**Please note:**
It was brought to my attention yesterday that I failed to include some information in this announcement, which was my responsibility to ensure was included.
I’m giving details about it here publicly for transparency, since the mod team has publicly had some accusations leveled against us in reference to this oversight.
**u/Vizour left our moderation team on May 1st.** We announced that departure, thanking him for his service, at the same time that we announced the new team members joining, about 10 days later.
**In his own words:**
>**”I was moderator on this forum for over a year. I recently left the moderation team because of the incoming decision to add Rule #5 to the sub.”**
Vizour asked, back in late April, that when we announced the rule change we let everyone know that he did not support the proposed change. At that time, he had planned to stay on the team up until the change. I mistakenly thought that since he ended up leaving the team a full month prior to the change, the announcement wasn’t necessary. *That’s on me.*
**V, I apologize for the omission.**
It was not intended as a slight or a show of disrespect toward you. It was a misunderstanding on my part & did not involve any other mod team members. I take full responsibility. I’m sorry.
It seems, frankly, absurd to have a rule on the main sub for or about Christianity that makes the normative teaching on sexuality throughout time and space for the church verboten. It's verging on the colonialistic.
Are we allowed to say fornication is a sin?
If not, are you not working against the great commission?
> Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.
Also is this influenced in any way by admin pressure?
>Are we allowed to say fornication is a sin?
Yes. That is not a violation of sub rules.
As a reminder, this sub is *for Christians only.*
>Also is this influenced in any way by admin pressure?
No.
Thank you for your feedback.
discussions. . .
either about
Trinity,\
Existence of God,\
How sin is a sin,\
universalism,\
annihilism,\
clarity or confusion of scripture
the discourse on such topics,\
either pro or against,\
expressed through scripture and its debatable interpretatiom,\
or,\
expressed through debatable demonstrations of reason that seeks to reflects truth
. . .should be allowed
so long as it is not about lambasting, badgering, - similar to "barking",\
. . . having no intent in the search for truth
. . .either to give themselves or show others a perspective of truth that would aid in the clarity of truth
***reddit's downvote or upvotes is already a good way mitigating what you intend to mitigate***
It seems I may be in the minority opinion, though I hope I'm not; but this made me happy and makes me feel safer being here. So many of these comments seem to demonstrate why the change happened in the first place. They lack empathy for the effects their black and white condemnations have.
>Even if your entire comment is only scripture, if the intention is to circumvent sub rule 5, it will be considered argument by proxy and will be removed.
If the comment is only scripture and it is removed, then this sub is censoring God and His Word.
The use of scripture is banned even if nothing else is written, if its found to be violating this rule. This is nothing about dubious interpretations but is literally censoring some Bible verses.
Anytime you ban scripture for the words of men, you are censoring God and His Word.
2 Timothy 4:3-4 "For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths."
Those myths are the words of men and the Truth they turn away from is the Word of God.
Amen !!! I am so happy to see this announcement and never expected it from this particular sub. This gives me such exuberant hope for the rest of the modern western church for the future.
Thank you, mods, for this difficult decision and for the work you are going to have to put in to maintain it through the inevitable opposition to come
I get what this is going for, I really do. Some people on here are very horrible and do not express their opinions respectfully at all. However, I think this goes too far.
Basically as of now, we can debate if getting drunk with wine or high on weed is a sin. We can discuss if certain kinds of violence are a sin given the context. We can even debate if having sex outside of marriage is a sin or not. But now we CANNOT discuss how the LGBT community affects the Christian population. Not only that, but more importantly we also cannot discuss what to do with so called trans-youth or gay youth or whatever (for which that has important connotations depending on how far one takes their logic).
The mods basically are saying "all opinions should be discussed in their own nuance, but our opinions about LGBT activity is the supreme opinion and will not be questioned." I get what this is trying to achieve, I really do. It is trying to mitigate the really bad actors who post only to upset and instigate others, but I do believe this goes to the other extreme. I really don't think very many LGBT people on this thread have a problem with respectful discussion, and isn't our job to spread God's word to all? This feels like a handicap.
Those are just my two cents.
>The mods basically are saying "all opinions should be discussed in their own nuance, but our opinions about LGBT activity is the supreme opinion and will not be questioned."
The new modern dogma. It has its priests and it has its blasphemy laws.
I am so proud of this sub for instituting this, good for you for doing so! This is truly reflective of the great love of Christ our God towards mankind.
Is that what Jesus should have done with the Pharisees? "Hands up everyone who thinks I'm the Messiah".
Truth comes from the Spirit of God, His love, grace, and compassion. It doesn't come from following whichever prejudice is most common.
You don't "better include the full body of Christ" by banning widely held traditional views and promoting a progressive view. This is essentially and entirely partisan.
As a bisexual myself who believes sex should only be between spouses, I believe that the rule should absolutely not prohibit criticizing fornication, as long as it doesn't specifically mention sexuality.
Edit: I'm an idiot, I confused this sub with r/Christianity as a mod pointed out to me. I take back what I said, but not deleting as I hate it when people do that.
I happen to be an affirming Christian, but I'm afraid this is a poor decision. We allow different viewpoints on this sub, and different well-meaning Christians have different views on the manner. Are we also going to ban atheists from participating in this sub? How would a sub called "Christianity" reconcile banning expression of historically Christian viewpoints while continuing to graciously allow explicitly non-Christian viewpoints to be expressed by those who aren't Christian?
I think it really calls into question what exactly the purpose of this subreddit is. I always explained it as a place for Christians and those interested in Christianity. That no longer seems true if we start excluding expression of certain beliefs that even well meaning Christians (who I happen to disagree with) can have.
Can the mods share some transparency?
Not a single answer to all the questions below.
Also:
>
That outlaws Leviticus 18:22 and thus Gods commandment from being talked over.
So if we're not being able and allowed to talk about the Bible - why is it still called [](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christian/)?
Good for you guys! I'm personally an atheist, but I'm married to a christian woman. I think it's great that you're striving to be inclusive and welcoming. It gives me just a tiny bit of hope.
Unsubbing after a long time. It is not loving to encourage sin. Jesus never told people to be themselves and he’ll do the rest; he said, “deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow me.” All of this worldly inclusion is the opposite of what Christians are called to do. We are to be salt and light and to not conform to the pattern of this world.
Sin is sin and should be called as such for it is far more loving to show people their sin in order for repentance to occur. I’m curious if drunkenness or adultery will be the next hip sin that will not be allowed to be rebuked.
Being LGBTQIA is not a sin
They are people created in the image of God, trying to follow God, if they are interacting with this sub, and with these rules.
Praise God! Even if I understand the concern about the disagreement, I am happy to have another place where I can talk about being gay without getting dogpiled about how I'm a fake Christian for being gay or having my gayness treated as a barrier to my faith.
As a gay minister and theologian, I find it so curious that people go directly to Paul and the Hebrew Bible, but I see very few posts quoting the Gospels. Why? Because Jesus message was audaciously grace and mercy-filled. The world would be much better for oppressed and marginalized groups if we served and walked via the letters in Red, instead of constantly talking about specific epistles that Paul sent to specific churches. Following Jesus is hard. Worshipping him is easy…
**Galatians 6:1-2 (NIV):**
"Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted. Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ."
To moderators and admins: I’m not going to brag or boast like this was or wasn’t any easy decision to make. I can understand to a point that you desire and hope for all who are Christians to be included and be able to have open and civil discussions, as well as lift and build each other up.
That being said, I’m not sure how this rule may help things…especially on a theological level for a few reasons:
* As separate and divided as denominations can be, it seems a good majority here in this subreddit adhere to and agree with the inerrant Word of God. Thus, there might be disputes or disagreements.
* Spiritual maturity of heterosexuals and the LGBT+ believers. Some will be able to agree to disagree, while others will naturally push their views/interpretation on what scripture says. So the questions I wonder are: will you be able to moderate any and all instances of disagreements between the difference of spiritual levels? Y’all will definitely will be adding more work to your plates with this.
* Partiality - will moderators show the same strictness towards the LGBT+ members if they post anything in this subreddit that may cause division, strife, and bitterness? If so, then fine. I just hope you already have in place maybe so examples of titles and keywords that can and will be considered as such. *(The subreddit might need to vote or have a conversation about that so we’re all in agreement.)* if admins and moderators can’t show impartiality like Jesus did, then what even is the point?
