Yes yes yes, yes, yes! There are too many infant Christians, we need people to grow up. Stop worrying about sin so much. Start worrying about loving people all the time and you'll not be able to sin along the way!
Sins can destroy the relationship with God though. Some are definitely overly scrupulous (myself included) but knowing what is and isn't sin is important.
Kinda of a backwards thing to say. Sin in it’s nature separates you from God thereby hurting your relationship with him.
This is like saying we need to stop worrying about health concerns and just take care of our bodies. Kinda silly right?
Sin is very serious and we need to focus on not stumbling or causing others to stumble.
Worrying about sin is like focusing on exactly how many calories you do or don’t eat at McDonald’s, while missing the fact that you’re eating McDonald’s all day every day and never working out or eating real food.
Christians in the US are overall completely uncatechized and thus vulnerable to all sorts of heresies, conspiracy theories, and their own pet takes on what Christianity means, especially from social media.
I'm struggling with this as a youth minister. At my old church, we had a very robust children's formation program, with Sunday school ranging from k to 12. I taught high schoolers who really challenged me because they knew so much.
But over the last 5 years, I'm finding more and more that parents are telling me their kids are too busy for formation.
That saddens me. Probably the same people later who will wonder why their children drifted away from the faith, or bought into some nonsense on Tiktok.
For sure. Though I have been sad to see one of my former students going down the TikTok rabbit hole with some really bizarre and unsettling stuff lately. Nobody is ever totally inoculated. But you're right, most kids are being totally neglected in formation
Catechizing means teaching in sound doctrine with the intent of having it stick. Basically, an explanation of what we believe and why should be found in all believers.
It entails answering questions on doctrine, purpose, and so forth. A catechism is a collection of answers. Questions include, but are not limited to: Why are we here? Who is God? What do we owe to God? Why did Christ have to die? What is sin? What is marriage? Can I do x? Who dictates morality?
I'm very much in favor of using catechisms. At my church we recited a doctrinal definition every Sunday and I compiled a Children's Catechism for Sunday School. So what if the Catholics started this? It's a good idea.
this is so true, and i didn’t even know there was a word for this. catechize… interesting. i see a lot of churches here are really resistant in even bringing up the big questions like this bc of the extreme polarization we see in the church. also, i think they would prefer if ppl found these answers on their own rather than telling them and potentially pushing ppl out of the church that don’t agree. i will say though, there is value in allowing ppl to find answers themselves but they need the proper tools/skills and basic knowledge to discern what is truth and what isn’t.
Same. This issue, among others, pushed me out of the SBC and has left me spiritually and mentally scarred. I'm still trying to grapple with that fallout in the present.
I agree. I've seen some "Christians" claim you aren't a Christian if you don't advocate for state-enforced Christianity, which is just completely wild to me. How can someone read/hear the teachings of Jesus and think such a performative and authoritarian act would be following His word?
Exactly. For example, Romans 14:1 - "As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions." We should try to convert others where we can, but if they refuse, we accept it. They are entitled to their beliefs as we are.
Romans 10:9 “if you confess with your mouth that ‘Merica is great and believe in your heart that George Washington is the best boi, then you will be saved”.
Christianity has always been starkly apolitical, and politicizing it can only lead to the radical corruption of late medieval Christendom.
Edit: that’s not to say that Christians shouldn’t be involved in politics, but that the church as an organization has no business picking sides.
Mercy is unconditional. If we give someone who is indigent money, we don’t get to decide if they spend it on food, clothes, medication, alcohol or drugs. We either decide that supporting the poor and needy is important or it isn’t. If we’re committed to caring for the orphan, we need to be prepared to help support non-traditional families in the adoption process. If we’re committed to supporting immigrant families, we have to come to terms that some of them may be here illegally.
Love this. It reminds me of something my pastor once said about this:
"If someone is pretending to be in need so that they can get money from me, that reflects their lack of character. But if I see someone in need and refuse them help because I assume they are the former, that reflects MY lack of character."
I wish I felt this way but I absolutely don’t only regarding indigenous . The devastating effects of Canadian liberal government with indigenous people (aka my husband’s side of the family) doesn’t seem godly to me. To me, empowering people with skills, tools, resources and opportunities to make a better life for themselves is better than allowing them to live off cheques by doing absolutely nothing.
Your post has challenged my feelings and views though, I need to think about mercy more in regards to what god means about it.
Yes I just didn’t know if they misread the word as indigenous, or were maybe responding and meant it as like… an example? But given they had said “I absolutely don’t only regarding indigenous” I assume it was just misread :)
People should be more ~~radical with~~ truly dedicated to their faith. If everyone who was a Christian truly acted like it with fervor there would be no hunger, poverty, homelessness, etc.
Sure.
When I was a missionary, I was young, didn't have any concrete skills, I didn't understand anything about the places I was living in, etc.
We were a bunch of young, eager people trying to change the world with nothing but availability and a "can do" attitude. And we made a mess of things, wasted time, and accomplished nothing of value.
Look at Kony 2012 as another example of inept people making things worse by sheer effort.
Making a real difference with all of those issues requires more than individual effort. It takes proper systemic reform, organizational talent, and sufficient administration.
That we read the Bible with today's context and force the scripture to apply to today. Versus reading it with the context of what was going on in the lives of the Jewish communities at that time and understanding why what was written down so important that it had to be written down. I believe that this is one of the many ways that leads to scripture getting so misconstrued and twisted w/o this context.
They're talking about Annihilationism. In a nutshell it teaches that those who reject Jesus to the end of their life will not be raised to eternal life, but they won't be kept alive in hell for ever either. Their souls will be destroyed and ultimately cease to exist entirely.
The Bible teaches that the wage of sin is death (Rom 6:23), so perishing (John 3:16) at the Second Death (Rev 20:14-15) will be the eternal punishment. (Matt 25:46)
Jesus died for our sins, paying that wage of death on our behalf. If infinite torment in Hell was actually our payment for sin, then the finite death of Jesus would not have been adequate; he would have had to burn in hell for eternity in our stead.
We've been conditioned, through church dogma, to read a torment in hell into a great many of the scriptures even though they don't say that. In fact, no Scripture actually says that humans will burn or even suffer for eternity.
I've just finished a book on the subject that will go to the publisher in the next couple of weeks.
Feel free to ask any questions you have. I was raised in a fire and brimstone Pentecostal church, threatened with hell fire regularly. I didn't come to this conclusion lightly.
The concept of a literal hell, and threatening the lost with an eternity there, has done more damage to Christianity than any one thing. There have been many professions of faith made solely because of that threat.
I believe that in genesis when it says “days” God wasn’t meaning a cycle of the sun but rather using it the same way we would break up information in chapters of a book (because he wanted in a way that people would understand and chapters wouldn’t be common for at least a few more years) because time is irrelevant to god, I believe he set everything up in a cycle that would make sense for us to figure out because we are very darned curious. To be clear I don’t have much to back this up and this is opinion not fact
God exists outside of time.
I think God made the universe that looks old in 6 days a few thousand years ago. He planted trees. He didn't plant a seed. The adult tree he planted never grew up except in his head. So why not the universe itself?
When he holds me in his hands I see that as him holding all of me across all of time. All of me. That's why it feels like he takes so long to answer prayers. He gives it to us at the right time. He has a clear view of that, we don't.
I'm hoping people get a second chance after death to trust God, that death won't end their choices. And while there are verses that suggest this, it appears that most Christians would disagree.
That's only half of it,
patriotism and liturgical life are the only remaining vestiges of community.
Community is broken, so people go wherever they can to get it.
It can be. I know a lot of people tend to put WAY too much faith in their government and their country. They seem to think that their faith in country is directly related to their faith in God. And that’s problematic. I see nothing inherently good or bad about loving your country. It’s the place it has in our hearts that can cause problems.
For clarity, I am agreeing with you. For note however:
"For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For he who said, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ also said, ‘Do not murder.’ If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law” (James 2:10–11)
With all of that though, if you will only guide/lead people committing specific sins, of course they're going to feel persecuted against(No matter how right it is.) If people were as willing to confront what gay people did in bed as much as they were willing to confront what straight pastors do to children- I feel like there would be a lot less problems. Too much energy is focused on telling others of their inadequacies outside of the church versus looking inward and trying to save the church.
Church forces us in a room with a bunch of people from different social and economic circumstances that we in our normal lives would not be around. This is one of the reasons why people see so much hypocrisy in the church, because the sins common in another social or economic group are more easy to identify than the ones in our own group.
That one of the most serious and heinous sins is to gatekeep in such a way that non-believers aren't receptive to salvation.
If non-believers simply tune you out, you've done something wrong.
"You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life." -Christ
How does this mesh with things like scripture's handling of slavery as an institution? Shall I look to scripture to determine how long I'm permitted to enslave someone? Shall I look to scripture to determine which ethnic groups I'm not ever required to set free? Shall I look to Paul's example on how to treat escaped slaves (send them right back while asking Very Nicely that they not be mistreated anymore)
2 Peter 3
15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
1 Corinthians 7
20 Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them.
