Over One Million United Methodists Quit Church Overnight Over Sex Rule Change

a reply to: chr0naut

But have you called out these evil sob's who have done this on purpose yet?

I can assure you whatever you have posted so far is proving to be the opposite of good most of the time. Trolling for the facts would fit you better. But we give you confirmed proof and you get amnesia. Deny ignorance.


I was never ever evil, nor if you met me would you have one reason to think it either.

originally posted by: Justoneman
a reply to: chr0naut
But have you called out these evil sob's who have done this on purpose yet?

Do you think that "calling people out" with plandemecist rubbish on some random social media site actually does something about the situation??

And especially if those allegations are provably false, as I have repeatedly tried to demonstrate with links to hard data and evidence?

The "evil SOB's" are those who bear false witness - who try and ruin lives and reputations in order to 'puff up' their pride. Not to mention that what they are doing to promote vaccine hesitancy will, and has, lead to unnecessary deaths.

That's pride, bearing false witness and murder, all from the comfort of your chair!

I can assure you whatever you have posted so far is proving to be the opposite of good most of the time. Trolling for the facts would fit you better. But we give you confirmed proof and you get amnesia. Deny ignorance.

What confirmed proof have you posted? Certainly none in this thread.

I was never ever evil, nor if you met me would you have one reason to think it either.

If you cannot admit your sin, you cannot truthfully repent of it. If you cannot repent of your sin, you will not be granted forgiveness.

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9

Whoever conceals their sins does not prosper, but the one who confesses and renounces them finds mercy. Proverbs 28:13

Produce fruit in keeping with repentance. Matthew 3:8

The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. 2 Peter 3:9

From that time on Jesus began to preach, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” Matthew 4:17

Come near to God and he will come near to you. Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded. James 4:8

Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent. Revelation 3:19

originally posted by: inflaymes69
I did provide proof if you see my other comments. I could post proof after proof but it does not matter because you all take the modern day bible as proof, even though hit was shortened and twisted by the church to control.

also,
The Ethiopian Bible is considered by some to be the oldest, most complete, and original Bible in the world. It is written in Ge'ez, an extinct Ethiopian language, and is about 800 years older than the King James Version (KJV). The Ethiopian Bible also includes texts that the KJV does not, such as the Books of Enoch, Esdras, Buruch, and Three Books of Maccabee.

a reply to: FlyersFan

The Ethiopian tradition does have some very early Hebrew traditions and practices incorporated into it, but the Ethiopian Bible is definitely post-Christian, from sometime between A.D. 330 to 650 AD.

We have fragments and pages of earlier Christian texts from as early as 70 AD and fragments of the Septuagint translation into Greek from the Hebrew source texts (a version originally written in 285–247 BC) from about 200 AD,

originally posted by: Shoshanna
a reply to: FlyersFan

I feel like the churches and religions have been corrupted by Satan.

The evidence and common sense tells us as much. But it happened longer ago than you might think. And some people have been trying to tell mankind for a while now. But it is difficult to wake people up to it, because they 'have become dull in their hearing' (Heb 5:11) and "the heart of this people has grown unreceptive" (Mt 13:13-15) to this information and "beneficial teaching" (2 Tim 4:3) that was already available and warned for in God's Word, the Bible, i.e. "the sayings of God" (John 8:42-47).

“For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.” (2 Timothy 4:3,4)

(False) Religion is a Snare and a Racket


Not to worry though...
The End of False Religion Is near!

2 Corinthians 4:3-9

If, in fact, the good news we declare is veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination* [Or “light.”] of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through. 5 For we are preaching, not about ourselves, but about Jesus Christ as Lord and ourselves as your slaves for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God is the one who said: “Let the light shine out of darkness,” and he has shone on our hearts to illuminate them with the glorious knowledge of God by the face of Christ.

7 However, we have this treasure in earthen vessels, so that the power beyond what is normal may be God’s and not from us. 8 We are hard-pressed in every way, but not cramped beyond movement; we are perplexed, but not absolutely with no way out;* [Or possibly, “but not left in despair.”] we are persecuted, but not abandoned; we are knocked down, but not destroyed.

John 8:42-47

Jesus said to them: “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I have not come of my own initiative, but that One sent me. 43 Why do you not understand what I am saying? Because you cannot listen to* [Or “accept.”] my word. 44 You are from your father the Devil, and you wish to do the desires of your father. That one was a murderer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks according to his own disposition, because he is a liar and the father of the lie. 45 Because I, on the other hand, tell you the truth, you do not believe me. 46 Who of you convicts me of sin? If I speak truth, why is it that you do not believe me? 47 The one who is from God listens to the sayings of God. This is why you do not listen, because you are not from God.”

Matthew 13:13-15

That is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations; for looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, nor do they get the sense of it. 14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’

originally posted by: Shoshanna
a reply to: FlyersFan

I feel like the churches and religions have been corrupted by Satan.

Coming back to my remark that this happened longer ago than you might think (this comment will be a bit longer than the previous one, cause now I'm getting to some details and the related evidence I spoke of). Keep the term at the end of 2 Timothy 4:3,4 in mind ("false stories" a.k.a. myths, from the Greek, myʹthos).

This article series is what my first thread on ATS was all about, I put that thread in this subforum (I went through all the individual myths used as examples, 1 article or page at a time, so I won't do that again, you can click the links if you want to read the rest):

One Myth Leads to Another

“LOOK out,” wrote the apostle Paul to Christians living in the latter half of the first century C.E. What was he warning against? “Perhaps there may be someone who will carry you off as his prey through the philosophy and empty deception according to the tradition of men.”​—Colossians 2:8.

Despite Paul’s warning, from the middle of the second century C.E., some Christians began using concepts borrowed from ancient philosophers in order to explain their beliefs. Why? They wanted to be accepted by the educated people of the Roman Empire and thus make more converts.

Justin Martyr, one of the most famous of these Christians, believed that God’s Spokesman had manifested himself to Greek philosophers long before the arrival of Jesus. According to Justin and like-minded teachers, the contribution of philosophy and mythology to Christianity made this form of religion truly universal.

Justin Martyr’s form of Christianity became very successful in gaining converts. However, the adoption of one myth led to the creation of others and produced what is now commonly believed to be Christian doctrine. To expose these myths, compare what the following reference works say with what the Bible actually teaches.

Myth 1: The Soul Is Immortal
Myth 2: The Wicked Suffer in Hell

Myth 3: All Good People Go to Heaven
Myth 4: God Is a Trinity
Myth 5: Mary Is the Mother of God
Myth 6: God Approves of the Use of Images and Icons in Worship

Remember, that's just a small sample of myths taught in most Churches or denominations of Christendom. There are many more. And even more if we're talking about false religion/Babylon the Great in general (not sticking to those religions claiming to be Christian or "based on the Bible", as the OP puts it; claiming it doesn't make it so, even when the claim is that it used to be based on the Bible but not anymore now).

“Look out that no one takes you captive by means of the philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ;” “We have much to say about him, and it is difficult to explain, because you have become dull in your hearing. For although by now* [Lit., “in view of the time.”] you should be teachers, you again need someone to teach you from the beginning the elementary things of the sacred pronouncements of God, and you have gone back to needing milk, not solid food. For everyone who continues to feed on milk is unacquainted with the word of righteousness, for he is a young child. But solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their powers of discernment* [Or “their perceptive powers.”] trained to distinguish both right and wrong.” (Col 2:8; Hebrews 5:11-14)

The Apologists​—Christian Defenders or Would-Be Philosophers?

INCEST, child murder, cannibalism​—these were some of the absurd charges leveled against Christians in the second century C.E. This led to such a wave of persecution that professed Christian writers felt obliged to defend their faith. Later known as the apologists, or defenders of their beliefs, these writers set out to prove that their religion was harmless so as to win over the Roman authorities and public opinion.

It was a risky undertaking, for the empire and public opinion were usually appeased only by giving in to them. There was also a real danger of stirring up more persecution or of watering down the Christian faith by unwarranted compromises. Just how did the apologists defend their faith? What arguments did they use? And what were the results of their efforts?

The Apologists and the Roman Empire

The apologists were educated men from the second and early third centuries. The most famous among them were Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian.* Their writings were principally addressed to pagans and the Roman authorities, with the intention of explaining the Christian faith, and included frequent references to the Bible. Above all, the apologists stood up against the persecutors, denied their accusations, and presented the Christians in a favorable light.

One of the apologists’ major concerns was to convince the political authorities that Christians were not enemies of the emperor or the empire. Tertullian said of the emperor that “our God has appointed him,” and Athenagoras defended the hereditary nature of the imperial throne, thus getting involved in the politics of the time. In so doing, they ignored the words of Jesus Christ, who said: “My kingdom is no part of this world.”​—John 18:36.

The apologists also suggested links between Rome and the Christian religion. According to Melito, the two entities formed a pair and contributed to the welfare of the empire. The anonymous writer of The Epistle to Diognetus likened Christians to the soul that was ‘holding the world together.’ And Tertullian wrote that Christians prayed for the prosperity of the empire and for the end of the system of things to be put off until later. As a result, the coming of God’s Kingdom somehow seemed less necessary.​—Matthew 6:9, 10.

“Christianity” Becomes a Philosophy

The philosopher Celsus mockingly described Christians as “labourers, shoemakers, farmers, the most uninformed and clownish of men.” This mockery was too much for the apologists to bear. They determined to win over public opinion by resorting to a new tactic. Once rejected, worldly wisdom was now used in the service of the “Christian” cause. Clement of Alexandria, for example, saw philosophy as “true theology.” Justin, though claiming to reject pagan philosophy, was the first to use philosophical language and concepts to express “Christian” ideas, considering this type of philosophy “to be safe and profitable.”

From this point on, the strategy was, not to oppose philosophy, but to make supposed Christian thought a philosophy higher than that of the pagans. “On some points we teach the same things as the poets and philosophers whom you honour, and on other points are fuller and more divine in our teaching,” wrote Justin. Adorned with its new philosophical finery, “Christian” thought now claimed the dignity of old age. The apologists pointed out that Christian books were far older than those of the Greeks and that the prophets of the Bible lived earlier than Greek philosophers. Certain apologists even concluded that the philosophers copied from the prophets. Plato was made out to be a disciple of Moses!

