View Poll

I mean looking at his policies they seem very reminiscent of the Eastern Orthodox tradition he lived in and went to seminary for for example criminalizing homosexuality criminlizaing abortion reopening the churches etc plus people generally don't lose their faith in a measly 5 years

The New Testament completely contradicts the Zionism ideology, prove me wrong

Christians do not murder people all the time. I made a post earlier this morning stating that Christians cannot be Zionist as that ideology goes against what Jesus taught. I think it’s very important to reinforce that belief, because we have people truly believing that Christians do terrible evil things. I think people do terrible and evil things, but you cannot be a Christian and do those things. We have to remember that being a Christian means following Christ. It’s not a blood religion. Jesus said so. How do you follow Christ and want to kill other people? How do you follow Christ and constantly do evil? You’re not following Christ when you constantly sin.

1 John 3:6
“Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.”

I also got a lot of comments stating I’m Islamophobic also, and those people in return were saying that Muslims and Christians worship the same Father. No we do not. Muslims do not believe Jesus is Lord. They don’t believe he was risen from death. They do not believe he lived again. In fact, they believe that Christians and Jews will replace them in hell for them to go to heaven.

Sahih Muslim 2767 a
When it will be the Day of Resurrection Allah would deliver to every Muslim a Jew or a Christian and say: That is your rescue from Hell-Fire.

I’ve been thinking about the context behind the virgin birth and the story behind it, but there are some gaps in my knowledge so apologies if I make wrong statements 👐🏽👐🏽. Was it that she was visited in a dream by the Spirit and asked? I also know that ideas around her age bring up moral issues, but there’s apparently nothing that specifically mentions her age. However I think it would be fair to say that if she was actually mid teens, then that should make anyone think. I know people give ‘cultural context’ argument when it comes to age of marriage, but would that not show that morality is flexible to change?

I hold that someone of that age is not mature mentally and physically to deal with that situation. I say this coming from a good place and someone who identifies as a Christian and believes that Christ was resurrected and his message. It’s just a question that has been pressing on me for a while regarding morality and things that we might overlook or justify because it’s a core feature of our faith, when in other situations would judge the morality of the circumstance more harshly.

Like if it was featured in another faith would we judge it more so, but we are less inclined when it occurs in our own faith?

I could be wrong - but would that not contradict some kind of real moral obligation? It would be wrong for that to occur to a teenager now, and I personally don’t see why it should be suddenly right then? I see many Christians criticize Islam because of the age of Aisha, but how is this any different? The arguments are the same regarding cultural customs and maturity etc

MAIN PREMISE

After thinking about the concept death for so long in both the Abrahamic (there is a hereafter (Heaven, Jannah, Sheol, etc) and the scientific kind (Black. Nothing), reading and having to coincide with the atheistic outlook you must have as a “true” non-revisionist communist in accordance with Dialectical Materialism, and how I don’t see any actual proof God exists, it’s been super hard for me to reconcile the fact that I am a practising Catholic that has no scientific significance of God. It stresses me out every day, between believing that I’m not a true Communist and not being a good Catholic because I don’t have complete faith in my Catholicism.

For context

I was a passive Catholic up for most of my Childhood and Teenage years up until 2022 when I became angry towards God and the faith for things I won’t discuss here for a few years up until I started reading for my church in October, 2025. I was still a bit hesitant up until that point because it was just a family thing I decided to accept and it was a huge blessing. I got to help out the community and do the bible justice. And at the start of February of this year, after years of denying God as an atheist/agnostic, it came to me that I really was Catholic. Not out of force from society or my family, but it was such a natural progression I fought so hard against because of my own experiences… that when I decided to surrender, it all made sense. It just made sense and felt natural. Again, no force, it was acceptance. It was an experience I don’t know if I’ll feel again.

I gave the thought of religion and the afterlife a lot of thought. In my opinion, my only two beliefs that made me still a Catholic while being Communist is that:
1 - If there was absolutely signs and evidence from God that our Lord and our father in Heaven is real, people would still be incredibly sceptical. In our world where people are saying “AI! AI! AI!” over piece of media and how right-wingers, liberals and nazis love to call everything blood libel and a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world, it genuinely wouldn’t surprise me if they reject God. So I decided to put my faith in the Lord.
2 - As a communist (I know. Catholic I am still), I’m aware that being religious would make me revisionist. If so, so be it. Anywho, I have recognised that it may be incredibly unlikely I will see a communist international in my lifetime. But I have faith I will see the day where the world fights and sees independence in Socialism so that communism may see the sun. It’s happened before. For every success (USSR, Cuba, North Korea), there was every failure (Peru, Che’s venture into Bolivia that led to his death, INLA in North of Ireland) and then there are the current (Karela, the CPP-NPA-NDF, etc). I decided that my faith in them can translate to my Catholicism because it’s possible there’s nothing after we die just like how there is a possibility there’s something after.

