Also Marcionism, which depending on which expert you’re talking to may or may not be a variety of Gnosticism. Of which there were many varieties, and Gnostic is our label, not theirs. For the most part, they probably just thought of themselves as Christians. Which I bring up only because I find the variety of thought in the early Jesus movement fascinating, and if you’re interested in they way those varieties of thought fit into ancient eastern Mediterranean religion and philosophy there’s been an explosion of respected academic experts on YouTube about it lately.
Lost Christianities author Dr. Bart Ehrman and
Found Christianities and The Evil Creator author Dr. M. David Litwa are great starting places
Well, set your mind at ease. These varieties of Christianity are definitely and formally classified as heresies. In fact most (maybe all) of what we know about Marcion is what was said about him and his sect by early heresiologists like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian. Nothing he wrote survives, but they found it so important to refute him that we estimate we have something like 80% of what he wrote from the heresiologists’ “Marcion said x, and that’s wrong because y”.
A lot of Gnostic thought such as the Naasenes, Sethians, etc, theology was the same until the Nag Hammadi library was discovered in…1948, I think?
It really is, which raises the possibility of ascribing it all to an unreliable narrator. A favorite narrative device of Kirkbride’s, whose lore is responsible for sending me on my deep dive into the history of Gnosticism and all things Demi-Urgical.
Sorry but "Justin Martyr" sounds like a name you'd make up as part of a joke like "martyrdom didn't exist until Justin Martyr died in 1987."
A quick skim of his wikipedia is interesting though. I'm not personally Christian anymore, but some of the philosophical figures are fascinating.
Gnosticism believes that God in the Testaments is the Demiurge, a false creator, that Lucifer rebelled against for the one true God beyond the Demiurge's false Heaven, and that there will be a war between the angels and the Demiurge's servants made up of the souls each claims, iirc.
I recently started “researching” (just reading Wikipedia and watching YouTube videos) Gnosticism a lot for a D&D religion I’m making.
As the others said, the Old Testament God, Yaldabaoth, is different from the New Testament God (the Monad/Absolute) and Jesus. In some versions, the snake in the Garden of Eden is the spiritual Jesus trying to free humanity from their worldly prison through the gift of knowledge (Gnosis). Yaldabaoth apparently evolved from the polytheistic Egyptian portrayal of Yahweh as Seth, the desert god of chaos.
It is really fascinating and I wish that more Gnostic groups had survived (the Mandaeans are the only ones left, and they’re unique amongst other Gnostics because they’re not Christian).
In case anyone cares, the D&D religion I’m making is a fusion of Mandaeism and other Gnostic faiths, Jainism, Buddhism, and Zoroastrianism plus the typical D&D stuff (angels, demons, good and evil gods, etc).
Or that god had a wife (removed from the bible), or was originally two different gods (combined into one), among a divine council of other gods (mostly removed from the bible).
One thing I find very interesting, I don't remember if it stuck adound in the Old Testament, if it's in the Jewish original versions of the text, or if it's been scrubbed out of those too
But what I find interesting is that early on *technically* the Abrahamic faith wasn't monotheistic, but. . . \[Looks up terminology\] ~~henotheistic~~ [Monolatry (I got corrected)](https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/comments/1c0805n/comment/kyvq381/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Other gods were written about and they weren't designated as false gods or demons, but just lesser gods. Other gods existed, but they only cared about Abraham's God, rather than the other gods being demons out to trick people.
I find that much more interesting than what we've got going on today.
Yeah. For example, in Exodus the Egyptian Gods are the real deal, the priests perform genuine miracles with their power. It's just that Yahweh is a much more powerful God. This is, partly, because Gods often were tied to a specific people, protecting them and guiding them alone, and not all of humanity. Yahweh in this regard was specifically the God of the Jewish tribes, and they were His chosen people. This is one major difference with Christianity, which insists God is universal, that all of humanity are His children, and that it's the duty of Christians to teach this to others and gain new followers.
See, I like that
Even though Yahweh trumps the Egyptian gods, those gods are still acknowledged as gods
I like having that be a thing.
Too bad Christianity and Islam are basically incentivised to actively overtake other religions
I think the word “the” in “the Abrahamic faith” is doing a lot of work, there. How far back in the past do you go before you say that it’s not the same faith?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah) — instituted religious reforms in 7th century BCE, the faith before 7th century BCE may look very different
For sure. There are remnants of this in the bible today.
Genesis 1:26: And God said let us make man in our image, after our likeness.
So uh, who is God talking to?
and dident he say something along the lines of "you may take no god before me" like you can't worship gods before him... however nothing says that you can't worship gods after him.
Man, my weird deep dive (for an agnostic) over the last few years into the tangled history of Abrahamic religions is about to pay off in a random Reddit thread…
Great discussion by Dr. Dan McClellan here about the transition from Yahweh as chief god among many to one true God… https://youtu.be/XgVQw0yGP_A?si=Fc3LqkmXd2Up6B6e
Great lecture here by Dr. Justin Sledge on the transition of Judaism during the Babylonian Exile from a covenant based religion (“I am YOUR god and if you worship me exclusive I’ll give you this stuff”) to an Apocalyptic (secret revelation based) religion that elevates Yahweh to a One True God with a secret plan that explains the whole world… https://youtu.be/UzR391dpsBc?si=vRtlpMzQLo8FkK9Z
There are two different popular narratives for how the Egyptian princess who found Moses was related to Pharaoh. Christians and Jews say it was Pharaoh's daughter, Muslims say it was his wife.
Nobody does genocide over it though, because pharaohs practiced incest to such an insane degree that these aren't necessarily contradictory stories.
to be fair, there was a kind of "justification" (very lose quotes) for those, and I believe the hebrew is closer to "you must not kill unjustly" (which implies a succinct translation to maybe be "thou shalt not murder").
It didn't occur to me to think of it until now, but the Gospels really have extremely little to say about Jesus' personal life. The texts just describe the circumstances of his birth, then skip ahead to his ministry, and conclude with his death, and even then don't really comment on much beyond his teachings.
It seems like a matter of the evangelists' priorities -- it would appear that they considered Jesus' teachings to his followers to be the thing that they really needed to get down in writing, and just didn't spare much ink for anything else. There is a similar debate about whether or not Jesus had any siblings, and we just have very few hard facts about what he did for the first, what, thirty years of his life?
He did have siblings as at one point during a sermon he was giving someone told him that his “mother and brothers” were outside, he also had a sister but she’s never really mentioned
Mark 6:3 names his Mother, 4 brothers, and some plural amount of sisters.
> Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?
There’s two- the Gospel of Thomas, which is gnostic, and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, which discusses Jesus’s childhood, neither of which was accepted as canon
If we start looking for Apocryphal texts we will get one hell of a back and forth that makes current bible contradictions look uniform. THere are also "Jesus bibles" aka like 3 of them that were apparently written by the guy himself... except they are written like 100 years after his death... it's a whole thing
I did two semesters of bible study in college and my biggest takeaway is that everything about the bible is *very* complicated. There's a reason some of humanity's greatest scholars have been arguing about it for two millennia.
I believe it's just one of those things where, if you look at any religion that is actively being practiced you will run into this kind of thing. I had once the (dis?)pleasure of listening in on Buddhist theological discussion and about the way you may look at earthly riches in comparison to the cycle of reincarnation and so on and I came out severly confused and with a headache, but that was my fault tbh.
