- cross-posted to:
- lgbtq_plus
- cross-posted to:
- lgbtq_plus
You must log in or register to comment.
Thank you so much for posting this, I needed that levity right now.
I don’t know what happened to me, just suddenly realized that christians are totally nuts and they should not be allowed in any position of power.
Have faith, no problems there, believing in an existing book as a source of all truths is a bit much, forcing any part of it on anyone else (including their own children) is despicable and should be stopped.
Ya I walk my dog past a church and every Sunday when I see the crowd of people there I can’t help but view them as a group of weird cultists, even though it’s pretty vanilla Christianity.
Some other phrases you can throw at them for greater impact:
- God will send you to hell for doing that
- Jesus would never approve of you
- You lack God in your life
- You’re blindly following Satan’s lies
Remember when he flipped all those tables because people where trading in church. Then the church went ahead and did trading in church, sure he’d love all those private jets and cars.
I just don’t understand why they feel they have to flaunt their religion. Like, we get it, you worship a zombie-corpse God and you really, really dont understand the concept of eternity but you don’t have to make it your whole personality.
They proselytize because of a prophecy, that has already been fulfilled. The prophecy said that once there were Christians world wide, Christ would return. Since they don’t recognize the guy that fit the bill, they assume that prophecy hasn’t been fulfilled, and they need more Christians everywhere.
It basically caused the 7th Day Adventists, and The Jehovah’s Witnesses to be founded. Funny thing was they got the year right, and then completely missed everything else.
Wait who’s the guy who fit the bill???
The Báb and Baha’u’llah were born directly descended from David, and declared their missions in 1844 and 1863 respectively, having never actually met each other, but The Báb specifically named Baha’u’llah as his successor just before taking three regiments worth of lead to the face, for the second time that month.
Xians are so friendly especially the part where they believe that I am going to suffer for eternity in a lake of fire.
Feel the love.
No hate like Christian love.
As a Christian, I don’t believe the Bible because I agree with it and like it. I believe in it because I’m convinced it’s true. Kinda sounds like to me “pro vaccine are so hateful! Saying if I don’t take the vaccine I’ll get sick and die!”
Genuine question. What convinces you that Bible is true? And among Abrahamic religions, why is this particular book true? Why do you accept “update” to Torah (that is, the Christian Bible), but not “update” to the Christian Bible (Quran)? Or do I miss the point?
Glad you asked! I’ll start with the Torah. One of the central purposes of Judaism was and is waiting for the Messiah. It even makes its way into modern day Judaism. The likes of Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 are clearly about Jesus of Nazareth. The records we have about Jesus consistently show to Him being perfect, doing miracles, being a good teacher, claiming to be the messiah and even God, and then He was crucified in the most humiliating way, died, and was buried. But on the third day He rose again from the dead and was seen by quite a few, who were so convinced they ended up entering a world of persecution and difficulty, many died. Because they refused to renounce that they had seen Him risen.
As historical records go- the Bible is pretty comprehensive for records of its time. Most other people we know about have their records dating to hundreds of years after their existence. Jesus’ records were written within the lifetime of people who would have known Him. And they’re pretty consistent, unlike legends which rapidly evolve with time. The Bible has been pretty much the same. Give or take some less important passages, though.
Now, there are a load of problems with Islam and the Qur’an, but I’ll keep it concise to how the Qur’an disproves itself. The Qur’an makes these points: The Gospel is the word of allah: 3:3-4 No one can change allah’s words: 18:27 Strongly implies that the Christians had the Gospel when the Qur’an was written: 7:157 Christians should judge by the Gospel: 5:47
The Qur’an also denies the death of Jesus and His divinity, which the Bible claims. So it’s in obvious contradiction. So judging by the Gospel, Islam is false. And the Gospel cannot be corrupted as the Qur’an recommends the Gospel and claims allah’s words cannot be corrupted.
Paul also gives us this warning: Galatians 1:8
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
Considering the Qur’an apparently was revealed to Mohammed by an “angel”… Yeah…
The Islamic dilemma explained in a YouTube video
I hope this makes sense
One of these things is not like the other…
“2000 year old goat herder fairytales are more real to me than consistently tested and verified modern scientific findings”
And what do modern scientific findings say?
Here is a very brief summary…
Nothing in that article about Christianity
Shocker.
Fed up of all their “holy days” every year. When is it unholy day?