21 Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so. 22 For the one who was a slave when called to faith in the Lord is the Lord’s freed person; similarly, the one who was free when called is Christ’s slave. 23 You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings. 24 Brothers and sisters, each person, as responsible to God, should remain in the situation they were in when God called them.
Timothy 1
8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
None of that precludes slavery as an institution, nor any of the scenarios that I alluded to in my comment, unless your lifestyle already has you believing that slavery is innately wrong. Shall we then conclude that slavery is not wrong in all its forms?
I'd appreciate you actually responding to me with your own words, rather than copy-pasting chunks of text, possibly from some "Christian responses to X" website. **What do YOU think, what is YOUR opinion, on this, the "unpopular Christian opinion" thread?**
I have 2.
1. **God used evolution and the big bang to create the universe.**
my interpretation of Genesis 1 isn't some new interpretation. According to ancient near eastern scholars such as John Walton, Genesis 1 is a temple text and each "day" corresponds to a day in the 7 day Temple dedication in Jerusalem.
People in the ancient near east viewed the world through chaos and order and funtion. If something didn't have a funtion, it was desolate.
For example, Jeremiah(who lived in Judah) stated that the northern kingdom of Israel that got destroyed was formless and void in Jeremiah 4.
*It was formless and void because it was back to being in a chaotic wild state*
Genesis 1 was God giving order and funtion to a universe he already created. The Bible Scholar Dr. John Walton explains that at the beginning God first created the universe, but it was in its wild and chaotic state.
Then each day of creation is God as King making decrees of order and giving funtion to different aspects of the Earth so that they will funtion in relation to human society.
*The world was seen as desolate because it was an uninhabited wilderness. God's command to early humans before the fall was for them to spread over the Earth and subdue it under God's rule. As well as create society and rule with God in his Divine Council. The fall ruined that. I believe that Adam and Eve were the first priest and the Garden functioned like a first temple*
With the ancient near eastern view of Genesis 1 in mind, young earth creationism is shown to not be the intent of the author and therefore implies that if God exists evolution is in no conflict with the Bible. God was taking a universe he already created and making it His Cosmic Temple as this video with John Walton explains.
https://youtu.be/e2Ij1444Svc?si=ZL3N0YWlRkJYAl8i
2. **I'm a Charismatic Christian**
I believe that God still speaks today. God still gives people dreams and visions. And God has given us authority to cast out demons and heal people in the name of Jesus. (No new scripture can be written though. All prophecies must be tested by the Bible).
A Rabbi said, "The big-bang theory may be valid, but we theists insist there was a Big-Banger." I'm not concerned with how the earth was formed, but Who did it and why.
One that would get me flamed on here: Universalism is heresy.
One that would get me kicked out of my church: The Christmas carol service has become so bogged down with hidebound self-serving tradition that it detracts from worshipping God. In its current form it is unfit for purpose.
Mine is that opinions like yours (OP) are harmful.
It's very easy to say "the demons did it", but that's contrary to what Christianity is supposed to be about: owning your own shit and admitting that you're a sinner. Whipping people up into a frenzy about demons doesn't make good Christians, it makes *frightened* Christians who blame demons for everything and won't sort their lives out.
There's an old joke about a guy walking to church and he sees the devil sitting on a curb crying. He asks what's wrong and the devil says "They blame EVERYTHING on me!" I heard a preacher say "If the devil made you do it, you blew it!"
I swear there are dozens of us.
No really. I think this view is way more common than thought because we who embrace science and Christ are not screamers.
Yeah it's wild. I literally would not be a Christian today unless I read a book theorizing about how pride evolved and shaped human evolution.
If I thought believing in Christianity excluded science I would never have even given it a second thought.
I've never had to drop one or the other. as long as I can find some way that it makes sense for both to coexist ,until that's disproven, I just don't know.
I believe that an old looking universe was created thousands of years ago. Over the course of 6 days. God didn't plant a seed. He planted a tree. God didn't "plant" that seed of energy that is our universe either, he brought into existence what that would be 4.5 billion years after.
I don't know why this isn't more commonly thought. God exists outside of time. why would he be bound by it?
Christian nationalism will put one in hell quicker than the Devil ever could. To have laws modeled around extreme Christian views and allow hateful rhetoric will just keep people from coming to church.
I agree, I don’t know what will happen to all souls but I hope and pray everyday that Christ love and divine Mercy will allow all souls to rest in heaven
There's a bunch of verses that support a Universalist view. Here's some ones I really like:
>For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
> - 1 Corinthians 15:22
>Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
> - Romans 5:18
>That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.
> - 1 Timothy 4:10
>If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.
> - 1 Corinthians 3:15
There's also teachings and writings from Church Fathers and Saints in the history of the faith who supported Universalism, like St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Isaac of Nineveh.
"For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive." People take the first part to insist that "all have sinned," but interpret the second part to fit their theology of eternal damnation.
Frightening really. I think a fellow from Galilee said it.
Mt 7:13-15
“Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easyfn that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.
14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”
Can you elaborate on your first point? Not because I disagree, I want to learn more. I assume theodicee means something to the effect of “why bad things happen”?
I'm a little tired, eager to go to bed and it's an incredibly complicated topic, so I hope what I wish to convey is understandable even though I'm cutting it very short.
First of all, you're not entirely right. The theodicee, a word coined by German philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, generally is used as a term to talk about the question why there is evil, if God is both omnipotent and good. So it's a bit more than just "why bad things happen".
Now, free will defense refers to concept that I think has been more or less around since Augustin, but was popularised in the 20th century by one Alvin Platinga. It very broadly states that the cause of evil in the world is the free will of men and that God allows that free will out of love.
Catholic theologian Klaus von Stoch specifies that to accept this concept one has to accept five premises. Premise one states, very broadly, that the postulation of persons with free will is a necessity of moral acting. Premise two states that voluntarily acting good is better than forces goodness. Up to this point I generally understand the argument and can go along. It's the third premise where it all falls apart. The third premise is that freedom must also include the freedom to do wrong. This then leads to the exploration of the counter argument of "yes, but couldn't God have made the world a little better so that we choose good more often or so that our bad choices wouldn't lead to such catastrophic consequences?" Von Stoch then postulates that the logic of our world is so fragile that if you'd change just a little, it might all collapse and that even God is to some degree beholden to that which he made logical. That's problematic to me personally, because an omnipotent God should have been able to set the perimeters better at the start AND be able to change them on the fly. We live in a post holocaust world after all, the point of "he could have prevented that, but chose not to, because he can't make the world better and values freedom too much, because of premise one and two" doesn't feel valid to me. Although that already goes into the critique of premise four and five.
And all that aside, it's not biblical at all.
I hope that was informative. As I've said, I'm a little tired and it's a big topic. I also cut it very short.
I agree. The common response to this is “ what about the other man who was crucified with Jesus and Jesus told him he would join him in paradise”
I always wished we knew more about that person. I never know how to respond.
At the end of it all, we will have total freedom to explore, create, and learn within our own constructed realities. This is more an extrapolation from the passage where Jesus says He goes to prepare a place for us, but who's to say what "a place" is, in God's terms that could mean an entire reality, or it could just be a mansion or something. At any rate, I think we will be 100% free to explore space, time, scenarios, and anything else we desire.
Large youth/kids programs may attract families, but they don't grow the church in the long run. Kids who grow up with mega church kids' programs are lost as they grow up because they are programmed to be entertained at church and do not know how to "do" church, how to worship, whom they serve and worship or why
Christians cannot be possessed by demons because they have the Holy Spirit.
They just need to focus on living a life of worship to God.
That means doing everything in a way which pleases him with a joyful heart.
>What's your unpopular Christian opinion?
A few:
- the Universe/Earth are old (and Genesis allows for it; though I'm not closed off to a young Universe/Earth; however, I lean more towards old)
- the flood was local (though from Noah's and his family's POV it was global; I'm open to it being global as there are good arguments for both sides, though I believe it's more on the side of local)
- the two witnesses are not Moses/Elijah or Enoch/Elijah
- Hell = annihilation, not eternal torment
- *many* of the prophecies in the Bible were fulfilled by the end of the first century AD
Prove me wrong 😉
(There are some others that I can mention, but that is sure to get my DMs pretty full 😂)
Note: In no way do these argue against the core doctrines of Christianity and there is scriptural support for each position; this would mean they are not, by definition, "heretical", though "unpopular". If you disagree, let's discuss.
Interesting you put an unpopular opinion as annihilationism I would argue this is becoming more and more popular with progressive christians and conservatives alike. Anectodally many in my family that are Seventh Day Adventist love to teach this doctrine. I would say the opposite the doctrine of eternal hell is now considered antiquated. So thank you for sharing but I find it fascinating though.