Christianity Distorted

This new strategy led to a mixture of Christianity and pagan philosophy. Comparisons were made between Greek gods and Bible characters. Jesus was compared to Perseus; and Mary’s conception to that of Perseus’ mother, Danaë, who was said to be also a virgin.

Certain teachings were greatly modified. For example, in the Bible, Jesus is called “the Logos,” meaning God’s “Word,” or Spokesman. (John 1:1-3, 14-18; Revelation 19:11-13) Very early on, this teaching was distorted by Justin, who like a philosopher played on the two possible meanings of the Greek word logos: “word” and “reason.” Christians, he said, received the word in the person of Christ himself. However, logos in the sense of reason is found in every man, including pagans. Thus, he concluded, those who live in harmony with reason are Christians, even those who claimed or were thought to be atheists, like Socrates and others.

Moreover, by forcing the tie between Jesus and the logos of Greek philosophy, which was closely linked with the person of God, the apologists, including Tertullian, embarked on a course that eventually led Christianity to the Trinity dogma.* [For further information on Tertullian’s beliefs, see The Paradox of Tertullian.]

The word “soul” appears over 850 times in the Bible, including more than 100 times in its Greek form. It basically refers to mortal, living creatures, either human or animal. (1 Corinthians 15:45; James 5:20; Revelation 16:3) The apologists, however, twisted this Bible teaching by linking it with Plato’s philosophy that the soul is separate from the body, invisible and immortal. Minucius Felix even asserted that belief in the resurrection had its early beginnings in Pythagoras’ teaching of the transmigration of the soul. How far Greek influence had led them from the teachings of the Bible!

The Wrong Choice

Some apologists sensed the danger that philosophy could pose to the Christian faith. Yet, even though they criticized the philosophers, they still loved the intellectual approach of philosophy. Tatian, for example, denounced the philosophers for accomplishing nothing good but, at the same time, called the Christian religion “our philosophy” and indulged in philosophical speculations. Tertullian on the one hand decried the influence of pagan philosophy on Christian thinking. On the other hand, he stated that he wanted to follow in the steps of “Justin, philosopher and martyr; Miltiades, the sophist of the churches,” and others. Athenagoras called himself “a Christian philosopher of Athens.” As for Clement, it is said that he felt that “philosophy can be judiciously used by the Christian as an aid to wisdom and the defense of the faith.”

Whatever success these apologists might have had in defending their faith, they had nonetheless committed a serious error in their defense. How so? The apostle Paul reminded Christians that among the spiritual weapons at their disposal, none is more potent than “the word of God,” which “is alive and exerts power.” With it, Paul said, “we are overturning reasonings and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God.”​—Hebrews 4:12; 2 Corinthians 10:4, 5; Ephesians 6:17.

On the night before he was killed, Jesus told his disciples: “Take courage! I have conquered the world.” (John 16:33) The trials and tribulations that he experienced in the world had not overcome his faith and his loyalty to his Father. Similarly, the last surviving apostle, John, wrote: “This is the conquest that has conquered the world, our faith.” (1 John 5:4) Although the apologists wanted to defend the Christian faith, they made the wrong choice in adopting the ideas and the approach of worldly philosophy. In so doing, the apologists allowed themselves to be seduced by such philosophies and, in effect, allowed the world to conquer them and their brand of Christianity. So rather than being champions and defenders of true Christian faith, the apologists of the early church, perhaps unwittingly, fell into the trap set by Satan, who “keeps transforming himself into an angel of light.”​—2 Corinthians 11:14.

The clergy and theologians of the churches today have largely followed in the same path. Instead of defending true Christianity by using God’s Word, they often downgrade the Bible and resort to worldly philosophy in their teaching in an effort to win over public opinion and the establishment. Rather than sounding a warning against the dangers of following the unscriptural trends of the world, they have become teachers who do their best to ‘tickle the ears’ of their listeners in order to win adherents. (2 Timothy 4:3) Sadly, as did the early apologists, these teachers have ignored the apostolic warning: “Look out: perhaps there may be someone who will carry you off as his prey through the philosophy and empty deception according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ.” And we are reminded that “their end shall be according to their works.”​—Colossians 2:8; 2 Corinthians 11:15.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: FlyersFan

To me Christianity got perverted by what people wanted it to be and forgot that it was about humility, self awareness, and forgiveness.

I've recently posted an article that made a remark about that very phenomenon (the bolded part). The article was about religious divisions in Christendom, as demonstrated by the over 20,000 different denominations, and counting; a reference work, published in 1982, had projected that by 1985 there would be 22,190, saying: “The present net increase is 270 new denominations each year (5 new ones a week).” I used this article from 1953 as elaboration on a remark I made that in 1970 there were already 188 denominations of Methodists. It said:

...

