Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here


    + friends - friends
    4,386,463 link karma
    419,617 comment karma
    send message redditor for

    [–] When Churches Are Superspreaders: Trump wants an immediate return to in-person worship. His own supporters have the most to lose. wonderingsocrates 1 points ago in Christianity


    Trump wants to stir up his supporters against Democratic governors and public-health officials, even if it means exposing churchgoers to the risk of infection. That risk, as a number of international and domestic episodes indicate, is serious.


    This is why the new guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control for religious communities recommend that they “consider suspending or at least decreasing use of a choir/musical ensembles and congregant singing, chanting, or reciting during services or other programming, if appropriate within the faith tradition. The act of singing may contribute to transmission of Covid-19, possibly through emission of aerosols.”

    CDC also recommends that religious groups “consider temporarily limiting the sharing of frequently touched objects that cannot be easily cleaned between persons, such as worship aids, prayer rugs, prayer books, hymnals, religious texts and other bulletins, books, shared cups, or other items received, passed or shared among congregants as part of services.”


    Perhaps even more surprising, 49 percent of other weekly churchgoers also believe Trump has been anointed by God, according to Djupe and Burge’s 2020 survey. The proportion of Americans who believe God has chosen Trump to be president varies directly with how often they go to church and, among Republicans, how often they hear clergy say that Trump is the anointed one. Djupe and Burge contend that this “phenomenon … is sweeping American religion” and cite a widely circulated internet meme showing Trump’s hand being guided by Jesus.


    In that context, the defiance of public-health limits by conservative religious leaders could have devastating consequences for their congregations. Conservative attitudes toward opioid addition miraculously changed as its prevalence shifted. The same might happen in connection with COVID-19 later this year—but too late for those already infected.


    [–] There's Only One Reason Trump and the GOP Don't Want Mail-in Voting: Vote-by-mail makes voting easier. And when voting is easier, Republicans have a much harder time suppressing the vote. wonderingsocrates 1 points ago * (lasted edited an hour ago) in politics


    The effect, of course, is to discourage voters from showing up or staying in line, particularly those people who are paid by the hour and have to take time off work to vote.


    With mail-in voting there is no long drive, bus ride, or wait in line, so Republicans can’t rig things to make it harder for people to vote. That particular voting suppression trick—which conservatives have been running for over a century, particularly in the South—just doesn’t work with mail-in voting.


    certainly helps explain why he doesn't like the usmail system. also, dr donnie -'the absolute fool'- now even threatening social media's twitter on his voting tweets since they are now fact checking him.

    [–] Trump asks reporter to remove mask, saying he's being 'politically correct' wonderingsocrates 60 points ago in politics

    After an event about seniors with diabetes, where President Trump announced a deal to cut out-of-pocket expenses for insulin, he tells a reporter who won't remove his mask he is trying to be "politically correct."

    • there's really no telling what this 'fool' will do or say next.

    [–] Trump says the grieving widower who demanded his conspiracy theory tweets be deleted actually wants someone to 'get to the bottom' of his wife Lori Klausutis' death of natural causes wonderingsocrates 15 points ago in politics

    In a Tuesday afternoon press conference about expanding access to insulin for seniors with diabetes during the COVID-19, President Donald Trump doubled down on promoting a false conspiracy theory that former congressman Joe Scarborough was involved in the death of a former staffer, even as the staffer's widower begs him to stop.


    yep. biden's is definitely right: trump is a fool - but many of us have been saying that for years!

    [–] “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter. wonderingsocrates 1 points ago * (lasted edited 15 hours ago) in Christianity

    First, i find it to be a metaphor of temporary exclusion, like the sealed doors of wedding feasts -matt 22. both metaphors are not to be understood literally. jesus used parables, metaphors, hyperboles and figurative language to illustrate his teachings, as most agree on that.

    yet, i've often wondered why so many Christians can understand scripture being full of metaphorical color when literally, from chapter to chapter as jesus teaches the jewish people, but then fail to comprehend his future plans for humanity by a person, called out by god himself, as to why jesus came.

    of course, i'm thinking of paul. paul wrote one third of the new testament. i think, along with many church fathers and important theologians, paul expands on what jesus was metaphorically saying, to the jews of his time. so, in the context of matt 7 what does paul say? let's begin with romans 5:

    18 Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all. 19 For just as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. 20 But law came in, with the result that the trespass multiplied; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, just as sin exercised dominion in death, so grace might also exercise dominion through justification[f] leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

    or 1 cor 15:

