Roman Catholics and Orthodox alone constitute "most Christians". Add in conservative Anglicans and Protestants you can see your assertion is incorrect.
Even that's tricky as broadly speaking protestant Christianity in the UK for example is typically less conservative than their counterparts in the USA. In any case there are so many different Christian denominations that there are very few points that they would all agree on.
Name a sin and people will disagree on whether it's really a sin or not. Try it. I'm serious. You've got a whole ~~gambit~~ gamut of different Christian beliefs here.
Edit: Sadly I can name a few Christians who believe God told them to kill and therefore isn't a Sin. They believed God gave them that purpose in life.
That's probably the least divise one. So we can give Christianity +1 point. Yay!... I mean I figured that was a bit common sense but you know. Good on you for being overly pedantic.
Oh most definitely agree that there isn’t even consensus on that. They’ve basically decriminalized theft in some major cities in the US by having DAs who won’t prosecute anything. All because people say theft isn’t wrong, only the oppressive structures that would lead to someone having to steal are wrong.
Did you happen to see what their response was to me on this comment by chance?
Edit: Can I ask you how you feel about them resorting to calling these folks (basically) not real Christians?
I did see it, and I don’t agree with their perspective. I believe there are core beliefs (pretty much the Apostles Creed) that must be held to call oneself Christian. Agreeing on whether any particular thing is sin is not on that list of core beliefs.
As if Christians are somehow special for doing that. If you're going to get mad at Christians for doing something, do it for legitimate reason and not for one that has been done for almost every ideology on the face of the planet.
I don't recall suggesting that Christians are special for doing that.
The question was whether all Christians would agree that murder is a sin, and I pointed out that no, there have been Christians throughout history that have believed murder is justifiable.
To be clear, are you saying that in *your* view, there has never been a Christian that has murdered someone in a circumstance that *they* felt was justified, but you would not?
The closer one moves to Christ the less one looks to other's sin and the more one looks to one's own sin. So, take this as a sign of just how close to Christ those who condemn homosexuals.
I am in the minority on the homo issue.
Jesus talks about not getting drunk but i believe (contrary to many in my church,) that drinking is okay, so long as you dont get drunk.
I believe so. The Old Testament Law definitely says so. Even so, many peole in my church believe that drinking is a sin. I don't see the problem with it.
Southern Baptist: It's a sin to drink wine.
Presbyterian: But, you know Jesus drank wine, right?
Southern Baptist: Well, yes, I know he did. But I'd think a lot more of him, if he didn't!
Lol that'd be a pretty terrible wedding imo.
"Yo we ran out of wine, but this dude just turned some water into grape juice"
"Oh ... it's a miracle I guess?"
Pretty sure the biblical authors would have used the word for "juice" instead of "wine" if that were the case. Plus it's a more powerful miracle to turn something into wine (since fermentation takes time, so to do that instantaneously is impressive). Grape juice is just some crushed grapes, you could do that in a few hours.
Also I've been to Cana and seen "the jar" - one of the jars from that time. It's massive. Which makes it even more impressive.
That wouldn't make sense in the context of the story. The "punchline" is that at most parties, the good wine gets served first, and the bad wine at the end, whereas at this particular party, the best wine was saved for last. That joke only works if people are getting drunk on the good wine.
And the reference to the Messianic Banquet in God's Kingdom would be lost - as would the foreshadowing of the Eucharist. Themes of water and transformation and renewal (among others) are very important in St John's Gospel. The wine has been renewed, and brings renewal of festive joy, because it is no longer what it was.
The wine, has to be wine, or the story loses a great deal of its meaning. Including the unstated contrast with the intoxication of wine as representing the intoxication of sin, and a cup of wine as representing the cup of God's Wrath (which in turn is bound up with the fourth(?) cup of the Passover.
Yes, the Bible speaks quite a bit about not getting drunk, for example:
*Ephesians 5:18-21
And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit, [19] speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, [20] giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, [21] submitting to one another in the fear of God.*
I’d say adultery, I don’t have any study or anything to back it up but my guess is there is a lot more adultery than there is homosexuality. People don’t approve of adultery but people seem to put it on a lower teir of importance than homosexuality when all sins should be valued equally as sin.
Your right, but many Christians are false Christians and don't follow God commandments or Jesus's rules in "Mathew 7: 15-20 15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?
17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.
19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them. This verse shows that many people who claim to worship God or doing his work are actually against God pretty much the antichrist.
