Christian general?

File: diff.jpg (1005KB, 1600x2092px) Image search: [Google]

1005KB, 1600x2092px

C******cs are NOT Christian.

File: orthodox-christian-timeline8003.png (123KB, 834x581px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 834x581px

Daily reminder.

>>2782942
Reminder, that you should only follow the teachings of Jesus and no one else. Your sect of Christianity, priests, bishops, and the pope should not matter. Only listen to Jesus, confess to him only

>the creation of "general" threads is discouraged.

>>2783091
But then you'd have to throw out most of the Bible. In fact, all of it, since the Gospels are clearly not written by eyewitnesses.

>>2783091
>priests
>pope
These are Antichrists
>>2783118
(You)

Since most Christians(outside of the Bible Belt ones) don't take the story of Adam&Eve literally why believe in original sin? What exactly is original sin anyway, what was the first sin man ever committed. This and the "problem of evil" make it really hard to believe in the Christian God and the concept of the sacrifice/resurrection.
>should I convert to Christianity or not?
It's always a back and forth battle in my head
How do some Christians not overthink this stuff? Do you guys ever question your faith?(this is an honest question to real Christians, not /pol/ larpers)

>>2783076
No one with a history book could possibly take this one sided nonsense seriously

>>2783122
Original Sin is simply not being perfect like God. Ta da.

>>2783122
>Since most Christians(outside of the Bible Belt ones) don't take the story of Adam&Eve literally
Why should I care? Athanasius contra mundum.
>What exactly is original sin anyway, what was the first sin man ever committed
The first sin was the fall of man. Adam ate the apple.
The guilt is inherited by all of Adam's progeny because he is the head of our household, so we are all counted in him. Then, the new Adam, Christ came, so a new house was founded, and all Christians are counted in Him, and are viewed as sinless by God.
>Do you guys ever question your faith?
No.

>>2783046
>>2783091
>>2783121
american catholic schools are the reason why most kids and teens become atheists, what they're teaching is complete garbage

>>2783122

>What exactly is original sin anyway

Not following God's will, which is to love God with all your heart, and to do onto others as they would have them do onoto you

>>2783125
>>2783139
No, that is personal sin, not original sin. Original sin refers to the sin that all people have from birth.

>>2783124
Shhh

>>2783143
Yes, precisely. By being born a mortal, fallible, material being, you have original sin, because you are not eternal, infallible, etc. like God.

>>2783162
No, you only have original sin because of Adam. Adam did not have original sin.

>>2783167
Yes he did. That's why he ate the fruit in the first place.

>>2783172
Adam was created perfect and sinless.

>>2783177
Adam was created, and therefore imperfect by definition. That's why you have so much screeching about heresy when you get idiots implying Jesus was created somehow non-eternal.

File: 1443901410824_1.jpg (119KB, 680x515px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 680x515px

>>2783046

Do you guys confess your sins to a priest or simply do it alone with God?
How do you know that you have truly forgiven yourself, what does repentance look like to you?

>>2783187
God said Adam was created "good".

"Good" to God is perfect.

When Adam sinned, he became less than perfect, and could only sire children who were also less than perfect.

Admittance to heaven is only for the perfect, so by Adam's sin, we were condemned as a race to eternal hellfire.

>>2783217

You have to know what it takes to have sins forgiven, and you have to (slowly) realize that Jesus forgave all sins on the cross. So your sins were forgiven you before you were born, Jesus having taken them all onto Himself and paid the ultimate punishment for them.

So now you don't have a sin problem, you have a "born dead" problem and need to be "born again" in the Spirit.

forcing people to live a life of constant repentance and obedience and failure and repentance and obedience and failure and repentance and obedience and failure is of the devil, not of Jesus.

He came to set us free from that.

>>2783231
Why do you save images like that?

Lutherans>>>other protestants>>>>>>>>old churches>mormons

Why are there so many religions? Why do some religions like islam and buddhism have such a large following?

>>2782942
which direction of christianism is the true one and why

>>2783228
>"Good" to God is perfect.
That is demonstrably wrong, otherwise you have to come to the idiotic conclusion that plants, water, the sun and moon, birds, bugs, cows, and literally everything ever created is perfect.

Also, if "Good" is perfect, then what is the "Very good" that creation as a collection gets at the end of Genesis 1? ULTRA-PERFECT, more perfect than perfect?

READ the Bible, you dumbass cathocuck. It helps.

