Best Church Denominations for Red Pill Men

How do you know the first Christians did not believe any of those things? The writers from 100s-400s are the best we can go off of, as they lived in a time much closer to when the apostles were alive. Even if these beliefs came about through later revelation does not mean that they are wrong, either. The doctrine of the trinity didn't exist in the early church, but now almost all Christians believe in it because of the Council of Nicaea (325).

You cannot just attempt to read the Bible and hope that your interpretation is correct (are you studied in theology? Greek? Biblical Jewish tradition? Political happenings of the time?). This is why Christ founded the Church to help His flock. He didn't just give the apostles the Bible and say "Here ya go, good luck!" This is the confusion that has brought about the thousands of denominations we have today. Even if it were a good idea to just read the Bible and trust yourself to determine the correct Church, you would still have to trust the Catholic Church. The Bible as it is known today was compiled at the Council of Rome in 382 under Pope Damasus. Even if you believe that the King James Bible is the only one which can be trusted (which doesn't have the 7 books that were taken out of the Catholic Bible) you still need to trust all 66 books that were left that were originally compiled by Catholic councils.

There are no early church writings indicating that the early church believed that Mary was sinless, that we should pray to Mary, or that purgatory exists. Writings about that didn't come about until centuries after Christ. The Bible itself does not give any indication that early Christians believed in purgatory, sinlessness of Mary, or in the need to pray to Mary. Romans 3:23 says all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Obviously "all have sinned" does not include Jesus because other verses say that Jesus never sinned. But there are no verses excepting Mary from Romans 3:23.

The Nicene Creed does not conflict with Scripture but is supported by Scripture. There were early church disagreements about the nature of the Trinity and they were resolved with the Council of Nicaea. I can accept the Nicene Creed because it can be derived from Scripture and is supported by Scripture. The belief that Mary never sinned conflicts with Scripture so I cannot accept that. We should check to see if something is consistent with Scripture and if it is not, we should reject it.

I agree that Christ founded the church. But how you do know what is "the church"? You are still exercising your own private personal interpretation when deciding what the church is. There's the Roman Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox Church, the Greek Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church, the Syrian church, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the Ukrainian Catholic Church, Coptic Churches, Monophysite churches, the Armenian church, Nestorian Churches, Eastern Rite Catholic churches, Sedevacantist Catholic churches, etc... How you do know which of these you are supposed to choose? You still must fall back on your own personal judgment.

And then even within these religious traditions you have divergence of belief--within Catholicism you have Franciscans, Jesuits, Benedictines, Cistercians, Augustinians, Catholics who favor women's ordination, Catholics who favor liberation theology, etc.... There are about a billion Catholics in the world and each one may have his own personal spin on things. Protestants have disagreements but they are united in the belief of Sola Scriptura, that the Bible is the ultimate source of authority.

The Catholic church approved a Bible that had already become generally accepted. The Bible did not come about as a result of the Roman Catholic church.
 
unable to read and understand the Word of God
The Bible is not the Word of God, or at least not the whole Word of God. This misconception is so common, yet nobody bothers to search up any verse that supports the claim that the Bible is the Word of God. The biblical Scriptures are referred to as the Law or Scriptures in the Bible. The Word of God is also what God reveals to you, His reason, His foresight, His moral and natural order. Don't get me wrong, you get a lot of information, moral guidance, and solace in the Scriptures, but they are not the end of all and I doubt that anybody before and after Christ (early Church Fathers) seriously believed that.

salvation only dispensed through a man/priest whom you must believe above God because only he can know what God means and says through the book
Many men are not qualified to interpret the Bible because, especially in this day of disinformation, and where you don't learn Latin and Greek in school anymore, the Bible becomes a dangerous tool in the wrong hands. Not only do you need extensive knowledge to understand the Scriptures properly, but also spiritual guidance, God's thought, Logos, common sense, or whatever you want to call it, to make sense of it. The Bible is like a hammer, you can fix or build something, but you can destroy something as well; it depends who and how he handles it. Did you forget that Jesus and His Apostles absolved man of his sins when he repented? I don't say it is a must to have an earthly intercessor whom you can talk to and be absolved of your sins, but it is not wrong to have one either.