Every day because we’re all sinful
There’s this spook in their religion that says everyone who’s not them will get tortured forever in hell so save as many as you can, but even the ones who don’t quite buy that aspect still have its lingering relative of “well if you’re gonna be a casual you ought to at least let them know how great it is”
“Worship me as a god or ill have you tortured for all eternity.”
Christians: yep, I see no problem with this. Its definitely not an abusive relationship.
“I love you more than you can understand, but I will use my unlimited cosmic power to hide from you, and I will never interact with you or help nudge all the diverging religions in the right direction. The fate of your immortal soul, your worth as a human being, and your relationship with me will depend on whether you think I exist and kiss my ass despite me using my aforementioned unlimited cosmic power to hide my very existence from you.”
Many humans: ooh I love a good mystery!
It’s like the ultimate rich deadbeat dad who you never get to see. The Elon Musk of the supernatural world, if you will.
You know!
Now, if you could step round all the Buddhists, Muslims etc. trying to appeal their fate because they “dedicated their lives to helping starving children” and “there’s no way we could have know ln about you” or whatever. Yeah, you should have thought about that before you became a sinner shouldn’t you! Yeah, thats what i thought…
No, no, I don’t care what you did. So long as you’re really sorry for not being perfect,
Like me
, acept me as your God and are willing to worship me forever and ever and ever, you can come right on in. Turns out, ultimately, I don’t care about good or bad that much. I want people who will worship me and tell me I’m good and kind, unlike like those disgusting sinners I’m torturing forever.
I mean, Christianity is the largest religion and varying properties and various concepts of a Jesus has infiltrated basically every main religion apart from Judaism. Which is a pretty big nudge. Anytime God does show Himself, people come up with all sorts of excuses not to believe. You also need to realise while God is infinitely merciful, He’s also infinitely just.
A question for you would be: how would you balance that out? Being infinitely merciful and infinitely just?
What do you mean when you say that God has shown himself?
Jesus.
This is all funny until you do it. Trying this kind of shit in 2009 as I was starting to fully transition got me a full swing baseball bat to my hip. I laid there for maybe 30 mins before I could crawl to a phone.
From a safety standpoint, please don’t do this. Just flip them off as you walk away and then vote as if your life depends on it, because it just may.
i dont think you will be able to vote away religious fundamentalism.
maybe bring a bat next time you are feeling cheeky, just in case.
Depending on the jurisdiction, always have a baseball and potentially gloves with you as well. Having only a baseball bat can be considered as either possession of a weapon or having an intent to cause harm I think, which can really backfire when authorities get involved.
IANAL, and anyone reading should consult their local laws surrounding self-defence before carrying items for the express purpose of self-defence
This is why everyone who isn’t a cis hetero white Christian man absolutely needs to buy a gun and learn how to use it. It’s your job to defend yourself. (Don’t get me wrong, allies are great, and people should be helping each other against the bigots, but end of the day, you’re alone, gotta defend yourself)
Edit: also, I’m really sorry that happened, not trying to blame the victim, just advocating for people taking their power back
In most countries you can’t buy a gun. Then again in most places that kind of violence carries significant jail time.
Oh, yeah I meant in the US… Sorry to be US centric
A mod deleted my comment and suggested I approach in a better way. I apologize for my presentation.
You were righteously angry. And, it’s definitely not ethical for the other to respond to words with physical violence.
I’m a multiple-minority with a strong sense of justice. I speak from experience when I say: We must pick our battles and means wisely, particularly since the orange baffoon emboldened a wide scope and magnitude of hatred.
I wasn’t there. But, it seems almost certain this was not a wise battle for you to fight alone, perhaps at all. There’s almost certainly something you should learn from this. And, whatever it is to be learned, it’s definitely not to silence yourself and advocate others follow.
If you tell us more and solicit others’ input then maybe there’s insight we could offer. And, if this isn’t a safe enough space to do that, PM me. I’ll share a place where such a post would be very well-received.
Gotta organize against physical violence any time of the day. Exercising violence to silence the voices that do not call to violence themselves should become unthinkable.
I’m sorry that happened to you but I appreciate you warning people of the dangers of being confrontational with these people.
It’s not worth it. You won’t change their mind, people nearby aren’t going to clap for you, you’re just unnecessarily putting yourself in harms way because many of these people are not kind, they will respond aggressively.
Did you sue them?
No. Hard to do when there was no way to identify them. I mouthed off at a gas station, and before I could react, a dude jumped out of a truck and assaulted me.
Fun! How pious of them.
Fucking me sideways, I am so sorry you went though that.
Surely the gas station had cameras?
We then know that they were white, were wearing clothing and the police says there were very fine people on both sides of this altercation.
But God forbid you try to drive of without paying. Then: believe it or not, straight to jail.
That both tracks and also says all anyone needs to hear about how much they actually believe in their religion that says to turn the other cheek. Holy hell
Supply side Jesus approves though
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
This is a pure ragebait answer.
Zero actual content or explanation, and instead just a pure angry gibberish.
I see where the take you decided to attack comes from. By simply calling to “ignore” violence, we give rise to it - and before long, being hit with the bat for reversing a verbal attack and defending from bullying becomes something normal and seemingly acceptable. It is absolutely not and never should be.
But the person in question was not in a position to fix that. Having others who sympathize with you or just can’t allow for violence to flourish could seriously turn the tides of the conversation and would probably never lead to violence in the first place. And instead of recognizing that, they seemingly came to a broader conclusion that one should never respond to such aggressive verbal takes in fear of physical attack - thereby completing its original goal as a silencing tool.
I cannot help but notice, though, that it was framed in a bit of a rough tone, which might not help to drive the message across.
And that is how you end a joke.
Look, I respect your right to be how you are, but keep it in your church. I don’t need to see it everywhere I go, and I damn sure don’t want it anywhere near me. I don’t have a problem with you, but if you try any of that God shit on me, I’m gonna put you on your ass, bro.
Are… Are you trying to convert me?
Deep down I’m very scared I might be religious, but I’m not sure because I’m so out of touch with my repressed feeling
*put it in your ass, bro
W-what are you doing, step-priest?
“I’ll gay for you.” 🙏
Gay the pray away and save a christian!
I gay for myself and myself alone. And that cute guy at the coffee shop. I’ll gay hard for him.
It seems people can join and quit religion. I’m thinking it’s more a choice than biological or sexual preference (which aren’t choices at all).
Also have you noticed how religion grooms children? Most of those weirdos go after new born babies.
They also go after the elderly and And dead people!
Like when the LDS church were posthumously baptising Holocaust victims.
What I’m trying to say is they got some real fetishes.
Winner winner chicken dinner
Yus
I know this is probably going to get downvoted, but I’m getting tired of people using “evangelical Christian” as the term for the problematic flavor of Christians. If you look up what evangelical Christian means, it’s just that there’s an emphasis on the authority of the Bible, sharing of faith, and personal salvation. Maybe it’s the sharing of faith that seems problematic*, but by context, I think you’re more referring to political conservative Christians.
*If that is the case, I hope it’s just when it’s done in an aggressive/tactless/heavy-handed way. I’d like to think we haven’t reached the point as a society where someone sharing their faith respectfully is seen as problematic.
You should probably look up what evangelical actually means then: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelism
It requires proselytizing.
If that’s the case, why is it that every single evangelical pastor, on TV, is absolutely guilty of using The Lord’s Name in Vain?
That refers to attempting to cast magic using The Lord’s Name, not cuss words.
Catholic means universal, but not all Christ worshippers are Catholic.
Orthodox means correct, but not everyone thinks Orthodox believes are correct.
Evangelical leaders do cause so many issue in the US.
sharing their faith respectfully
How can you respectfully tell someone that they will burn for all eternity for not following the same book you do?
But they don’t like being called fundamentalist zealots and they get less angry if you use terms that make them appear less crazy.
If someone’s out trying to bring about a second Holocaust, you can call them a Nazi. It wouldn’t be right to call them “someone with an old German mindset.”
I’m getting tired of people using “evangelical Christian” as the term for the problematic flavor of Christians.
It’s ok, the rest of us are tired of evangelical Christians being the problematic flavor of Christianity.
but by context, I think you’re more referring to political conservative Christians.
That venn diagram a circle within a circle.
If you call yourself a Christian while evangelical Christians are making all these problems, you are helping them make problems. They love more than anything being able to claim that they’re in the right because they’re in the majority. If you want to follow the teachings of a middle eastern Jew from the Roman era, that’s fine, but don’t call yourself a Christian because that label has been ruined.
Not only that, it’s unlikely most of the beliefs, teachings and rituals done since the establishment of the Eastern Orthodoxy (~110AD?) are part of Jesus* original teachings. Add the differences that happened after the catholic schism, then protestant reform, plus other shenanigans and you get to today.
