The Council of Nicea

File: Constantine.jpg (154KB, 800x1067px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 800x1067px

the criterias came from this gentleman in the pix who said
>You all are rustling my jimmies
>you have 3 days to finish or I hang you all

hello botched work

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasius_of_Alexandria
Ask this Saint. Read up on theach Holy Father's in general.

>>1629562
sweet bait, delicious

>>1629439
Nicaea did not adress canon in any way. Stop listening to muslims
The first ecumenical council to declare a council was the council of Trent, which included the apocryphal deuterocanon. The Eastern Orthodox still do not require acceptance of the deuterocanon, and Christians reject the deuterocanon as canon, and rightly so.

>>1629689
to declare a canon*

The modern Bible came to be at the council of Carthage, not nicae

>>1629689
You moron.

The Eastern Orthodox takes the Deuterocanon as Scripture

Same with everyone else during the time of Nicaea, before and after. The only difference was how much of it is scripture.

Some even disregard as canonical some of the NT books as the Peshitta shows

If any, all this really shows is Protestants going "muh Appcrypha isn't Biblical" aren't even knowledgable of history or outright alter it

>>1629790
Constantine?

>>1629790
>The Eastern Orthodox takes the Deuterocanon as Scripture
False, they neither accept nor reject it.
>Same with everyone else during the time of Nicaea, before and after.
*tips mitre*
>Some even disregard as canonical some of the NT books
So?
>If any, all this really shows is Protestants going "muh Appcrypha isn't Biblical" aren't even knowledgable of history or outright alter it
You're projecting
In reality, rejection of the Apocrypha as scripture skyrocketed prior to the Reformation. Even Cardinal Cajetan, who tried Luther for heresy, rejected the deuterocanon. Trent declared it canon in response to Protestants rejecting it.

>>1629814
No

Just someone who knows the true story on this subject

>>1629814
He has a writing style closer to the Malaysian autist than Constie. I've never seen Constantine insult someone.

>>1629824
>true story
Roman delusion*

File: image.jpg (293KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 640x1136px

>>1629823
>>1629823
They do moron.

Stop lying to yourself

In fact before Nicaea, some non canonical books are even Scripture to some fathers. Like Irenaeus on Hermas.

The fact that one can find plenty of fathers citing books of the deuterocanon as Scripture is evident that it is canonical to varying degrees. This also ends up being the reason why the various Orthodox churches EO and OO don't even have the same canon.

In reality, Church Fathers all unanimously accepted the Deuterocanon

Even Athanasius who is cited as didn't cites them as Scripture

Stay mad loser

>>1629823
Let us see now if in these cases we are not forced to the conclusion, that while the Saviour gives a true account of them, none of the Scriptures which could prove what He tells are to be found. For they who build the tombs of the prophets and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, condemning the crimes their fathers committed against the righteous and the prophets, say, "If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets."[2] In the blood of what prophets, can any one tell me? For where do we find anything like this written of Esaias, or Jeremias, or any of the twelve, or Daniel? Then about Zacharias the son of Barachias, who was slain between the temple and the altar, we learn from Jesus only, not knowing it otherwise from any Scripture. Wherefore I think no other supposition is possible, than that they who had the reputation of wisdom, and the rulers and elders, took away from the people every passage which might bring them into discredit among the people. We need not wonder, then, if this history of the evil device of the licentious elders against Susanna is true, but was concealed and removed from the Scriptures by men themselves not very far removed from the counsel of these elders. Origen,To Africanus,9(ante A.D. 254),in ANF,IV:389

>>1629823
"But he ought to know that those who wish to live according to the teaching of Sacred Scripture understand the saying, 'The knowledge of the unwise is as talk without sense,' [Sirach 21:18] and have learnt 'to be ready always to give an answer to everyone that asketh us a reason for the hope that is in us.’ [1 Pt 3:15] " Origen, Against Celsus, 7:12 (A.D. 248),in ANF, IV:615

File: pope-francis-1.jpg (96KB, 1240x930px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1240x930px

>>1629839
Explain this

>>1629823
"[T]he sacred writers to whom the Son has revealed Him, have given us a certain image from things visible, saying, 'Who is the brightness of His glory, and the Expression of His Person;' [Heb 1:3] and again, 'For with Thee is the well of life, and in Thy light shall we see lights;' [Ps 36:9] and when the Word chides Israel, He says, 'Thou hast forsaken the Fountain of wisdom;' [Baruch 3:12] and this Fountain it is which says, 'They have forsaken Me the Fountain of living waters' [Jer 2:13]" [3] Athanasius the Great: Defense of the Nicene Faith,2 (A.D. 351), in NPNF2, IV:158.