Some reasons for this division have been petty, others practically ridiculous, few of them Christian. A main cause has been man’s determination to make his religion over to suit him, instead of making himself over to suit God. These attempted “improvements” were long ago foretold: “Men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves,” and, “There will also be false teachers among you. These very ones will quietly bring in destructive sects and will disown even the owner that bought them [Christ].” (Acts 20:29, 30; 2 Pet. 2:1, NW) In evidence that this happened, The Kingdom of God in America says current religion “represents not so much the impact of the gospel upon the New World as the use and adaptation of the gospel by the new society for its own purposes”. Unity of doctrine is gone, and that loss of unity represents a loss of true Christianity.

Religious boundaries have been frequently laid out along the political and economic map. William Warren Sweet in The Story of Religions in America points out that the most important and far-reaching of the schisms in American churches occurred over Negro slavery, and says: “It was not until church members had become wealthy cotton growers, that the churches ceased to denounce the institution. At the adoption of the Constitution all the churches were unanimous in their opposition to slavery; by the opening of the Civil War the churches had become a bulwark of American slavery.” So, with religion not molding the people, but being molded by them; not influencing the world, but being influenced by it, it is little wonder that it has spread out in so many different and conflicting directions.

HISTORY OF DIVISIONS

The first settlers brought with them a great number of religions. There were Anglicans, Puritans, Pilgrims, Scotch Presbyterians, Calvinists, Lutherans, Quakers, Baptists, Methodists, and others. But the pioneer was a rugged individualist, independent and determined to go his own way in religion as well as in politics. He took this already confused stock of religions and severed and split them into myriads of smaller groups. “Denominations such as the Dunkers and Mennonites, which were of European origin, when transplanted to America divided and redivided as they moved westward into the undeveloped frontier,” says Sweet, who describes this frontier religion as “warped though it often was, almost beyond recognition”. The foundations for the new religions were, therefore, based not on sound doctrine but on this warped frontier viewpoint. While getting farther and farther from true worship, the number of sects grew and grew.

Further severing America’s religion was the “Great Awakening” between 1734 and 1790. This was a surge of revivalism that spread from New England down through New Jersey and into the South. The new preachers or “New Lights”, however, were not looked on with favor by the more conservative elements or “Old Lights” who frequently expelled the newer group. These, being vigorously evangelistic, just established their own congregations, some of which grew into new religions. The Unitarians split off from the Congregationalists in this manner. The Presbyterians split temporarily into “New Side” and “Old Side” bodies, and many “Separate” congregations that were formed became Baptist. Shubal Stearns, the founder of one of these, moved to North Carolina, where his evangelism produced the Separate Baptists, now a comparatively small group, whose immediate growth was called “almost unparalleled in Baptist history”.

Slavery, already mentioned, was the third great reason for schisms. It split Methodism wide open in 1844. The great Baptist split was in 1845. The Presbyterian house divided right down the Mason-Dixon line between North and South. Entirely separate religious organizations were established to conform to politics, and when politics can divide the church it has certainly fallen a long way from the separateness from politics taught by Christ and the apostles! The Baptist and Presbyterian divisions remain to this day; the Methodist breach was healed only in 1939. Frank S. Mead in his Handbook of Denominations says this split “concerned neither doctrine nor polity; it was purely political and social”. The real effort was not to follow God’s Word, but to support the political views of the members, to ‘adapt the gospel to their own purposes’. [whereislogic: i.e. and to use your way of phrasing it, they (the clergy) turned it into what they (the members) wanted it to be. Or to use your words directly, it "got perverted by what people wanted it to be", according to their "political views" as it says here in the article. A Bible text that I frequently use, 2 Tim 4:3,4 also quoted in my first comment here, uses the phrase "according to their desires", i.e. according to what they wanted.]

Differently, the Episcopalians did not divide; they just went out and shot each other. Bishop Polk was a Southern general, and according to Mead’s See These Banners Go, “Bishop McIlvaine of Ohio and fighting Bishop Polk of Louisiana prayed for each other by name in their chancels, every Sabbath day.” They just “separated for the moment, as two travelers might separate to walk around a mud puddle in their road and join again when the obstacle was passed”.

THE ROAD BROADENS

Not only did this sectional conflict also divide these same religions into white and colored, developing new denominations for Negroes, but national divisions severed other groups. Though the early Christian congregation was to make no division between Jew or Greek, slave or free, and James said class distinctions were a sin, the Eastern Orthodox churches within the United States are divided into Albanian, Bulgarian, Greek, Roumanian, Russian, Serbian, Syrian and Ukrainian groups. The Lutherans are divided into Danish, Finnish, Norwegian and other sections. “The churches of America,” says H. Richard Niebuhr, “no less than those of Europe, have often been more subject to the influence of provincial or class environment than to the persuasions of a common gospel.”—1 Cor. 12:13; Jas. 2:1-9.

[whereislogic: and because you brought it up when you brought up the Churches of Christ...]

The fourth and fifth major causes of division were the phenomenal antimission movements that swept the frontier in the early nineteenth century, and the use of instrumental music. Antimissionism developed from the frontier objections to sending money back East to pay for the missionaries, and from the frontier preachers’ jealousy over the eloquent, better-trained new arrivals. The movement swept the whole of the frontier, particularly through Kentucky and Tennessee, and so struck the Baptists that at least three groups of “Hard-Shell” or “Antimission” Baptists still remain.

