• BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s really really progressive church who are not like those shitty conservative churches. I don’t think anything of those churches either.

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      34
      ·
      1 year ago

      Participating in any Christianity props up and validates the bad ones.

      That said, if you really are the “good ones” then I wish you luck in fixing the rest of Jesus’ stray flock. And I hope you personally get the chance to fix some of them.

      • BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t want to fix anybody. I want to do my best and be with other people who also feel that way, in an inclusive and completely welcoming way to all. I absolutely hate the bastardized version of Christianity it has become for many and I won’t stand for it.

        • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well that’s a shame. As a fellow Christian you’re in the unique position to “call in” your peers and actually be listened to.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You don’t “fix” other people. You fix yourself. That’s all you have any control over.

        • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You don’t control other people, but you constantly influence them.

          Isn’t the whole point of a pastor to encourage other people to be their best selves? Isn’t that fixing them?

      • Tyfud@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This right here. There are no good participants in religion. Everyone participating, no matter their intent or actions, is s part of the problem. Because they enable the bad behavior by supporting the underlying common beliefs and adding some degree of legitimacy to this.

        It’s the same problem with ACAB

    • Chunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      For me it’s not about the shittiness of the Church. If you are from a progressing and welcoming church then that’s great and you’re probably giving some people a community who might not have had one otherwise.

      I get more caught up in the fact that an adult would actually believe this crap. Even young kids know magic isn’t real but actual adult humans believe in it with all their hearts.

      • Cylusthevirus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Probably they’re more like Quakers, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, United Church of Christ, or United Methodists. You know, the denominations with openly gay clergy who see their role as advancing the cause of social justice and helping the poor and disenfranchised in their communities.

        Giving people shit for a label is bigoted as fuck. Also, thanks for making a dad joke thread about your unresolved religious trauma.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          United Methodist is a tricky example to use. I know because I was one of their clergy at one point.

          Officially they still ban gay clergy, even after the recent schism where the most-bigoted group left and formed the “Global Methodist Church.”

          American United Methodists (especially the clergy) tend to be fairly progressive, but the African and Asian branches of the church are massive and extremely conservative. They’ve managed to keep the church from being able to change its official stance on homosexuality, which is that it’s “incompatible with Christian teaching.”

        • SquishyPandaDev@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          United Methodists are no longer cool. They voted against gay marriage. And yes, to be fair, a good number of local congregations were pissed

          • Nahvi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            That seems to be more of a kick-the-can vote to allow the more conservative churches time to leave.

            More than 6,000 United Methodist congregations — a fifth of the U.S. total — have now received permission to leave the denomination amid a schism over theology and the role of LGBTQ people in the nation’s second-largest Protestant denomination

            With these departures, progressives are expected to propose changing church law at the next General Conference in 2024 to allow for same-sex marriage and the ordination of LGBTQ people.

            https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2023-07-06/one-in-five-united-methodist-congregations-in-the-us-have-left-the-denomination-over-lgbtq-conflicts

            • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              That seems to be more of a kick-the-can vote to allow the more conservative churches time to leave.

              “We only voted against human rights so the people who are against those human rights can leave with all their money and property intact, we promise!”

              Man, you’re making these “progressive” churches sound wonderful!

              • Nahvi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Compromises are useful when you want something. When your side is about to win you don’t blow up the organization unless you have a mental problem.

                Also, from what I can tell the gay bishops voted for the compromise. If they thought it was the right way to handle it, I am not going to shame them for it.

                We will see if they make good on it next year.

                • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Compromises are useful when you want something. When your side is about to win you don’t blow up the organization unless you have a mental problem.

                  Exactly. Like when the north was about to win the civil war, Lincoln allowed some slavery to be legal.

                  Or when the allies were on the brink of victory, they went and allowed some concentraition camps to open again.

                  Also, folding and voting against human rights to keep your hand on some property doesn’t sound like winning to me.

                  Maybe you meant the Charlie Sheen kind of “winning”?

                  Also, from what I can tell the gay bishops voted for the compromise. If they thought it was the right way to handle it, I am not going to shame them for it.

                  I will! Fuck them, it was a shit decision, good job appeasing the regressives, well done guys.