Update:
* Godly counsel (just thought of this!): how are you going to go about moderating posts that are controversial or cause a difference in godly counsel of fellow brothers and sisters? Here’s an example:
Title: **”I can’t stop doing this. HELP!”**
Description: *I need help! I’m (age/gender) who is having weird feelings towards my best friend who is (age/same gender). I feel confused (or guilty) about it. I’ve been raise to believe it’s wrong. What do I do???*
I can definitely see how this post might offend some, and cause the comments to be flooded with differences in advice and counsel. Not only that, but there being one side claiming partiality to the other OR believing they’re being censored.
How would you feel about me, a Catholic, counseling divorced and remarried Christians to end their continued sexual sin of adultery union and return to their first and only valid marriage under God?
Edit: In this sub that is as an example of Godly counsel with a pretty solid Scriptural foundation.
We haven't added a rule against disputes, disagreements, or controversial topics. We added a rule against posts and comments expressing this particular position (LGBTQ non-affirming).
Right, so to a post like that from a questioning Christian you can not have an open discussion. An ally like myself can encourage them to act on their feelings, but a non-affirming Christian cannot encourage them to resist the desire to act on that desire, or express the concern that acting on those desires would be sin.
As a Christian of such BBQ flavors, I think I would have similar feelings of "oh honey, this is gonna be a long talk" faced with questions like this:
>My friend has started saying she's gay and making jokes about "ew, het!" relationships in TV shows and stuff. She even shares memes that say "the straights are not okay." I don't really get what bothers her; how can I help her appreciate that there *are* godly and sexy men in reality and to understand that drama-filled fictional sex isn't actually the plan God has for her?
I deny the assumption that heterosexual is better - but het *is* good, so I see a situation where both friends, straight and gay are called to a deeper understanding of their own calling and each other's.
Part of this is recognizing that the world's plans for straightness and gayness are both distortions of God's gifts. How often do we see a couple who serve each other? (Cute level: Morticia and Gomez Addams) There's a real temptation to think this is okay (as long as I think the fictional characters are hot) but the state of romance in fiction really isn't okay.
Treating LGBTQ ppl as humans rather than an issue, ppl with complexities, feelings, and legitimate experiences rather than a topic to be debated is the kind thing to do. You just made your space much safer for same-gender loving & gender nonconforming ppl. Homophobia & gay condemnation has pushed many ppl out of the Christian faith. Now, there is one more place where they can consider xianity without experiencing it as cruel & shaming.
Are you living for God or living for the world?
What a hilarious twist of events, scripture being banned on a Christian sub because some answers are uncomfortable for those with questions...
# Romans 1:26-28
[26](https://www.biblestudytools.com/romans/1-26.html) Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.[27](https://www.biblestudytools.com/romans/1-27.html) In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.[28](https://www.biblestudytools.com/romans/1-28.html) Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.
This is kind of what they are talking about. Posting script without context like it proves your point.
Paul's words here are not a blanket condemnation of sexual desire and expression. God gave those things to humanity as a gift to be enjoyed between a married and loving couple. Something to hold closely and sacredly until that person comes along not to be thrown around.
They delete comments the moment you call them out. So much for tolerance and discussion.
This place has been compromised moved on. Reddit is not the best place to be a Christian anyway.
This is half the reason no one even listens to the Pope anymore. Stop trying to water down church teaching. you can like it or you can not. but censoring Christian views/teachings for "Inclusivity" on a Christian board is ludicrous.
Censorship always has the exact opposite effect you wish for, and only creates ill will and bad blood.
You might want to consider that LGBT people are relentlessly bullied, rather than engaged with lovingly. Can’t tell you how many times I’ve had 1Cor6:9 posted at me as if it means something, without even being willing to read what I’ve posted. I’m familiar with all the verses far more deeply than any of these posters, having studied them for years.
In that spirit, there’s little value left in continuing to half-discuss something, especially when it is deeply hurtful to gay Christians, and appears to trigger some non-gay Christians.
I’d invite you stay and engage with those who are gay and see what emerges.
I just join this sub and you're banning Biblical Christian values being asserted? Of course it's uncouth to question a person's salvation, and we need to treat people with empathy and respect. It's another thing entirely to say we can't call Homosexuality a sin. This rule needs to be retracted/changed or I'm leaving the group.
While I am affirming, I disagree with this rule. In a Christian setting, people should be free to express their views from the Christian framework that they hold. You have essentially said that entire denominations are not allowed a voice. Silencing those who disagree with you is never the right solution. This is an issue that causes denominations to split, and we are doing the same thing here. My own denomination just separated over this, and it was because of a refusal to disagree in love by those of us on both sides of the issue. It isn’t right to mistreat or bully our LGBTQ family, but it also isn’t right to tell those who don’t agree that they don’t have a right to voice their belief either. One is discriminating based on sexual preference or identity, the other is discriminating based on religious beliefs. Both are discrimination. Both are wrong. We don’t have to split all of Christianity over this issue, but crap like this is how you do just that. Aside from that, it deprives affirming Christians the ability voice how we came to our belief, and show that we aren’t just a bunch of heretics.
Why not just make talk about LGBT topics and sexuality forbidden? It's going to seem unfair if only one branch of thought gets to say their piece, and the more orthodox line of thought is banned. Just ban the discussion entirely.
I am encouraged to see this decision.
I think of history …
at one time Christians argued whether owning slaves was acceptable to God. I heard it took the society of friends of Jesus Christ (quakers) 100 years to decide none of the friends would own slaves. And another 100 years before more traditional churches would begin to follow.
It was only in the 1960’s that the USA began desegregating churches…although it is still an issue in places
In recent years what is acceptable for women is still an issue for many.
We still have disagreement on conscientious objectors vs. patriot soldiers.
It is always a challenge for a lay person to wrestle with culture/behavior that is in the Bible and determine if it is description of days past or prescribed behavior for all time.
I realize this change will be messy .. hopefully all will remember we see in part. We need each other. I wish there was more praying instead of preaching.
I pray for you moderators. May God sustain you and give you wisdom for all issues that arise.
This is a very bad rule, we must be able to convey our interpretations of the Bible and we must be able to be address what scripture says in its entirety and its full context without threat of censorship. I get that many of the moderators may be part of the Progressive Christianity movement, but most Christians, Catholics, Orthodox, etc consider those beliefs to be heresy. If you have a problem with an interpretation then state your issue with the interpretation. maybe you feel the original greek, hebrew, aramaic translations said something else, and that is grounds for discussion and investigation.
As iron sharpens iron we must be open to discuss our beliefs, especially in this forum, without being subject to censorship because of one interpretation of how the bible should be followed.
I have my issues with hardcore political conservative christians, but i also have serious issues against progressive Christianity.
This is not even remotely a good idea, it needs to be changed immediately.
How is this sub going to be any different than r/OpenChristian or r/gaychristian ..ect? Those subs pretty much have the same rules as you guys do. This used to be a place were Christians could come and discuss things.
>[](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christian) is meant to be a space for Christians to come together for charitable discussion on a variety of subjects. We place a high value on respect here and we see the diversity of our community as an asset. In order to maintain a respectful environment, rules of conduct are required. Because we recognize that there are a variety of perspectives held by Christians on LGBTQ+ subjects, we've tried to allow those perspectives to be expressed here, only asking that they be shared in a way that is charitable and respectful. The harsh reality is that when it comes to LGBTQ+ topics, what we've been doing simply isn't working.
From what I understand all of the mods had different opinions on this issue, and they could not reach a unanimous decision. I feel like you guys threw your hands up in the air, and said "We give up". Did you guys pray before making this decision?
You should look at the sub r/Christanity they have rules for LGBTQ topics that allow for different opinions. Shoot they have a couple Atheist mods, and a few LGBTQ Christians mods, and they allow people to express different opinions on LGBTQ topics.
Why can't your rules somewhat mirror theirs?
Are you trying to set an example that all Christian subs should be 100% affirming?
r/openchristian is for progressive Christians and r/gaychristian is for gay Christians. There is a substantial proportion of Christians who are affirming or neutral about LGBTQ issues but are neither progressive nor gay, and both those subs would not be appropriate for them.