>When Adam sinned, he became less than perfect, and could only sire children who were also less than perfect.
>Implying Cain wasn't sired before the fall, owing to the lack of any diction about her pain in childbirth or anything like that.

>>2783260
There are many ways that seem right to a man, but they all end in death.

Many false prophets have arisen, and lead many to their destruction.

When God says "many", it's usually millions or billions.

Most people are going to hell, by their own choice, and by their own plan.

>>2783260
The corruption of man split the abrahamic religions(I know Buddhism isn't one of them, Judaism is)

>>2783289
It was until the Fall of Man.

After the Fall of Man, it was all cursed.

You're judging the pre-Fall creation by what exists now, and the two are very different.

>>2783289
Yes, God is able to increase infinities. It's his specialty, actually. That and turning evil into good.

File: christians vs protestants.jpg (2MB, 1845x2331px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1845x2331px

>>2783046

Pr*testants aren't Christian

>>2783401
People who know how they became Christians are generally Christians.

Catholics? They only know how they became a Catholic.

>>2783418

>People who know how they became Christians are generally Christians
>Catholics only know how they became a Catholic
>Catholics are indisputably Christians
>Christians don't know how they became Christians

Great logic there Proddy.

>>2783401
Only American evangelicals do that shit on the right

>Civil theology thread on 4chan

>Oh no here comes the butthurt kathlicks
>>2783205
>>2783401
>>2783404
>>2783409

>>2782942
Catholic or bust honestly

>>2783076
>orthodoxy didn't break from Rome
But that's literally what they said
>>2783091
>being a latitudinarian

>>2783483
>civil church in Christendom
>oh no here comes the Protestants
>NO CHURCH NO TAXES XDD
>ALL MY PEASANTS MUST BE PROTESTANTS JO TOELRARION FOR THEM BUT TOLERATE ME

>>2783427
Airtight.

How is a man saved, papist?
How were you saved, papist?
How do you know you were saved, papist?
What does being saved mean, papist?
How would you lead someone to salvation, papist?

>>2783532

I don't owe a satan worshipper any explanations.

>>2783519
I HEAR THAT! sans Francis.

>>2783532
Not him but a man is saved by being baptised, that gives him a lifering, but with sin he tears the rope, then with confession ties it up
>>2783545
Gods plan for him will be revealed sometime, it was probably to remove cultural Catholics from the church

>>2782942
>Christians
>on 4chan
Literally why
Everyone here talks in a vulgar manner, people are offensive on purpose here because no one is stopping us from doing so. Most of boards here are dedicated to sex and they would all be considered sinful.

>>2783537

Airtight.

>>2783559
Not him, but as wrong as him.

Can you confess every sin you do? Think? Can you confess every good you do not do? Think? Can you confess every sin you commit unconsciously? Can you ever repent and pay penance and be like God?

Then you can no more answer my questions than he could. If it were as you say, heaven would be God and angels only. If your salvation depends on you in any way possible, it fails because you fail.

>>2783569

Don't know about you, but when I go fishing, I go to where the fish are. I don't ask them to come to me.

I mentioned this in another thread a few days ago but where do you make the "leap' or "jump" between the metaphorical and the literal? My train of thought has been following of some lectures from Jordan Peterson in that he makes the strong case that the Christian stories in the bible have deep and complex meaning and significance and help us to find order in our lives. In one interview he mentions that one may say that literature like Dostoyevsky or Shakespeare reveal a certain moral truth that helps orient our lives and that religious stories do the same. Some archetypes, themes, and meaning are found cross culturally as well and thus, in a sense are true. But at what point do you go from that view that "these stories are useful" to these stories are true? Peterson mentions in another interview that for him he acts as if God exists rather than possessing a cognitive belief that he exists. Belief is found more in our actions rather than our thoughts. But what if I am acting based on the assumption that the archetypal hero and his action exist and not one specific hero? What if acting as if Jesus really did rise from the grave is no different than acting as if Gandalf really rose from the grave? Again if certain archetypes, themes, and meaning,especially morals, are actually found cross culturally and not just in Christianity, then by me acting according to these principals why would that make me Christian? Sure they are Christian values found in Christianity, but they may also be jewish values, Islamic values, Norse values, or values found in fictional mythology like in Tolkien. There is validity in the abstractions we gain from religious stories but where do you find the validity in the specific details of the stories, such as Jesus rising from the grave or God existing?

>>2783616
When the literal leads you to an absurd conclusion.

Start with the literal sense first. Golden rule of hermenuetics.

