Reply to Do churches generate a lot of revenue from the LGBT community?

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "Do churches generate a lot of revenue from the LGBT community?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]First off, I am an atheist. Admittedly, I have a cynical view of religion. Also, my vantage point is Bethesda.

I can't help but notice that pretty much every church I see has a flag, placard, or message out front targeting a single demographic: the LGBT community.  Not asians, not hispanics, not men, not women, not young, not old - LGBT.

Churches exist for one reason: to propagate themselves.  That requires money and customers. So, it must be that singularly advertising to LGBT is a smart business move.  Its just a surprising one, given the % of population and, I would think, I general dis-inclination toward religion.

So what is the deal?  Smart business move?  Meaningless signaling?  Something else?

[/quote]

Those aren't real churches [/quote]

Folks, here is the poster who thinks that Protestant denominations that have been mainstays of religious life in the US since the nation’s founding aren’t “real churches.”

Draw your own conclusions.[/quote]

Objectively, it isn’t that.
It’s that there is literally a “guidebook” that identifies what God considers sinful behavior. It’s called the Bible. And engaging in homosexual acts is specifically called out as a sin in the word of God—several times. So are many many other sins. And each of us sin on a daily basis. Yet we are all welcome and in fact called by by God to worship Him and to confess our sin, repent of that sin (whatever it may be), and accept that on the cross, Christ took the punishment for OUR sins…all of them…paying the price for us and allowing us to live forever with God in heaven.
One would think that the churches that put out the LGBTQ+ flag are signaling “yes—you are welcome here, too. ALL are welcome to come and worship the Lord and repent of whatever sin is keeping hold of you. Jesus is the answer to setting you free from whatever sin is defining you, including sexual sin and sins of lust or idolatry, regardless of orientation.”
 But instead, the message from these churches that put out the LGBT flag seems to be “we promise we will value your self-identification as part of the LGBT community above any Biblical teaching. If you come to this church, we will affirm your desire to keep this area of your life off limits to God and you can hang onto this particular sin because you really really like it and society has decided it’s who you are.”

These are “real” churches, but they have been ideologically captured at the seminary level by folks who are more interested in pleasing society than obeying and submitting to God.

The church also welcomes those who are divorced or having premarital sex or who eat shellfish or who tell lies or who have dishonored their parents, etc. The difference is that they do not celebrate those sins as being who you are. Instead they recognize that we are all sinners worthy of love from God and are invited and called to repent. 
[/quote]

This is an excellent post.

I would add —

Sexuality is one area where for 2,000 years — from Jesus giving the Sermon on the Mount until very recently — all three major parts of Christianity — the RCC, mainline Protestants, and Evangelicals — agreed that sex was to be between a man and a woman in the covenant relationship of a marriage, period.   This was one area where there was basically no daylight amongst Christians.

And then in the last 40 years or so — so a very small period of time across the broad spectrum of world history  — mainline Protestant churches have attempted to redefine this core part of Christianity because of societal pressure.   Nevermind that aspects of Christianity have ALWAYS been offensive in every culture and age.  Back in the days of the Romans, people could not understand why these silly Christians opposed rape, all kinds of other horrific misgony, and literally throwing babies into trash cans when you didn’t like that a girl popped out.  Christians believed these very counter-cultural things at the time because that’s what the Bible says.

But these mainline Protestant churches have unilaterally decided on very flimsy theological grounds that it’s OK to ignore certain teachings now because they aren’t fashionable.  They don’t want Christianity that is true to the Bible and counter-cultural — they want a Christianity that fits into their larger political view.

I absolutely believe that this is part of the reason why these churches are on the decline while evangelical churches everywhere and even RCC churches in some places continue to grow.   
[/quote]

If it makes you happy to believe these congregations are in decline, that's fine. It's not my experience, given the growth at my church, but I also don't care that you think that and maybe it bears put natuonally, I don't know. 
[b]It is, however, a little silly to believe that LGBT and ally members are a big constituency that chuches want to attract, yet also the reason for severe membership decline. [/b][/quote]

To the contrary, being hostile towards LGBTQ+ is contributing to membership decline, because GenX and younger are much more accepting and are turned off by the hierarchy's homophobia. Lack of ordained women's roles in the Church is another issue causing young people to abandon the faith.[/quote]

Gay man from the second page chiming in. It's been interesting reading all the posts and seeing the prejudices and stereotypes coming through. As a PP(s) pointed out, the more liberal the mainline denominations became, the faster their membership fell. The Episcopalian church has gone full on pro LGBTQ and with no shortage of female clergy and bishops, it is already a heavily female led church, and yet that hasn't prevented a near catastrophic decline in attendance and membership. Many churches are surviving off endowments, ironically from past donors who'd be shocked and aghast at what the churches have become.

Is it a chicken or egg situation? Is there a causal effect here? Is it more that the progressive wing of America shuns any religion, no matter how progressive the church or synagogue becomes? Probably. Meanwhile those religious institutions keep becoming too progressive for those who are still interested in religion.

I find the history of theology and Christianity fascinating and I do understand why, under modern cultural influences, the mainline denominations felt they had no choice but to turn leftwards in the name of moral righteousness. A core (and early) tenet of Christianity was that the last will be first, aka the poor and dispossessed. Hence the huge traditional emphasis on helping the poor and deprived. In the 20th century, that morphed into the quest to fight every ism that could be found, eventually taking us to LGBTQ as the last frontier, in a sense.

There's no denying LGBTQ is a fashionable cause. And the skeptical snark in me recognizes it's because it's a safe and clean and friendly cause. Well dressed, charming gay men in your congregation? How wonderful! Gives you a nice warm vibe that you're being inclusive and of course God loves everyone. Meanwhile the actual poor and dispossessed continue to be poor and dispossessed and largely ignored. No one is really interested in poor whites in Appalachia or even poor urban blacks. There was a brief exception with St. George Floyd, but eventually people figured out he really was a drug addled scumbag, which is why BLM quietly faded away discreetly.

This hypocrisy isn't new. Even in the 19th century Dickens was commenting on the proclivity of middle class churches favoring rescuing the souls of poor babies in Africa via missionaries and donations, while genuinely poor people continued to live overlooked and ignored in their communities. Poor people are never tasteful and no one wants to spend time around them.

LGBTQ being the latest cause celebre for educated white women these days is amusing. But it's also valid to ask questions about what it really means. It's one thing to welcome same sex couples, it's something else to enable all the queer and trans identities because isn't that really defying your true self, which would be sinning? And that would be a key reason behind the collapse in meaningful moral authority of the churches. And all this "be kind" mantra ignores that while you're to love the sinner but hate the sin, you're also supposed to help the sinner reform and stop sinning.

Yeah, yeah, I know you'll probably ask but aren't I gay. I am. But I don't deny my body and claim to be something I am biologically not.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics