Jesus was a racist

flashleg8 · Post by **flashleg8** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:42 am

I’m posting this because something came up in one of the other religion threads (hard to keep a track of them all!) that someone said that Jesus stood for brotherly love and was against racial discrimination.

Sorry, but I don't buy this - I think the guy was clearly racist, in particular against the Samaritans.

From Jesus’ own words (recorded in Luke 10:25-37 The Parable of the Good Samaritan) we can see that Jesus was racist. This parable is often held up by some Christians to show that Jesus was against discrimination but in actual fact it clearly shows he holds racialist prejudices and is guilty of stereotyping.

In the parable a man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was robbed, stripped of his clothes, beaten and left half dead.
Jesus says a priest (obviously an upstanding member of the community at this time) and a Levite (a favoured person who would perform special religious and political duties), seen him but passed by on the other side.
Then he says “but a Samaritan, as he travelled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him”

Got that? Well let me explain – the Samaritans were an ethnic group despised by the Jews at this time. Now Jesus uses this parable to show that people should love their neighbour but to me it just shows Jesus held racist stereotypes. First he has two people who are supposed to be good/clean/respectable pass by then he has someone who is supposed to not be good/clean/respectable doing the helping – if he wasn’t racist why did he use Samaritans in this example? Why would a Samaritan person not stop and help? Are they some how morally inferior to the first two people? They wouldn't stop to help a half dead man?
What he's really saying is that you should love all your neighbours no matter how bad they are, but he’s not saying Samaritans aren’t bad!

Let me put the parable another way. A guy gets robbed, left at the roadside etc and a doctor sees him but walks by, then a policeman sees him but walks by, but a black man stops to help him. Whoa, you could see that would clearly be racist – by stating this in the parable I am exposing prejudices against black people.

Get it?

jay_a2j · Post by **jay_a2j** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:44 am

These baseless threads are getting ridiculous.

Jamie · Post by **Jamie** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:52 am

Yeah, if a black man stopped to help me after I was robbed, and beaten, that would certainly make me racist against them.

flashleg8 · Post by **flashleg8** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:58 am

jay_a2j wrote:These baseless threads are getting ridiculous.

What's baseless? I feel as if I've constructed a logical argument, if you want to debate against it feel free to do so - not just reject it out of hand.

Jamie · Post by **Jamie** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:07 am

flashleg8 wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:These baseless threads are getting ridiculous.
What's baseless? I feel as if I've constructed a logical argument, if you want to debate against it feel free to do so - not just reject it out of hand.

It's totally baseless. You're point is that Jesus is racist because he told a story in which the Good person in the story was a samaritan. He cast the Samaritan in a GOOD light. If I told a story about a black boy scout walking an old lady across a street, would that make me racist? If Jesus had said that the man was robbed by Samaritans, as Samaritans tend to do, that would be racist. If I were robbed by a black guy, i would tell the police that the man was black, but that doesn't make me racist. If the Cop asked what the guy looked like, and I said, well he robbed me, so you know he had to be black, THAT, would be racist. Telling a story, whether it is fact or fiction, and casting a certain race in a good light does not make the storyteller racist, unless you are talking about REVERSE racism, ie, hiring a man for a job because he's black, over a white guy who was equally qualified, and you did so to avoid looking racist, that is reverse Racism, and at most, Jesus MIGHT be guilty of that.

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:10 am

There is no such thing as reverse racism. Racism is racism.

jay_a2j · Post by **jay_a2j** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:13 am

flashleg8 wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:These baseless threads are getting ridiculous.
What's baseless? I feel as if I've constructed a logical argument, if you want to debate against it feel free to do so - not just reject it out of hand.

You are injecting meaning into scripture that is not there. Jesus came and died for ALL men. (including Samaritans) This parable has similarity to the Rich man who gave a bag of gold, while the poor woman gave but 2 gold coins (all she had). Now which is the bigger gift to God? The bag of gold from the rich man who had plenty more where that came from. Or the poor woman who gave ALL she had.

The parable which you are talking about has a beaten man lying on the side of the road. Two "upstanding" members of the community passed him by. But the Samaritan, despised by Jews, helped the man. Of the 3 men who do you think did Gods will? It has nothing to do with racism. That was injected by you.

flashleg8 · Post by **flashleg8** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:21 am

jay_a2j wrote:
flashleg8 wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:These baseless threads are getting ridiculous.
What's baseless? I feel as if I've constructed a logical argument, if you want to debate against it feel free to do so - not just reject it out of hand.

You are injecting meaning into scripture that is not there. Jesus came and died for ALL men. (including Samaritans) This parable has similarity to the Rich man who gave a bag of gold, while the poor woman gave but 2 gold coins (all she had). Now which is the bigger gift to God? The bag of gold from the rich man who had plenty more where that came from. Or the poor woman who gave ALL she had.

