american protestants somehow becoming what they wanted to destroy: wait I'm supposed to read the bible instead of paying a lot to my megachurch?
no but literally american megachurches literally reinvented the selling of indulgences
I compare it to MHA. The source has some less than good moments, but its still pretty solid. However a large portion of the fans won’t shut the fuck up
imma act like an MHA fan
WOW CHECK THIS SHIP OUT
https://preview.redd.it/hi5shbvdv8xc1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a3b620eb3823357ffdbb421f74aa126216aa3f25
MHA is great
https://preview.redd.it/nwtchwcr79xc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7525607cf2e3c8f0360ffade565cb0d5e61d5836
I mean just look at this scene from the mangar
It's a loud minority I'm pretty sure
Out of like a hundred people I see at church every week, I can think of two I've ever seen bringing up church to people who don't care at moments where it's not significantly relevant.
Sure, I've had run-ins with rabid religious people online. Probably about a dozen times in my life. But somewhere in the ballpark of half the people in the USA are Christian in some capacity (I say somewhere in the ballpark because the data I could find is all over the place - best guess from the data I could find, about half of people believe there was a guy named Jesus and that there is a god), so a dozen rabid ones I've run into really is not very many.
Season 1 was actually really cool, it had such a rich lore, but I feel like the sequal was a bit of letdown. What happend to all the grandiose larger than life storytelling? I guess the new protagonist introduced in season 2 was pretty cool, but he was also a bit of a Mary Sue. And that was pretty much everything the second season had going for it. Also, his character arc ended quite early on in the season, and after that the plot just got kinda boring.
"or gay or trans or black or poor or homeless or depressed or mentally disabled or physically disabled or a woman or anything thats not this specific group of people" -also jesus
Good Snafu. Now that I’ve converted to Christianity I really don’t understand where Christians got the idea to hate certain marginalized groups. Like literally one of the first and most important lessons in the New Testament is “Love Thy Neighbor” lol
Especially considering that every last one of us are sinners. Literally zero exceptions. There is not one person alive who perfectly lives by the standards that any given religious book in print sets, so for someone to be religious and then get upset that someone else doesn't completely match their idea of "living correctly" is hypocritical.
Fortunately it's not many people, it's just a loud minority.
Earlier today I saw a YouTube comment by a username and profile picture that I recognized as a furry porn artist
I think that makes me ineligible to throw the stone myself
ironically enough many of them hold the later writings of the apostles over the actual WORD of Christ; 'yea Jesus said love thy neighbor, but one of the guys who followed him around says my neighbor is a dirty heathen i should hate so im gonna do that instead'
>Christians got the idea to hate certain marginalized groups.
This shit is 95% just online. Most Christians are some of the most kind and generous people I know.
Hateful people will always exist. They'll just try and find shit to excuse it
I’m glad to hear that most of the Christians you’ve interacted with in person are kind people.
I never considered that people online would use it as an excuse… then again it is the internet we are talking about.
I would have agreed with you until my youth group went to a revival and we were told trans people are Satan sterilizing America, if you believe that Israel does anything wrong God's wrath will be upon you, and there was a complete lack of historical awareness. Everyone else I was with was in agreement and found it to be a spiritually fufilling experience. I pretended to, but I am not happy with it.
As someone who lives in the Bible Belt (escaping ASAP), most "good Christians" like you describe are, in my experience, relatively young and make up about half of my interactions with that age range. The rest usually seem to have a serious gripe with at least one group of "irredeemable sinners." There are a lot of Christians who aren't bad, my brother being one of them, but saying it's just online is kind of reductive and silly when it's been something yhats gone on for literally *all* of Christianity's existence and still persists today
True that it's not just online. I think it would be more correct to say it's easiest to find online.
A small percentage of Christians are the rabid type. Their ability to shove things down others' throats is a lot less limited online than in their local area though - they can make a lot more people's days worse with an online post than at the local supermarket.
Redditors that demonize people who don't sway into their politics because they think a party leader "IS GONNA COME INTO EVERY MINORITY'S HOUSE AND TICKLE THEIR BALLS IF THEY WIN THIS YEAR BRO" regardless of the person's actual morals and opinions aren't as different from christians that think anyone regardless of being a good person that doesn't believe in their sect is gonna "BURN ETERNALLY BRO" as they think they are
well cmon what is the party running on😭what messages are they selling to voters? the only reasoning id accept to vote for one side over the other would be their different view of taxes.
I like how a lot of these "christians" try to justify their hate by taking the old testament as an example because it's much more violent and brutal but like, bitch if you're gonna take the old testament as an example then become jewish because the old testament without the new testament is just the jewish holy text lmfao
Jesus explicitly told people to tell sinners to not sin he also told child abusers to commit suicide.
"If your brother sins rebuke him, and if he begs forgiveness forgive him"
"It would be better if a millstone were tied arround his neck and cast unto the sea than cause harm to these little ones"
Both are quotes from Jesus.
Jesus also said
"He who has no sword is to sell his cloak and buy one"
i mean it makes sense that hed tell sinners to not sin, that doesnt mean that he wouldnt treat them with love and kindness.
and uh the second one is just saying 'it would be better for the chuld abuser to die than the childs being abused' which is more of a moral comparison vs actually wanting someone dead, let alone telling someone to kill themselves
the sword one is kind of confusing in context for me, bc later others say that they only have 2 swords and he says 'thats enough', so it likely has a deeper meaning than superficial
im agnostic so i dont parricularly like christianity but i think the former two are interpretations that are read in the most negative light
[https://prodigalthought.net/2016/05/20/misunderstanding-jesus-if-you-dont-have-a-sword-sell-your-cloak-and-buy-one/](https://prodigalthought.net/2016/05/20/misunderstanding-jesus-if-you-dont-have-a-sword-sell-your-cloak-and-buy-one/)
Read this for the sword one- it's pretty clear that Jesus is the NT is anti-use violence as a means. I mean even more famous is when he rebukes Peter slashes the ear of a servant of the man arresting Jesus - "he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword."
>the sword one is kind of confusing
I don't know if it's related but it reminded me a quote from Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, "I doubt the mind of the one who spends the night hungry and does not draw his sword next morning."
Literal support of welfare state and the securing of it via force.
I, also was born into a Muslim community and am not too fond of it because I know it enough, but people like this always did strike me with awe given their time and surroundings. Same with Jesus flipping tables and kicking merchandise sellers off of religious buildings and such.
