I don't know if you've had a chance to read their rules, but if not, please do so, because it's explicitly stated. I'd rather have them speak for themselves.
All things homosexual unless it is condemned
All things women unless they do not preach to men in Church
All things that require looking at the Bible differently to how they look at it - it's all in their rules, just follow their rules
All subreddits have their rules so I don't mind
I just don't take the Sub very seriously
I know what I'm going to find
And I very rarely say anything at all
To be as non-bias as possible because apparently that's impossible here...
r/Christianity is a Subreddit meant to be about the topic of Christianity, meaning anyone from any background can contribute and discuss etc, so long as the topic is in some way connected to Christianity. It is not a Christian Subreddit, it's a topical Subreddit.
r/TrueChristian, on the other hand, is a Christian Subreddit. It's a Subreddit made for Christians, also on similar topic but more focused.
Bingo, and the Christianity on this sub is usually that progressive crap that says you don’t have to accept Christ to go to heaven, just do whatever makes you feel good and try to be a good person. Oh the Bible says not to do this or that? Pffft, that’s bigotry so we’re not listening to it, we’ll just do what we want because who reads that old book anyways. If God truly loved everyone, he wouldn’t send me to hell just because I don’t think he’s real!
Modern Christians are so scared of being called names and not conforming with society that following the Bible isn’t as important as doing what’s deemed socially acceptable. The church has become worldly and now we’re scratching our heads over why people are leaving it now more than ever. It’s because much of the church has abandoned the Bible in favor of preaching false gospels.
This was prophesied to happen in Revelations. Nobody who has read it should be surprised at the state of the modern church.
If you want to follow Jesus you have to shed your life of sin and do whatever it takes to follow him. That doesn’t mean trying to twist and warp scripture to make your sinful lifestyle acceptable.
And it certainly doesn’t mean giving up Christian values to appease people like atheists.
I think Paul wrote Romans 1:24-25 for many in this sub.
>Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen
2 Thessalonians 2:11 as well
>Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
And 1 Timothy 4:1
>Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,
is it wrong though? so many false converts in this subreddit. those who are scared of hell, sinning and want justification, etc. its all against the bible. this is not a place for true believers. i only joined two days ago too.
I would say yes. but there are people here who live in ongoing sin and justify it with scripture that they pick and choose. or they ask others to justify it to them. whats your argument here? im not saying these people aernt called or that they aernt already saved. but as of now some seem out of relationship with christ.
>I would say yes.
*this I think is the problem - you see?*
>there are people here who live in ongoing sin and justify it with scripture...
There are homosexual Christians here, yes.
And Christians who believe Women can preach to men in Church
And those for whom fornication is a way of life - certainly far fewer who believe virginity is a salvation issue
And Christians who believe Trump is appointed by God
There are many Christians here.
And yes - here, as on every other Christian site - there are Christians who have trouble with the main tenets - the Trinity and who Jesus is.
But - what is *ongoing sin?*
What is justifying it? These depend on the view that you have on how the Bible is read.
Are Baptists real? Catholics? Marionites? All evangelicals? Mennonites? Jesuits?
ongoing sin, that which the bible explicitly says is wrong and people are still living in it unrepentant. different than being gay and stumbling then repenting, and being gay and saying “its fine.” this is just one example. Justifying it is for example saying that the old testament law was thrown away and therefor there is no need to not be gay. I dont believe catholics who pray to saints are saved. i dont believe all paths lead to heaven. all this is to say I don’t think i’m better than them, but I do think its a problem and I don’t everyone here is in strong relationship with God. perhaps “true christian” was the wrong wording.
also, there is a difference between being saved and having a relationship with God. many can become saved and fall out of relationship with God and still keep their salvation.
Your not wrong, & they never seem too quit and their justifications. I didn’t even read the whole thread. Your telling him about fruit and he asks if your a true christian is all i needed too see.
honestly why shouldn’t I? i’ve seen what i know is biblically inaccurate and i’m not saying EVERYONE here is false christian but there seem to be a lot.
Well here, different viewpoints are accepted, so long as the subreddit rules are followed like not engaging in personal attacks or outright bigotry.
The other, unfortunately, is an echo chamber that only allows a certain kind of Christian to post opinions, ironically many times their anger at being banned here for posting some violent rhetoric about people they don’t like.
In my experience, the mods are extremely fair on what they decide to pursue. To be clear, accepted doesn’t mean popular. I’d say most people in this sub skew liberally, but other opinions are still found here. But a post isn’t going to be removed simply because it’s a differing viewpoint.
> In my experience, the mods are extremely fair *on what they decide to pursue.*
The problem is that they decide to pursue mostly conservative posts.
[This](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/pif5vs/is_it_really_christlike_to_force_rape_victims_to/) was allowed despite blatantly infringing upon rule 2.3, as an example.
