News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I think the risk more is the bad theology and idol worship that American Christianity is becoming. It’s sorta like how almost all mega churches are “non denominational.” There’s not a commitment to an actual ideology or set of religious beliefs, it’s become a strange cult fixated on Trump. It’s more dangerous in some ways because it’s less predictable. Being a “Christian” has nothing to do with believing that Jesus died on the cross for our sins, it’s more a conservative White identity status.
The cultists drive out the moderates who would keep things on an even keel.
sadfasfsadfd
Yes.
Say, Islam as a religion has the "cut in stone" part, the only way to change that is a new prophet. Literally. And it has the rest, which is up to very wide interpretation. And it doesn't have a central authority (no Caliph today, though a certain ISIS type claimed that role).
So, that didn't make Islam a more tolerant religion. Not even remotely.
Gotta wonder how things would have shaken out if Mohammad had a son survive long enough to take over.
With Islam, you do have multiple thorough legal traditions to choose from for authority. There’s at least some consistency. Iirc, there’s an entire system of grading Hadith based on how many steps removed they are from the prophet - while your average American Christian believes that Mark, Matthew, John and Luke wrote Mark, Matthew, John and Luke.
Evangelicals don’t have that kind of textual tradition, and what they do have is cockeyed squinting at their Bibles while trying to make it work with their pop culture understanding of theology. The focus on having a “personal” relationship with Jesus + sola scriptura when most of these folks have sub fifth grade reading levels means that whatever feels good at the time is what God wants.
I've met a lot of (ex-Soviet, that should be kept in mind) Muslims, most wouldn't be able to tell the difference between this madhhab and that.
And Christian theology, when you don't reduce it to average American Christians, has a lot of tradition.
What I mean ... you typical Salafi is just like that:
Can we just agree that most people with religious identities don't care about actual philosophy?
I don’t disagree with you about Christian theology in general. I think a part of it is that American Evangelical Christianity is rapidly diverging from what most would recognize as Christianity. I’ve seen a few news articles where pastors get pushback on things like the Sermon on the Mount. I’ve never a seen a literalist/dominionist advocate for the clearing of debts every 7 years; only stoning queer people. I could see Trump ending up as some sort of messiah figure.
I think Salafism and American evangelical fundamentalism have a lot in common; in my religious historiography class we discussed how increased literacy in general in the 19th century led to a lot of these “literalist” movements.
100% - for the vast majority of individuals it’s more of a cultural/in group experience. Very enlightening when you study periods of mass conversion… usually more of a practical concern than one of conviction.
Literacy increase in 1920s-1930s USSR (European parts) led to a certain kind of people for whom things officially printed are obviously true.
They unironically consider it the ultimate argument that some general summary, that is printed in an official history book for schools, says what they say. They don't get the idea of cross-checking sources, they don't get the idea of hermeneutics, they don't get the idea of dispute. Actually it's worse - they think they get all these ideas, and all these ideas are barbarism, while reading something officially printed and not doubting it is enlightenment. It's that bad.