Thread: What happened to Christianity?

So as the fellow gentlemen here know, I am not a christian. Coming from Saudi, everyone is pretty much the same religion, with some small variations between the sects; but that is about it.

However, it seems like although Islam is heading in the direction of more liberalisation and therefore becoming more gynocentric; I thought it be interesting to discuss christianity and where it is going.

How do the fellow members feel about the christian church and all its' denominations? Why have most denominations become so gynocentric including the more traditional ones like Orthodox Church and Catholic Church?

Is Christianity inherently gynocentric? Or do you think the liberals broke christianity?

And more specifically, why has christianity become so cheap? No disrespect, but it seems anyone can now call themselves a Christian and they have never picked up the bible or gone to church.

The Western/Roman Catholic church was pozzed/progged with 'Liberation Theology' back in the 1960s. That said, the rot really started with the papal encyclical 'Rerum Novarum' of 1891; here, the Church took it upon itself to assume a political stance.

The 'Mainline' Protestants (Lutherans, Episcopalians, Baptists, Methodists etc) followed the Romans after WW2.

I'm not religious - I think it's a philosophy for those who don't want the effort of making up their own minds - but I can see that meaningful rituals, solemnity and fear of the Creator would make for the best in terms of civilizational stability.

Originally Posted by Opaque

Is Christianity inherently gynocentric? Or do you think the liberals broke christianity?

As far as I can see they're a match made in ... erm.

Both espouse kindness and tolerance while totally fucking you over. (ex Catholic here)

Originally Posted by Jackoff

As far as I can see they're a match made in ... erm.

Both espouse kindness and tolerance while totally fucking you over. (ex Catholic here)

Catholics push Jesus into the background in favor of Mary. I would say Catholics are gynocentric.

What happened to Christianity?

Why, nothing. It's you.

Why have most denominations become so gynocentric including the more traditional ones like Orthodox Church and Catholic Church?

How far back was it different? Describe what it was before that made you see this change you notice, and when that was. What are the comparisons you are making between then and now?

Is Christianity inherently gynocentric?

Hmm. This fundamental question suggests to me that you have no firm knowledge to make sturdy your above comparisons. Maybe you should have started with this question?

it seems anyone can now call themselves a Christian and they have never picked up the bible or gone to church.

Only now you notice? When has that never been the case? Perhaps you are young in age? This is not a fault of liberals. This is human nature. It may depend where you live. How many people say they are this or are that but have only the lightest exposure to whatever they are claiming? Most of us are scholars of nothing much.

Full disclosure: I am a born-again Christian.

All'zz I can say about religion is beware of sheep skinned wolves! Or else some day you'll be catching a ride on a comet or drinking some Kool-Aid!

My relationship with the almighty is one on one, I don't look for human mediators or hypocritical mentors, I'm also a christian, I see truths where other's are deceived.

Originally Posted by MGTOWFOREVER

Catholics push Jesus into the background in favor of Mary. I would say Catholics are gynocentric.

I would refute this. Yes there are many icons of Mary and she is considered a very important figure, but there is little mention of her really. There is more spoke of the saints, and mostly male saints, of which there are also many icons.

She does get mentioned in the Catholic service, but primarily to intercede with her son Jesus on behalf of the congregation. In fact she is asked to "pray for us sinners" putting her squarely below Jesus in any meaningful way.

Most of what is heard or said about Mary comes from outside the formal teachings of Catholocism, mostly pushed by nuns and the movie industry. That being said, many Catholic girls-only schools have a number of nuns teaching them and who knows what's being said there.

Edit: I'll try to ask around about the effect of nuns on education, but due to the current lockdown this may take some time.

The Western/Roman Catholic church was pozzed/progged with 'Liberation Theology' back in the 1960s. That said, the rot really started with the papal encyclical 'Rerum Novarum' of 1891; here, the Church took it upon itself to assume a political stance.

I have also researched this. Liberation theology was praised by socialists and figures like Noam Chomsky hailed it as one of the best contributions of religious intimations; and the Catholic Church in particular.

Many traditional catholics see liberation theology as a "Trojan horse" and well, the same can be said of the new mass, with all manner of changes from Latin to English and where the priest becomes the central point of focus as opposed to Jesus on the cross.

How aware do you think the average catholic is, of the changes to the Latin Mass, and do you think it bothers them much?

@ Unboxxed.

How far back was it different? Describe what it was before that made you see this change you notice, and when that was. What are the comparisons you are making between then and now?

Mainly, what propelled my question was the changes we are seeing in the more traditional churches. This new pope Francis says that "I cannot be the judge of people" and he has made several suggestions to change actual traditions that have been untouched for hundreds if not thousands of years, the Tridentine Mass (Traditional Latin Mass) being one of them.