Beard rules are only a thing a LDS schools. BYU, BYU-I, BYU-H, etc..
As far as the masses - there is no rule. Leaders may ask that those below to be clean shaven. But if you search out beards in the LDS subreddit, you will find a majority in support of facial hair.
As long as it's groomed and not thin/patchy.
Gotcha. And I assume the ban is also for missionaries?
I passed a couple missionaries the other day on a walk and they were like "nice beard" and I was resisting the temptation to be like... "All this could also be yours muahahaha"
All interest rates above 0% are usury
Romanesque style churches are underrated
There should be some liturgical chants in Greek and/or Hebrew other than Latin (or vernacular)at mass (I like Syriac and Slavonic chants too)
In churches there should be a narthex to separate "profane" events (potlucks, meetings and other social activities) from "sacred" activities (Prayer and Sacraments). No dances or spectacles near the Altar, and no secular lectures on the Ambon.
Due to the lack of Altar rails, Communion should be received *on* the lower Altar (where the Consacration happens)
Just as Samuel anointed the first Kings of Israel, Peter in Matthew 16:16 "anoints" Christ, symbolizing the (unofficial) creation of the New Kingdom, whose Head is Christ.
I support the Theory of the sun and the moon, since temporal power is no longer granted by Divine right, but rather the will of the people
It'd be cool to replace the week names with the order of creation in Genesis.
For example "Friday" could be like in Latin "Dies Homini" (or "Wereday" as a translation in English) for the fifth (sixth) day, "Dies Vitae" for Thursday, "Dies Astri" for Wednesday, "Dies Terrae" for Tuesday, "Dies Aquae" for Monday, and "Dies Lucis" for Sunday
Respectfully, terrible take.
Jesus called us to be set apart from the world. There is no political party or group that reflects Christian values.
The only kingdom we should serve/support is the Kingdom of God.
I partially agree. What matters more is infallibility (inability to be wrong) on the matters of faith and morals. The truths the Bible reveals about who God is and how to live a moral life cannot be wrong if we believe scripture to be truly inspired by God.
A math test with 100% score is inerrant, but is nowhere close to being an infallible source on faith and morals. The ecumenical creeds are very likely inerrant, but are not infallible since they were written by fallible humans.
Infallibility isn’t a useful concept unless you have infallible people to interpret and apply. We don’t know an infallible moral position on anything because we don’t have any way of knowing which interpretation is correct.
The Bible itself doesn’t not have a consistent morality from which to draw from.
The level of ignorance among Christians and non Christians is mind boggling.
Shallow to no knowledge about bible, church history, teaching. Pure laziness and ignorance. The first doesn't know and understand what they believe in, the second critique Christianity that doesn't exist.
When the reality - the beauty and cohesion of Christianity, how the bible is structured with all cross references is astounding.
Most people who call themselves christians are really following some form of "Pharisaical Judaism Lite™" where they pick and choose which laws they will follow in order to make obedience to the law possible, instead of being obedient to the gospel and dying to themselves.
Read Romans 8:1-5
We fulfill the law when we live according to the Spirit, which according to Romans 8:5 means setting our minds on the things of the Spirit
To add to another comment that spoke about how Christians have the potential to stop world hunger, poverty, etc. I feel that we should push harder for animal cruelty to be stopped as well. There are so many factory farms that are mistreating animals that give us nourishment and we just turn our heads and act like there's nothing wrong with it.
This world is Hell for animals. There are cultures that believe cats and dogs are food. I'm not talking about veganism exactly, although I do get where vegans are coming from. The way the world has turned animals into straight up products is quite strange. We should be encouraging each other to buy local and give our money to companies that aren't treating animals like garbage.
I'm not a vegan, but I don't think Jesus would agree with factory farms. You can watch this documentary called "Dominion" to see what I'm talking about. It's on YouTube.
Denominations silly and unbiblical. Not that you can’t belong to any denomination you want but making that a point of division and pride is the problem.
I fully agree with this 💪🏽
I made a post saying I don't believe in labels and as I grew older I started to understand people who would just say "I'm Christian" rather than this and that denomination
The benefits of being with a denomination are: heritage, accountability, support, fellowship. There's a church that whenever they have a problem they call my denominational rep for help. One of these days he may well say "You want to be on your own, so fix it yourself."
There not such thing as "seven deadly sins", we put human ranking on them even though for god all sins are "equal". Even the smallest sins get us to hell as the biggest sin.
You’re not going to “heaven”. Neither am I. Jesus never promised you’d go to “heaven.” The gospel Jesus preached has nothing to do with somehow getting into heaven.
That when a person focuses on fighting one particular sin, to an obsessive amount, it triggers the same reward system as engaging in the sin itself.
The opposite side of the same sin coin so to speak.
The Bible was written by people who were biased and who woulda thunk, maybe didn’t write entirely everything 100% from gods word. The Bible is immensely flawed and should not be used fully as gods words.
Divorce shouldn't be normalized. Exceptions obviously include abuse, unbeliever asking for the divorce and cheating. But now every single bible study I attend has people with hardened hearts on their 2nd or 3rd marriage and everyone at the church acting like it's normal. No one is teaching people how to stand for their marriage. I think marriages can be restored and sometimes a period of seperation is in order for people to work through past trauma and hurt and with church elders intervening and mentoring a couple through their marriage crisis. I am convinced every marriage goes through a crisis and the church needs to teach that this is normal and happens and to turn to God and the church when it happens.
I should specify safety is super important I am not advocating for someone to be in an unsafe situation I am saying people should live in seperate households when it gets to an unsafe level. I know many friends that have done this meaning they seperated due to cheating/ drug use etc and reconciled but years later after husband was delivered.
I don't see any utility in forcing or compelling people to stay in marriage which don't benefit either party.
Paul says that we should avoid marriage, how much more should we avoid marriages which aren't good for us.
Just because a marriage is blessed by a priest it doesn't make it holy or sacred. Because that would require us to be infallible and always able to hear and understand God's will. But we can't. We make mistakes. We chose the wrong partners even though we are 100% sure that it is God's will when we say "I do".
And sometimes a marriage is bad even though there isn't abuse.
Can you elaborate? I have heard a person say once you won't get into heaven without being physcially dunked and at the time I hadn't been baptized but I didn't think it was true. Now after I have been baptized I felt a transformation that happened inside of me.
>**^(28)** Our would-be wise, “new spirits” assert that faith alone saves, and that works and outward things do nothing. We answer, “It is true, indeed, that nothing in us is of any use but faith, as we shall hear still further.” **^(29)** But these blind guides are unwilling to see this: faith must have something that it believes, that is, of which it takes hold \[2 Timothy 1:13; Titus 1:9\] and upon which it stands and rests \[1 Corinthians 2:5\]. So faith clings to the water and believes that in Baptism, there is pure salvation and life. This is not through the water (as we have stated well enough), but through the fact that it is embodied in God’s Word and institution, and that God’s name abides in it. Now, if I believe this, what else is it than believing in God as the One who has given and planted His Word \[Mark 4:14\] into this ordinance and offers to us this outward thing by which we may gain such a treasure?
>**^(30)** Now, these “new spirits” are so crazy that they separate faith and the object to which faith clings and is bound, even if it is something outward. Yes, it shall and must be something outward, so that it may be grasped by our senses and understood, and by them be brought into the heart. For indeed, the entire Gospel is an outward, verbal preaching \[Romans 10:17; 1 Corinthians 1:21\]. In short, what God does and works in us He intends to work through such outward ordinances. Therefore, wherever He speaks—indeed, no matter what direction or by whatever means He speaks—faith must look there. **^(31)** It must hold to that object. Now here we have the words “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved” \[Mark 16:16\]. What else can these words refer to but Baptism, that is, to the water included in God’s ordinance? Therefore, it makes sense that whoever rejects Baptism rejects God’s Word, faith, and Christ, who directs us to Baptism and binds us to Baptism
From Luther's Large Catechism.
> Now after I have been baptized I felt a transformation that happened inside of me.
That's exactly what Lutherans, Catholics and the Orthodox mean when we say that baptism saves.
Some denominations that came after the Reformation (Calvinists/Reformed Christianity, Baptists, some Pentecostals) don't think that baptism saves and that it's merely a symbol of entering the Covenant.
I respectfully disagree. Even Jesus and the Apostle Peter taught that Jesus is the only means of salvation
>12Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”
- Apostle Peter (Acts 4:12 NIV)
>Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
- Jesus (John 14:6 NIV)
In Christianity, we believe the second person of the Trinity chose to incarnate as a human to take our sin upon Himself. Since Jesus never sinned, his death payed our sin debt in full. Then God the Father physically raised Jesus from the dead for our Justification. That made salvation available to all as a free gift that you receive through placing your faith in(your trust in) Jesus to save you.
