That's why it's important to remember that the Bible has Christ saying & doing lousy things, too. Most of my Christian friends lean on the good stuff, but Evangelicals lean on, say, his actual treatment of an outsider (the Canaanite woman, whom he calls a dog when he was sent for the children of Israel), and where he says he's come to divide families, and plenty more lousy parts. No "gotcha" here! Just the key reminder that Evangelicals have Biblical backing for their awfulness, too.
@MLClark @kenc313 in regards to scripture, your examples lack a bit of context. The dog reference was an explanation as to his focus. Afterwards the daughter was healed. The woman wasn't directly called a dog. It was a term for gentiles, in that period. As for division, that was referencing the choice people had to make to choose the godly path or to choose the godless path. Evangelicals pick and choose chop shop scripture to excuse their hate. They have ears, but do not hear
No, your context is incorrect. After his disciples ask him to send her away (showing their own views on outsiders), he tells her that he has come for the children of Israel and it would not be fit to give their food to the dogs. Only when she embraces her role in his social order of peoples, as a dog that can still eat scraps from master's table, that he says to go home, her daughter is healed. It's hateful stuff, but entirely in keeping with the prejudice of his time.
We can definitely agree to disagree. I don't raise the awfulness of many of Christ's words and actions to try to affect anyone's faith: only to illustrate a key part of the struggle against hateful actors in the world today. I suspect we're on the same "side" of that struggle, by and large, and I wish you great strength and fellow-feeling in your own pursuit of those better ends.
@MLClark @kenc313 indeed. We do align overall. I think interpretation is the root of many misconceptions or miscommunications. Thank you for your discussion, I wish you well in your endeavors as well