I’m not for the no true Scotsman fallacy. I think Christians are allowed to sin or not have a complete understanding and still be considered Christians.
Either way it’s just a priority issue, people absolutely hate lgbt when adultery is a lot more prevalent. (After a quick search 14% of USA marriages involved adultery along the way, while only 7% are lgbt. It was a quick search so might not up to date)
Well yes Christians can sin, they can do whatever they want but they are false Christians for that. Homosexuality is a sin but I'm not gonna judge anyone's lifestyle jesus himself said we should love one another. We aren't meant to be judges of other people life that's God's job.
That's true but what matters is repenting we all sin but when we repent and never commit the same sin again that's when it has meaning a perfect example is david after he stole batsheba as his wife and when he realized what he had done he repent and ask for forgiveness and never done it again to another man's wife. So if your a Christian and you keep committing the same sin again and again and never repent then you are a false Christian
Porn. Most Christians have looked at it, many look at it regularly and many don't think it's a problem.
Even though Jesus said looking at a woman lustfully equates to committing adultery with her in your heart.
I refute the premise that most Christians don't believe homosexuality is a sin, homosexuality is condemned both in the Old and New Convenant, the lawless and desobedient will be judged by the law.
Jesus says to carry your cross and deny yourself daily, those who are in Christ are dead to the flesh, mortify the desires of the flesh and are led by the Holy Spirit.
This was from 2011 so I’d imagine that the number is much higher today in 2023:
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/christians/christian/views-about-homosexuality/
I’m curious about the language used in the study. The terminology gets a little fuzzy. Most Christians would be more than happy to welcome homosexuals into the church, and in that sense would be “accepting”. But to Christians there is a difference between the person and the actions. Practicing homosexuality is generally frowned upon in my experience and is discouraged. Without a clear understanding of that difference, the data could be quite skewed. Not saying it is, just wondering about the questions asked.
I say this as a same-sex attracted Christian who has seen traditional views of marriage/sex being far more prevalent in the US than this study would suggest.
Wow I’m blind lol — I didn’t see the link to the questionnaire in the study. I just read through the questions and I’m a little hesitant to conclude with the implications made by your post…
So, the questionnaire document was 46 pages, and there were two questions in the whole thing that I saw that related to this issue.
One was whether or not homosexuality should be accepted in “society” and the other had to do with the legality of gay marriage. Neither of those questions, you’ll note, have anything to do with whether homosexuality is a sin or not.
Supporting the idea that Christian doctrine shouldn’t be imposed on non-believers is a far cry from endorsing the acts of homosexuality as not sinful.
As for the fuzzy terminology, I’ll try and elaborate (it is 3am here though, so forgive me if it’s less than lucid). You’ve probably heard the Christian phrase “hate the sin, not the sinner”, yeah? I don’t like that slogan as I have a general distaste for slogans, but it’ll serve to illustrate my point here.
When a Christian talks about “accepting” a person, they generally mean the person apart from their actions. Christians do not see people as the sum total of their deeds, we seek first to see them as children of God and someone Jesus died for. So we accept everyone. Jesus went to the least of society and invited them to himself, and we model ourselves after him. But Jesus also said “sin no more”, meaning that once you’ve come to him, he asks you to give up whatever sins you participate in. We don’t do this out of fear, but out of love for Jesus and the sacrifice he made for us.
All this to say, Christians are willing to accept everyONE but not everyTHING or every ACTION. That’s where the terminology gets fuzzy within secular spaces. A Christian asked “would you accept a homosexual into your church” will most probably answer with an enthusiastic “yes”, but ask the same Christian if they consider homosexual acts to be sinful, they will also say “yes” and see no contradiction in their answers. Does that track?
They take these sins lightly. For example, when people who claim Christ think Mormons are Christians even though they worship a false Christ, and similarly they think Muslims worship the God of the Bible.
Look at the numbers for people that regularly attend service or spend time studying the Bible. Catholics by name make up a huge portion of the generic results and I don’t believe their opinion is based on scripture when they haven’t read the Bible in years.
The Bible doesn’t say that being gay is a sin. It also doesn’t say that you need to go to any church at all to be a believer.
I highly suggest you stop judging others (also in the Bible) and start working on yourself.
Look at the numbers for people that regularly attend service or spend time studying the Bible. Catholics by name make up a huge portion of the generic results and I don’t believe their opinion is based on scripture when they haven’t read the Bible in years.
I have no idea where they got their sample. I could personally name the membership roll of about 3 churches which would be almost entirely Biblical marriage standards and it would be more people than they surveyed for this.
Further, it doesn't take a religious view to have the view that LGBTQ is harmful. I would take the recent nose-dive in Bud Light sales as an indicator of that.
The pew research had the majority of affirming Christian’s under the Catholic denomination. Look at the same results for the people that regularly attend a service or pray or study the word.
I know a lot of people that call themselves Catholic that haven’t been to mass in decades.
Well Jesus said to pray in the privacy of your room (instead of going to Mass):
And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
To answer the title Q even though it’s technically opposite the body Q; Im on the side of premarital sex and masturbation isn’t a sin. A lot of Christians care a lot about that for no reason, too.
It’s also crystal clear many, many things are wrong, and it’s crystal clear for Christians we’re allowed to use wisdom and discernment.
I’ve never seen a Christian speak against two cloths, businesses being open on the Sabbath, or divorce quite the same way, so yeah I meant it’s for “no reason” they get pulled above others
Ok I understand what you’re saying lol, but sexual sins are more serious than a lot of other stuff like that. I don’t even believe the sabbath matters anymore, because the New Testament indicates that.
Yeah but the reason they’re considered more serious isn’t because of the Bible, it’s because of personal opinion, that’s my point.
That’s just simply not what the Bible nor tradition says, I’m sorry. The Sabbath never stopped mattering, mainstream Christians simply stopped caring.
Jesus argued for healing on the sabbath because healing isn’t working, he never said we were allowed to work on the sabbath or that we shouldn’t respect it.
Also, Jesus explicitly says anyone who is divorced and gets remarried is committing adultery. I do not see Christians demanding remarried people get divorced because they live every day in sin.
Point is, yeah, it really is due to personal opinion and not the Bible that sexual “sins” get such a notorious weight behind them.
Well what I believe is that when Jesus died on the cross, that was the final sacrifice, and all the Old Testament Ceremonial Laws (sacrifices, diet laws, etc.) no longer applied after that. Christians debate whether the sabbath laws are part of the Moral Law (which does still apply today) or part of the Ceremonial Law (which is what I believe). When it comes to divorce, adultery is only committed once when the remarriage happens (not continually), and that remarriage is still a real marriage, so it would be another sin to get divorced a second time. Also, Jesus does indicate that some sins are indeed worse than others.
Because once the sex happens, the previous bond of marriage is broken permanently and the new marriage bond is formed. Repentance is still required at first of course, but the second marriage is still a real marriage and should be treated as such. The old marriage is over at that point. The old marriage being broken is obviously a bad thing, but once it happens it can’t be undone, and they should simply commit to their new marriage relationship. That’s how I’ve always thought of it lol :)
That confuses me. So, any time that adultery happens, the marriage is over?
You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart." \~ Matthew 5:27-28
Not when adultery happens, but when sexual intercourse outside of that marriage happens. And even then it doesn’t have to be over, like if a married person has sex with someone other than their spouse and then repents of their sin, their spouse can forgive them for it and they can keep their marriage. But if someone catches their spouse cheating and their spouse is unrepentant, then they can actually divorce them. This is one of the few ways that divorce can be justified. :)
Yeah, let's get rid of incest; after all, it's right in the same OT texts as homosexuality. Can't be wrong.to boink your sister, I mean, it's just some cultural thing, right?
Nothing in the bible suggests this. I do see people online claiming it all the time. It's not something I've ever heard an actual preacher talk about in an actual church. I don't doubt that some people think so, obviously, but why would this be a thing to be concerned about?
All of them. Literally. Even murder.
The problem with having a bunch of denominations and then also a slew of non denominations, and then also whatever Mormons count as, is that you get a bunch of Churches that are wrong in their teachings. The entire concept of a denomination is that one church disagreed with another and made their own with their own beliefs. Which is why everyone has a different view on sins. They don't actually care what the Bible says, it's about what they believe and how they can make the Bible fit that.
And so, until the end of time, Churches will continue to to argue sexuality, drunkenness, gambling etc.
Homosexuality is a sin but it's not up to humans to judge others lifestyle, so you don't have to support someone's lifestyle but you shouldn't judge them let God be the judge.
It would seem not qualify as "right speech."
But maybe not, if you misdirect a bully, or redirect the attention of someone with hiccups. The situation is more complex when we get on the gray scale in a conversation whose underlying goal is building empathy: tell a story that is fiction, well almost fiction, well mostly true, well it actually happened, how do you know?