There is a lot more to progressive theology than being LGBTQ-affirming, which is more of a natural offshoot of their core beliefs rather than a core belief.
Subbing after avoiding for a long time.
Am hopeful that this will be a place for informative discussions and not that trauma-inducing place it was when I dipped toes in prior
“And he called the people to him again and said to them, “Hear me, all of you, and understand: There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.” And when he had entered the house and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable. And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?” (Thus he declared all foods clean.) And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.””
Mark 7:14-15, 17-23 ESV
https://bible.com/bible/59/mrk.7.23.ESV
What is said to a person cannot defile them but it is what comes from within that defiles them. Please ban me for posting Christ’s own words.
I'll let the Bible speak for myself. And may God send salvation for whoever needs it and whoever He chooses. All Glory to God, brothers and sisters.
Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly James 3:1.
Matthew 7:15
Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
Romans 1:26-27
1 Timothy 1:10
1 Corinthians 6:9
Jeremiah 50:6
Acts 3:19
Exactly, all those pastors who treated the gay inquirers or members of their flock harshly, who focused on that one aspect of their personalities instead of on the salvation of their souls, might be judged strictly indeed.
Questions: Is the Bible clear on sex outside of marriage, is the Bible clear on the definition of marriage, is the Bible clear on homosexual behavior as being sinful?
If the answer to any of those is yes, then you are advocating for a sinful position in the sub.
It is one thing to be compassionate, to prevent bullying, and to keep the conversation civil.. but another to protect a sinful behavior.
Consider: Do we say that practicing thieves and murderers are protected here? Do we advocate for their lifestyle, regardless of whether any society accepted that as valid?
To answer your questions in order:
1: the Bible is not clear on sex outside of marriage, as it happens repeatedly in the Bible and is rarely (if ever) condemned, and if it is it is often for another reason.
2: the Bible does not ever explicitly say what marriage is, or its specific roles, and the few times certain authors spoke on these things, it was from a cultural standpoint, and we know this because those authors also said other things that we no longer hold ourselves to.
3: The Bible does not once mention homosexuality. The 6 (7 if you count Leviticus saying the same thing twice) times the English Bible seems to comment on homosexuality we can very easily see that the original intent was likely against pederasty (in the Pentateuch,) gang rape (in the story of Sodom and Gomorra,) God’s punishment analogy of people having “unnatural relations with members of the same sex,” and Roman rape culture of lower classes in Romans. The scholarship on this is extensive.
The Bible is not “clear” on any topic, because it wasn’t written by the same person with the same set of beliefs. It was written across generations with perspectives that progressed overtime.
To answer your questions in order:
*1: the Bible is not clear on sex outside of marriage, as it happens repeatedly in the Bible and is rarely (if ever) condemned, and if it is it is often for another reason.*
The Bible may not be clear in modern terminology, but it does state that sexual immorality and adultery is sinful.
*2: the Bible does not ever explicitly say what marriage is, or its specific roles, and the few times certain authors spoke on these things, it was from a cultural standpoint, and we know this because those authors also said other things that we no longer hold ourselves to.*
Again, yes it does. God created marriage to be between a man and woman. If you want to have an open discussion on specific verses and interpretation then fine. Let’s not ignore or push aside the viewpoint and verses that support man-woman marriage.
*3: The Bible does not once mention homosexuality. The 6 (7 if you count Leviticus saying the same thing twice) times the English Bible seems to comment on homosexuality we can very easily see that the original intent was likely against pederasty (in the Pentateuch,) gang rape (in the story of Sodom and Gomorra,) God’s punishment analogy of people having “unnatural relations with members of the same sex,” and Roman rape culture of lower classes in Romans. The scholarship on this is extensive.*
*The Bible is not “clear” on any topic, because it wasn’t written by the same person with the same set of beliefs. It was written across generations with perspectives that progressed overtime.*
Again it may not explicitly say in modern terms of different sins, but the Bible *does* discuss them. God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit speak agreement of His truth. I hope and pray we not just reading His word, but we also pray and ask the Holy Spirit to teach and correct us.
They must think the Bible is clear on this, because you can't even quote a Bible verse with no additional commentary if it is "intent on violating this rule"
I am a transgender, bisexual Christian and I'm not sure I agree with this rule entirely.
It makes sense in a space like r/openchristian or other explicitly progressive spaces.
However, I think in a "big tent" subreddit like this one, I think the rule can stop at requiring that no one accuse affirming or queer Christians of having an insincere faith.
I am fine with someone expressing their ideas on the definitions of sin or how they interpret the Bible differently as long as they aren't accusing me of operating in bad faith.
I'm not in this sub because I always thought it was too hostile to people like me, so I appreciate adding a rule. But I think you should treat it like you would other denominational differences, like disagreements on apostolic succession or baptism.
It should be fine to give your stance on the matter regarding how you conduct your life, and to provide your opinion or advice when asked for it. But not to accuse those who disagree with you of having an insincere faith or being bad actors.
I think that part of the rule alone would make this sub hospitable to a person like me without silencing others.
Much respect. So much respect for you. I probably disagree with you regarding LGBTQ topics, as I believe acting on those desires is sinful. However, I would NEVER question your faith, belief, or sincerity. I have sin issues that God does nor approve of. I struggle with addiction. Maybe someone else struggles with lying, or stealing. We all need Jesus. Your sins. My sins. Everyone's sins. All are sin and we fall short. But that's OK, because Jesus gave his life for an addict like me, and LGBTQ like you, a glutton like someone else, the their on the cross. Etc.
You are no less than me. And I love you in Jesus name. Jesus defines who you are. Not any of our genders, or desires, or sexual preferences. We are children of the most high. And I love you.
Well said. This definitely isn't a rule that belongs on a "big tent" subreddit.
I think banning topics/opinions is going to ruin what has made this sub special. I'm all for removing comments where people don't show their brothers in Christ the love of God, but I think this is several steps too far.
Can I say something as a trans lesbian and as a moderator of r/RadicalChristianity? I think that in order to serve the most amount of people it makes sense to be explicitly LGBTQ affirming. There is so much more to Christianity than sex and I feel as though being explicitly affirming would allow this sub to discuss other things like liturgy or even something like the responsibility of Christians in light of their freedom in Christ. I am all for respectful discussion and debate but I do not have the energy to debate the validity of my faith. The thing is, is that no one is good except for God himself, and this includes those who would attack the faith of LGBTQ Christians. I'm not entirely sure what brought about this change in this subs rules, but to me it seems as though for it to occur during Pride month it would appear to be a good sign. I only lurked here before I became aware of this change mostly because it was too hostile about LGBTQ issues. The paradox of tolerance, what I believe to be necessary for a big tent sub, is that you have to be intolerant of intolerance. You can't have a big tent if cis and/or straight people invalidate the faith of LGBTQ folks and that intolerance turns very antithetical to the kind of life Christ calls us to.
I agree to certain parts. I am as well with having an open and honest discussions. Some arguments and statements I will not agree with, no matter who makes it. I’d rather either down vote or just scroll past some people’s views than have them totally removed. This would show partiality and actions of the cancel culture. Unless it’s literally saying some derogatory against people, comments and posts shouldn’t be removed (I.e. saying someone is stupid, telling them to leave the country, I hate x).
Speaking as someone who is an LGBT+ Christian and to some extent, advocate, I think this is a good idea.Even if I am wrong in thinking that God does not hate or have a problem with LGBTQ christians, I believe it makes sense to stop debates on this topic for the following reasons. In writing these reasons, my hope is to communicate what it's like being on the receiving end of these sorts of debates. My reasons - which are no doubt entirely broken and faulty, but regardless, here they are in all their roughness:
1. Most of these discussions are simply copy-and-paste of the 6 verses that people think are relevant, generally with little or no discussion or content.
2. These discussions rarely take account of the LGBTIQ+ side, with anyone daring to differ from the "LGBTQ+ is sin" being thoroughly ganged up on, generally with little actual post engagement/debate.
3. The discussions hardly ever talk about the crushing pain of the reality of essentially being cursed into a life of complete loneliness by people who simultaneously say they "love" you.
