Rule 5D Explained

[u/ruizbujc]

Many people aren't getting this. Let's be very simple:

Don't Be Lazy

1. If your post is a title-only, it will be removed. You must include a substantive enough body to your post to explain why you're asking the question, why you think people should listen to what you have to say, how to apply a concept, how you arrived at your conclusions, etc. Something of substance has to be there. We have always moderated this way and we will continue to do so.

2. If your post is Scripture-only, it will be removed. I know this one gets a lot of objection, but no one has changed our minds yet. It's lazy. The presumption is that anyone who has access to Reddit also has access to the Bible through the same internet. We all have Scripture. One person might need a different passage than the one you posted, so why should the passage you like get more attention than the others? Oh, you actually have an answer to that question? Great! Put that answer in your post as well so that everyone can know why you're posting it.

Don't Be Shady

1. Posts/comments that imply a point while being evasive about actually making it MAY be removed. This is part of the "reasonable quality" bit of Rule 5D. Certainly there's a degree of wit and implication that's part of normal speech. We're fine with that. But some people try to post in ambiguous ways without giving clear conclusions and obviously trying to trap people through word games. Being evasive and dodging issues just to sow doubt in someone else's view without stating your own is obnoxious. If you want to make a point, just make the point instead of playing coy. It makes it look like you have ulterior motives, which will cause us to treat you like a troll. Yes, that means a ban.

2. Posting opinions (especially conspiracy theories) without backing them up may result in removal. Obviously we're extremely lenient in how we enforce this part - especially when it comes to the comments. I'm not sure we've ever removed a comment on this ground. But sometimes we see posts where someone shares their own personal view on something, and it's a rather "out in left field" kind of thing, and they don't give any Scriptural basis to support it. At best, they make political or philosophical arguments. This is how cults get started. Granted, if the point is reasonable, we've often been pretty relaxed. But if you're talking about how Trump is the antichrist or the coronavirus is from the white-horsed rider, you'd better have a fantastically clear analysis of the appropriate biblical texts if you want to get your content through. Otherwise, we're removing it.

Don't Be ... Grandstand-y (yeah, I didn't feel like thinking of another word to fit the pattern)

1. Preaching to the choir may result in removal. This is the real issue that has prompted this post on Rule 5. Several people like to share what they call "objectionable" or "unpopular" views that they know will widely be accepted on this sub. It's a form of karma-whoring (though perhaps more for self-validation than actual karma). These are the anti-r/Christianity posts, or the ones that talk about how crazy all those liberal christians must be for not seeing the "truth" about whatever LGBT issue comes up for the day.

Most people who post these things, on LGBT issues, for example, don't have any actual in-person relationships with actual LGBT people other than "One sits on the other side of the office from me" - or if they do, they don't bring it up in their posts. There's no application. No personal investment. No question or curiosity on the subject. It's just a grand announcement of their own frustration or position in the hope of hearing lots of validation from a like-minded community. Your validation should come from God, not from us.

Now, if you're unsure of your position and you need validation that you're on the right track, then simply explaining your position and insecurities followed by a question or request for insight is certainly fine. But grandstanding just to hear the applause is cringe-worthy. No, we can't know your actual motive. Yes, the way you communicate can give us enough insight to make a judgment-call anyway.

---

Final Notes

There are other ways to violate Rule 5D. These are just the ones some people seem to be missing.

The vast majority of posts are fine. We have just seen a rise in the types of posts that are addressed here and want to make sure the community at large is aware, as the more people who are aware of the rules, the less people who will unintentionally violate them - and this makes for better discussion all-around, rather than having dead posts dangling out there - especially if they're the kind of content that will give Christ a bad name.

---

UPDATE 5/29/25

Posts/comments that look like they have been written by AI may be removed at mod discretion. Arguing in modmail that you personally wrote it and didn't use AI is not sufficient. If you're concerned, just ask the mod who removed it what they'd need to do to rewrite the post to get it approved.