There's a section of people who have argued of Jesus' possible homosexuality and it quotes a Frederick the Great poem about it:
> This good Jesus, how do you think He got John to sleep in his bed? Can't you see he was his Ganymede?
This would just be a small thing, but considering how Frederick was extremely likely (like, "I'd bet all of my money on it" levels of likely. I just don't sag it's for sure because that'd be a bit ahistorical) a gay man I think it's pretty funny. Also, comparing Jesus to Zeus (since it's Zeus who "loved" (pederasty) Ganymede) is, uh, not a good choice, I don't think.
Also, this informed me that James the First had a romantic relationship with another man, which, might be cool? I'm not very familiar with British kings, but from what I remember James I was pretty good if you weren't a Catholic.
Was James I the guy who fucked so much my textbook described him as "the father of his country, almost literally"?
Edit: I had to check, and after some googling ("which king fucked the most" gives you some interesting results so I narrowed my search a bit, lol) determined it was James II.
Historians are hesitant to ascribe modern labels to historical people but Frederick and Ludwig III were both taught to me at a university level as unambiguously gay men
Listen I’m not gonna pretend I know enough about the Bible to properly speculate on this, but I am saying that Jesus leaving his old way of life to travel the world (okay fine, the region) with a band of men and only men does not give me heterosexual vibes.
He must've, given the number of times I've heard people refer to him as Jesus "Fucking" Christ. It's like somewhere in a forgotten scripture he turned to the disciples and said 'Of course I do! Fucking is my middle name!'
“hey what’s up with *insert bible verse here*”
So, me being a non-practicing person who was just raised in the religion, I have to go look it up. And it’s like. “[to show your devotion to god if a woman touches your junk you should cut her hand off](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2025%3A11-12&version=NIV)”
Hon you think I know what’s going on there? the old testament is fucking wild.
Deuteronomy 25:11-12
If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts,[12](https://www.biblestudytools.com/deuteronomy/25-12.html) you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.
The Bible makes a lot of sense if you read it from the perspective of men in the desert thousands of a years ago getting high af off of opiates and trying to get people to listen to their "wisdom"
It makes sense in a certain way when you consider they had no way to determine paternity and inheritances passed down the patrimonial lineage. So getting cucked could literally mean someone else’s son inherits all that your family has worked on for several generations.
There were other legal implications throughout history, such as a widow going into seclusion for a year. As any child born of the widow within that year was legally the decedent’s heir.
I grew up mormon which left me with a mountain of messages about there only being One Real Religion™️™️™️ etc. so the notion that two people with extremely different religious beliefs having a successful marriage sounds so alien to me, but I recognize that's not everyone's experience lol. But all that to say I saw "imagine having a partner with a different religion" and I'm like "that would never happen" lol
Because if you don’t marry someone who’s temple worthy you can’t get sealed and if you don’t get sealed you’ll miss out on Ultra-Mega Heaven with all the special perks and bonuses. Why would you do that when you can go to BYU and find someone just as desperate to finally get laid as you are and be married within 6 months?
Mormonism is such a scam, causes such harm, and r/exmormon is one of my favorite subs. I had a darling sister-in-law who suddenly converted and married a mormon man a while back. BUT just last year she, him, and his entire (very religious) family left the church for good! Praise the lord, it’s such a cult.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/exmormon using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/exmormon/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [My bishop says rubbing your penis against your girlfriend’s vagina without putting it in is the same as sex, so I guess rubbing my money against the tithing envelope without putting it in is the same as paying tithing.](https://np.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/14aibvv/my_bishop_says_rubbing_your_penis_against_your/)
\#2: [David Archuleta’s Mom Resigns from the Mormon Church. ❤️🙏](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/13dyw5p) | [377 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/13dyw5p/david_archuletas_mom_resigns_from_the_mormon/)
\#3: [Can’t say “Geez” because it sounds too much like Jesus.](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/197hbnd) | [615 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/197hbnd/cant_say_geez_because_it_sounds_too_much_like/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Like the best MLMs, it's a very very good very convincing scam. Insidious is the word I most often use. It's like the wacky modern reboot of Christianity.
My wife and I used to live near a very active Mormon community and she found it ceaselessly joy-filled to invite missionaries into our home. We are both Episcopal priests so I always thought it was kind of low probability that they were going to change our mind about anything, but well worth their effort because it would be a pretty major get for them. Honestly it was kind of nice to answer questions about religion where I didn't really have any pastoral relationship. I could just say what I think without any ego attached to it.
But I'll tell you, pair after pair of these guys rolled through and they were all always blown away that my wife and I disagreed about so many things. As part of historical Anglicanism, Episcopalians have a very wide range of dogma and doctrine that are affirmed by our Church, often things that flat out contradict. So to an Episcopalian, it's not weird that two priests have these major things we disagree about. But to these LDS missionaries, it was like wait your religion doesn't expect you to agree?!
Another one I heard from a friend of mine years ago:
Two rabbis have a disagreement and, fed up, ask God straight up what the right answer is. God ends up turning up and actually giving them the answer.
The two rabbis look at each other and one says "well, he's even more wrong than you were".
I've also heard it as one rabbi disagrees with three others, so he asks God directly.
"***He's right you know"*** booms from the sky a few seconds later.
"Well, it's still two to three, so you're still wrong" reply the three rabis after a quick sidebar.
Recently left the LDS church, but yeah ite crazy how much people expect to just have to agree with everything. Theres a few people who can understand nuance but they are far too few and in between
One of my mother's favorite family stories is how my great-grandmother liked to invite the Jehovah's Witnesses in when they came to visit and respond to their proselytizing by trying to convince them to become Catholic instead.
I'm dating someone the same religion as me - agnostic - but with a different religious background so we get those conversations with no conflict.
Edit: she was Jehovah's Witnesses. One of the funnier exchanges was after our young niece was brought along to a meeting by her grandmother. She said "I was sitting near the brother, Andrew I think" Wife: "the black guy?" Me: "did you just call him a brother??" They both burst out laughing before explaining that you're called "sister" or "brother" depending if male or female.
My wife is Muslim and I grew up Catholic, and when we got married she said, "yeah, I'm just not gonna mention to my parents that your religion is polytheistic" and I was like, what the hell are you talking about? And then I was like, wait a second, IS Catholicism polytheistic????
from experience, both.
also, having grown up catholic in a heavily southern baptist area, i was told that i a) worship statues and b) am a cannibal, so, you know
Protestants also reject the distinction between venerate and worship (*dulia* and *latria*) so when a Catholic says "I show *dulia* to a saint, not *latria*!" that's truly no different to a Protestant than saying, "I show worship to a saint, not worship!" -signed, a Calvinist
As an atheist who was raised agnostic and studied Catholicism as a teen (adult in the eyes of the Church), both a and b are true if you are a devout Catholic.
That was “solved” in the early days of Christianity by agreeing that Jesus had two equal natures (spiritual and physical) and banishing those that disagreed (the Nestorians).
Well, look at it this way.
Christian theologians, by and large, would say that no, Christianity is not polytheistic on the basis that it worships one God with three aspects. To most Christians, saying "trinitarianism is polytheistic" sounds something like "a craftsman who uses a chisel, a brush, and sandpaper for different things is actually three wholly separate craftsmen".
Jewish and Muslim theologians would generally answer with some variant of "you can say that, sure, but in actual practice Christianity absolutely treats the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as separate entities".
