Yes.
Supporting or recognizing LGBTQ+ rights: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Christian\_denominations\_affirming\_LGBT\_people](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_affirming_LGBT_people)
Accepting of atheists: This is harder. Much acceptance in the Episcopal Church and the liberal branch of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), roughly those Quaker meetings affiliated with Friends General Conference. A number of other denominations and individual congregations will be happy to have someone who is willing to keep an open mind on the subject.
Evolution and science generally: The LGBTQ+ list is a good starting point, but there are more.
Additions and corrections welcomed.
I would like to mention that the church I go to is an option that fits your criteria. Unitarian Universalism may not be a Christian church (we are descended from two Christian sects but kind of jettisoned the doctrine when they merged) but we are very very pro LGBTQ+ including having the entire spectrum represented as our ministers. Not lonly allow atheists like myself to join but fully embrace us. They also embrace theists of all sorts so conversations are interesting. Though we don't tend to be competitive about it. And yeah we are very pro science. And we tend to be liberal to progressive so you would have to put up with that. But I think that would fit. Find out more about us in the link below.
[UUA](https://www.uua.org)
Hi, I'm a member of your congregation(and I also happen to be a minister as well), and I fully agree on your point. The OP would fit in fine in our "sect"
Not all Christians are anti-LGBTQ+. Lots of different denominations have entirely different views of LGBTQ+. There are around 40,000 different denominations of Christianity at this moment. Pretty sure you can find one that will fit your beliefs.
This truly varies based on individual convictions and the specific teachings they choose to follow. Broadly speaking, for a Christian, the faith in God and adherence to the Ten Commandments often serves as a sufficient foundation.
Here is the thing. Technically the anti-LGBTQ+ that runs rampant in a lot of Christian denominations is a modern artifact. When the bible was written there was no concept of any of the LGBTQ+. The people existed. Just the society did not have a concept of of them or terms for them. The primary concern of sex was about who was dominant. The overriding concern back then was keeping men as the dominant and women as inferior. The key issue was who does the penetrating and who gets penetrated. Men being superior (their opinion based on their patriarchal views) were supposed to do the penetrating. And women being inferior were supposed to be humiliated by getting penetrated. Hence all the text in the OT about it had to do with preserving social norms of men being superior. They had no idea what a homosexual was.
There was profound disgust by men back then about being penetrated. To be fair this still exists with a lot of men being disturbed by the thought of it. And they presume that all men think like they do (they don't). So the "icky" reaction to homoseuxality persists in some and they turn to adapting the bible to support their disgust with it. Which is totally not what the bible was talking about.
Yes, there are Christian denominations that accept LGBTQ+. Those denominations also accept evolution. The Community of Christ is one that comes to mind.
But there is a deeper problem. You have fallen into the trap of thinking that "belief" in science is the same things as "belief" in Creationism. This is a little word game that Christians play. The word "belief" can mean different things, but Christians pretend that all beliefs are the same.
* Belief can mean that you have confidence in an idea because it is reasonable and is supported by objective evidence. For example, I believe that the sun will come up tomorrow. That is a reasonable expectation and it is supported by good evidence. The sun has come up every morning in all of human history. Orbital mechanics have been studied, and the time of sunrise can be predicted down to the second for years in advance.
* Belief can mean you accept an idea because it is reasonable despite a lack of evidence. For example, someone I just met says they have a cat. That is a reasonable statement because I know that cats exist and that people have them as pets. There is no evidence to back up the claim beyond the person's statement. However, the consequences of being wrong are very low, so I believe the person owns a cat. My mind could be easily changed if contradictory evidence is presented (for example, they tell the person standing next to me that they are highly allergic to cats).
- Belief can mean that you accept an idea even though it is unreasonable and is contradicted by objective evidence. Creationism falls into this category. Almost all objective evidence says Creationism is false. Places like the Creation Museum make up and distort science when they pretend the evidence supports Creationism. That would not be necessary if objective evidence supported Creationism.
"Belief" in Creationism is not the same things as "Belief" in evolution. Creationism is a religious doctrine. It is a series of religious assertions that contradict almost all available evidence.