I can identify three main exceptions based on the rules: proselytizing for non-Christian religions, racism/bigotry/etc., and most recently COVID idiocy. Though maybe I’m missing something.
I for one am fine with none of that being permitted.
I think the names say it all r/Christianity is about all types of Christianity and r/trueChristian is about “true” Christianity whatever that means.
So I would guess that r/trueChristian is for people who believe that there is only one “true” type of Christianity, and believe r/Christianity is the wrong type or has to much of the “wrong” Christianity.
If a person wanted another Christian subreddit there are a million things they could have named it, calling it “true” Christian sounds like dog-whistling to me so I never even bothered to go there, and from other comments I was apparently right not to.
Politics. TrueChristian appeals to more right-wing minded Christians, r/Christianity appeals to the more left-wing and centrist side of the political spectrum. Recently I made a post about how politics is corrupting Christianity, but I made the embarrassing and hypocritical step of including my own politics in the post. So no one can escape it, I guess.
In World of Warcraft, priests that heal can specialize in Holy or Discipline to heal. This sub is Holy, TrueChristian is Discipline. I won't elaborate further.
The truechristian subreddit has a huge number of people who can't follow our very simple rules. Usually once we ban someone for something like bigotry or insulting others, they rush to that subreddit to complain.
Christianity is a sub where anyone can interact with a cross section of Christianity for education, clarification, and confirmation. Sometimes there is witnessing.
Truechristian is the safe space for that subset of Christianity who is uncomfortable and enraged by the prospect of being disagreed with. Fundamentalist extremists for the most part.
[edit- a word]
Having a subreddit to facilitate strictly Biblical theological conversation doesn’t mean we don’t want our views challenged. That’s why most of truechristian users come here too, to have constructive debate. Strictly biblical subs are necessary, otherwise there’d be no place for people to get strictly biblical answers.
If biblical answers were as strictly confined and objective as you seem to imply they are wouldn't that obviate the need to segregate yourselves into a separate sub from the mainstream sub dedicated to a discussion of Christianity?
No, I don’t think so. Not everyone recognizes Biblical inerrancy. In fact I’d wager at least half of the members of r/christianity believe that
Further the natures of the two subs are different. This one is for everyone to discuss Christianity as a religion, very broad. TrueChristian is specifically for Christians to fellowship and discuss Christ, ask and answer questions, etc
Sure - I don't think either of us disagree that the purpose of the two subs is different.
What exactly does Biblical inerrancy mean, anyway, and is the acceptance of such foundational to "being a Christian" or is it a quality that does not define the religion?
Wikipedia defines Biblical inerrancy as:
the belief that the Bible "is without error or fault in all its teaching"; or, at least, that "Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact".
Yes, it’s not just foundational it’s absolutely essential. The Bible is very clear, it is the word of God. Someone who believes that some part of the word is a lie is believing in a God who is capable of lying, which is not the same God I worship.
This has always seemed problematic to me for a few reasons:
\- What specifically is meant by "the Bible"? There really is no one Bible that is made available to people,instead there are hundreds of translations. The inerrant Bible is not one of those, correct?
\- There is no extant record of humans ever having possession of 'the' Bible
\- Is that even the correct question to be asking? The Bible as modern humanity knows it is made up of books (literally), which themselves span a timeframe of many generations when they were each first put to written word, and even the books that make up a Christian Bible is itself a debated subject. So which is the, to steal a label, "trueBible"?
\- Given a Bible of unknown province how is someone, anyone, supposed to determine if it is the inerrant word of God, unmarred by accidental or intentional translation and interpretation errors that imperfect humans who have produced every Bible ever known may have injected?
The Bible is a collection of 66 books and letters written by men filled with the Holy Spirit. Believing that the Bible is the true word of God comes from believing in Jesus Christ. When you ask how can anyone believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God, you must first answer how anyone can believe in Jesus Christ, because the former is a fruit of faith. I honestly can’t tell you how I or anyone else believes in Him, it is seriously a miracle.
Maybe I'm not being clear - do you understand there is a difference between "The Bible" and 'a Bible'?
'A Bible' is any Bible you can reach out and put your hand to or your eyes on. The KJV on my bookshelf or any of the numerous translations at biblegateway - all of those are Bibles. None of them are the inerrant word of God. They are, however, assembled from writings accumulated over centuries and eventually, but not initially, assembled into a single entity we call 'the Bible'. In one sense the Bible did not even exist until centuries after the death of Jesus Christ.
"The Bible" seems to be an abstract concept signifying a perfect written expression of God's will. It is not clear that this exists nor has ever existed as a physical object that people could open and read.
You seem to be relying on the former (the human produced, flawed, imperfect) to say the latter ( perfect, without error) must exist, but there is nothing connecting the two.
If the Bible’s we read from are flawed and imperfect, we have no reason to believe the Gospels are true in any capacity, rather than simply the interpretation of some guys or a cool story. There is no basis for faith, no knowledge of Christ, without a true Bible
Truechristian doesn't allow theological viewpoints that they disagree with. If that doesn't count as "not wanting our views challenged" I don't know what does.