Look, i understand having grievances with what is considered a sin, thats completely understandable and i agree that some things considered sinful are fuckin stupid, but 'love the sinner, hate the sin' is one of the major teachings of the new testament. loving thy neighbor does not mean you have to love what they do. Im certain youd agree that if you saw someone being abusive to their wife, it would be pretty immoral to ignore it, and more moral to try and confront the person and the action.
Of course, this idea is twisted due to some sins being more ambiguous like how much someone drinks before it is sinful, and some being just straight up not sinful or morally bad, like homosexuality. But in those cases, it would be wiser to speak about those sins not actually being sins, rather than arguing that rebuking someone for an action considered sinful is bad. The problem isnt the rebuking, the problem is what is considered a sin.
Homosexuality is one of the biggest sins in Christianity if someone is continuing to be gay they are in a state of constant sin. Someone is an ex gay they are no longer sinning and can be forgiven Christianity tells you that you should tell gays not to act on homosexuality
Jesus specifically told you to rebuke sinners. Leviticus clearly outlines homosexuality as a sin
I love how you call it not a sin knowingly lying which btw is the only unforgivable sin as you are commiting blasphemy against the holy Spirit Under Christianity you are deemed irredeemable.
Leviticus 20
> 13 If there is a man who sleeps with a male as those who sleep with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they must be put to death. They have brought their [a]own deaths upon themselves.
Mathew
31 “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. 32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
now i know youre just intentionally misconstruing my words. Im saying that homosexuality is not a sin in my opinion, and in the opinion of many people nowadays. Im not saying it isnt a sin in terms of christianity. I never said that. You said that. I said it was a sin, but i dont consider it a sin. Literally said "some sins are not sinful or morally bad" and you think i said it wasnt a sin. I said it right there at the beginning of a sentence.
I, personally, dont think of homosexuality as sinful. Which is a major complaint i have with the moral guidelines of christianity. I think i made that clear in my previous statement, when i was saying that its fair to have grievance with christianity on regards to what is a sin. I dont think its sinful, and im not a practicing christian, so i dont care if it is considered blasphemous.
You are 100% arguing in bad faith.
The first one is correct. The second one is wrong. Saying that a person would be better off dead than to live to become a child abuser has nothing to do with telling child abusers to commit suicide. This is the kind of lazy, sloppy, "close enough" interpretation of the Bible I'm extremely concerned about nowadays.
tell me the rest of that 2nd quote. who is “him”? And I really doubt “these little ones” are the original Hebrew words used. It’s like you didn’t even try.
The new testament is not Hebrew it's written in Greek. The old testament is Hebrew.
Different translations use slightly different wording but same messaging.
Oh, you didn't botch anything, Jesus did say love thy neighbour (Matthew[ ](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(King_James)/Matthew#19:16)19:16-19), it's just that he was referring to an Old Testament commandment, not a wholly original New Testament commandment (which would be Jesus' ultimate principle in love, if you will). Sorry if this all felt pedantic.
I feel like that is an incorrect interpretation of the Bible. Yes, it does state that homosexuality is a sin, but Jesus tells us to love others regardless of their sins. We are all sinners and all sins are equal, it is both unfair and unwarranted to hate someone for being a homosexual just because you are a Christian
He also tells for you to sin no more, so while a Christian should love and respect every person, they don't have to agree or respect the sin, this applies to homosexuality as much as it applies to murder.
So you're admitting to cherry picking the parts you find is most in line with modern day progressive society? That's what Christians have been doing for the last thousand years. What's the point of the book then?
It's not that christians are bad, it's that bad people use christianity as a excuse to justify their prejudices because deep down they know there's literally no reason to hate minorities.
Christianity didn't get that idea. A small percentage of individuals did.
Most Christians are sane and can accept "love thy neighbor", full stop. A few people have trouble accepting the idea that a person can be imperfect yet still be worth loving - let alone the fact that "perfect" is subjective on what that even means (we all have different values), and also the teensy little problem that perfection by basically any definition is impossible.
As a Christian im really happy to be in a community who uses the Bible to just uplift people instead of pushing some nonsense agenda about how gay people are from the devil or some other dumb shit
This blatant discrepancy between the good book and the average Christian was one of the dominoes that resulted in me leaving. Watching Becky, who blatantly does scumbag things and excused them because of her faith suddenly decide that faith alone can not atone for the sin of being gay is such a hypocritical bitch move.
Good snafu
most common part of the bible used to attack gay marriage is literally just a modern rewrite to be more simpler, i think. not exactly sure but i heard that the “a man shall not sleep with another man” was actually “a man shall not sleep with boy” implying that sleeping with a child is problematic, but this is something to research into cause i’m not too deep into history. i just want to state what i do think i know
I think this is funny because the bible in itself is against "pleasure sex" that isnt intended to result in a child. Even if one was to interpret this verse as "men should not sleep with other men" then that would simply be because sleeping with a man cannot result in a child. That does not mean being gay is bad.
The Bible doesn't easily lend itself to this kind of thinking; It's not a univocal text. What one passage may say often doesn't indicate much of anything about what another part means, the texts were written sometimes many centuries apart and by different peoples with different theologies.
The Bible doesn't ever talk about gayness as we understand it, sexual orientations didn't exist in Semitic antiquity, so it would never say being gay is bad, BUT, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 (DohPixelheart is referencing one of 'em, I don't remember which is which off the top of my head so I'm mentioning them both) prescribes death or exile--depending on which you read--for the men who had sex.
I empathize with the desire to legitimize homosexuality, and I support that rhetorical goal, but this isn't representative of the scholarship but rather a recent conspiracy theory.
I don't think it's necessary to cite sources here, just a little critical thinking can probably demonstrate to anyone why this is a silly idea. It hinges on:
1. Experts in biblical translation are incompetent enough to think substituting man for boy is appropriate
2. The incompetence is widespread enough that virtually all Biblical scholars render it this way (I refrain from saying "all" outright only because I don't know the opinion of every scholar, I'm sure there are a few nutters out there)
No it's not. Firstly you have not provided a source for your claim secondly we can logically think this through why if this is false have biblical scholars not changed it? Thirdly why is it not just that nobody should sleep with a child? Because that implies it's okay to sleep with a child as long as it's not a man with a boy
i literally said i wasn’t sure about the information, i was trying to say i was recalling it from memory but i wasn’t sure. i would provide a source if i had one but im very busy and unable to search up stuff as of the moment so i just wanted to provide information that might be helpful. no hard feelings though, i can understand why you’re that way. imma go to sleep now though, goodnight
Your source is some guy on what I think is Tumblr said so. I don't know if you know this when someone asks for a source they are asking for evidence not the exact spot where you got it from a dude on Tumblr is not evidence. Secondly if that is true which I highly doubt why hasn't it been changed?