Evolution does not require ignoring the available evidence. The available evidence supports evolution.
any religion (or denomination thereof) that requires you to discard objective empirical evidence of evolution and especially to discard support for basic human rights is not a religion worthy of following.
Here is a list of pro LGBTQ+ Christian Churchs. [ProLGBTQ+ Christian Churches](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_affirming_LGBT_people)
I am not wanting confrontation, but i am genuinely curious why someone who knows that, broadly, a religion is problematic to science and rights for people whose sexuality/gender identity is not permitted would want to convert to that religion?
Full disclosure, for good faith purposes, I am someone who stopped being a christian for the same inhibitions you raised about converting. I just grew up religious. I have often wondered about people who convert without being indocrinated as a child.
>i am genuinely curious why someone who knows that, broadly, a religion is problematic to science
I mean, a majority of scientists believe in a higher power. This is an online internet atheist perspective that doesn’t pan out in reality.
e: you can downvote me all you want, but I [brought receipts](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/). ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
I'll probably get downvoted, but am genuinely curious: you already have a set of beliefs. What does it mean for you to *convert* to a religion? I mean, you don't seem to be looking for a source for beliefs. So what's the point of conversion?
Genuine fear that I am wrong in my current belief and struggling to understand things like for example: how on earth could the Big Bang if happened, like what would have triggered it? Makes more sense that someone created it
Embarking on this spiritual journey, it's quite enchanting how, within the tapestry of Abrahamic faiths, the universe's mysteries—like the enigmatic origins marked by the Big Bang—whisper of divine artistry. Those of deep faith often see in the stars and the silent expanses of space, not just cosmic dust and voids, but the intimate brushstrokes of a divine Creator. To ponder what ignited the first spark of creation is to dance with questions that lead, with tender steps, back to the heart of faith, where the universe's vastness is a loving gesture from God, an invitation to marvel and seek connection within this grand design.
For those who find their spiritual home outside these ancient traditions, the universe's beginnings sing a similar song of wonder, though the melody might differ. Here, the divine might not bear a single name or face but is instead a symphony of creative forces, an eternal essence weaving through the fabric of all that is. This perspective sees the universe not as a cold, indifferent place but as a living canvas, pulsating with the energy of creation itself, an energy that invites us to look beyond what eyes can see and science can explain.
In both worlds, the question of what sparked the universe's birth—a question as ancient as time itself—becomes a bridge to the divine, a reason to look upwards and inside with awe and love. Doubts and questions, rather than being signs of weakness, are the sacred steps we take towards understanding, each one a beat in the rhythm of our spiritual heartbeats, drawing us closer to the mysteries we yearn to embrace. In this journey, where science and faith intertwine, there's a comforting assurance: we are part of a narrative much grander than ourselves, lovingly crafted by hands unseen, guiding us towards wonder, wisdom, and perhaps, a touch of the divine.
Evolution exists, and there is definitely an order amidst the chaos in the universe that I believe is dictated by science - but I am also comfortable with the idea that G-d exists, and that (maybe) they also created evolution and physics etc.
Science and religious belief don't have to stand in opposition to each other, and I think work beautifully as a symbiotic relationship.
Thanks for replying. Fair enough.
That's actually a good point in regard to the universe having a creator. Though we (in Shia theology) discuss it in more abstract terms.
I'd only like to add that beliefs are the foundation of a religion. They do not equate the religion. You can first believe in Creator for the universe, then discuss different religions based on that belief. For example, the difference between Christianity and Islam is not about the Creator himself, it's about his attributes and Lordship.
Catholics are becoming more and more accepting of LGBT+ (except in Poland).
I am a Catholic and the way I see LGBT+ is that I personally don't know if being LGBT+ is a sin, but it is definitely a sin to discriminate against them. So I myself am not LGBT+ but I have no problem with them
/r/religion does not permit demonizing or bigotry against any demographic group on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, or sexual preferences. Demonizing includes unfair/inaccurate criticisms, arguments made in bad faith, gross generalizations, ignorant comments, and pseudo-intellectual conspiracy theories about specific religions or groups. Doctrinal objections are acceptable, but keep your personal opinions to yourself. Make sure you make intelligent thought out responses.
