/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

From what I've seen, these seem to fall into two categories, but there could be more. To wit:

1) Churches with bad doctrine; they are founded either through erroneous interpretation of scripture, or in a much more alarming case the subversion of scripture. For example, "we will pretend Leviticus, and some parts of the NT, and what the early fathers said, didn't happen; we won't mention it". Thoughts along those lines. The latter option, exercised out of a presumption that a church can't survive in an urban area with traditions or accepted scripture. Or the personal bias of a preacher. There may be other reasons more or less nefarious than those two.

2) Political churches. Basically worldly affairs, who see the pulpit as a way to galvanize a political section. Hardly being just pro-sodomy, they will adopt any particular issue that is popular with secular people. In some cases, like the Church of Sweden, they are also political since the state controls the church; regardless if the people in it accept dogma or not, they are forced a certain way by a bureaucrat.

>>698710

You just gotta remember that most people do not come to their religious beliefs through any form of theology. These people were Christian, they didn’t wanna give up their faith, so they just syncretized it with the pleasures of the world. Nothing more to it

>>698710

If you sell your faith to capitalism you'll suffer the consequences.

>>698726

I sometimes wonder if the most dangerous thing in the world isn't a bad cleric.

I have my own sins but I try to fight them. I don't try to justify them and turn evil into good.

These are really weak willed people, like Fat Acceptance movement types. They want to justify what is ugly and bad

this whole thread needs to read this >>697986 and be rendered ill

>>698730

... especially when they have as much power as they do, yes.

But, James 3:1 ... they will reap as they sow ...

>>698725

>capitalism

you blame capitalism for this degeneracy?!?! Look, I am only too ready to lay the boot into the (((usurers))) and (((money changers))), but I find it hard to believe this is their doing. There's no win for them in it.

I find it bewildering how someone can convince themselves that being a 'gay-affirming' Christian is a valid position to hold. I mean, I get how some people can believe that being gay is no big deal, and I get how people can think Christianity is true, but not how they can hold both opinions at the same time. If being gay is okay (I mean acting on it), the Old Testament is garbage, everything written by Paul (most of the New Testament) is garbage, and you have to interpret the gospels through an odd lens that puts Jesus at odds with both the Old Testament saints and prophets that preceded him and the New Testament saints and prophets that succeeded him. Yeah there are some claims that the Bible doesn't actually condemn gays and is actually talking about pagan prostitutes or something, but honestly you'd have to be retarded to buy that, it goes against the plain meaning of the text. Honestly I think the people in the churches at the top who push this are activists first and do not believe in God in any meaningful way. The laity who go along with it grew up in the church but know nothing about Jesus except that He was nice, didn't judge, hung out with prostitutes and hated rich people, etc. They go along with what the church says since it conforms to the world, and doesn't require them to hurt gay people's feelings and become unpopular.

>>698757

I'm not forgetting that, it's just that Jesus is not recorded singling out homosexuality in particular which they use as a loophole.

>>698750

Of course there is. More customers, more target groups, etc. Why do you think all these big companies were celebrating 'pride month' (companies like Apple, Amazon, and even Ford) coloring their logos with the gay flag, sponsoring gay parades even…

2 Timothy 4:3-4: For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (KJV)

Isn't it clear? They seek the approval of the world. But it is clear that "…friendship of the world is enmity with God … whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." These places are not churches, they have turned aside. It's a great tragedy because thousands of people are stuck in these places thinking they are right with God, but they are only building up His wrath. I truly fear for the leaders of these places/organisations, as the Bible promises they will get what is coming to them for leading people astray.

>>698760

It's not capitalism, it's greed. Blaming capitalism for greed is like blaming God for sin

>>698817

Capitalism is full of satans corruption. We need to implement distributism.

>>698818

I just can't see how we could implement distributism without stealing

>>698822

Usury is theft

>>698710

Surely, it's not that hard to understand?

Homosexuals arise from amongst us, they are our brothers and sisters and they become afflicted by this condition.

The idea that we should just condemn them and/or kill them is abhorrent.