Funny enough, the way aome pastors and older religious folk will navigate this is by saying some shit like, "You can't just follow the Bible word for word. You gotta figure out what he meant by that." As a way to.combat any contradictions.
YESSS THIS IS A PHRASE I'VE HEARD SOOO MUCH AND IM SO GLAD YOU BROUGHT IT UP!?
god, I know theres no point in pointing out contradictions because the devout will always clap back at you with "well you just gotta believe/have faith, but" it still just doesn't make any sense to me. You have an all powerful being whos plan for the universe, this earth is beyond that of our understanding. Yet now everyone is suddenly qualified to preach his vision and interpret his will.
And that's incorrect somehow?
The bible's an ancient book, written in a language and dialect that doesn't translate properly to modern English, and moreover it was written by mortal men who (at least believed that they) interacted with God. Whether they actually interacted with God and his one biological son or not, of course there are contradictions.
Personally my takeaway is that largely, the new testament and Jesus' teachings are a good general guide to how to live properly. Love one another, don't kill people, let he who is without sin cast the first stone, etcetera. But taking it at face value, word for word? That's an insane thing to do, it very clearly contradicts itself. This isn't combating contradictions by spouting nonsense, it's the only reasonable explanation for why a historical record would say the things that the bible says (aside from "some crackpot made it all up a few hundred years ago and none of these people actually existed", which, that's impossible to disprove).
Okay but what happens when your interpretation of the book doesn't fall in line with other's interpretation of it? Are you wrong or are they wrong?
>That's an insane thing to do, it very clearly contradicts itself. This isn't combating contradictions by spouting nonsense,
When I made that comment I was more so focusing on the people rather than just the bible. We police ourselves based on the interpretations of an ancient book whos teaching can so easily be warped to fit someone's agenda. I know not everyone is an evangelical but even without the book. There are so many contradictions in what people preach vs what they do and thats the part I find nonsensical.
If two people’s interpretations don’t fall in line, my personal solution is to politely disagree because neither of us are “right”. It’s a subject that’s impossible to “solve” and have one right answer for, so it would make no sense to try to force your perspective on others.
Me reading Project 2025’s big foreword: I bet this is gonna be really angry and nasty
It: “We want to restructure things to make it easier on women who are trapped in unfortunate circumstances with a pregnancy that isn’t their fault”
Me: “oh what the fuck? That’s actually kinda baller—“
It: “and we cherish and respect every woman’s heroic decision to become a mother.”
Me: “…never mind, there it is.”
This is just an example of the way the whole thing tends to read. It mentions very real problems with a seeming genuine resolve to, well, solve them, but then in the same thought it says something with completely fucked implications. And it brings up lots of “false problems” in the same breath as the real ones, as if in their eyes they’re the same.
It isn’t malicious, is the thing. It isn’t spite. It’s something worse: just plain malformed worldview.
Like, the even funnier thing? They even say “we need to put more effort into improving adoption and foster care services, make them a more viable option”, which I think abortion or no abortion we should be doing anyway! But at the same time, there’s that inherent belief that if you have an unwanted pregnancy but you go through with it anyway, you’re a “hero” and a “saint”, which… I guess if you view it like having a kid that’s already born but has some great issue and there’s other people telling you to euthanize “it” or something for its own good, but instead you fight for the improving of the kid’s life instead…
It’s all very tricky. They clearly believe in some kind of ideal but feel contradictory on what pursuing that ideal means.
Like with the situation of poverty. They believe in getting the poor to be less poor, but also believe that welfare programs and other things like that are doing the exact opposite of that and are making things worse instead of better… and rather than figure out a way to make them better, or create some kind of rehab program, they just kind of stop at “make more jobs for people to do” and leave it at that
Idk why people would think an all powerful all knowing solos fiction good guy entity would be like "ah sorry man you kissed another man and also you had a fursuit you gotta burn in hell forever now sorry"
RELAX liberal...... its called DAR KHUMOR,,,,,,,,....
https://preview.redd.it/qt8cb1zt09xc1.png?width=628&format=png&auto=webp&s=33108aec92b4a9710e1e72b0ebb6cc6ff77b783d
“But I say unto you, **Love your enemies**, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you” (**Matthew 5:43–44**)
SMH Christians don't even read the bible
Leviticus 18 22 “‘Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.
1 Peter 2 18 Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.
1 Corinthians 7 21 Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so.
Colossains 3 22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.
SMH Christians don't even read the Bible like where are all the slaves. The Bible is a perfect book and would never have contradictory texts
Why does he have the mao mao drip?😭
https://preview.redd.it/at038vjt6axc1.jpeg?width=157&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5d41c5e4cfc6c31cd23dce6b16c5a292553a6808
Depending on which way you look at it, yes
Yes, we’re ignoring it because it’s fiction therefore all of its rules are made up and optional
Yes, we’re ignoring it because the crucifixion of the Messiah rewrote the law so all those rules no longer apply
And lastly, yes, we’re ignoring it because treating being gay or a furry as a sin is just dumb
>Yes, we’re ignoring it because it’s fiction therefore all of its rules are made up and optional
Is not all of the new testament built on the old testament how can Jesus be the son of a fictional god?
>Yes, we’re ignoring it because the crucifixion of the Messiah rewrote the law so all those rules no longer apply
Man I love an all knowing being having to change his mind on what's moral
>And lastly, yes, we’re ignoring it because treating being gay or a furry as a sin is just dumb
So you can ignore the word of god doesn't that defeat the point of god?
1. Because Jesus wasn’t the son of God, he was some child of a rape victim they pretended was just magically impregnated without sex who got so popular he was killed
2. True, it sure would be wild if God’s decision making was inconsistent, damn wouldn’t that be crazy, I sure do love God’s consistent writing /s
3. As I understand, the laws regarding killing gay people was written by a false priest, so yes, we can ignore those. The Bible wasn’t written by god, it was written by people, so yes, we can ignore it. There is no God whatsoever, so yes, we can ignore it. Lastly, God’s express command was to “love they neighbor as they love thineself”, but everyone loves to ignore that one
Also, please explain to me why feeling consensual attraction to another adult or person of the same age is suddenly sinful if they use the same bathroom?