This, along with debate over that particularly noisy instrument, the organ, disrupted the Disciples of Christ so violently that a fourth of their members split off to form the “Churches of Christ”. The antiorgan argument said: “No element of public worship is legitimate which is not explicitly authorized in the New Testament. Instrumental music is not so authorized. Therefore it is not legitimate.” The extent to which this was carried was shown by Lard’s Quarterly (1864), which said: “Let every preacher resolve never to enter a meetinghouse of our brethren in which an organ stands. Let no one who takes a letter from one church ever unite with another using an organ. Rather let him live out of a church than go into such a den. Let all who oppose the organ withdraw from the church if one is brought in.” (Italics his) Today a million people think God is vitally concerned over whether any musical accompaniment helps the singers stay on key. Of course, they have no objections to other modern innovations not mentioned in the Scriptures: the radio, songbooks, stained-glass windows, etc.; but they justify this by saying these are not elements of worship as they think a sounded note somehow is. However, instrumental music seems approved in the so-called “New Testament”.—Rev. 5:8; 15:2.

The desire of particular men to lead their group was another major cause of religious divisions. Such jurisdictional divisions are well exemplified by the Mormons. When their founder, Joseph Smith, died, the largest group, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, followed Brigham Young to Utah where they built Salt Lake City. A second group, the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, was led by Joseph Smith’s sons. A third formed the Church of Christ (Temple Lot); a fourth, the Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonites), followed Sidney Rigdon; a fifth, the Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerites), followed Alpheus Cutler, one of the original seven elders of Mormonism; and the sixth group, the Church of Jesus Christ (Strangites), followed James J. Strang, who claimed he had written credentials from Joseph Smith.

STILL MORE DIVISIONS

Others followed quirks of their own ideas to further confuse the picture. The “two seed” theory of the Two—Seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian Baptists (one of the antimission groups) is that back in Eden God put a good seed in man; Satan, the evil one. Babies, they think, are born with one seed or the other, so missionary work is useless; a man with the bad seed is helpless and one with the good will come to the church anyway. At last report (eight years ago) their numbers had dropped to a mere 200. Their doctrine is based on a misinterpretation of Genesis 3:15 about the seed of the woman.

Then, as one writer commented: “In any large city unheard-of sects can be located, frequently consisting of only one or two churches. A dissatisfied preacher finds it easy to lead off a group and start a new denomination of his own. . . . Most of the little groups have no history save a church quarrel, and few of them possess any distinctive doctrines or practices.” It has been estimated that there may be as many as 3,000 of these independent groups.

Away back in 1890 a little book, Short History of the Church in the United States, truthfully said: “The multiplication of ecclesiastical organizations has been one of the characteristics of American religious life.” Some like to call them the “many mansions” in the Father’s house, perverting John 14:2, which refers to heavenly blessings. In most minds today a shamefully hazy blending occurs to where divergence of doctrine and difference of belief are passed over, put aside with the view that they are all different roads going to the same place. But they are not. While propounding their own theories they cannot be gathering with Christ. He called the tradition-following religious leaders of his day who did not hold to right doctrine while claiming divine authority for their acts hypocrites, blind guides, fools, serpents, viperous offspring doomed to destruction. (Matt. 12:30; 23:1-39) Those seeking life and truth must get off these broad paths, dust off their Bibles and learn from that thousand pages the difference between all this hodgepodge of self-contradicting doctrines and the true inspired Word given by Jehovah God. But for a discussion of this and of its importance we must refer you to our following article, “The Narrow Way Leads to Life.”

Source: The Broad Road of Religious Divisions (1953)

a reply to: CriticalStinker

The mention of a "broad road" and at the end, "the narrow way", in the article in my previous comment is based on Matthew 7:13,14 (something Jesus said):

“Go in through the narrow gate, because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are going in through it; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are finding it.”

Over 2 billion people in this world call themselves Christian. If Jesus is to be believed above, most of them are on the wrong (spiritual) path/road. The one that leads to their destruction (death, at which point they will cease to exist and not go to some mythological place of eternal conscious torture as many of these self-professed 'Christians' have been taught and believe, see myth 2 from my previous commentary and the video for details).

Proverbs 14:12

12 There is a way that seems right to a man,

But in the end it leads to death.

The Bible says: “The living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:5; Psalm 146:4) Therefore, when we die, we cease to exist. The dead can’t think, act, or feel anything.

What crime, however horrible, could cause a God of love to torture a person endlessly? (1 John 4:8)

The fiendish concepts associated with a hell of torment slander God and originate with the chief slanderer of God (the Devil, which name means “Slanderer”), the one whom Jesus Christ called “the father of the lie.”—John 8:44.

Further details:

Hell (easoning From the Scriptures)

Which addresses subjects such as:

Does the Bible indicate whether the dead experience pain?
...
Does the Bible indicate that the soul survives the death of the body?
...
Why is there confusion as to what the Bible says about hell?
...

Is there eternal punishment for the wicked?
...
What is the meaning of the ‘eternal torment’ referred to in Revelation?
...
What is the ‘fiery Gehenna’ to which Jesus referred?
...
What does the Bible say the penalty for sin is?

Rom. 6:23: “The wages sin pays is death.”