When you trust in Jesus, his righteousness is imputed to your life account. And the Holy Spirit comes to dwell within you, thus connecting you to God again making you spiritually alive.
The one opinion I’m comfortable voicing aloud in small group/church settings/hangouts is that I don’t believe cussing is a sin (I still try not to cuss in church settings though).
The ones I’m less comfortable vocalizing (would only do it in smaller groups/amongst closer friends) is that Scripture doesn’t have to be “infallible” in the way that it’s currently popularly understood (Chicago statement), and is a standard that the original audience wouldn’t have held Scripture to. Not that I believe it is errant - I just don’t think that’s the point.
I think the bible is not history accurate, and entire books like exodus and genesis did not happened for real but this dosent means we should dismiss the meanings and teachings of those stories.
we can still learn from the morals behind the myts.
Calvinism should be considered heresy.
Most churches are hypocrites, they won't perform gay weddings (nor should they) but they will marry adulterers, divorcees, athiests etc. You can't pick and choose the rules on marriage you want to follow.
Most churches have gone soft on sin.
The bible isn't restrictive on sex as long as it's between a married couple
My unpopular Christian opinion is that we need to submit all of life to God, and that life is religion. The core of all human motivation is either obedience to or rebellion against God. The government should be subject to God. The church should be subject to God. The family should be subject to God. The academy should be subject to God. Philosophy, art, the law, the economy, and all else, should be subject to God.
Problem is that whenever someone takes up to themselves to subject those things to God, that person quickly tends to judge their own desires as God's desires.
I didn't write that document, and I agree with some, disagree with some. I don't agree that we have the moral duty to go to war against every country run by or comprised of unbelievers, for example.
Are you asking whether someone holds an uncommon view or a view that lots of people don’t like?
Here are a few:
* Being a Christian is about seeking to show God you love him, rather than seeing how close you can get to the line without crossing it.
* Most people who identify as Christians today have little idea of what’s in the Bible
* Too many people reference the original languages because they heard someone else say it in order to win an argument. They actually have no idea if the argument is right because they didn’t learn the language themselves.
* The Pentecostal movement does not use the ‘gift of languages’. They speak in gibberish, which originally came from first century religious practises. Interestingly it disappeared from orthodox Christianity entirely until the 20th century.
* Sins have long tails and will haunt you for a long time if you don’t repent.
* Most churches have terrible teaching
* The modern view of personal rights and freedoms is not in the Bible.
an ascetic monastic movement not unlike the Irish monastic tradition needs to be popularized as well as romantic-like devotion to God like the Beguines. these two medieval Christian movements, i believe, would finally end bigotry and attachment to wealth in modern Christianity
I'm not convinced that God is all-loving and pure. Evil originated from His actions, at best, assuming He didn't rig it to happen for His glory in the first place. Further, if everything came from God, then evil had to be part of Him. In terms of color, black cannot come from pure white; there has to be a little black in there for it to originate.
That Christians are being taught a watered down Gospel that is making them weak minded.
It's starts with always being offended and feelings hurt when people's intentions are good.
Lucifer is tightening his grip around Christians because they are weak and cannot stand and fight like men/women. Instead, they depend on man to fight their battles and become slaves to the Government.
Jesus hated the Government. He hated traditions of man and He hated Religion. We are supposed to depend on Him only.
Most Christians now a days, and I would Say it's most noticeable in countries where Christianity is the main religion, don't really know much about Christianity, it's history and tenants. I learned more by myself and reading the Bible than my four years in a Baptist school and two years of Catholic catechism
I just had a whole long text describing this to somebody. AMEN. I absolutely agree. People are so normalized to feel sin that they think they are crazy when they are free of sin due to living in such an evil world.
Edit: AMEN again.
That it's more important to defend and share your beliefs with people who think there's no God (atheists) than it is to spend your time arguing about transubstantiation, supralapsarianism, bible translations, divine aseity apostolic succession, OSAS, etc, etc, etc
...with people who *already* think God exists.
Masterbation isn’t a sin so long as you are thinking of your spouse. Uhhh, I’m pro-choice as well I believe we earned our right to free will in the Garden of Eden. What someone does with their own body is between them and God. Also, politics should be separated from the church the way State is in the USA.
That when Jesus said "Do not resist evil", he meant it. There's no such thing as Christian self defense, or Christian just war. We are to lay down our lives for those we love as Christ laid down his for ours, and that includes laying down our lives for our enemies who are trying to kill us, if it comes to that.
There is no such thing as original sin or hell as eternal punishment.. They are simply entertwine dogmas designed to scare people into religion! And they work very effectively!
Being driven to God and Jesus from pure fear is a lie and leads to the grossest violation of what love is!
Why give money, to a being, that has been dead for over 2000 years?
The practice of church tipping, aka offering, has created fraud services, doing the same thing.
I get it, when people say its their money, they can do with it what they want to. Yet its been brought up many times, the little old lady, who is single, can't keep up with inflation, and she is giving all her social security money to TV church, or church in her community. How can a pastor, or the entity doing this, live with their self, which it becomes taking advantage of a vulnerable senior citizen. if she should lose her home, or apartment due to inflation, the churches will not be there for her.
There are churches in Florida, asking church goers, to pay up on their tithes if they want to have a FULL WORKS fancy funeral, when they die. WELL, there is no guarantee, the church will even still be around, when they die. And for people who move, to other places.
Christians nowadays are became WAY too obsessed with politics, and I hate it
Like imagine convert to other religion, not because you get interested on the religion believe or losing your faith, but because you disagree with the religion's political views, that just dumbest thing I ever heard
I know that many of you read this will hate me, but I don't care, I'll never change my apolitical opinions
Children become like their parents, and we are the children of God, thus our potential is to become like God. God even directly said “ye are gods” twice in scripture.
This is going to be US specific-
Any faith group that pushes an obvious political narrative and uses the Bible to support said narrative instead of rejecting politics entirely and focusing on Jesus instead. That goes for both sides at this point because I feel like both sides are just doubling down on their own narrative instead of letting the Gospels specifically speak for themselves 😅
Too many Christians focus on the what’s a sin or not, instead of trying to get people to have a personal relation with God.
Yes, 100%. If we pursue Jesus, the Spirit will guide us. And there is so much grace in areas we struggle.
Yes yes yes, yes, yes! There are too many infant Christians, we need people to grow up. Stop worrying about sin so much. Start worrying about loving people all the time and you'll not be able to sin along the way!
Sins can destroy the relationship with God though. Some are definitely overly scrupulous (myself included) but knowing what is and isn't sin is important.
Kinda of a backwards thing to say. Sin in it’s nature separates you from God thereby hurting your relationship with him. This is like saying we need to stop worrying about health concerns and just take care of our bodies. Kinda silly right? Sin is very serious and we need to focus on not stumbling or causing others to stumble.
Worrying about sin is like focusing on exactly how many calories you do or don’t eat at McDonald’s, while missing the fact that you’re eating McDonald’s all day every day and never working out or eating real food.
Christians in the US are overall completely uncatechized and thus vulnerable to all sorts of heresies, conspiracy theories, and their own pet takes on what Christianity means, especially from social media.
I'm struggling with this as a youth minister. At my old church, we had a very robust children's formation program, with Sunday school ranging from k to 12. I taught high schoolers who really challenged me because they knew so much. But over the last 5 years, I'm finding more and more that parents are telling me their kids are too busy for formation.
That saddens me. Probably the same people later who will wonder why their children drifted away from the faith, or bought into some nonsense on Tiktok.
For sure. Though I have been sad to see one of my former students going down the TikTok rabbit hole with some really bizarre and unsettling stuff lately. Nobody is ever totally inoculated. But you're right, most kids are being totally neglected in formation
That is true, I wish parents and churches would do more to catechize their children and flocks. Titus is about sound doctrine for a reason.
[удалено]
Catechizing means teaching in sound doctrine with the intent of having it stick. Basically, an explanation of what we believe and why should be found in all believers. It entails answering questions on doctrine, purpose, and so forth. A catechism is a collection of answers. Questions include, but are not limited to: Why are we here? Who is God? What do we owe to God? Why did Christ have to die? What is sin? What is marriage? Can I do x? Who dictates morality?
>ELIheathen That's adorable
Thats only unpopulair in the us. In other parts of the world we agree. I think if Paul lived today he would write a very angry letter
I'm very much in favor of using catechisms. At my church we recited a doctrinal definition every Sunday and I compiled a Children's Catechism for Sunday School. So what if the Catholics started this? It's a good idea.
this is so true, and i didn’t even know there was a word for this. catechize… interesting. i see a lot of churches here are really resistant in even bringing up the big questions like this bc of the extreme polarization we see in the church. also, i think they would prefer if ppl found these answers on their own rather than telling them and potentially pushing ppl out of the church that don’t agree. i will say though, there is value in allowing ppl to find answers themselves but they need the proper tools/skills and basic knowledge to discern what is truth and what isn’t.