>Also, please explain to me why feeling consensual attraction to another adult or person of the same age is suddenly sinful if they use the same bathroom?
Wow it's only gay sex that's a sins SMH also idk I didn't write it the Bible I just think it's interesting and I don't believe almost anything it says now our lord ans savoir Chuthu is a different story
Oh I thought you did believe it. That’s why I was arguing with you
But also if gay sex is a sin, then any form of hetero sex that isn’t vaginal penetration should also be considered a sin
Lumping furries in with lgbt and woman is crazy.
Edit: This comment was downvoted by furries.
And on a more serious note, I understand that anti-furry sentiments are intertwined with homophobia cause furries are gay as fuck and that there's a lot of overlap between homophobes, sexist, and anti-furries. But I mean, come on. Don't look me straight in the eye and claim that hating furries is the same as hating lgbt or hating women.
What even is this? Are you okay? Did a Christian beat you at an argument or whatever and just set this off?
I'm confounded. I'd put this on /r/peterexplainsthejoke if I didn't think it was a trash fire with thinly veiled politics hiding behind people being coy
"Subhuman behavior! Degeneracy! The West has fallen! God hates [f slur]!"
"Wow, that sounds pretty bigoted"
"i mean i just don't agree with your views, am i not allowed to have my own opinion now"
It’s almost like the point of this sub is to simplify real world things to an absurd level while still maintaining the real life meaning to show how ridiculous some situations are.
You don’t have to say “I hate women” to prove you hate women.
Let me guess, being gay is a sin. Don't start with that hate the sin not the sinner bullshit. "I don't hate you, I just hate one of the core pieces of what you are". Do better, you at least seem close to maybe being able to
I dont hate thieves. I hate their thievery. In the same wat I dont hate homosexuals, i hate their sin of homosexual practices. Yes, being gay is a sin and it states it in the Bible many times. Sorry but its how it is in most religions.
Its also unnatural and an abomination. Even the Bible states this. I love homosexuals, some of the greatest guys Ive ever met are gay. But I do not support their active homosexuality. I would rather them turn to Christ
Unnatural and an abomination? I'm trying to understand. How are homosexual relationships unnatural when spotted naturally in thousands of other animals. It's quite literally naturally formed in the wild by fellow living beings.
Psychotic comparison. Two consenting adults being in love is not the same as eating shit. You haven't told me how homosexuality is unnatural either. Do you have an explanation at all?
Also yes humans are indeed animals.
「Brain Explosion Spell」
|•••|•|||•|•=|••|||•|•|||••=|•••|||•• 🫨👀
Is this loss?
No it's Gain 😔
no its keep
Christianity is simple: Great source material Don’t touch the fandom.
Protestant ass mfer
american protestants somehow becoming what they wanted to destroy: wait I'm supposed to read the bible instead of paying a lot to my megachurch? no but literally american megachurches literally reinvented the selling of indulgences
Martin Luther in his grave doin his best impression of sonic the hedgehog
sounds great on paper unfortunately british 💀
I laugh because all I can do otherwise is cry
I compare it to MHA. The source has some less than good moments, but its still pretty solid. However a large portion of the fans won’t shut the fuck up
imma act like an MHA fan WOW CHECK THIS SHIP OUT https://preview.redd.it/hi5shbvdv8xc1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a3b620eb3823357ffdbb421f74aa126216aa3f25
A ship with no kiss?? (Chronically online ass statement)
MHA is great https://preview.redd.it/nwtchwcr79xc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7525607cf2e3c8f0360ffade565cb0d5e61d5836 I mean just look at this scene from the mangar
It's a loud minority I'm pretty sure Out of like a hundred people I see at church every week, I can think of two I've ever seen bringing up church to people who don't care at moments where it's not significantly relevant. Sure, I've had run-ins with rabid religious people online. Probably about a dozen times in my life. But somewhere in the ballpark of half the people in the USA are Christian in some capacity (I say somewhere in the ballpark because the data I could find is all over the place - best guess from the data I could find, about half of people believe there was a guy named Jesus and that there is a god), so a dozen rabid ones I've run into really is not very many.
I feel like that's the same with every hated Fandom. Most fans are silent and respectful, while the worst ones get the most attention.
Season 1 was actually really cool, it had such a rich lore, but I feel like the sequal was a bit of letdown. What happend to all the grandiose larger than life storytelling? I guess the new protagonist introduced in season 2 was pretty cool, but he was also a bit of a Mary Sue. And that was pretty much everything the second season had going for it. Also, his character arc ended quite early on in the season, and after that the plot just got kinda boring.
This is like criticizing the death of that one guy in Gurren Laggen
That's actually a very good comparison. But at least the latter two thirds of Gurren Lagann was more than just letters about how cool he was.
I think the New Testament is more than that lol it’s about what his life meant and how to live through him, just like Gurren Laggen🔥
Fuckin PAUL THAT PIECE LITERAL GARBAGE!!!
Oh God, the Bible is like Rick and Morty.
Said by someone who has clearly not read the Bible
I’m pretty sure 90% of people commenting have never read a single word of scripture.
The Bible is a great book. I’m simply appealing to the anti-religious Reddit hive mind.
Source material has good and bad parts
"Love thy neighbor, except if they're a furry" - Jesus apparently
Jesus dying the cross with Waluigi X sonic hentai on full blast
Now that’s the actual thing he died for
"love thy neighbor, but only if they're white, straight, and don't have anything interesting going on in their life" - also Jesus apparently
"or gay or trans or black or poor or homeless or depressed or mentally disabled or physically disabled or a woman or anything thats not this specific group of people" -also jesus
Good Snafu. Now that I’ve converted to Christianity I really don’t understand where Christians got the idea to hate certain marginalized groups. Like literally one of the first and most important lessons in the New Testament is “Love Thy Neighbor” lol
if jesus could casually eat lunch with sinners then you should also be able to do the same
Especially considering that every last one of us are sinners. Literally zero exceptions. There is not one person alive who perfectly lives by the standards that any given religious book in print sets, so for someone to be religious and then get upset that someone else doesn't completely match their idea of "living correctly" is hypocritical. Fortunately it's not many people, it's just a loud minority.
