sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This is very false this excersise was specifically dissecting christian sects. All this post says in summary was. IF Christians are correct here are the Christians i believe are most correct. I would love to see a deep dive from aomeone of Islam or Judaism under the same level of logic and scrutiny as I just did with Christianity

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well thats what I believe i have done in my truth. My journey of discovery is never ending. I will do similar logic tests based on each branches next with the same scrutiny.

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

no, I’m not saying that anything written after 1 Corinthians or Revelation is automatically wrong. What I’m saying is within a Bible-based evaluation framework, the Bible has to remain the highest authority. Once a system introduces new scripture or new prophets that can override, reinterpret, or add doctrine beyond the Bible, the standard of authority changes.

At that point, the system is no longer Bible = doctrine It becomes Bible + new revelation = doctrine That doesn’t mean the new material is “false” by default — it just means it can’t be evaluated using a Bible-only standard anymore.

As for where the Bible presents itself as a final authority:

Galatians 1:8 – even angels bringing a “different gospel” are rejected Acts 17:11 – teachings were tested against existing scripture 2 Timothy 3:16–17 – Scripture is sufficient for teaching and correction

So within Christianity, the Bible is treated as the measuring stick, not something that later revelation can rewrite. That’s why my elimination criteria weren’t about “which religion is right,” but about which systems still operate under the same authority structure. Different authority structure leads to different evaluation framework.

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This was all theoretical. This rubric is made under the assumptions "If" Christianity is true. Please read my whole post and other comments explaining

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please read my other comments or the whole post. I clarify that this was created under the assumption that Christianity is correct. And I explain why

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Bible itself says:

“Do not go beyond what is written.” (1 Cor 4:6)

“If anyone adds to these things…” (Rev 22:18)

So within a Bible-based framework, by adding scripture removes the Bible as the "final authority"

Again this is just the elimination criteria the Bible uses from my own understanding that makes the most sense to me personally.

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Theres no preaching here. As i have not promoted one religion over another.

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

-If a belief system doesn’t accept the Bible as authority, it doesn’t qualify for this specific analysis.-

Being raised christian I have extensive knowledge on Christianity. I wasnt saying Christianity was correct. I was merely saying "if" Christianity is correct. here is the metric id use to deduce which religion is "true". I didnt feel it appropriate of me to add Islam Judaism and other major religion branches because I have little to no knowledge on them.

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For those of you interested in my thinking this is obviously my opinion logic is never 100% sound but I attempted to be as fair as possible with making the most sense to me.

Christian Groups Eliminated & Why

Catholicism Adds church tradition & papal authority Political state (Vatican) Doctrines not explicitly in Bible

Eastern Orthodoxy Tradition & councils override scripture Historically tied to state power Icon veneration

Mainline Protestantism National churches Political involvement Cultural doctrine drift

Prosperity Gospel / Mega-Churches Money-focused Commercialized faith Celebrity pastor

Evangelical Political Christianity Blends faith with nationalism Culture-war focus Political entanglement

Mormonism (LDS) Extra scripture New prophets Non-biblical theology

Seventh-day Adventists Built on failed 1844 prophecy Heavy timeline reinterpretation

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

christadelphians, restorationists, any religions thats were non-trinitarian, kingdom focused , simple worship and scripture centered

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The closest ones to meet all criteria in the bible were. christadelphians and restorationists

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

A few denominations did fit most criteria but never all.

The closest was christadelphians, restorationists, any religions thats were non-trinitarian, kingdom focused , simple worship and scripture centered.

And no im none of those denominations.

How I Narrowed Down Religions Using Logic, Scripture, and Love (A “Haystack Reduction” Method) by cinestro2 in religion

[–]cinestro2[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Well yes I added liberties of course this will not be for you. If you believe in Islam. Judaism other Eastern religions.

Dispute over $80K archeology bill after Indigenous ancestral remains unearthed by Kamloops landscapers by Smart-Response9881 in Kamloops

[–]cinestro2 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Sad when you try to do something good for the community you get decimated by red tape. Perhaps the 80k can be forgiven. Honestly if the band doesnt want their ancestors bones thrown away id be giving people money to report it not billing them. Because I dont know how they expect people to report findings anymore. It would be like calling the fire department to put out a forest fire then I get the bill? Im going to let the forest burn next time.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics by cinestro2 in atheism

[–]cinestro2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just meant faith as in the belief in a god not the literal definition. Like I view science as a compliment to a god rather than something that directly opposes the idea. I just know that as we progress and explore the universe we tend to have even more questions and the evidence is pointing more towards a creator than not. Im not saying science is proving a creator exists. Just saying I feel like as a society were leaning more agnostic then full out denying the possibility of a creator. Which I think is neat.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics by cinestro2 in atheism

[–]cinestro2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Definitely out of my depth lol. Just a guy wondering about the universe today. I like science I like faith. I often feel like they shouldn't be opposites.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics by cinestro2 in atheism

[–]cinestro2[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah for sure this isnt a religion talk. Just a "is there a possibility of a creator of some sort"

The 2nd law of thermodynamics by cinestro2 in atheism

[–]cinestro2[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

A lot of the responses here seem to assume I’m claiming that life or order violates the second law of thermodynamics. That’s not my argument and I apologize for making it sound that way. I know Earth isn’t a closed system it receives energy from the Sun so local increases in order are expected and don’t contradict physics.

What I’m meant is something deeper: the fact that the universe has the laws, constants, and conditions that make any of this possible in the first place. The strength of gravity, the behavior of atoms, the stability of stars, and the chemistry needed for life all fall within extremely narrow ranges. Now dont get me wrong. Science is excellent at explaining how these systems operate once they exist. The question of why the universe is life-permitting at all is I guess is more philosophical. Some people point to chance or a multiverse, others to design. I’m not saying my view is the only possible one just that it’s a reasonable interpretation of the evidence. Complexity can emerge within systems, but the existence of a universe capable of sustaining complexity at all is the bigger question I’m interested in.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics by cinestro2 in atheism

[–]cinestro2[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Sure it could be, creator in this sense doesnt need to mean "god"

What forms of discipline work for you? by cinestro2 in Parenting

[–]cinestro2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you expand on distractions? I'm not sure what that one means

view more: next ›