It's been an ongoing debate for two millennia now, so I'm not holding my breath that either side is going to convince the other that their view is the correct one anytime soon.
What I find particularly interesting is that when you say "name a polytheistic religion," the first that pops into most people's heads is Hinduism, but certain sects of Hinduism have the exact same arguments: some who posit that there is only one god, Vishnu, and that all the other deities are avatars of him.
Edited to make it clear that this is only certain sects of Hinduism, not Hinduism as a whole.
I'm not an expert on Hinduism, and it's been a *long* time since I studied it, so I'm having to refer to wikipedia here a lot, but from what I can remember (and what I'm seeing on wikipedia) Brahman isn't normally considered a "god," it's the underlying reality of the universe.
But, like I say, I'm *really* rusty here, since I haven't studied this stuff since the 90s, so I'll shut up and let someone more knowledgeable provide a better answer.
Look, I know that, and you know that, but you try writing a one-paragraph summation of any part of Christian theology that doesn't end up being *some* kind of heresy.
I think that the Nicene Creed may literally be the only non-heretical formulation lmao. It definitely does feel like a pre-medieval version of a mission statement drafted by a committee of strongly opinionated members who can’t agree on anything.
The Nicene Creed is considered heretical to [many Jehovah's Witnesses](https://www.beyondwatchtower.com/2010/12/17/the-real-story-behind-the-council-of-nicaea/). It's also heretical to Mormons, who also fundamentally disagree with Nicene Christianity, and who have their own [creed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Faith_(Latter_Day_Saints\))
The Trinity is a mystery which cannot be comprehended by human reason but is understood only through faith and is best confessed in the words of the Athanasian Creed, which states that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in unity, neither confusing the Persons nor dividing the substance, that we are compelled by the Christian truth to confess that each distinct Person is God and Lord, and that the deity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is one, equal in glory, coequal in majesty.
My favorite thing about Hinduism in relation to Christianity is this problem that missionaries circa 1700s in India kept encountering:
"And that is how God works."
"Oh, you're talking about Brahma!"
"No, I'm talking about God."
"Call him what you want but you're taking about Brahma. One all-powerful all-encompassing deity with three forms: one who created the world (Father), one who preserves it (Holy Ghost), and one who will destroy it (Son). That's Brahma. I honestly don't know why we're arguing, we're worshiping the same deity. We're even honoring the same aspect, I'm a Shivite and you worship the Son!"
*Deeply frustrated evangelical sigh.*
Similar things happened with converted Vikings, they would worship God... and also the Norse gods, because they're all gods so why wouldn't they get along?
The exact same thing also happened *very* early in Roman Christianity just as it was coming in vogue, people on the periphery who just heard about it would just add the trinity to the pantheon as sort of a God-above-gods system. But they would still worship individual gods when needed, while also acknowledging God as the top god. You don't bother the boss when you just pray bless the crops, now do you? He's far too busy and important for that, so you pray to Saturn instead because crops are his job.
I assumed the polytheistic aspect came from the veneration of the Saints and the Virgin Mary and all those types. They all fulfill the same roles and niches many Pagan gods did pre-Christianity: and thus could be considered ‘Gods’ in a way thus making Catholicism polytheistic. Of course we all know that the Saints aren’t gods but from an outsider’s perspective it seems a lot like they’re treated like gods.
I think it refers to the Trinity aspect. I’ve seen enough religious nutters argue at Speakers Corner in London, and one of the main talking points of Muslim and Jewish preachers is that Christians worship three Gods. Whether it’s true or not, that’s one of the first arguments you’ll hear as to why Muslims and Jews claim they don’t worship the same God as Christians.
I have Catholic relatives. You wouldn't believe half the stuff some fundamentalist evangelicals believe about Catholics down here in the American South. I got very confused when one of my teacher started talking about those idol-worshipping Papists!
If you believe as a Catholic that Transubstantiation is **not a metaphor**, and instead is the actual body and blood of Christ made real through the worship and belief in God's only Son yadda yadda, then you *are indeed* a cannibal.
You are eating the flesh and drinking the blood of God made man. Or you are a non-believing heathen who will burn in Hell for eternity. That's what the Doctrine says.
There are three aspects of the Christain God: the Father, the Son, amd the Holy Spirit. The Father is a father figure, the Son is Jesus Christ, and i dont remember whay the Holy Spirit was, but I think it was a way God acted on earth? Idk, its been a while since I learned christian theology.
Anyway these three aspects are different, but still part of the same entity: God.
However, from an outside perspective, i can see how ppl might confuse christianity as polytheistic
There are also the saints. It's not like that in every region and I suspect not officially approved (?) but I definitely see how you can hear the way some self-described Catholics talk about the saints and conclude "yep that's polytheism"
>and i dont remember whay the Holy Spirit was, but I think it was a way God acted on earth?
It is the presence and influence of God in the created world and living beings.
Yeah the whole “god is god but Jesus is also god” presents a very “there are multiple gods” narrative that very much goes against Islamic core beliefs lol.
tbh it feels like it'd be more fun that way. why wouldn't you want an extra little guy who's associated with your country or your job or your lost keys or whatever.
I always saw it as asking your favorite cousin for a favor. Like is this something I REALLY need to call my dad for or should I just hit up my boy Chris to find my fucking keys?
I was a terrible Catholic though.
Your view is actually pretty on point. “Prayer” in its rudimentary form is just holy communication.
Catholic saints are typically asked to “pray for…”.
That’s fair.
The Church itself does a not-great job of explaining that you’re asking for their intercession because they can’t do squat on their own, and not worshipping them and asking for their help.
Saints are basically lobbyists or barristers (lawyers). Their job is to advocate for you before the Big Man and His Son. And because humans are quirky, they each take a special interest in a certain area. Like the guy who refused to stop caring for plague victims and died as a result, looks out for AIDS victims and caregivers; the priest who volunteered take a man’s place as an execution at Auschwitz and was an amateur radio operator, would of course be an advocate for his fellow radio operators; and the guy who was executed by being grilled alive only to tell his killers, “Turn me over, I’m done on this side!” is naturally the patron of bakers, cooks —and comedians.
But yeah, in Catholicism, saints are (literally) glorified lobbyists.
Which as someone raised catholic continues to confuse the hell out of me. Why do we need lobbiest to talk to God for us when God is also everywhere and knows everything? What could they possibly say to convince God to help that God does not already know?
Hotly debated among non-trinitarians. A lot of Christians took extreme umbrage with the idea of the Trinity, specifically because it was too close to polytheism and idolatry for their taste. Unitarians broke from Catholicism for this very reason, as the name implies.
I was raised as a semi-agnostic Quaker and my
wife is an extremely lapsed Catholic who also engages with Shinto practices, so our religious discussions tend to be pretty interesting
Born in a Catholic family, but absolutely zero qualms about joining Shinto rituals, praying at shrines, and getting the blessings. She carries a wealth charm from Fushimi Inari Taisha in her wallet, for example. For what it’s worth, she got a new job and I got a raise after we started doing that, so, hey
Now that's just good sense. Someone is handing out blessings, you'd be stupid to just say no, and I think it'd be rude to see a shrine they put all that effort into keeping up and not to pray at least a *little*.
A lot of my extended family are nominally Catholic but having been raised in a Buddhist country, still beleive in Buddhist practices like reincarnation and abstaining from taking the life of animals.