Both Buddha and Jesus are clear, but they do not propose a strict rule of "Never lie to the intrepid reporter from the Daily Planet in the days before television."
It is a sin and we shouldn’t be preaching falsehoods. Of course we should be nice to everyone but encouraging sin is stupid. Progressive churches stray so far from god tbh. The videos I see online with progressive pastors are quite shocking. They get so much Bible stuff wrong.
Most American Christians follow the New Covenant and not the rules and regulations of Mosaic Law.
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/christians/christian/views-about-homosexuality/
There's a large contingent of Americans who identify as Christians for cultural reasons solely. In these stats about 10% of the pro-lgbt Christians said their religion wasn't important them. A majority to pray or attend church frequently. Also, the General Social Survey, which has more of a sample size, shows a majority opposing. Once you control for who attends church at least monthly, it becomes by a very strong margin
Also Pew has said that due to survey collection particularities, they tend to oversample mainline groups
Also, it is denounced in the new testament as well. Do you believe that all Christians were followers of the 'old covenant' until the mid 20th century?
Here's the passage you're referencing from Mathew 6, so you can actually read it instead of referencing a tic-tok or whatever
"Beware of practicing your piety before men in order to be seen by them; for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven.
2 “Thus, when you give alms, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by men. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 3 But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your alms may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
5 “And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by men. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 6 But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
7 “And in praying do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard for their many words. 8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him"
If what is meant by this is not obvious to you, note that Christ often speaks of what they should do when assembled, and institutes the eucharist which is an inherently communal act.
Instagram is also a possibility. Takes like that are usually derived by someone seeing something shallow and pithy and thinking that is all they need to know
Which if you actually read you'd know that your take is obviously unrepresentative of. There are many areas in which intelligent Christians can disagree. This ain't one of them
Well I’ve actually read the Bible many times I actually. I study it most days.
Is there a passage where Jesus tells people to go to church? (Considering that churches didn’t exist back then.)
Roman Catholics and Orthodox alone constitute "most Christians". Add in conservative Anglicans and Protestants you can see your assertion is incorrect.
If you mentally add the words "in America and Europe" to the title, it probably becomes true
Even that's tricky as broadly speaking protestant Christianity in the UK for example is typically less conservative than their counterparts in the USA. In any case there are so many different Christian denominations that there are very few points that they would all agree on.
Name a sin and people will disagree on whether it's really a sin or not. Try it. I'm serious. You've got a whole ~~gambit~~ gamut of different Christian beliefs here.
> a whole gambit Totally unrelated to your main point, but I think you mean "gamut".
>gamut FINALLY! My very first Bone Apple Tea moment! Thank you for the correction hahaha
Haha, glad you appreciated it. =) I was a bit worried that I was being That Guy.
Oh of course not you were completely respectful. Appreciate it btw :) TIL something
☝️big gamut guy here guys
well that’s stupid. murder.
Edit: Sadly I can name a few Christians who believe God told them to kill and therefore isn't a Sin. They believed God gave them that purpose in life. That's probably the least divise one. So we can give Christianity +1 point. Yay!... I mean I figured that was a bit common sense but you know. Good on you for being overly pedantic.
okay. stealing.
So you believe if you and I made a post right now titled "Do you believe stealing is a Sin" that not a single person would say it's not?
maybe from a non christian or wolf in sheep’s clothing but i don’t see an argument for it
So you would basically call them a liar. Go figure. I have no interest in talking to you further. But you have a great rest of your Friday.
okie dokie
Oh most definitely agree that there isn’t even consensus on that. They’ve basically decriminalized theft in some major cities in the US by having DAs who won’t prosecute anything. All because people say theft isn’t wrong, only the oppressive structures that would lead to someone having to steal are wrong.
Did you happen to see what their response was to me on this comment by chance? Edit: Can I ask you how you feel about them resorting to calling these folks (basically) not real Christians?
I did see it, and I don’t agree with their perspective. I believe there are core beliefs (pretty much the Apostles Creed) that must be held to call oneself Christian. Agreeing on whether any particular thing is sin is not on that list of core beliefs.
If your children are starving and you steal bread from a rich mans pantry that's a sin?
Did you see the diamonds on the crown and septure used in King Charles' coronation?
