Christian right calls James Talarico "demonic" — for quoting Jesus
3d 2h ago by lemmy.cafe/u/resipsaloquitur in nottheonion from www.salon.com
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/48166923
James Talarico has been found guilty of quoting Jesus. The sentence he uttered, according to right-wing media, was “demonic” and “blasphemous,” exposing him as a “fake Christian.” Talarico is running for the U.S. Senate in Texas on a platform The New Yorker recently described as basically the New Testament. One Newsmax host accused him of using fake Bible passages.
The passages in question are familiar ones, found in Matthew 22 and Matthew 25. Love God and love your neighbor. Feed the hungry, heal the sick, welcome the stranger. They are, in fact, in the Bible.
The right’s attacks on Talarico aren’t about him, or at least not entirely. They’re about a much older argument — one progressive Christianity has been losing in public for 50 years — about whose version of the faith gets to count as real. The answer to that question has consequences far beyond any Senate race. When Christianity becomes a tool of power rather than a challenge to it, it doesn’t just damage the church. It destabilizes democracy. We are watching that happen in real time.
The “Christian” right should try reading the Bible more than listening to Fox News.
Faux News is their bible.
You lost them at "reading"
The Christian right is actually worshipping a false idol, taking His name in vain, and working to undermine the word of God by trying to force the starting of Rapture. The fools are so eager to not die they're killing the world.
Pronounced Faux Nooz. When you want to think, they will tell you what to think.
read? the bible?
Why?
The bible is nothing but a tool, a cudgel, used to beat others into submission. Its not like theres anything important inside of it.
I still maintain that they need to introduce a new Bible. One that's actually interesting and the people would read.
"Jesus Christ, the teenage years". I want a YA novel about Jesus' misspent youth running from Roman police.
you laugh, but the quran already exists
iirc there are books from the bible that cover Jesus's youth, but they are kept out to preserve the desired narrative.
Oh I know. That's what I mean, the Bible is it stands is boring and isn't engaging to anyone. That's why both Christians and non-Christians both failed to read it.
At one point Jesus has a brother, who presumably wasn't very successful which is why he's never mentioned again. Oh and there's also a dragon. At one point Jesus fights a dragon. Officially, Christians believe in dragons. Why are they hiding all of this, it's good stuff. I'd worship a dragon.
Most of them cant read above a 4th grade level and could not write a coherent essay on literally anything. So. Ya know. Ta-da!
“whatsoever you do to the least of mine you do unto me” right? that’s kryptonite for the GOP, suicidal empathy as they like to say these days
Pete Hegseth quoted a fictional passage and they said nothing.
I don't know the books and numbers so well, but there's literally a passage where Jesus says nonsense for five lines, and the pharisees all ponder it in deep contemplation, but he explains to his followers that it's not what he says that gets people to listen, it's the authority in which he spoke. Jesus was a confident man. A con man. And it changes the meaning of "Jesus said nothing," so those who attacked him were idoltarers who just wanted an excuse to be awful people to what would have been perceived to Pontius as a mentally disabled man.
anti-Christian right. There are no right-wing Christians. The whole concept is oxymoronic. It’s like meat-eating vegans or smart crypto bros.
It's not though, Christianity does not equal Jesus teachings as much as you wish it did. Christianity has been against Christ's message from day one. He literally says don't worship me, and then a religion worshipping him is born almost immediately.
Following “Christ” means doing the very very minimum of what “Christ” said to do. Anyone who believes otherwise is an illogical nihilistic moron.
Of course there are lots and lots of right wing Christians. The credentials to calling yourself Christian is exactly that: "call yourself Christian". There aren't any authority on who can call themselves Christian. There are authorities on whether you can join specific nominations, but there are countless of them, and in the end you can just make your own if that is your thing.
So arguing that they aren't Christians is using the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. If you call yourself Christian you are in the same group as these people, and it is a personal issue whether that is a problem for you or not.
This nihilistic attitude is exactly what people in power desperately want. The minimum requirement to any ostensible commitment to “Jesus” is abiding by “His” explicit commands.
That’s logically non-negotiable. Calling yourself Christian doesn’t make it so. And we are fools for failing to rub it in their anti-Christian faces.
Any true Scotsman though?
How did logic ever hurt you that you hate it so?
depends on who you ask.
