784
‘The President Is Right, The Pope Is Wrong’: Hannity Suggests Leo Has ‘Totally Lost Sight of the Bible and Its Teachings’ (www.yahoo.com)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
240 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Fox News host Sean Hannity dedicated a segment of his Thursday show to deliver a message to Pope Leo XIV, suggesting he and others at the Vatican had totally lost sight of the true meaning of the bible and its teachings.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 6 months ago (12 children)

What do you think it says?

There's no reason in the Bible to not be at war with Iran, or anybody else. Murder is used to punish the unworthy from beginning to end.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (11 children)

    There’s no reason in the Bible to not be at war with Iran, or anybody else.

    Have you read the Old Testament? Several genocides done in the name of Yahweh. Not going to defend Hannity, but the Pope was kind of wrong when he said:

    God does not bless any conflict. Anyone who is a disciple of Christ, the Prince of Peace, is never on the side of those who once wielded the sword and today drop bombs.

    Even Jesus himself said:

    34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 And a person's enemies will be those of his own household.

    Matthew 10:34-36

    Pretty much exactly the opposite of the Pope's tweet.

    Edit:

    Lol at people replying to me thinking that I'm somehow defending the Bible or the scum who use it. Just like pointing out that it's all complete nonsense

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Nothing like using a book from over two thousand years ago to justify why you think someone today is wrong.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (7 children)

    》 Matthew 10:34-36

    》Ignores all of the other many lines in the chapter saying not to fight

    Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Matthew 10:16

    Brother will delivef brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death, and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next, for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns before the Son of Man comes. Matthew 10:21-23

    It's almost like cherry-picking random lines to oppose other random lines isn't viable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (6 children)

    It's almost like the book is complete nonsense, and any attempt to quote it to defend any type of behavior is fucking stupid

    I assure you that I didn't ignore shit, my point was that it's all contradictory

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (5 children)

    You did ignore things, you were just consciously omitting text that reshape the meaning of your quote. Because, when taken in larger context, the meaning of quotes changes. Lile how language works.

    But I agree that quoting the Bible as if it were a collection of independent axioms needs to stop. I'm just not in favor of your Hammurabian approach to disproving it. Everything can look like bollocks when everyone uses shite methods of proof but for opposite positions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    you were just consciously omitting text that reshape the meaning of your quote. Because, when taken in larger context, the meaning of quotes changes.

    Preachers have been doing exactly that since before the Bible was codified by the council of Nicaea. And continue to do so in increasingly more outrageous ways.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah. That sucks.

    I'm of the belief that the Bible isn't some living, hold text. It's just a history book of the philosophy of Christianity, where the Old Testament is used as foundational context for the espoused philosophy in the New Testament. Pretending every word is divinely-inspired and every verse has to be Truth is weird and completely incorrect.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •