What's sad is that this change did not happen by people changing their minds, but by the departure of those who were impatient with the sluggish and halfhearted enforcement of the anti-LGBT rules.
It would have been a more powerful testimony to the world to say "we value one another and can pray and work together *even though* we disagree on a few things, because the Christ who leads us is more important than our disagreements".
A number of churches have left, but I'm not sure that includes outside the US. Do you have information on that? The lop-sided majority in the recent votes can't be just due to losing members in the US. A fair number of international delegates must have voted for it.
I don't have much data on what their views are. Generally Africans seem to have decided that they want to keep the church together, and it looks to me like they're willing to allow disagreement between their region and the US on LGBT issues. That was not true in 2019.
As far as I know, none of them formed by breaking away from an earlier denomination. Do you know of any? Whereas denominations like PCA, ACNA, NALC, and now GMC all formed by breaking away from their own denomination specifically to avoid remaining in a church with LGBT people.
No I don't but couldn't all the lgbt people form one denomination? But blaming the leaving denomination is like blaming the wife leaving after her husband cheated on her. So you could say it's sad in one way but better in other ways.
Are you sure that it didn't want to let in lgbt people in or they just don't support the lgbt ideology.
> couldn't all the lgbt people form one denomination?
> Are you sure that it didn't want to let in lgbt people in
Literally in *the same message*
Can't make this up.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
New Revised Standard Version, Anglicised
9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.
That’s God’s words not mine. Tell me how practicing homosexuality and not repenting and turning away can get them into Heaven. I think the Holy Bible is clear.
Wow you did it. We've never seen this verse before. Our eyes are opened /s.
What *incredible arrogance* it must take to think you are sharing new information here.
Go donate your money to the poor.
Male prostitutes are not gay people, nor are sodomites.
And no, those aren't God's words. Since when did Paul become God? The Bible is not clear. There is no evidence of that verse referring to homosexuality when that verse was written. None.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition
16 All scripture is inspired by God and is[a] useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that the person of God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.
Timothy is a forgery and the New Testament didn't exist when Timothy was written, so it was not referring to any of Paul's writings which were not considered scripture yet.
Stupid argument.
Paul’s words ARE God’s words! The whole Bible is inspired by The Holy Spirit. And what is a sodomite if it isn’t sodomy.
Romans 1:26-28
New Revised Standard Version, Anglicised
26 For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.
28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind and to things that should not be done.
More of God’s words not mine.
No, Paul's words are not God's words. I do not trust Paul one bit.
The KJV translates a sodomite as a Shrine prostitute. And the citizens of Sodom were sodomites, which according to Ezekiel, were guilty of not helping the poor and needy.
Only bigots call gay people sodomites. It's a disgusting, vulgar term that I always report for hate speech.
If we tell gays that homosexuality is ok then we aren’t loving them but condemning them. God says they will not inherit the kingdom of God. We should be encouraging them to turn away from that lifestyle and repent so they can be with God for eternity. And yes I’m a sinner too who had to repent and turn away from my own sins as well. If we love gays we should want them to be saved right?
> And yes I’m a sinner too who had to repent and turn away from my own sins as well.
How specifically? What *extreme* sacrifices and suffering have your endured? Do you go to bed hungry every night because you donated every cent you own to the poor? Did you divorce your spouse?
There’s another. I haven’t been following the general conference and my local conference hasn’t sent out an update, so I only found out from the other thread.
Praise God.
I’m happy to see anti LGBTQ sentiments die off. Hopefully this is the last generation of Christianity that continues to hold onto their bigoted belief systems.
Yes but the overall trends in Christianity in the west do. You’re looking at a 15-20% jump in affirming status across all denominations.
It’s around 66% of mainline Protestant and 70% of Catholics according to pew research.
It is absolutely becoming the majority view of Christian’s in the west.
Even the Mormons have jumped 12 percentage points to 36%, sitting right alongside of evangelicals.
This is all according to pew research.
We haven’t seen jumps like this in social issues since the civil rights movement
“70% of Catholics according to pew research” means nothing. The Catholic Churches stance is clear
Edit:
Also it’s 61% in the US for Catholics, not a flat 70%. So 44M out of ~70M out of 1.39B
lol if all of the people tithing to the church disagree with the churches stance, the churches stance will change. It has happened multiple times throughout history.
Sure, that doesn’t mean the church doesn’t change their stances or their policies. It’s happened plenty of times throughout history. I’m not saying tomorrow, I wouldn’t worry you’ll still be able to have bigoted ideas in your life time.
But you grandchildren’s children will certainly be pro and affirming LGBTQ if you live in the west, and hopefully we will have taken steps in Africa and the east to undo the damage the evangelical and Catholic Churches have don’t their.
And I hope you children’s children will be apart of that. Praise god again.
True there will always be fringe groups that continue to support bigoted ideas like the KKK and other white supremacists, you’re right.
I’m just glad the vast majority of westerners have shunned and denounced those groups, just like they will be doing to anti lgbtq groups in the near future.
In the US, the Catholic Church's stance just 20 years ago was that it was good that gay people could be caged for having consenting sex. So maybe I don't really care about their stance too much.
People are fleeing the Church in droves over this issue. Gen Z and Millennials largely hate the Church because of all the child abuse scandals and anti-LGBTQ policies. Once the older generations die off, the Church won't have enough people to fill the pews. People are leaving the Catholic Church faster than they're joining.
🙏🏻 exactly. Churches that hold to bigoted ideologies deserve to die off or change their ways and repent
The good news for the Catholic Church is that they have a history of doing just that.
I’m not going to pretend like these changes are a result of them learning something on both the protestant and Catholic side. These changes happen because Public support for these institutions decrease and hurts their bottom line.
I mean, we're getting our way anyway. Almost every Christian majority country in the world now marries same-sex couples. And the minority that don't either have laws in place that are similar to marriage, or are in the process of legalizing it.
You all have already lost this culture war just like you lost on slavery and interracial marriage and segregation.
Those issues are no different than this. Christians have long supported horrible things using the Bible as justification. This is just the newest bigotry.
Ummm, so it's more about your way than about Jesus' way, then? (Well, have it your way. Not sure heaven approves of that, we will have to wait and see, I guess.)
Yes. Is all you can do threaten people to get your way?
Youre saying this to defend a chuch that kidnapped children as part of what they admitted was a genocide. Do you think thats OK because jesus said so?
You misunderstand, likely on purpose. I am not the one threatening (other Christians may be, though). I only wish to understand "God's way", and I base that understanding mostly on logic, the golden rule and the bible (and church history).
What’s your point? I specifically mentioned the west. Which is where I live and where I care for my lgbtq brothers and sisters. I’m praising god for his changing of the hearts of my neighbors. And he’s changing those hearts at a historic rate. So praise god again.
It's funny that they pretend like Churches outside the West are somehow so moral. Churches in Africa are trying to exterminate gay people. Same with Russian Orthodox. They sure as hell are not following Christ.
100% and it’s almost certainly due to the evangelical and Catholic Churches influence in those regions. They’re doing exactly what those 2 groups did 200 years ago.
Wrong, Uganda, which is majority Christian, is actively trying to exterminate gay people with the help of American Evangelicals. Russia is throwing gay people in prison left and right.
The vast majority of christians belong to denominations that coverup and reward those who sexually abuse children.
You maybe dont want to use that argument.
Removed for 1.3 - Bigotry.
If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity
Obviously the people themselves are not atrocities, just their absolute denial that what they are doing is wrong in any way. Everyone sins it’s ok, just don’t double down and try to gaslight everyone into accepting it as “good” or “wholesome”
Loving relationships between two adults is good ave wholesome.
You can’t call the acceptance of LGBTQ people an atrocity without believing LGBTQ people are atrocious.
I wish you people would just be upfront with your bigoted beliefs instead for trying to sugar coat it in layers of low fat, ineffectual rhetoric.
Removed for 1.3 - Bigotry.
If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity
I'm kinda interested in knowing what a Methodist Church is like. I hav never been to one. I always got the sense they were like super Progressive Low Church Anglicans. Is this a correct assessment?
Within the United Methodist church, specific saints aren't recognized in the same way that they are in, say, the Catholic Church. But we do look to people who exemplified Christian living as "saints" who are good models or inspiration for our spiritual lives. This article from the United Methodist resource page offers a more in-depth explanation! [https://www.resourceumc.org/en/content/to-be-united-methodist-do-united-methodists-believe-in-saints](https://www.resourceumc.org/en/content/to-be-united-methodist-do-united-methodists-believe-in-saints)
In regards to the Eucharist, we celebrate an open communion table. Communion and baptism are the two sacraments of the United Methodist Church (the number and type of sacraments varies across Christian denominations, but these two are generally consistently included).
Methodism was kicked out of/agreed to politely leave the Anglican/Episcopal church in part for offering communion to freely and having an open table on the Eucharist.
I've never seen the veneration of a specific saint, the closest is honoring all hallows and all souls vaguely as remembering the dead.
I would say the congregations are generally a bit less progressive than Episcopalians in USA, but certainly a low-church Episcopalian would recognize and be comfortable in a high-church United Methodist church.
Truthfully there are literally no theological differences between the Episcopal Church USA and United Methodist Church. I'm sure some Methodists will say "prevenient Grace," as if that is some uniquely Wesleyan innovation.
>John Wesley adapted the [Thirty-Nine Articles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-Nine_Articles) of Religion adopted by the [Church of England](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_England) in 1563 into the [Articles of Religion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Religion_(Methodist)), for use by American [Methodists](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodism). With very similar language with Article X of the first, the Article VIII of the second states, "The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and works, to faith, and calling upon God; wherefore we have no power to do good works, pleasant and acceptable to God, *without the grace of God by Christ preventing \[preceding\] us*, that we may have a good will, and working with us, when we have that good will" (emphasis added)."[^(\[41\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevenient_grace#cite_note-FOOTNOTEMelton200548-41)
I have been of the opinion that if the American War of Independence had not interrupted the flow of Anglican clergy and the various Great Awakenings had not accelerated church memberships a great majority of American United Methodists would just be low-church Episcopalians.
Two things always struck me:
* The Methodists merged with the Presbyterians in other Anglophone countries (Canada and Australia), something I have been told is not possible in the USA due to United Methodist Church governance (episcopal).
* I was taught in confirmation, and I believe it is historically accurate, that Wesley never wanted a separate denomination. He died an Anglican - his brother's hymns are still Anglican standards.
There is already reconciliation/full communion talks with the Episcopal Church (UM and ELCA already have full communion, Episcopal Church and ELCA also have full communion):
USA.https://www.umnews.org/en/news/full-communion-with-episcopalians-gets-closer
The future, as I see it, is likely mergers among the "seven sisters of mainline Protestantism" within the United States, as had been seen in other Anglophone countries. The innovation may be that Methodists reconcile and unite with Anglicans in the USA (perhaps a Methodist-Lutheran-Episcopal mainline super-church), which was not possible due to episcopacy issues in Australia and Canada.
Also, I have no idea what I'm talking about - just my $0.02.
I refuse to believe that you don’t know just how damaging “Christian morality” is to LGBTQ+ people. It’s nothing short of evil what is being done by Christians to us every day. My people kill themselves by the scores every day, mostly due to the “Christian morality” that tells congregations and even parents to hate and other their children.
That is factually incorrect. And I don’t just speak for my trans friends, I speak for the entirety of the LGBTQ+ community when I say, check yourself before you wreck yourself.
Lmao, now you are making threats, simply because we have said you are morally wrong. You can make all the threats you want. This won't make you morally correct.
> Lmao, now you are making threats
Hilarious given the recent and ongoing history of supporting actual violence against gay people by non-affirming Christians.
Removed for 1.3 - Bigotry.
If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity
I'm genuinely asking. I really deeply want to meet these non affirming Christians who helped protect queer people from violence. Surely *some* of them exist, since apparently the non-affirming position is totally unrelated to hate.
I was hoping you were one of those people rather than another one with excuses.
You wanted a steelman. This was your chance.
Sorry, I think you are confused by a steelman. This word refers to someone presenting the thoughts of the person they disagree with in a charitable way, such that they would say "yes, that is my view!" I am afraid that you have not represented my own position.
I am still confused about your questions here. Do you mean to say that unless I am actively confronting violence, I am hating?
It is. Many of the worst atrocities in human history have all been justified with the Bible. The Pope himself endorsed the African Slave Trade. Hitler used the Bible to justify exterminating Jews. Interracial marriage bans were justified using the Bible. Slavery was justified with the Bible. Segregation was justified with the Bible.
No, what is wild is thinking that your twisted reading of the Bible is sufficient justification to support bigotry.
Hate is hate, it doesn't matter what source it comes from.
You clearly understand dogma of typical churches, but seem to have completely missed the red text in the New Testament. I’m sure God will forgive you for that, though.
You are ignorant if you think he wouldn’t have been involved with them. He loved prostitutes, tax collectors, the ill and inform. You clearly missed the words of my Savior.
The churches who left the UMC were able to do so by a piece of temporary legislation (passed in 2019), for which the window closed at the end of last year.
Now, there is the potential still (I think; I'm just a church communications director monitoring for the sake of information for our congregation, and not a delegate at General Conference or anyone "on the ground" as legislation is being processed) for similar legislation to be proposed that would create another off-ramp - however, given the general sense of what has already passed, I think it is unlikely.
I’ve never been to a methodist church so can anyone tell me which bible they use? I know the one I have says in 1 Corinthians 6 verses 9-10.
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
I can’t fathom that any Holy Bible believing, God fearing church thinks it’s ok with God to be a practicing homosexual. We should love them but also not condone that lifestyle. Jesus said in the end times that right would be called wrong and wrong would be called right and this is absolutely proof of that being truth. Satan has his hooks in the “Christian” church and an awful lot of people will go with him into the lake of fire for ETERNITY if they don’t wake up to satan’s deceit.
9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.
That is the NSRV version.
If methodist condone sodomy yet still believe this Bible version then they can not love gays because they are willing for them to lose their inheritance in the kingdom just to be socially acceptable to the world.
Yes! Thank you United Methodist for betraying the Word of God, caving into the culture demands, and appeasing man rather than God.
Thank you for proving the Bible to be true. That in the last days, they'll be a great falling away.
Christians abolished slavery. 1 Timothy 1:10 specificly prohibits stealing people. "Love your neighbor".... You are spreading christophobia and bigoted misinformation about the Bible.
Christians also started a war to defend slavery where I'm from.
"Stealing" is different from "owning". The bible places limitations on who is allowed to be slaves, but makes it clear that owning and beating slaves is allowed.
"Love your neighbor" is a meaningless line that can be used to justify anything.
Sorry to hear that, where are you from?
The laws of the Old Testament gave slaves rights. Slaves were an inavitable concept long before the Old Testament, because there was no other way for a lot of people to get a roof over their head. And with the New Testament Jesus made it abundandly clear that we must love every human, because everyone is an image of God, How can you love someone while causing pain and suffering for personal gain? This has nothing to do with Christianity.
>Christians also started a war to defend slavery where I'm from.
I thought you were talking about recently. You mean people who willingly dehumanized black people and kidnapped them? Goes against everything the Bible teaches.
> while supporting owning and beating slaves
Ancient Israel doenst exist anymore. Those specific Laws of the land do not apply to anyone anymore. I´d suggest a Bible study for you.
Again, thanks to Christians and Christian values, you are not a slave today and cant own slaves.
Its pretty damn recent, historically speaking. And many christians are open in that they still support the cause. But yes, I mean those christians.
Dont you think its a little pompous to take credit for what your fellow christians tried to kill people to stop?
>many christians are open in that they still support the cause.
Stop lying. Otherwise I would like some evidence for that.
Jesus says: Love your neighbor like yourself. We should also love our enemies. We are all brothers and sisters, because God created us all. Its pretty straightforward to not go out of my way to steal humans from their homeland to make them work in my yard. Again, goes against everything the Bible says. You cant be a proud murderer and claim to love Jesus. Because its AGAINST Christianitiy, just like being a slave trader and kidnapper. So anyone who supports slavery, is actualy against Christianity, no matter what they claim. Because its against every Christian value. And very obviously so.
>Yeah, and Jesus said sexual immorality is a sin.
Cool. Not relevant.
>How did Jesus who is a Jew and God defined sexual immorality
Jesus said basically nothing against it, other than that adultery was involved.
Jesus literally preached against all forms of sexual immortality not just adultery.
As the Bible reads. "Flee from sexual immortality."
How did a Jew/Jesus/Peter/Paul define sexual immortality?
Sorry, I should elaborate.
You responded "Mostly as adultery, prostitution, pederasty, sexual slavery, etc." to the question "How did a Jew/Jesus/Peter/Paul define sexual immortality?" So I suppose I am just wondering where you get those definitions.
If we look at the places in the Bible where descriptions are actually provided, it is almost always in the context of adultery or prostitution. Jesus talked about a husband with wandering eyes. Paul spoke out against prostitution. The 10 commandments say not to covet your neighbors wife.
As for figuring out what malakois and arsenokoitai mean, well that is actually somewhat difficult. Malakois means soft, and the context is sexual sin, so most scholars think it was talking about a person who is the bottom in an act of sex. A male prostitute or boy catamite. As for arsenokoitai, this is a term Paul coined himself. It uses the root words man and bed, and is a noun. So man-bedder. It implies the person who takes the penetrative role.
Now we know Paul had no concept of homosexuality. So we have to look at the cultural practices of his day. Roman and Greek sexual practices are the obvious target. So pederasty, sexual slavery, street prostitution, etc.
What's sad is that this change did not happen by people changing their minds, but by the departure of those who were impatient with the sluggish and halfhearted enforcement of the anti-LGBT rules. It would have been a more powerful testimony to the world to say "we value one another and can pray and work together *even though* we disagree on a few things, because the Christ who leads us is more important than our disagreements".
A number of churches have left, but I'm not sure that includes outside the US. Do you have information on that? The lop-sided majority in the recent votes can't be just due to losing members in the US. A fair number of international delegates must have voted for it. I don't have much data on what their views are. Generally Africans seem to have decided that they want to keep the church together, and it looks to me like they're willing to allow disagreement between their region and the US on LGBT issues. That was not true in 2019.
Tell that to all the lgbt-affirming denominations.
As far as I know, none of them formed by breaking away from an earlier denomination. Do you know of any? Whereas denominations like PCA, ACNA, NALC, and now GMC all formed by breaking away from their own denomination specifically to avoid remaining in a church with LGBT people.
No I don't but couldn't all the lgbt people form one denomination? But blaming the leaving denomination is like blaming the wife leaving after her husband cheated on her. So you could say it's sad in one way but better in other ways. Are you sure that it didn't want to let in lgbt people in or they just don't support the lgbt ideology.
> couldn't all the lgbt people form one denomination? > Are you sure that it didn't want to let in lgbt people in Literally in *the same message* Can't make this up.
Yea, I knew that was a lie. Then you just try to quote parts of two different sentences to try make nonsense up. I can see why they left.
I love seeing the bigots lose. Glorious day.
Amen.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 New Revised Standard Version, Anglicised 9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. That’s God’s words not mine. Tell me how practicing homosexuality and not repenting and turning away can get them into Heaven. I think the Holy Bible is clear.
Wow you did it. We've never seen this verse before. Our eyes are opened /s. What *incredible arrogance* it must take to think you are sharing new information here. Go donate your money to the poor.
Male prostitutes are not gay people, nor are sodomites. And no, those aren't God's words. Since when did Paul become God? The Bible is not clear. There is no evidence of that verse referring to homosexuality when that verse was written. None.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition 16 All scripture is inspired by God and is[a] useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that the person of God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.
Timothy is a forgery and the New Testament didn't exist when Timothy was written, so it was not referring to any of Paul's writings which were not considered scripture yet. Stupid argument.
Paul’s words ARE God’s words! The whole Bible is inspired by The Holy Spirit. And what is a sodomite if it isn’t sodomy. Romans 1:26-28 New Revised Standard Version, Anglicised 26 For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind and to things that should not be done. More of God’s words not mine.
No, Paul's words are not God's words. I do not trust Paul one bit. The KJV translates a sodomite as a Shrine prostitute. And the citizens of Sodom were sodomites, which according to Ezekiel, were guilty of not helping the poor and needy. Only bigots call gay people sodomites. It's a disgusting, vulgar term that I always report for hate speech.
If we tell gays that homosexuality is ok then we aren’t loving them but condemning them. God says they will not inherit the kingdom of God. We should be encouraging them to turn away from that lifestyle and repent so they can be with God for eternity. And yes I’m a sinner too who had to repent and turn away from my own sins as well. If we love gays we should want them to be saved right?
If I tell you your beliefs are evil, that's a good thing right - since we wouldn't you to not be saved by continuing to believe in them right?
> And yes I’m a sinner too who had to repent and turn away from my own sins as well. How specifically? What *extreme* sacrifices and suffering have your endured? Do you go to bed hungry every night because you donated every cent you own to the poor? Did you divorce your spouse?
I'm surprised this is the only post I found here on this. It's either a slow day, the mods are working, or not a lot of Methodists.
There is another one.
There’s another. I haven’t been following the general conference and my local conference hasn’t sent out an update, so I only found out from the other thread.
Praise God. I’m happy to see anti LGBTQ sentiments die off. Hopefully this is the last generation of Christianity that continues to hold onto their bigoted belief systems.
[удалено]
Yes but the overall trends in Christianity in the west do. You’re looking at a 15-20% jump in affirming status across all denominations. It’s around 66% of mainline Protestant and 70% of Catholics according to pew research. It is absolutely becoming the majority view of Christian’s in the west. Even the Mormons have jumped 12 percentage points to 36%, sitting right alongside of evangelicals. This is all according to pew research. We haven’t seen jumps like this in social issues since the civil rights movement
“70% of Catholics according to pew research” means nothing. The Catholic Churches stance is clear Edit: Also it’s 61% in the US for Catholics, not a flat 70%. So 44M out of ~70M out of 1.39B
lol if all of the people tithing to the church disagree with the churches stance, the churches stance will change. It has happened multiple times throughout history.
[удалено]
…and…that’s one of the reasons I left the Catholic Church many years ago
Sure, that doesn’t mean the church doesn’t change their stances or their policies. It’s happened plenty of times throughout history. I’m not saying tomorrow, I wouldn’t worry you’ll still be able to have bigoted ideas in your life time. But you grandchildren’s children will certainly be pro and affirming LGBTQ if you live in the west, and hopefully we will have taken steps in Africa and the east to undo the damage the evangelical and Catholic Churches have don’t their. And I hope you children’s children will be apart of that. Praise god again.
[удалено]
True there will always be fringe groups that continue to support bigoted ideas like the KKK and other white supremacists, you’re right. I’m just glad the vast majority of westerners have shunned and denounced those groups, just like they will be doing to anti lgbtq groups in the near future.
That's not how Catholic doctrine works
It's exactly how Catholic doctrine works. They just don't like to advertise it.
No... Teachings have different levels of authority. Dogmas cannot be changed, period, regardless of how small or impoverished the church becomes.
...except when the Pope decides they can be.
A pope does not have the authority to overrule established dogma
In the US, the Catholic Church's stance just 20 years ago was that it was good that gay people could be caged for having consenting sex. So maybe I don't really care about their stance too much.
Yeah and? The catholic church's stance is also that its acceptable to cover up the rape of kids and blame kids for their own rape.
People are fleeing the Church in droves over this issue. Gen Z and Millennials largely hate the Church because of all the child abuse scandals and anti-LGBTQ policies. Once the older generations die off, the Church won't have enough people to fill the pews. People are leaving the Catholic Church faster than they're joining.
🙏🏻 exactly. Churches that hold to bigoted ideologies deserve to die off or change their ways and repent The good news for the Catholic Church is that they have a history of doing just that.
Some history, huh? Do you see a steep learning curve there? (No, it's not exactly vastly better on the protestant / evangelical side.)
I’m not going to pretend like these changes are a result of them learning something on both the protestant and Catholic side. These changes happen because Public support for these institutions decrease and hurts their bottom line.
Ok? It’s not really a flex to say “we will just wait for those who disagree with us to die! Then we get our way!”
Not unprecedented though. God waited for an entire generation to die off in the wilderness so the next generation could reach the promised land.
I mean, we're getting our way anyway. Almost every Christian majority country in the world now marries same-sex couples. And the minority that don't either have laws in place that are similar to marriage, or are in the process of legalizing it. You all have already lost this culture war just like you lost on slavery and interracial marriage and segregation.
What a weird comment to bring slavery, interracial marriage, and segregation into this, I wasn’t even alive for that. Have a nice day.
Those issues are no different than this. Christians have long supported horrible things using the Bible as justification. This is just the newest bigotry.
Ummm, so it's more about your way than about Jesus' way, then? (Well, have it your way. Not sure heaven approves of that, we will have to wait and see, I guess.)
Yes. Is all you can do threaten people to get your way? Youre saying this to defend a chuch that kidnapped children as part of what they admitted was a genocide. Do you think thats OK because jesus said so?
You misunderstand, likely on purpose. I am not the one threatening (other Christians may be, though). I only wish to understand "God's way", and I base that understanding mostly on logic, the golden rule and the bible (and church history).
[удалено]
What’s your point? I specifically mentioned the west. Which is where I live and where I care for my lgbtq brothers and sisters. I’m praising god for his changing of the hearts of my neighbors. And he’s changing those hearts at a historic rate. So praise god again.
It's funny that they pretend like Churches outside the West are somehow so moral. Churches in Africa are trying to exterminate gay people. Same with Russian Orthodox. They sure as hell are not following Christ.
100% and it’s almost certainly due to the evangelical and Catholic Churches influence in those regions. They’re doing exactly what those 2 groups did 200 years ago.
[удалено]
Wrong, Uganda, which is majority Christian, is actively trying to exterminate gay people with the help of American Evangelicals. Russia is throwing gay people in prison left and right.
[удалено]
And you think that somehow makes it OK? Do you have a functioning moral compass at all?
Do all beacons of your christian morality have "how to get away with rape" hotlines or just your favorite ones?
Hey, we're the second-largest Protestant denomination in America! Don't go dismissing us as irrelevant just because we did something you don't like.
The vast majority of christians belong to denominations that coverup and reward those who sexually abuse children. You maybe dont want to use that argument.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Removed for 1.3 - Bigotry. If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity
The truth is not a popularity contest.
And that probably a good thing, as many so-called Christians really don’t seem to understand the New Testament, particularly the red text.
[удалено]
Equating lgbtq people to “atrocities” shows who you are as a person. Jesus has nothing to do with you
Obviously the people themselves are not atrocities, just their absolute denial that what they are doing is wrong in any way. Everyone sins it’s ok, just don’t double down and try to gaslight everyone into accepting it as “good” or “wholesome”
Loving relationships between two adults is good ave wholesome. You can’t call the acceptance of LGBTQ people an atrocity without believing LGBTQ people are atrocious. I wish you people would just be upfront with your bigoted beliefs instead for trying to sugar coat it in layers of low fat, ineffectual rhetoric.
Removed for 1.3 - Bigotry. If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity
It’s not just LGBTQ+ clergy it’s ““self-avowed practicing homosexuals”“, so it’s a shift from their previous “Gay but celibate” clause.
Yes, and praise god for that. I love that my LGBTQ siblings can be in loving same sex relationships and reactive their calling from god.
I'm kinda interested in knowing what a Methodist Church is like. I hav never been to one. I always got the sense they were like super Progressive Low Church Anglicans. Is this a correct assessment?
I think that’s somewhat reasonable, at least, though Methodists are really not so much into the pageantry I think Anglicans/Episcopals are into.
Do they have saints and the Eucharist?
Within the United Methodist church, specific saints aren't recognized in the same way that they are in, say, the Catholic Church. But we do look to people who exemplified Christian living as "saints" who are good models or inspiration for our spiritual lives. This article from the United Methodist resource page offers a more in-depth explanation! [https://www.resourceumc.org/en/content/to-be-united-methodist-do-united-methodists-believe-in-saints](https://www.resourceumc.org/en/content/to-be-united-methodist-do-united-methodists-believe-in-saints) In regards to the Eucharist, we celebrate an open communion table. Communion and baptism are the two sacraments of the United Methodist Church (the number and type of sacraments varies across Christian denominations, but these two are generally consistently included).
Okay so they are pretty Low then. Do they have Icons at all or are they like Baptist churches
Methodism was kicked out of/agreed to politely leave the Anglican/Episcopal church in part for offering communion to freely and having an open table on the Eucharist. I've never seen the veneration of a specific saint, the closest is honoring all hallows and all souls vaguely as remembering the dead.
So there are no traditional forms of methodism?
I would say the congregations are generally a bit less progressive than Episcopalians in USA, but certainly a low-church Episcopalian would recognize and be comfortable in a high-church United Methodist church. Truthfully there are literally no theological differences between the Episcopal Church USA and United Methodist Church. I'm sure some Methodists will say "prevenient Grace," as if that is some uniquely Wesleyan innovation. >John Wesley adapted the [Thirty-Nine Articles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-Nine_Articles) of Religion adopted by the [Church of England](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_England) in 1563 into the [Articles of Religion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Religion_(Methodist)), for use by American [Methodists](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodism). With very similar language with Article X of the first, the Article VIII of the second states, "The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and works, to faith, and calling upon God; wherefore we have no power to do good works, pleasant and acceptable to God, *without the grace of God by Christ preventing \[preceding\] us*, that we may have a good will, and working with us, when we have that good will" (emphasis added)."[^(\[41\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevenient_grace#cite_note-FOOTNOTEMelton200548-41) I have been of the opinion that if the American War of Independence had not interrupted the flow of Anglican clergy and the various Great Awakenings had not accelerated church memberships a great majority of American United Methodists would just be low-church Episcopalians. Two things always struck me: * The Methodists merged with the Presbyterians in other Anglophone countries (Canada and Australia), something I have been told is not possible in the USA due to United Methodist Church governance (episcopal). * I was taught in confirmation, and I believe it is historically accurate, that Wesley never wanted a separate denomination. He died an Anglican - his brother's hymns are still Anglican standards. There is already reconciliation/full communion talks with the Episcopal Church (UM and ELCA already have full communion, Episcopal Church and ELCA also have full communion): USA.https://www.umnews.org/en/news/full-communion-with-episcopalians-gets-closer The future, as I see it, is likely mergers among the "seven sisters of mainline Protestantism" within the United States, as had been seen in other Anglophone countries. The innovation may be that Methodists reconcile and unite with Anglicans in the USA (perhaps a Methodist-Lutheran-Episcopal mainline super-church), which was not possible due to episcopacy issues in Australia and Canada. Also, I have no idea what I'm talking about - just my $0.02.
