There's little doubt our influence is growing weaker. What I purpose is that we must reunite as one rule, and to carry out the same goals.
Also, if there's any disparity between our beautiful people; we must work to resolve them by methods of evidence, philosophical reasoning, and reexamination to find the truth. Rather than be isolated in secular space.
The Church mustn't be known as a 'service', but what it was originally intended: a community, which we are all connected.
We are gonna build a Christian tribe.
Taking care of widows and providing medical services is one of the most traditionally christian things you can do, now get off the computer and go do good works.
Remember to send all donations to me btw.
+Bread and Wine
+Unlocks Access to Certain Women
+Capes if you reach a certain level in the development tree
+/-Can get away with pedophilia if you reach a certain level in the development tree
>Taking care of widows and providing medical services is one of the most traditionally christian things
specifically helping others, Good start.
>Remember to send all donations to me.
Do you need it? If not, fuck off.
What did Jesus say about it?
"My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it."
If this establishes a ranking system by Jesus, it'll depend on the Pope actions, and believe. But anyone can become closer to God, regardless of 'pope' status.
>oh happy day
Fuck off, weed.
I've seen transform by the word of God.
The argument presented for a higher power is more compelling than most.
There's outside evidence that the bible is more historic.
Christianity gives objective foundations like; Morality, human equality, reason, etc.
>Do you need it?
What are we, communists? Just give me the money and go get your hands dirty. I've got palaces to build and people to bribe.
Watch your tone. That'll be 12 hail marys, two complete rosarys, and a pilgrimage to Jerusalem for you.
>please, fuck off
One more time and you're going on a walking tour of christian persecution sites around Europe.
>You were asking for charity.
I wasn't asking for charity. I was telling you to behave like a good christian and work, then when you receive donations, hand them up to me so that I might administrate properly.
>I wasn't asking for charity.
Give (money or goods) for a good cause, for example to a charity.
By oxford dictionaries
"Something that is given to a charity..."
>One more time and you're going on a walking tour of christian persecution sites around Europe.
So...You want me to prove Matthew 24:9? Wow, I never knew you cared so much, or you're just entering a field which you have very little intelligence about.
The issue with moral base for Islam is that it's contradictory. One verse will say man-kind is (somewhat) equal then you'll find verse about beheading non-believers.
With that said. What I search for in other religions is outside evidence supporting what that certain religion teaches.
>an act or instance of presenting something as a gift, grant, or contribution.
Nope, no charity. Just a contribution to our fund that I might use to improve the prestige of our new church while enriching myself.
>So...You want me to prove Matthew 24:9
What? No! No one here is prophesying or causing tectonic shifts. You just just need to think about your language and a good long prayerful walk should help.
Don't shop around for a faith
It doesn't have to be one that you agree with 100%
I follow the One, Holy, Apolistic Church, because I am a stupid mortal who has lived 18 years, what could I possibly know about the universe? I like the ancient traditions and beliefs of the Catholic Church because they seem less affected by being "hip" and all about "you, who God will love no matter what so just follow your dreams~". I think the Orthodox church may be just as right if not moreso, but it's the whole pascal's wager. Denying the Catholic faith for another is too risky especially if it truly is the correct way, which no one truly has any way of knowing. Don't pick one that is easy to be or all sugar and gumdrops. God's judgement is not swayed by your own opinions, it will always be the same, so picking one that is more convenient for you in favor of another is irrelevant; your allegiance should be about God, not fun or qts or whether you like the certain beliefs. Pick one that you truly feel is Godly. God doesn't care if you're happy, only if you're worshipping and following his will in a certain way that is difficult to determine.
With this outlook, you should probably be a Lutheran.
If you want to have power and influence in the west you need something less ridiculous than Christianity. You'd need something like pagan pantheism, at least it has roots in our bloodlines and makes sense metaphorically. As in gods representing forces of nature and humanity, rather than one Jewish god who's just kind of a dick.
>while enriching myself.
>What? No! No one here is prophesying or causing tectonic shifts. You just just need to think about your language and a good long prayerful walk should help.
Fuck off. You are like a hollow shell, people will help you by filling you, but you're dead and just drain away.
Here some outside proof:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artifacts_in_biblical_archaeology (some of the narrative is biased and outdated)
>Here some outside proof:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artifacts_in_biblical_archaeology (some of the narrative is biased and outdated)
How'd I guess?
And other faiths don't have this?
Can Mecca not be found? Some of these intersect with Judaism too. Other faiths have had their secular scholars and chroniclers as well.
>Fuck off. You are like a hollow shell, people will help you by filling you, but you're dead and just drain away.
Yeah, well you have a stupid face.
>a book that has been translated numerous times and was based on oral traditions and testimonies is 100% infallible
>Jesus isnt in the eucharist even though the Bible says so
>How'd I guess?
I can't help with that, it's not my choice.
>Can Mecca not be found?
Again, I don't deny there's outside evidence for Islam, but I don't find it as evident and compelling as Christianity. Also, there's proof for Christianity which contradicts Muhammad's teaches. (the first source)
I forgot to add this as one of the proofs
>Some of these intersect with Judaism too.
Yeah...Is this a surprise to you?
>Fuck off. You are like a hollow shell...
I was addressing to someone else, not you.
>I was addressing to someone else, not you.
I'm two of the three posters you addressed.
I wanted to see how flustered you'd get and how the other guy came to find Christianity out of all the religions one might examine.
