Protestn't

Apparently I'm a Lutheran now. My main blog for fandom and general nonsense is https://afanofmanyhats.tumblr.com.

[explanatorypower-deactivated201]

[ummukasha-deactivated20230515]

[woolandflax]

[wiseoldllamaenby]

[blessedistrust-inthelord]

Dear Lord,

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE. Thank you.

Amen.

[apricops]

I think I’ve been reading too much about early modern Europe because I just heard someone go “of course Christians don’t think the communion wafer is actually the body of Christ, it’s a metaphor” and I said out loud “girl no they started wars about this.”

Which is kind of a pedantic thing to say! because absolutely that’s a benign and perfectly reasonable statement in the year 2026 but for a second I felt like there was an absolutely gobsmacked 17th century Austrian priest watching over my shoulder

[animate-mush]

A perfectly reasonable statement in the year 2026 if you've never met (or heard of??) a Christian who isn't Protestant I guess????

Heck I think most High Protestants have some sort of doctrine of the Real Presence - Anglicans sure do at least.

This isn't some esoteric historical curiosity, it's a pretty egregious misrepresentation of the majority of modern Christendom

[exactly-one-gremlin]

preserving the tag because oooooooooo boyyy it is both correct and important. saying "nobody really believes that" makes it sound -- intentionally or not -- like you think it's a stupid thing to believe and everyone with that sincere belief is either stupid or self-deceptive. so maybe don't be an asshole! if you sincerely think that a piece of theological doctrine is less relevant or less literally interpreted than it used to be in the same faith ... say that instead!!

(source: raised by aggressively ex-catholic atheists and I'm pretty sure I was awful about this as a Youth)

[starlightomatic]

what do christians mean when they say jesus fulfilled the law? whenever i am arguing with people who are trying to proselytize people keep saying this as though the meaning is obvious but it’s not 😭

[evilwickedme]

To my understanding from a class I took last year, it means that the purpose of the law was essentially replaced by Jesus, that is the law is no longer necessary because Jesus fulfills the same purpose

[starlight-shadowbanned]

but what to them is the purpose of the law?

[indecisiveavocado]

and why do they keep citing stuff from the allegedly superseded law? like they do cite "leviticus" when they're being homophobic, and they talk about adam and noach and moshe and all of our people, and they cite our prophets as evidence for jesus? so what's the theological explanation for that?

[thedeepbreathbeforetheplunge]

The purpose of the law, as I remember it, was a stand in until Jesus could come - wherein he had to come at "the right time" to fulfill the "prophecies" (mis translated or cherry picked and d contextualized verses from the Prophets or the writings) so everyone who lived pre-jesus but followed God's laws are "pre-christian" As far as why do they cite the law they think it still informs Christian ethics- they split the law into "ethical" and "ritual", where "ritual" law (such as the sacrifices, kashrut, sperating fabric) are superceded by Jesus, but the "ethical laws" still remain in force. There is a verse where Jesus says he "didn't come to replace the law" that they usually cite there, but "obviously" that doesn't apply to the ritual law.

[starlight-shadowbanned]

fulfilling prophecies makes sense! (as in i understand what it means; i don’t actually think he fulfilled them). but i still don’t understand how you’d fulfill a law?

like, you can fulfill a prophecy, a promise, a prediction, an order, a prescription, an expectation… but how do you fulfill a law?

[starlight-shadowbanned]

@thedeepbreathbeforetheplunge oh wait no. i didn’t read what you said clearly. if the purpose of the law is to be a stand in for jesus to come, then yeah it makes sense to say it was fulfilled when he came. it’s tautological but linguistically it works.

so since jesus is there to absolve people of sin does that mean that to christians, that’s also the purpose of the law? (that’s what evilwickedme was saying in another reblog)

[afanofmanysaints]

The way it was explained to me, in my non-denominational/Baptist upbringing, is that God gave the Law to the Israelites as a temporary measure to absolve sins for those who kept the Law and reveal His will to the world before Jesus came. When Jesus came to the world, died, and was resurrected, that established a new covenant that superseded the Law by 1. making it a universal covenant (as opposed to the Law which was primarily between God and the Israelites/their descendants) and 2. giving people direct access to God through the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit, as opposed to the Levite priesthood intervening on behalf of the Israelites before God in the Tabernacle and the Temple.