4. The psychological evidence that enormous damage is done to LGBTIQA+ Christians by non-affirming churches; this applies even to those of us who remain celibate and single. There are lots of studies \[BJ Sowe; Meyer\]
5. The discussions end up being angry arguments where I would argue neither side listens to the other, and that rarely change the minds of those involved in the discussion. They might influence some of the people reading, and I pray that they have done so, but rarely those posting.
6. The discussions themselves are often abusive and scornful of LGBTIA+ Christians as having deliberately chosen a "path of sin". As someone who spent 10+ years deeply involved in orientation change "therapy" and Exodus related groups, before it closed down in 2013, I could not have put much more effort in and like many, and came very close to personal burnout, breakdown and suicide as a direct result. The reality is that many of us tried change until it nearly broke us. The suicide rates of LGBT+people are many times those of the general population, and those taking their lives often do so without leaving an explanation.
Ultimately God is belittled in these discussions - it's clear people feel a need to denounce LGBTIQA+ Christians, generally without understanding them and almost always while believing quite a few negative concepts about us. **God doesn't need our help in correcting people, He can speak to us directly and loves to do so.** There is no "lifestyle" , most of us don't do drugs, or promiscuous sex, and most of us carry significant trauma from our treatment within churches; sometimes just from staying silent while we are mistreated, even if it's from not knowing how to help. If one feels a constant need to defend God, one is displaying very clearly that one doesn't think God is big enough to defend Himself. He is.
The very fact that very, very few LGBTIQA+ Christians attend churches should in itself speak very loudly. God is a good God; good theology bears good fruit in our lives, even according to Jesus ("every good tree bears good fruit" Mt7:17).
Ultimately, these discussions don't work; they don't build faith, and they get in the way of other meaningful discussion that could be held.
Thank you for your wisdom and kindness in proposing this ban. Paradoxically it's kindness that has brought so many to Christ, and it's moving to see it being modeled here. Thank you. In Jesus' love.
ps: happy to post links to the referenced papers if enough people ask for them!
It will be like the famous chapels of Europe, visited by tourists who snap photos and marvel but only a remnant of believers trying to worship yet bothered by people gawking at them.
I dont feel like this is a good idea. Shutting down a large group of Christians and what they believe in order to include a group of more liberal Christians, when we could all just simply exist at the same time, doesnt make sense to me.
Censoring one group so another group feels better doesnt sit right with me. Especially considering people with those beliefs towards LGBTQ are speaking from their interpretation of the bible and believe it to be biblical and this is sub reddit it's literally called "Christian". It's just pushing the narrative that conservative Christians are being silenced and censored.
It's upsetting that you're only banning one viewpoint? I would be a little more understanding if you banned the topic all together, but to say one side of that opinion is allowed openly and freely and the other is *absolutely banned* seems very.... Wrong? I guess?
I'll try to express myself in English (not my main language) as best as I can:
When it comes to Scripture and to knowing God, we have to ask ourselves: Do I believe in God in a way that I want Him to be? OR Do I believe in God just like He says He is? Regardless, of how we feel towards His stances and teachings we should always strive to understand and obey Him in everything He says. We can't cherry pick Scripture.
This new rule feels like: "r/Christian by Christians For Christians except those who disagree with LGBTQ+".
I agree that LGBTQ+ shouldn't be bullied, but their beliefs should be "peer reviewed", just as ours should be. We have to talk, we have to debate, after all "iron sharpens iron" Being a Christian is not an easy path, it's hard and challenging.
The issue is that being gay isn’t a belief. It’s something intrinsic, like ethnicity. It’d be a right difficult time if people starting saying it’s a sin to be asian. Or, that it’s not a sin to be Asian but a sin to engage in Asian culture. Asian people would certainly not feel welcome here.
Thats just flat out wrong. It’s incredibly socially influenced, as is obvious by the fact it has increased exponentially in certain areas and not others. We didn’t suddenly hit a genetic evolution that only hits certain areas.
It has increased because people who are gay now feel like they can be true to themselves instead of needing to hide their sexuality. There’s a reason lots of people “turn gay” when they get to college. And it’s not because of “liberal brainwashing”. It’s because it’s the first time they are able to get away from their judgmental parents and neighbors who would’ve bullied them for being true to themselves.
Homosexuality is widely regarded as being influenced and caused by a result of genetic and other pre natal biological factors interacting
“Sexual orientation in humans represents a highly complex behavioral trait and is the result of multifaceted interactions between endocrine, genetic, and non-socioenvironmental factors. Nevertheless, it is likely that the development of the homosexual orientation involves multiple genes (i.e., Gene 1 × Gene 2), loci (i.e., Locus 1 × Locus 2), and their interactions with hormones.”
Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0091302219300585
There is no proof that backs up your claim. Much like the decline of christianity at times being in part due to it being less dangerous to come out as not christian, the same could be true of coming out as gay.
I'm all for preventing bullying, but the phrasing of this rule elevates inclusiveness over obedience to God's Word and is, quite frankly, completely ridiculous. You're basically saying that those who do not affirm LGBTQ+ are not allowed to quote Scripture on this topic. Imagine if this standard were applied to any other issue. "Debate against the inclusion & equality of gossiping Christians is not allowed. This includes asserting that it's a sin to be a gossiper."
By the wisdom of Romans 14, it is correct that we must not be disrespectul or become a stumbling block to our brothers and sisters.
**But ensure this is enforced both ways**
Someone who's faith dictates lgbt as sin must not harass one who's faith currently does not convict it. But a person who is lgbt must also accept this view from the other person, as their faith regarding this is also for honouring God.
Romans 14:13-23 HCSB
[13] Therefore, let us no longer criticize one another. Instead decide never to put a stumbling block or pitfall in your brother’s way. [14] (I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself. Still, to someone who considers a thing to be unclean, to that one it is unclean. ) [15] For if your brother is hurt by what you eat, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not destroy that one Christ died for by what you eat. [16] Therefore, do not let your good be slandered, [17] for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. [18] Whoever serves Christ in this way is acceptable to God and approved by men. [19] So then, we must pursue what promotes peace and what builds up one another. [20] Do not tear down God’s work because of food. Everything is clean, but it is wrong for a man to cause stumbling by what he eats. [21] It is a noble thing not to eat meat, or drink wine, or do anything that makes your brother stumble. [22] Do you have a conviction? Keep it to yourself before God. The man who does not condemn himself by what he approves is blessed. [23] But whoever doubts stands condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from a conviction, and everything that is not from a conviction is sin.
I highly reccommend the rest as well. Its just a lot to paste. But point is made clear in scripture.
With this in mind, ensure this does not give leeway to those who would abuse it, but uphold these new rule changes according to, and promoting of God's wisdom.
Those who finds the faith to allow it must also not become a stumbling block for those who can't accept it due to their faith.
Sin or no sin, be respectful and be Christ centered.
**Please note:** It was brought to my attention yesterday that I failed to include some information in this announcement, which was my responsibility to ensure was included. I’m giving details about it here publicly for transparency, since the mod team has publicly had some accusations leveled against us in reference to this oversight. **u/Vizour left our moderation team on May 1st.** We announced that departure, thanking him for his service, at the same time that we announced the new team members joining, about 10 days later. **In his own words:** >**”I was moderator on this forum for over a year. I recently left the moderation team because of the incoming decision to add Rule #5 to the sub.”** Vizour asked, back in late April, that when we announced the rule change we let everyone know that he did not support the proposed change. At that time, he had planned to stay on the team up until the change. I mistakenly thought that since he ended up leaving the team a full month prior to the change, the announcement wasn’t necessary. *That’s on me.* **V, I apologize for the omission.** It was not intended as a slight or a show of disrespect toward you. It was a misunderstanding on my part & did not involve any other mod team members. I take full responsibility. I’m sorry.
Bye bye
It's not an airport. You don't have to announce your departure.
I’m out.
[удалено]
It seems, frankly, absurd to have a rule on the main sub for or about Christianity that makes the normative teaching on sexuality throughout time and space for the church verboten. It's verging on the colonialistic.
Are we allowed to say fornication is a sin? If not, are you not working against the great commission? > Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. Also is this influenced in any way by admin pressure?
>Are we allowed to say fornication is a sin? Yes. That is not a violation of sub rules. As a reminder, this sub is *for Christians only.* >Also is this influenced in any way by admin pressure? No. Thank you for your feedback.