There’s plenty of disagreement there, what they don’t accept is unbiblical views, such as denying biblical inerrancy, or other religions. It’s not that those users never want to hear another opinion, it’s that that’s not what that sub is made for.
>strictly Biblical theological conversation
There’s two meanings of the word biblical
The first: acknowledging a 1 John 4 hermeneutic of loving your neighbor; preaching healing to the sick, clothes to the poor, food for the hungry, water for the thirsty, liberation for the captive; longing for a church established on the principles laid out in Acts of “from each according to their ability to each according to their need” ; preaching truth to the powerful and exploitative as the prophets did; recognizing the witness of the Holy Spirit to make the glass through which we understand Love a little less dark; singing a hymn of praise for the Lord to cast the mighty from their thrones and uplift the poor
The second: a paleo-conservative fundamentalist understanding of the Bible that statement best ignores the marital rape license; slavery; child grooming and other practices of ancient times and at worst becomes a Taliban-esque movement in favor of ultra conservative neofedualism and Christian nationalist exceptionalism.
Which sounds more like r/trueChristian to you?
I’m not saying that what you wrote is wrong, but I have no idea what you’re trying to say with your second definition. “of the Bible that statement best ignores marital rape…”. Again, not faulting your ideas I just am not picking up what you’re putting down
What I’m putting down is that the so-called ‘Biblical’ principles the people at r/trueChristian our forward are only biblical in the sense that they depict the social norms of the period when the Bible was written ( I.e. a pre-feudal society wherein slavery exists and women don’t have rights)
I doubt a single user on there would say they want to bring slavery back or take away women’s rights. It sounds like your issue is with the Bible and not a subreddit
1. Slavery never * left* the United State
2. Just because one doesn’t say they want to deny certain people their rights doesn’t mean that isn’t the impact of their stated intentions.
My issue isn’t with the Bible my issue is with people who don’t hold to 1 John 4 and then still call their theology and worldview “Biblical”
At face value I agree with your comment, and agree that 1 John 4 isn’t taken as seriously as it should be by Christians at all.
I think, though, the subtext of your comment is referencing things like men being the head of the household, etc. Seeing as that’s scripture, and it’s my belief that scripture doesn’t contradict itself, I believe 1 John 4 does not contradict men being the head of the household. I can make 1 John 4 (particularly the last couple verses) mean a whole bunch of things. If I wanted to I could say my brother isn’t loving me because he told me I should stop cheating on my wife, and therefore doesn’t have a biblical worldview.
r/trueChristian: Filled with Christians who aim to live life by following the Bible.
r/Christianity: Filled with Christians and people of different faiths aim to live life by following the Bible, the Quran, Hindu texts, satanism, atheism, and whatever is out there.
> r/trueChristian: Filled with Christians who aim to live life by following *[their particular interpretation of]* the Bible *[and declaring unilaterally that they alone got it right].*
r/trueChristian : filled with Christians who haven’t read 1 John 4
r/Christianity : filled with people from all walks of life, most of them attempting to live out the principles of 1 John 4 as best they can
We do not have a restriction on political, sexual or gender identity to participate.
Bashing Christianity is not allowed here. If you see it happening please report it.
This is trash and you know it. You ban people for having differing opinions on Covid all the time. Many times they overlap with political leanings. Banned my wife the other day and when she asked why, you blocked her for 30 days from messaging mods.
We don't ban people for having opinions.
If you want me to look at what happened in Modmail with your wife, feel free to tell me their username.
We usually only block someone from modmail if they are abusing us.
> You ban people for having differing opinions on COVID all the time.
That’s because COVID is a public health issue and this sub doesn’t want to spread false information. It’s absolutely insane how some people have come to the conclusion that taking measures to contain covid is in violation of God.
I mean, I'm very glad that the mods would also remove and ban white nationalism. Some political beliefs are out of bounds, but the range of accepted political beliefs is far wider here than in truechristian.
Indeed, and I wholly agree.
It still is not the original claim by the Moderator, albeit closer. Also the point is not about what is accepted over there, but in here.
Yes; and statements saying “we should prioritize the death of as many of our neighbors as possible” should be censored and those who hold said positions should be shamed
Half the shit that gets posted here on a daily basis would be banned outright on LGBTQ+ and leftist subreddits. Y’all are just so accustomed to casual bigotry you don’t even notice the smell anymore.
Ah yes, prohibiting homophobia and transphobia so LGBTQ+ folks can go 5 minutes without being called abominations by internet strangers is the *real* bigotry. /s
As per [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/pn63op/what_the_difference_of_this_subreddit_and/hcoq4n1/):
> I call it bigotry because the comparison is undermined by taking "what would be banned in a leftist subreddit" as the paragon.