As for the mainline protestant denominations, I have never heard any preacher talk down to a woman for divorcing her husband, and I have never heard any preacher mention that a woman must submit to her husband - it says so in the bible. Ephesians 5:22 -33 "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord"

Hmm. This fundamental question suggests to me that you have no firm knowledge to make sturdy your above comparisons. Maybe you should have started with this question?

I'll admit, this was a badly word post.

As for starting with this question... I do not think Christianity is inherently gynocentric, and the reason is because it is the only Abrahamic religion that allows a man to refuse marriage. (maybe it is to do with the fact the Christianity has a history of monasticism, which Judaism and Islam don't - there is Kabbalah and Sufism, but this is nowhere near developed to the extent Franciscan or Dominican orders)

In Islam, a married man's prayer is worth twice that of an unmarried man. He gets brownie points for simply being married.

I have also researched this. Liberation theology was praised by socialists and figures like Noam Chomsky hailed it as one of the best contributions of religious intimations; and the Catholic Church in particular.

Liberation theology? First I’ve heard of it but that’s hardly surprising as I denounced all organised religion at a very young age (maybe about 16 years of age).

From Wikipedia:

Liberation theology is a synthesis of Christian theology and socio-economic analyses, based on far-left politics, particularly Marxism, that emphasizes "social concern for the poor and political liberation for oppressed peoples."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology

Sounds about right. This would seem to be intrinsic to Catholicism, and indeed all Abrahamic religions. My reasoning being the Book of Exodus – “Let my people go!” but even without this reason dictates that it would be a good way to appeal to the masses (population, not services). Maybe religion is even the source of socialism for all I know rather than religion having been affected by it.

How aware do you think the average catholic is, of the changes to the Latin Mass, and do you think it bothers them much?

Assuming here you mean changes to the Latin mass and not the change from Latin to spoken languages I can only speak of what I see here in Ireland.

I’m in my fifties and cannot recall ever having been to a Latin mass, although it is possible as a very young child as I can recall my mother lamenting its passing (well, more like giving off about it as was her wont). When I was a child she would often attend the Latin service that was held only once per week and only in the Cathedral, not in the local parishes.

So, to answer your questions: While some maybe aware that changes have been made to the Latin mass even most of them would be unaware of any specifics. As for the average Joe or Jane I doubt they even give it a second’s thought.

But this, of course, depends on what exactly you mean by “the average Catholic”. As you say many (most from what I can see) claim to be Catholic but rarely attend service and have never read the Bible. They attend certain rituals like baptisms, confirmations and funerals and that’s about it. They know next to nothing about the religion they claim membership of and unless the topic is brought up in conversation they rarely even think about it.

That being said I wouldn’t want to tar everyone with the same brush, there are many for whom their religion is a major part of their lives, but these are becoming rarer every day and are often seen by the majority as a little, ah, let me be careful here, eccentric?


As for it being gynocentric, it is the one major Christian religion that has tried to resist. Take women Catholic priests for example. While a few now do exist they have been excommunicated by the Vatican and are widely seen by Catholics as an abomination, except for the feminists of course.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_...c_Womenpriests

But the world is changing, God knows (pun intended) how long it can hold out. Not much longer I think.

@OP. What has happened to Christianity? The better question is what has happened to US? We in the church tolerate infidelity, divorce, abortion, throw away children, animal cruelty, poverty, homelessness, rampant crime, homosexuality and transgenderism. We absolve ourselves of any type of civic duty, tolerate anti-intellectualism, BLM and Antifa to name a few. God must weep over this stuff. None of this is what HE intended for us. We are broken and morally bankrupt. God have mercy on our souls.

Originally Posted by Mrkoolkat5249

@OP. What has happened to Christianity? The better question is what has happened to US? We in the church tolerate infidelity, divorce, abortion, throw away children, animal cruelty, poverty, homelessness, rampant crime, homosexuality and transgenderism. We absolve ourselves of any type of civic duty, tolerate anti-intellectualism, BLM and Antifa to name a few. God must weep over this stuff. None of this is what HE intended for us. We are broken and morally bankrupt. God have mercy on our souls.

There's so much wrong about this post, it's hard to conceptualize.

Church is in the person, not the organization, we separate ourselves individually and walk a path of one.

You like me and others know this by our recognition of evil and deception, therefore we leave that gathering of wolves in light of what we know to be pure and clean. I take no responsibility or accountability in a foul church just as much in a foul state, we are in the world but not of this world, we walk a path of abstinence and isolation but not spiritual desolation as others do looking for church in some sort of gathering and intellectual melting pot.

God likes his people spicy, sweet, salty and different from one another, as different as our personalities, I'm most certain mob mentality and blind followers are bitter to his liking.