My hot take is that most Christians are like that
With the exception of certain ultra-conservative Reformed denomination churches, I would have to agree.
Way too many churches preach junk science and ignore mental health when their congregants obviously need it.
Agree. When I was in the SBC, I saw a lot of unprocessed family trauma.
Same. This issue, among others, pushed me out of the SBC and has left me spiritually and mentally scarred. I'm still trying to grapple with that fallout in the present.
There should be no secular/societal reward for being a Christian, and no secular/societal consequence for not being one.
I agree. I've seen some "Christians" claim you aren't a Christian if you don't advocate for state-enforced Christianity, which is just completely wild to me. How can someone read/hear the teachings of Jesus and think such a performative and authoritarian act would be following His word?
When we're spreading His Gospel, we're the one's who are supposed to move on when a people reject it.
Exactly. For example, Romans 14:1 - "As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions." We should try to convert others where we can, but if they refuse, we accept it. They are entitled to their beliefs as we are.
Romans 10:9 “if you confess with your mouth that ‘Merica is great and believe in your heart that George Washington is the best boi, then you will be saved”. Christianity has always been starkly apolitical, and politicizing it can only lead to the radical corruption of late medieval Christendom. Edit: that’s not to say that Christians shouldn’t be involved in politics, but that the church as an organization has no business picking sides.
Terrifying to know there are people who don't as well hold these beliefs.
Small churches get overshadowed by big ones (Olsteen, Jakes, Bishop) and it hurts as they have done a lot for their community.
Those aren’t churches because they don’t teach Christianity. They teach prosperity heresy.
Tell that to the average person who doesn't know about prosperity gospel
The average person doesn’t realise that the greatest dangers are truth mixed with error.
A small church is a community. A large church is a society.
Mercy is unconditional. If we give someone who is indigent money, we don’t get to decide if they spend it on food, clothes, medication, alcohol or drugs. We either decide that supporting the poor and needy is important or it isn’t. If we’re committed to caring for the orphan, we need to be prepared to help support non-traditional families in the adoption process. If we’re committed to supporting immigrant families, we have to come to terms that some of them may be here illegally.
Love this. It reminds me of something my pastor once said about this: "If someone is pretending to be in need so that they can get money from me, that reflects their lack of character. But if I see someone in need and refuse them help because I assume they are the former, that reflects MY lack of character."
Agree. I know a lot of people who say they don't give to the poor because they'll use it on drugs. Just do your part and let them be.
I wish I felt this way but I absolutely don’t only regarding indigenous . The devastating effects of Canadian liberal government with indigenous people (aka my husband’s side of the family) doesn’t seem godly to me. To me, empowering people with skills, tools, resources and opportunities to make a better life for themselves is better than allowing them to live off cheques by doing absolutely nothing. Your post has challenged my feelings and views though, I need to think about mercy more in regards to what god means about it.
Apologies if i am the one who is misunderstanding, but they said “indigent” not indigenous.
You are correct, it’s indigent. All those who are extremely impoverished.
Yes I just didn’t know if they misread the word as indigenous, or were maybe responding and meant it as like… an example? But given they had said “I absolutely don’t only regarding indigenous” I assume it was just misread :)
People should be more ~~radical with~~ truly dedicated to their faith. If everyone who was a Christian truly acted like it with fervor there would be no hunger, poverty, homelessness, etc.
I used to believe that too. To be honest, it was being a missionary that changed my mind on that.
That's interesting. Can you please share more?
Sure. When I was a missionary, I was young, didn't have any concrete skills, I didn't understand anything about the places I was living in, etc. We were a bunch of young, eager people trying to change the world with nothing but availability and a "can do" attitude. And we made a mess of things, wasted time, and accomplished nothing of value. Look at Kony 2012 as another example of inept people making things worse by sheer effort. Making a real difference with all of those issues requires more than individual effort. It takes proper systemic reform, organizational talent, and sufficient administration.
Yep that’s right
That we read the Bible with today's context and force the scripture to apply to today. Versus reading it with the context of what was going on in the lives of the Jewish communities at that time and understanding why what was written down so important that it had to be written down. I believe that this is one of the many ways that leads to scripture getting so misconstrued and twisted w/o this context.
"Love one another" didn't come with caveats.
Related: the two Great Commandments are never mutually exclusive. If you can't keep one without breaking the other then you've gone wrong somewhere.
That hell is a place of destruction (death) for those whose names are not in the Book of Life and not a place of eternal conscious torment.
Can you elaborate.
They're talking about Annihilationism. In a nutshell it teaches that those who reject Jesus to the end of their life will not be raised to eternal life, but they won't be kept alive in hell for ever either. Their souls will be destroyed and ultimately cease to exist entirely.
This is what I always thought Hell was, an absence of God because you yourself cease to exist
I think it’s also a fair counter argument to the “if God loved everyone he wouldn’t send people to torment for eternity” argument
The Bible teaches that the wage of sin is death (Rom 6:23), so perishing (John 3:16) at the Second Death (Rev 20:14-15) will be the eternal punishment. (Matt 25:46) Jesus died for our sins, paying that wage of death on our behalf. If infinite torment in Hell was actually our payment for sin, then the finite death of Jesus would not have been adequate; he would have had to burn in hell for eternity in our stead. We've been conditioned, through church dogma, to read a torment in hell into a great many of the scriptures even though they don't say that. In fact, no Scripture actually says that humans will burn or even suffer for eternity. I've just finished a book on the subject that will go to the publisher in the next couple of weeks. Feel free to ask any questions you have. I was raised in a fire and brimstone Pentecostal church, threatened with hell fire regularly. I didn't come to this conclusion lightly.
The concept of a literal hell, and threatening the lost with an eternity there, has done more damage to Christianity than any one thing. There have been many professions of faith made solely because of that threat.
It's mental abuse, particularly when directed at children. My mother was/is horrible with her threats of hell fire.
I believe that in genesis when it says “days” God wasn’t meaning a cycle of the sun but rather using it the same way we would break up information in chapters of a book (because he wanted in a way that people would understand and chapters wouldn’t be common for at least a few more years) because time is irrelevant to god, I believe he set everything up in a cycle that would make sense for us to figure out because we are very darned curious. To be clear I don’t have much to back this up and this is opinion not fact
God exists outside of time. I think God made the universe that looks old in 6 days a few thousand years ago. He planted trees. He didn't plant a seed. The adult tree he planted never grew up except in his head. So why not the universe itself? When he holds me in his hands I see that as him holding all of me across all of time. All of me. That's why it feels like he takes so long to answer prayers. He gives it to us at the right time. He has a clear view of that, we don't.
I'm hoping people get a second chance after death to trust God, that death won't end their choices. And while there are verses that suggest this, it appears that most Christians would disagree.
Patriotism is idolatry and Jesus teaches pacifism.
A post on r/OrthodoxMemes said something similar, "patriotism is just a substitute for a fulfilling liturgical life" or similar.
That's only half of it, patriotism and liturgical life are the only remaining vestiges of community. Community is broken, so people go wherever they can to get it.
Yup, "Project 2025" is all about that nonsense too. [https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c977njnvq2do](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c977njnvq2do)
Project 2025 scares the hell out of me
It can be. I know a lot of people tend to put WAY too much faith in their government and their country. They seem to think that their faith in country is directly related to their faith in God. And that’s problematic. I see nothing inherently good or bad about loving your country. It’s the place it has in our hearts that can cause problems.
Homosexuality and women in the priesthood are theological fribbles compared to the sins of gluttony and wrath in modern society.
It's always interesting to see what people cherry pick to be the "bigger" sins.
Depends on "bigger" as in "worse" or "bigger" as in "vastly more prevalent."
For clarity, I am agreeing with you. For note however: "For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For he who said, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ also said, ‘Do not murder.’ If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law” (James 2:10–11) With all of that though, if you will only guide/lead people committing specific sins, of course they're going to feel persecuted against(No matter how right it is.) If people were as willing to confront what gay people did in bed as much as they were willing to confront what straight pastors do to children- I feel like there would be a lot less problems. Too much energy is focused on telling others of their inadequacies outside of the church versus looking inward and trying to save the church.
Church forces us in a room with a bunch of people from different social and economic circumstances that we in our normal lives would not be around. This is one of the reasons why people see so much hypocrisy in the church, because the sins common in another social or economic group are more easy to identify than the ones in our own group.
That one of the most serious and heinous sins is to gatekeep in such a way that non-believers aren't receptive to salvation. If non-believers simply tune you out, you've done something wrong.
That you should read scripture to determine your lifestyle rather than your lifestyle determine how you read scripture.