And the reason given as to why the Law was a temporary measure is because it was supposed to be impossible for anyone to keep completely, to showcase mankind's need for God's direct intervention. Jesus' death and resurrection made it so that God's grace could make up for the impossible standards of the Law. I don't recall anyone ever explaining why the sacrifices would be mandated then if they weren't effective recompense for breaking the Law, and the explanations for why Christians keep trying to enforce lesser versions of the Law socially and politically never sat right either.

[transbian-in-christ]

[portraitsofsaints]

Saint Bede the Venerable

Doctor of the Church

672/673-735

Feast Day: May 25 (New), May 27 (Trad)

Patronage: English writers, historians, Jarrow, St. Bede college and university

Saint Bede was a Benedictine monk in Britain. He was the greatest scholar, author, and teacher of his time, deeply versed in the sciences and history, and known as the “Father of English History”. As a linguist and translator, he brought the works of the Latin and Greek writings of the early church fathers to the English, which contributed significantly to English Christianity. St. Bede was the first to date events anno domin (AD). He’s called Venerable to acknowledge his wisdom and learning.

Prints, plaques & holy cards available for purchase. (website)

[bcbdrums]

Psalms‬ ‭46‬:‭10‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

[iustuspeccator]

Shout out to Acts 2:14-15, the funniest two verses in the Bible. "We're not drunk, it's 9am. Catch us at 9pm tho you know what I'm saying?"

[woolandflax]

The worm of the Lord

R: Thanks be to God.

[wheatfish-in-a-basket]

Me to God when I pray because he likes talking to us

[margindoodles2407]

the fatal catholic urge to draw mary,,,

[comedownstairsandsayhello]

“There is no Christian group that can avoid scandals if it objectifies women, devalues sexually-active or assaulted women, removes sexual agency from women, apportions any amount of blame to women who are victimized, polices women’s sexuality, seeks to punish women for disobedience to their script, or views women as marginalized Others with no power. There is literally no other way that can work out. The more of this stuff a Christian group does, the more likely that group has a closet packed with howling skeletons trying to be heard above the noise of blustery preaching.”

— Libby Anne (via entanglingbriars)

[iustuspeccator]

I bought a new, good history book to make up for my terrible Christian History II class and I have not ready very much of it but something that immediately made an impact on me was the observation that the Enlightenment criticized and turned against religion for upholding an inadequate status quo. which I suppose on some level I knew happened but on another level I absolutely did not make that connection.

and I'm so frustrated that my professor completely skimmed over the Enlightenment because that's actually really important for the moment we live in now when many people are against religion for upholding an unjust status quo. one thing that we can learn from taking the long view of history is that it's survivable. questioning and pushing back against religious institutions doesn't destroy faith or religion. the US was founded out of secular Enlightenment ideals and went on to have two religious awakenings in the course of 250 years.

all the hand-wringing about decline and secularism and worry for the future really is just hand-wringing. can you, by worrying, add a single hour to the span of your life, or the life of the church? no. all we can do is respond to today, and the call today is a reckoning for justice that we as Christians have no right to refuse.

[transbian-in-christ]

how am i supposed to love a world that killed the perfect man

[many-sparrows]

same way he did, I think

[sanguine-scales]

i think something a lot of people don't get is that years of mocking your child, even in jest, does in fact tend to get under their skin

[sanguine-scales]

a decade or two of even light verbal harassment is very much accentuated when it's an authority figure you are in every meaningful way subservient to

[christiangirl]

Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger by the way you treat them. Rather, bring them up with the discipline and instruction that comes from the Lord.

Ephesians 6:4

[luxangelae]

He left the 99 to find His silliest sheep (me)

[jurakan]

@woolandflax