The Pharisees were the liberals. God's law wasn't good enough, so they changed it to suit themselves, just as our modern-day liberals. Jesus was the conservative. He taught God's law as it is, He changed nothing. [...]
And so, the liberals killed Him as He was a threat to their self-serving religious and social liberalism. And so, Mopey claims Jesus was liberal to justify his own self-serving religious and social liberalism.
25 comments
So, wait, the guy who came in preaching an entirely NEW message was, in fact, the guy who supported the old ways? The one that broke the commandment telling them not to work on the Sabbath? The one that was crucified for defying the old ways? How exactly does this logic work?
See, what did I say about fundies turning language on its head?
Um ... wait, it was Jesus who told the Pharisees, "No, you can't let that woman off the hook, Mosaic law demands that she be stoned to death!"?
Wait, are you talking about those "people" who wanted Christ to adapt to Sabbath to neurotical levels because the scriptures say so, and wanted Christ not to socialize with sinners because the scripture says so............man, are you reading the Bible or a Brian's life?
Tiny Bulcher: Ghengis Khan wanted to slaughter the whole population of Northern China to make a huge grazing-field for the Mongols' horse... so, Ghengis Khan IS an animal rights warrior, weird enough.
Despite the expression "to the right of Ghengis Khan", he was also quite social-democratic.
You know, I coulda sworn it was the other way around. The pharisees were ultra-conservatives not unlike today's fundies, while Jesus was the standard-changing liberal.
Man, these people need a dictionary.
"He changed nothing.'
Correct.
Myths do that.
Nothing.
I've seen fundies speak for Jesus in ways which don't represent his documented character before but damn, this is like a complete reversal. This is just like they've gone into the Bible and swapped the names around. What good is a perfect and holy spiritual leader if you have to change his race, his name and even his views ?? In a few years they'll be telling us how Jesus taught us all we should desire money above all things and kill the poor. (wait, there are people teaching that as we speak)
Gjervan: On the other hand, one of Genghis's city conquests was done by telling the population that his demands were just about a thousand each of birds and cats. So the "tribute" was given to him. Then he proceeded to tie cotton onto the animals' tails and have the cotton set on fire. The panicked animals instinctively charged for the safety of home--in the city. With most of the populace busy trying to put out all those fires, Genghis had little trouble capturing the city.
Emphatically NOT something that PETA would approve of...
And that's why Jesus is remembered ! For changing absolutely nothing !
Seriously, did this guy ever red his "Holy book", or what ?
Yes indeed, the great liberal Roman Army occupation.
Wait,,,that's ridiculous.
I'm not surprised at this though, Republicans, far-right Christians and FoxNews has spent a lot of time changing "Liberal" or "Progressive" into dangerous or destructive. Liberal is a dirty word to these idiots now, the damn fundie word-redefinition project has gained way too much ground. If they keep this up they won't have to have their own dictionary, they'll succeed in changing the standards, keep a watch on Websters people.
I'm fairly sure it was the other way around...
But what do I know, I'm one of those dirty, self-serving lie-berals.
Actually, when you take the definition of conservative, that is, one disposed to preserving existing traditions or restoring traditional ones, the conservatives here would be the Pharisees. Jesus introduced new teachings, the Pharisees held onto old ones. To call the Pharisees conservative you would have to redefine the word conservative. It would be like saying water is dry.
Oh, and the political concept of 'liberal' didn't exist at the time of Jesus, so that's another irrelevant argument.
Well, granted, the Jesus of Matthew was pretty conservative, with is emphasis on how the law was unchangeable. But the Jesus of Luke talked a lot about caring for the poor and turning away from worldly wealth, teachings you would hardly associate with modern day American conservatives. The Jesus of Mark was a lot like the Jesus of Luke. The Jesus of John, by contrast, said very little besides "its all about me," not unlike a lot of conservative commentators.
We won't even consider the Jesus of Paul's epistles, since that Jesus seemingly did nothing of note except die.
So it looks like its kind of a toss up. If you want to settle the Jesus: liberal or conservative debate, the first thing you have to do is answer the question, "which one?"
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