>>1629849
>PROTNIGGERS CAANOOT FACE FACTS

File: opinion discarded.jpg (3KB, 88x88px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 88x88px

>>1629839
>>1629845
>>1629847
Oh, it's you.
Could you please fuck off back to /pol/ with the other swine?

>>1629825
You who can't accept the facts I post is the autist here

>>1629860
Shouldn't you be posting in all caps?

>>1629858
PROTNIGGERS CANNOT HANDLE IT WHEN REAL HISTORY IS HANDED TO THEM

>>1629862
OH THE DEUTEROCANON IS NEVER ACCEPTED

WRONG DUMB PROT

"And where the sacred writers say, Who exists before the ages,' and 'By whom He made the ages,’ [Heb 1:2] they thereby as clearly preach the eternal and everlasting being of the Son, even while they are designating God Himself. Thus, if Isaiah says, 'The Everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth;’ [Is 40:28] and Susanna said, 'O Everlasting God;' [Daniel 13:42-Susanna] and Baruch wrote, 'I will cry unto the Everlasting in my days,' and shortly after, 'My hope is in the Everlasting, that He will save you, and joy is come unto me from the Holy One;' [Baruch 4:20,22]" Athanasius the Great: Discourses Against the Arians, 1:4 (A.D. 362), in NPNF2, IV:313

>>1629862
Since, however, after all his severe sufferings, after his retirement into Gaul, after his sojourn in a foreign and far distant country in the place of his own, after his narrow escape from death through their calumnies, but thanks to the clemency of the Emperor,- -distress which would have satisfied even the most cruel enemy,-- they are still insensible to shame, are again acting insolently against the Church and Athanasius; and from indignation at his deliverance venture on still more atrocious schemes against him, and are ready with an accusation, fearless of the words in holy Scripture, 'A false witness shall not be unpunished;’ [Proverbs 19:5] and, 'The mouth that belieth slayeth the soul;' (Wisdom 1:11) we therefore are unable longer to hold our peace, being amazed at their wickedness and at the insatiable love of contention displayed in their intrigues. [Athanasius the Great: Defence Against the Arians, 3 (A.D. 362), in NPNF2, IV:101

>>1629839
>>1629845
>>1629847
>>1629851
What books of the bible did they write again?

I think that most of the old testament, following from the example of Ecclesiastes, are derived from an earlier oral-based Hebrew culture and merely recorded at a later date.

The Spirit also, who is in him, commands, saying, 'Offer unto God the sacrifice of praise, and pay to the Lord thy vows. Offer the sacrifice of righteousness, and put your trust in the Lord (Sir. 18:17).') [Athanasius the Great: Letter 19, 5 (A.D. 333), in NPNF2, IV:546

File: 1461881050119.gif (3MB, 256x172px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 256x172px

>>1629849
Explain this >>1610680

>>1629825
Constantine will insult people in exclusively biblical terms, not with regular insults.

>>1629872
IGNORING MAIN POINT OF ARGUMENT

PROTTIES BTFO

It was the twelfth year of the rule of Nebuchadnezzar, who ruled the Assyrians in the great city of Nineveh.
This is the very first verse in the book of Judith. Already it has historical error, in the very first verse.

File: selling_of_indulgences.gif (59KB, 383x267px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 383x267px

>>1629876
Explain this

2. The Divine Nature then it is impossible to see with eyes of flesh: but from the works, which are Divine, it is possible to attain to some conception of His power, according to Solomon, who says, "For by the greatness and beauty of the creatures proportionally the Maker of them is seen" (Wis 13:5). He said not that from the creatures the Maker is seen, but added proportionably. For God appears the greater to every man in proportion as he has grasped a larger survey of the creatures: and when his heart is uplifted by that larger survey, he gains withal a greater conception of God. 3. Wouldest thou learn that to comprehend the nature of God is impossible? The Three Children in the furnace of fire, as they hymn the praises of God, say "Blessed art thou that beholdest the depths, and sittest upon the Cherubim" (Song of the Three Children, 32, or in Daniel 3, between verses 23 and 24, there are 68 verses, of which this is verse 32. This is part of the Deuterocanonical portion). Tell me what is the nature of the Cherubim, and then look upon Him who sitteth upon them. And yet Ezekiel the Prophet even made a description of them, as far as was possible, saying that every one has four faces, one of a man, another of a lion, another of an eagle, and another of a calf; and that each one had six wings (Ezek. 1:6-11), and they had eyes on all sides; and that under each one was a wheel of four sides. Nevertheless though the Prophet makes the explanation, we cannot yet understand it even as we read. But if we cannot understand the throne, which he has described, how shall we be able to comprehend Him who sitteth thereon, the Invisible and Ineffable God? To scrutinize then the nature of God is impossible: but it is in our power to send up praises of His glory for His works that are seen. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, NPNF2, Lecture IX:2-3, Volume 7, p. 51.