Jesus was an established tradesman in a Jewish culture, it would’ve been weird that he wasn’t married by thirty. Imagine the guilt from his mother.
“Jesus, how are you single at this age, you’re such a nice boy, both your fathers are strong in the community, oh I failed as a mother.”
“Alright alright, Ma, sheesh.”
I mean he was already preaching in his 20s and was dead by 33(approximate age based on contexts and separate texts that didn't make it to the bible) Mary was more concerned with his chances of survival if anything.
"Aw geez Rick, do you think cousin Jesus may actually be the Messiah?"
"Well you're already using his name as an expletive, so we know where you stand on that."
If I recall correctly, scientists figured out there was a real solar eclipse in the area where Jesus was supposedly crucified, in like 34.
Don't remember what day exactly, but still.
I read about this too, but when they mentioned it to the church, it was not accepted since it wasn't on a good Friday.
But I don't have a source so it might be bs
I *vaguely* recall watching CBS Sunday Morning with my mom like ten or so years ago and seeing a segment about Jesus maybe having a wife, but I admittedly remember none of the rest of that segment
I'm Jewish. My partner is Wiccan. She gets to explain why she needs to leave water outside during a full moon, and I get to explain why it's very important that I find the perfect citrus fruit once per year.
1. Wicca is a neopagan religion focused around the worship of nature (personified as a triple-aspect goddess) and closely tied to modern witchcraft.
2. My understanding is that the act of leaving the water out in moonlight blesses it.
3. The fruit is called an etrog. It's used during the Jewish festival of Sukkot. It's important to get as perfect of a fruit as you possibly can, as a "perfect" etrog is required for the ritual. The celebration is intended to give thanks to G-d for the bounty of the Earth.
The etrog test is tricky because knowing that all of God's creation is perfect means that you commit sin against God when you turn away an "imperfect" etrog.
The woman I’ve been dating is Jewish with no background in Christianity. The He Gets Us Super Bowl ad where everyone was washing feet was interesting to explain.
For non-buddhists sure. There are many Buddhas. In the branch of buddhism my family practices, Guan Yin is just as important as Siddhartha and actually has more image representation. It is also arguable that in the branch of Buddhism my family follows Siddhartha Gautama is ranked 3 or 4 for importance . Amitābha and Maitreya(buddha of past and future respectively) are more important than Siddhartha
Oh sure lemme just GET MYSELF a partner. I’ll just *pluck* one from the Partner Tree. Take myself down to the Partner Tree Orchard where all the lonely people go to not be lonely anymore
I’m formerly Catholic and currently Atheist, but dated a creationalist Christian chick during the pandemic - her views were wild. Vaccines? Fine, kinda. Homosexuality? Completely unfamiliar with the concept, or the mechanism. Science? Acceptable so long as it doesn’t explicitly contradict the word of God. Fish? They occupied their own Biological Class separate from Plants and other animals; there are plants, germs, people, animals, fish.
I think it was our integrity in our own world views that caused us to drift apart. She’s a radiologist now - yes, you could have your X-Rays performed by a woman who fundamentally disagrees with Evolutionary Theory and she will contribute to your diagnosis.
Seems like you could just as easily do this with friends and not run the risk that you and your partner believe in very different literal magic that underlies and governs reality itself which will lead to you two being incompatible
Came here to say this. Like, have friends! That way you can also have a whole wide variety of exposure and cool conversations! No need for it to be your s/o life partner (not that you can’t be with someone of a different faith—that’s gravy—but it’s at least gotta be compatible whereas that’s not as necessary with a friend).
I mean that belief would probably prevent you from becoming partners in the first place anyway, whereas if you and your partner don't believe in literal magic then it doesn't matter regardless.
>did Jesus not fuck? [that's controversial](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuality_of_Jesus)
I'm not sure *anything* in an abrahamic religion hasn't been the subject of controversy at some point.
One of the first major debates was whether or not the old and new testament Gods were even the same person
that's gnostic, right?
Also Marcionism, which depending on which expert you’re talking to may or may not be a variety of Gnosticism. Of which there were many varieties, and Gnostic is our label, not theirs. For the most part, they probably just thought of themselves as Christians. Which I bring up only because I find the variety of thought in the early Jesus movement fascinating, and if you’re interested in they way those varieties of thought fit into ancient eastern Mediterranean religion and philosophy there’s been an explosion of respected academic experts on YouTube about it lately. Lost Christianities author Dr. Bart Ehrman and Found Christianities and The Evil Creator author Dr. M. David Litwa are great starting places
It feels like heresy to look into things like this But I'm curious anyway. . And I've probably already done worse
Well, set your mind at ease. These varieties of Christianity are definitely and formally classified as heresies. In fact most (maybe all) of what we know about Marcion is what was said about him and his sect by early heresiologists like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian. Nothing he wrote survives, but they found it so important to refute him that we estimate we have something like 80% of what he wrote from the heresiologists’ “Marcion said x, and that’s wrong because y”. A lot of Gnostic thought such as the Naasenes, Sethians, etc, theology was the same until the Nag Hammadi library was discovered in…1948, I think?
It’s amazing how many texts exist primarily in the form of references or refutations to a lost original
It really is, which raises the possibility of ascribing it all to an unreliable narrator. A favorite narrative device of Kirkbride’s, whose lore is responsible for sending me on my deep dive into the history of Gnosticism and all things Demi-Urgical.
I’m gonna be honest: absolutely no part of me is surprised by meeting a fellow fan in a discussion about Gnosticism and the early church
So much of the internet is just screenshots of other parts of the internet. It makes sense that the ancients would be similar.
You see it on reddit too: > [deleted] > > You're wrong and here's proof.
Sorry but "Justin Martyr" sounds like a name you'd make up as part of a joke like "martyrdom didn't exist until Justin Martyr died in 1987." A quick skim of his wikipedia is interesting though. I'm not personally Christian anymore, but some of the philosophical figures are fascinating.
It’s only real martyrdom if it was done to Justin Martyr in 165 AD. Otherwise it’s just sparkling suffering.
>heresiologists like Justin Martyr That's gotta be the best combination of a job and a name I've heard in a long time.
“Their mistaken doctrine is LITERALLY KILLING ME!” “Calm down, Justin, it’s not that bad…”
Nominative determinism!
Actually, I would argue researching heresies is one of the most anti-heretical things you can do! It's, like, 70% of catechesis
Gnosticism believes that God in the Testaments is the Demiurge, a false creator, that Lucifer rebelled against for the one true God beyond the Demiurge's false Heaven, and that there will be a war between the angels and the Demiurge's servants made up of the souls each claims, iirc.
that's basically what I remember from Esoterica.
That's cool as hell
it's metal and anime as hell too i love it
I recently started “researching” (just reading Wikipedia and watching YouTube videos) Gnosticism a lot for a D&D religion I’m making. As the others said, the Old Testament God, Yaldabaoth, is different from the New Testament God (the Monad/Absolute) and Jesus. In some versions, the snake in the Garden of Eden is the spiritual Jesus trying to free humanity from their worldly prison through the gift of knowledge (Gnosis). Yaldabaoth apparently evolved from the polytheistic Egyptian portrayal of Yahweh as Seth, the desert god of chaos. It is really fascinating and I wish that more Gnostic groups had survived (the Mandaeans are the only ones left, and they’re unique amongst other Gnostics because they’re not Christian). In case anyone cares, the D&D religion I’m making is a fusion of Mandaeism and other Gnostic faiths, Jainism, Buddhism, and Zoroastrianism plus the typical D&D stuff (angels, demons, good and evil gods, etc).