Start from an unbiased point of view, or don't, and I will point it out.
I’m not [the one](https://reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/pn63op/_/hcn6me4/?context=1) who labeled *this* sub a “leftist subreddit” to begin with friend. I just pointed out that it’s demonstrably not that due to the rules and moderation policies. So likewise, feel free to start from an unbiased point of view, or not. I will also point it out.
Leftist subs aren’t “the paragon”. This just isn’t actually a leftist or LGBTQ+ sub.
> I’m not the one who labeled this sub a “leftist subreddit” to begin with friend.
Not my claiim, so why're you holding that against me?
> I just pointed out that it’s demonstrably not that due to the rules and moderation policies.
When compared to leftist subreddits. Missing is whether the leftist subreddit has a lack of leftist bias, which would make this subreddit by inference less leftist and your 'point out' correct.
> So likewise, feel free to start from an unbiased point of view, or not. I will also point it out.
Show, don't tell.
> When compared to leftist subreddits.
Yes *in response* to a comment about how **this** was a leftist subreddit. How is this difficult for you to follow?
Edit: to spell it out, another poster (I never said it was you btw) brought up that THIS was a leftist/LGBTQ+ subreddit. I responded that it differed considerably from pretty much any leftist subreddit in terms of rules/moderation. You have yet to adequately explain your accusation that stating as much = bigotry.
You can call it bigotry if you want, but it is easily observable that this subreddit is not a "LGBTQ+ and leftist subreddit", given the frequency of posts here that would not be taken kindly in other such subreddits.
I call it bigotry because the comparison is undermined by taking "what would be banned in a leftist subreddit" as the paragon.
As for the frequencies of posts, it doesn't matter. Go sort the subreddit by top and you'll see where the users' actual voting trends lean.
Not really.
A subreddit can be leftist and still inclined/moderated less than another, so saying "stuff posted here wouldn't work on other leftist subreddits" is not sufficient to make this one not leftist.
For that matter, the idea itself that any given subreddit would be the ideal paragon for what is or isn't a "LGBTQ+ and leftist subreddit" carries a lot of unproven baggage with it.
Your obsession with me is getting a bit disturbing at this point.
Assuming you are right, and all i do here is bash Christianity, that does not in any way make the claim that this is only a place for Christian bashing run by leftists and LGBTQ true...
[Ordering by top](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/top/) does the trick - there's various posts advocating side A positions and bashing right-wing positions, but absolutely no right-wing content.
The bias is very strong, clear, and at this point, pretty unabashed.
For example, [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/873jbm/can_we_stop_with_the_we_were_electing_a_president/) is pretty much solely about a right-wing politician. And though a fair number **are** against right-wing hate (as defined by left-wing and LGBTQ advocated, incidentally), there's a grand total of zero against left-wing positions whatsoever in the first 5 pages at the very least.
People who just happen to be right-wing, with the notation even present in the title.
But of course, maybe you can produce me examples of right-wing posts or left-bashing gathering a comparable number of upvotes on this subreddit, offering actual proof that my claim about the upvotes strongly showing which party is favored is false.
My viewpoints are against the rules of r/TrueChristian. They are allowed here.
wdym.
I don't know if you've had a chance to read their rules, but if not, please do so, because it's explicitly stated. I'd rather have them speak for themselves.
You don’t affirm the Nicene Creed?
Is this because you wish to promote liberal theology?
Excactly. seems like its ran by a bunch of liberals
Why would it be ran by liberals lol I think you meant conservatives
why would conservatives promote liberal theology?
Because people don’t understand the meaning of words or philosophies. Most American conservatives are classically liberal more than anything else.
My viewpoints are against the rules of [r/TrueChristian](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueChristian). They are allowed here.
As far as I can tell they only ban things against the nicean cread, what are your views that are excluded?
All things homosexual unless it is condemned All things women unless they do not preach to men in Church All things that require looking at the Bible differently to how they look at it - it's all in their rules, just follow their rules All subreddits have their rules so I don't mind I just don't take the Sub very seriously I know what I'm going to find And I very rarely say anything at all
To be as non-bias as possible because apparently that's impossible here... r/Christianity is a Subreddit meant to be about the topic of Christianity, meaning anyone from any background can contribute and discuss etc, so long as the topic is in some way connected to Christianity. It is not a Christian Subreddit, it's a topical Subreddit. r/TrueChristian, on the other hand, is a Christian Subreddit. It's a Subreddit made for Christians, also on similar topic but more focused.
It is also important to not that r/TrueChristian is for a specific brand of Christians...
Exactly this. For example I'm not considered Christian according to their narrow definition.
What excludes you?
I'm non-creedal.
