this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
841 points (97.7% liked)

Microblog Memes

7690 readers
2371 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (8 children)

This is a level of stupidity and confident wrongness that I haven't seen in some time. I would say this is a ChatGPT disaster but even ChatGPT isn't this stupid. The incident on the road to Damascus was a description of a vision after Jesus's death. Neither Acts, nor any of the gospels mention Paul in the ascension story, and none of Paul's letters mention him knowing Jesus during his earthly life, witnessing the crucifixion, or the ascension.

Read Acts and tell me where Paul is before Chapter 8.

https://www.bible.com/bible/2016/ACT.1.NRSV

What about a search in the Bible for "Saul?" Hmmm nothing in Acts or the Gospels before Acts 8? Fascinating.

https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?qs_version=NRSVUE&quicksearch=saul&startnumber=1&resultspp=250

What about a search for "Paul?"

https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=paul&resultspp=250&version=NRSVUE

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (6 children)

I mean, ultimately you're both basically arguing over Star Wars about whether Han shot first or second. Its several non-fictional people tied together with a fictional story to push an agenda of control.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

You do realize the historicity of Paul is pretty robust and the common consensus amongst historians is Jesus was also a real person. Him being a real person doesn't mean he was a Messiah or had magical powers. But just deciding that anyone who was involved with the foundation of a religion didn't exist means you are founding your views on feelings instead of actual information.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

As I said, non-fictional people tied together with a fictional story.

Deciding that I said one thing, when simply looking up and seeing I didn't say it means you are founding your reply on feelings instead of actual information.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)