Because you're dealing with the supernatural, you will require supernatural assistance. No amount of delusion will cause you to actually believe that Gandalf rose from the dead in real life because he was presented to you as a fictional character.

There are no such fictional characters in the bible, and especially not Jesus.

So literal first; if that's absurd (like thinking Jesus is really made out of bread) then go to metaphor; just as bread sustains physical life, so Jesus sustains spiritual life.

If symbolic language is used, the bible will explain the symbols, somewhere. And in 2 or 3 places, as that is how many witnesses it takes to make the claim to it being true. (No prophecy is of private interpretation.)

If the bible is speaking parabolically, this is not for the lost, but for the saved. The lost will only get the lower story, and never the upper story. So while you might get that a shepherd was happy he found his lost sheep, you'll never know it was about you and Jesus and the moment you got saved.

>>2783660
>there are no fictional characters in the bible
Job
Moses
Noah
Abraham
Adam
Eve

>>2782942
Is St. Paul responsible for the split of Judaism and Christianity

>>2783660
to go off of that though, it is plausible that there actually was a man named Jesus who existed at that time in that place. But it is harder to say if he actually performed miracles and rose from the dead. Another example of this would be something like I, Claudius. Sure all the main characters were actual people who really lived in that time and place, and mentions actual events that they caused or took part in. But I, Claudius is still a fictional book. You can't use it as an accurate account of events or actions like a scholarly source. So again there are some elements where you would grant that some of what is described is literal, in that it is a historical "fact" that this happened as described. Yet there are also many other moments which are pure fiction or exaggerated for artistic license. So again with the resurrection story, it is possible that a man named Jesus was crucified, but how do you decide if his resurrection from the grave actually happened or was artistic license for the purpose of metaphor?

When you say that the literal turning into the absurd is when it becomes metaphor one could argue that it is exactly these absurd "miraculous" events that drive belief in God or Jesus. Would Jesus be seen as who he is if he never performed any miracles? Would God be viewed the way he is if he never created the world or interacted with us? In that a certain element of Christian or religious belief is belief in certain seemingly absurd ideas. For example, Moses parting the Red Sea sounds absurd. Jesus turning water into wine sounds absurd. Noah building an Ark with 2 of every animal and surviving a flood that wipes out the rest of the world sounds absurd. What makes the bible different from a fictional piece of literature that is centered around true events?

>>2783616
yeah I have seen peterson's explanation, yet I find it ultimately trivial. Who cares about a story that isn't true. I believe folks like Aquinas (and Aristotle) are correct in that man's final end is in the contemplation of truth (God).

>>2783187
>Adam was created, and therefore imperfect by definition.
So you're saying that God isn't perfect?

>>2783749
Did I say God was created?

>>2783755
Created beings being imperfect by definition implies that their creator cannot be perfect either, because otherwise he would be able to create perfect beings.

>>2783744
A lot of the stuff in the bible is allegorical and metaphorical. Taking a story like the one of Job as a real event would destroy all the meaning of the story. It's easy to separate the bible and what's within it from the LOTR mythology
Middle earth isn't real, the lands Jesus visited were real(the Levant)
No one in LOTR mythos is real
St. Paul, herod, and St. Peter are real people
The writings of Josephous and tacitus prove the validity of Jesus

>>2783767
I think you need some understanding of the Christian theological tradition. Not of the American Evangelical tradition, but read the summa theologica. This would clear up some confusion you have.

>>2783767
>Created beings being imperfect by definition implies that their creator cannot be perfect either,
No, it does not. That's just stupid. A created being is imperfect by definition because it was not self-actualized, and it did not exist at a specific point in time; neither of which apply to God.

>>2783748
well in response to that I think he makes the good point in that the stories may not be literally true but have another kind of "meta" truth. They reveal certain moral or value archetypes that are seen in multiple stories cross culturally and thus, in a way, are true. Again to mention Tolkien, it is a completely fictional world and mythology yet there are still certain archetypes and moral values that accurately map onto our world. So stories can still matter and people can still care about making sure people read them even if they aren't literally true, in that the characters, locations, and actions didn't historically happen.

To your mention of truth or a story being true you then have to define what this truth is. This was the basis of Peterson's discussion with Sam Harris. He tries to make the distinction between truth being the 'objective material world" and thus scientific facts and statistics and truth in the way of, I guess, meaning or usefulness. Is it "true" that people should not act maliciously too each other? Its not something you can prove scientifically, or with statistics. But you can pull that "truth" out by examining stories and extracting that moral out of multiple stories across multiple demographics and cultures. So is it more true to say that God is a particle or that God is the manifestation of the archetypal father of civilization that both gives us order and is tyrannical?