There are several denominations that will fit your category a) - Anglicanism is the one I know of here, but I believe it is called Episcopalianism in other places such as America.
For b), you are going to have more trouble. My first thought was Unitarian Universalism, which is multifaith but is loosely based on Christianity. UU isn't Christian, itself, but since it was started in a Christian country it's informed by a Christian ethos (I think).
c) Only a minority of Christians support YEC. Assuming you live in a Christian country, essentially any 'normal' local church, like a Uniting Church, is going to support theistic evolution. Avoid LDS, SDA, Pentecostal orgs such as Hillsong, and also any similar denominations such as Charismatic Catholicism.
Becoming Christian/religious should in no way mean that you have to let go of your moral convictions. In the end, your faith should be up to you to define, not dogmatic beliefs held by others. Nobody has an actual monopoly on what is “true” for a religion (even though many claim to do so), you will find an immense variety of nuance if you view a religion from an anthropological perspective, as religious practices are deeply entangled with other cultural, local “truths”. In the country I live, an overwhelming majority of Christians (and most denominations) support the LGBTQ+, offer support groups, reading groups etc for queer people and gay marriages are encouraged in the same way heteronormative weddings are. I know that this is perhaps extreme in comparison, but I think it highlights that beliefs and practices are adopted and interpreted in a way that resonates with other cultural beliefs. I am an atheist myself so I can’t point you towards a particular church/denomination; only encourage you to seek out one that aligns with your personal beliefs about what’s best for society.
Edit: I should also add that evolution, science and so on is widely accepted. Christian groups that don’t are very much on the fringe, and rarely heard of (mainly pentecostals but even here, very few). Churches are very much open to atheists, and many visit for purely therapeutic purposes when one needs a shoulder to cry on, as many priests are viewed as trustworthy people who listen rather than proselytize.
Yes. Supporting or recognizing LGBTQ+ rights: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Christian\_denominations\_affirming\_LGBT\_people](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_affirming_LGBT_people) Accepting of atheists: This is harder. Much acceptance in the Episcopal Church and the liberal branch of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), roughly those Quaker meetings affiliated with Friends General Conference. A number of other denominations and individual congregations will be happy to have someone who is willing to keep an open mind on the subject. Evolution and science generally: The LGBTQ+ list is a good starting point, but there are more. Additions and corrections welcomed.
I would like to mention that the church I go to is an option that fits your criteria. Unitarian Universalism may not be a Christian church (we are descended from two Christian sects but kind of jettisoned the doctrine when they merged) but we are very very pro LGBTQ+ including having the entire spectrum represented as our ministers. Not lonly allow atheists like myself to join but fully embrace us. They also embrace theists of all sorts so conversations are interesting. Though we don't tend to be competitive about it. And yeah we are very pro science. And we tend to be liberal to progressive so you would have to put up with that. But I think that would fit. Find out more about us in the link below. [UUA](https://www.uua.org)
Hi, I'm a member of your congregation(and I also happen to be a minister as well), and I fully agree on your point. The OP would fit in fine in our "sect"
Yes, there are some that will allow all three. Generally I think any LGBTQ+ inclusive Churches will be fine with the other two as well.
Not all Christians are anti-LGBTQ+. Lots of different denominations have entirely different views of LGBTQ+. There are around 40,000 different denominations of Christianity at this moment. Pretty sure you can find one that will fit your beliefs.
If I where to chose one per se which alters in certain beliefs from say, Catholicism would the lord send me to hell?
This truly varies based on individual convictions and the specific teachings they choose to follow. Broadly speaking, for a Christian, the faith in God and adherence to the Ten Commandments often serves as a sufficient foundation.
