people.
Spammers and trolls will be instantly banned no exceptions.
No False Reporting
NSFW posts must be marked as such.
Resources
International Suicide Hotlines
Non Religious Organizations
Freedom From Religion Foundation
Ex-theist Communities
Other Similar Communities
The context for this is that Jesus was telling his disciples about the consequences of spreading the Gospel: that they and any who followed them would be persecuted. That is, the implication is that his followers will be put to the sword, rather than living in peace; he's not encouraging them to use swords on other people.
He does, separately, assure them that terrible things will happen to people who were mean to them when he comes back, but that's not this verse, lol.
He also said that he would introduce strife into the world turning family against itself. Might be the only prophecy he got correct, how many LGBT people were disowned or tormented by their family for the first time today?
This is one of those times where I'm convinced this meme was made ironically by a Christian to say that atheists do take things out of context, because that's actually taken out of context
It's more a problem with Christians simply learning things from their priest/pastor and not reading the Bible themselves. The message of spreading peace on earth sounds good so it they're told that it's what Jesus said, they believe it without question. It's the same reason Christians are more susceptible to misinformation.
Yeah, they really don't like you pointing out that they cherry picked the bible when what they are saying is the opposite of what a quote means in full.
I'm curious if I'll get downvoted for this take, just bringing the facts regardless of the situation 😉
The problem here is that the meme did the same, and situational bias occurred in the reverse direction for you.
Peace on earth appears many times in the Bible in different contexts, many of them positive (as per a Google search, anyway).
Looks like you were upvoted
God works in mysterious ways.
The Bible said it multiple times, Jesus didn't. So saying Jesus said peace on earth is cherry picking what he actually said because the whole quote says differently. It's not situational bias, it's a fact.
Actually, when quoting this phrase from "the sayings of Jesus," they would not merely quote "peace on earth" as the saying (above) is rendered meaningless without the entire quote. When Xians (and others) allude to the "peace on earth" phrase (mostly around the Xmas holidays), they are not quoting Jesus but a supposed angelic messenger. Her/His/Its message reads, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men." And they'll fight anyone who disagrees with their "saying."
I will hail fire and sulfur over all your people and kill every single member of your house and your family with great pain and suffering for all eternity, unless you accept my message of peace and love.
Mostly Jesus argues for peace to the point that our powers that be have to make jus bellum arguments to justify going to war, say in retaliation against the 9/11/2001 attacks or the expansionist campaign of the German Reich.
「rant」
Personally I thought it would be a bold move of faith for George W. Bush to forgive the attackers and then request an act of good faith from the Taliban, say requiring them to charter and enforce human rights for all (including women, non-Muslims and apostates) or face a NATO backed military intervention.
But no instead we got a broadly defined war on terror, a nonsensical axis of evil and attacked Iraq and tortured people for no good reason, demonstrating the US is, indeed run by spoiled plutocrats. The US is in a sorry state
「/rant」
Notably, when Simon challenges Jesus to war against Rome (an abusive imperialist regime if their was one), Jesus is pretty clear that's not the Christian way.
When Peter stands to defend Jesus from arrest in Gethsemane, Jesus points out that's not how we do things.
As such the Church had to commission monks to write books of equivocation to justify that wars and regime changes the Holy See wanted to support, and it depends on those sophistic arguments to this day when the CDC wants to recommend a military response.
A more honest response might be Jesus condones no act of war, but we cannot afford to not respond to this threat to civilization. I suppose it would reveal the Church has multiple masters, but it does that anyway with money.
So Jesus was an NRA rep after all?