[u/ruizbujc]

Hi all - it's been years since I wrote this, but I understand it's becoming an issue again - and a new wave of "low quality content" is being addressed: AI scripted posts/comments.

So, I've updated this post to address that, but wanted to remind you all of what Rule 5D is all about. Let's try to keep the quality of this place up. Thanks!

[u/ThePastelCactus]

😂Welcome to reddit, where the word “karma-whoring” is acceptable on a Christian subreddit.

[u/ruizbujc → u/ThePastelCactus]

I thought about that before using the phrase. But even the Bible uses the word "whore" often enough, depending on your translation. There's nothing wrong about the word, and it's certainly not being used in a misogynistic context here, which is the primary context where the word is frowned upon in modern culture.

But even at that, even though I personally don't use cuss words (I literally can't think of a single time in my life I have), I'm not of the theological view that it's inherently sinful to do so. There are certainly sinful ways to use words - but that's true for any word, not just cuss words. There are also non-sinful ways to use even cuss words.

[u/voicesinmyhand]

If your post is Scripture-only, it will be removed. I know this one gets a lot of objection, but no one has changed our minds yet. It's lazy.

It is lazy, yes, but I think the bigger, underlying problem is that it pretty much always shows up as manipulation.

[u/ruizbujc → u/voicesinmyhand]

Not necessarily. Yes, it gets done in the comments like that. But even more common is people who literally write up whole posts that are just copy/paste of a chapter they read recently. No explanation. No agenda. No context. Just pasting verses.

That's why I addressed the "don't be shady" stuff separately.

[u/ilikedota5]

Can I talk about the Slaveholder's Rebellion (American Civil War), and walk through how Christianity was twisted?

[u/ruizbujc → u/ilikedota5]

Sure, as long as you can back up what you say with historical reference and show the biblical foundation for why you believe Christianity became twisted. That would be a fascinating post.

[u/xaveria]

Is this why the post expressing disappointment with r/TrueChristian was removed? The one titled: "I am appalled with parts of r/TrueChristian today" ?

[u/TheNerdChaplain]

Thanks for the reinforcement and clarification.

[u/Samanata]

This is one of the most constructive and well-maintained subreddits on Reddit. The work that the moderators and community do is appreciated.

[u/1Sam167]

There are a lot of comments that don’t reference scripture.

I get that people have opinions outside of the Bible, but most times I come here specifically looking for answers backed up by the Bible, whether you believe it supports your opinion or destroys (for lack of a better term) my opinion.

I often don’t see that or get it. I get wise and sound advice, but most times I’m here looking for something built on the Bible, not just what you think and feel in your heart.

[u/voicesinmyhand → u/1Sam167]

I get that people have opinions outside of the Bible, but most times I come here specifically looking for answers backed up by the Bible, whether you believe it supports your opinion or destroys (for lack of a better term) my opinion.

Scripture is great, but I think you may have missed OP's point...

Let's take a baby-version of the problem:

...Judas went out and hung himself.... <flips a few pages> Go thou and do likewise.

Just because something "shows up" in the bible, doesn't mean that the face-value-interpretation is biblical. Prooftexting sounds a lot like "good 'ol Sola Scriptura", but usually just starts people down a completely unbiblical path. The better method is to simply read one of the stories or laws or whatever "from start to end" and do actual "Critical Thinking^TM" with what you have read.

[u/1Sam167 → u/voicesinmyhand]

What I meant is that when I ask questions here, I’d like people to point me in a direction using scripture. I’ve read the Bible front to back a few times, but I often come upon a story someone is sharing that I’ve forgotten because there are so many to choose from.

I use critical thinking when people share scriptures to back up what they claim. I like to go back and read the scripture in context because it avoids a lot of like what you pointed out where people take one verse out of a bunch and can twist it whichever way they’d like, for good or evil.