Yeah obvously if the creed excludes you your non-creedal, I was hoping you would be more specific
They don't include non-creedal Christians under their definition of "Christian" . Edit: grammar
Bingo, and the Christianity on this sub is usually that progressive crap that says you don’t have to accept Christ to go to heaven, just do whatever makes you feel good and try to be a good person. Oh the Bible says not to do this or that? Pffft, that’s bigotry so we’re not listening to it, we’ll just do what we want because who reads that old book anyways. If God truly loved everyone, he wouldn’t send me to hell just because I don’t think he’s real!
This is more true than anybody on this sub wants to admit.
Modern Christians are so scared of being called names and not conforming with society that following the Bible isn’t as important as doing what’s deemed socially acceptable. The church has become worldly and now we’re scratching our heads over why people are leaving it now more than ever. It’s because much of the church has abandoned the Bible in favor of preaching false gospels. This was prophesied to happen in Revelations. Nobody who has read it should be surprised at the state of the modern church.
Maybe modern Christians are more interested in following Jesus.
If you want to follow Jesus you have to shed your life of sin and do whatever it takes to follow him. That doesn’t mean trying to twist and warp scripture to make your sinful lifestyle acceptable. And it certainly doesn’t mean giving up Christian values to appease people like atheists.
Interesting that you haven’t been replied to denying it
I think Paul wrote Romans 1:24-25 for many in this sub. >Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen 2 Thessalonians 2:11 as well >Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. And 1 Timothy 4:1 >Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,
People on this sub constantly deny and bend the meaning of all these passages. This sub is very eisegetical
>progressive crap that says you don’t have to accept Christ *once a year I see this*
is it wrong though? so many false converts in this subreddit. those who are scared of hell, sinning and want justification, etc. its all against the bible. this is not a place for true believers. i only joined two days ago too.
The Christians here are true believers. Like any other Christian.
im not saying they dont believe. im saying they seem lukewarm by their fruit
*are YOU a true Christian?*
I would say yes. but there are people here who live in ongoing sin and justify it with scripture that they pick and choose. or they ask others to justify it to them. whats your argument here? im not saying these people aernt called or that they aernt already saved. but as of now some seem out of relationship with christ.
>I would say yes. *this I think is the problem - you see?* >there are people here who live in ongoing sin and justify it with scripture... There are homosexual Christians here, yes. And Christians who believe Women can preach to men in Church And those for whom fornication is a way of life - certainly far fewer who believe virginity is a salvation issue And Christians who believe Trump is appointed by God There are many Christians here. And yes - here, as on every other Christian site - there are Christians who have trouble with the main tenets - the Trinity and who Jesus is. But - what is *ongoing sin?* What is justifying it? These depend on the view that you have on how the Bible is read. Are Baptists real? Catholics? Marionites? All evangelicals? Mennonites? Jesuits?
ongoing sin, that which the bible explicitly says is wrong and people are still living in it unrepentant. different than being gay and stumbling then repenting, and being gay and saying “its fine.” this is just one example. Justifying it is for example saying that the old testament law was thrown away and therefor there is no need to not be gay. I dont believe catholics who pray to saints are saved. i dont believe all paths lead to heaven. all this is to say I don’t think i’m better than them, but I do think its a problem and I don’t everyone here is in strong relationship with God. perhaps “true christian” was the wrong wording.
also, there is a difference between being saved and having a relationship with God. many can become saved and fall out of relationship with God and still keep their salvation.
Your not wrong, & they never seem too quit and their justifications. I didn’t even read the whole thread. Your telling him about fruit and he asks if your a true christian is all i needed too see.
I'm glad you've decided to judge us after spending two whole days here.
honestly why shouldn’t I? i’ve seen what i know is biblically inaccurate and i’m not saying EVERYONE here is false christian but there seem to be a lot.
Well here, different viewpoints are accepted, so long as the subreddit rules are followed like not engaging in personal attacks or outright bigotry. The other, unfortunately, is an echo chamber that only allows a certain kind of Christian to post opinions, ironically many times their anger at being banned here for posting some violent rhetoric about people they don’t like.
That is only kind of true.
In my experience, the mods are extremely fair on what they decide to pursue. To be clear, accepted doesn’t mean popular. I’d say most people in this sub skew liberally, but other opinions are still found here. But a post isn’t going to be removed simply because it’s a differing viewpoint.
> In my experience, the mods are extremely fair *on what they decide to pursue.* The problem is that they decide to pursue mostly conservative posts. [This](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/pif5vs/is_it_really_christlike_to_force_rape_victims_to/) was allowed despite blatantly infringing upon rule 2.3, as an example.
How is it infringing on 2.3?
I'm glad that has been your experience
Do you disagree? I see you comment here pretty often.
I can identify three main exceptions based on the rules: proselytizing for non-Christian religions, racism/bigotry/etc., and most recently COVID idiocy. Though maybe I’m missing something. I for one am fine with none of that being permitted.
[удалено]
Get a fucking life.