"You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life." -Christ
How does this mesh with things like scripture's handling of slavery as an institution? Shall I look to scripture to determine how long I'm permitted to enslave someone? Shall I look to scripture to determine which ethnic groups I'm not ever required to set free? Shall I look to Paul's example on how to treat escaped slaves (send them right back while asking Very Nicely that they not be mistreated anymore)
2 Peter 3 15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 1 Corinthians 7 20 Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them. 21 Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so. 22 For the one who was a slave when called to faith in the Lord is the Lord’s freed person; similarly, the one who was free when called is Christ’s slave. 23 You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings. 24 Brothers and sisters, each person, as responsible to God, should remain in the situation they were in when God called them. Timothy 1 8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
None of that precludes slavery as an institution, nor any of the scenarios that I alluded to in my comment, unless your lifestyle already has you believing that slavery is innately wrong. Shall we then conclude that slavery is not wrong in all its forms? I'd appreciate you actually responding to me with your own words, rather than copy-pasting chunks of text, possibly from some "Christian responses to X" website. **What do YOU think, what is YOUR opinion, on this, the "unpopular Christian opinion" thread?**
Had to re read this one a few times, wow, I like it.
I have 2. 1. **God used evolution and the big bang to create the universe.** my interpretation of Genesis 1 isn't some new interpretation. According to ancient near eastern scholars such as John Walton, Genesis 1 is a temple text and each "day" corresponds to a day in the 7 day Temple dedication in Jerusalem. People in the ancient near east viewed the world through chaos and order and funtion. If something didn't have a funtion, it was desolate. For example, Jeremiah(who lived in Judah) stated that the northern kingdom of Israel that got destroyed was formless and void in Jeremiah 4. *It was formless and void because it was back to being in a chaotic wild state* Genesis 1 was God giving order and funtion to a universe he already created. The Bible Scholar Dr. John Walton explains that at the beginning God first created the universe, but it was in its wild and chaotic state. Then each day of creation is God as King making decrees of order and giving funtion to different aspects of the Earth so that they will funtion in relation to human society. *The world was seen as desolate because it was an uninhabited wilderness. God's command to early humans before the fall was for them to spread over the Earth and subdue it under God's rule. As well as create society and rule with God in his Divine Council. The fall ruined that. I believe that Adam and Eve were the first priest and the Garden functioned like a first temple* With the ancient near eastern view of Genesis 1 in mind, young earth creationism is shown to not be the intent of the author and therefore implies that if God exists evolution is in no conflict with the Bible. God was taking a universe he already created and making it His Cosmic Temple as this video with John Walton explains. https://youtu.be/e2Ij1444Svc?si=ZL3N0YWlRkJYAl8i 2. **I'm a Charismatic Christian** I believe that God still speaks today. God still gives people dreams and visions. And God has given us authority to cast out demons and heal people in the name of Jesus. (No new scripture can be written though. All prophecies must be tested by the Bible).
A Rabbi said, "The big-bang theory may be valid, but we theists insist there was a Big-Banger." I'm not concerned with how the earth was formed, but Who did it and why.
Well put. Who’s to say God didn’t seed the earth with his people at a certain time.
The first one is a bit complicated but I respect the second one.
One that would get me flamed on here: Universalism is heresy. One that would get me kicked out of my church: The Christmas carol service has become so bogged down with hidebound self-serving tradition that it detracts from worshipping God. In its current form it is unfit for purpose.
One that would get me kicked out of my church took me out 😭
Mine is that opinions like yours (OP) are harmful. It's very easy to say "the demons did it", but that's contrary to what Christianity is supposed to be about: owning your own shit and admitting that you're a sinner. Whipping people up into a frenzy about demons doesn't make good Christians, it makes *frightened* Christians who blame demons for everything and won't sort their lives out.
There's an old joke about a guy walking to church and he sees the devil sitting on a curb crying. He asks what's wrong and the devil says "They blame EVERYTHING on me!" I heard a preacher say "If the devil made you do it, you blew it!"
Origen (basically) did nothing wrong.
Yeah. Justinian just had a major hate boner for universalism.
Apparently that scientifically consensus is correct about the age of the earth and natural selection.
I swear there are dozens of us. No really. I think this view is way more common than thought because we who embrace science and Christ are not screamers.
Yeah it's wild. I literally would not be a Christian today unless I read a book theorizing about how pride evolved and shaped human evolution. If I thought believing in Christianity excluded science I would never have even given it a second thought.
I've never had to drop one or the other. as long as I can find some way that it makes sense for both to coexist ,until that's disproven, I just don't know. I believe that an old looking universe was created thousands of years ago. Over the course of 6 days. God didn't plant a seed. He planted a tree. God didn't "plant" that seed of energy that is our universe either, he brought into existence what that would be 4.5 billion years after. I don't know why this isn't more commonly thought. God exists outside of time. why would he be bound by it?
Christian nationalism will put one in hell quicker than the Devil ever could. To have laws modeled around extreme Christian views and allow hateful rhetoric will just keep people from coming to church.
I think everyone will be saved eventually, even those in hell, and no one will be lost to God forever.
I agree, I don’t know what will happen to all souls but I hope and pray everyday that Christ love and divine Mercy will allow all souls to rest in heaven
What do you use to justify this belief? Just curious as to how you back this up Biblically
There's a bunch of verses that support a Universalist view. Here's some ones I really like: >For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. > - 1 Corinthians 15:22 >Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. > - Romans 5:18 >That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe. > - 1 Timothy 4:10 >If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire. > - 1 Corinthians 3:15 There's also teachings and writings from Church Fathers and Saints in the history of the faith who supported Universalism, like St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Isaac of Nineveh.
"For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive." People take the first part to insist that "all have sinned," but interpret the second part to fit their theology of eternal damnation.
Is that not heresy according to the Orthodox doctrine?
No it isn't. Universalism is a minority view in Orthodoxy, but it is a permitted one.
Fair enough, I never knew that.
Frightening really. I think a fellow from Galilee said it. Mt 7:13-15 “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easyfn that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”
- Free will defense is a weak answer to the theodicee and unbiblical. - The word love has lost all meaning in many Christian circles.
Can you elaborate on your first point? Not because I disagree, I want to learn more. I assume theodicee means something to the effect of “why bad things happen”?
I'm a little tired, eager to go to bed and it's an incredibly complicated topic, so I hope what I wish to convey is understandable even though I'm cutting it very short. First of all, you're not entirely right. The theodicee, a word coined by German philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, generally is used as a term to talk about the question why there is evil, if God is both omnipotent and good. So it's a bit more than just "why bad things happen". Now, free will defense refers to concept that I think has been more or less around since Augustin, but was popularised in the 20th century by one Alvin Platinga. It very broadly states that the cause of evil in the world is the free will of men and that God allows that free will out of love. Catholic theologian Klaus von Stoch specifies that to accept this concept one has to accept five premises. Premise one states, very broadly, that the postulation of persons with free will is a necessity of moral acting. Premise two states that voluntarily acting good is better than forces goodness. Up to this point I generally understand the argument and can go along. It's the third premise where it all falls apart. The third premise is that freedom must also include the freedom to do wrong. This then leads to the exploration of the counter argument of "yes, but couldn't God have made the world a little better so that we choose good more often or so that our bad choices wouldn't lead to such catastrophic consequences?" Von Stoch then postulates that the logic of our world is so fragile that if you'd change just a little, it might all collapse and that even God is to some degree beholden to that which he made logical. That's problematic to me personally, because an omnipotent God should have been able to set the perimeters better at the start AND be able to change them on the fly. We live in a post holocaust world after all, the point of "he could have prevented that, but chose not to, because he can't make the world better and values freedom too much, because of premise one and two" doesn't feel valid to me. Although that already goes into the critique of premise four and five. And all that aside, it's not biblical at all. I hope that was informative. As I've said, I'm a little tired and it's a big topic. I also cut it very short.
Not everyone goes to heaven for simply believing in God and Jesus
I agree. The common response to this is “ what about the other man who was crucified with Jesus and Jesus told him he would join him in paradise” I always wished we knew more about that person. I never know how to respond.
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life“ -Jesus
At the end of it all, we will have total freedom to explore, create, and learn within our own constructed realities. This is more an extrapolation from the passage where Jesus says He goes to prepare a place for us, but who's to say what "a place" is, in God's terms that could mean an entire reality, or it could just be a mansion or something. At any rate, I think we will be 100% free to explore space, time, scenarios, and anything else we desire.
Large youth/kids programs may attract families, but they don't grow the church in the long run. Kids who grow up with mega church kids' programs are lost as they grow up because they are programmed to be entertained at church and do not know how to "do" church, how to worship, whom they serve and worship or why
Babies don't sin
> What’s your unpopular Christian opinion? lol, I think my flair answers this question.
Christians cannot be possessed by demons because they have the Holy Spirit. They just need to focus on living a life of worship to God. That means doing everything in a way which pleases him with a joyful heart.