One of my recent posts was like this. I wanted clarification and opinions from others on the topic of forgiveness. Give me your idea of what forgiveness is and why you believe that using scripture. I specifically used a [Christians Only] tag because I was hoping to only get people who follow the Bible and use it to back up their conclusions. I didn’t get a lot of that. I got one person quoting a scripture I already covered and that was all they included in their comment and then a few other people commenting their opinion. I received a private message from someone quoting Buddha or something which is exactly what I was trying to avoid.

The discussion never developed into what I was looking for. What I got felt like something I could get from any secular subreddit.

[u/theserviceofhishonor → u/1Sam167]

That's why I always use at least a verse to back up any point I make. I don't like people thinking that what I say is just opinion, rather than what Scripture says.

[u/dion_reimer]

Can you give an example of something that would be removed for being shady through implication?

[u/ruizbujc → u/dion_reimer]

Most actual examples are taken down, so I can't really point you to anything on the sub. That said, an example from another self-alleged believer was a conversation where he was saying things like:

• "That's a good point. But how do you explain verses like ...?" and then he'd point to the baptism of Jesus about the three persons of God separately appearing. The person would explain that and he'd say ...

• "I can understand why you'd think that. What do you make of ...?" and then he'd quote Jesus saying, "not my will, but yours" in Gathsemene. Then after that was explained, the person would move on:

• "Interesting. How about this passage?" and it's another verse non-trinitarians try to use to prove polytheism instead.

After a while the pattern becomes obvious. They're a non-trinitarian using a Christian flair. They don't want to get their flair removed and be labeled a non-trinitarian, so they're cautious never to admit their own actual view so that we can't say they violated a rule for preaching against the Nicene Creed. By doing it through implicit questions, they're making arguments in favor of non-trinitarianism without actually arguing the point - it's all through implication.

This same type of conversation happens with people trying to disprove the existence of God, people trying to convince others that homosexuality is perfectly acceptable to God, and lately from people trying to shed doubt on the authenticity of any of Paul's letters.

They're careful not to share their own view because they know that doing so would be a bannable offense. But they still want to persuade others to their view. As such, they commit bannable offenses through implication rather than directly, thinking they can get away with it. We're not allowing that.

[u/ryanduff]

Point 3 is appreciated. I can think of a few posters who act this way in comments, never using scripture. They tend to get downvoted because their stance is often not accepted here. It’s low effort disagreeing without any attempt to even show people their point of view.

[u/Zealousideal-Elk3230]

I had a post removed about "What the Bible says about itself."

I posted it for discussion. I wrote it probably 8 years ago.

It was more scriptures than my own opinion. It had nothing to do with grandstanding or AI.

I'm a bit confused as to why it was removed?

It had nothing to do with the LGBTQ community at all.

Is there an issue with posting personal studies?

I have hundreds of studies that I've done over the past several years, and each study is 90% scripture and 10% my own views about the scriptures. 

I don't past any studies so that I can "grandstand." I post them for general discussion on a certain topic. I always hope that something stands out to someone who reads it,that leads to a discussion.

The study I posted about what the Bible says about itself got a very rude and wrong reply. The person claimed that the Bible doesn't say anything about itself, and then my post was removed.

Sometimes maybe even moderators are wrong. In that case, I'd say they were.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/MRH2 → u/[deleted]]

He's not. These are very wise and pertinent rules.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/ruizbujc → u/[deleted]]

Without a link, no. It must be linked in a DM or message. Comments on a thread are not a good way to reach us. I'm locking this post so it doesn't happen again accidentally.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/Byzantium → u/[deleted]]

Dozens of people told you what the problem is.

Please stop.

[u/Dr_Acula7489 → u/[deleted]]

Posts about AI responses to queries are low value. AI is easy to manipulate and has no soul, and posting about it does nothing to forward the mission of the subreddit, which is discussion between human beings about Christ and Christianity. That’s why it was removed.