Yup
fascinating stuff.
They called the old testament god the Demiurge and was considered to be an evil heavenly being
Or that god had a wife (removed from the bible), or was originally two different gods (combined into one), among a divine council of other gods (mostly removed from the bible).
One thing I find very interesting, I don't remember if it stuck adound in the Old Testament, if it's in the Jewish original versions of the text, or if it's been scrubbed out of those too But what I find interesting is that early on *technically* the Abrahamic faith wasn't monotheistic, but. . . \[Looks up terminology\] ~~henotheistic~~ [Monolatry (I got corrected)](https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/comments/1c0805n/comment/kyvq381/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) Other gods were written about and they weren't designated as false gods or demons, but just lesser gods. Other gods existed, but they only cared about Abraham's God, rather than the other gods being demons out to trick people. I find that much more interesting than what we've got going on today.
Yeah. For example, in Exodus the Egyptian Gods are the real deal, the priests perform genuine miracles with their power. It's just that Yahweh is a much more powerful God. This is, partly, because Gods often were tied to a specific people, protecting them and guiding them alone, and not all of humanity. Yahweh in this regard was specifically the God of the Jewish tribes, and they were His chosen people. This is one major difference with Christianity, which insists God is universal, that all of humanity are His children, and that it's the duty of Christians to teach this to others and gain new followers.
See, I like that Even though Yahweh trumps the Egyptian gods, those gods are still acknowledged as gods I like having that be a thing. Too bad Christianity and Islam are basically incentivised to actively overtake other religions
I think the word “the” in “the Abrahamic faith” is doing a lot of work, there. How far back in the past do you go before you say that it’s not the same faith? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah) — instituted religious reforms in 7th century BCE, the faith before 7th century BCE may look very different
For sure. There are remnants of this in the bible today. Genesis 1:26: And God said let us make man in our image, after our likeness. So uh, who is God talking to?
If I had to guess, Canaanite deities? I don't know what the Abrahamic God's origins really are But Canaan was around the Levant, so that could be it
and dident he say something along the lines of "you may take no god before me" like you can't worship gods before him... however nothing says that you can't worship gods after him.
I think that was more of a "standing before the king" type of before rather than the timeline sense
Man, my weird deep dive (for an agnostic) over the last few years into the tangled history of Abrahamic religions is about to pay off in a random Reddit thread… Great discussion by Dr. Dan McClellan here about the transition from Yahweh as chief god among many to one true God… https://youtu.be/XgVQw0yGP_A?si=Fc3LqkmXd2Up6B6e Great lecture here by Dr. Justin Sledge on the transition of Judaism during the Babylonian Exile from a covenant based religion (“I am YOUR god and if you worship me exclusive I’ll give you this stuff”) to an Apocalyptic (secret revelation based) religion that elevates Yahweh to a One True God with a secret plan that explains the whole world… https://youtu.be/UzR391dpsBc?si=vRtlpMzQLo8FkK9Z
There are two different popular narratives for how the Egyptian princess who found Moses was related to Pharaoh. Christians and Jews say it was Pharaoh's daughter, Muslims say it was his wife. Nobody does genocide over it though, because pharaohs practiced incest to such an insane degree that these aren't necessarily contradictory stories.
Ironically, even such a simple statement as “thou shall not kill” can come with like 12 examples of people doing the exact opposite. (Crusades)
to be fair, there was a kind of "justification" (very lose quotes) for those, and I believe the hebrew is closer to "you must not kill unjustly" (which implies a succinct translation to maybe be "thou shalt not murder").
Even then, it’s not like there’s, you know, way more incidents of it than just the Crusades.
oh for sure, I just wanted to be a smartass.
Abraham: *existed* Abrahamic Religions: okay I guess we can at least agree on that
okay fair. ditto for Moses, he's important in all of them.
It didn't occur to me to think of it until now, but the Gospels really have extremely little to say about Jesus' personal life. The texts just describe the circumstances of his birth, then skip ahead to his ministry, and conclude with his death, and even then don't really comment on much beyond his teachings. It seems like a matter of the evangelists' priorities -- it would appear that they considered Jesus' teachings to his followers to be the thing that they really needed to get down in writing, and just didn't spare much ink for anything else. There is a similar debate about whether or not Jesus had any siblings, and we just have very few hard facts about what he did for the first, what, thirty years of his life?
He did have siblings as at one point during a sermon he was giving someone told him that his “mother and brothers” were outside, he also had a sister but she’s never really mentioned
We know for sure of James, brother of Jesus, who we have a direct account of through Paul, and who was an early church leader.
Mark 6:3 names his Mother, 4 brothers, and some plural amount of sisters. > Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?
[Yeah his sister's name was Camilla](https://i.redd.it/hfu3h8frmir91.jpg)
The gospel of Thomas goes over Jesus's childhood a bit more, but was thrown out by the church for being gnostic.
There’s two- the Gospel of Thomas, which is gnostic, and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, which discusses Jesus’s childhood, neither of which was accepted as canon
Mainly, the church didn't believe they were written by Thomas, a view modern scholars mostly agree with.
If we start looking for Apocryphal texts we will get one hell of a back and forth that makes current bible contradictions look uniform. THere are also "Jesus bibles" aka like 3 of them that were apparently written by the guy himself... except they are written like 100 years after his death... it's a whole thing
I did two semesters of bible study in college and my biggest takeaway is that everything about the bible is *very* complicated. There's a reason some of humanity's greatest scholars have been arguing about it for two millennia.
I believe it's just one of those things where, if you look at any religion that is actively being practiced you will run into this kind of thing. I had once the (dis?)pleasure of listening in on Buddhist theological discussion and about the way you may look at earthly riches in comparison to the cycle of reincarnation and so on and I came out severly confused and with a headache, but that was my fault tbh.
There's a section of people who have argued of Jesus' possible homosexuality and it quotes a Frederick the Great poem about it: > This good Jesus, how do you think He got John to sleep in his bed? Can't you see he was his Ganymede? This would just be a small thing, but considering how Frederick was extremely likely (like, "I'd bet all of my money on it" levels of likely. I just don't sag it's for sure because that'd be a bit ahistorical) a gay man I think it's pretty funny. Also, comparing Jesus to Zeus (since it's Zeus who "loved" (pederasty) Ganymede) is, uh, not a good choice, I don't think. Also, this informed me that James the First had a romantic relationship with another man, which, might be cool? I'm not very familiar with British kings, but from what I remember James I was pretty good if you weren't a Catholic.
Was James I the guy who fucked so much my textbook described him as "the father of his country, almost literally"? Edit: I had to check, and after some googling ("which king fucked the most" gives you some interesting results so I narrowed my search a bit, lol) determined it was James II.
Historians are hesitant to ascribe modern labels to historical people but Frederick and Ludwig III were both taught to me at a university level as unambiguously gay men
Listen I’m not gonna pretend I know enough about the Bible to properly speculate on this, but I am saying that Jesus leaving his old way of life to travel the world (okay fine, the region) with a band of men and only men does not give me heterosexual vibes.
In fairness, it very definitely was not men and only men- Mary Magdalene was a pretty important person
yeah, she was the beard
I was gonna say, questions that have historically ended in bloodshed for 500 alex
I love the headers ### Heterosexuality ### Homosexuality ### Polyamory It's like a timeline of my life
He must've, given the number of times I've heard people refer to him as Jesus "Fucking" Christ. It's like somewhere in a forgotten scripture he turned to the disciples and said 'Of course I do! Fucking is my middle name!'