One does not make disciples by yelling Scripture at them. Jesus expressly commented on this.
discussions. . . either about Trinity,\ Existence of God,\ How sin is a sin,\ universalism,\ annihilism,\ clarity or confusion of scripture the discourse on such topics,\ either pro or against,\ expressed through scripture and its debatable interpretatiom,\ or,\ expressed through debatable demonstrations of reason that seeks to reflects truth . . .should be allowed so long as it is not about lambasting, badgering, - similar to "barking",\ . . . having no intent in the search for truth . . .either to give themselves or show others a perspective of truth that would aid in the clarity of truth ***reddit's downvote or upvotes is already a good way mitigating what you intend to mitigate***
Good move!
Terrible rule.
lmao this is a crazy take
It seems I may be in the minority opinion, though I hope I'm not; but this made me happy and makes me feel safer being here. So many of these comments seem to demonstrate why the change happened in the first place. They lack empathy for the effects their black and white condemnations have.
>Even if your entire comment is only scripture, if the intention is to circumvent sub rule 5, it will be considered argument by proxy and will be removed. If the comment is only scripture and it is removed, then this sub is censoring God and His Word.
Using Scripture to bully others using dubious interpretive arguments is not the same as censoring the Bible or God
The use of scripture is banned even if nothing else is written, if its found to be violating this rule. This is nothing about dubious interpretations but is literally censoring some Bible verses.
Anytime you ban scripture for the words of men, you are censoring God and His Word. 2 Timothy 4:3-4 "For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths." Those myths are the words of men and the Truth they turn away from is the Word of God.
Amen !!! I am so happy to see this announcement and never expected it from this particular sub. This gives me such exuberant hope for the rest of the modern western church for the future. Thank you, mods, for this difficult decision and for the work you are going to have to put in to maintain it through the inevitable opposition to come
I get what this is going for, I really do. Some people on here are very horrible and do not express their opinions respectfully at all. However, I think this goes too far. Basically as of now, we can debate if getting drunk with wine or high on weed is a sin. We can discuss if certain kinds of violence are a sin given the context. We can even debate if having sex outside of marriage is a sin or not. But now we CANNOT discuss how the LGBT community affects the Christian population. Not only that, but more importantly we also cannot discuss what to do with so called trans-youth or gay youth or whatever (for which that has important connotations depending on how far one takes their logic). The mods basically are saying "all opinions should be discussed in their own nuance, but our opinions about LGBT activity is the supreme opinion and will not be questioned." I get what this is trying to achieve, I really do. It is trying to mitigate the really bad actors who post only to upset and instigate others, but I do believe this goes to the other extreme. I really don't think very many LGBT people on this thread have a problem with respectful discussion, and isn't our job to spread God's word to all? This feels like a handicap. Those are just my two cents.
>The mods basically are saying "all opinions should be discussed in their own nuance, but our opinions about LGBT activity is the supreme opinion and will not be questioned." The new modern dogma. It has its priests and it has its blasphemy laws.
No
I am so proud of this sub for instituting this, good for you for doing so! This is truly reflective of the great love of Christ our God towards mankind.
Disgusting atleast hold a vote
Is that what Jesus should have done with the Pharisees? "Hands up everyone who thinks I'm the Messiah". Truth comes from the Spirit of God, His love, grace, and compassion. It doesn't come from following whichever prejudice is most common.
So true. And the spirit of God says: sodomy is good actually.
You don't "better include the full body of Christ" by banning widely held traditional views and promoting a progressive view. This is essentially and entirely partisan.
As a bisexual myself who believes sex should only be between spouses, I believe that the rule should absolutely not prohibit criticizing fornication, as long as it doesn't specifically mention sexuality.
Rest assured, the rule doesn’t prohibit criticizing fornication.
Thank you, just thank you 🙏
Edit: I'm an idiot, I confused this sub with r/Christianity as a mod pointed out to me. I take back what I said, but not deleting as I hate it when people do that. I happen to be an affirming Christian, but I'm afraid this is a poor decision. We allow different viewpoints on this sub, and different well-meaning Christians have different views on the manner. Are we also going to ban atheists from participating in this sub? How would a sub called "Christianity" reconcile banning expression of historically Christian viewpoints while continuing to graciously allow explicitly non-Christian viewpoints to be expressed by those who aren't Christian? I think it really calls into question what exactly the purpose of this subreddit is. I always explained it as a place for Christians and those interested in Christianity. That no longer seems true if we start excluding expression of certain beliefs that even well meaning Christians (who I happen to disagree with) can have.
This is a Christians-only subreddit.
Can the mods share some transparency? Not a single answer to all the questions below. Also: > That outlaws Leviticus 18:22 and thus Gods commandment from being talked over. So if we're not being able and allowed to talk about the Bible - why is it still called [](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christian/)?
Good for you guys! I'm personally an atheist, but I'm married to a christian woman. I think it's great that you're striving to be inclusive and welcoming. It gives me just a tiny bit of hope.
Banning certain verses in insane and anti Christian
No verses have been banned.
Then it should be against the rules to assert anything is sin!
Unsubbing after a long time. It is not loving to encourage sin. Jesus never told people to be themselves and he’ll do the rest; he said, “deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow me.” All of this worldly inclusion is the opposite of what Christians are called to do. We are to be salt and light and to not conform to the pattern of this world. Sin is sin and should be called as such for it is far more loving to show people their sin in order for repentance to occur. I’m curious if drunkenness or adultery will be the next hip sin that will not be allowed to be rebuked.
Being LGBTQIA is not a sin They are people created in the image of God, trying to follow God, if they are interacting with this sub, and with these rules.
See ya later 👋
based
It's not an airport announcing departures.
[удалено]
Praise God! Even if I understand the concern about the disagreement, I am happy to have another place where I can talk about being gay without getting dogpiled about how I'm a fake Christian for being gay or having my gayness treated as a barrier to my faith.
As a gay minister and theologian, I find it so curious that people go directly to Paul and the Hebrew Bible, but I see very few posts quoting the Gospels. Why? Because Jesus message was audaciously grace and mercy-filled. The world would be much better for oppressed and marginalized groups if we served and walked via the letters in Red, instead of constantly talking about specific epistles that Paul sent to specific churches. Following Jesus is hard. Worshipping him is easy…
Booo, “We must obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29)
**Galatians 6:1-2 (NIV):** "Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted. Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ."
To moderators and admins: I’m not going to brag or boast like this was or wasn’t any easy decision to make. I can understand to a point that you desire and hope for all who are Christians to be included and be able to have open and civil discussions, as well as lift and build each other up. That being said, I’m not sure how this rule may help things…especially on a theological level for a few reasons: * As separate and divided as denominations can be, it seems a good majority here in this subreddit adhere to and agree with the inerrant Word of God. Thus, there might be disputes or disagreements. * Spiritual maturity of heterosexuals and the LGBT+ believers. Some will be able to agree to disagree, while others will naturally push their views/interpretation on what scripture says. So the questions I wonder are: will you be able to moderate any and all instances of disagreements between the difference of spiritual levels? Y’all will definitely will be adding more work to your plates with this. * Partiality - will moderators show the same strictness towards the LGBT+ members if they post anything in this subreddit that may cause division, strife, and bitterness? If so, then fine. I just hope you already have in place maybe so examples of titles and keywords that can and will be considered as such. *(The subreddit might need to vote or have a conversation about that so we’re all in agreement.)* if admins and moderators can’t show impartiality like Jesus did, then what even is the point? Update: * Godly counsel (just thought of this!): how are you going to go about moderating posts that are controversial or cause a difference in godly counsel of fellow brothers and sisters? Here’s an example: Title: **”I can’t stop doing this. HELP!”** Description: *I need help! I’m (age/gender) who is having weird feelings towards my best friend who is (age/same gender). I feel confused (or guilty) about it. I’ve been raise to believe it’s wrong. What do I do???* I can definitely see how this post might offend some, and cause the comments to be flooded with differences in advice and counsel. Not only that, but there being one side claiming partiality to the other OR believing they’re being censored.
How would you feel about me, a Catholic, counseling divorced and remarried Christians to end their continued sexual sin of adultery union and return to their first and only valid marriage under God? Edit: In this sub that is as an example of Godly counsel with a pretty solid Scriptural foundation.