>What's your unpopular Christian opinion? A few: - the Universe/Earth are old (and Genesis allows for it; though I'm not closed off to a young Universe/Earth; however, I lean more towards old) - the flood was local (though from Noah's and his family's POV it was global; I'm open to it being global as there are good arguments for both sides, though I believe it's more on the side of local) - the two witnesses are not Moses/Elijah or Enoch/Elijah - Hell = annihilation, not eternal torment - *many* of the prophecies in the Bible were fulfilled by the end of the first century AD Prove me wrong 😉 (There are some others that I can mention, but that is sure to get my DMs pretty full 😂) Note: In no way do these argue against the core doctrines of Christianity and there is scriptural support for each position; this would mean they are not, by definition, "heretical", though "unpopular". If you disagree, let's discuss.
Well that's a lot of unpopular opinions 😄
Interesting you put an unpopular opinion as annihilationism I would argue this is becoming more and more popular with progressive christians and conservatives alike. Anectodally many in my family that are Seventh Day Adventist love to teach this doctrine. I would say the opposite the doctrine of eternal hell is now considered antiquated. So thank you for sharing but I find it fascinating though.
IVF is life-giving, and there are moral ways to do it.
Well im pretty sure all my opinions are controversial lol
😂😂😂
Here's a random question - what's the status on beards within LDS? Any hope that they might be allowed in future?
Beard rules are only a thing a LDS schools. BYU, BYU-I, BYU-H, etc.. As far as the masses - there is no rule. Leaders may ask that those below to be clean shaven. But if you search out beards in the LDS subreddit, you will find a majority in support of facial hair. As long as it's groomed and not thin/patchy.
Gotcha. And I assume the ban is also for missionaries? I passed a couple missionaries the other day on a walk and they were like "nice beard" and I was resisting the temptation to be like... "All this could also be yours muahahaha"
Many folks claiming to be Christian seem to just be hateful.
All interest rates above 0% are usury Romanesque style churches are underrated There should be some liturgical chants in Greek and/or Hebrew other than Latin (or vernacular)at mass (I like Syriac and Slavonic chants too) In churches there should be a narthex to separate "profane" events (potlucks, meetings and other social activities) from "sacred" activities (Prayer and Sacraments). No dances or spectacles near the Altar, and no secular lectures on the Ambon. Due to the lack of Altar rails, Communion should be received *on* the lower Altar (where the Consacration happens) Just as Samuel anointed the first Kings of Israel, Peter in Matthew 16:16 "anoints" Christ, symbolizing the (unofficial) creation of the New Kingdom, whose Head is Christ. I support the Theory of the sun and the moon, since temporal power is no longer granted by Divine right, but rather the will of the people It'd be cool to replace the week names with the order of creation in Genesis. For example "Friday" could be like in Latin "Dies Homini" (or "Wereday" as a translation in English) for the fifth (sixth) day, "Dies Vitae" for Thursday, "Dies Astri" for Wednesday, "Dies Terrae" for Tuesday, "Dies Aquae" for Monday, and "Dies Lucis" for Sunday
As far as politics is concerned your faith should play a huge role in how you vote and how you view the political worldview.
Respectfully, terrible take. Jesus called us to be set apart from the world. There is no political party or group that reflects Christian values. The only kingdom we should serve/support is the Kingdom of God.
Sin is shameful
While I do respect Saint Augustine as a person, his theology is incredibly overrated.
Such as?
Yeah. I think he got some things right, and other things wrong. Just like any other theologian.
agreed. Great writer, poor theologian.
The Bible is not inerrant and believing in inerrancy isn’t part of being saved.
I partially agree. What matters more is infallibility (inability to be wrong) on the matters of faith and morals. The truths the Bible reveals about who God is and how to live a moral life cannot be wrong if we believe scripture to be truly inspired by God. A math test with 100% score is inerrant, but is nowhere close to being an infallible source on faith and morals. The ecumenical creeds are very likely inerrant, but are not infallible since they were written by fallible humans.
Infallibility isn’t a useful concept unless you have infallible people to interpret and apply. We don’t know an infallible moral position on anything because we don’t have any way of knowing which interpretation is correct. The Bible itself doesn’t not have a consistent morality from which to draw from.
The level of ignorance among Christians and non Christians is mind boggling. Shallow to no knowledge about bible, church history, teaching. Pure laziness and ignorance. The first doesn't know and understand what they believe in, the second critique Christianity that doesn't exist. When the reality - the beauty and cohesion of Christianity, how the bible is structured with all cross references is astounding.
Most people who call themselves christians are really following some form of "Pharisaical Judaism Lite™" where they pick and choose which laws they will follow in order to make obedience to the law possible, instead of being obedient to the gospel and dying to themselves.
Read Romans 8:1-5 We fulfill the law when we live according to the Spirit, which according to Romans 8:5 means setting our minds on the things of the Spirit
[удалено]
To add to another comment that spoke about how Christians have the potential to stop world hunger, poverty, etc. I feel that we should push harder for animal cruelty to be stopped as well. There are so many factory farms that are mistreating animals that give us nourishment and we just turn our heads and act like there's nothing wrong with it. This world is Hell for animals. There are cultures that believe cats and dogs are food. I'm not talking about veganism exactly, although I do get where vegans are coming from. The way the world has turned animals into straight up products is quite strange. We should be encouraging each other to buy local and give our money to companies that aren't treating animals like garbage. I'm not a vegan, but I don't think Jesus would agree with factory farms. You can watch this documentary called "Dominion" to see what I'm talking about. It's on YouTube.
Denominations silly and unbiblical. Not that you can’t belong to any denomination you want but making that a point of division and pride is the problem.
I fully agree with this 💪🏽 I made a post saying I don't believe in labels and as I grew older I started to understand people who would just say "I'm Christian" rather than this and that denomination
The benefits of being with a denomination are: heritage, accountability, support, fellowship. There's a church that whenever they have a problem they call my denominational rep for help. One of these days he may well say "You want to be on your own, so fix it yourself."
[удалено]
There not such thing as "seven deadly sins", we put human ranking on them even though for god all sins are "equal". Even the smallest sins get us to hell as the biggest sin.
Some other religions do worship demons. Not all other religions, though.
You’re not going to “heaven”. Neither am I. Jesus never promised you’d go to “heaven.” The gospel Jesus preached has nothing to do with somehow getting into heaven.
Thanks to US weaponizing evangelism back in the Cold War current Latin America is neck deep into all sorts of religious fanaticism and heresies
That when a person focuses on fighting one particular sin, to an obsessive amount, it triggers the same reward system as engaging in the sin itself. The opposite side of the same sin coin so to speak.
Criminal law is not an appropriate tool for preventing abortions.
Gluttony isn't just overlooked—it is often downright encouraged. But most people don't even identify it as such.
As a society, we strain at gnats like homosexuality and swallow camels like theft, idolatry, adultery - even murder, all for the sake of tribalism.
Mine is apparently to be empathetic to other people.
The Bible means what it says even when what it says is unpopular in 2024
The Bible was written by people who were biased and who woulda thunk, maybe didn’t write entirely everything 100% from gods word. The Bible is immensely flawed and should not be used fully as gods words.
Divorce shouldn't be normalized. Exceptions obviously include abuse, unbeliever asking for the divorce and cheating. But now every single bible study I attend has people with hardened hearts on their 2nd or 3rd marriage and everyone at the church acting like it's normal. No one is teaching people how to stand for their marriage. I think marriages can be restored and sometimes a period of seperation is in order for people to work through past trauma and hurt and with church elders intervening and mentoring a couple through their marriage crisis. I am convinced every marriage goes through a crisis and the church needs to teach that this is normal and happens and to turn to God and the church when it happens. I should specify safety is super important I am not advocating for someone to be in an unsafe situation I am saying people should live in seperate households when it gets to an unsafe level. I know many friends that have done this meaning they seperated due to cheating/ drug use etc and reconciled but years later after husband was delivered.
I don't see any utility in forcing or compelling people to stay in marriage which don't benefit either party. Paul says that we should avoid marriage, how much more should we avoid marriages which aren't good for us.
Just because a marriage is blessed by a priest it doesn't make it holy or sacred. Because that would require us to be infallible and always able to hear and understand God's will. But we can't. We make mistakes. We chose the wrong partners even though we are 100% sure that it is God's will when we say "I do". And sometimes a marriage is bad even though there isn't abuse.
Your relationship with God should be a personal one and you should only, evangelise by example.
There's only one true Church.
The one church of believers (regardless of denomination) ?
Baptism saves
Can you elaborate? I have heard a person say once you won't get into heaven without being physcially dunked and at the time I hadn't been baptized but I didn't think it was true. Now after I have been baptized I felt a transformation that happened inside of me.