As a tradition, orthodoxy has it. As an active form of magical practise, the gnostics have it (watch out for fakes lol) As an expression of the Holy Spirit, atheists who perform good for its own sake have it.
When Christianity becomes a tool of power
When? We are far beyond that point...
When? The day after Jesus died ( the second time)
He promised to come back, but it seems he realized what an immense fuck up it'd be. He could at least say "Guys, I'm not coming back anymore, ok?"
Religion was always a tool of power. Men in robes making making shit up to control others. Tribalism is our downfall.
Yeah, people remember hippie Jesus from the 1960's and forget the 1,500 years Christianity propped up monarchical feudalism. Forget it, guys: religion will never lead people to the promised land. The human instinct to us/them is too strong and religion is an accelerant to that more that it ever will be for neighborly love.
The only real question in this race, and its a very real question, is whether or not Texans are capable of thinking for themselves or not. A very open question.
Which is why republicans have spent 50 years trying to undermine and destroy the American Education System.
If you sabotage the system, so kids cant learn how to think, investigate, or question.. then it becomes super easy to pump out new generations of conservatives.
Christianity, like ALL religion, has ALWAYS been a "Tool of Power." That's all it's ever been. It's the very reason for it's existence.
Yeah, I was like "wdym when it becomes a tool of power"?
No no no you see they weren't True Christians, as defined by my interpretation of the Bible. Doesn't count.
They are just pissed he called them out. If they were smart enough to understand the Bible, they would have to admit they are the bad ones in the book. Luke 18, 9-24...
Well Satan himself quotes Jesus so I guess sure
Or herself.. eh? Think about it...
I mean, literally "him" from the Powerpuff girls:
Tool of power? You mean when the Catholic church was founded?
Funny thing they did back in ye olde times (circa 200-300 AD), back when there wasn't an "orthodox christianity", which was accumulate power and declare every other type of christianity heresy
to be fair demons are closer to "god" than evangelicals to jesus/christianity.
Well, modern day American Christians are exactly the opposite of what Jesus and Christianity stand for, so I get it that they see Jesus as demonic.
Hmm neither article actually gives us the controversial quotation, just gets right to the apologetics.
Don't read the article, upvote if you like the sentiment I guess, but it's a waste of time to read.
The passages in question are familiar ones, found in Matthew 22 and Matthew 25. Love God and love your neighbor. Feed the hungry, heal the sick, welcome the stranger. They are, in fact, in the Bible.
Not only is it in the article, it's quoted in the post above.
That's not a quotation, that's a paraphrase. What did Talarico specifically say that people reacted to? Was it the actual verses? If so, which translation (using a modern-language translation alone could draw that condemnation from some commenters).
It quoted Talarico, at a different event, saying "Politics is just another word for how you treat your neighbors", but that's not the thing they were reacting to.
I'm curious to know specifically what he said that pissed people off, because the details are important when you're popcorning monotheistic textual sectarian religious spats.
So what's your position, that there's a possibility that he did say something demonic and its all being misconstrued to make people "feel good?" For someone who's so interested in 'just asking questions,' you don't seem very interested in finding answers.
The article links to the sources of this controversy in the very first paragraph by the way.
If so, which translation (using a modern-language translation alone could draw that condemnation from some commenters).
Yeah I'm sure Fox News is hotly debating the merits of Hebrew vs Aramaic vs Greek.
In the Old Testament, only the books of Daniel and Ezra were written in Aramaic; the rest is Hebrew. All of the New Testament was written in koine Greek, though the Gospels quote short phrases of Jesus's speech that are in Aramaic, which was his primary language (there's some evidence that people in Galilee knew Greek, and he might have also known Hebrew, which was still spoken by the Samaritans as well as being the liturgical language of the Jewish religion).
The original languages of both testaments is disputed by scholars, there's evidence both were written originally in Greek (the OT no earlier than 200BC) and translated later into Hebrew, Aramaic, etc. Hebrew was basically a dead language at the time the Old Testament was written, having around 8000 words, and the OT seems to draw heavily from Greek mythological texts available at the time through the Library of Alexandria.
Greek was the lingua franca of the time and Judea, Galilee and Bethlehem were thoroughly conquered at this time and Jesus and the disciples were native Greek speakers. The ruins of synagogues unearthed from the centuries near the crucifixion had Greek text on the walls.