Roman Harlot
The Catholic Church is not the Whore of Babylon, it was Jerusalem until 70 AD, given the Jews took Babylonian mysticism and practices into their religion and culture is a testament to it.

yet the catholics have some serious issues with getting along and following forum rules
I don't know if it rings true for this forum, but it is generally true that some internet Catholics are hyper autistic. This is due to some of them coming back to the Faith or being new converts and are, as a result, zealous which results in an superiority complex about their particular church. Some outgrow that phase, some never do.
 
I think we could screen a church by seeing how the priest acts and how the general congregation acts etc. Also being picky when it comes to finding a good church is not a bad thing in my opinion.
 

Hermetic Seal

Kingfisher
Gold Member
...salvation only dispensed through a man/priest whom you must believe above God because only he can know what God means and says through the book. Really, is God so harsh that he would make it so difficult and force you to bow down to a man in a dress for your salvation?

Now I'm not a Catholic and may be getting this wrong, but that sounds like a really uncharitable mischaracterization of what Catholics believe. My impression of the Catholic/Orthodox view of clergy is more along the lines of them being servants who help carry out the mission of the Church and guide people through worship, sacraments, etc., rather than "intermediaries" in the Old Testament sense of needing a broker between us and God who performs sacrifices on our behalf, and that sort of thing.

This is why Christ founded the Church to help His flock. He didn't just give the apostles the Bible and say "Here ya go, good luck!" This is the confusion that has brought about the thousands of denominations we have today.

The harder I think about this subject, the more I find myself agreeing with this line of thinking. The fact that the protestant reformers couldn't even agree about the nature of things like the Eucharist makes doctrines like sola scriptura seem downright cruel if we're expected to figure it out all on our own (even moreso as you go back in history, to times when most people were illiterate and didn't have the opportunity to study the Bible.)
 

Benedictus

Newbie
I agree that Christ founded the church. But how you do know what is "the church"? You are still exercising your own private personal interpretation when deciding what the church is. There's the Roman Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox Church, the Greek Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church, the Syrian church, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the Ukrainian Catholic Church, Coptic Churches, Monophysite churches, the Armenian church, Nestorian Churches, Eastern Rite Catholic churches, Sedevacantist Catholic churches, etc... How you do know which of these you are supposed to choose? You still must fall back on your own personal judgment.
Churches in communion with Rome (submit to the Pope) are considered Catholic Churches. Orthodox are also apostolic but not in communion. There are multiple rites in the Catholic Church, but that doesn't mean they are different churches. They all are a part of the hierarchy.
And then even within these religious traditions you have divergence of belief--within Catholicism you have Franciscans, Jesuits, Benedictines, Cistercians, Augustinians, Catholics who favor women's ordination, Catholics who favor liberation theology, etc.... There are about a billion Catholics in the world and each one may have his own personal spin on things. Protestants have disagreements but they are united in the belief of Sola Scriptura, that the Bible is the ultimate source of authority.
What you are describing are called Holy Orders within the Church (one of the sacraments actually). There might be difference in style or opinion, but regarding doctrine, they must believe the same thing. Doctrine is laid out by Church Fathers and better understood through books like the Catechism of the Council of Trent. Priests who advocate for homosexuality, women priests, etc. are going against their vows to guide the flock, and will be held accountable in the next life. These priests make the mistake of interpreting things on their own and not submitting to traditional teaching.
 

Thurisaz

Newbie
I think actual Roman Catholic, that is, not Novus Orco nonsense, church would be the best place for a Christian to belong to.

There isn't one where I live, but one day there will be.
 

Timothy Crow

Sparrow
Now I'm not a Catholic and may be getting this wrong, but that sounds like a really uncharitable mischaracterization of what Catholics believe. My impression of the Catholic/Orthodox view of clergy is more along the lines of them being servants who help carry out the mission of the Church and guide people through worship, sacraments, etc., rather than "intermediaries" in the Old Testament sense of needing a broker between us and God who performs sacrifices on our behalf, and that sort of thing.