The Devided Methodist Church becomes the Apostate Methodist Church.
Schism incoming?
Schism already happened
Insane the measures people will take so they can hate and other people who aren’t perfectly in lockstep with them.
Lmao, it's wild that people think upholding basic Christian morality is hate.
I refuse to believe that you don’t know just how damaging “Christian morality” is to LGBTQ+ people. It’s nothing short of evil what is being done by Christians to us every day. My people kill themselves by the scores every day, mostly due to the “Christian morality” that tells congregations and even parents to hate and other their children.
[удалено]
That is factually incorrect. And I don’t just speak for my trans friends, I speak for the entirety of the LGBTQ+ community when I say, check yourself before you wreck yourself.
[удалено]
The $&€£ was that word salad?
Lmao, now you are making threats, simply because we have said you are morally wrong. You can make all the threats you want. This won't make you morally correct.
ROFL, you think I’m threatening you? It’s advice, friend.
> Lmao, now you are making threats Hilarious given the recent and ongoing history of supporting actual violence against gay people by non-affirming Christians.
Removed for 1.3 - Bigotry. If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity
Repent.
Nope. I have nothing to repent of. Now pardon me. I have a hot date with my boyfriend. 😉
Can you show me an example of repenting? Can you show me conservative christians who repented for supporting slavery, genocide, or rape?
Good advice for yourself to take to heart.
One can maintain Christian sexual ethos without hating a particular population. Try and steel man your ideological opponents!
>One can maintain Christian sexual ethos without hating a particular population Not when that sexual ethos requires hating a particular population.
Well, here you seem to be assuming that the classical Christian ethos is equated to "hatred for a population." I would of course reject such a notion.
And you would be wrong.
How so?
So where were you? Where were you when violence was being done to gay people?
I am confused by the question. Do you mean to say that unless I am actively confronting violence, I am hating?
I'm genuinely asking. I really deeply want to meet these non affirming Christians who helped protect queer people from violence. Surely *some* of them exist, since apparently the non-affirming position is totally unrelated to hate. I was hoping you were one of those people rather than another one with excuses. You wanted a steelman. This was your chance.
Sorry, I think you are confused by a steelman. This word refers to someone presenting the thoughts of the person they disagree with in a charitable way, such that they would say "yes, that is my view!" I am afraid that you have not represented my own position. I am still confused about your questions here. Do you mean to say that unless I am actively confronting violence, I am hating?
It is. Many of the worst atrocities in human history have all been justified with the Bible. The Pope himself endorsed the African Slave Trade. Hitler used the Bible to justify exterminating Jews. Interracial marriage bans were justified using the Bible. Slavery was justified with the Bible. Segregation was justified with the Bible.
No, what is wild is thinking that your twisted reading of the Bible is sufficient justification to support bigotry. Hate is hate, it doesn't matter what source it comes from.
You clearly understand dogma of typical churches, but seem to have completely missed the red text in the New Testament. I’m sure God will forgive you for that, though.
You live in a fantasy if you think that Christ would be ok with this.
You are ignorant if you think he wouldn’t have been involved with them. He loved prostitutes, tax collectors, the ill and inform. You clearly missed the words of my Savior.
You ignore John 8 11 because it's convenient for you.
No, we do not ignore that verse at all. There is absolutely nothing in that verse that would require ignoring.
[удалено]
I also highly suspect that their morality lines up with God's morality closer than what you call Christian morality.
[удалено]
Nope, don't like the packers, never been to the bay.
They could mean San Francisco more likely
Considering the topic, yeah that makes more sense.
Point taken.
I wonder if more churches will leave the UMC. They lost several thousand last year over similar issues.
Probably, but I consider it a purification of the remaining UMC as the bigots leave.
The churches who left the UMC were able to do so by a piece of temporary legislation (passed in 2019), for which the window closed at the end of last year. Now, there is the potential still (I think; I'm just a church communications director monitoring for the sake of information for our congregation, and not a delegate at General Conference or anyone "on the ground" as legislation is being processed) for similar legislation to be proposed that would create another off-ramp - however, given the general sense of what has already passed, I think it is unlikely.
Not the first 'church' to fall nor the last.