                  • Nahvi@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    The examples listed are examples of violent victories not political ones. Even then, they imply backtracking instead of maintaining the status quo until victory.

                    This was not a change in policy, it maintained the existing one, so that they could finalize their “divorce” amicably. There is a ton of properties as well as pensions involved. Properties that the UMC technically owns but was paid for by local congregations.

                    It might be worth noting that those gay bishops that I mentioned aren’t actually allowed under current church rules. If they forced the issue and the conservative churches brought them to court instead, there is no telling what the courts would decide. Making deals was likely the smart choice, even if it meant waiting a bit until they start offering gay marriages to their parishioners.

            • DarthBueller@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not that I give a fuck whether the UMC survives, but you are correct. The bigots are leaving the denomination and many/most that left joined the Global Methodist Church.

              The only reason that the UMC wasn’t gay as fuck years ago is because the denomination is global and the African churches are bigoted against LGBTQ+. Their votes plus a fifth of USA congregations was enough to guarantee a schism. They’re just being strategic about the breakup because of how property is owned in the denomination.

          • Cylusthevirus@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            True, sadly. Though there’s been a lot of local defiance of that and in 2024 they’re expected to vote on it again.

            The local UM congregation in my city has a gay pastor and giant banners up detailing that they are open and affirming. There’s a whoooole splinter going on right now.

            Some of the conservative nutjobs are breaking off too, but a lot of that is in the US South (and Africa, interestingly; still a lot of homophobia on that continent).

            Also should be mentioned that there are two similarly named Presbyterian church denominations and one is cool and the other is VERY not.

            Still, all the more reason to not get hung up on labels.

        • Alto@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m not religious these days, but I’m really glad the church I raised in was a UCC church. My first experience with blatant church bigotry was when I went to a Baptist church service with a friend when I was around 10. Pastor used 3 slurs within 10 minutes, even as a 10 year old I was wondering what the fuck happened to love thy neighbor.

          • Sotuanduso@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re holding this person responsible for an evil because they share a demographic with the perpetrators, even though they have nothing to do with it? Yeah that sounds like bigotry to me.

              • Sotuanduso@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Correct me if I’m misapplying your logic then, but it sounds like this means…

                • It’s okay to hold Muslims responsible for Al Qaeda because they can just choose not to follow Islam.
                • It’s okay to think of all Romani as criminals because they can just choose to leave their culture.
                • It’s okay to be misandristic because they can just choose to transition.
        • Nougat@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Giving people shit for a label is bigoted as fuck.

          Only if you have no choice about it. I have zero qualms criticizing people for their choices.

          • BaldProphet@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            From Merriam-Webster:

            Bigot
            : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
            especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

            Synonyms include dogmatist, partisan, and sectarian.

            Here’s an article that may help you to understand why you are a bigot a bit better: https://www.existbetter.co/single-post/2019/04/15/Bigotry-is-a-SymptomHow-to-Handle-a-Bigot

            Hopefully we can eliminate hate of all kinds from this world.

            • Nougat@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Racial or ethnic groups are made up of people who did not have a choice about their race or ethnicity. While indoctrination from childhood can certainly cause a person’s religious views, and work alongside community pressure to keep them pinned in place, ultimately an individual is responsible for their own thoughts. Criticizing someone for what they think is not bigotry.

              Your article link goes to a domain that does not exist.

              • BaldProphet@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Maybe it’s blocked in your country. I had no trouble accessing the article.

                EDIT: Looks like the website got deleted after I linked it. Weird.

                • Nougat@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Looks like this domain isn’t
                  connected to a website yet
                  Is this your domain?
                  Connect it to your Wix website in just a few easy steps:
                  Go to Wix.com > Subscriptions > Domains
                  Click Use a Domain You Already Own
                  Follow the steps to connect your domain to your website

      • Sho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        And in some circles tattoos are a no-no, a la leviticus 19:28

          • Sotuanduso@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            To keep it straight, remember when Jesus declared all foods clean. He didn’t say “all foods are clean,” he gave a policy basically stating that external things aren’t where sin lies, but internal, which meant that foods are clean. The same can be said of clothing policies, the health code, etc… Sin lives in the heart, and unless you think it’s wrong, marks on your skin generally aren’t going to taint your heart.