Anywho, I hope the Lord blesses you all with love, life and happiness. God bless you all!

Hey everyone, I’ve made a few posts on here about my research on denomations along with their history and theology. I’ve mentioned that I like different parts of Eastern Orthodoxy and Methodist and Episcopal theology. Some responses have included that you cannot combine different elements that are not recognized as an officiant church.

My question is though - apart from affirming the Nicene Creed, what makes a church a church? Protestantism exists because of Reform and change, what makes that any different to me embracing Theosis yet rejecting the idea that women cannot occupy higher positions.

Another question is - is Orthodoxy the truly authentic church taught by Christ and the apostles, and we reject it because we do not agree with certain ideas? Also - the concept of Theosis or apophatic/negative theology developed a bit after the time of Christ and his apostles if I’m not wrong? So even in ‘Orthodoxy’ concepts develop from Aristotelian or Platonic philosophy and metaphysics.

Catholics who also claim to be the one true church due to apostolic succession believe in papal authority - which I don’t believe was mentioned in the Bible or practiced by Christ and the Apostles? If theology develops and changes within apostolic churches, why can I not combine different ideas?

And isn’t Theosis the same as social holiness in Methodism?

I can’t be the only Episcopal priest who is a fan of Phoebe Bridgers’ music.

The virgin birth narrative isn’t in the earliest we have (the Gospel of Mark) written around 70 CE. None of the seven genuine Pauline epistles mention the virgin birth (written around 50-6” CE).

In Mark’s gospel Jesus’s mother thinks he’s crazy (Mark 3:21; Mark 3:31-35) which seems unlikely if an angel had appeared and told Mary her son would be born while she was a virgin.

Many pagan religions of the era had stories of divine men whose human mothers had relations with a male deity (Hercules, etc) Many Christians of the time were ascetic and I think they felt it made Jesus seem more “pure” if his mother had been a virgin.

The writer of Matthew read Isaiah 7:14 in the mistranslated Greek (Hebrew says “young woman” while the Septuagint says “virgin”) and decided it was a prophecy about Jesus.

This virgin mother idea morphed into the perpetual virginity as Mary became an impossible and unattainable standard to be both maiden/virgin and mother simultaneously. The ultimate version of true womanhood to the Christian men of late antiquity.

Notably the only woman to be sinless was the “virgin” Mary as the “New Eve” unlike the “Old Eve” whose sinful nature would cause her to desire and lust after her husband (Genesis 3:16).

It’s been a way to narratively frame women’s sexuality as inherently sinful and shameful. The only way to be truly pure as a woman in this framework is to renounce all sexuality and sexual desires. The salvation of men could only come through a vessel of female asexuality.

Thoughts?

Hey all! This is my first post here. I was born and raised in a conservative Christian family, I became a Christian myself at the age of 21 or 22. We always went to Hellfire-and-Brimstone type churches where most of the followers have been scared into their faith, rather than being allowed to explore and decide for themselves.

I came out as a gay man when I was 14 years old and was unfortunately not accepted by those churches, and the road to acceptance for my family has been long, arduous, and ongoing.

I have recently decided to come back to Christianity from a curious, (what I feel is genuine,) and inward looking point of view and I have been reading my Bible, praying, and attending a progressive church very often.

I want to have a deep spirituality and a deep connection with God. And I believe I do have a deep connection with God. I want to be like Jesus and like my actions show a Christlike life more than just my words. I want to love everyone with the love that Jesus had for us. I believe that loving our neighbors, and showing humility, are far more important than worrying about the afterlife. I believe that helping the poor, and the marginalized, and treating everyone like your best friend are the core teachings of Jesus. I believe that we should fight against oppression for the people who are not as fortunate or who are ostracized by the government. And I believe that Jesus is the word of God made into flesh so that he could take away our sins.

Now I also have a loving and committed relationship with my boyfriend of over a year. We talk every night, and see each other as often as possible. We have a lot of trust and no secrets from one another. We also share a kink. (I won't go into explicit details, but it is something that harms no one, and we keep it private, we don't broadcast what we do in the bedroom.) That kink is a feature of our relationship but not the whole of our relationship, and we share a connection that is based on friendship, trust, and love.

As I've been exploring my faith I find myself worried that somehow this kink could prevent me from having a truly deep form of spirituality and I want to know if anyone has any thoughts on that. Do you think it's possible to have kinks in a loving relationship and still experience a deep connection with God? Any and all insights are appreciated and thank you for reading!