Jesus wouldn't quote the Bible. It was written hundreds of years after his death.
this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2025
148 points (94.0% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
35645 readers
3703 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Merely providing Bible quotes is probably the better decision though.
Yeah. Basically just acting as a pretty good search engine to find relevant quotes.
yeah but he's quoting from heaven
didn't they teach you anything in science class?
Also wasn't white
He might quote himself, which was then put in the Bible, tho.
Let's be correct here: the Christian Bible was canonized centuries after Jesus's death. That's not the same thing as being written.
I still appreciate the point you're making, though.
The New Testament was written after his death too, some parts of it earlier than others. I think it's also a pretty safe bet that there was a lot of editorializing over the centuries, since AFAIK the earliest surviving copies of anything are from the 2nd or 3rd centuries CE.
There's probably less editorializing than you'd think. At least less that was successful in being hidden. There are verses that we know we're added in later that seem like they fit in perfectly. Example: "for yours is the kingdom, the power, and the glory, now and forever" at the end of the Lord's prayer. That verse feels right at home there, but based on early copies and differences between copies as Christianity spread, we know that wasn't original.
Well, the gospels themselves are an example of editorializing. None of the gospels are written by the disciples themselves, most if not all of them were written after all the apostles would have been dead, and it is widely agreed that two of them (Matthew and Luke) are basically fanfiction spin-offs of Mark and a second, long lost source.
To clarify, I think by the time the stories were canonized, the narrative was likely more or less established. But in the 2-3 centuries before that I expect it to have been quite varied. We have no real way of knowing either way because there are very few surviving scraps of manuscripts from that early on.
Some parts of the bible are shown to have been written about 400 years later
I don't see where I said otherwise.
The implication is incorrect.
What is it that you think I was implying with my post?
This is the post you replied to
Jesus wouldn’t quote the Bible. It was written hundreds of years after his death.
The implication was that it was not correct because of a reply that starts with:
Let’s be correct here:
The original post says that "the Bible" was written "hundreds of years after [Jesus's] death." I consider this to be an incorrect statement. When someone says "the Bible," I wouldn't think of only the most recently composed passages, but as a whole, from Genesis to Revelation.
This doesn't mean that those recent passages weren't written hundreds of years after Jesus died, only that I wouldn't identify that point in history as "when the Bible was written."
Except english language discussions on writing would generally be fine with how the post you replied to is written.
If an author writes a book for several decades then publishes it we would generally say "it was written" up to the publishing date even if sections of the book had not changed significantly for decades before publishing it. So I think its completely correct english to say "The Bible was written hundreds of years after christ lived" even if parts of it were written when he lived.
I agree that its misleading but I disagree that it's incorrect because its correct linguistically and its correct in the broader point that essentially "Christ would likely not quote documents written after his existence" with the caveat being that he may quote documents that eventually found their way into the old testament unchanged.
I don't disagree that one can generally talk about books in that way, but given what I know about how biblical authorship, I think it's an incorrect (or as you say, misleading) way of describing the Bible specifically.
Of all the books that became canon in the Christian Bible, the most recent ones were written in the late 1st/early 2nd century CE. The later edits were additions, deletions, or alterations to these existing works rather than entirely new books on their own, and by the time those edits were made the books were already being used as scripture in Christian communities.
I'd liken it to The Hobbit. The first edition was published in 1937. In order to align more with The Lord of the Rings, a 2nd edition was published in 1951, and it contained significant changes to the the characterization of Gollum and the function of the One Ring. However, despite those changes, I would never say that, "The Hobbit was written in 1951."
My final note: you can see in my first post that I agreed with the sentiment of the post I was responding to: that, "Christ would likely not quote documents written after his existence," as you said. Many words have been put into the mouth of Jesus of Nazareth, because everything written about him came after he was too dead to make corrections.
He would and did quote the old testament. The prophets books were written at least a few hundred years before he lived, and those were the latest of the old testament to be written.
The new testament was written about 100 years after he lived, and canonized a few hundred years later.
The old testament did exist, and Jesus misquoted and misunderstood the fuck out of it.
Matthew 22:41-45
Jesus asks the pharisees how the messiah can be the son of David when David calls the holy spirit "lord," referring to psalm 110 whish starts "the lord said to my lord." It's a ridiculous claim to start with, but it's not even the correct understanding. The narrator is not David, they're recounting what happened to David. The lord (God) said to my lord (king David). At no time does David even speak in psalm 110.
And not in English
So how is this not blasphemy? Not that I care, mind you, but they're supposed to
"They" are supposed to do and be many things, which they usually do or are the opposite of. But covertly.
The people making this are almost always cynical, amoral, business-as-religion tech bros.
Of course its blasphemy that's why they do it. They love making a buck off gullible believers.
Who are these "they" you speak of? Do you mean the small handful of christians that actually adhere to their own religious texts?
load more comments
(2 replies)
The image looks rather a lot like the "Buddy Christ" from Dogma. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Buddy_christ.jpg
I see Christian bale
25“Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? 27And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life?g 28And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, 29yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? 31Therefore do not be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. 33But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.
34“Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.
You'd think a JesusGPT would remember the Gospels better than the letters Paul wrote decades after he died having never met him.
This just makes me want to try to get it to hallucinate a Bible verse that doesn't exist.... but it's not worth giving them the traffic to try.
I have a neighbor down the street named Jesus I gab with sometimes but he hasn't been out much because the government is trying to human traffick him into torture.
That first sentence had me startled.
EDIT: Looks at second text. Is this secretly Winn Adami?
She did her homework. Easily the best actor on that show, she was so perfectly hateable.
So umm "make no idols before me" really took a 180⁰ turn in this capitalist hellscape. Its almost like Jesus was hippie commie who wanted peace in the middle east and not generations of war and bloodshed against the native inhabitants of Jerusalem and the west bank
Why did they use a picture of Christian Bale?
Someone please hack this to only return Torah quotes and only in Aramaic.
The literal peak of AI psychosis, in your hands
First the pope throws a rave, now this 🤦
Afaik these things are not approved of by any churches or religious organizations.
If you ask them if Jesus would suck a dick to save a soul none of them give the correct answer.
And thus far, neither have you. Neither have you.
Ask him what that hole in his hand do
I need this
No, it's not. It's texting with an Ai bot pretending to be Jesus.
To be fair, AI is considerably more real than Jesus ever was.
No it's not. Jesus dit live at some point in history, although he was just a normal bloke. AI doesn't exist, even AGI doesn't even exist yet. We just have LLM's. It has not artificial intelligence or artificial general intelligence.
Just like actual Jesus this version also isn't real.
view more: next ›