    12 Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised; 14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our proclamation has been in vain and your faith has been in vain. 15 We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified of God that he raised Christ—whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised. 17 If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have died[e] in Christ have perished. 19 If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

    or 1 tim 2:

    First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for everyone, 2 for kings and all who are in high positions, so that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and dignity. 3 This is right and is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For

    there is one God;
    there is also one mediator between God and humankind,
    Christ Jesus, himself human, 6  who gave himself a ransom for all
    • that's a lot of 'all's

    i find that to be quite easily understood as literal expression of the salvation of all people. and we know that's how paul writes too, literally, for the most part. perhaps one might say the 3 pieces above (which i could multiply, moreover) are better understood as an exaggeration; if so, but then, why not say this is an exaggeration:

    Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter.

    therefore, i think it's best, once we understand the rhetorical devices of jesus and paul and their missions, as we acknowledge what they are saying this this is the right way to balance things out.

    [–] Why Study/Learn Historical Theology wonderingsocrates 3 points ago in Christianity

    roger e. olson:


    Many Christians seem intent on reinventing Christianity as if nothing of any value happened between the New Testament times and today. A great deal of time and effort is wasted on reinventing Christianity. What studying historical theology can do is help us realize the need to rediscover Christianity rather than reinvent it. Of course that does not mean nothing can be new, but the new should not be novel; it should be informed by what has gone before, taking that into account and building on it. Reinventing Christianity runs the real risk of tearing up the roots and creating something so different from real Christianity that it is a different religion. God has not been absent for two thousand years. Our modern and contemporary churches and forms of discipleship have much to learn from church fathers and reformers such as Irenaeus, Origen, Athanasius, Augustine and Jan Hus and Luther and Calvin and Wesley and Karl Barth—just to name a few of the members of that “great cloud of witnesses” that make up the Great Tradition of Christianity.

    Studying historical theology is, for the Christian, like studying your family tree, your own family roots. It can reveal much about yourself. When I teach church history I require my students to investigate their own religious family tree—going back as far as they can. I require them to trace their historical-theological influences back through their parents, aunts and uncles, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc. Then they create a written family tree and an essay explaining it. They always tell me how practical that assignment was for them.


    Studying historical theology is somewhat like studying your own ancestors, only it is studying your spiritual ancestors. Among mine I found a woman named Phoebe Palmer who lived in New York in the middle of the nineteenth century and who led massive Bible studies about the Holy Spirit. She was one of the first modern Christians to emphasize the “second blessing” of the infilling of the Holy Spirit and the Holiness-Pentecostal movements owe much to her even if they have largely forgotten her.

    There are so many advantages, for Christians, of studying historical theology and church history that I could go on talking about them for a very long time, but I hope I have said enough to whet your appetite for it.

    [–] Priest: Mr. President, we don't need to open churches to practice our faith wonderingsocrates 1 points ago * (lasted edited a day ago) in Christianity

    first, my arg is not a language puzzle, nor jump 'hoops' -- i've countered your socalled bad faith w/ counter examples, citing cnn has an 'interest' in presenting truthful catholic news in premises 1-3: you did not even question my premise 1 on bad faith. also, citing just 4 articles on socalled cnn anti-catholicism does not prove cnn 'has no interest in what the priest said.'

    second, the priest is not silent - he has an argument. he's not saying, i'm a priest, do as i say; if he were: that's the fallacy. but he's not. he's presenting an a 12 paragraph arg., which you haven't addressed. in your way of thinking of the fallacy, every time beck writes or speaks for cnn, cnn is 'appealing to an authority' -- that's not how it works! beck, is saying, i'm a priest, i have an argument why trump is wrong, check out my arg. for years beck has been on fox, msnbc and cnn making arguments.

    third, if you are a news skeptic, in my experience, it's really pointless to continue this discussion, as you have no/little trust in the mainstream news system, calling it 'entertainment media'. regarding bias, i was presenting/defining a 'soft' form of bias, we bring with us from our education, culture, language and so on when one does the news or is writing a column, or even talking with a friend. as i see it, bias is everywhere and we will always have it. that's what being human is; to not have bias is to be perfect, as we have a bias to ourselves. your form of bias appears to be like an ideological 'brainwashing' as most news only has 'entertainment value' and its presentation is void of truth. so, given that, you can't respect the new york times, wpost, and of course, beck, as he's a tool for cnn, and cnn is a corporate propaganda machine. i think to label all mainstream media as 'entertainment' and 'non mainstream' that has 'no bias at all' is a faulty dilemma as well as wishful thinking.