>>1629876
what denomination is this?

File: 1472609312579.jpg (206KB, 966x1000px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 966x1000px

>op posts an interesting and well thought out thread
>torn apart again by denominational shit-flinging

Just make /christian/ and be done with it

>>1629881
YOU DUMBASS

JUDITH WAS MEANT TO BE A FOLK TALE

>>1629890
More like torn apart by Malaysian shitposting

>>1629890
Such suggestions are inconsistent with the clear sense of Scripture For all things, as the Prophet says [ref 2 Maccabees 7:28], were made out of nothing; it was no transformation of existing things, but the creation into a perfect form of the non-existent." Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, 4:16 (A.D. 359), in NPNF2, IX:76

>>1629893
TORN APART BY PROTTIENIGGERS

>>1629891
So in other words uninspired and extra biblical?

Pride is of course the root of all evil, of which it is said, as Scripture bears witness: Pride is the beginning of all sin. (Sirach 10:26) Moreover; proliferating from this poisonous root as its first offspring are seven capital sins: vainglory, envy, anger malancholy, avarice, gluttony, lust. For because he grieved that we were held in bondage by these seven derivatives of pride, on that account our Redeemer, full of the spirit of sevenfold grace, joined spiritual battle for our liberation. St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job, Part 1, Book 3, p. 85.

>>1629896
>taken as canonical by church fathers
>ignores
>ITT PROTNIGGERS OWNED TO SHIT

The former, it is said by Holy Scripture: Do not become like the horse and the mule which have no understanding (Psalm 31:9). The proud effort of the latter is blamed when it is said: Seek not the things that are too high for thee, and search not into things above thy ability (Sirach 3:22). To the former it is said: Mortify your members which are upon the earth: fornication, uncleanness, lust, eveil consupiscence (Col. 3:5), to the latter it is said: Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy and vain deceipt (Col. 2:8) St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job, Book 1, Part 3, 21, p. 116

"And in the proverbs Solomon tells us that as "the north wind driveth away rain, so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue.(Prov. 25:23)" It sometimes happens that an arrow when it is aimed at a hard object rebounds upon the bowman, wounding the would-bewounder, and thus, the words are fulfilled, "they were turned aside like a deceitful bow," (Psalm 128:57) and in another passage: "whoso casteth a stone on high casteth it on his own head." (Sir. 27:25) Jerome, To Rusticus, Epistle 125, 19 (A.D. 404), in NPNF2, VI:251

File: (You).jpg (1011KB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

1011KB, 3840x2160px

>>1629790
>>1629839
>>1629845
>>1629847
>>1629851
>>1629857
>>1629860
>>1629863
>>1629869
>>1629871
>>1629874
>>1629880
>>1629887
>>1629891
>>1629894
>>1629895
>>1629899
>>1629902
>>1629908
(((You)))

>>1629890
The compiling of the Bible was a long draw out affair that was part of all manner of politics, both secular and religious. The sheer fact that Marion HAD to be upstaged is proof alone that the Bible is the product of political meddling.

There are going tk be inconsistences and disagreements. It's a flawed text made by flawed hands that has been subject to flawed translations by flawed men and is taken as absolute divine infallible truth by many groups that have their own political and theological agendas. This thread was doomed from the start, and any thread on the subject will be as long as Christians are allowed to comment on it.

what has this board become

>>1629920
STAY MAD PROTESTCUNT

"I would cite the words of the psalmist: 'the sacrifices of God are a broken spirit,’ [Ps 51:17] and those of Ezekiel 'I prefer the repentance of a sinner rather than his death,’ [Ez 18:23] AND THOSE OF BARUCH,'Arise, arise, O Jerusalem,’ [Baruch 5:5] AND MANY OTHER PROCLAMATIONS MADE BY THE TRUMPETS OF THE PROPHETS." Jerome, To Oceanus, Epistle 77:4 (A.D. 399), in NPNF2, VI:159

>>1629935
Now you're just lying. It's an undisputed fact that Jerome rejected the Apocrypha.