>Yeah...Is this a surprise to you?
Surprise? No. But in a discussion about the historical/archaeological justification for Christianity, there's an awful lot of Torah there.
It's been too long since I sat down and read Tacitus. I think I'll give him a once over tomorrow morni- rather later this morning.
>none of these are specific to christianity except the historicity of the bible
Yeah...uh...That's what outside evidence is.
>I wanted to see how flustered you'd get and how the other guy came to find Christianity out of all the religions one might examine.
Well, are you satisfied?
Assuming you meant to tag me as well, no, it didn't. Although it looked for a moment like you would follow, I wasn't able to lead you into the pit where we might sling clods of mud at each other.
Correct me if I'm wrong. Nietzsche considered god dead simply because few were using god as a bases in their lives at the era he was in?
>step outside the cave
2016, believing Socrates existed, but not Jesus. Soooo euphoric!
However, those who speak about Socrates as an actual person (primary sources) are a bit less creditable if that's the case.
>2016, believing Socrates existed, but not Jesus. Soooo euphoric!
Socrates not existing has no relevance. Okay, he didn't. "His" ponderings have their own merit.
Now Jesus didn't exist. Oops, the whole of Christianity is completely discredited, because the beliefs hinge on his poorly evidenced existence.
>Remember to send all donations to me.
This was supposed to be a throwaway, mildly baitious line.
>>Do you need it? If not, fuck off.
Everything after this was trying to bring out the hot head I assumed you were.
>Okay, what would be your first attempt if I was coaxed into debate?
You were to be the lead in this tango. Just purposeful misinterpretation and continuing to tell you to put your nose to the grindstone of good works while making others wealthy.
No, actually, 20 more years and every 1st world country will be Muslim. It's a shame that by the time christianity is defeated intellectually, secularism is going to be defeated demographically.
YOu can bitch and moan and ignore as much as you wan't, Most parts of the developed world already have a irreligious majority, and the trendline is the same on the other countries. Religion is going down, and soon it will be only a big thing in 3rd world shitholes. Deal with it.
It won't die, it will just become irrelevant, like it already is today in Scandinavia or most parts of western Europe.
Like 15-20% believers vs 80% non believers. Good luck pushing your agenda then.
Yes, and now it finally has become true in the majority of OECD members. And the next review will be just a little worse and so on.
But hey, feel free to ignore that, makes it even more easy.
That's up to you
It might help if you didn't use all the doublethink and pretzel logic to squeeze meanings out of your holy texts that aren't present.
But then I suppose you wouldn't have much of a religion left. Tough luck, guys, it was a fun millennia or two.
I don't understand why you would want your religion to have influence... You want to change the way other people live their lives because you believe that your way is the only way?
I'm glad Christianity is losing influence.
>I don't understand why you would want your religion to have influence
That's how naive rationalizing and naive intervention work. Fundies like the ones you find on 4chan can only think and behave in a naive fashion. They turn even the most complex problems of the world into moral problems that can only be resolved by thinking and behaving in exactly the same fashion as they do, which, oddly enough, is very close to the moral program of Marxism.
Basically, they view every deviation from their 'infallible' way of life as an error and obsessively try to stomp them out, no matter how many times we explain to them that this has at best little to no effect and at worst actively undermines their own religion
>I don't understand why you would want your religion to have influence... You want to change the way other people live their lives because you believe that your way is the only way?
Gee anon, I don't know why a group of people, having the belief that their religous and moral system is the best moral and religious system, and also holding the belief that if everyone was united in this belief then there would be less conflict, more goodwill torwards others and a betterment of humanity as a whole would want everyone to follow their religion.
It's a real mystery ain't it, people wanting to try to help others become better people.
But a bunch if people who don't believe in anything, and reject higher powers acting militantly about it, even though their "belief" is simply a lack of or rejection of belief, that makes sense and is definitely the thing that should be influential, right?
And here you demonstrate everything I wrote here >>677362
>They turn even the most complex problems of the world into moral problems
>there would be less conflict, more goodwill torwards others and a betterment of humanity as a whole would want everyone to follow their religion
>that can only be resolved by thinking and behaving in exactly the same fashion as they do
>their religous and moral system is the best moral and religious system
> they view every deviation from their 'infallible' way of life as an error and obsessively try to stomp them out
> people who don't believe in anything, and reject higher powers acting militantly about it, even though their "belief" is simply a lack of or rejection of belief
Thank you for proving my point
>>thank you for proving my point
>implying I actually believe what I wrote
While I agree with what you said, my statements aren't meant to reflect my personal beliefs, instead they are sarcastic way of expressing to him the militant christian mindset, and then comparing it to that of the militant atheist mindset. That doesn't prove anything, it's just a different way of answering his question.
>But a bunch if people who don't believe in anything, and reject higher powers acting militantly about it
Considering that Christposters are more or less nonstop shitposters on /his/, don't throw stones.
You also act as though your religion has no fucking baggage of its own. Teaching people to hate their own bodies, ambition, and desires. To continually deny themselves in the one life they get in exchange for a fictitious afterlife.
Go away, and take your false ecumenism with you.
He is a cuck, but he is also The Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Christ, Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, and Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church.
Just because you don't like him, or don't like the heresy spreading around the Church doesn't mean you have to leave the Mother Church.
To leave the church is to be cut off from our Lord Jesus Christ.