After one’s death, is he still subject to further punishment for his sins?

Rom. 6:7: “He who has died has been acquitted from his sin.”

Is eternal torment of the wicked compatible with God’s personality?
...

By what Jesus said about the rich man and Lazarus, did Jesus teach torment of the wicked after death?
...

What is the origin of the teaching of hellfire?
...

Regarding the parable or illustration concerning the rich man and Lazarus I also know a video that explains it rather well:

Coming back to the Methodist Church in particular, what is happening now is "nothing new under the sun" (Eccl. 1:9). And also not limited to the Methodist Church alone.

Watching the World (Awake!—1983)

Churches Warm to Homosexuals

● The United Methodist Church’s Judicial Council for the United States recently ruled: “We find no provision [in Church law] making same-sex orientation a disqualification for ordination.” The council said that individual ordinations of Methodist ministers must be decided at the Church’s annual regional conferences. Evidently the Bible is not considered to be part of Church law.

The Minnesota Council of Churches, representing almost half the state’s Church members, has urged member churches to welcome homosexuals. A unanimously approved statement declares: “Creative and whole expressions of one’s sexuality may be found in relationships between men and women, between men and men and between women and women.”

What is probably the first conference for Catholic lesbians in the history of the Church was held in Bangor, Pennsylvania. “Mercy Sister Theresa Kane, the conference’s keynote speaker and president of the 4,500-member organization of the Sisters of Mercy of the Union, spoke to 110 women,” said the National Catholic Reporter. Karen Doherty, the meeting organizer, exulted: “The conference was revolutionary in that women were saying, ‘we are lesbian and we are also Catholic’​—and there’s no separation anymore.”

“The highest court of the United Methodist Church has ruled that an avowed homosexual . . . may remain as pastor of the Washington Square Church in New York City.”​—The New York “Times,” November 3, 1979

Insight on the News (1979)

“Spirit of the Age”

● After three years’ work the Methodists in England have produced a report on sex by their Division of Social Responsibility and its Faith and Order Committee. The report urges the British Methodist Church to change its attitude toward homosexuality. The study considers “stable permanent relationships” a suitable way of homosexuality. This view would regard “homosexual relationships as not being intrinsically wrong.” The conclusions of this study were said to be based on “the Bible, reason, the traditional teaching of the church, the personal and corporate experience of modern Christians, the understanding provided by the human sciences and what may be called the ‘spirit of the age.’”

The Bible the basis for such conclusions? Hardly! The Bible makes clear God’s view of homosexuality. (Rom. 1:24-27; 1 Cor. 6:9-11; Lev. 18:22) The truth is that the basis for such conclusions is really, as even they call it, the “spirit of the age,” or, as the Bible terms it, “the spirit of the world,” which is the invisible force activating human society in its pursuits, or in its style of life.​—1 Cor. 2:12; Eph. 2:2.

Watching the World (Awake!—1974)

Religion’s “Gay Crusade”

◆ The National Federation of (Catholic) Priests’ Councils recently urged the repeal of civil laws that make “homosexual acts between [consenting] adults” a crime. Their resolution on this also asks that special effort be made in assisting homosexuals “to find employment in the church consistent with their abilities and desires.” Meanwhile, the United Methodist Council on Youth Ministry declares that homosexuality should “not be a bar to the ministry.” The Bible disagrees.​—1 Cor. 6:9, 10.

Where Does Your Church Stand on Homosexuality? (1973)

Do you know for sure? Have you asked your minister?

TREMENDOUS changes have been going on in the churches, including changes in their views on homosexuality. The Christian Century, December 15, 1971, notes:

“More and more ‘mainline’ denominations are now prepared to welcome homosexuals to membership and participation in their life, both in England and in the United States.”

So you see, the questions asked here are appropriate ones. Do you really know where your church stands on homosexuality?

The apparent success of churches established especially for homosexuals has had a lot to do with the ‘mainline’ churches changing their attitude toward homosexuality. The first homosexual church was organized in 1968, but now there are reportedly 43 homosexual congregations in 19 states and London, with an international membership of 15,000! Also, there is the homosexual synagogue Beth Chayim Chadashim in California, and Rabbi Erwin Herman says that its “chances are excellent” for membership in the Union of American Hebrew Congregations.

Of course, it is still true that if certain ‘mainline’ churches learn that their minister is a homosexual, they may remove him. But such action is counter to the trend. No longer, for example, is it the policy at Union Theological Seminary to dismiss known homosexuals studying for the ministry. In fact, in June 1972 the two-million-member United Church of Christ ordained an openly declared homosexual minister. In the voting, 27 clergymen favored the ordination, 13 opposed.

With the changes in view, some religious leaders are now openly declaring their homosexuality. One wrote in The Christian Century, September 27, 1972:

“I hold the highest degree one can earn in religion; I have taught at the university level for almost 20 years; and I am an ordained minister. . . . I prefer the company of men​—in bed and out.”

Are you disgusted by this? If we love God and his inspired Word we will be, for the Bible says: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Also, instead of treating homosexuals as Christians, the apostle Paul declared: “Do not be deceived; neither the immoral . . . nor homosexuals . . . will inherit the kingdom of God.” They could become Christians only after abandoning immoral ways.​—Lev. 18:22; 1 Cor. 6:9, 10, Revised Standard Version.