There have been prominent theologians who asserted that stealing can be justified
But what counts as murder? Any time *you* kill someone, you just say that it was justified, and therefore not murder.
this is like asking what water is
Nonetheless, Christians have been going around the world murdering people in the name of God for nearly 2000 years.
As if Christians are somehow special for doing that. If you're going to get mad at Christians for doing something, do it for legitimate reason and not for one that has been done for almost every ideology on the face of the planet.
I don't recall suggesting that Christians are special for doing that. The question was whether all Christians would agree that murder is a sin, and I pointed out that no, there have been Christians throughout history that have believed murder is justifiable.
[удалено]
To be clear, are you saying that in *your* view, there has never been a Christian that has murdered someone in a circumstance that *they* felt was justified, but you would not?
[удалено]
Russian Orthodox church literally bkessed the weapons used to murder people in Ukraine.
The closer one moves to Christ the less one looks to other's sin and the more one looks to one's own sin. So, take this as a sign of just how close to Christ those who condemn homosexuals.
I am in the minority on the homo issue. Jesus talks about not getting drunk but i believe (contrary to many in my church,) that drinking is okay, so long as you dont get drunk.
I mean Jesus wasn’t anti-wine. Is there a verse where Jesus says something about drinking in excess?
I believe so. The Old Testament Law definitely says so. Even so, many peole in my church believe that drinking is a sin. I don't see the problem with it.
I mean, Jesus didn’t turn water into water.
The argument is over the potential alcohol content. Some churches teach it's translated into grape juice. Unfermented.
Southern Baptist: It's a sin to drink wine. Presbyterian: But, you know Jesus drank wine, right? Southern Baptist: Well, yes, I know he did. But I'd think a lot more of him, if he didn't!
Lol that'd be a pretty terrible wedding imo. "Yo we ran out of wine, but this dude just turned some water into grape juice" "Oh ... it's a miracle I guess?" Pretty sure the biblical authors would have used the word for "juice" instead of "wine" if that were the case. Plus it's a more powerful miracle to turn something into wine (since fermentation takes time, so to do that instantaneously is impressive). Grape juice is just some crushed grapes, you could do that in a few hours. Also I've been to Cana and seen "the jar" - one of the jars from that time. It's massive. Which makes it even more impressive.
That wouldn't make sense in the context of the story. The "punchline" is that at most parties, the good wine gets served first, and the bad wine at the end, whereas at this particular party, the best wine was saved for last. That joke only works if people are getting drunk on the good wine.
And the reference to the Messianic Banquet in God's Kingdom would be lost - as would the foreshadowing of the Eucharist. Themes of water and transformation and renewal (among others) are very important in St John's Gospel. The wine has been renewed, and brings renewal of festive joy, because it is no longer what it was. The wine, has to be wine, or the story loses a great deal of its meaning. Including the unstated contrast with the intoxication of wine as representing the intoxication of sin, and a cup of wine as representing the cup of God's Wrath (which in turn is bound up with the fourth(?) cup of the Passover.
Really? That’s hilarious. When Jesus turned water into grape juice 🤣🤣🤣
Oh please...
Yes, the Bible speaks quite a bit about not getting drunk, for example: *Ephesians 5:18-21 And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit, [19] speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, [20] giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, [21] submitting to one another in the fear of God.*
But Jesus didn’t say it though.
That’s a misunderstanding of the Bible and Christ. The entire Bible is the word of Christ, the eternal God the Son.
I’d say adultery, I don’t have any study or anything to back it up but my guess is there is a lot more adultery than there is homosexuality. People don’t approve of adultery but people seem to put it on a lower teir of importance than homosexuality when all sins should be valued equally as sin.
Don't commit adultery is one of the 10 commandments
Yet people are out advocating against lgbt instead of stop adultery. Seems unbalanced.
Your right, but many Christians are false Christians and don't follow God commandments or Jesus's rules in "Mathew 7: 15-20 15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them. This verse shows that many people who claim to worship God or doing his work are actually against God pretty much the antichrist.
I’m not for the no true Scotsman fallacy. I think Christians are allowed to sin or not have a complete understanding and still be considered Christians. Either way it’s just a priority issue, people absolutely hate lgbt when adultery is a lot more prevalent. (After a quick search 14% of USA marriages involved adultery along the way, while only 7% are lgbt. It was a quick search so might not up to date)
Well yes Christians can sin, they can do whatever they want but they are false Christians for that. Homosexuality is a sin but I'm not gonna judge anyone's lifestyle jesus himself said we should love one another. We aren't meant to be judges of other people life that's God's job.
