faggots
(twitter.com)
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
Toast message
The entire moral lynchpin of the parable of the good Samaritan is that "neighbor" transcends racial boundaries. "Neighbor" is the person in front of you, with particular reference to *physical proximity.* The man (going from *Jerusalem to Jericho)* is strongly implied to be jewish. The entire reason that the Samaritan's charity is so charged is because he is extending it to a racial outsider, and one he has natural cause to be hostile towards at that.
Jesus himself would *rebuke* you for thinking you can shrink the definition of neighbor to just your racial kin. You are morally bound by your own faith to give of yourself to *anyone* in need, regardless of how they ended up in your path.
Seriously, you people can parse that the messaging in Hollywood media products is pozzed, but not this shit?
> What society would YOU rather live in: Fake christianity? The jew? Or the merciful brotherhood of Christ?
We're currently living all of the above simultaneously. All the Catholic beaners and Christian Haitians entering your country are your brothers in Christ by definition, per Galatians 3:28.
It says the opposite of your argument.
>Jesus himself would rebuke you for thinking you can shrink the definition of neighbor to just your racial kin.
Nope. “Embrace your neighbor as your brother.” Does your brother live in your house? Eat your food? Command your family?
Fuck off, retard.
>All the Catholic beaners and Christian Haitians entering your country are your brothers in Christ by definition, per Galatians 3:28.
Ye shall know them by their fruits. What are their fruits, exactly?
It doesn't.
> Nope. “Embrace your neighbor as your brother.” Does your brother live in your house? Eat your food? Command your family?
How about you address the text I actually quoted instead of referencing a verse that doesn't even exist?
> Ye shall know them by their fruits. What are their fruits, exactly?
It only takes a single one of them who passes the rubric of Christian charity (and they do exist, particularly among beaners) to render this point inert.
It does.
>How about you address the text I actually quoted
I did.
>instead of referencing a verse that doesn't even exist?
[Shoot yourself, jew.](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2012&version=KJV)
>Having then **gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us**, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith… **Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love**; in honour preferring one another;
The crux of this is that you’re pretending (like every jew does) that we have to treat nonbelievers the same as believers.
>It only takes a single one of them who passes the rubric of Christian charity (and they do exist, particularly among beaners) to render this point inert.
lol, *“he raped fifty children but then he gave to charity so it’s okay!”* No one will ever believe that bullshit.
Ad nauseum.
> I did.
You didn't. *I am challenging you to address the parable of the good Samaritan, without fleeing into abstract rhetoric.*
> Shoot yourself jew.
*Who's* being jewy with phonetics? If you were confident in your position, you would've quoted the verse outright instead of grossly reframing the wording and then presenting it as a direct quote.
> The crux of this is that you’re pretending (like every jew does) that we have to treat nonbelievers the same as believers.
I have no idea how tf you came to this conclusion. I'm talking about racial implications *among* believers.
Even if you can make the argument that believers of your own race are closer to you in worth and duty than believers of other races (which I do lend some level of exegetical legitimacy to,) the fact that you have to consider nons "spiritual brothers" under a single banner is a huge problem in itself. And the overwhelming majority of Christians don't even bother with that distinction.
It also doesn't free you from Jesus's teaching to help anyone in need that you find before you, race notwithstanding. The very same chapter you linked includes:
> 19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
> 20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
.
> lol, “he raped fifty children but then he gave to charity so it’s okay!” No one will ever believe that bullshit.
Non sequitur. Even if those peoples as a whole are wicked, there *are* non European Christians who have lived lives well enough in line with Christ's teachings that you can't just hand wave them all away as subhuman monsters.
And if you insist on the Christian framework, you don't get to derisively dismiss the "not all X" argument. Christianity is *built* on drawing attention to the outliers, and elevating them as worthy of God's grace.
It’s not working, jew.
>you would have quoted the verse outright
Did that. Linked directly to it. It’s not working, jew.
> I'm talking about racial implications among believers.
There is no mandate to allow infinity browns into our country. It doesn’t exist. You need to get over it.
> the fact that you have to consider nons "spiritual brothers"
# WHERE. DOES. YOUR. BROTHER. LIVE? DOES. HE. LIVE. IN. YOUR. HOUSE? DOES. HE. EAT. YOUR. FOOD? DOES. HE. MAKE. YOUR. DECISIONS?
There is no problem. There is just you. And your lies.
>It also doesn't free you from Jesus's teaching to help anyone in need that you find before you
Psst. I find my race before me.
> Non sequitur
Direct example.
>there are non European Christians who have lived lives well enough in line with Christ's teachings that you can't just hand wave them all away as subhuman monsters.
Okay? They’re not coming into my country, though. I don’t have to let them in.
>And if you insist on the Christian framework, you don't get to derisively dismiss the "not all X" argument.
I do, yeah. I don’t have to accept any fallacy from any source.
> The man (going from Jerusalem to Jericho) is strongly implied to be jewish.
lol OK
The levite is the jew, the priest is the failed christian and the samaritan is your kin. Jesus himself recognized the distinction between actual and fake Christianity, which is why it was a priest, not a commoner, who kept walking.
There's as much evidence to suggest the samaritan is of kin, if not more so, than he is not.
> Jesus himself would rebuke you for thinking you can shrink the definition of neighbor to just your racial kin. You are morally bound by your own faith to give of yourself to anyone in need, regardless of how they ended up in your path.
Yeah, except I don't consider sub IQ feral animals to be men, let alone my kin.
> We're currently living all of the above simultaneously.
Yes. The hell that jews created.
> All the Catholic beaners and Christian Haitians entering your country are your brothers in Christ by definition, per Galatians 3:28.
^^ This guy believes niggers are men lol
Foreign invaders forced through the gates by the jew aren't my brothers or my kin. But again, nice of you to conflate modern jewish NGOs with the good moral teachings of Christendom. It's practically a 1:1!
Not the roast you think it is. I *wasn't* interpreting the text initially, but did so in the next message when you displayed a failure to pick up on the subtext.
Kind of like you did here.
> “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”
> “For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility… his purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two.”
> “For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
> “After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb.”
> “Then Peter began to speak: ‘I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right.’”
If you want to argue that non-whites can be Christian, but shouldn't be in your country, that's impotent, but logical. But trying to claim that Christianity doesn't consider the other races human at all is a nonstarter. That is delusional.
That's what I said initially. Didn't stop you from disagreeing.
> Kind of like you did here.
Yeah, except I never quoted any of that lol
> That is delusional.
I don't think so. These arguments are what's going to be required moving forward if there is any hope of building a moral, high trust society like NatSoc Germany did.
Regardless, the fact of the matter is you *ARE* interpreting the text, just as many others have and will continue to do. What's curious about your interpretations is that they're only done *against* Christendom.
You seem very smug about criticizing a belief system that has kept the yid on the back foot for almost 2000 years. Throwing its entire legacy away because of modern small hat subversion is magnitudes more delusional than anything I've said.
They’ve been thrown out of every single civilization they’ve inhabited, Christian or not. And you’re trying to ascribe that credit to Christianity?
It’s literally standard operating procedure to remove the jew from your country. It’s nothing special.
Maybe if Christianity was based, they would’ve been fully exterminated by now, especially when “real Christianity” was being practiced.
But alas, it did nothing to prevent the genocide of millions of white christian russians, nor is it doing anything to save western civilization today. You guys are clinging to a losing self destructive mentality.
Considering most of the expulsions came from Christian nations... Do you even think about your asinine arguments?
https://archive.org/details/TheCompleteListOfThe1030JewishExpulsionsInHumanHistory/page/n25/mode/2up
> Maybe if Christianity was based, they would’ve been fully exterminated by now, especially when “real Christianity” was being practiced.
As opposed to what? Where's your magical machination, historical or otherwise, that has gotten rid of the jew? It doesn't exist because all other religions play catch up to Christianity when it comes to naming, ousting and persecuting the jew.
If Christianity can't get it done, whatever modern/ancient horseshit you dredge up certainly won't cut it, and hasn't.
Christ is King.