The parable which you are talking about has a beaten man lying on the side of the road. Two "upstanding" members of the community passed him by. But the Samaritan, despised by Jews, helped the man. Of the 3 men who do you think did Gods will? It has nothing to do with racism. That was injected by you.

No, still don't think so. I've had a quick search to see if he spouts anymore racial intolerant stuff and I came up with these gems.

Matthew 10:5

These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans"

In other words "Right enough lads - go help our lads but stay away from the ghettos"

John 4:22

You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews

Or "Your kind are stupid, we're the chosen ones"

The man's a card carrying anti-samaritic! (if I can invent such a word)

Jamie · Post by **Jamie** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:26 am

wicked wrote:There is no such thing as reverse racism. Racism is racism.

Yes there is. I did a 15 page report on racism in my college psychology class, and a few paragraphs were about reverse racism. The notes I used for the report came from books in the college library, the professors own words, and the textbook we used. Specifically, reverse racism is when you make a decision based on race, but the decision is designed to make you look, unracist, so by proxy, you still committed a racist act, due to the person who got left out in the cold because of his race, even though, he might have been the same race as you.

Jamie · Post by **Jamie** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:31 am

Hey flashleg8, people might take you more seriously if you didn't have a "Geico Cave Man" as your avatar

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:33 am

I agree there's that term out there, but in the real working world, every HR dept will tell you that racism is racism. Look at your definition again... that act is still racism, no reverse about it.

jay_a2j · Post by **jay_a2j** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:35 am

flashleg8 wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:
flashleg8 wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:These baseless threads are getting ridiculous.
What's baseless? I feel as if I've constructed a logical argument, if you want to debate against it feel free to do so - not just reject it out of hand.

You are injecting meaning into scripture that is not there. Jesus came and died for ALL men. (including Samaritans) This parable has similarity to the Rich man who gave a bag of gold, while the poor woman gave but 2 gold coins (all she had). Now which is the bigger gift to God? The bag of gold from the rich man who had plenty more where that came from. Or the poor woman who gave ALL she had.

The parable which you are talking about has a beaten man lying on the side of the road. Two "upstanding" members of the community passed him by. But the Samaritan, despised by Jews, helped the man. Of the 3 men who do you think did Gods will? It has nothing to do with racism. That was injected by you.
No, still don't think so. I've had a quick search to see if he spouts anymore racial intolerant stuff and I came up with these gems.

Matthew 10:5

These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans"

In other words "Right enough lads - go help our lads but stay away from the ghettos"

John 4:22

You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews

Or "Your kind are stupid, we're the chosen ones"

The man's a card carrying anti-samaritic! (if I can invent such a word)

hehehe

Notice your explanation of these verses are not in scripture. They are how you are reading them.... out of context and all. BTW....the Jews are the chosen ones.

jay_a2j · Post by **jay_a2j** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:39 am

Jamie wrote:Hey flashleg8, people might take you more seriously if you didn't have a "Geico Cave Man" as your avatar

A premium Conquer Club Membership....... $20

A computer to play it on .......................... $1000

Humor at a Conquer Club Forum.............. PRICELESS!

flashleg8 · Post by **flashleg8** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:41 am

Jamie wrote: If I told a story about a black boy scout walking an old lady across a street, would that make me racist?

That’s exactly my point. Why mention his race? It’s solely used to plug in to the connotations that this implies. All Jesus is doing is reinforcing this stereotype. He could have used any 3 examples - why a Samaritan?

Your other point about being robbed by someone and relating his colour to the police is of course correct as a physical description is needed, this shouldn't be racist.

Your point about reverse racism has some merits but positive discrimination (I think maybe you call it affirmative action in the states?) is used really as a last resort when minority groups (not just races, but social classes and gender [although that’s not minority!]) are under-represented in some occupation or social position. This has to be done as the present system appears to discriminate against some groups and needs to be helped.

jay_a2j · Post by **jay_a2j** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:46 am

PLEASE don't get me started on Affirmative Action and how racist it is. Minorities being "less represented"? Go get the qualifications for the job in which you are applying for! A man/woman should be hired based on HIS or HER qualifications NOT what ethnicity they are.

flashleg8 · Post by **flashleg8** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:59 am

jay_a2j wrote:PLEASE don't get me started on Affirmative Action and how racist it is. Minorities being "less represented"? Go get the qualifications for the job in which you are applying for! A man/woman should be hired based on HIS or HER qualifications NOT what ethnicity they are.

What about the police or the army? I can't speak for the US (although I'm pretty sure you have similar problems in the police) but in the UK ethnic minority groups are vastly under represented. This is partly due to the historic institutional racism present in these sectors which failed to promote black officers and also the cultural fact that some black/Asian people feel (rightly or wrongly) that the police are their enemy. In short it has nothing to do with their education. A good ethnic mix is essential for the police to build trust in all sectors of the community and as for the army - well, don't think there would be the same problems in Iraq if the peacekeeping forces were Muslim - or at least had a good idea of local sensibilities - rather than the Gung-ho attitude displayed.