LOL, indeed it is most uncharitable, but then, no more so than being told you are not a real Christian and that you are just "making shit up" because you happen to be protestant or baptist and not a card carrying member of the one true faith/church. Truly, I do not even feel this way as you can see by my other posts. I only wish to point out that we are all Christian and should not be fighting amongst ourselves over such arguments, arguments that will not be resolved in this age.
 
One of the biggest problems for modern men is finding a church that isn't completely limp-wristed and feminized.

So, what are the best church denominations for masculine men like us to attend?

How would you screen a church before attending?

I usually look for red flags like promoting women pastors or accepting homosexuality, but I'm curious what denominations forum members recommend.

Hello all, this is my first post.

Former Red Piller here, recently born again. Was struggling with this issue myself until I found Mark Driscoll's men's ministry.

Driscoll was essentially kicked out of Mars Hill Church in Seattle (which he helped to found) after it was discovered that he'd been posting Red Pill–style material on church message boards under the pseudonym William Wallace.

He's since relocated to Arizona and tempered his message a bit, but the Red Pill influence is still quite evident in his work, and it gives me faith that I have found at least one pastor worth following.

If you explores Driscoll's material and it resonates with you, please reach out to me personally at [email protected].

I am here to build real-world connections with fellow masculine men, Red Pillers, and former Red Pillers.

Iron sharpens iron, as you know.

God bless you all—
Tyler
 
Hello all, this is my first post.

Former Red Piller here, recently born again. Was struggling with this issue myself until I found Mark Driscoll's men's ministry.

Driscoll was essentially kicked out of Mars Hill Church in Seattle (which he helped to found) after it was discovered that he'd been posting Red Pill–style material on church message boards under the pseudonym William Wallace.

He's since relocated to Arizona and tempered his message a bit, but the Red Pill influence is still quite evident in his work, and it gives me faith that I have found at least one pastor worth following.

If you explores Driscoll's material and it resonates with you, please reach out to me personally at [email protected].

I am here to build real-world connections with fellow masculine men, Red Pillers, and former Red Pillers.

Iron sharpens iron, as you know.

God bless you all—
Tyler

I have heard people criticize Mark Driscoll for using profanity and explicit sexual language in his sermons. However, the times I have heard Driscoll speaking his language was clean. Are the stories about foul language true?
 

redbeard

Hummingbird
Moderator
One of the biggest problems for modern men is finding a church that isn't completely limp-wristed and feminized.

So, what are the best church denominations for masculine men like us to attend?

How would you screen a church before attending?

I usually look for red flags like promoting women pastors or accepting homosexuality, but I'm curious what denominations forum members recommend.

It's been a year since I posted this, so I wanted to update anyone keeping score at home. I was baptized Catholic as a child, so I re-entered the Roman Catholic Church.

The RCC isn't perfect but there is a lot of strong momentum in the "Trad Cath" movement right now. If there are any lapsed Catholics reading this, I highly encourage you to come home.
 
The RCC isn't perfect but there is a lot of strong momentum in the "Trad Cath" movement right now. If there are any lapsed Catholics reading this, I highly encourage you to come home.

The wife and I met with the priest of our local parish today, and it was such a great experience. We'll be attending Mass tomorrow morning, and setting her (and our three sons) down the path of the catechumenate very soon! I was baptized Catholic as a child too, so I am also re-entering. Ready to be home!
 

redbeard

Hummingbird
Moderator
The wife and I met with the priest of our local parish today, and it was such a great experience. We'll be attending Mass tomorrow morning, and setting her (and our three sons) down the path of the catechumenate very soon! I was baptized Catholic as a child too, so I am also re-entering. Ready to be home!

Great to hear.

Feel free to ask questions or share more about your experience in The Catholic Church thread.
 