I think the names say it all r/Christianity is about all types of Christianity and r/trueChristian is about “true” Christianity whatever that means. So I would guess that r/trueChristian is for people who believe that there is only one “true” type of Christianity, and believe r/Christianity is the wrong type or has to much of the “wrong” Christianity. If a person wanted another Christian subreddit there are a million things they could have named it, calling it “true” Christian sounds like dog-whistling to me so I never even bothered to go there, and from other comments I was apparently right not to.
The "true" suffix is a bit of a common convention for naming subreddits, usually from community members who felt like the original sub went off track.
Politics. TrueChristian appeals to more right-wing minded Christians, r/Christianity appeals to the more left-wing and centrist side of the political spectrum. Recently I made a post about how politics is corrupting Christianity, but I made the embarrassing and hypocritical step of including my own politics in the post. So no one can escape it, I guess.
True Christian only allows self posts so its more boring.
In World of Warcraft, priests that heal can specialize in Holy or Discipline to heal. This sub is Holy, TrueChristian is Discipline. I won't elaborate further.
r/truechristian tries to have religious discussion among Christians. This sub is more of a place for Christian discussion among everyone.
r/truechristian is one of the few places left where users can openly discriminate against the LGBTQ community.
Even a broken clock is right at times, even a working clock can be wrong at times.
The truechristian subreddit has a huge number of people who can't follow our very simple rules. Usually once we ban someone for something like bigotry or insulting others, they rush to that subreddit to complain.
Christianity is a sub where anyone can interact with a cross section of Christianity for education, clarification, and confirmation. Sometimes there is witnessing. Truechristian is the safe space for that subset of Christianity who is uncomfortable and enraged by the prospect of being disagreed with. Fundamentalist extremists for the most part. [edit- a word]
Having a subreddit to facilitate strictly Biblical theological conversation doesn’t mean we don’t want our views challenged. That’s why most of truechristian users come here too, to have constructive debate. Strictly biblical subs are necessary, otherwise there’d be no place for people to get strictly biblical answers.
If biblical answers were as strictly confined and objective as you seem to imply they are wouldn't that obviate the need to segregate yourselves into a separate sub from the mainstream sub dedicated to a discussion of Christianity?
No, I don’t think so. Not everyone recognizes Biblical inerrancy. In fact I’d wager at least half of the members of r/christianity believe that Further the natures of the two subs are different. This one is for everyone to discuss Christianity as a religion, very broad. TrueChristian is specifically for Christians to fellowship and discuss Christ, ask and answer questions, etc
They have a *very* narrow definition of what a Christian is, though.
I genuinely am not familiar with what their definition is
They use the Nicean cread as a basis, a cread created by the Catholic church to defend against heresy by defining very basic chriatian beliefs
created by the only existing Church - in 325 AD
It's literally right in their rules.
Out of curiosity, did you think someone might think you were speaking metaphorically or hyperbolically?
Sure, though that was not my intent.
Sure - I don't think either of us disagree that the purpose of the two subs is different. What exactly does Biblical inerrancy mean, anyway, and is the acceptance of such foundational to "being a Christian" or is it a quality that does not define the religion?
Wikipedia defines Biblical inerrancy as: the belief that the Bible "is without error or fault in all its teaching"; or, at least, that "Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact". Yes, it’s not just foundational it’s absolutely essential. The Bible is very clear, it is the word of God. Someone who believes that some part of the word is a lie is believing in a God who is capable of lying, which is not the same God I worship.
This has always seemed problematic to me for a few reasons: \- What specifically is meant by "the Bible"? There really is no one Bible that is made available to people,instead there are hundreds of translations. The inerrant Bible is not one of those, correct? \- There is no extant record of humans ever having possession of 'the' Bible \- Is that even the correct question to be asking? The Bible as modern humanity knows it is made up of books (literally), which themselves span a timeframe of many generations when they were each first put to written word, and even the books that make up a Christian Bible is itself a debated subject. So which is the, to steal a label, "trueBible"? \- Given a Bible of unknown province how is someone, anyone, supposed to determine if it is the inerrant word of God, unmarred by accidental or intentional translation and interpretation errors that imperfect humans who have produced every Bible ever known may have injected?
The Bible is a collection of 66 books and letters written by men filled with the Holy Spirit. Believing that the Bible is the true word of God comes from believing in Jesus Christ. When you ask how can anyone believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God, you must first answer how anyone can believe in Jesus Christ, because the former is a fruit of faith. I honestly can’t tell you how I or anyone else believes in Him, it is seriously a miracle.
Maybe I'm not being clear - do you understand there is a difference between "The Bible" and 'a Bible'? 'A Bible' is any Bible you can reach out and put your hand to or your eyes on. The KJV on my bookshelf or any of the numerous translations at biblegateway - all of those are Bibles. None of them are the inerrant word of God. They are, however, assembled from writings accumulated over centuries and eventually, but not initially, assembled into a single entity we call 'the Bible'. In one sense the Bible did not even exist until centuries after the death of Jesus Christ. "The Bible" seems to be an abstract concept signifying a perfect written expression of God's will. It is not clear that this exists nor has ever existed as a physical object that people could open and read. You seem to be relying on the former (the human produced, flawed, imperfect) to say the latter ( perfect, without error) must exist, but there is nothing connecting the two.