>>1629937
>cites direct from Jerome
>his late stage
>no alterations
>lying

PROTLOGIC 101

>>1629937
Does not the SCRIPTURE say: 'Burden not thyself above thy power' [SIRACH 13:2] Jerome, To Eustochium, Epistle 108 (A.D. 404), in NPNF2, VI:207

>>1629937
Do not, my dearest brother, estimate my worth by the number of my years. Gray hairs are not wisdom; it is wisdom which is as good as gray hairs At least that is what Solomon says: "wisdom is the gray hair unto men.’ [Wisdom 4:9]" Moses too in choosing the seventy elders is told to take those whom he knows to be elders indeed, and to select them not for their years but for their discretion (Num. 11:16)? And, as a boy, Daniel judges old men and in the flower of youth condemns the incontinence of age (Daniel 13:55-59, or Story of Susannah 55-59, only found in the Catholic Bibles) Jerome, To Paulinus, Epistle 58 (A.D. 395), in NPNF2, VI:119

>>1629937
"Yet the Holy Spirit in the thirty-ninth(9) psalm, while lamenting that all men walk in a vain show, and that they are subject to sins, speaks thus: "For all that every man walketh in the image."(Psalm 39:6) Also after David's time, in the reign of Solomon his son, we read a somewhat similar reference to the divine likeness. For in the book of Wisdom, which is inscribed with his name, Solomon says: "God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of his own eternity."(Wisdom 2:23) And again, about eleven hundred and eleven years afterwards, we read in the New Testament that men have not lost the image of God. For James, an apostle and brother of the Lord, whom I have mentioned above--that we may not be entangled in the snares of Origen--teaches us that man does possess God's image and likeness. For, after a somewhat discursive account of the human tongue, he has gone on to say of it: "It is an unruly evil ... therewith bless we God, even the Father and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God."(James 3:8-9) Paul, too, the "chosen vessel,"(Acts 9:15) who in his preaching has fully maintained the doctrine of the gospel, instructs us that man is made in the image and after the likeness of God. "A man," he says, "ought not to wear long hair, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God."(1 Cor. 11:7) He speaks of "the image" simply, but explains the nature of the likeness by the word "glory."

7. Instead of THE THREE PROOFS FROM HOLY SCRIPTURE which you said would satisfy you if I could produce them, BEHOLD I HAVE GIVEN YOU SEVEN"--- Jerome, Letter 51, 6, 7, NPNF2, VI:87-8

>>1629939
>>1629943
>>1629944
>>1629950
I'm guessing "NPNF2" is put out by the Vatican?

>>1629882
Google "indulgences explained".

>>1629937
A. "Your argument is ingenious, but you do not see THAT IT GOES AGAINST HOLY SCRIPTURE, which declares that even ignorance is not without sin. Hence it was that Job offered sacrifices for his sons, test, perchance, they had unwittingly sinned in thought. And if, when one is cutting wood, the axe-head flies from the handle and kills a man, the owner is[Num. 35:8] commanded to go to one of the cities of refuge and stay there until the high priest dies; that is to say, until he is redeemed by the Saviour's blood, either in the baptistery, or in penitence which is a copy of the grace of baptism, through the ineffable mercy of the Saviour, who[Ezek. 18:23] would not have any one perish, nor delights in the death of sinners, but would rather that they should be converted and live. C. It is surely strange justice to hold me guilty of a sin of error of which my conscience does not accuse itself. I am not aware that I have sinned, and am I to pay the penalty for an offence of which I am ignorant? What more can I do, if I sin voluntarily?
A. DO YOU EXPECT ME TO EXPLAIN THE PURPOSES AND PLANS OF GOD? THE BOOK OF WISDOM GIVES AN ANSWER TO YOUR FOOLISH QUESTION: [Sir 3:21] "LOOK NOT INTO THINGS ABOVE THEE, AND SEARCH NOT THINGS TOO MIGHTY FOR THEE." AND ELSEWHERE,[5] "Make not thyself overwise, and argue not more than is fitting." And in the same place, "In wisdom and simplicity of heart seek God." You will perhaps deny the authority of this book;" "Jerome, "Against the Pelagians, NPNF2, VI:464-5"

>>1629953
No. Use your words.

>>1629951
>NPNF2
>Vatican
ITS THE PROTTIES DUMBASS

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf206.html

>>1629937
"And in the proverbs Solomon tells us that as "the north wind driveth away rain, so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue.(Prov. 25:23)" It sometimes happens that an arrow when it is aimed at a hard object rebounds upon the bowman, wounding the would-bewounder, and thus, the words are fulfilled, "they were turned aside like a deceitful bow," (Psalm 128:57) and in another passage: "whoso casteth a stone on high casteth it on his own head." (Sir. 27:25) Jerome, To Rusticus, Epistle 125, 19 (A.D. 404), in NPNF2, VI:251

File: 1462857830252.jpg (101KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 640x640px

>>1629888
It doesn't matter, it's still proddy garbage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QWB1mtZhQo

>>1629890
Some of us already browse /christian/ ;^)

>>1629966
The curch was Protestant for over 1,000 years.

>>1629959
I won't spoon feed you. Stop vomiting stale anti-Catholic memes and do your own research.