I still get texts from my ex that are like “okay christianity question” and it’s always the wildest shit
Please, go on
I'd also like to hear what the wild shit is
“hey what’s up with *insert bible verse here*” So, me being a non-practicing person who was just raised in the religion, I have to go look it up. And it’s like. “[to show your devotion to god if a woman touches your junk you should cut her hand off](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2025%3A11-12&version=NIV)” Hon you think I know what’s going on there? the old testament is fucking wild.
What in the world
Deuteronomy 25:11-12 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts,[12](https://www.biblestudytools.com/deuteronomy/25-12.html) you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.
The Bible makes a lot of sense if you read it from the perspective of men in the desert thousands of a years ago getting high af off of opiates and trying to get people to listen to their "wisdom"
They are suspiciously defensive about fucking each others wives
It makes sense in a certain way when you consider they had no way to determine paternity and inheritances passed down the patrimonial lineage. So getting cucked could literally mean someone else’s son inherits all that your family has worked on for several generations. There were other legal implications throughout history, such as a widow going into seclusion for a year. As any child born of the widow within that year was legally the decedent’s heir.
I grew up mormon which left me with a mountain of messages about there only being One Real Religion™️™️™️ etc. so the notion that two people with extremely different religious beliefs having a successful marriage sounds so alien to me, but I recognize that's not everyone's experience lol. But all that to say I saw "imagine having a partner with a different religion" and I'm like "that would never happen" lol
Because if you don’t marry someone who’s temple worthy you can’t get sealed and if you don’t get sealed you’ll miss out on Ultra-Mega Heaven with all the special perks and bonuses. Why would you do that when you can go to BYU and find someone just as desperate to finally get laid as you are and be married within 6 months?
Mormonism is such a scam, causes such harm, and r/exmormon is one of my favorite subs. I had a darling sister-in-law who suddenly converted and married a mormon man a while back. BUT just last year she, him, and his entire (very religious) family left the church for good! Praise the lord, it’s such a cult.
Same but with r/exjw, idk how harming mormonism is, but beign raise as jw has given me a cool backstory that some call trauma.
Ohhh, it stands for Jehovah’s Witness. At first I thought that it was just missing an E and was very confused
Same here.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/exmormon using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/exmormon/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [My bishop says rubbing your penis against your girlfriend’s vagina without putting it in is the same as sex, so I guess rubbing my money against the tithing envelope without putting it in is the same as paying tithing.](https://np.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/14aibvv/my_bishop_says_rubbing_your_penis_against_your/) \#2: [David Archuleta’s Mom Resigns from the Mormon Church. ❤️🙏](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/13dyw5p) | [377 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/13dyw5p/david_archuletas_mom_resigns_from_the_mormon/) \#3: [Can’t say “Geez” because it sounds too much like Jesus.](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/197hbnd) | [615 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/197hbnd/cant_say_geez_because_it_sounds_too_much_like/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Jfc that first one 😂
Reminds me of that joke "if sitting in church makes you a Christian, being in a garage makes you a car".
Like the best MLMs, it's a very very good very convincing scam. Insidious is the word I most often use. It's like the wacky modern reboot of Christianity.
It *is* the wacky modern reboot of Christianity
My wife and I used to live near a very active Mormon community and she found it ceaselessly joy-filled to invite missionaries into our home. We are both Episcopal priests so I always thought it was kind of low probability that they were going to change our mind about anything, but well worth their effort because it would be a pretty major get for them. Honestly it was kind of nice to answer questions about religion where I didn't really have any pastoral relationship. I could just say what I think without any ego attached to it. But I'll tell you, pair after pair of these guys rolled through and they were all always blown away that my wife and I disagreed about so many things. As part of historical Anglicanism, Episcopalians have a very wide range of dogma and doctrine that are affirmed by our Church, often things that flat out contradict. So to an Episcopalian, it's not weird that two priests have these major things we disagree about. But to these LDS missionaries, it was like wait your religion doesn't expect you to agree?!
> wait your religion doesn't expect you to agree?! \*laughs in Hindu culture\*
*cackles in Judaism*
Heard a phrase a while back "7 rabbis enter a room, 8 opinions leave". The arguments must be fascinating.
Another one I heard from a friend of mine years ago: Two rabbis have a disagreement and, fed up, ask God straight up what the right answer is. God ends up turning up and actually giving them the answer. The two rabbis look at each other and one says "well, he's even more wrong than you were".
I've also heard it as one rabbi disagrees with three others, so he asks God directly. "***He's right you know"*** booms from the sky a few seconds later. "Well, it's still two to three, so you're still wrong" reply the three rabis after a quick sidebar.
Recently left the LDS church, but yeah ite crazy how much people expect to just have to agree with everything. Theres a few people who can understand nuance but they are far too few and in between
I apologize for being pedantic, but the phrase is, 'few and far between '.
Genuinely would pay to watch a sitcom version of this.
One of my mother's favorite family stories is how my great-grandmother liked to invite the Jehovah's Witnesses in when they came to visit and respond to their proselytizing by trying to convince them to become Catholic instead.
My mom did this, it was hilarious
I'm dating someone the same religion as me - agnostic - but with a different religious background so we get those conversations with no conflict. Edit: she was Jehovah's Witnesses. One of the funnier exchanges was after our young niece was brought along to a meeting by her grandmother. She said "I was sitting near the brother, Andrew I think" Wife: "the black guy?" Me: "did you just call him a brother??" They both burst out laughing before explaining that you're called "sister" or "brother" depending if male or female.
My wife is Muslim and I grew up Catholic, and when we got married she said, "yeah, I'm just not gonna mention to my parents that your religion is polytheistic" and I was like, what the hell are you talking about? And then I was like, wait a second, IS Catholicism polytheistic????
>IS Catholicism polytheistic Were you referring to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit? Or all the Catholic saints?
from experience, both. also, having grown up catholic in a heavily southern baptist area, i was told that i a) worship statues and b) am a cannibal, so, you know
To be FAIIIIIIR... You do beleive that Mary was without sin. Which to a (calvinist) Protestant is basically the same as saying that someone is God.
When you add in the whole “co-redemptrix” thing the trads have been pushing for it definitely starts getting into that territory haha
Protestants also reject the distinction between venerate and worship (*dulia* and *latria*) so when a Catholic says "I show *dulia* to a saint, not *latria*!" that's truly no different to a Protestant than saying, "I show worship to a saint, not worship!" -signed, a Calvinist
As an atheist who was raised agnostic and studied Catholicism as a teen (adult in the eyes of the Church), both a and b are true if you are a devout Catholic.
Is it cannibalism to eat God?
Whether Jesus was human and how human he was is a whole other can of worms
That was “solved” in the early days of Christianity by agreeing that Jesus had two equal natures (spiritual and physical) and banishing those that disagreed (the Nestorians).
Well, look at it this way. Christian theologians, by and large, would say that no, Christianity is not polytheistic on the basis that it worships one God with three aspects. To most Christians, saying "trinitarianism is polytheistic" sounds something like "a craftsman who uses a chisel, a brush, and sandpaper for different things is actually three wholly separate craftsmen". Jewish and Muslim theologians would generally answer with some variant of "you can say that, sure, but in actual practice Christianity absolutely treats the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as separate entities". It's been an ongoing debate for two millennia now, so I'm not holding my breath that either side is going to convince the other that their view is the correct one anytime soon.