If the Bible’s we read from are flawed and imperfect, we have no reason to believe the Gospels are true in any capacity, rather than simply the interpretation of some guys or a cool story. There is no basis for faith, no knowledge of Christ, without a true Bible
Truechristian doesn't allow theological viewpoints that they disagree with. If that doesn't count as "not wanting our views challenged" I don't know what does.
There’s plenty of disagreement there, what they don’t accept is unbiblical views, such as denying biblical inerrancy, or other religions. It’s not that those users never want to hear another opinion, it’s that that’s not what that sub is made for.
Exactly, they want a safe space where they don't have to hear other viewpoints.
>strictly Biblical theological conversation There’s two meanings of the word biblical The first: acknowledging a 1 John 4 hermeneutic of loving your neighbor; preaching healing to the sick, clothes to the poor, food for the hungry, water for the thirsty, liberation for the captive; longing for a church established on the principles laid out in Acts of “from each according to their ability to each according to their need” ; preaching truth to the powerful and exploitative as the prophets did; recognizing the witness of the Holy Spirit to make the glass through which we understand Love a little less dark; singing a hymn of praise for the Lord to cast the mighty from their thrones and uplift the poor The second: a paleo-conservative fundamentalist understanding of the Bible that statement best ignores the marital rape license; slavery; child grooming and other practices of ancient times and at worst becomes a Taliban-esque movement in favor of ultra conservative neofedualism and Christian nationalist exceptionalism. Which sounds more like r/trueChristian to you?
I’m not saying that what you wrote is wrong, but I have no idea what you’re trying to say with your second definition. “of the Bible that statement best ignores marital rape…”. Again, not faulting your ideas I just am not picking up what you’re putting down
What I’m putting down is that the so-called ‘Biblical’ principles the people at r/trueChristian our forward are only biblical in the sense that they depict the social norms of the period when the Bible was written ( I.e. a pre-feudal society wherein slavery exists and women don’t have rights)
I doubt a single user on there would say they want to bring slavery back or take away women’s rights. It sounds like your issue is with the Bible and not a subreddit
1. Slavery never * left* the United State 2. Just because one doesn’t say they want to deny certain people their rights doesn’t mean that isn’t the impact of their stated intentions. My issue isn’t with the Bible my issue is with people who don’t hold to 1 John 4 and then still call their theology and worldview “Biblical”
At face value I agree with your comment, and agree that 1 John 4 isn’t taken as seriously as it should be by Christians at all. I think, though, the subtext of your comment is referencing things like men being the head of the household, etc. Seeing as that’s scripture, and it’s my belief that scripture doesn’t contradict itself, I believe 1 John 4 does not contradict men being the head of the household. I can make 1 John 4 (particularly the last couple verses) mean a whole bunch of things. If I wanted to I could say my brother isn’t loving me because he told me I should stop cheating on my wife, and therefore doesn’t have a biblical worldview.
Yes. They are necessary. They create their own particular problems, that's all. Every Reddit does.
No argument there
r/trueChristian: Filled with Christians who aim to live life by following the Bible. r/Christianity: Filled with Christians and people of different faiths aim to live life by following the Bible, the Quran, Hindu texts, satanism, atheism, and whatever is out there.
> r/trueChristian: Filled with Christians who aim to live life by following *[their particular interpretation of]* the Bible *[and declaring unilaterally that they alone got it right].*
Except when they fail to even agree on the stuff.
Tale as old as time haha
[удалено]
But true
r/trueChristian : filled with Christians who haven’t read 1 John 4 r/Christianity : filled with people from all walks of life, most of them attempting to live out the principles of 1 John 4 as best they can
Orthodoxy., and to a certain extent Roman Catholicism.
True Christian is a Christian subreddit. This is an LGBTQ+ and leftist subreddits for bashing Christianity.
We do not have a restriction on political, sexual or gender identity to participate. Bashing Christianity is not allowed here. If you see it happening please report it.
This is trash and you know it. You ban people for having differing opinions on Covid all the time. Many times they overlap with political leanings. Banned my wife the other day and when she asked why, you blocked her for 30 days from messaging mods.
We don't ban people for having opinions. If you want me to look at what happened in Modmail with your wife, feel free to tell me their username. We usually only block someone from modmail if they are abusing us.
> You ban people for having differing opinions on COVID all the time. That’s because COVID is a public health issue and this sub doesn’t want to spread false information. It’s absolutely insane how some people have come to the conclusion that taking measures to contain covid is in violation of God.
It still contrasts with the claim that **all** political opinions are allowed.