When you see sin and corruption in a minister, preacher, or whatever, you're looking at a wolf in sheep's skin. God gives us wisdom and understanding as long as we walk with him and him alone. The road to hell is paved in masses, the road to heaven is solitary.

Originally Posted by Opaque

So as the fellow gentlemen here know, I am not a christian. Coming from Saudi, everyone is pretty much the same religion, with some small variations between the sects; but that is about it.

However, it seems like although Islam is heading in the direction of more liberalisation and therefore becoming more gynocentric; I thought it be interesting to discuss christianity and where it is going.

How do the fellow members feel about the christian church and all its' denominations? Why have most denominations become so gynocentric including the more traditional ones like Orthodox Church and Catholic Church?

Is Christianity inherently gynocentric? Or do you think the liberals broke christianity?

And more specifically, why has christianity become so cheap? No disrespect, but it seems anyone can now call themselves a Christian and they have never picked up the bible or gone to church.

Divorce in America started taking off in the Eighties. Yes, it happened before. But it was relatively less common.

During the Eighties, many Greatest Generation types were still pastors and leaders of various Christian congregations. They didn't hesitate to raise the alarms about the rise of divorce, "latchkey kids", single mom households, etc. Considering how many single moms were in the pews, offending them hurt the congregation's bottom line.

Starting in the Nineties, when Silent Generation and Boomers began taking over leadership roles, many Christian congregations have simply put the onus on men. "Men need to step up", "Men need to care for the widows and orphans and YES, THE DIVORCEES", etc. Basically, these Christian "leaders" did the calculus and realized that men were less likely to leave a congregation over being blamed for the divorce crisis than women were.

Plus, the other reason to appeal to women is because they normally had custody of the children. If you wanted the "family" to stick around the congregation, you needed to appeal to women. If ten single men leave a congregation, you might not even notice. But if ten single moms leave, yeah, you'll definitely notice that.

I mean, yes, liberal theology definitely hurt Christianity. There's just no getting around that.

But the destruction of the family unit did far more to hurt Christians' collective influence in the US than all the bad/liberal theology in the world.

If one sees marriage and family as the cure-all for society's problems, there are reasons for optimism.

Devout Millennials and Zoomers have been trending toward trad forms of the Christian faith for about fifteen years now. What we're talking about is VERY theologically conservative men who are serious about the faith. In particular, traditional Christianity such as Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and so forth are VERY attractive to them. These types of Catholics lean toward traditional Catholicism, the Latin Mass, all that stuff.

When I was attending Latin Mass in 2018, I noticed that the age range was clustered around 22-38 (Millennials at that time) and 75+ (Silent Generation at that time). Boomers and Gen X were largely absent from the traditional Latin Mass. Since then, the median age skews lower and lower all the time. You'll see married Millennials with children disproportionately represented in nearly every single Latin Mass.

If you know where to look on Reddit, you'll see them building communities with each other, making and sharing memes and constructing their own Internet culture in ways that Millennials and Gen Z understand and relate to. They're beginning to exert considerable influence in how trad Catholicism is expressed online. I'm far from the only one noticing it. As a Millennial myself, I've taken part in this stuff quite a lot.

Still, while I see no harm with devout Millennials and Zoomers going to Mass, the fact is that religious devotion, Church affiliation, stable marriages and growing families won't magically reverse the damage done to society these past several decades.

I'm simply saying that the Christian community in America has been heavily winnowed in the past 20+ years. And what's left will ultimately be the most devout members. The quantity will be vastly reduced. But the quality will be through the roof.

And finally, traditional Christianity like Catholicism is attracting cohorts that the Protestant world would give ANYTHING to have in their membership rolls. The future of Christianity in the US is looking rather traditional and conservative. These younger Christians look like they've just a won a tremendous victory with the likely overturning of Roe v Wade. That energy could translate into advocating other things that might actually benefit society and improve our situation.

Christianity was never a European thing anyway. The Christians had to alter their religion heavily to get the Pagan Europeans on board. That's why you see odd things like Easter Bunnies and Christmas trees among other things they are throwbacks to Pagan traditions and beliefs.

The major thing that happened to Western civilization was World War II. You just can't send off so many young men to war and put women in factories etc and expect that when it's all over they will just settle back down to how things used to be done. We are seeing similar with the aftermath of CoVid now, people want more, they want different.

Europeans have always questioned things as well. What does Christianity and the Church do for us exactly? How does a virgin get pregnant? Why does God sacrifice his only son? And if he does that to his only son, what hope do the rest of us have?

It doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

What does Christianity and the Church do for us exactly?

Do for you? As a Christian, I don't understand the question. It's not, um, a subscription service. It's there for you to practice your belief in Jesus and God. You have to put into it.

How does a virgin get pregnant?