In my opinion, anyone who tries to talk about the Bible but has a lack of understanding of the Grecoroman world is missing 90% of the picture. The most authentic texts are the Greek ones, the Seputagints for the Old Testament and the Greek versions for the New Testament.
Anyone interested in learning ancient Greek is fortunate right now as Dr. Ammon Hillman has a free 2 week intensive course up on his non monetized youtube channel along with a vast amount of supplementary material.
using a modern-language translation alone could draw that condemnation from some commenters
You're hinting that it's in some sense invalid to quote the New Testament in some other language than Greek or something?!
I think you want to scrape the bark off two trees in the hope that once you're done people won't see the forest.
There is a pretty significant portion of America Christians who believe than any translation besides the 1611 King James version of the Bible is blasphemous, nevermind that they are probably reading the 1769 version, but what matters is what think is the 1611 version.
There's also a smaller but still significant portion of American Christians who juggle snakes and roll around in the aisles of their churches speaking in tongues.
And some fundies believe that, not only is the KJB the definitive text, but that ol' JC spoke English.
It's never wise to underestimate the lumpen stupidity of fundamentalists. They are largely morons led by con artists (though there are a depressingly small number of exceptions).
I'm from a region with snake handlers and it is fascinating! Highly encourage anyone reading this to look more into it.
RTFB[ible]. It says which passages were quoted; look them up yourself if you're that fucking worried about it!
At least, that's what you would do if you were actually "curious" and not concern trolling.
I went to Episcopal school and Matthew is the only book I actually liked. But ok sure.
Then why were you even asking when you already knew?
Your bitching was like complaining about a footnote citation because they didn't copy and paste the entire referenced work into the middle of the article for you.
Oh shit, careful guys this one is for real
https://www.texasobserver.org/senate-james-talarico-presbyterian-christianity/
References a Colbert appearance, quoting and linking:
Talarico often says he learned from his Baptist preacher grandfather that Christians “follow a barefoot rabbi who gave us two commandments: Love God and love neighbor—because there is no love of God without love of neighbor.” That’s a reference to Matthew 22:36-40, one of Talarico’s go-to, and definitely non-“fake,” scripture passages. And as Talarico told Stephen Colbert, it has radical implications: We are to love our neighbor “regardless of race or gender or sexual orientation or immigration status or religious affiliation.”
Another of Talarico’s go-to Gospel passages, Matthew 25:35-40, directly links love for Jesus with care for the hungry, the stranger, and the imprisoned. For many evangelicals, this passage refers mainly to a future end-times Tribulation. For Talarico, by contrast, it is manifestly current and intensely political. Here’s how he deploys it in the Colbert appearance:
“For 50 years, the religious right … convinced a lot of our fellow Christians that the most important issues were abortion and gay marriage … two issues that Jesus never talked about. Jesus in Matthew 25 tells us exactly how you and I and every one of our fellow believers [are] going to be judged and how we’re going to be saved: by feeding the hungry, by healing the sick, by welcoming the stranger.”
Awesome, thanks.
That's because the problem is not whether or not he was exact in his quotation. He could have been reading those passages directly from the book and they would have still had a cow.
And the article actually nails the reason why quite well: those passages are inclusionary, and really points out how these Nationalist Christians are distorting that message. They have turned their form of American Christianity into only caring about abortion, guns, and how evil immigrants and trans people are. But the Jesus in that book loves everyone, unconditionally, and calls his followers to love everyone too.
If Jesus were alive today, the Nat-C's would have sent him to CECOT already. (It doesn't help his case that he's a brown-skinned Palestinian Jew....)
But the Jesus in that book loves everyone, unconditionally, and calls his followers to love everyone too.
He also whipped the temple merchants and berated his disciples who went around getting coins in his name. Makes one wonder
It literally links to BibleGateway. Or did the first three paragraphs make you so cross that you stopped reading then and there?
Counterpoint: test everything against what you KNOW to be true.
Yall need Jesus
Both the real Christians and the fake ones can get in the sea because they're both as bad as each other. The Catholic church covers up horrendous crimes and the American televangelists take advantage of the most vulnerable in society. Neither of them actually practise the religion they claim to represent.