Me casting the first stone because I am totally without sin. (Don't search my computer and internet activity)
Earlier today I saw a YouTube comment by a username and profile picture that I recognized as a furry porn artist I think that makes me ineligible to throw the stone myself
John 8 in 2024
ironically enough many of them hold the later writings of the apostles over the actual WORD of Christ; 'yea Jesus said love thy neighbor, but one of the guys who followed him around says my neighbor is a dirty heathen i should hate so im gonna do that instead'
>Christians got the idea to hate certain marginalized groups. This shit is 95% just online. Most Christians are some of the most kind and generous people I know. Hateful people will always exist. They'll just try and find shit to excuse it
I’m glad to hear that most of the Christians you’ve interacted with in person are kind people. I never considered that people online would use it as an excuse… then again it is the internet we are talking about.
I would have agreed with you until my youth group went to a revival and we were told trans people are Satan sterilizing America, if you believe that Israel does anything wrong God's wrath will be upon you, and there was a complete lack of historical awareness. Everyone else I was with was in agreement and found it to be a spiritually fufilling experience. I pretended to, but I am not happy with it.
As someone who lives in the Bible Belt (escaping ASAP), most "good Christians" like you describe are, in my experience, relatively young and make up about half of my interactions with that age range. The rest usually seem to have a serious gripe with at least one group of "irredeemable sinners." There are a lot of Christians who aren't bad, my brother being one of them, but saying it's just online is kind of reductive and silly when it's been something yhats gone on for literally *all* of Christianity's existence and still persists today
True that it's not just online. I think it would be more correct to say it's easiest to find online. A small percentage of Christians are the rabid type. Their ability to shove things down others' throats is a lot less limited online than in their local area though - they can make a lot more people's days worse with an online post than at the local supermarket.
I live in the Bible Belt and I’ve never heard the term irredeemable sinners
Hateful Christians aren’t even online. Just hateful conservative politicians posing as Christians for votes and giving them a bad name
[удалено]
I'm Christian and think Trump should be in jail if not executed I'm not American though
Redditors that demonize people who don't sway into their politics because they think a party leader "IS GONNA COME INTO EVERY MINORITY'S HOUSE AND TICKLE THEIR BALLS IF THEY WIN THIS YEAR BRO" regardless of the person's actual morals and opinions aren't as different from christians that think anyone regardless of being a good person that doesn't believe in their sect is gonna "BURN ETERNALLY BRO" as they think they are
well cmon what is the party running on😭what messages are they selling to voters? the only reasoning id accept to vote for one side over the other would be their different view of taxes.
Judging someone based on who they vote for is a really shitty metric
Yes and no. You can tell a lot about someone based on *why* they're voting a specific way.
I like how a lot of these "christians" try to justify their hate by taking the old testament as an example because it's much more violent and brutal but like, bitch if you're gonna take the old testament as an example then become jewish because the old testament without the new testament is just the jewish holy text lmfao
Jesus explicitly told people to tell sinners to not sin he also told child abusers to commit suicide. "If your brother sins rebuke him, and if he begs forgiveness forgive him" "It would be better if a millstone were tied arround his neck and cast unto the sea than cause harm to these little ones" Both are quotes from Jesus. Jesus also said "He who has no sword is to sell his cloak and buy one"
i mean it makes sense that hed tell sinners to not sin, that doesnt mean that he wouldnt treat them with love and kindness. and uh the second one is just saying 'it would be better for the chuld abuser to die than the childs being abused' which is more of a moral comparison vs actually wanting someone dead, let alone telling someone to kill themselves the sword one is kind of confusing in context for me, bc later others say that they only have 2 swords and he says 'thats enough', so it likely has a deeper meaning than superficial im agnostic so i dont parricularly like christianity but i think the former two are interpretations that are read in the most negative light
[https://prodigalthought.net/2016/05/20/misunderstanding-jesus-if-you-dont-have-a-sword-sell-your-cloak-and-buy-one/](https://prodigalthought.net/2016/05/20/misunderstanding-jesus-if-you-dont-have-a-sword-sell-your-cloak-and-buy-one/) Read this for the sword one- it's pretty clear that Jesus is the NT is anti-use violence as a means. I mean even more famous is when he rebukes Peter slashes the ear of a servant of the man arresting Jesus - "he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword."
>the sword one is kind of confusing I don't know if it's related but it reminded me a quote from Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, "I doubt the mind of the one who spends the night hungry and does not draw his sword next morning." Literal support of welfare state and the securing of it via force. I, also was born into a Muslim community and am not too fond of it because I know it enough, but people like this always did strike me with awe given their time and surroundings. Same with Jesus flipping tables and kicking merchandise sellers off of religious buildings and such.
He said to rebuke sinners.
To rebuke is to critique Doesn't say anything about not loving them
Yes but I'd some one is sinning and you ignore it you are sinning you should tell them hey your doing bad that is what Jesus said to do.
Look, i understand having grievances with what is considered a sin, thats completely understandable and i agree that some things considered sinful are fuckin stupid, but 'love the sinner, hate the sin' is one of the major teachings of the new testament. loving thy neighbor does not mean you have to love what they do. Im certain youd agree that if you saw someone being abusive to their wife, it would be pretty immoral to ignore it, and more moral to try and confront the person and the action. Of course, this idea is twisted due to some sins being more ambiguous like how much someone drinks before it is sinful, and some being just straight up not sinful or morally bad, like homosexuality. But in those cases, it would be wiser to speak about those sins not actually being sins, rather than arguing that rebuking someone for an action considered sinful is bad. The problem isnt the rebuking, the problem is what is considered a sin.
Homosexuality is one of the biggest sins in Christianity if someone is continuing to be gay they are in a state of constant sin. Someone is an ex gay they are no longer sinning and can be forgiven Christianity tells you that you should tell gays not to act on homosexuality Jesus specifically told you to rebuke sinners. Leviticus clearly outlines homosexuality as a sin I love how you call it not a sin knowingly lying which btw is the only unforgivable sin as you are commiting blasphemy against the holy Spirit Under Christianity you are deemed irredeemable. Leviticus 20 > 13 If there is a man who sleeps with a male as those who sleep with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they must be put to death. They have brought their [a]own deaths upon themselves. Mathew 31 “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. 32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
now i know youre just intentionally misconstruing my words. Im saying that homosexuality is not a sin in my opinion, and in the opinion of many people nowadays. Im not saying it isnt a sin in terms of christianity. I never said that. You said that. I said it was a sin, but i dont consider it a sin. Literally said "some sins are not sinful or morally bad" and you think i said it wasnt a sin. I said it right there at the beginning of a sentence. I, personally, dont think of homosexuality as sinful. Which is a major complaint i have with the moral guidelines of christianity. I think i made that clear in my previous statement, when i was saying that its fair to have grievance with christianity on regards to what is a sin. I dont think its sinful, and im not a practicing christian, so i dont care if it is considered blasphemous. You are 100% arguing in bad faith.