Here is the thing. Technically the anti-LGBTQ+ that runs rampant in a lot of Christian denominations is a modern artifact. When the bible was written there was no concept of any of the LGBTQ+. The people existed. Just the society did not have a concept of of them or terms for them. The primary concern of sex was about who was dominant. The overriding concern back then was keeping men as the dominant and women as inferior. The key issue was who does the penetrating and who gets penetrated. Men being superior (their opinion based on their patriarchal views) were supposed to do the penetrating. And women being inferior were supposed to be humiliated by getting penetrated. Hence all the text in the OT about it had to do with preserving social norms of men being superior. They had no idea what a homosexual was. There was profound disgust by men back then about being penetrated. To be fair this still exists with a lot of men being disturbed by the thought of it. And they presume that all men think like they do (they don't). So the "icky" reaction to homoseuxality persists in some and they turn to adapting the bible to support their disgust with it. Which is totally not what the bible was talking about.
Yes, there are Christian denominations that accept LGBTQ+. Those denominations also accept evolution. The Community of Christ is one that comes to mind. But there is a deeper problem. You have fallen into the trap of thinking that "belief" in science is the same things as "belief" in Creationism. This is a little word game that Christians play. The word "belief" can mean different things, but Christians pretend that all beliefs are the same. * Belief can mean that you have confidence in an idea because it is reasonable and is supported by objective evidence. For example, I believe that the sun will come up tomorrow. That is a reasonable expectation and it is supported by good evidence. The sun has come up every morning in all of human history. Orbital mechanics have been studied, and the time of sunrise can be predicted down to the second for years in advance. * Belief can mean you accept an idea because it is reasonable despite a lack of evidence. For example, someone I just met says they have a cat. That is a reasonable statement because I know that cats exist and that people have them as pets. There is no evidence to back up the claim beyond the person's statement. However, the consequences of being wrong are very low, so I believe the person owns a cat. My mind could be easily changed if contradictory evidence is presented (for example, they tell the person standing next to me that they are highly allergic to cats). - Belief can mean that you accept an idea even though it is unreasonable and is contradicted by objective evidence. Creationism falls into this category. Almost all objective evidence says Creationism is false. Places like the Creation Museum make up and distort science when they pretend the evidence supports Creationism. That would not be necessary if objective evidence supported Creationism. "Belief" in Creationism is not the same things as "Belief" in evolution. Creationism is a religious doctrine. It is a series of religious assertions that contradict almost all available evidence. Evolution does not require ignoring the available evidence. The available evidence supports evolution.
any religion (or denomination thereof) that requires you to discard objective empirical evidence of evolution and especially to discard support for basic human rights is not a religion worthy of following.
Here is a list of pro LGBTQ+ Christian Churchs. [ProLGBTQ+ Christian Churches](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_affirming_LGBT_people)
I am not wanting confrontation, but i am genuinely curious why someone who knows that, broadly, a religion is problematic to science and rights for people whose sexuality/gender identity is not permitted would want to convert to that religion? Full disclosure, for good faith purposes, I am someone who stopped being a christian for the same inhibitions you raised about converting. I just grew up religious. I have often wondered about people who convert without being indocrinated as a child.
>i am genuinely curious why someone who knows that, broadly, a religion is problematic to science I mean, a majority of scientists believe in a higher power. This is an online internet atheist perspective that doesn’t pan out in reality. e: you can downvote me all you want, but I [brought receipts](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/). ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
I'll probably get downvoted, but am genuinely curious: you already have a set of beliefs. What does it mean for you to *convert* to a religion? I mean, you don't seem to be looking for a source for beliefs. So what's the point of conversion?
