4 ms·

> he didn’t mean it as allow yourself to get killed. You know, what happened on Easter right?

• d3ckard 2y ago
  I do, according to christian doctrine Jesus sacrificed himself for humanity’s sins. That sacrifice wouldn’t be particularly meaningful if it came with expectation for everybody to follow through. As much as I am not a fan of this (or any other) religion, I’m pretty sure it’s not a suicide pact.
  • 1718627440 2y ago
    I think getting killed for your belief is exactly what Jesus was arguing for. It was also what all apostles did and the only cause for the next 300 years to be declared a saint. Jesus' death was special, because he was without sins, he was the son of God (YMMV) and, because was walking around afterwards physically (i.e. capable of touching and eating, etc.) on earth. I am not sure, why you name it suicide, because he didn't killed himself, he got himself killed. I do not think, that Jesus would defend "the agressor". But fighting in return is also not good, which is where "turning the other cheek" comes into play.
    • angra_mainyu 2y ago
      There's almost two millennia of counter arguments to the usual attempts to reframe Christianity as strictly "just suicide and turn the other cheek".
      • 1718627440 2y ago
        Suicide is a mortal sin, so I'm not sure, if we argue past each other. > reframe Christianity How is it reframing, when it is what it is all about? Can you elaborate about the counter arguments? Of course dying is not the only method of worshiping God and promote the faith, but it is quite effective. And giving the other option is killing people it is definitely the preferred way.