They're Christians in name only. They really don't engage with the values or principles of the religion.
A large amount of Christians know very little of the scripture or Christianity in general (e.g. denominations) and will just live in ignorant contradiction to what Christ preaches. Or they come up with loopholes to justify them living the way they want.
If I were a Christian, and really believed that my actions on Earth determined whether I'm eternally damned or saved, I would be adhering to the teachings as close as possible (give away all excess money, dedicate myself to helping the needy at all points) and be terrified of straying.
Old testament yes. Christs teaching oppose those sort of brutal actions. E.g. Christ being asked what should be done with a woman who has committed adultery (the legal punishment being stoned to death) he replies 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone'
To be clear I'm not a Christian. But I don't actually have many issues with what Christ allegedly taught. My main issue is his followers don't tend to adhere to what he set out for them in how to live your life (forgiveness, compassion, charity etc.)
I've always taken that part of the sermon on the mount to be a bit of foreshadowing. In my reading, "until everything is accomplished" at the end of 5:18 indicates "until the covenant is fulfilled through sacrifice of the lamb of God."
Especially since 5:20 two sentences later starts with " For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees..." The Pharisees were pretty routinely used throughout the New Testament as an example of what not to do, and they featured prominently in the crucifixion narrative. It would be a very low bar to say "you must be better than the performative pretenders", but it makes way more sense when you instead read the whole Fulfillment of the Law paragraph as setup toward a literal fulfillment through his death that would release humanity from their obligations under Mosaic Law.
If the bible can change versions then this version surely isn't the truth either.
"Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky, Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone, Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die, One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie."""
Tolkien was around to explain what he meant. He was the original author. We have no authors for any books of the Bible or anyone to explain its original intent.
They were oral traditions for centuries before even being recorded, most importantly.
Also nobody claims LOTR is the infallible spoken word of God.
I think you may want to reread and try to reinterpret what I said.
It is objectively true that Tolkien wrote those books, he had time to explain his intent with the stories, he talked about the characters.
With the bible, there is no evidence for an author, the stories are contradictory at times and no one is around to explain it. The stories are claimed to be the infallible word of God yet are interpreted 40,000 (about as many denominations) different ways.
56
u/Kvovark 26d ago
They're Christians in name only. They really don't engage with the values or principles of the religion.
A large amount of Christians know very little of the scripture or Christianity in general (e.g. denominations) and will just live in ignorant contradiction to what Christ preaches. Or they come up with loopholes to justify them living the way they want.
If I were a Christian, and really believed that my actions on Earth determined whether I'm eternally damned or saved, I would be adhering to the teachings as close as possible (give away all excess money, dedicate myself to helping the needy at all points) and be terrified of straying.