Despite these plain Scriptural statements, many churches are welcoming practicing homosexuals. In fact, the Washington Daily News reported: “An increasing number of clergy (both homosexual and heterosexual) are officiating at ‘marriages’ of both male and female homosexuals.” As an example, the Boston Globe, April 8, 1973, observed:

“Two Boston men who met while studying for the United Methodist ministry were ‘married’ yesterday in the denomination’s Old West Church . . . The homosexual wedding ceremony . . . was performed by Rev. William E. Alperts, pastor.”

“However,” you may say, “my church would never approve such things.” But are you sure? Did you know that many leaders of the Episcopal, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Catholic, Methodist, Baptist and other religious bodies do approve of homosexuality?

EPISCOPAL Bishop J. Brooke Mosley, president of Union Theological Seminary in New York city, recently said:

I firmly believe that a homosexually oriented person can be a sound and faithful Christian; and what’s more, that he or she can be a dedicated Christian minister​—and some of them already are.”

In 1970 the 182nd General Assembly of the UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH published and recommended for study a report that states:

“The ethical reflections and personal attitudes of the Christian community should be such that homosexual persons will not be made to feel that their sexual preference is in irresolvable conflict with their membership in the Christian fellowship.”

Also in 1970, in its Fifth Biennial Convention, the LUTHERAN CHURCH IN AMERICA approved this statement on homosexuality:

“Persons who engage in homosexual behavior are sinners only as are all other persons​—alienated from God and neighbor. . . . It is essential to see such persons as entitled to understanding and justice in church and community.”

ROMAN CATHOLIC priest Henry Fehren, writing in the September 1972 U.S. Catholic, which magazine was “published with ecclesiastical approval,” said:

“If God does not abhor, but rather loves, the homosexual with the nature he was created with we can do no less. And this means that we must accept the homosexual as he is. . . .
“Homosexual love can be as noble, beautiful and holy as heterosexual love.”

W. Paul Jones, professor at Saint Paul School of Theology METHODIST, Kansas City, Missouri, wrote in Pastor Psychology, December 1970:

“We conclude that . . . profound relation between two members of the same sex is not only morally permissible but is to be sought, encouraged, supported, and enabled with all the powers at our command. There is no substitute for such relation, and of it the homosexual must not be denied.”

And in Review and Expositor, Spring 1971, a journal published by the faculty of the SOUTHERN BAPTIST Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky, Professor John H. Boyle said:

“The roots of the sin lie not in the homosexual act itself. . . .
“If the Church is true to her calling she must declare boldly that homosexuals are persons, made in the image of God, for whom Christ died, and that by God’s grace they who were no people are God’s people, for once they had not received mercy but now they have received mercy.”

Yes, eminent religious leaders of the ‘mainline’ churches do approve of homosexuality. They have rejected the Bible. As Episcopal Bishop Brooke Mosley said: “Our understanding of Christian morality has advanced far beyond the Old Testament laws . . . and the St. Paul edicts.” If the leaders of the ‘mainline’ churches say such things, can you really be sure that your minister does not feel similarly? Why not ask him?

You can call it catering to the market, 'tickling their ears' as per 2 Timothy 4:3,4.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: CriticalStinker

One of the things about church is that it's a place to confess your sins, ask forgiveness of your sins, not celebrate them.

2 cents.

It's a good "place" to get fleeced. ('good' as in effective)

It's "a snare and a racket" (note what's mentioned after 2:47 regarding why it's a racket, which is just one example):

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: CriticalStinker

In what context. To be a member? Or to be an elder or elected official. I’ve been to many a church you could attend and volunteer with. Becoming elected to a positions requires certain conditions. And rightly so.

From the examples from the 70's and early 80's in my previous commentary it seems those conditions are somewhat open to interpretation and molded by this world* (or this system of things, the people of this world, human society), or "the spirit of the age" as the report by the Methodists in England in the example from 1979 puts it. (*: as the article about religious divisions in my first response to CriticalStinker puts it, see 3rd bolded part.)

What does the Bible say about it?

“And stop being molded by this system of things,* [ Or “this age.”] but be transformed by making your mind over, so that you may prove to yourselves the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.” (Romans 12:2)

“Furthermore, God made you alive, though you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you at one time walked according to the system of things* [Or “the course; the ways; the customs.”] of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience.” (Eph 2:1,2)

I.e. "the spirit of the age", "the spirit of the world" (1 Cor 2:12), the impelling force that influences human society, causing such people to say and do things according to a characteristic pattern. Although people act on individual preferences, those who manifest the spirit of the world give evidence of certain basic attitudes, ways of doing things, and aims in life that are common to the present system of things of which Satan is ruler and god. (John 12:31; 2 Cor 4:4)

Spirit of the World (Reasoning From the Scriptures)

...

What are some of the characteristics of the spirit of the world against which we need to be on guard?