If this truly is a great sin (and it might very well be, to be quite honest), than as christians we should leave no stone unturned in our pursuit of an actual cure, or preventative measure.

I blame the political left for the current situation, which basically eliminates all possibility of a gay cure research due to political screeching.

And if a cure can't be found, than these people must be dealt with in a non-violent manner anyways. It's better to have them openly profess their identity than to have them go undercover and infiltrate the church and other institutions.

>>698823

We agree, but usury isn't necessary for capitalism.

>>698823

Hippitty hoppitty, statists off of my property.

>>698830

>true capitalism has never been tried

yeah yeah

UCC thinks they're entitled to gay parishioners. It's going poorly for them.

>red up

>lgbt

the lgbt "curruption rainbow" is purple on the top.

It its red on the top, its gods symbol

>>698824

That's not what those churches are doing. They are point-blank *celebrating* the sins of homosexuality. Love is love, man!

>>698729

Excommunicating incoming.

Aren't these guys afraid? Wtf?

>>698735

It's on the catechism. It's says it's completely anti nature and a terrible imoral act.

But again even with the Internet people don't read shit. Why read it if it disproves their twisted morality?

>>698818

>we

GOD needs to implement distributism. You would mess it up.

>>698824

>Homosexuals arise from amongst us, they are our brothers and sisters and they become afflicted by this condition. The idea that we should just condemn them and/or kill them is abhorrent.

Homosexuality is a gravely unnatural condition, but it can be dealt with through non-violent and forgiving means. However, that is much different than celebrating.

>If this truly is a great sin (and it might very well be, to be quite honest)

Leviticus, and then later on in both the OT and NT. Plus the Church Fathers. Polycarp for instance, who was directly trained by the apostles and said, "neither fornicators, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, shall inherit the kingdom of God". Augustine said the act was against nature, in a near ultimate sense, which was repeated by John Chrysostom. Outside the unified church: Peter Damian, Thomas Aquinas, Catherine of Siena repeat those first three fathers on the Roman end…in fact Catherine says that the act is so extremely Corrupt to the fabric of reality, to natural law, that demons run for the hills when confronted with gay sex. Martin Luther said it was the "monstrous depravity" and felt disgusted even bringing the subject up. The Eastern Church is aggressively against it in all regards. This is one area that, on paper, would be a universally agreed point from the start to the present day.

>It's better to have them openly profess their identity than to have them go undercover and infiltrate the church and other institutions.

They infiltrate anyway. Every such assembly they openly lead, features more total error in other areas besides the one that affects them directly; abortion advocacy, Marxist lines, the celebration of sin as love, the error that supernatural faith in Heaven and Hell isn't important. One or more of these can be easily seen on a regular basis in rebellious houses.

>>698927

Never though I'd say this but Luther was right. He'd kill himself if he saw the Lutheran church of Sweden.

They have been total cast over, as a attempt to appeal the world. Now they're dying out of irrelevance.

>>698710

A rainbow flag isn't necessarily denoting LGBT acceptance. Remember that the rainbow is a symbol of God's everlasting covenant with every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.

>>698991

This is the UCC, it's satanic as it gets

>>698710

>I'm losing my mind.

So are they

liberals and sodomites infiltrated the church

>>698991

As a rule of thumb, you should start worrying whenever you see a rainbow with less than seven colors

>>698927

What would your solution be?

I say gather them up and put them in a seclided space with spiritual fathers guiding them towards the right path.

>>698710

>untaxed income

>continuation of ruining society

This isn't complicated.

>>698927

>They infiltrate anyway.

Are you the same fag who said that we shouldn't put fags in monasteries because they would "have lots of sex with each other anyways"?

You're a bit lukewarm, aren't you?

>>699015

Oh wow, you're right. There's only six colors on that thing. How appropriate.

>>699120

>Are you the same fag who said that we shouldn't put fags in monasteries because they would "have lots of sex with each other anyways"?

No.

>You're a bit lukewarm, aren't you?

No. Your "it might be a great sin" post I replied to is a bit of an eye-opener though. Anyway, not even worth bumping the thread really.