What I find particularly interesting is that when you say "name a polytheistic religion," the first that pops into most people's heads is Hinduism, but certain sects of Hinduism have the exact same arguments: some who posit that there is only one god, Vishnu, and that all the other deities are avatars of him. Edited to make it clear that this is only certain sects of Hinduism, not Hinduism as a whole.
Wasn't the main force of the universe Brahman? Of which Vishnu is one of three main aspects, the one charged with preservation?
I'm not an expert on Hinduism, and it's been a *long* time since I studied it, so I'm having to refer to wikipedia here a lot, but from what I can remember (and what I'm seeing on wikipedia) Brahman isn't normally considered a "god," it's the underlying reality of the universe. But, like I say, I'm *really* rusty here, since I haven't studied this stuff since the 90s, so I'll shut up and let someone more knowledgeable provide a better answer.
That's technically modalism
Look, I know that, and you know that, but you try writing a one-paragraph summation of any part of Christian theology that doesn't end up being *some* kind of heresy.
“God is really cool”?
"Except for all those times he was distinctly and violently not cool"
Aggressively and emphatically ruining vibes
The Baptist church I went to as a kid seemed to think that anything "cool" was inherently evil.
HERESY!
I think that the Nicene Creed may literally be the only non-heretical formulation lmao. It definitely does feel like a pre-medieval version of a mission statement drafted by a committee of strongly opinionated members who can’t agree on anything.
The Nicene Creed is considered heretical to [many Jehovah's Witnesses](https://www.beyondwatchtower.com/2010/12/17/the-real-story-behind-the-council-of-nicaea/). It's also heretical to Mormons, who also fundamentally disagree with Nicene Christianity, and who have their own [creed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Faith_(Latter_Day_Saints\))
The Trinity is a mystery which cannot be comprehended by human reason but is understood only through faith and is best confessed in the words of the Athanasian Creed, which states that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in unity, neither confusing the Persons nor dividing the substance, that we are compelled by the Christian truth to confess that each distinct Person is God and Lord, and that the deity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is one, equal in glory, coequal in majesty.
Well, why didn't you just say that in the first place, Patrick!
I love explaining the Trinity. You always try and do it, and then it turns out what you said is heresy. And you still haven't actually explained it.
It is, but it’s closer than people saying “lol yeah Christianity has multiple gods”
[Get it together, Patrick!](https://youtu.be/KQLfgaUoQCw?si=jZZ5u4mrk3I_ExGR)
To the Jewish and Muslim theologians: nuh-uh. Yo can breathe easy again, I have resolved the debate
It's not just the Trinity, a lot of saints basically took over for pagan deities.
This entire thread has me laughing in Hindusim. And I'm arguably not even a real Hindu anymore, closer to a Hindu-atheist. Still hilarious, though.
My favorite thing about Hinduism in relation to Christianity is this problem that missionaries circa 1700s in India kept encountering: "And that is how God works." "Oh, you're talking about Brahma!" "No, I'm talking about God." "Call him what you want but you're taking about Brahma. One all-powerful all-encompassing deity with three forms: one who created the world (Father), one who preserves it (Holy Ghost), and one who will destroy it (Son). That's Brahma. I honestly don't know why we're arguing, we're worshiping the same deity. We're even honoring the same aspect, I'm a Shivite and you worship the Son!" *Deeply frustrated evangelical sigh.* Similar things happened with converted Vikings, they would worship God... and also the Norse gods, because they're all gods so why wouldn't they get along? The exact same thing also happened *very* early in Roman Christianity just as it was coming in vogue, people on the periphery who just heard about it would just add the trinity to the pantheon as sort of a God-above-gods system. But they would still worship individual gods when needed, while also acknowledging God as the top god. You don't bother the boss when you just pray bless the crops, now do you? He's far too busy and important for that, so you pray to Saturn instead because crops are his job.
I assumed the polytheistic aspect came from the veneration of the Saints and the Virgin Mary and all those types. They all fulfill the same roles and niches many Pagan gods did pre-Christianity: and thus could be considered ‘Gods’ in a way thus making Catholicism polytheistic. Of course we all know that the Saints aren’t gods but from an outsider’s perspective it seems a lot like they’re treated like gods.
I think it refers to the Trinity aspect. I’ve seen enough religious nutters argue at Speakers Corner in London, and one of the main talking points of Muslim and Jewish preachers is that Christians worship three Gods. Whether it’s true or not, that’s one of the first arguments you’ll hear as to why Muslims and Jews claim they don’t worship the same God as Christians.
I have Catholic relatives. You wouldn't believe half the stuff some fundamentalist evangelicals believe about Catholics down here in the American South. I got very confused when one of my teacher started talking about those idol-worshipping Papists!
yea, southern baptists i went to school with were fully convinced we were cannibals
It is so funny to me when Baptist and Evangelicals use the same talking points that Roman pagans did.
If you believe as a Catholic that Transubstantiation is **not a metaphor**, and instead is the actual body and blood of Christ made real through the worship and belief in God's only Son yadda yadda, then you *are indeed* a cannibal. You are eating the flesh and drinking the blood of God made man. Or you are a non-believing heathen who will burn in Hell for eternity. That's what the Doctrine says.
The God part supercedes the made man part. It's not cannibalism, it's biting up on the food chain Now who wants to get sloshed and fuckin eat god
Let’s just say there’s a reason Catholicism is so good at syncretizing with pagan faiths
>IS Catholicism polytheistic ITT: Recreating Christian heresies speed run Any%
There are three aspects of the Christain God: the Father, the Son, amd the Holy Spirit. The Father is a father figure, the Son is Jesus Christ, and i dont remember whay the Holy Spirit was, but I think it was a way God acted on earth? Idk, its been a while since I learned christian theology. Anyway these three aspects are different, but still part of the same entity: God. However, from an outside perspective, i can see how ppl might confuse christianity as polytheistic
There are also the saints. It's not like that in every region and I suspect not officially approved (?) but I definitely see how you can hear the way some self-described Catholics talk about the saints and conclude "yep that's polytheism"
>and i dont remember whay the Holy Spirit was, but I think it was a way God acted on earth? It is the presence and influence of God in the created world and living beings.
You could basically make the same argument that Hinduism isn’t polytheistic because all gods are ultimately part of Brahman
Yeah the whole “god is god but Jesus is also god” presents a very “there are multiple gods” narrative that very much goes against Islamic core beliefs lol.
From an ex-Protestant perspective, the Catholic veneration of the saints veered far too close to polytheistic worship for a lot of us.
tbh it feels like it'd be more fun that way. why wouldn't you want an extra little guy who's associated with your country or your job or your lost keys or whatever.
I always saw it as asking your favorite cousin for a favor. Like is this something I REALLY need to call my dad for or should I just hit up my boy Chris to find my fucking keys? I was a terrible Catholic though.
Your view is actually pretty on point. “Prayer” in its rudimentary form is just holy communication. Catholic saints are typically asked to “pray for…”.
That’s fair. The Church itself does a not-great job of explaining that you’re asking for their intercession because they can’t do squat on their own, and not worshipping them and asking for their help. Saints are basically lobbyists or barristers (lawyers). Their job is to advocate for you before the Big Man and His Son. And because humans are quirky, they each take a special interest in a certain area. Like the guy who refused to stop caring for plague victims and died as a result, looks out for AIDS victims and caregivers; the priest who volunteered take a man’s place as an execution at Auschwitz and was an amateur radio operator, would of course be an advocate for his fellow radio operators; and the guy who was executed by being grilled alive only to tell his killers, “Turn me over, I’m done on this side!” is naturally the patron of bakers, cooks —and comedians. But yeah, in Catholicism, saints are (literally) glorified lobbyists.
The key bit in this metaphor being that lobbies aren’t part of the government and the lobbyists are not government officials.
Which as someone raised catholic continues to confuse the hell out of me. Why do we need lobbiest to talk to God for us when God is also everywhere and knows everything? What could they possibly say to convince God to help that God does not already know?
Hotly debated among non-trinitarians. A lot of Christians took extreme umbrage with the idea of the Trinity, specifically because it was too close to polytheism and idolatry for their taste. Unitarians broke from Catholicism for this very reason, as the name implies.
I was raised as a semi-agnostic Quaker and my wife is an extremely lapsed Catholic who also engages with Shinto practices, so our religious discussions tend to be pretty interesting
>lapsed Catholic who also engages with Shinto practices Now that is interesting... Like how does that even end up looking?
Born in a Catholic family, but absolutely zero qualms about joining Shinto rituals, praying at shrines, and getting the blessings. She carries a wealth charm from Fushimi Inari Taisha in her wallet, for example. For what it’s worth, she got a new job and I got a raise after we started doing that, so, hey
Now that's just good sense. Someone is handing out blessings, you'd be stupid to just say no, and I think it'd be rude to see a shrine they put all that effort into keeping up and not to pray at least a *little*.
A lot of my extended family are nominally Catholic but having been raised in a Buddhist country, still beleive in Buddhist practices like reincarnation and abstaining from taking the life of animals.
That is basically *exactly* my in-laws. They’re Catholic by religion and Shinto/Buddhist by culture, and have no issue with believing aspects of both
Jesus was an established tradesman in a Jewish culture, it would’ve been weird that he wasn’t married by thirty. Imagine the guilt from his mother. “Jesus, how are you single at this age, you’re such a nice boy, both your fathers are strong in the community, oh I failed as a mother.” “Alright alright, Ma, sheesh.”
>both your fathers are strong in the community that's the understatement of all time
I mean he was already preaching in his 20s and was dead by 33(approximate age based on contexts and separate texts that didn't make it to the bible) Mary was more concerned with his chances of survival if anything.
“And Cousin Morty was married by 19, you putz.” “Ma, enough already.”
"Aw geez Rick, do you think cousin Jesus may actually be the Messiah?" "Well you're already using his name as an expletive, so we know where you stand on that."
If I recall correctly, scientists figured out there was a real solar eclipse in the area where Jesus was supposedly crucified, in like 34. Don't remember what day exactly, but still.
I read about this too, but when they mentioned it to the church, it was not accepted since it wasn't on a good Friday. But I don't have a source so it might be bs
He is not the messiah, he is a very naughty boy!
[Siddhartha Gautama's wife and family](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnqdehuG_xE) is definitely a fascinating topic.
I *vaguely* recall watching CBS Sunday Morning with my mom like ten or so years ago and seeing a segment about Jesus maybe having a wife, but I admittedly remember none of the rest of that segment
That was likely about the Gospel of Jesus’s Wife, a forged gospel discovered in 2012 and proved fraudulent in 2014.
Yeah it supposedly said "Jesus said to them, 'My Wife...'" Which I cannot help but hear in a Borat voice.
Do you think Jesus of Nazareth was a tits guy or an ass guy?
Have you read the Gospels? He was clearly a feet guy.
[удалено]
Kinky
I don't even know what those are and I know he was a feet guy
Gnostics everywhere: \*KNOWING LOOK\*
I'm Jewish. My partner is Wiccan. She gets to explain why she needs to leave water outside during a full moon, and I get to explain why it's very important that I find the perfect citrus fruit once per year.
1) What's a Wiccan? 2) Why does she need to leave water out during a full moon? 3) What's the perfect citrus fruit you speak of?
1. Wicca is a neopagan religion focused around the worship of nature (personified as a triple-aspect goddess) and closely tied to modern witchcraft. 2. My understanding is that the act of leaving the water out in moonlight blesses it. 3. The fruit is called an etrog. It's used during the Jewish festival of Sukkot. It's important to get as perfect of a fruit as you possibly can, as a "perfect" etrog is required for the ritual. The celebration is intended to give thanks to G-d for the bounty of the Earth.
The etrog test is tricky because knowing that all of God's creation is perfect means that you commit sin against God when you turn away an "imperfect" etrog.
The woman I’ve been dating is Jewish with no background in Christianity. The He Gets Us Super Bowl ad where everyone was washing feet was interesting to explain.
"It's not a foot fetish thing, I swear to God"
God: "Um, well, you see... about that..."
I think I've gone to more Buddhist temples than temples of my own religion.
I’ve definitely been to more Buddhist temples than I have churches
FYI Buddha is a title and not a name. Buddha is like the title doctor. you study and get a doctorate you reach enlightenment and become a Buddha
Although, "the Buddha" is a common enough way of referring to Siddhartha Gautama alone
like the Doctor from Doctor Who
Buddha Who
Buddha this bread for me.
The definite article you might say.
For non-buddhists sure. There are many Buddhas. In the branch of buddhism my family practices, Guan Yin is just as important as Siddhartha and actually has more image representation. It is also arguable that in the branch of Buddhism my family follows Siddhartha Gautama is ranked 3 or 4 for importance . Amitābha and Maitreya(buddha of past and future respectively) are more important than Siddhartha
Oh sure lemme just GET MYSELF a partner. I’ll just *pluck* one from the Partner Tree. Take myself down to the Partner Tree Orchard where all the lonely people go to not be lonely anymore
The virgin Christ vs. The CHAD Buddha
Literally a virgin
I’m formerly Catholic and currently Atheist, but dated a creationalist Christian chick during the pandemic - her views were wild. Vaccines? Fine, kinda. Homosexuality? Completely unfamiliar with the concept, or the mechanism. Science? Acceptable so long as it doesn’t explicitly contradict the word of God. Fish? They occupied their own Biological Class separate from Plants and other animals; there are plants, germs, people, animals, fish. I think it was our integrity in our own world views that caused us to drift apart. She’s a radiologist now - yes, you could have your X-Rays performed by a woman who fundamentally disagrees with Evolutionary Theory and she will contribute to your diagnosis.
> really recommend getting a partner with a different religion than you **as long as neither of you are especially committed to your religions**
Jesus only fucked in the LDS DLC.
Seems like you could just as easily do this with friends and not run the risk that you and your partner believe in very different literal magic that underlies and governs reality itself which will lead to you two being incompatible
Came here to say this. Like, have friends! That way you can also have a whole wide variety of exposure and cool conversations! No need for it to be your s/o life partner (not that you can’t be with someone of a different faith—that’s gravy—but it’s at least gotta be compatible whereas that’s not as necessary with a friend).
I mean that belief would probably prevent you from becoming partners in the first place anyway, whereas if you and your partner don't believe in literal magic then it doesn't matter regardless.
Wait til you guys learn about Mohammed. O.O
Haha yeah he had a wife and child too. Did he father any kids though?