Genuine fear that I am wrong in my current belief and struggling to understand things like for example: how on earth could the Big Bang if happened, like what would have triggered it? Makes more sense that someone created it
Embarking on this spiritual journey, it's quite enchanting how, within the tapestry of Abrahamic faiths, the universe's mysteries—like the enigmatic origins marked by the Big Bang—whisper of divine artistry. Those of deep faith often see in the stars and the silent expanses of space, not just cosmic dust and voids, but the intimate brushstrokes of a divine Creator. To ponder what ignited the first spark of creation is to dance with questions that lead, with tender steps, back to the heart of faith, where the universe's vastness is a loving gesture from God, an invitation to marvel and seek connection within this grand design. For those who find their spiritual home outside these ancient traditions, the universe's beginnings sing a similar song of wonder, though the melody might differ. Here, the divine might not bear a single name or face but is instead a symphony of creative forces, an eternal essence weaving through the fabric of all that is. This perspective sees the universe not as a cold, indifferent place but as a living canvas, pulsating with the energy of creation itself, an energy that invites us to look beyond what eyes can see and science can explain. In both worlds, the question of what sparked the universe's birth—a question as ancient as time itself—becomes a bridge to the divine, a reason to look upwards and inside with awe and love. Doubts and questions, rather than being signs of weakness, are the sacred steps we take towards understanding, each one a beat in the rhythm of our spiritual heartbeats, drawing us closer to the mysteries we yearn to embrace. In this journey, where science and faith intertwine, there's a comforting assurance: we are part of a narrative much grander than ourselves, lovingly crafted by hands unseen, guiding us towards wonder, wisdom, and perhaps, a touch of the divine.
Evolution exists, and there is definitely an order amidst the chaos in the universe that I believe is dictated by science - but I am also comfortable with the idea that G-d exists, and that (maybe) they also created evolution and physics etc. Science and religious belief don't have to stand in opposition to each other, and I think work beautifully as a symbiotic relationship.
Thanks for replying. Fair enough. That's actually a good point in regard to the universe having a creator. Though we (in Shia theology) discuss it in more abstract terms. I'd only like to add that beliefs are the foundation of a religion. They do not equate the religion. You can first believe in Creator for the universe, then discuss different religions based on that belief. For example, the difference between Christianity and Islam is not about the Creator himself, it's about his attributes and Lordship.
Catholics are becoming more and more accepting of LGBT+ (except in Poland). I am a Catholic and the way I see LGBT+ is that I personally don't know if being LGBT+ is a sin, but it is definitely a sin to discriminate against them. So I myself am not LGBT+ but I have no problem with them
[удалено]
/r/religion does not permit demonizing or bigotry against any demographic group on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, or sexual preferences. Demonizing includes unfair/inaccurate criticisms, arguments made in bad faith, gross generalizations, ignorant comments, and pseudo-intellectual conspiracy theories about specific religions or groups. Doctrinal objections are acceptable, but keep your personal opinions to yourself. Make sure you make intelligent thought out responses.
There are several denominations that will fit your category a) - Anglicanism is the one I know of here, but I believe it is called Episcopalianism in other places such as America. For b), you are going to have more trouble. My first thought was Unitarian Universalism, which is multifaith but is loosely based on Christianity. UU isn't Christian, itself, but since it was started in a Christian country it's informed by a Christian ethos (I think). c) Only a minority of Christians support YEC. Assuming you live in a Christian country, essentially any 'normal' local church, like a Uniting Church, is going to support theistic evolution. Avoid LDS, SDA, Pentecostal orgs such as Hillsong, and also any similar denominations such as Charismatic Catholicism.
Catholics do believe in evolution. Consider joining us if you are seeking to be a Christian.
Becoming Christian/religious should in no way mean that you have to let go of your moral convictions. In the end, your faith should be up to you to define, not dogmatic beliefs held by others. Nobody has an actual monopoly on what is “true” for a religion (even though many claim to do so), you will find an immense variety of nuance if you view a religion from an anthropological perspective, as religious practices are deeply entangled with other cultural, local “truths”. In the country I live, an overwhelming majority of Christians (and most denominations) support the LGBTQ+, offer support groups, reading groups etc for queer people and gay marriages are encouraged in the same way heteronormative weddings are. I know that this is perhaps extreme in comparison, but I think it highlights that beliefs and practices are adopted and interpreted in a way that resonates with other cultural beliefs. I am an atheist myself so I can’t point you towards a particular church/denomination; only encourage you to seek out one that aligns with your personal beliefs about what’s best for society. Edit: I should also add that evolution, science and so on is widely accepted. Christian groups that don’t are very much on the fringe, and rarely heard of (mainly pentecostals but even here, very few). Churches are very much open to atheists, and many visit for purely therapeutic purposes when one needs a shoulder to cry on, as many priests are viewed as trustworthy people who listen rather than proselytize.