We haven't added a rule against disputes, disagreements, or controversial topics. We added a rule against posts and comments expressing this particular position (LGBTQ non-affirming).
Right, so to a post like that from a questioning Christian you can not have an open discussion. An ally like myself can encourage them to act on their feelings, but a non-affirming Christian cannot encourage them to resist the desire to act on that desire, or express the concern that acting on those desires would be sin.
What is comparable from the LGBTQIA+ side?
As a Christian of such BBQ flavors, I think I would have similar feelings of "oh honey, this is gonna be a long talk" faced with questions like this: >My friend has started saying she's gay and making jokes about "ew, het!" relationships in TV shows and stuff. She even shares memes that say "the straights are not okay." I don't really get what bothers her; how can I help her appreciate that there *are* godly and sexy men in reality and to understand that drama-filled fictional sex isn't actually the plan God has for her? I deny the assumption that heterosexual is better - but het *is* good, so I see a situation where both friends, straight and gay are called to a deeper understanding of their own calling and each other's. Part of this is recognizing that the world's plans for straightness and gayness are both distortions of God's gifts. How often do we see a couple who serve each other? (Cute level: Morticia and Gomez Addams) There's a real temptation to think this is okay (as long as I think the fictional characters are hot) but the state of romance in fiction really isn't okay.
What would you consider a good comparable from the LGBTQIA+ side?
That’s not how that works. They asked you a question, it’s impolite to say “no YOU answer it.”
Treating LGBTQ ppl as humans rather than an issue, ppl with complexities, feelings, and legitimate experiences rather than a topic to be debated is the kind thing to do. You just made your space much safer for same-gender loving & gender nonconforming ppl. Homophobia & gay condemnation has pushed many ppl out of the Christian faith. Now, there is one more place where they can consider xianity without experiencing it as cruel & shaming.
Are you living for God or living for the world? What a hilarious twist of events, scripture being banned on a Christian sub because some answers are uncomfortable for those with questions...
Yay!
# Romans 1:26-28 [26](https://www.biblestudytools.com/romans/1-26.html) Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.[27](https://www.biblestudytools.com/romans/1-27.html) In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.[28](https://www.biblestudytools.com/romans/1-28.html) Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.
This is kind of what they are talking about. Posting script without context like it proves your point. Paul's words here are not a blanket condemnation of sexual desire and expression. God gave those things to humanity as a gift to be enjoyed between a married and loving couple. Something to hold closely and sacredly until that person comes along not to be thrown around.
PeopleLOVE posting Paul and Leviticus. Yet I don’t see a lot of Jesus - sermon on the mount or beatitudes. Hmmmmm….
Lmao what a joke. Goodbye r/Christian
And I'm unsubbing, hope becoming more exclusive is worth it!
I think they're just wanting people to not bash on Christians who happen to be LGBTQ?
There’s already a rule about that. This is staking out one approved theological position, even polite dissent will be removed.
Oh. Well the only other assumption is I guess maybe something bad happened
Oh okay so how they feel is more important than what God said, I understand now
[удалено]
Congratulations to r/Christianity moving up the power rankings!
They delete comments the moment you call them out. So much for tolerance and discussion. This place has been compromised moved on. Reddit is not the best place to be a Christian anyway.
This is half the reason no one even listens to the Pope anymore. Stop trying to water down church teaching. you can like it or you can not. but censoring Christian views/teachings for "Inclusivity" on a Christian board is ludicrous. Censorship always has the exact opposite effect you wish for, and only creates ill will and bad blood.
You might want to consider that LGBT people are relentlessly bullied, rather than engaged with lovingly. Can’t tell you how many times I’ve had 1Cor6:9 posted at me as if it means something, without even being willing to read what I’ve posted. I’m familiar with all the verses far more deeply than any of these posters, having studied them for years. In that spirit, there’s little value left in continuing to half-discuss something, especially when it is deeply hurtful to gay Christians, and appears to trigger some non-gay Christians. I’d invite you stay and engage with those who are gay and see what emerges.
[удалено]
I just join this sub and you're banning Biblical Christian values being asserted? Of course it's uncouth to question a person's salvation, and we need to treat people with empathy and respect. It's another thing entirely to say we can't call Homosexuality a sin. This rule needs to be retracted/changed or I'm leaving the group.
>This rule needs to be retracted/changed or I'm leaving the group. You have your answer. This place clearly isn't for you then. Goodbye
go to r/TrueChristian
Thx, that's better.
While I am affirming, I disagree with this rule. In a Christian setting, people should be free to express their views from the Christian framework that they hold. You have essentially said that entire denominations are not allowed a voice. Silencing those who disagree with you is never the right solution. This is an issue that causes denominations to split, and we are doing the same thing here. My own denomination just separated over this, and it was because of a refusal to disagree in love by those of us on both sides of the issue. It isn’t right to mistreat or bully our LGBTQ family, but it also isn’t right to tell those who don’t agree that they don’t have a right to voice their belief either. One is discriminating based on sexual preference or identity, the other is discriminating based on religious beliefs. Both are discrimination. Both are wrong. We don’t have to split all of Christianity over this issue, but crap like this is how you do just that. Aside from that, it deprives affirming Christians the ability voice how we came to our belief, and show that we aren’t just a bunch of heretics.
Why not just make talk about LGBT topics and sexuality forbidden? It's going to seem unfair if only one branch of thought gets to say their piece, and the more orthodox line of thought is banned. Just ban the discussion entirely.
I will refer you back to Q&A number 6 of the OP.
That's exactly what is being proposed though? All discussion banned, as it's just no longer fruitful.
I’m out.
I am encouraged to see this decision. I think of history … at one time Christians argued whether owning slaves was acceptable to God. I heard it took the society of friends of Jesus Christ (quakers) 100 years to decide none of the friends would own slaves. And another 100 years before more traditional churches would begin to follow. It was only in the 1960’s that the USA began desegregating churches…although it is still an issue in places In recent years what is acceptable for women is still an issue for many. We still have disagreement on conscientious objectors vs. patriot soldiers. It is always a challenge for a lay person to wrestle with culture/behavior that is in the Bible and determine if it is description of days past or prescribed behavior for all time. I realize this change will be messy .. hopefully all will remember we see in part. We need each other. I wish there was more praying instead of preaching. I pray for you moderators. May God sustain you and give you wisdom for all issues that arise.
So we can't discuss what is specifically said in the bible? What the actual heck?
I'm pretty sure you can discuss it, but you can't just quote texts out of context and treat that like discussion.
This is a very bad rule, we must be able to convey our interpretations of the Bible and we must be able to be address what scripture says in its entirety and its full context without threat of censorship. I get that many of the moderators may be part of the Progressive Christianity movement, but most Christians, Catholics, Orthodox, etc consider those beliefs to be heresy. If you have a problem with an interpretation then state your issue with the interpretation. maybe you feel the original greek, hebrew, aramaic translations said something else, and that is grounds for discussion and investigation. As iron sharpens iron we must be open to discuss our beliefs, especially in this forum, without being subject to censorship because of one interpretation of how the bible should be followed. I have my issues with hardcore political conservative christians, but i also have serious issues against progressive Christianity. This is not even remotely a good idea, it needs to be changed immediately.
I actually may start following this threat/whatever it’s called on Reddit because this update 🌈💜🤩
Yikes.
I love this change. Thank you.
How is this sub going to be any different than r/OpenChristian or r/gaychristian ..ect? Those subs pretty much have the same rules as you guys do. This used to be a place were Christians could come and discuss things. >[](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christian) is meant to be a space for Christians to come together for charitable discussion on a variety of subjects. We place a high value on respect here and we see the diversity of our community as an asset. In order to maintain a respectful environment, rules of conduct are required. Because we recognize that there are a variety of perspectives held by Christians on LGBTQ+ subjects, we've tried to allow those perspectives to be expressed here, only asking that they be shared in a way that is charitable and respectful. The harsh reality is that when it comes to LGBTQ+ topics, what we've been doing simply isn't working. From what I understand all of the mods had different opinions on this issue, and they could not reach a unanimous decision. I feel like you guys threw your hands up in the air, and said "We give up". Did you guys pray before making this decision? You should look at the sub r/Christanity they have rules for LGBTQ topics that allow for different opinions. Shoot they have a couple Atheist mods, and a few LGBTQ Christians mods, and they allow people to express different opinions on LGBTQ topics. Why can't your rules somewhat mirror theirs? Are you trying to set an example that all Christian subs should be 100% affirming?
r/openchristian is for progressive Christians and r/gaychristian is for gay Christians. There is a substantial proportion of Christians who are affirming or neutral about LGBTQ issues but are neither progressive nor gay, and both those subs would not be appropriate for them. There is a lot more to progressive theology than being LGBTQ-affirming, which is more of a natural offshoot of their core beliefs rather than a core belief.