Aboulia

Robin
The harder I think about this subject, the more I find myself agreeing with this line of thinking. The fact that the protestant reformers couldn't even agree about the nature of things like the Eucharist makes doctrines like sola scriptura seem downright cruel if we're expected to figure it out all on our own (even moreso as you go back in history, to times when most people were illiterate and didn't have the opportunity to study the Bible.)

We were never intended to figure it out on our own, as the eunuch in Acts 8 said to Philip "How can I understand unless someone guides me?" We were always meant to have guides, this is why Jesus Christ selected 12 apostles to teach, and those apostles instructed and ordained men going all the way to the present day. There's always been hierarchy in the Church. Sola Scriptura is incoherent because it doesn't actually apply an interpretation to what you're reading. People are flawed, and project their flaws into their interpretation. "LBGT Christianity" comes about because of Sola Scriptura, granted it took about 500 years to get there, but this is how doctrinal errors play out over time, and this is why people had such heated debates and called councils, to come to conclusions about the nature of reality, Jesus Christ and the Theotokos.

Even if all people could read the scriptures when they were written, it doesn't mean they can necessarily understand it. This is also what St Paul means when he gives the analogy of the body in his Epistle to the Corinthians. All Christians are called to be different parts of the Christian body, but to realize their limitations. The hand is not the foot, and the eye is not the head, we run into problems when the eye and the hand step outside their boundaries and try to become the head. The doctor is not the farmer, both are equally important in society, but have different functions.

Protestantism, as I view it is a natural reaction to the solidification to Church and Crown which exists in Roman Catholicism. The church was never meant to have political power enshrined in it. It's role in society was to declare the truth about reality, constantly remind worldly rulers of it, and to be a social net for the poor. Once the Roman Catholics said the sole authority exists in the pope and solidified it with the Filoque clause, it invited corruption and they broke tradition with their fathers, most notably St Gregory the Great who rejected the universal title.

2 Orthodox articles on the subject
2 Roman Catholic articles on the subject

Edit: Wasn't finished, This isn't to say Orthodoxy is a perfect structure in the world, it has it's own worldly problems. The Greeks under the Ecumenical Patriarch succumbed to Ecumenism and the calendar change, the Russian Patriarchate succumbed to the communists under Patriarch Sergius, and is involved in Ecumenism as well. But I do find the worldview to be healthier, and more flexible, recognizing that we are different people, we have different customs, and different ways of expressing the same thing, as long as we express the same thing. We aren't all meant to be little Latins.
 
I agree that Christ founded the church. But how you do know what is "the church"? You are still exercising your own private personal interpretation when deciding what the church is. There's the Roman Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox Church, the Greek Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church, the Syrian church, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the Ukrainian Catholic Church, Coptic Churches, Monophysite churches, the Armenian church, Nestorian Churches, Eastern Rite Catholic churches, Sedevacantist Catholic churches, etc... How you do know which of these you are supposed to choose? You still must fall back on your own personal judgment.

And then even within these religious traditions you have divergence of belief--within Catholicism you have Franciscans, Jesuits, Benedictines, Cistercians, Augustinians, Catholics who favor women's ordination, Catholics who favor liberation theology, etc.... There are about a billion Catholics in the world and each one may have his own personal spin on things. Protestants have disagreements but they are united in the belief of Sola Scriptura, that the Bible is the ultimate source of authority.

Add to the fact that seemingly, even within the Apostles, there seemed to be disagreements, shown in Paul's letter to the Galatians.

St. Paul seems to claim that his gospel is a personal revelation to him from a divine origin, he was not "taught" it.

"Paul an apostle—sent neither by human commission nor from human authorities, but through Jesus Christ
and God the Father..." (Gal 1:1)

"For I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin;
for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of
Jesus Christ
." (Gal 1:11-12)


He seems to say that, in this way, he was "entrusted" with the gospels, in the same way that Peter was entrusted with the gospels.

"On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel for the uncircumcised, just as
Peter had been entrusted with the gospel
for the circumcised..." (Gal 2:7)


Upon receiving the revelation, He "did not not confer" with the Apostles immediately.