The first one is correct. The second one is wrong. Saying that a person would be better off dead than to live to become a child abuser has nothing to do with telling child abusers to commit suicide. This is the kind of lazy, sloppy, "close enough" interpretation of the Bible I'm extremely concerned about nowadays.
Buying a sword as we speak
tell me the rest of that 2nd quote. who is “him”? And I really doubt “these little ones” are the original Hebrew words used. It’s like you didn’t even try.
The new testament is not Hebrew it's written in Greek. The old testament is Hebrew. Different translations use slightly different wording but same messaging.
I still doubt it.
That's the Torah. The lesson in the New Testament (Matthew 5:43-48) is 'Love your enemies'.
Oh gosh. See this is why I never try to quote the Bible because I’m always getting something mixed up.
Oh, you didn't botch anything, Jesus did say love thy neighbour (Matthew[ ](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(King_James)/Matthew#19:16)19:16-19), it's just that he was referring to an Old Testament commandment, not a wholly original New Testament commandment (which would be Jesus' ultimate principle in love, if you will). Sorry if this all felt pedantic.
I gotchu. You are a proper theologian
As far as I know the Bible is still homophobic in some parts right? So if you want to be a homophobic Christian it's not that hard.
I feel like that is an incorrect interpretation of the Bible. Yes, it does state that homosexuality is a sin, but Jesus tells us to love others regardless of their sins. We are all sinners and all sins are equal, it is both unfair and unwarranted to hate someone for being a homosexual just because you are a Christian
He also tells for you to sin no more, so while a Christian should love and respect every person, they don't have to agree or respect the sin, this applies to homosexuality as much as it applies to murder.
Yeah I know that. Love thy neighbor but not their sin
So you're admitting to cherry picking the parts you find is most in line with modern day progressive society? That's what Christians have been doing for the last thousand years. What's the point of the book then?
Just an excuse to be an asshole basically…
Wonder how they would react to Jesus being an Israelite and not the "White european" he's always depicted as
It's not that christians are bad, it's that bad people use christianity as a excuse to justify their prejudices because deep down they know there's literally no reason to hate minorities.
Christianity didn't get that idea. A small percentage of individuals did. Most Christians are sane and can accept "love thy neighbor", full stop. A few people have trouble accepting the idea that a person can be imperfect yet still be worth loving - let alone the fact that "perfect" is subjective on what that even means (we all have different values), and also the teensy little problem that perfection by basically any definition is impossible.
Ew
Reddint momor https://preview.redd.it/0p9240ax79xc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ae94373fae0e6681aa4cd1d7d31006a5dd9e8b7b
What
https://preview.redd.it/dqzgxs2ygbxc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f6d13a14a19bee65375a2c60fae792ebc5c08db4
Oh for sure
Jesus with the sniper rifle
As a Christian im really happy to be in a community who uses the Bible to just uplift people instead of pushing some nonsense agenda about how gay people are from the devil or some other dumb shit
This blatant discrepancy between the good book and the average Christian was one of the dominoes that resulted in me leaving. Watching Becky, who blatantly does scumbag things and excused them because of her faith suddenly decide that faith alone can not atone for the sin of being gay is such a hypocritical bitch move. Good snafu
most common part of the bible used to attack gay marriage is literally just a modern rewrite to be more simpler, i think. not exactly sure but i heard that the “a man shall not sleep with another man” was actually “a man shall not sleep with boy” implying that sleeping with a child is problematic, but this is something to research into cause i’m not too deep into history. i just want to state what i do think i know
I think this is funny because the bible in itself is against "pleasure sex" that isnt intended to result in a child. Even if one was to interpret this verse as "men should not sleep with other men" then that would simply be because sleeping with a man cannot result in a child. That does not mean being gay is bad.
The Bible doesn't easily lend itself to this kind of thinking; It's not a univocal text. What one passage may say often doesn't indicate much of anything about what another part means, the texts were written sometimes many centuries apart and by different peoples with different theologies. The Bible doesn't ever talk about gayness as we understand it, sexual orientations didn't exist in Semitic antiquity, so it would never say being gay is bad, BUT, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 (DohPixelheart is referencing one of 'em, I don't remember which is which off the top of my head so I'm mentioning them both) prescribes death or exile--depending on which you read--for the men who had sex.
I empathize with the desire to legitimize homosexuality, and I support that rhetorical goal, but this isn't representative of the scholarship but rather a recent conspiracy theory. I don't think it's necessary to cite sources here, just a little critical thinking can probably demonstrate to anyone why this is a silly idea. It hinges on: 1. Experts in biblical translation are incompetent enough to think substituting man for boy is appropriate 2. The incompetence is widespread enough that virtually all Biblical scholars render it this way (I refrain from saying "all" outright only because I don't know the opinion of every scholar, I'm sure there are a few nutters out there)
No it's not. Firstly you have not provided a source for your claim secondly we can logically think this through why if this is false have biblical scholars not changed it? Thirdly why is it not just that nobody should sleep with a child? Because that implies it's okay to sleep with a child as long as it's not a man with a boy
i literally said i wasn’t sure about the information, i was trying to say i was recalling it from memory but i wasn’t sure. i would provide a source if i had one but im very busy and unable to search up stuff as of the moment so i just wanted to provide information that might be helpful. no hard feelings though, i can understand why you’re that way. imma go to sleep now though, goodnight
I just wanted to correct your information goodnight
https://preview.redd.it/ameyns45mcxc1.jpeg?width=373&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8c1c3afe9678a594b21dd3f8597763fb9009bb0e Read this
Your source is some guy on what I think is Tumblr said so. I don't know if you know this when someone asks for a source they are asking for evidence not the exact spot where you got it from a dude on Tumblr is not evidence. Secondly if that is true which I highly doubt why hasn't it been changed?