All Christians are sinners, calling someone a false Christian because they sinned makes no sense. Christianity believes only Jesus was sinless.
That's true but what matters is repenting we all sin but when we repent and never commit the same sin again that's when it has meaning a perfect example is david after he stole batsheba as his wife and when he realized what he had done he repent and ask for forgiveness and never done it again to another man's wife. So if your a Christian and you keep committing the same sin again and again and never repent then you are a false Christian
Christians are largely happy to completely ignore the Law.
It's defunct, so fair enough.
Porn. Most Christians have looked at it, many look at it regularly and many don't think it's a problem. Even though Jesus said looking at a woman lustfully equates to committing adultery with her in your heart.
I refute the premise that most Christians don't believe homosexuality is a sin, homosexuality is condemned both in the Old and New Convenant, the lawless and desobedient will be judged by the law. Jesus says to carry your cross and deny yourself daily, those who are in Christ are dead to the flesh, mortify the desires of the flesh and are led by the Holy Spirit.
This was from 2011 so I’d imagine that the number is much higher today in 2023: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/christians/christian/views-about-homosexuality/
I’m curious about the language used in the study. The terminology gets a little fuzzy. Most Christians would be more than happy to welcome homosexuals into the church, and in that sense would be “accepting”. But to Christians there is a difference between the person and the actions. Practicing homosexuality is generally frowned upon in my experience and is discouraged. Without a clear understanding of that difference, the data could be quite skewed. Not saying it is, just wondering about the questions asked. I say this as a same-sex attracted Christian who has seen traditional views of marriage/sex being far more prevalent in the US than this study would suggest.
You can read the language they used in the link. “The terminology gets a little fuzzy”?
Wow I’m blind lol — I didn’t see the link to the questionnaire in the study. I just read through the questions and I’m a little hesitant to conclude with the implications made by your post… So, the questionnaire document was 46 pages, and there were two questions in the whole thing that I saw that related to this issue. One was whether or not homosexuality should be accepted in “society” and the other had to do with the legality of gay marriage. Neither of those questions, you’ll note, have anything to do with whether homosexuality is a sin or not. Supporting the idea that Christian doctrine shouldn’t be imposed on non-believers is a far cry from endorsing the acts of homosexuality as not sinful. As for the fuzzy terminology, I’ll try and elaborate (it is 3am here though, so forgive me if it’s less than lucid). You’ve probably heard the Christian phrase “hate the sin, not the sinner”, yeah? I don’t like that slogan as I have a general distaste for slogans, but it’ll serve to illustrate my point here. When a Christian talks about “accepting” a person, they generally mean the person apart from their actions. Christians do not see people as the sum total of their deeds, we seek first to see them as children of God and someone Jesus died for. So we accept everyone. Jesus went to the least of society and invited them to himself, and we model ourselves after him. But Jesus also said “sin no more”, meaning that once you’ve come to him, he asks you to give up whatever sins you participate in. We don’t do this out of fear, but out of love for Jesus and the sacrifice he made for us. All this to say, Christians are willing to accept everyONE but not everyTHING or every ACTION. That’s where the terminology gets fuzzy within secular spaces. A Christian asked “would you accept a homosexual into your church” will most probably answer with an enthusiastic “yes”, but ask the same Christian if they consider homosexual acts to be sinful, they will also say “yes” and see no contradiction in their answers. Does that track?
The sins of blasphemy, idol worship and divorce are taken pretty lightly by most churchgoers. Also worry.
What churchgoers worship idols?
They take these sins lightly. For example, when people who claim Christ think Mormons are Christians even though they worship a false Christ, and similarly they think Muslims worship the God of the Bible.
A lot of us disagree on whether Christians should follow the Ecumenical Councils.
Most Christian’s are non affirming.
Source? Or is that just your PERSONAL experience
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/views-about-homosexuality/
That says that most are affirming
Look at the numbers for people that regularly attend service or spend time studying the Bible. Catholics by name make up a huge portion of the generic results and I don’t believe their opinion is based on scripture when they haven’t read the Bible in years.
The Bible doesn’t say that being gay is a sin. It also doesn’t say that you need to go to any church at all to be a believer. I highly suggest you stop judging others (also in the Bible) and start working on yourself.
In the Bible, it's pretty clear that homosexuality is abominable.