DIRESTRAITS · Post by **DIRESTRAITS** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:00 am

The reason the story uses a Samaritan is to tell the Jews that they should help everybody, even those they despised

flashleg8 · Post by **flashleg8** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:04 am

DIRESTRAITS wrote:The reason the story uses a Samaritan is to tell the Jews that they should help everybody, even those they despised

Exactly! Nothing to do with Samaritans being the same as Jews, nothing anti-rascist at all about it - just another "Love your enemy" speech.

DIRESTRAITS · Post by **DIRESTRAITS** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:05 am

flashleg8 wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:The reason the story uses a Samaritan is to tell the Jews that they should help everybody, even those they despised
Exactly! Nothing to do with Samaritans being the same as Jews, nothing anti-rascist at all about it - just another "Love your enemy" speech.

No, he was saying that everyone deserves help

Jamie · Post by **Jamie** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:25 am

flashleg8 wrote:
Jamie wrote: If I told a story about a black boy scout walking an old lady across a street, would that make me racist?
That’s exactly my point. Why mention his race? It’s solely used to plug in to the connotations that this implies. All Jesus is doing is reinforcing this stereotype. He could have used any 3 examples - why a Samaritan?

Your other point about being robbed by someone and relating his colour to the police is of course correct as a physical description is needed, this shouldn't be racist.

Your point about reverse racism has some merits but positive discrimination (I think maybe you call it affirmative action in the states?) is used really as a last resort when minority groups (not just races, but social classes and gender [although that’s not minority!]) are under-represented in some occupation or social position. This has to be done as the present system appears to discriminate against some groups and needs to be helped.

You can tell someones race ina story, even if it doesn't improve the story to do so, simply to give the persn hearing it, a more accuarate vision of what happened. If i come home, and say to my wife, "Hey you know what this Mexican guy at the store told me?" It's totally pointless to describe the person's race in this instance, as the story would most likely go on to have nothing to do woth the guys race, but you still say it, so that in this case, my wife, would envision a Mexican person telling me something. It's not racist to describe a persons race ina story. It's just descriptive. That's what Jesus was doing in his parable.

jay_a2j · Post by **jay_a2j** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:27 am

flashleg8 wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:PLEASE don't get me started on Affirmative Action and how racist it is. Minorities being "less represented"? Go get the qualifications for the job in which you are applying for! A man/woman should be hired based on HIS or HER qualifications NOT what ethnicity they are.
What about the police or the army? I can't speak for the US (although I'm pretty sure you have similar problems in the police) but in the UK ethnic minority groups are vastly under represented. This is partly due to the historic institutional racism present in these sectors which failed to promote black officers and also the cultural fact that some black/Asian people feel (rightly or wrongly) that the police are their enemy. In short it has nothing to do with their education. A good ethnic mix is essential for the police to build trust in all sectors of the community and as for the army - well, don't think there would be the same problems in Iraq if the peacekeeping forces were Muslim - or at least had a good idea of local sensibilities - rather than the Gung-ho attitude displayed.

If someone is being discriminated against, whether it be in hiring or promotion they should be brought up on charges. But a General in the Army needs to be the best qualified person for the job- race not an issue. Giving positions which require a much needed know-how, to someone less qualified because you need to fill a quota or be more "diverse" is just plain wrong.

Jamie · Post by **Jamie** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:27 am

Destroying flashleg8's point, so easy a caveman could do it.

Skittles! · Post by **Skittles!** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:33 am

Jamie wrote:Destroying flashleg8's point, so easy a caveman could do it.

You can't do it, so that must mean you're lower than a caveman, which isn't very low, seeming cavemen have enough intelligence to make weapons, ignite fire.. Etc.

Jamie · Post by **Jamie** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:35 am

Skittles! wrote:
Jamie wrote:Destroying flashleg8's point, so easy a caveman could do it.
You can't do it, so that must mean you're lower than a caveman, which isn't very low, seeming cavemen have enough intelligence to make weapons, ignite fire.. Etc.

Guess you haven't seen the commercials. Yeah, I think me, and a few others have done a pretty good job of unraveling his stupid point.

reverend_kyle · Post by **reverend_kyle** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:41 am

jay_a2j wrote:
Jamie wrote:Hey flashleg8, people might take you more seriously if you didn't have a "Geico Cave Man" as your avatar

A premium Conquer Club Membership....... $20

A computer to play it on .......................... $1000

Humor at a Conquer Club Forum.............. PRICELESS!

Hey retards people might take you more seriously if you knew what the hell you were talking about.