>>1629966
Why do Catholics think attacking Luther does anything to Protestants? It's like Fundamentalists pointing out Darwin's inaccuracies/missteps thinking that would disprove evolution as a whole.

>>1629968
No.

Study Church history.

>>1629973
My own research led me to stop vomiting stale Papist memes

File: image.jpg (292KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 640x1136px

>>1629968
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

EXPLAIN THIS

>>1629976
I am

File: 5541299-L.jpg (32KB, 369x500px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 369x500px

>>1629975
>Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.
Matthew 7:15-20

What don't you understand?

File: peter's successor.jpg (106KB, 708x720px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 708x720px

>>1629981
The Pope is said false prophet all popes are

File: image.jpg (297KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 640x1136px

>>1629977
MY OWN RESEARCH SHOWS PROTTIES TO BE ILLGETIMATE

>>1629981
Peter was a bad tree because he bore the bad fruit of the medieval Catholic popes/church.

>1629986
If i take away your (You)'s, would you die?

>>1629988
Peter was Protestant

File: image.jpg (304KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 640x1136px

>>1629993
PROTESTANTS

Pic is the Catholic Christ

File: Signorelli-Antichrist_and_the_devil.jpg (115KB, 495x686px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 495x686px

>>1630003
fug

File: image.jpg (287KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 640x1136px

>>1629993
PROTESTANTS DO THIS?

File: image.jpg (194KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 640x1136px

>>1629993
PROTTIES DO THIS?

File: piazza_san_pietro_statue.jpg (830KB, 1200x801px) Image search: [Google]

830KB, 1200x801px

>>1629985
One flock, one shepherd. John 10:16. One Church, one Pope.

>>1629988
>"This Church is holy, the one Church, the true Church, the Catholic Church, fighting as she does against all heresies. She can fight, but she cannot be beaten. All heresies are expelled from her, like the useless loppings pruned from a vine. She remains fixed in her root, in her vine, in her love. The gates of hell shall not conquer her."
St. Augustine, Sermon to Catechumens, on the Creed, 6,14, AD 395

>But, even the Church itself by itself, because of its marvelous propagation, its exceptional holiness, and inexhaustible fruitfulness in all good works; because of its catholic unity and invincible stability, is a very great and perpetual motive of credibility, and an incontestable witness of its own divine mission.
Vatican I, Session 3, Chapter 3, AD 1870

Non praevalebunt, my sad proddy friend.

>>1629993 (You)

>>1630006
>>1630013
Go sip your wine and chew your crackers you damn fool

File: 93d91255d9b6b965ab73bb831885340c1f0d3c42a9d52ac2e833e2533ee411e2.jpg (84KB, 448x500px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 448x500px

>>1630005

File: image.jpg (201KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 640x1136px

>>1629977
EXPLAIN THIS

File: image.jpg (343KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 1366x768px

>>1630016
PROTTIES BE MAD HISTORY IS AGAINST THEM

>>1630015
>one shepherd
Jesus
>Non praevalebunt
That was about Protestants, not Catholics

>>1629966
Luther would have found that image blasphemous, and the people in that video probably deny as heresy everything that Luther, Calvin, Melanchthon, Bucer, Peter Martyr, Zwingli, Petri, Karlstadt, Trubar, Oecolampadius, Osiander, Agricola, and all the other Reformers and their heirs taught.

You keep using that word "Protestant." I do not think it means what you think it means.

File: image.jpg (273KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 640x1136px

>>1630024
PROTTIES DO THIS?

File: average pope.jpg (26KB, 474x538px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 474x538px

>>1630017

File: image.jpg (227KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 640x1136px

>>1630034
THIS KILLS THE PRODDIE

File: image.jpg (293KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 640x1136px

>>1630034
PRODDIES BTFO

File: Cephas.jpg (892KB, 1500x1974px) Image search: [Google]

892KB, 1500x1974px

>>1630024
Jesus is not walking around on this planet anymore, or are you perhaps denying His Ascension? He built His Church upon Saint Peter as Scripture makes it clear:

>And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Matthew 16:18-19

"Binding and loosing" is a phrase which comes from the rabbis. It refers to the authority to make decisions binding on the people of God.

As for your preposterous second statement, no, He was talking about the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church which He founded Himself, NOT the 30000+ proddy denominations.

File: shape.jpg (226KB, 525x783px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 525x783px

>>1630023
Nothing highlighted there contradicts sola scriptura or the Protestant view of the canon.

>>1630051
The origional church of Christ was founded not on a person such as Peter but on a confession of faith that Peter gave.

Therefore the church that Christ founded was one on doctrine,the doctrines which are found and taught in the holy scriptures only.