The issue I have is that if you say that religious stories are on the same plane as literature, or share archetypes and truth between multiples cultures then how do you make the distinction that you will worship God, as described in the bible, as opposed to worshipping the gods in I, Claudius? Or how do you say that the Christian stories got it right and that the jewish or Islamic stories didn't?

>>2783792
You're right when you say that a definition of truth is needed, but I do not assent to Scientism, that only the measurable is true (I think you're saying that too?). Yes, there is a metric of truth within the stories concerning what they teach.
However it would be unscientific, and more importantly unreasonable, to operate on the assumption that something like the Gospels are not true, as in, they did not happen and are not correct in what they claim: that Christ is God. To answer your last question, if Christianity is true, it only further validate the Torah as that's where we find the prophesies of the messiah who Christ claimed to be.
To further explain where I am coming from when I talk about God, I'm speaking of the non-conditioned cause of all contingent reality. Therefor scientific inquiry is sort of out of bounds when making claims against the existence of God, since science is the measurement of observable reality.

>>2783666
NO ONE MENTIONED YOUR TRIPS?!

>christian thread
>literally can't even get past the first post before protestant vs catholic shitposting and larping
>tfw just want to have a normal conversation

>>2783942
it's a game of who's the better christian, and they're all losing

>>2782942
I want to beleive in Christianity, but I can't reconcile it with my deep-seated conviction that Mexicans are at best sub-human if not completely inhuman, and are thus not worthy of salvation.

What should I do?

>>2783964
Get rid of that deep-seated conviction. Conversion is a life-long process.

>>2783849
that is the other point of discussion, what is meant by God. If I understand you correctly, when you talk of God you mean an unmoved mover, a first cause. That isn't necessarily the conception of the Judeo-Christian God. So there is a difference in saying that God could simply be the unexplained first cause and saying that God has a personality and is actively concerned with our actions and regularly talks to people or intervenes in certain cases? So I agree that scientism doesn't seem sufficient, in that God is outside of scientific inquiry. But again should we stop at God as described in Christianity or the bible, or gain should we extract out a "meta" God from all religions. Thus there is a belief in God, but not necessarily the Christian God, or being a Christian. Again the point I am trying to figure out and understand is that if these "meta" truths are extracted from stories throughout multiple cultures, then do the specifics of the stories matter or just the meta truths and archetypes that are extracted from them? So does it matter if Jesus, rather than Gandalf, existed and rose from the grave or is all that really matters is the meta idea of sacrifice and resurrection?

>>2783964
or you could an hero too

>>2783976
But it's so self-evidently true. I mean, have you ever had to deal with them?

unitarian here. can anyone give me 3 good reasons that catholicism isn't a load of horse shit?

like, its the most autistic way any fucking person could ever interpret either the bible or the organization of religion. it's comically fucking stupid.

>>2783989
Judaizers are heretics.

I'm currently reading matthew and it seem like Jesus only came to save the jews. What's going on here?

>>2784018
he didn't want to get blacklisted in Hollywood. Also they promised to always portray him as white in movies.

>>2783978
This is exactly and precisely the God that all of Thomistic Theology speaks of. It is explicitly the grounds of Aquinas' 5 proofs, which is the foundation of all Christian (no, actual Christian) Theology.

>>2784018
"He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation"
Mark 15:16

>>2784018
ehh read john

The religious organizations around me iirc are mormon, baptist, and Jehovah's Witness

Which one is the best?

I hope I'm at least 1% jewish.

>>2784080
Baptist

Who here /Jewish Christian/

Christianity and Judaism should have never split, yeshua is the fulfillment of the Old Testament

>>2784098
Are you high? The two religions are pretty much nothing alike. You're nothing more than a filthy heretic.

>>2784098
So you're a messianic jew?

>>2784080
none of the above, go find some quakers or jews or something

File: here_come_the_catholics.png (499KB, 680x1236px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 680x1236px

>>2783401
>>2783404
>>2783409

>>2784177
Great, how do you explain why the Orthodox, the Coptic, and a bunch of obscure eastern Churches basically agree with the Catholics on all those things?

Either all of Christianity was wrong before protestants came along, or the protestant interpretations were something new.