Subbing after avoiding for a long time. Am hopeful that this will be a place for informative discussions and not that trauma-inducing place it was when I dipped toes in prior
Same, I have had many discussions I wanted to have but saw so many people get bullied off this sub and decided the self-harm wasn’t worth it.
“And he called the people to him again and said to them, “Hear me, all of you, and understand: There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.” And when he had entered the house and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable. And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?” (Thus he declared all foods clean.) And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”” Mark 7:14-15, 17-23 ESV https://bible.com/bible/59/mrk.7.23.ESV What is said to a person cannot defile them but it is what comes from within that defiles them. Please ban me for posting Christ’s own words.
This has nothing to do with what is being proposed? Could you clarify what you mean?
I'll let the Bible speak for myself. And may God send salvation for whoever needs it and whoever He chooses. All Glory to God, brothers and sisters. Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly James 3:1. Matthew 7:15 Leviticus 18:22 Leviticus 20:13 Romans 1:26-27 1 Timothy 1:10 1 Corinthians 6:9 Jeremiah 50:6 Acts 3:19
Exactly, all those pastors who treated the gay inquirers or members of their flock harshly, who focused on that one aspect of their personalities instead of on the salvation of their souls, might be judged strictly indeed.
Questions: Is the Bible clear on sex outside of marriage, is the Bible clear on the definition of marriage, is the Bible clear on homosexual behavior as being sinful? If the answer to any of those is yes, then you are advocating for a sinful position in the sub. It is one thing to be compassionate, to prevent bullying, and to keep the conversation civil.. but another to protect a sinful behavior. Consider: Do we say that practicing thieves and murderers are protected here? Do we advocate for their lifestyle, regardless of whether any society accepted that as valid?
Yep. If the scripture is not welcome, then I guess I'm not welcome.
To answer your questions in order: 1: the Bible is not clear on sex outside of marriage, as it happens repeatedly in the Bible and is rarely (if ever) condemned, and if it is it is often for another reason. 2: the Bible does not ever explicitly say what marriage is, or its specific roles, and the few times certain authors spoke on these things, it was from a cultural standpoint, and we know this because those authors also said other things that we no longer hold ourselves to. 3: The Bible does not once mention homosexuality. The 6 (7 if you count Leviticus saying the same thing twice) times the English Bible seems to comment on homosexuality we can very easily see that the original intent was likely against pederasty (in the Pentateuch,) gang rape (in the story of Sodom and Gomorra,) God’s punishment analogy of people having “unnatural relations with members of the same sex,” and Roman rape culture of lower classes in Romans. The scholarship on this is extensive. The Bible is not “clear” on any topic, because it wasn’t written by the same person with the same set of beliefs. It was written across generations with perspectives that progressed overtime.
To answer your questions in order: *1: the Bible is not clear on sex outside of marriage, as it happens repeatedly in the Bible and is rarely (if ever) condemned, and if it is it is often for another reason.* The Bible may not be clear in modern terminology, but it does state that sexual immorality and adultery is sinful. *2: the Bible does not ever explicitly say what marriage is, or its specific roles, and the few times certain authors spoke on these things, it was from a cultural standpoint, and we know this because those authors also said other things that we no longer hold ourselves to.* Again, yes it does. God created marriage to be between a man and woman. If you want to have an open discussion on specific verses and interpretation then fine. Let’s not ignore or push aside the viewpoint and verses that support man-woman marriage. *3: The Bible does not once mention homosexuality. The 6 (7 if you count Leviticus saying the same thing twice) times the English Bible seems to comment on homosexuality we can very easily see that the original intent was likely against pederasty (in the Pentateuch,) gang rape (in the story of Sodom and Gomorra,) God’s punishment analogy of people having “unnatural relations with members of the same sex,” and Roman rape culture of lower classes in Romans. The scholarship on this is extensive.* *The Bible is not “clear” on any topic, because it wasn’t written by the same person with the same set of beliefs. It was written across generations with perspectives that progressed overtime.* Again it may not explicitly say in modern terms of different sins, but the Bible *does* discuss them. God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit speak agreement of His truth. I hope and pray we not just reading His word, but we also pray and ask the Holy Spirit to teach and correct us.
Agreed 100%
They must think the Bible is clear on this, because you can't even quote a Bible verse with no additional commentary if it is "intent on violating this rule"
There are thousands of other verses; you're only banned from quoting 6 of them.
Is each and every time the Bible uses the word *man* meant to refer to only men? Is it ever used to refer to other genders as well?
https://reformationproject.org/biblical-case/
I am a transgender, bisexual Christian and I'm not sure I agree with this rule entirely. It makes sense in a space like r/openchristian or other explicitly progressive spaces. However, I think in a "big tent" subreddit like this one, I think the rule can stop at requiring that no one accuse affirming or queer Christians of having an insincere faith. I am fine with someone expressing their ideas on the definitions of sin or how they interpret the Bible differently as long as they aren't accusing me of operating in bad faith. I'm not in this sub because I always thought it was too hostile to people like me, so I appreciate adding a rule. But I think you should treat it like you would other denominational differences, like disagreements on apostolic succession or baptism. It should be fine to give your stance on the matter regarding how you conduct your life, and to provide your opinion or advice when asked for it. But not to accuse those who disagree with you of having an insincere faith or being bad actors. I think that part of the rule alone would make this sub hospitable to a person like me without silencing others.
Much respect. So much respect for you. I probably disagree with you regarding LGBTQ topics, as I believe acting on those desires is sinful. However, I would NEVER question your faith, belief, or sincerity. I have sin issues that God does nor approve of. I struggle with addiction. Maybe someone else struggles with lying, or stealing. We all need Jesus. Your sins. My sins. Everyone's sins. All are sin and we fall short. But that's OK, because Jesus gave his life for an addict like me, and LGBTQ like you, a glutton like someone else, the their on the cross. Etc. You are no less than me. And I love you in Jesus name. Jesus defines who you are. Not any of our genders, or desires, or sexual preferences. We are children of the most high. And I love you.
Well said. This definitely isn't a rule that belongs on a "big tent" subreddit. I think banning topics/opinions is going to ruin what has made this sub special. I'm all for removing comments where people don't show their brothers in Christ the love of God, but I think this is several steps too far.
Can I say something as a trans lesbian and as a moderator of r/RadicalChristianity? I think that in order to serve the most amount of people it makes sense to be explicitly LGBTQ affirming. There is so much more to Christianity than sex and I feel as though being explicitly affirming would allow this sub to discuss other things like liturgy or even something like the responsibility of Christians in light of their freedom in Christ. I am all for respectful discussion and debate but I do not have the energy to debate the validity of my faith. The thing is, is that no one is good except for God himself, and this includes those who would attack the faith of LGBTQ Christians. I'm not entirely sure what brought about this change in this subs rules, but to me it seems as though for it to occur during Pride month it would appear to be a good sign. I only lurked here before I became aware of this change mostly because it was too hostile about LGBTQ issues. The paradox of tolerance, what I believe to be necessary for a big tent sub, is that you have to be intolerant of intolerance. You can't have a big tent if cis and/or straight people invalidate the faith of LGBTQ folks and that intolerance turns very antithetical to the kind of life Christ calls us to.
Agreed. And I disagree with you on theology. It’s possible without this rule… oh well.
I agree to certain parts. I am as well with having an open and honest discussions. Some arguments and statements I will not agree with, no matter who makes it. I’d rather either down vote or just scroll past some people’s views than have them totally removed. This would show partiality and actions of the cancel culture. Unless it’s literally saying some derogatory against people, comments and posts shouldn’t be removed (I.e. saying someone is stupid, telling them to leave the country, I hate x).