"But when God, who had set me apart before I was born and called me through his grace, was pleased to
reveal his Son to me, so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles, I did not confer with any human
being, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were already apostles before me
, but I went away at
once into Arabia..." (Gal 1:15-17)


Also, the "leaders" contributed nothing to him.

"And from those who were supposed to be acknowledged leaders (what they actually were makes no
difference to me; God shows no partiality)—those leaders contributed nothing to me
." (Gal 2:6)


And he also opposed Peter.

"But when Cephas [Peter] came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood self-condemned; for
until certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But after they came, he drew back and
kept himself separate for fear of the circumcision faction. And the other Jews joined him in this hypocrisy, so
that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy
. But when I saw that they were not acting
consistently with the truth of the gospel.
.." (Gal 2:11-14)


So from this, some personal revelation/interpretation/judgment, as you said, may be needed.

I would really like to hear scorpion's take on this, being one of the respected members of this forum, as I think he is a protestant and may be well versed in their theology. I cannot imagine the ONE BILLION protestants being damned just because they are not part of Rc/Orthodox.
 
I cannot imagine the ONE BILLION protestants being damned just because they are not part of Rc/Orthodox.

There's definitely no need to assume someone is damned for not being right about everything. If we look at how God separates the sheep from the goats in Matthew 25, he says things like "I was thirsty and you gave me drink" rather than "You understood the difference between transubstantiation and sacramental union."

The Roman Catholics teach quite explicitly that non-Catholics can be saved, and they even made a non-Roman Catholic a doctor of the Church (St. Gregory of Narek). Though my own Orthodox Church is less explicit about it, we also do not teach that non-Orthodox automatically go to hell.
 
There are some Protestants who take the position that Catholics go to hell. I do not hold to that position. I do not believe God would throw a Christian into hell over a doctrinal error.
The Catholic Church today does not teach that Protestants go to hell. However, it is interesting that this is contrary to what the Catholic Church traditionally taught. The Catholic Church used to teach that Protestants went to hell. After the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church became more accepting of Protestantism. Now they teach that Protestants are "separated brethren." I don't know as much about the Eastern Orthodox position on this. Can somebody who is Eastern Orthodox provide more explanation of this?
 
I attend a local OPC church - Orthodox Presbyterian Church. The orthodox refers to more generic 'true doctrine' and has nothing to do with eastern orthodoxy. They are on the very far right doctrinally of protestantism. The church broke off from the more liberal and mainstream PCUSA back in the 40s (the founder, J. Greshem Machen wrote a still very relevant book called Christianity and Liberalism -- read here: http://www.onthewing.org/user/Edu_Christianity and Liberalism - Machen.pdf).

The denomination and the churches are still small. The one I attend is a little over 100 people. The majority of the families have a lot of children and homeschool. The dads are for the most part, very nerdy. The church really stresses learning your doctrine so it attracts that kind of crowd, which can be good for introducing RP concepts as these people don't respond with their emotions first. The women are, with a few exceptions, feminine and motherly. A few really remind me of Titus 2 women and are a pleasure to interact with. The majority of the members are patriotic like most Christians, but they are more on the libertarian, anti-big gov't and anti-big business side and not just strict repubs like you'll find in most conservative churches.

The preaching is very biblical but not perfect. They love to stress calvinism and other doctrines I'm not as interested in as I am the Bible, and although they are against women preachers (and deacons) they still are light on teaching the verses that wives should submit to their husbands.

Anyways, it's been a great blessing going to this church. The pastor and his family had us over for lunch a few weeks ago, and the other families have all been very warm and welcoming as well. It's especially good as we had our first kid last year and it's great having a place with large homeschooling families to interact with (my wife has been making friends with a few of the moms and going on little play-dates with them). This is the only local church we could find where a majority of the moms are SAH and the kids homeschooled. In most of the other 'conservative' churches around here that is still seen as an anomaly.

You can find if there's a local church for you here: https://opc.org/locator.html

I have long admired the Reformed and Calvinist-oriented churches for the reasons you describe. However, I have trouble with their doctrine of predestination so that has made it harder for me to get attached to them.
 
Top