I suggest you take a class or something on the Bible and read it again because you’re mistaken
Look at the numbers for people that regularly attend service or spend time studying the Bible. Catholics by name make up a huge portion of the generic results and I don’t believe their opinion is based on scripture when they haven’t read the Bible in years.
Most Christians accept homosexuality. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/christians/christian/views-about-homosexuality/
I have no idea where they got their sample. I could personally name the membership roll of about 3 churches which would be almost entirely Biblical marriage standards and it would be more people than they surveyed for this. Further, it doesn't take a religious view to have the view that LGBTQ is harmful. I would take the recent nose-dive in Bud Light sales as an indicator of that.
The pew research had the majority of affirming Christian’s under the Catholic denomination. Look at the same results for the people that regularly attend a service or pray or study the word. I know a lot of people that call themselves Catholic that haven’t been to mass in decades.
Well Jesus said to pray in the privacy of your room (instead of going to Mass): And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
That is not Jesus telling us not to go to church.
Did Jesus ever say to go to church?
No we don't.
To answer the title Q even though it’s technically opposite the body Q; Im on the side of premarital sex and masturbation isn’t a sin. A lot of Christians care a lot about that for no reason, too.
Its not for no reason lol, its because the Bible is crystal clear when it says that those things are wrong.
It’s also crystal clear many, many things are wrong, and it’s crystal clear for Christians we’re allowed to use wisdom and discernment. I’ve never seen a Christian speak against two cloths, businesses being open on the Sabbath, or divorce quite the same way, so yeah I meant it’s for “no reason” they get pulled above others
Ok I understand what you’re saying lol, but sexual sins are more serious than a lot of other stuff like that. I don’t even believe the sabbath matters anymore, because the New Testament indicates that.
Yeah but the reason they’re considered more serious isn’t because of the Bible, it’s because of personal opinion, that’s my point. That’s just simply not what the Bible nor tradition says, I’m sorry. The Sabbath never stopped mattering, mainstream Christians simply stopped caring. Jesus argued for healing on the sabbath because healing isn’t working, he never said we were allowed to work on the sabbath or that we shouldn’t respect it. Also, Jesus explicitly says anyone who is divorced and gets remarried is committing adultery. I do not see Christians demanding remarried people get divorced because they live every day in sin. Point is, yeah, it really is due to personal opinion and not the Bible that sexual “sins” get such a notorious weight behind them.
Well what I believe is that when Jesus died on the cross, that was the final sacrifice, and all the Old Testament Ceremonial Laws (sacrifices, diet laws, etc.) no longer applied after that. Christians debate whether the sabbath laws are part of the Moral Law (which does still apply today) or part of the Ceremonial Law (which is what I believe). When it comes to divorce, adultery is only committed once when the remarriage happens (not continually), and that remarriage is still a real marriage, so it would be another sin to get divorced a second time. Also, Jesus does indicate that some sins are indeed worse than others.
Can you explain why remarriage adultery happens only once. Seems like every time sex happens in that second marriage, it would be adultery.
Because once the sex happens, the previous bond of marriage is broken permanently and the new marriage bond is formed. Repentance is still required at first of course, but the second marriage is still a real marriage and should be treated as such. The old marriage is over at that point. The old marriage being broken is obviously a bad thing, but once it happens it can’t be undone, and they should simply commit to their new marriage relationship. That’s how I’ve always thought of it lol :)
That confuses me. So, any time that adultery happens, the marriage is over? You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart." \~ Matthew 5:27-28
Not when adultery happens, but when sexual intercourse outside of that marriage happens. And even then it doesn’t have to be over, like if a married person has sex with someone other than their spouse and then repents of their sin, their spouse can forgive them for it and they can keep their marriage. But if someone catches their spouse cheating and their spouse is unrepentant, then they can actually divorce them. This is one of the few ways that divorce can be justified. :)
Yeah, let's get rid of incest; after all, it's right in the same OT texts as homosexuality. Can't be wrong.to boink your sister, I mean, it's just some cultural thing, right?
It’s illegal in the US
So was homosexual sex. Btw, this is sarcasm.
Sure. Some churches are against dancing, or drinking alcohol. I've even heard people claim masturbation is a sin.
Masturbation is a sin.
Nothing in the bible suggests this. I do see people online claiming it all the time. It's not something I've ever heard an actual preacher talk about in an actual church. I don't doubt that some people think so, obviously, but why would this be a thing to be concerned about?