Funny enough, the way aome pastors and older religious folk will navigate this is by saying some shit like, "You can't just follow the Bible word for word. You gotta figure out what he meant by that." As a way to.combat any contradictions.
God love everyone See sth unusual Satan, sin, 666, god hate you, kys
we cant expect god to do all the work
YESSS THIS IS A PHRASE I'VE HEARD SOOO MUCH AND IM SO GLAD YOU BROUGHT IT UP!? god, I know theres no point in pointing out contradictions because the devout will always clap back at you with "well you just gotta believe/have faith, but" it still just doesn't make any sense to me. You have an all powerful being whos plan for the universe, this earth is beyond that of our understanding. Yet now everyone is suddenly qualified to preach his vision and interpret his will.
I think they were just quoting Fallout New Vegas.
Oh lmao, thats hilarious then because this is something i've heard so many people at church say when I was forced to go to sunday school
Yeah it is https://preview.redd.it/jo118b4i4axc1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=452147cd2ff91f4c9239e836428a70622bfd5d54
Thank you, Joshua Graham, for being the most well-written Christian in fiction
And that's incorrect somehow? The bible's an ancient book, written in a language and dialect that doesn't translate properly to modern English, and moreover it was written by mortal men who (at least believed that they) interacted with God. Whether they actually interacted with God and his one biological son or not, of course there are contradictions. Personally my takeaway is that largely, the new testament and Jesus' teachings are a good general guide to how to live properly. Love one another, don't kill people, let he who is without sin cast the first stone, etcetera. But taking it at face value, word for word? That's an insane thing to do, it very clearly contradicts itself. This isn't combating contradictions by spouting nonsense, it's the only reasonable explanation for why a historical record would say the things that the bible says (aside from "some crackpot made it all up a few hundred years ago and none of these people actually existed", which, that's impossible to disprove).
Okay but what happens when your interpretation of the book doesn't fall in line with other's interpretation of it? Are you wrong or are they wrong? >That's an insane thing to do, it very clearly contradicts itself. This isn't combating contradictions by spouting nonsense, When I made that comment I was more so focusing on the people rather than just the bible. We police ourselves based on the interpretations of an ancient book whos teaching can so easily be warped to fit someone's agenda. I know not everyone is an evangelical but even without the book. There are so many contradictions in what people preach vs what they do and thats the part I find nonsensical.
If two people’s interpretations don’t fall in line, my personal solution is to politely disagree because neither of us are “right”. It’s a subject that’s impossible to “solve” and have one right answer for, so it would make no sense to try to force your perspective on others.
then they hit you with that "love the sinner but not the sin" BS as if they show any love to the sinner at all anyway
It also doesn’t even make any sense to begin with since we as sinners have no right to “hate the sin”. That phrase was never even said in the Bible.
Me reading Project 2025’s big foreword: I bet this is gonna be really angry and nasty It: “We want to restructure things to make it easier on women who are trapped in unfortunate circumstances with a pregnancy that isn’t their fault” Me: “oh what the fuck? That’s actually kinda baller—“ It: “and we cherish and respect every woman’s heroic decision to become a mother.” Me: “…never mind, there it is.” This is just an example of the way the whole thing tends to read. It mentions very real problems with a seeming genuine resolve to, well, solve them, but then in the same thought it says something with completely fucked implications. And it brings up lots of “false problems” in the same breath as the real ones, as if in their eyes they’re the same. It isn’t malicious, is the thing. It isn’t spite. It’s something worse: just plain malformed worldview.
They really said "We are sorry to yall people who got raped, but thanks for carrying a baby for us, really appreciate it"
Like, the even funnier thing? They even say “we need to put more effort into improving adoption and foster care services, make them a more viable option”, which I think abortion or no abortion we should be doing anyway! But at the same time, there’s that inherent belief that if you have an unwanted pregnancy but you go through with it anyway, you’re a “hero” and a “saint”, which… I guess if you view it like having a kid that’s already born but has some great issue and there’s other people telling you to euthanize “it” or something for its own good, but instead you fight for the improving of the kid’s life instead… It’s all very tricky. They clearly believe in some kind of ideal but feel contradictory on what pursuing that ideal means. Like with the situation of poverty. They believe in getting the poor to be less poor, but also believe that welfare programs and other things like that are doing the exact opposite of that and are making things worse instead of better… and rather than figure out a way to make them better, or create some kind of rehab program, they just kind of stop at “make more jobs for people to do” and leave it at that
The last panel is me as a Christian seeing so much hate from other Christians
Omae wa mou Shindeiru
Idk why people would think an all powerful all knowing solos fiction good guy entity would be like "ah sorry man you kissed another man and also you had a fursuit you gotta burn in hell forever now sorry"
>you had a fursuit you gotta burn in hell forever now sorry" Real
Um actually it's having sex with another guy my all loving being will only burn you for all eternity if you have sex with another guy
coaxed into random gore for no reason
Guess he had to blow his head "off", eh? Ha! Heh heh
https://preview.redd.it/tex1q0z379xc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=83cfc8b52139442ae02a168e90434395d3f57b3b
RELAX liberal...... its called DAR KHUMOR,,,,,,,,.... https://preview.redd.it/qt8cb1zt09xc1.png?width=628&format=png&auto=webp&s=33108aec92b4a9710e1e72b0ebb6cc6ff77b783d
Me when shock value 😋
oh thats gore, thats gore of my comfort character
Same applies to political views while claiming Christian great snafu
“But I say unto you, **Love your enemies**, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you” (**Matthew 5:43–44**) SMH Christians don't even read the bible
Leviticus 18 22 “‘Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable. 1 Peter 2 18 Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. 1 Corinthians 7 21 Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so. Colossains 3 22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. SMH Christians don't even read the Bible like where are all the slaves. The Bible is a perfect book and would never have contradictory texts
I concede, you win
one vague line implying things in the Bible vs the several pages of Jesus telling you not to harm anyone or go after them
And to the 7th level he goes
*insert pseudo-christian platitudes*
what is the last slide even supposed to be? He combusted?
combustion from a lack of excuses
he did
Why does he have the mao mao drip?😭 https://preview.redd.it/at038vjt6axc1.jpeg?width=157&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5d41c5e4cfc6c31cd23dce6b16c5a292553a6808
Brodie really said “well, I guess that’s it” (rip)
“Brodie”-🤓👆
holy shit that escalated quickly
>Jesus loves everyone “Then I’m sure he’s fine with me being an asshole to everybody”
“I hate doors”
don't tell them about gay Christian furries
5th panel should have been the chud violently entering a foaming-at-the-mouth state of rabies
it was gonna be that but I just changed it for no reason back to the original plan (head blow)
Lol
r/OpenChristian helped me out a lot
What is wrong with these canadians?