    [–] Priest: Mr. President, we don't need to open churches to practice our faith wonderingsocrates 1 points ago * (lasted edited 2 days ago) in Christianity

    on bad faith: cnn has a bias, it's a cable news station, and like all corporate cable news, or even mass media, there is a bias (wpost, or nytimes, wsjournal, and washington times, etc.), usually rooted in a financial and/or ideological/power interests. therefore, what does one do in this case to avoid propaganda? i suggest using one's reason and experience, and intuition.

    first, cnn employs fr. fred beck - the author of this faith piece and has for many years - as a news commentator. chris cuomo and carol costello are also catholic; i'm confident there are more catholics from the dozen's of news providers at cnn. so, one can assume cnn has 'an interest.'

    second, if we conclude a news network 'has no interest in what' jones and smith say, since they are pawns, have we now made news an reductio ad absurdum, an appeal to extremes? does fox have 'no interest' with their pro-choice tomi lahren, or their guests and contributors that disagree on climate change, universal health care, supreme court nominees or decisions to reopen or not? if we take this extreme approach, we are reduced to news skepticism.

    third, much of cnn's anti-catholicism, as i understand it, comes from their coverage of the sex abuse scandal. which i find in the large accurate, setting aside bill donohue. should this alarm us to an extent whereby we say what a priest says about a 'reopening' is void? no, there is no relationship.

    therefore, cnn has 'an interest' and it's not in bad faith.

    on appeal to authority: i didn't say the priest's argument was sound, did i? nope. i said:

    [...] it's about whether or not the priest's conclusion is correct

    also, note my noun, 'priest's' - it's possessive; meaning involving another, and in this case, involving a 'conclusion'. and where does a conclusion come from? the argument's premises. i have only appealed to an argument.

    • therefore i have not used your 2 mentioned fallacies.

    [–] As Trump Pushes for Reopenings, Congregations Choose Safety Over Haste wonderingsocrates 3 points ago in Christianity

    Ephesians 5:15 Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, 16 making the most of the time, because the days are evil. 17 Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.

    i say go to the new testament whenever you can. going to genesis is too allegorical and fraught w difficulties of interpretation

    [–] Priest: Mr. President, we don't need to open churches to practice our faith wonderingsocrates 11 points ago in Christianity

    red herring fallacy

    the arg is not about cnn, it's about whether or not the priest's conclusion is correct

    [–] Netflix just added a stinging documentary about the prosperity gospel wonderingsocrates 3 points ago in Christianity

    it also exposes trump and his association with the pg:

    While I cannot recommend American Gospel enthusiastically enough, there are a couple of small caveats worth mentioning. First, early on in the film, they take two brief swipes at President Trump for epitomizing the so-called American gospel. While not without warrant (since Trump famously claimed he had nothing to seek God’s forgiveness for), if you’ve got some big-time Trump supporters in your church, you’ll probably have some interesting conversations. [...]

    [–] Trump Goes to Golf Club, Not Church, After Demanding Houses of Worship Open wonderingsocrates 5 points ago * (lasted edited 3 days ago) in Christianity

    Behind Trump’s demand to reopen churches: Slipping poll numbers and alarm inside his campaign

    edit: more here:

    “The governors need to do the right thing and allow these very important essential places of faith to open right now,” Trump said in a statement on Friday. “If they don’t do it I will override the governors.”

    [–] Trump Goes to Golf Club, Not Church, After Demanding Houses of Worship Open wonderingsocrates 3 points ago * (lasted edited 3 days ago) in Christianity

    President Donald Trump headed to his Virginia golf club once again Sunday morning, according to a Wall Street Journal reporter, just days after he made a brief press statement demanding that houses of worship be opened “right now for this weekend” during the coronavirus pandemic. Trump said Friday afternoon he would override governors if they didn’t follow his lead, adding that “in America we need more prayer, not less.” [...]

    Trump’s return visit to the Trump National Golf Club in Virginia was his second of the holiday weekend. As of late Sunday morning, the nation’s death toll from the coronavirus was over 97,000, according to Johns Hopkins University. “Cases, numbers and deaths are going down all over the Country!” Trump tweeted Sunday.

    so as 24 states still have an uncontrolled virus increase and we now approach 100,000 killed, we must conclude golf is more essential than church, prayer and honoring the dead.