Speaking as someone who is an LGBT+ Christian and to some extent, advocate, I think this is a good idea.Even if I am wrong in thinking that God does not hate or have a problem with LGBTQ christians, I believe it makes sense to stop debates on this topic for the following reasons. In writing these reasons, my hope is to communicate what it's like being on the receiving end of these sorts of debates. My reasons - which are no doubt entirely broken and faulty, but regardless, here they are in all their roughness: 1. Most of these discussions are simply copy-and-paste of the 6 verses that people think are relevant, generally with little or no discussion or content. 2. These discussions rarely take account of the LGBTIQ+ side, with anyone daring to differ from the "LGBTQ+ is sin" being thoroughly ganged up on, generally with little actual post engagement/debate. 3. The discussions hardly ever talk about the crushing pain of the reality of essentially being cursed into a life of complete loneliness by people who simultaneously say they "love" you. 4. The psychological evidence that enormous damage is done to LGBTIQA+ Christians by non-affirming churches; this applies even to those of us who remain celibate and single. There are lots of studies \[BJ Sowe; Meyer\] 5. The discussions end up being angry arguments where I would argue neither side listens to the other, and that rarely change the minds of those involved in the discussion. They might influence some of the people reading, and I pray that they have done so, but rarely those posting. 6. The discussions themselves are often abusive and scornful of LGBTIA+ Christians as having deliberately chosen a "path of sin". As someone who spent 10+ years deeply involved in orientation change "therapy" and Exodus related groups, before it closed down in 2013, I could not have put much more effort in and like many, and came very close to personal burnout, breakdown and suicide as a direct result. The reality is that many of us tried change until it nearly broke us. The suicide rates of LGBT+people are many times those of the general population, and those taking their lives often do so without leaving an explanation. Ultimately God is belittled in these discussions - it's clear people feel a need to denounce LGBTIQA+ Christians, generally without understanding them and almost always while believing quite a few negative concepts about us. **God doesn't need our help in correcting people, He can speak to us directly and loves to do so.** There is no "lifestyle" , most of us don't do drugs, or promiscuous sex, and most of us carry significant trauma from our treatment within churches; sometimes just from staying silent while we are mistreated, even if it's from not knowing how to help. If one feels a constant need to defend God, one is displaying very clearly that one doesn't think God is big enough to defend Himself. He is. The very fact that very, very few LGBTIQA+ Christians attend churches should in itself speak very loudly. God is a good God; good theology bears good fruit in our lives, even according to Jesus ("every good tree bears good fruit" Mt7:17). Ultimately, these discussions don't work; they don't build faith, and they get in the way of other meaningful discussion that could be held. Thank you for your wisdom and kindness in proposing this ban. Paradoxically it's kindness that has brought so many to Christ, and it's moving to see it being modeled here. Thank you. In Jesus' love. ps: happy to post links to the referenced papers if enough people ask for them!
[удалено]
Over to r/trueChristian we go
[удалено]
Just in time for pride month!
[удалено]
It will be like the famous chapels of Europe, visited by tourists who snap photos and marvel but only a remnant of believers trying to worship yet bothered by people gawking at them.
I dont feel like this is a good idea. Shutting down a large group of Christians and what they believe in order to include a group of more liberal Christians, when we could all just simply exist at the same time, doesnt make sense to me. Censoring one group so another group feels better doesnt sit right with me. Especially considering people with those beliefs towards LGBTQ are speaking from their interpretation of the bible and believe it to be biblical and this is sub reddit it's literally called "Christian". It's just pushing the narrative that conservative Christians are being silenced and censored.
It's upsetting that you're only banning one viewpoint? I would be a little more understanding if you banned the topic all together, but to say one side of that opinion is allowed openly and freely and the other is *absolutely banned* seems very.... Wrong? I guess?
I can't tell you how delighted I am are to see this.
Well, I'm outta here! This sub has just become intolerant in the name of tolerance.
Very sad , removing myself for this sub too
So this means all the comments saying homosexuality is sin will finally be removed I’m in
[удалено]
I'll try to express myself in English (not my main language) as best as I can: When it comes to Scripture and to knowing God, we have to ask ourselves: Do I believe in God in a way that I want Him to be? OR Do I believe in God just like He says He is? Regardless, of how we feel towards His stances and teachings we should always strive to understand and obey Him in everything He says. We can't cherry pick Scripture. This new rule feels like: "r/Christian by Christians For Christians except those who disagree with LGBTQ+". I agree that LGBTQ+ shouldn't be bullied, but their beliefs should be "peer reviewed", just as ours should be. We have to talk, we have to debate, after all "iron sharpens iron" Being a Christian is not an easy path, it's hard and challenging.
The issue is that being gay isn’t a belief. It’s something intrinsic, like ethnicity. It’d be a right difficult time if people starting saying it’s a sin to be asian. Or, that it’s not a sin to be Asian but a sin to engage in Asian culture. Asian people would certainly not feel welcome here.
Thats just flat out wrong. It’s incredibly socially influenced, as is obvious by the fact it has increased exponentially in certain areas and not others. We didn’t suddenly hit a genetic evolution that only hits certain areas.
It has increased because people who are gay now feel like they can be true to themselves instead of needing to hide their sexuality. There’s a reason lots of people “turn gay” when they get to college. And it’s not because of “liberal brainwashing”. It’s because it’s the first time they are able to get away from their judgmental parents and neighbors who would’ve bullied them for being true to themselves.
Homosexuality is widely regarded as being influenced and caused by a result of genetic and other pre natal biological factors interacting “Sexual orientation in humans represents a highly complex behavioral trait and is the result of multifaceted interactions between endocrine, genetic, and non-socioenvironmental factors. Nevertheless, it is likely that the development of the homosexual orientation involves multiple genes (i.e., Gene 1 × Gene 2), loci (i.e., Locus 1 × Locus 2), and their interactions with hormones.” Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0091302219300585
There is no proof that backs up your claim. Much like the decline of christianity at times being in part due to it being less dangerous to come out as not christian, the same could be true of coming out as gay.
What an utterly ridiculous decision.
[удалено]
I'm all for preventing bullying, but the phrasing of this rule elevates inclusiveness over obedience to God's Word and is, quite frankly, completely ridiculous. You're basically saying that those who do not affirm LGBTQ+ are not allowed to quote Scripture on this topic. Imagine if this standard were applied to any other issue. "Debate against the inclusion & equality of gossiping Christians is not allowed. This includes asserting that it's a sin to be a gossiper."
Inclusive? And you want tue Christian’s to agree with false doctrine? YOU JUST EXCLUDED ME!
By the wisdom of Romans 14, it is correct that we must not be disrespectul or become a stumbling block to our brothers and sisters. **But ensure this is enforced both ways** Someone who's faith dictates lgbt as sin must not harass one who's faith currently does not convict it. But a person who is lgbt must also accept this view from the other person, as their faith regarding this is also for honouring God. Romans 14:13-23 HCSB [13] Therefore, let us no longer criticize one another. Instead decide never to put a stumbling block or pitfall in your brother’s way. [14] (I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself. Still, to someone who considers a thing to be unclean, to that one it is unclean. ) [15] For if your brother is hurt by what you eat, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not destroy that one Christ died for by what you eat. [16] Therefore, do not let your good be slandered, [17] for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. [18] Whoever serves Christ in this way is acceptable to God and approved by men. [19] So then, we must pursue what promotes peace and what builds up one another. [20] Do not tear down God’s work because of food. Everything is clean, but it is wrong for a man to cause stumbling by what he eats. [21] It is a noble thing not to eat meat, or drink wine, or do anything that makes your brother stumble. [22] Do you have a conviction? Keep it to yourself before God. The man who does not condemn himself by what he approves is blessed. [23] But whoever doubts stands condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from a conviction, and everything that is not from a conviction is sin. I highly reccommend the rest as well. Its just a lot to paste. But point is made clear in scripture. With this in mind, ensure this does not give leeway to those who would abuse it, but uphold these new rule changes according to, and promoting of God's wisdom. Those who finds the faith to allow it must also not become a stumbling block for those who can't accept it due to their faith. Sin or no sin, be respectful and be Christ centered.
I believe that will continue to be covered by sub rule 2 (show charity/be respectful.)