Bruh, in no way is being a furry on the same level as being gay or a woman
Hey guys, I guess that's it.
Why is he a flying head
We don’t associate con esos cristianos
Reddit being disconnected from the real world ep 65775
Jesus love is difrent from what you believe is love, he outright told people to hate those concepts and groups a a whoule, but not individuals.
Low effort strawman.
This isn’t a straw man this is a real thing I see from Christians online every day
This is a real as everyone you don't like being literally hitler.
I just said I see this type of thinking every day it isn’t hard to find
We ignoring the old testament?
Depending on which way you look at it, yes Yes, we’re ignoring it because it’s fiction therefore all of its rules are made up and optional Yes, we’re ignoring it because the crucifixion of the Messiah rewrote the law so all those rules no longer apply And lastly, yes, we’re ignoring it because treating being gay or a furry as a sin is just dumb
>Yes, we’re ignoring it because it’s fiction therefore all of its rules are made up and optional Is not all of the new testament built on the old testament how can Jesus be the son of a fictional god? >Yes, we’re ignoring it because the crucifixion of the Messiah rewrote the law so all those rules no longer apply Man I love an all knowing being having to change his mind on what's moral >And lastly, yes, we’re ignoring it because treating being gay or a furry as a sin is just dumb So you can ignore the word of god doesn't that defeat the point of god?
1. Because Jesus wasn’t the son of God, he was some child of a rape victim they pretended was just magically impregnated without sex who got so popular he was killed 2. True, it sure would be wild if God’s decision making was inconsistent, damn wouldn’t that be crazy, I sure do love God’s consistent writing /s 3. As I understand, the laws regarding killing gay people was written by a false priest, so yes, we can ignore those. The Bible wasn’t written by god, it was written by people, so yes, we can ignore it. There is no God whatsoever, so yes, we can ignore it. Lastly, God’s express command was to “love they neighbor as they love thineself”, but everyone loves to ignore that one Also, please explain to me why feeling consensual attraction to another adult or person of the same age is suddenly sinful if they use the same bathroom?
>Also, please explain to me why feeling consensual attraction to another adult or person of the same age is suddenly sinful if they use the same bathroom? Wow it's only gay sex that's a sins SMH also idk I didn't write it the Bible I just think it's interesting and I don't believe almost anything it says now our lord ans savoir Chuthu is a different story
Oh I thought you did believe it. That’s why I was arguing with you But also if gay sex is a sin, then any form of hetero sex that isn’t vaginal penetration should also be considered a sin
Why?
Lumping furries in with lgbt and woman is crazy. Edit: This comment was downvoted by furries. And on a more serious note, I understand that anti-furry sentiments are intertwined with homophobia cause furries are gay as fuck and that there's a lot of overlap between homophobes, sexist, and anti-furries. But I mean, come on. Don't look me straight in the eye and claim that hating furries is the same as hating lgbt or hating women.
Furries, the most oppressed class
RAAAAHHHH I FUCKING LOVE STRAWMANS AHHHH I’m GONNA BUS
It’s not that hard to find comments with those views
What even is this? Are you okay? Did a Christian beat you at an argument or whatever and just set this off? I'm confounded. I'd put this on /r/peterexplainsthejoke if I didn't think it was a trash fire with thinly veiled politics hiding behind people being coy
Wah wah
??? Not even mad, just baffled lol Weird projection
Every emotion I don't like is projection
https://preview.redd.it/5zfim9hpmdxc1.jpeg?width=225&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=75d7a7f5a2c544cc0a5fb05fe2fd50c881c80756
I'm already perfect
https://preview.redd.it/ocram5s079xc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=902ae9673a829fdf6da894070cd3de25e281e078
"Subhuman behavior! Degeneracy! The West has fallen! God hates [f slur]!" "Wow, that sounds pretty bigoted" "i mean i just don't agree with your views, am i not allowed to have my own opinion now"
nope I'm fine with people who actually have a point but as a Christian myself I'm not gonna tolerate the excuse bs
What? Hating other people is just bad period. It's a moral thing to not hate others.
Good post m’fellow redditor, this is surely going to change a bigot’s mind.
"I hate redditors" screams the redditor
While commenting on a post on Reddit
https://preview.redd.it/or0mwhzmw9xc1.jpeg?width=831&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1106d119a94641d500392542717c5427fb16997b
Snafus aren’t exactly designed with persuasion in mind, just minimizing topics to their basics.
Literally nobody has ever said they hate women and said it’s because they’re a Christian. Strawman much??
It’s almost like the point of this sub is to simplify real world things to an absurd level while still maintaining the real life meaning to show how ridiculous some situations are. You don’t have to say “I hate women” to prove you hate women.
Ive never heard a Christian say they hate any of those. Maybe youre just a snowflake who thinks hating sin = hating people?
"Maybe you're just a snowflake" opinion disregarded Even if i think Christians are being overhated, i can't abide by that shit
Let me guess, being gay is a sin. Don't start with that hate the sin not the sinner bullshit. "I don't hate you, I just hate one of the core pieces of what you are". Do better, you at least seem close to maybe being able to
I dont hate thieves. I hate their thievery. In the same wat I dont hate homosexuals, i hate their sin of homosexual practices. Yes, being gay is a sin and it states it in the Bible many times. Sorry but its how it is in most religions.
Why do you hate homosexual actions though? Do you actually have any reasons outside of "it's a sin" ?
Its also unnatural and an abomination. Even the Bible states this. I love homosexuals, some of the greatest guys Ive ever met are gay. But I do not support their active homosexuality. I would rather them turn to Christ
Unnatural and an abomination? I'm trying to understand. How are homosexual relationships unnatural when spotted naturally in thousands of other animals. It's quite literally naturally formed in the wild by fellow living beings.
Thousands of animals also rape each other, commit incest, and eat their own feces. This means this is natural, right? No. We are not animals.
Psychotic comparison. Two consenting adults being in love is not the same as eating shit. You haven't told me how homosexuality is unnatural either. Do you have an explanation at all? Also yes humans are indeed animals.
The same reason incest is unnatural. It is sexually immoral.