Thanks for the response.
Your beginning is about the inherit flaws/limitations of the reddit voting methodology. Reddit does overly favor cheap, quick content. It's why I tend to visit subreddits directly as much of the better content will never get the votes to appear on all or my default page.
I agree and this is where it ties into my critique of the predilection that /r/christianity has for the dead horse topics. Everyone's mind is made up, and it's easy enough to go in swinging. There's no need to read and process an argument because your mind is already made up and you're just going into jump into the fray and regurgitate either your liberal or conservative talking points. Simply go in post the same slogans, upvote everyone that agrees with you downvote anyone that disagrees. This happens regardless of viewpoint, theological conservatives do the same to liberals.
I don't know if it's fixable or can be prevented, I think it's just something inherent to reddit. Which is why I've kind of abandoned reddit except for following hockey.
No, they happen over and over as they are the religious controversies of our time. It's not about witty retorts, it's about issues people care about.
I agree with you. But I think once again it's low-hanging fruit it takes no effort to participate. No one is really neutral on any of those topics, and so once again it devolves into tired sloganeering, witty retorts, and insults. There is no "new" argument to be made one way or the other. The upvoted comments in those threads, are the one-line witty retorts.
It's not about witty retorts, it's about issues people care about. And since most of them (like gay marriage, women priests, YEC-evolution,charity-vs-safetynet) tie directly into how people should practice what they think is important in Christianity, I find the attempt to separate out "Christian practice" into a different category amusing
I addressed a good chunk of this above but I wanted to clarify what I meant by "Christian practice". When I say Christian practice I mean practical advice meant to grow holier in Christ. Things such as "What Bible should I read?" "What's a good Bible plan?" "How do you pray?" "What are some things you do to remember God through out the day?" "Hey what do you think of this exegesis of insert Biblical text?"
It's the kind of discussion that anyone can engage in and benefit from.
The vast majority of people's day-to-day life isn't impacted by the fact that the earth was created 10,000 or 14 billion years ago, or the fact that some churches and people believe homosexuality to be a sin, or the fact that some churches have women priests and others don't.
The controversial or dead-horse topics will never stop until society changes and one side or the other reaches a big enough majority in civil society. That's not a defect of reddit or /r/christianity.
The way the conversations take place is a defect of reddit though. The most popular opinion is the one that dominates the debate through upvoting and downvoting. Then there is also the famous reddit tendency to focus on witty one-liners and slogans rather than engaging in analysis.
Why would a theological conservative reply with their position when it's downvoted to the bottom and seen by no one? Why would a theological conservative reply with their position when insulted and called insane?
It's the reason why /r/politics is a bad place, it's the reason why /r/atheism is a bad place, and it's a reason why /r/conservative is a bad place. The hivemind in those subreddits is so strong that any attempt to offer an alternative position is instantly attacked. Now to be avoid hyperbole /r/christianity is not that bad, but it's enough to make a theological conservative question whether or not participating is worth it.
People have tied these issues to what they think it means to be Christian, so of course these things are going to be fought about constantly!
No doubt, but that doesn't mean the conversations or debates as of now are worth having. The debates and discussions will happen, but we can at the same time critique when people approach the discussion with a wrong attitude. I think both sides of these dead horse topics do approach with the wrong attitude.
Maybe not the exact words I'd use, but I'll go with the general sentiment. I certainly wouldn't want a science denialist controlling one of the world's important sources of science funding. And someone dismisses the evidence of reality and has a high probability of being an ends-timer (since YEC believers seem to have a very high probability of also being a endstimer) is not someone I want to give control of the most dangerous weapons of technology to.
I understand. This is one of the reasons I don't come here anymore. Why would I hang out in a community that views me in that way, barring masochism?
Many people love a good train wreck. And then there's the "better laugh before you start weeping" effect.
Oh, I understand that. But creating sockpuppets, subreddits dedicated to outlining the abuses of /r/reformed, repeated involvement in meta discussions when they had barely ever went there I think is beyond watching the train wreck and instead sabotaging the rails. It is once again, done under the guise of "transparency" and "caring about the community" but it rings hollow considering the above points.
There is an element of that. Much of /r/atheism is for ranting about the people atheists feel have been assholes or are being stupid.
No it's not. It's primarily for looking down on others that aren't euphorically enlightened by their own intelligence, a desire to be seen as avant-garde or edgy, and a place for the confirmation that their beliefs are correct. It's a circlejerk. It's where they can go to feel more intelligent than others, primarily their parents.
This is a ranting sub, and plenty of the people here have more than enough justification to want to rant about people being assholes or stupid.
That language is symptomatic of exactly what I have a problem with. I don't think we should be calling image bearers of God assholes or stupid. I think the people on this subreddit are better than that. I tried in my initial post to highlight that I felt it was both conservatives and liberals that have this issue. Running around claiming that someone denies the authority of scripture because they use a different hermeneutic. I don't think it's a the poor conservatives are being run into the ground problem, I think it's a "Wow, the discourse on this sub is really bad."
That some theological conservatives say stupid, asshole things is their own problem.
I agree. I'm proposing everyone stop saying stupid, asshole things. Never going to happen on the internet but might as well.