1 Cor. 2:12: “Now we received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is from God, that we might know the things that have been kindly given us by God.” (If the spirit of the world takes root in a person’s thinking and desires, its fruitage is soon seen in actions that manifest that spirit. So, breaking free from the spirit of the world requires not only avoiding unchristian activities and excesses but also getting to the root of the matter by cultivating attitudes that reflect God’s spirit and genuine love for his ways. This you should keep in mind as you consider the following manifestations of the spirit of the world.)

Doing what a person wants to do, without regard for the will of God

...

Reacting to situations on the basis of pride

... [whereislogic: isn't it LGBTQ Pride Month now? There is also Black Pride, White Pride, Latino Pride, Asian Pride (racial pride). And there is national pride (and the accompanying nationalism and its cousin patriotism). Ever heard of 'divide and conquer'? It's the favorite tactic of "the ruler of this world" and "god of this system of things" "who is misleading the entire inhabited earth" (John 12:31;2Cor 4:4;Rev 12:9).]

Manifesting a rebellious attitude toward authority

...

Giving free rein to the desires of the fallen flesh

...

Allowing one’s life to be dominated by the desire to possess what one sees

...

Showing off one’s possessions and supposed attainments

...

Giving vent to one’s emotions in abusive speech and violent acts

... [whereislogic: there's a thread right now in this subforum that provides a rather clear demonstration of "abusive speech". And the nature of most of it is to incite hatred and "violent acts" against the target of said abusive speech. Of course, this true motive, is well-concealed, see Proverbs 26:20-28 quoted at the end of page 7 in that thread. "And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps disguising himself as an angel of light. It is therefore nothing extraordinary if his ministers also keep disguising themselves as ministers of righteousness. But their end will be according to their works." (2 Cor 11:14,15) The thread title is an obvious one, well to me it is at least, kinda hoping it is for others as well, cause I don't actually recommend reading the abusive, slanderous and rotten speech there, commentary that is not "good for building up as the need may be, to impart what is beneficial to the hearers." (Eph 4:29, also quoted in its context there)]

Basing one’s hopes and fears on what humans are able to do

...

Giving to humans and things the worshipful honor that belongs to God

...

This video also speaks about "the spirit of the world":

a reply to: whereislogic

I wouldn't recommend going to church then.

originally posted by: malte86
a reply to: Nickn4

Its about 5 %. That would be about 16 million people. They should have a voice. And who are "we"?

They have a voice though, both literally and figuratively. Their figurative voice is actually quite loud in the entertainment industry, politics and education. They even have their own special pride month which many other minority groups do not have (not that promoting pride is a good idea, most people are familiar with the saying "pride comes before the fall", which is actually a proverb from the Bible book of Proverbs; inordinate pride tends to make people arrogant, haughty and headstrong, which causes them not to be open to any agreement, and often leads to hatred and even violence, either physical or mental/spiritual, entire witch hunts have been started by those propagandists playing on people's pride, as well as people's fear and hatred of someone for being different or having different opinions from what is most promoted or propagandized as being the more 'acceptable' or 'socially/politically correct' opinion; see 2 Tim 3:1-5).

Does (almost) everything in entertainment need to be saturated with pro-LGBTQ propaganda at the cost of an entertaining story though (often also leading to discrimination in casting and writing choices and what many people in rightwing politics refer to as "cancel culture", which is a very real phenomenon, the evidence for which keeps on accumulating*)? That's a little over the top. (*: it is easy for actors to become social pariahs in the entertainment industry for not getting with the program, villified by their colleagues and the hiring studios, that's not a very loving or forgiving attitude is it? Some people in this thread were talking a lot about being judgemental, I've seen quite a bit of judgemental attitudes and behaviours from those who do this on a regular basis or are OK with it happening to someone, even making fun of it if the targeted individual speaks up about it, they start entire witch hunts against some actors or actresses. Gina Carano is probably the most familiar name for these modern day witch hunts.)

2 Timothy 3:1-5

But know this, that in the last days critical times hard to deal with will be here. 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, haughty, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, disloyal, 3 having no natural affection, not open to any agreement, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, without love of goodness, 4 betrayers, headstrong, puffed up with pride, lovers of pleasures rather than lovers of God, 5 having an appearance of godliness but proving false to its power; and from these turn away.

The Manipulation of Information (Awake!—2000)

... This communications revolution has led to information overload, as people are inundated by countless messages from every quarter. Many respond to this pressure by absorbing messages more quickly and accepting them without questioning or analyzing them.

The cunning propagandist loves such shortcuts—especially those that short-circuit rational thought. Propaganda encourages this by agitating the emotions, by exploiting insecurities, by capitalizing on the ambiguity of language, and by bending rules of logic. As history bears out, such tactics can prove all too effective.

...

Playing on the Emotions

Even though feelings might be irrelevant when it comes to factual claims or the logic of an argument, they play a crucial role in persuasion. Emotional appeals are fabricated by practiced publicists, who play on feelings as skillfully as a virtuoso plays the piano.

For example, fear is an emotion that can becloud judgment. And, as in the case of envy, fear can be played upon. ...

Hatred is a strong emotion exploited by propagandists. Loaded language is particularly effective in triggering it. There seems to be a nearly endless supply of nasty words that promote and exploit hatred toward particular racial, ethnic, or religious groups.

Some propagandists play on pride. ...