>>1630016
lmao Protestants officially btfo

File: Luther_as_the_Devil's_Bagpipes,_1535.jpg (48KB, 393x525px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 393x525px

>>1630027
>Luther would have found that image blasphemous
He was the pawn of Satan >>1610680 and the father of 30000+ harlot daughters.

>I'm not like these protestants!!11
Sorry special snowflake but you are as lost as your fellow proddies.

File: image.jpg (305KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 640x1136px

>>1630065
IT DOES YOU MORON

ONCE WE ACCEPTED THAT THE BIBLE IS DERIVED FROM TRADITION AND TRADITION IS HOW THE CHURCH RECOGNIZED THE CANON WHICH WAS NEVER EVEN CONSENSUALLY AGREED UPON, THE WHOLE MYTH OF SOLA SCRIPTURA FALLS TO THE GROUND

IN FACT TRADITION IS KEY TO THE BIBLE AS IT MUST BE READ IN THE CONTEXT THAT FORMED IT

>>1630065
OH HEY SCRIPTURE IS THE AUTHORITY OF ALL MATTERS OF FAITH

TRADITION IS VALID BECAUSE IT AGREES WITH SCRIPTURE

ISNT THIS SOLO SCRIPTURA

>>1630051
You know he wasn't talking about Peter, right? It's a translation error from Greek to Latin. The original Greek isn't referencing Peter. Roman Catholicism is a heresy.

T. Orthodox.

File: Stopped_reading_there.png (127KB, 1153x823px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1153x823px

>>1630075
>origional

File: image.jpg (275KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 640x1136px

>>1630065
EVEN REFORMED SCHOLAR LANE AGREES WITH ME

can't we just get along?

File: >One >Catholic >Orthodox.png (1MB, 1200x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1200x2000px

>>1630093
ctrl+f: ''0p0k'' or ''Keepa''
http://www.peshitta.org/pdf/Mattich16.pdf

Peter (Cephas) is the rock (Cephas). Deal with it.

>Orthodox
You're an ethnophyletist eastern schismatic and here's what your ancient "orthobros" thought: >>1621952

>>1630103
>>>1621952
orthocucks btfo

OP here. Was NOT expecting all... this.

True, I should have known better, this being 4chan, but dang. Yall are smart... but mean.

>"If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing." (1 Corinthians 13:2)

>>1630103
>>1630103
>schismatic
Papal supremacy isn't part of the Church and Her traditions, it's an addition. Therefore, it is a heresy.
The Roman Catholic Church are the schismatics. Learn your history.

Matthew 16:18, the word “rock” refers to Peter’s confession of faith, and not to Peter himself, despite the fact that Peter/rock is a play on the word for rock in Aramaic [petros] and Greek [petra]. As we read in 1Corinthians 10:4, “...they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ,” Who alone is the very foundation, or true Rock, upon which stands the Church. It is on Jesus Christ, the Rock, that the Church’s unchanging faith and confession is firmly rooted.

>>1630051
Christ is the head of the Church. He is high priest.

>>1630082
You need to repent and believe the gospel or hell is your fate.

& humanities was a huge mistake

File: Ribera-José-de-St-Peter-c1630-Prado.jpg (443KB, 1341x1600px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 1341x1600px

>>1630144
>The Roman Catholic Church are the schismatics.
Remember the massacre of the Latins and the Council of Florence.
>Learn your history.
Take your own advice.
>It is on Jesus Christ, the Rock, that the Church’s unchanging faith and confession is firmly rooted
I agree with this but not with the mindless babble which preceded this statement.

Read John 10:16, Matthew 12:30 and what your "orthobros" wrote: >>1621952

>>1630159
You need to open a history book.

>>1630179
You need to open a Bible.

File: 7799727632_dfb4cb7493_b.jpg (328KB, 806x945px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 806x945px

>>1630146
Indeed and the Pope is His Vicar.

>>1630188
Take your own advice.

>When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.” He said to him a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Tend my sheep.” He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, “Do you love me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” Jesus said to him, “Feed my sheep.”
John 21:15-17

>>1630196
Peter was a pastor, yes
The Pope is Antichrist

File: aef87777503542a5633dc4860eb6e3c5.jpg (150KB, 736x1144px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 736x1144px

>>1630204
http://www.protestanterrors.com/

The truth will set you free. Jn 8:32

>>1630228
Nice propaganda

>>1630204
If the pope is the antichrist, and he's the head of the religion, isn't the religion also antichrist?

File: IMG_0183.jpg (60KB, 266x400px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 266x400px

>>1630243
Nice buzzword.

>>1630249
>average_protestant.jpg

>>1630245
Yes. The Catholic religion is Antichrist.