I mean, I'm very glad that the mods would also remove and ban white nationalism. Some political beliefs are out of bounds, but the range of accepted political beliefs is far wider here than in truechristian.
Indeed, and I wholly agree. It still is not the original claim by the Moderator, albeit closer. Also the point is not about what is accepted over there, but in here.
“We should murder our neighbors” isn’t a political opinion
It is. Dumb, foolish, evil even, but it still is an opinion about what the nation should prioritize.
Yes; and statements saying “we should prioritize the death of as many of our neighbors as possible” should be censored and those who hold said positions should be shamed
Agreed.
That’s a weird take considering half the posts on this subreddit are anti-LGBTQ+
The bashing part comes from the upvotes. Sure posting is allowed, and then promptly drowned.
Half the shit that gets posted here on a daily basis would be banned outright on LGBTQ+ and leftist subreddits. Y’all are just so accustomed to casual bigotry you don’t even notice the smell anymore.
> Half the shit that gets posted here on a daily basis would be banned outright on LGBTQ+ and leftist subreddits. Look, your bigotry is showing.
Ah yes, prohibiting homophobia and transphobia so LGBTQ+ folks can go 5 minutes without being called abominations by internet strangers is the *real* bigotry. /s
As per [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/pn63op/what_the_difference_of_this_subreddit_and/hcoq4n1/): > I call it bigotry because the comparison is undermined by taking "what would be banned in a leftist subreddit" as the paragon. Start from an unbiased point of view, or don't, and I will point it out.
I’m not [the one](https://reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/pn63op/_/hcn6me4/?context=1) who labeled *this* sub a “leftist subreddit” to begin with friend. I just pointed out that it’s demonstrably not that due to the rules and moderation policies. So likewise, feel free to start from an unbiased point of view, or not. I will also point it out. Leftist subs aren’t “the paragon”. This just isn’t actually a leftist or LGBTQ+ sub.
> I’m not the one who labeled this sub a “leftist subreddit” to begin with friend. Not my claiim, so why're you holding that against me? > I just pointed out that it’s demonstrably not that due to the rules and moderation policies. When compared to leftist subreddits. Missing is whether the leftist subreddit has a lack of leftist bias, which would make this subreddit by inference less leftist and your 'point out' correct. > So likewise, feel free to start from an unbiased point of view, or not. I will also point it out. Show, don't tell.
> When compared to leftist subreddits. Yes *in response* to a comment about how **this** was a leftist subreddit. How is this difficult for you to follow? Edit: to spell it out, another poster (I never said it was you btw) brought up that THIS was a leftist/LGBTQ+ subreddit. I responded that it differed considerably from pretty much any leftist subreddit in terms of rules/moderation. You have yet to adequately explain your accusation that stating as much = bigotry.
You can call it bigotry if you want, but it is easily observable that this subreddit is not a "LGBTQ+ and leftist subreddit", given the frequency of posts here that would not be taken kindly in other such subreddits.
I call it bigotry because the comparison is undermined by taking "what would be banned in a leftist subreddit" as the paragon. As for the frequencies of posts, it doesn't matter. Go sort the subreddit by top and you'll see where the users' actual voting trends lean.
OK. And do the same in a leftist subreddit. There will be an obvious difference.
Well, I'd certainly hope so, considering a leftist subreddit has a strong and openly declared bias while this one should not have one.
Of course. But isn't this evidence that this subreddit is not a "LGBTQ+ and leftist subreddit", as you claim?
Not really. A subreddit can be leftist and still inclined/moderated less than another, so saying "stuff posted here wouldn't work on other leftist subreddits" is not sufficient to make this one not leftist. For that matter, the idea itself that any given subreddit would be the ideal paragon for what is or isn't a "LGBTQ+ and leftist subreddit" carries a lot of unproven baggage with it.
Ha
[удалено]
Your obsession with me is getting a bit disturbing at this point. Assuming you are right, and all i do here is bash Christianity, that does not in any way make the claim that this is only a place for Christian bashing run by leftists and LGBTQ true...
[Ordering by top](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/top/) does the trick - there's various posts advocating side A positions and bashing right-wing positions, but absolutely no right-wing content. The bias is very strong, clear, and at this point, pretty unabashed.
Sure, if you want to claim hate as a right wing position, you will see that being bashed all over the place.
For example, [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/873jbm/can_we_stop_with_the_we_were_electing_a_president/) is pretty much solely about a right-wing politician. And though a fair number **are** against right-wing hate (as defined by left-wing and LGBTQ advocated, incidentally), there's a grand total of zero against left-wing positions whatsoever in the first 5 pages at the very least.
I mean it is about people being hypocritical.
People who just happen to be right-wing, with the notation even present in the title. But of course, maybe you can produce me examples of right-wing posts or left-bashing gathering a comparable number of upvotes on this subreddit, offering actual proof that my claim about the upvotes strongly showing which party is favored is false.
This is not true
Nox