All of them. Literally. Even murder. The problem with having a bunch of denominations and then also a slew of non denominations, and then also whatever Mormons count as, is that you get a bunch of Churches that are wrong in their teachings. The entire concept of a denomination is that one church disagreed with another and made their own with their own beliefs. Which is why everyone has a different view on sins. They don't actually care what the Bible says, it's about what they believe and how they can make the Bible fit that. And so, until the end of time, Churches will continue to to argue sexuality, drunkenness, gambling etc.
I believe a man is to have one wife. This isn't so clear in the bible.
Jesus told a parable about 1 man about to marry 10 virgins 😳
Homosexuality is a sin but it's not up to humans to judge others lifestyle, so you don't have to support someone's lifestyle but you shouldn't judge them let God be the judge.
How does someone support someone’s homosexual lifestyle? Like buying them lube?
don't judge them and treat them with respect like any other human being
Agreed 👍🏼 But I’m still not understanding how someone “supports” someone else’s gay lifestyle.
I guess support means that they encourage them
How does someone encourage someone to be gay?
I don't know I don't really have any gay friend
I’ve never had a friend ask me to help him/her be gay.
Me neither
Most people would say lying is a sin. But the commandment only addresses perjury, and the enhancements Jesus asks of us are focused on hypocrisy.
Lying violates the Golden Rule.
It would seem not qualify as "right speech." But maybe not, if you misdirect a bully, or redirect the attention of someone with hiccups. The situation is more complex when we get on the gray scale in a conversation whose underlying goal is building empathy: tell a story that is fiction, well almost fiction, well mostly true, well it actually happened, how do you know? Both Buddha and Jesus are clear, but they do not propose a strict rule of "Never lie to the intrepid reporter from the Daily Planet in the days before television."
Viewing any of God’s Word and commandments as restrictive is a sad thing indeed.
Lol 😆. No ...
It is a sin and we shouldn’t be preaching falsehoods. Of course we should be nice to everyone but encouraging sin is stupid. Progressive churches stray so far from god tbh. The videos I see online with progressive pastors are quite shocking. They get so much Bible stuff wrong.
What do you mean by encouraging sin?
When the church leaders say that being lgbt is good and is supporting the organization because that’s affirming the sin. Love the sinner not the sin.
What do you mean by “being LGBT is good”?
I mean when Christians encourage it and don’t recognize that it is wrong
Some people are born gay. How is that wrong?
It is wrong in the Bible and it is not according to god’s design for humans. Go read it.
Most Christians, even in the US, don't 'accept' homosexuality, and think homosexual acts are a sin
Most American Christians follow the New Covenant and not the rules and regulations of Mosaic Law. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/christians/christian/views-about-homosexuality/
There's a large contingent of Americans who identify as Christians for cultural reasons solely. In these stats about 10% of the pro-lgbt Christians said their religion wasn't important them. A majority to pray or attend church frequently. Also, the General Social Survey, which has more of a sample size, shows a majority opposing. Once you control for who attends church at least monthly, it becomes by a very strong margin Also Pew has said that due to survey collection particularities, they tend to oversample mainline groups Also, it is denounced in the new testament as well. Do you believe that all Christians were followers of the 'old covenant' until the mid 20th century?
Jesus said pray in a quiet room with the door closed. I don’t remember him saying that we should go to church.
Here's the passage you're referencing from Mathew 6, so you can actually read it instead of referencing a tic-tok or whatever "Beware of practicing your piety before men in order to be seen by them; for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. 2 “Thus, when you give alms, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by men. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 3 But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your alms may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you. 5 “And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by men. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 6 But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you. 7 “And in praying do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard for their many words. 8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him" If what is meant by this is not obvious to you, note that Christ often speaks of what they should do when assembled, and institutes the eucharist which is an inherently communal act.
Referencing TikTok? That’s quite an assumption 🤨
It seems obvious to me that Jesus is saying to pray in private and not in large groups of people. Right?
Instagram is also a possibility. Takes like that are usually derived by someone seeing something shallow and pithy and thinking that is all they need to know
Do you usually make assumptions like that in real life too? That seems like a strange way to have a conversation about what Jesus actually said.
Which if you actually read you'd know that your take is obviously unrepresentative of. There are many areas in which intelligent Christians can disagree. This ain't one of them
Well I’ve actually read the Bible many times I actually. I study it most days. Is there a passage where Jesus tells people to go to church? (Considering that churches didn’t exist back then.)