>>1630249
>>1630252
See >>1629849

File: 1471816579829.gif (3MB, 309x313px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 309x313px

>>1630258
>WAAAAAHHHH!!! THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE WHOOORE OF BAAABYLONN!!!!1111 THE WHOOOOREEEE OF BAAAABYYYYLOOOON!!!!11 THE WHOOOOREEEEEE!!!!!11111

http://www.protestanterrors.com/

>>1630261
See >>1629876

>>1630265
What are you, the Catholic Jack Chick?

>>1630273
Is there a problem officer?

>>1630279
Yea, it seems you're a Papist heretic.

>>1630309
>no u are le heretic xD
cringe

BRAVO LUTHER

https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=W-kANR1vJkM

>>1630319
>I know i'm not a heretic! Pope Arius infallibly declared himself right!

>>1630322
Shouldn't you be attending Papa Frank's seroconversion party?

>>1629439
For the New Testament, the book must have been written by an apostles or by a disciple who recorded the teaching of the apostle, and the book must be recognized by the whole Church which mean a church must have transmited to other churches like when Paul asked to transmit his letters to the other churches.

>>1630322
I honestly have no idea how the Swedes went from basically being the protestant ISIS and the biggest religious warmongers in Europe to these flaming sissies. It's mind boggling.

>>1630334
>have been written by an apostles
must be written by an apostle *

>>1630336
Jews

>>1630345
Tell me more

>>1630360
Communists

>>1630360
Here's the truth:

Countries with a significant atheist population have been either the victim of forms of PROTESTANTISM or forms of COMMUNISM.

>>1630377
Sometimes even both.

>>1630377
I don't know man, the US is majority protestant and they don't really have an atheist problem. They have some seriously wacky cults for sure, but not atheists.

On the other hands you have traditionally Catholic countries like France or Spain where people believe are Christians only on paper but in reality they're atheist and secular as fuck.

>>1630377
Countries with a significant catholic population are not christian,and this makes Mary weep

>>1630389
americans are becoming atheist quickly

>>1630395
No Mary no Jesus
Know Mary know Jesus.

>>1630404
You're blaspheming the Holy Spirit

>>1630377
The pope is a communist

>>1630322
It's actually pretty telling that a baptist preacher from the Deep South is the most normal person in that entire video.

>>1630389
The US has been very Christian ever since it has been very anti-Communist. Is it a coincidence that ever since the fall of the Soviet Union the country has become increasingly atheist? I think not.

>France
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution#Communism
>Spain
Their leftism is a rebellious response to fascism. When you go too extreme you mess things up.

Portugal is another historically Catholic country which could've been atheist today:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Portuguese_Republic#Religion

File: pius-xi.jpg (89KB, 606x753px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 606x753px

>>1630427
t. son of the accuser, the father of all lies

The Pope is the Vicar of Christ.

>Pius XI watched the rising tide of totalitarianism with alarm and delivered three papal encyclicals challenging the new creeds: against Italian Fascism, "Non abbiamo bisogno" (1931; 'We do not need (to acquaint you)'); against Nazism, "Mit brennender Sorge" (1937; 'With deep concern') and against atheist communism, "Divini redemptoris" (1937; 'Divine Redeemer'). He also challenged the extremist nationalism of the Action Française movement and anti-semitism in the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_XI#International_relations

>>1630459
The Pope is the avatar of Lucifer

File: Spas_vsederzhitel_sinay.jpg (385KB, 1100x2127px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 1100x2127px

>>1630459
Cover one half of the faces of both images at a time, notice anything ;^) ?

>>1630461
t. son of Satan, the accuser, the father of all lies

>>1629922
well said. I don't know about the
>Christians being allowed to comment
being the problem as much as
>>1629926
>>1629928

this particular one being the problem. ITT, anyway.
It's a shame, cause OP set the stage well for what could have been a decent thread/discussion
>>1630141
don't give up, OP, that loud Catholic and Apostolic Asshole can't be around 24/7

I was really hoping to learn about the /his/tory of the scriptures ITT.

File: u mad.png (36KB, 555x267px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 555x267px

>>1631880
you're not giving history, you're fucking yelling.

>>1631880
I'm Roman Catholic, as my entire family is, btw.

You're still yelling and not teaching anything. Explain what praying for the dead means for a layman?

File: nice shitpost.png (42KB, 538x310px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 538x310px

>>1631908
I read the sources you cited in this thread. It would help if you used some context or explained what you were trying to argue. You just post whatever pic and yell. I'm on your fucking side and you're still shit flinging and calling people niggers and cunts in all caps. fuck you, psycho.

>>1631908
>>1631913
Stop posting and do some serious peat instead. You're being influenced by Satan with your anger and lunacy. Your posts have no love of God or humility whatsoever.