The answer is in the Bible and I bet you know something of it, yes? Otherwise, I can only think that you are asking this as a question to really make a statement that you won't go for what the Bible says on this.

Why does God sacrifice his only son?

We all deserve to die for our sins, in the sense of separation from God, according to the Bible. However, God has this thing where He accepted substitute offerings. You can see some of that in the OT. So, He accepted his own Son to symbolically die in our place, through physical death as we know. That is a very generous clause, if you will, in His requirement that all of us must atone for our sins. You can say that God loves us so much that He even did a work-around for His own demand that we each atone. I am, ha, eternally grateful that Jesus died for my sins. That's why you see Christians make such a big deal out of this and of the Resurrection and the cross as a symbol. It's major. It's huge.

And if he does that to his only son, what hope do the rest of us have?

Eternal salvation (no separation from God).

It doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

Not the way you're currently looking at it, I would agree.

Originally Posted by Kryptic

Christianity was never a European thing anyway.

Um, yeah it was. "Christendom" was basically a euphemism for Europe. For centuries, I might add.

Originally Posted by Kryptic

The Christians had to alter their religion heavily to get the Pagan Europeans on board. That's why you see odd things like Easter Bunnies and Christmas trees among other things they are throwbacks to Pagan traditions and beliefs.

The absolute state of public education. In brief, this simply isn't true. The Easter bunny (and similar cultural observances) are not inherently tied up with the Christian faith. This is a matter of non-controversial historical fact. The fact that things can (and do) coexist alongside Easter/Resurrection Day IN THE WEST (curious, isn't it, how critics never seem to acknowledge Christian religious practice in the East?) doesn't tell us much of anything aside from the fact that certain meaningless ancient semi-pagan customs survive to this day.

Why does God sacrifice his only son?

You might enjoy this 2005 movie:

The Perfect Stranger

The Perfect Stranger tells the story of Nikki, a troubled attorney who one day receives a mysterious dinner invitation from a man claiming to be Jesus of Nazareth.

I've seen episodes from the TV series but only just now saw this full-length movie that preceded it.

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

The answer is in the Bible ...

Indeed it is. If one reads the Gospels – I mean you can get through reading them in a single session – Is Christ not reported as repeatedly saying “I am the son of man”?

Now you may interpret this as claiming to be the son of all mankind, but I think he repeated this phrase often because he was pissed off at being hailed as some kind of immaculate conception and was trying to tell people: “Look, I’m an ordinary person. A human male sired me just like each and every one of you!”

My interpretation is that Christ knew the truth, spoke the truth, and people came along afterwards and tried to mangle his words into meaning whatever they wanted them to mean.

Christianity got woke and went broke.

Originally Posted by Jackoff

Indeed it is. If one reads the Gospels – I mean you can get through reading them in a single session – Is Christ not reported as repeatedly saying “I am the son of man”?

Now you may interpret this as claiming to be the son of all mankind, but I think he repeated this phrase often because he was pissed off at being hailed as some kind of immaculate conception and was trying to tell people: “Look, I’m an ordinary person. A human male sired me just like each and every one of you!”

My interpretation is that Christ knew the truth, spoke the truth, and people came along afterwards and tried to mangle his words into meaning whatever they wanted them to mean.

I've never heard that interpretation, that he was pissed off. FWIW, my study Bible says in the notes for Acts 7:56, one place that term is used:

Son of Man. Jesus used this title of himself (see Mk 2:10) to emphasize his relationship to Messianic prediction (Mt 25:31; Da 7:13-14). It is unusual for someone other than Jesus to apply this term to Christ (see also Rev 1:13).

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

I've never heard that interpretation, that he was pissed off. FWIW, my study Bible says in the notes for Acts 7:56, one place that term is used:

Son of Man. Jesus used this title of himself (see Mk 2:10) to emphasize his relationship to Messianic prediction (Mt 25:31; Da 7:13-14). It is unusual for someone other than Jesus to apply this term to Christ (see also Rev 1:13).

The term "man" means "human" ("anthropos" in the Greek language) -- in his case born of a human. Like in Genesis when "man" was created, what that really means is that "anthropos" was created.

J.C. referred to himself as son of man not just to describe the birth event but also to highlight the fact that, having been born on earth of a woman (anthropos again), he had authority here on earth. Before he appeared in a physical body, he had none.

If that's too big a pill for some people here to swallow, that's understandable; most Christians don't understand that truth, either. Their churches have brainwashed them into laziness and passivity by convincing them that God's sovereignty gives Him the authority to control anything and everything down here. The "No matter how bad things get, relax, because God is in control" lie, straight from the pit of Hell. It's exactly the opposite of what Jesus taught.

Since this isn't a Christian-focused web site, I'll stop there and leave several crucial relevant truths unaddressed. There are other forums on the Web where this topic is discussed in depth.