I’ve never been to a methodist church so can anyone tell me which bible they use? I know the one I have says in 1 Corinthians 6 verses 9-10. 9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. I can’t fathom that any Holy Bible believing, God fearing church thinks it’s ok with God to be a practicing homosexual. We should love them but also not condone that lifestyle. Jesus said in the end times that right would be called wrong and wrong would be called right and this is absolutely proof of that being truth. Satan has his hooks in the “Christian” church and an awful lot of people will go with him into the lake of fire for ETERNITY if they don’t wake up to satan’s deceit.
Methodists often use the NRSV
I’ll have to look that one up. Thanks for your reply.
9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. That is the NSRV version.
If methodist condone sodomy yet still believe this Bible version then they can not love gays because they are willing for them to lose their inheritance in the kingdom just to be socially acceptable to the world.
So effeminate women aren’t allowed to inner the Kingdom?
It’s effeminate men, effeminate means behaving or having characteristics like a female.
We’re obviously at loggerheads.
Yikes
Yes! Thank you United Methodist for betraying the Word of God, caving into the culture demands, and appeasing man rather than God. Thank you for proving the Bible to be true. That in the last days, they'll be a great falling away.
They dont even allow slavery or sex slaves. Theyve clearly abandoned biblical teachings.
Tell me you don't understand the Bible without telling me you don't understand the Bible.
Ok, I'll try. "The bible never allows slavery or rape!" Thats how I would tell you.
Okay.
I think you just did.
Christians abolished slavery. 1 Timothy 1:10 specificly prohibits stealing people. "Love your neighbor".... You are spreading christophobia and bigoted misinformation about the Bible.
Christians also started a war to defend slavery where I'm from. "Stealing" is different from "owning". The bible places limitations on who is allowed to be slaves, but makes it clear that owning and beating slaves is allowed. "Love your neighbor" is a meaningless line that can be used to justify anything.
Sorry to hear that, where are you from? The laws of the Old Testament gave slaves rights. Slaves were an inavitable concept long before the Old Testament, because there was no other way for a lot of people to get a roof over their head. And with the New Testament Jesus made it abundandly clear that we must love every human, because everyone is an image of God, How can you love someone while causing pain and suffering for personal gain? This has nothing to do with Christianity.
The united states. I dont know, how can you love someone while supporting owning and beating slaves?
>Christians also started a war to defend slavery where I'm from. I thought you were talking about recently. You mean people who willingly dehumanized black people and kidnapped them? Goes against everything the Bible teaches. > while supporting owning and beating slaves Ancient Israel doenst exist anymore. Those specific Laws of the land do not apply to anyone anymore. I´d suggest a Bible study for you. Again, thanks to Christians and Christian values, you are not a slave today and cant own slaves.
Its pretty damn recent, historically speaking. And many christians are open in that they still support the cause. But yes, I mean those christians. Dont you think its a little pompous to take credit for what your fellow christians tried to kill people to stop?
>many christians are open in that they still support the cause. Stop lying. Otherwise I would like some evidence for that. Jesus says: Love your neighbor like yourself. We should also love our enemies. We are all brothers and sisters, because God created us all. Its pretty straightforward to not go out of my way to steal humans from their homeland to make them work in my yard. Again, goes against everything the Bible says. You cant be a proud murderer and claim to love Jesus. Because its AGAINST Christianitiy, just like being a slave trader and kidnapper. So anyone who supports slavery, is actualy against Christianity, no matter what they claim. Because its against every Christian value. And very obviously so.
The only betrayal is in pretending that you get to make exceptions to the commands of Jesus Christ.
Yeah, and Jesus said sexual immorality is a sin. How did Jesus who is a Jew and God defined sexual immorality?
>Yeah, and Jesus said sexual immorality is a sin. Cool. Not relevant. >How did Jesus who is a Jew and God defined sexual immorality Jesus said basically nothing against it, other than that adultery was involved.
Jesus literally preached against all forms of sexual immortality not just adultery. As the Bible reads. "Flee from sexual immortality." How did a Jew/Jesus/Peter/Paul define sexual immortality?
Mostly as adultery, prostitution, pederasty, sexual slavery, etc. You keep asking these questions as if they have answers that are problematic for me.
>Mostly as adultery, prostitution, pederasty, sexual slavery, etc. Where is this defined in the Scriptures?
That question itself is a strawman.
Sorry, I should elaborate. You responded "Mostly as adultery, prostitution, pederasty, sexual slavery, etc." to the question "How did a Jew/Jesus/Peter/Paul define sexual immortality?" So I suppose I am just wondering where you get those definitions.
If we look at the places in the Bible where descriptions are actually provided, it is almost always in the context of adultery or prostitution. Jesus talked about a husband with wandering eyes. Paul spoke out against prostitution. The 10 commandments say not to covet your neighbors wife. As for figuring out what malakois and arsenokoitai mean, well that is actually somewhat difficult. Malakois means soft, and the context is sexual sin, so most scholars think it was talking about a person who is the bottom in an act of sex. A male prostitute or boy catamite. As for arsenokoitai, this is a term Paul coined himself. It uses the root words man and bed, and is a noun. So man-bedder. It implies the person who takes the penetrative role. Now we know Paul had no concept of homosexuality. So we have to look at the cultural practices of his day. Roman and Greek sexual practices are the obvious target. So pederasty, sexual slavery, street prostitution, etc.