• Dicska@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh but if I went ‘round sayin’ I was Emperor, just because some moistened bint lobbed a scimitar at me, they’d put me away.

  • BleakBluets@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    … symbolically eat his flesh, drink his blood…

    Unless you are Lutheran. In which case they believe Jesus has “real presence” during communion.

    Jesus said it, so it must literally be true, “is means is”.

    • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      this can’t be right. I was raised catholic and I have the word “transubstantiation” burnt into my brain. It means that the cracker and wine have actually become the flesh and blood. So no, it’s not symbolic for christians either

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, it’s not symbolic for Catholics.

        Plenty of other denominations look at you a little funny when you insist transubstantiation happens (and I’m pretty sure whoever started thst doctrine made the word up.)

        It was pretty obvious symbolic and metaphorical.

      • Captain_Waffles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yep, I remember struggling to learn to pronounce transubstantiation when I was 7 and in speech therapy because I was struggling to pronounce anything correctly. So I was just forced to practice it over and over and over again.

  • Johanno@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean I don’t think even there’s any god there but I think you should at least see the bible as a book that tries to explain the existence of humanity. People back then tried to explain why they are and why everything is. Then we have a few thousand years until they start to write down those stories. Those stories are so weird because people didn’t know shit. However the idea of two people creating humanity must be much older than the old testament since the Mayas had a similar belief where a God creates a man and woman.

    People who literally believe every word in the bible though are just stupid.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it’s neat that if you squint a bit, Genesis tells the story of the birth of Sol, Earth, evolution and finally human evolution.

      Couple of things created out of order, plants before sea life and such, but not too bad! And their punishment for eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge? Now that they’re smart, they’re no longer just hanging around the Garden picking up free food. They have to go out and invent agriculture and work. Now they know they’re mortal, understand death. Pain of childbirth? Big brains!

      Of course there are two creation stories in Genesis, I’m going with the first one.

  • unreasonabro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    naw see you have to expand on the myth. Jbro popped and then flew to teach yall monkeyass motherfuckers bout them muhfuggin lizzid people. Seen? lookout!

    • brambledog@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Except there largely is no explanation for these occurances in the Bible either. Almost all interpretations are not given in the text and are highly culture-dependent.

      The issue is that the claims of the Bible are insane.

    • mindbleach
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Aside from the word “baby” - that’s a pretty straightforward description. It’s not some Strange Planet defamiliarization. Even the parts about eating flesh are in the bible, in red ink.