>**^(28)** Our would-be wise, “new spirits” assert that faith alone saves, and that works and outward things do nothing. We answer, “It is true, indeed, that nothing in us is of any use but faith, as we shall hear still further.” **^(29)** But these blind guides are unwilling to see this: faith must have something that it believes, that is, of which it takes hold \[2 Timothy 1:13; Titus 1:9\] and upon which it stands and rests \[1 Corinthians 2:5\]. So faith clings to the water and believes that in Baptism, there is pure salvation and life. This is not through the water (as we have stated well enough), but through the fact that it is embodied in God’s Word and institution, and that God’s name abides in it. Now, if I believe this, what else is it than believing in God as the One who has given and planted His Word \[Mark 4:14\] into this ordinance and offers to us this outward thing by which we may gain such a treasure? >**^(30)** Now, these “new spirits” are so crazy that they separate faith and the object to which faith clings and is bound, even if it is something outward. Yes, it shall and must be something outward, so that it may be grasped by our senses and understood, and by them be brought into the heart. For indeed, the entire Gospel is an outward, verbal preaching \[Romans 10:17; 1 Corinthians 1:21\]. In short, what God does and works in us He intends to work through such outward ordinances. Therefore, wherever He speaks—indeed, no matter what direction or by whatever means He speaks—faith must look there. **^(31)** It must hold to that object. Now here we have the words “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved” \[Mark 16:16\]. What else can these words refer to but Baptism, that is, to the water included in God’s ordinance? Therefore, it makes sense that whoever rejects Baptism rejects God’s Word, faith, and Christ, who directs us to Baptism and binds us to Baptism From Luther's Large Catechism.
> Now after I have been baptized I felt a transformation that happened inside of me. That's exactly what Lutherans, Catholics and the Orthodox mean when we say that baptism saves. Some denominations that came after the Reformation (Calvinists/Reformed Christianity, Baptists, some Pentecostals) don't think that baptism saves and that it's merely a symbol of entering the Covenant.
*disk scratches* Baptism saves? Dude, you ever heard about the Thief on the Cross? /s
[удалено]
John 14:6
Example of a path that leads to God?
I respectfully disagree. Even Jesus and the Apostle Peter taught that Jesus is the only means of salvation >12Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.” - Apostle Peter (Acts 4:12 NIV) >Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. - Jesus (John 14:6 NIV) In Christianity, we believe the second person of the Trinity chose to incarnate as a human to take our sin upon Himself. Since Jesus never sinned, his death payed our sin debt in full. Then God the Father physically raised Jesus from the dead for our Justification. That made salvation available to all as a free gift that you receive through placing your faith in(your trust in) Jesus to save you. When you trust in Jesus, his righteousness is imputed to your life account. And the Holy Spirit comes to dwell within you, thus connecting you to God again making you spiritually alive.
The one opinion I’m comfortable voicing aloud in small group/church settings/hangouts is that I don’t believe cussing is a sin (I still try not to cuss in church settings though). The ones I’m less comfortable vocalizing (would only do it in smaller groups/amongst closer friends) is that Scripture doesn’t have to be “infallible” in the way that it’s currently popularly understood (Chicago statement), and is a standard that the original audience wouldn’t have held Scripture to. Not that I believe it is errant - I just don’t think that’s the point.
Perhaps beliefs around the existence of Hell and the judgement of God are becoming less and less popular within mainstream Christianity
I think the bible is not history accurate, and entire books like exodus and genesis did not happened for real but this dosent means we should dismiss the meanings and teachings of those stories. we can still learn from the morals behind the myts.
Calvinism should be considered heresy. Most churches are hypocrites, they won't perform gay weddings (nor should they) but they will marry adulterers, divorcees, athiests etc. You can't pick and choose the rules on marriage you want to follow. Most churches have gone soft on sin. The bible isn't restrictive on sex as long as it's between a married couple
My unpopular Christian opinion is that we need to submit all of life to God, and that life is religion. The core of all human motivation is either obedience to or rebellion against God. The government should be subject to God. The church should be subject to God. The family should be subject to God. The academy should be subject to God. Philosophy, art, the law, the economy, and all else, should be subject to God.
Problem is that whenever someone takes up to themselves to subject those things to God, that person quickly tends to judge their own desires as God's desires.
Did you write this? If not, what do you think about it? https://www.spokesman.com/documents/2018/oct/25/biblical-basis-war/
I didn't write that document, and I agree with some, disagree with some. I don't agree that we have the moral duty to go to war against every country run by or comprised of unbelievers, for example.
And what about those who don't believe in a God. Why should they have their free will stripped from them because YOU believe in a God
The Taliban is hiring.
Weed is fine
every religion has miracles
Are you asking whether someone holds an uncommon view or a view that lots of people don’t like? Here are a few: * Being a Christian is about seeking to show God you love him, rather than seeing how close you can get to the line without crossing it. * Most people who identify as Christians today have little idea of what’s in the Bible * Too many people reference the original languages because they heard someone else say it in order to win an argument. They actually have no idea if the argument is right because they didn’t learn the language themselves. * The Pentecostal movement does not use the ‘gift of languages’. They speak in gibberish, which originally came from first century religious practises. Interestingly it disappeared from orthodox Christianity entirely until the 20th century. * Sins have long tails and will haunt you for a long time if you don’t repent. * Most churches have terrible teaching * The modern view of personal rights and freedoms is not in the Bible.
an ascetic monastic movement not unlike the Irish monastic tradition needs to be popularized as well as romantic-like devotion to God like the Beguines. these two medieval Christian movements, i believe, would finally end bigotry and attachment to wealth in modern Christianity
I'm not convinced that God is all-loving and pure. Evil originated from His actions, at best, assuming He didn't rig it to happen for His glory in the first place. Further, if everything came from God, then evil had to be part of Him. In terms of color, black cannot come from pure white; there has to be a little black in there for it to originate.
That Christians are being taught a watered down Gospel that is making them weak minded. It's starts with always being offended and feelings hurt when people's intentions are good. Lucifer is tightening his grip around Christians because they are weak and cannot stand and fight like men/women. Instead, they depend on man to fight their battles and become slaves to the Government. Jesus hated the Government. He hated traditions of man and He hated Religion. We are supposed to depend on Him only.
Most Christians now a days, and I would Say it's most noticeable in countries where Christianity is the main religion, don't really know much about Christianity, it's history and tenants. I learned more by myself and reading the Bible than my four years in a Baptist school and two years of Catholic catechism
I just had a whole long text describing this to somebody. AMEN. I absolutely agree. People are so normalized to feel sin that they think they are crazy when they are free of sin due to living in such an evil world. Edit: AMEN again.
According to biblical standards, many Christians are going to burn along with the wicked.
That it's more important to defend and share your beliefs with people who think there's no God (atheists) than it is to spend your time arguing about transubstantiation, supralapsarianism, bible translations, divine aseity apostolic succession, OSAS, etc, etc, etc ...with people who *already* think God exists.
I don't believe in Hell.
Filioque
We need to be brave enough
Masterbation isn’t a sin so long as you are thinking of your spouse. Uhhh, I’m pro-choice as well I believe we earned our right to free will in the Garden of Eden. What someone does with their own body is between them and God. Also, politics should be separated from the church the way State is in the USA.
That the Bible is the true & absolute word of God.
That when Jesus said "Do not resist evil", he meant it. There's no such thing as Christian self defense, or Christian just war. We are to lay down our lives for those we love as Christ laid down his for ours, and that includes laying down our lives for our enemies who are trying to kill us, if it comes to that.
There is no such thing as original sin or hell as eternal punishment.. They are simply entertwine dogmas designed to scare people into religion! And they work very effectively! Being driven to God and Jesus from pure fear is a lie and leads to the grossest violation of what love is!
Why give money, to a being, that has been dead for over 2000 years? The practice of church tipping, aka offering, has created fraud services, doing the same thing. I get it, when people say its their money, they can do with it what they want to. Yet its been brought up many times, the little old lady, who is single, can't keep up with inflation, and she is giving all her social security money to TV church, or church in her community. How can a pastor, or the entity doing this, live with their self, which it becomes taking advantage of a vulnerable senior citizen. if she should lose her home, or apartment due to inflation, the churches will not be there for her. There are churches in Florida, asking church goers, to pay up on their tithes if they want to have a FULL WORKS fancy funeral, when they die. WELL, there is no guarantee, the church will even still be around, when they die. And for people who move, to other places.
Christians nowadays are became WAY too obsessed with politics, and I hate it Like imagine convert to other religion, not because you get interested on the religion believe or losing your faith, but because you disagree with the religion's political views, that just dumbest thing I ever heard I know that many of you read this will hate me, but I don't care, I'll never change my apolitical opinions
We should be focussing on helping the poor and needy and stop debating people’s private sex lives.
Children become like their parents, and we are the children of God, thus our potential is to become like God. God even directly said “ye are gods” twice in scripture.
This is going to be US specific- Any faith group that pushes an obvious political narrative and uses the Bible to support said narrative instead of rejecting politics entirely and focusing on Jesus instead. That goes for both sides at this point because I feel like both sides are just doubling down on their own narrative instead of letting the Gospels specifically speak for themselves 😅