>>1631913
what's the connection with Protestantism? how does it prove they're illegitimate? I honestly don't know. I'm a Catholic, remember?

>>1629923
my sweetest friend

>>1631928
You really are getting paid to shill, aren't you? You've been on this thread 9 hours straight.
OP, forgive him, he isn't a representation of a Christian, especially on /his/

>>1631928
so you don't know or understand anything. You just take stuff from protestanterrors.com or wherever and blast it at people with insults, offering no context or explanation and declare yourself what, a winner, or something? you can cite stuff all day long but it doesn't mean anything if you're too fucking mad or autistic to have a discussion.

>>1631931
Papal supremacy isn't a doctrine of the Holy Church fathers. How about you take the time to read some such as St. Maximos, St. Athanasius, St. Anthony, St. Gregory?

File: not an argument.png (46KB, 525x365px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 525x365px

>>1631953

File: whatever you say bounces of me and sticks to you.png (48KB, 563x401px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 563x401px

>>1631981

File: all I hear is ppbbbbbtttthh.png (51KB, 616x434px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 616x434px

>>1631993

File: kys.png (38KB, 569x303px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 569x303px

>>1631998

>>1629439
>What were the criteria for including a book in Biblical canon?
>Where did this idea of infallibility of this particular compilation originate?
>Why do we/the church/etc not add new books periodically? Either upon discovery or new revelation? Why is biblical canon "closed?"

anyone?

Also, is there a tl;dr about how the Bible or scriptures were put together? is there a timeline that shows changes made over the years or something? If I want to learn about the history of the gospels, where would I start?

>>1632034
You start by killing yourself you piece of shit

File: you're an autistic fuckhead.png (36KB, 508x280px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 508x280px

>>1632070

File: fart-ass troll.png (39KB, 609x307px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 609x307px

>>1632117

File: what is discuss.png (48KB, 597x403px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 597x403px

>>1632117
still a Catholic, honestly interested in the history of the gospels. But as you are incapable of discussing, explaining, teaching, talking or having anything even near a sane conversation, you can go fuck yourself, you useless cunt.

>>1632070
>SO MAD

File: STFU.png (39KB, 547x312px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 547x312px

>>1632160

File: you're ungodly.png (37KB, 619x284px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 619x284px

>>1632192
>THIS IS ALL THEY CAN SAY
>NIGGERS

I am not a protestant, so riddle me this:

Protestants resent the papal authority, instead they follow the bible more closely, correct?

But then there have been numerous councils to decide what is supposed to be in the bible. Those happened in a time where the church already existed, right?

So, why is the Catholic Church's authority on a one time book collection more viable than a permanent long time authority position?

>>1629849
Is there anything wrong with it?

>>1629993
KEK

File: unimpressed frog pepe.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>>1632283

File: hBay2Oz.gif (137KB, 418x380px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 418x380px

>>1632289
>'gods that impregnate humans'
>'gods'
>'s'

>>1631945
>You just take stuff from protestanterrors.com
I'm the anon who first posted here >>1630228

I am not the malaysian autist.

>>1635105
>who first posted
the link*

File: 1.png (311KB, 405x595px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 405x595px

>>1632283
First """"contradiction"""": two different events.

Second """"contradiction"""": In Romans 4:2 it says "if Abraham was justified by works" while in James 2:21 it says "Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar?". How do both statements contradict each other?

Third """"contradiction"""": In Heb 11:17-18 it says "By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.”, Ishmael (Gen 16:15) was previously expelled (Gen 21:10-13) and as for Genesis 25:1-2 it says "Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah. 2 She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah." Where the hell is the contradiction? This is why I despise atheists.

>>1632283
http://www.contradictingbiblecontradictions.com/?p=708

>>1629439
>the 4th century Council of Nicea where they, allegedly under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, compiled the 66 "books" that span from a period of millennia into what we know as the Bible today.

No, the idea of a 66 book canon is Protestant.

>>1629689
>The first ecumenical council to declare a council was the council of Trent, which included the apocryphal deuterocanon

The deuterocanon isn't apocryphal. Also while Trent was the first ecumenical council to declare canon there were various ancient synods like the several at Carthage which concerned biblical canon. Eastern Orthodox absolute do accept deuterocanon and they read it as part of their liturgies. Their deuterocanon is actually a bit larger than the Latin Catholic one.

>and rightly so

No

>>1635658
>The deuterocanon isn't apocryphal.
Yes it is.
>Also while Trent was the first ecumenical council to declare canon
In other words: the first dogmatic declaration.
>there were various ancient synods like the several at Carthage which concerned biblical canon
Local, non binding
>Eastern Orthodox absolute do accept deuterocanon
Not binded with anathema. You can be EO and reject them.
>No
Yes