* Him or any other figures that were responsible for the “creation” of the new religion
Proselytizing in any form is a problem. Keep it to yourself.
there’s an emphasis on the authority of the Bible
yeah that’s the problem, particularly when you try to apply it to governance.
Which is a fool’s errand, as the whole reason for Jesus (or at least a big part of it) is that you can’t save people through laws. Nobody can live up to those standards, so everyone would be a criminal.
doesn’t stop people from doing it though.
evangelical Christian" as the term for the problematic flavor of Christians.
If you look up what evangelical Christian means, it’s just that there’s an emphasis on the authority of the Bible
sharing of faith, and personal salvation
Whether people WANT to share your personal superstitions or not. That’s why evangelical Christians are worse: they evangelize to those of us who have made it clear that we don’t consent and, which is much worse, pass laws based on the assumption that everyone must believe in their favorite fairy tales.
Maybe it’s the sharing of faith that seems problematic
Congratulations on getting the point! If only you hadn’t immediately dismissed it again, there might have been hope for you yet.
If that is the case, I hope it’s just when it’s done in an aggressive/tactless/heavy-handed way. I’d like to think we haven’t reached the point as a society where someone sharing their faith respectfully is seen as problematic
What you don’t seem to understand is that telling people who have not asked about your weird relationship to your invisible friend is an INHERENTLY aggressive, tactless and heavy-handed way to attempt to convert people. Don’t make me trot out the penis example…
I think you’re more referring to political conservative Christians
Because believing that the Bible should continue to have authority over modern society IS a conservative view that’s very political in nature.
There’s a difference between sharing your faith and making it illegal to not follow its rules. That’s what I was trying to emphasize.
I fit the definition of evangelical Christian, though I generally don’t use that label. I believe the God is the ultimate authority, and by extension, the Bible is the ultimate authority over Christians. That does not mean I believe in forcing people to follow its rules or punishing them if they don’t. A lot of the laws simply don’t work or make sense if you don’t have faith, and the Bible makes it clear that you need a change of heart to follow the laws, not vice versa. That’s why I’m not voting for or supporting movements to ban abortions (also the biblical basis of that is questionable) or force shops to close on Sundays.
I believe in the sharing of faith, but I’m not acting like an arch user or a vegan who has to work it into conversation every chance they get (yes, that’s an exaggeration.) My friends already know I’m a Christian, and most people in Western society already know the basic tenets of the religion, so sharing that repeatedly isn’t going to do much. And I can’t force someone to be saved or bring them to salvation, God has to call them. So all I can and should do is help to show it’s real by the way I live my life, demonstrating love for all mankind, and hope they get the idea. If that much is problematic, I think we’ve got issues.
The reason I take issue with demonizing evangelicals is that it comes off as “Christianity as a whole might be fine, just don’t be an evangelical because they’re the bad ones,” and then you look it up and it becomes “you can be a Christian, just don’t tell anyone and don’t believe the Bible.” I figured that isn’t what was meant exactly, which is why I’m asking for a different label to be used, because that’s how it comes off.
Youre doing it right now. No one wants to hear about your faith, or how “You might be one of the good ones” that exact thing has been said to persecute too many actual good people who are literally just trying to go about their day.
Its typically not seen as a good thing to go around proclaiming how terrible your critical thinking skills are.
Your argument is the same one cops use to justify “bad apples”: it’s not all of us, it’s only some of us.
Before any religion starts preaching to their neighbors or “sharing the faith,” y’all need to get your own folks in order. You may not demonize LGBTQ+ people, or want to ban abortion, or force others to live under the same tenets as you, but those who wear your cross and share your God do.
So all I can and should do is help to show it’s real by the way I live my life, demonstrating love for all mankind, and hope they get the idea. If that much is problematic, I think we’ve got issues.
I would argue we definitely have issues. You will not change my mind, but religion has done significantly more harm across history, particularly Christianity, than any amount of Christian do-gooding will ever be able to undo. Millions across history have suffered, been enslaved, had their rights taken away, been tortured, and killed at the hands of “Christians,” and that includes the modern day. Christian groups are the ones helping to spread HIV/AIDS across Africa because god forbid anyone use a condom, Christians are the ones pushing for abortion bans, and Christians are the ones trying to pull the US into an authoritarian theocracy.
So if you don’t want to be associated with the ills of Christianity, you may want to reconsider, in my opinion, what benefit God provides to mankind. Because from where I’m sitting, it’s literally zero. The world would be a much better place without religion, and you shouldn’t need the promise of an eternal paradise and eternal salvation to, as you put it, “demonstrating love for all mankind.” If you can’t live that way without “God” telling you, then you’re exactly the problem with Christianity.
“Christianity as a whole might be fine, just don’t be an evangelical because they’re the bad ones,” that’s about what I got from it. In my church at least, we’re starting to focus more and more on doing actual outreach that doesn’t include evangelizing. Those people who believe that we need to tell all our neighbors regardless of whether they want to hear are becoming more and more of the minority.
I get that a lot of evangelicals are bad but the level of hate Lemmy has for them is… Excessive
The problem is the sharing. If they only did it when asked no problem. But they don’t. They leave shitty tip notes and letters on your door if not outright invoke you to talk with them by knocking randomly. They try to change the laws for everyone to conform to their own personal “salvation” and impose that on us all. They stand outside clinics and shame people trying not to die. If they kept it personal no one would care. But they don’t.
There’s two others that nearly died from evangelicals trying to over share. Stop this and no one would give a fuck. Until then: in for a penny in for a pound.
it’s just that there’s an emphasis on the authority of the Bible, sharing of faith, and personal salvation
Two of those three things are at best annoying and at worst deadly to the evangelical Christian’s victims
I don’t we were ever at a time where sharing your faith respectfully was problematic. We were and are always in the phase where people sharing and using their faith as an excuse to be a dick is problematic.
If someone is religious but they’re chill with my people and the lgbt community then I’m chill with them.
Anyone who’s actually an evangelical Christian should be. The Bible says to emulate Jesus, and that Jesus is a friend of sinners. Even if someone walks in naked and wasted with “I love Satan” tatooed on their chest and they punch you in the face and steal your wallet, love is not rude.
Anyone who’s actually an evangelical Christian should be. The Bible says to emulate Jesus, and that Jesus is a friend of sinners.
By that metric we’d have only a dozen or so “real” evangelical Christians
Yeah, and that’s sad, but it’s a narrow road.
There’s a bit of “No True Scotsman”, going on here I think. You cannot deny what we all see every day, Evangelicals working every day to suppress LGBTQ and women’s rights. That’s what they do, that’s what they are.
[Edit for typo]
No True Scotsman is a tricky one here. In the original, it works because strictly speaking, a Scotsman is just anyone who lives in Scotland, so you can’t prescribe additional requirements to it. As for Christianity, I feel the term should be limited to those who actually follow the Bible, but in general use it’s just anyone who chooses to call themselves that. I’d love to have a separate term for those who follow the Bible so we can avoid this problem, but if it catches on, the grifters would start calling themselves that too.
In any case, the Bible is the rulebook for Christianity, and calling yourself a Christian implies that you believe it, so I think that it’s fair to say a true Christian is one who follows the Bible. But then, the Scottish law is the rulebook for Scotland. Though calling yourself a Scotsman doesn’t necessarily imply that you’re not a criminal, that’s just the default assumption for everyone (barring racism and other prejudices.)
You’re not going to split hairs out of this one. Trying to say that these are not Evangelicals because no true Evangelical would do this is pretty much the "No True Scotsman " evasion. When people say, “Evangelicals”, this is exactly the group to which they are referring.
The one or two “True Evangelicals” in the US can consider themselves exempt from this thread.
I think that it’s fair to say a true Christian is one who follows the Bible.
And I think you could waste your entire life looking for a single person that fits your arbitrary definition of what a true Christian is.
All you’re doing here is trying to carve yourself out a comfortable little niche where you can hide and pretend that the criticisms against Christianity as an institution don’t apply to you, because that’s easier than honestly examining your belief system.
All flavors are problematic. It shows a lack of critical thinking skills that leak into every facet of their lives, showing that they can’t be depended on to make rational decisions. The vast majority of this worlds problems have religion as a root cause, and the rest are just greed, which goes hand in hand with most organized religions.
The pages from the Bible are worse than toilet paper
You’re going to hell, repent sinner!
You’re going to hell, repent sinner!
Not sure whether you’re
- inventing a new kind of sinner,
- maybe misspelling ‘recent’,
- really wanting to say “You’re going to hell. Repent, sinner!” in English.
Ah crap. Forgot the internet is super cereal
You’re going to hell. Repent, sinner!
Better?
Eat shoots and leaves.
Oh, cool, see you there…