File: 1408690682989.jpg (2MB, 1821x3111px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1821x3111px

>>2784177
THIS THIS THIS

>>2784048
what I meant is that I think there is a difference in saying that logically there is a God and assuming and believing in a certain nature of God. The first mover argument for God says nothing of whether onto he is all good or all knowing, or if he cares about what we do or how we act towards each other. There is a leap between there is a first mover, which we attribute to God, and this is the nature of God.

>>2784048
Aquinas five proofs were practically copy pasta'd from a muslum writer

File: average catholicposter.png (128KB, 422x375px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 422x375px

>>2784193
>>2784197

>>2784214
>a muslum writer
Aristotle
>>2784191
Or maybe those beliefs are later developments and novelties contradicted by both scripture and the fathers.

>>2782942
>Christians of all denominations are welcome
Does a deist who goes to Episcopal churches (since that's how I was raised), just in case God actually does want active worship and not just general good deeds, count?

>>2784230
refer to >>2784197

>>2784221
no a muslum writer who read Aristotle

>Or maybe those beliefs are later developments and novelties contradicted by both scripture and the fathers.

If your talking about Protestantism sure, if your talking about early churches there is very little evidence of that. Of course you could argue the original Christians were Jews but that puts both sides in a bad position

>>2784230
No.
>>2784234
Catholics don't count either. Christians only

>>2784248
>If your talking about Protestantism sure, if your talking about early churches there is very little evidence of that
There are no patristic scholars who actually think the early church was anything like the RCC

>>2784255
Well not if your talking about the earliest groups, no. Notice however I was not talking about Just Catholics.

most hold that the earliest groups were Jewish in nature and most of their theology. However once we get to the second century we see the bishop priest deacon hierarchy, Martyr veneration, sacraments, apostolic succession and most of the other things protestants object to. Everything suggests this transition was caused by gentiles entering the church, there is nothing to suggest that there was a stage where something like protestant theology was the norm or even existed.

>>2784273
>most hold that the earliest groups were Jewish in nature and most of their theology
There was only one group in the beginning, and the theology of the New Testament is deeply rooted in the Old Testament.
>priest
You don't get these in the 2nd century
>Martyr veneration
Worship of the dead did not exist for many centuries.
>sacraments
Do you mean the counting of sacraments as seven instead of two? Either way you are very wrong.
>Everything suggests this transition was caused by gentiles entering the church
The apostolic fathers were all Gentiles, and the only error to take dominance by their time was momoepiscopalism, and even then it was not universal.
>there is nothing to suggest that there was a stage where something like protestant theology was the norm or even existed
Completely false.

>>2784308
monoepiscopalism*

not trying to troll this seems like the most relevant place to ask, but I've Huysman's "La Bas" and in which he talks about how most satanists are actual priests that become corrupted and lead contradictory lives. Im not talking about LeVayan(athiest) satanism, but about long standing tradition of satanism dating back before medieval times relying on desecration of the host and even child sacrifice, mixing child blood with ash as related to manichaeist practices.

Do any of you have much knowledge of satanism? Could this be connected with the catholic church's seedy history of pedophilia?

>>2784197

>Jehova's Witnesses
>Saved

Pick a troll pic that isn't such obvious b8 m8.

>>2783666
All real people.

>666
Nice try, devil.

File: jesus1.jpg (37KB, 500x492px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 500x492px

>The Impact of Relativism, Postmodernism, and Cultural Marxism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0JAD7w72Wc
In this lecture, Dr. Tony Costa discusses the impact of moral relativism, postmodernism, and cultural Marxism on Western society.

>Postmodernism and Society
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3r9L8lPCY_M
This message will explain the pervasive influence of postmodern thinking on every aspect of contemporary culture: politics, business, education, entertainment, etc.

>The Disappearance of God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTvcrAmj_lY
G.K. Chesterton once said that when people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing, they believe in anything. The rejection of Christianity by our culture has resulted in a spiritual vacuum that is being filled by all manner of aberrant teachings. In this session, Dr. Albert Mohler will provide guidance to Christians who are confused by all the falsehoods swirling around them every day.

>Welcome to the Machine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xx9T1WaOv8k
When a culture rejects God, it always replaces Him with something else. For many in our post-Christian culture, the new “god” is science, the new priests (those whom we must not question) are the scientists, and the new religion is a materialistic scientism. In this session, Dr. Albert Mohler will explore the changing place of science in our culture and explain how Christians should respond to the claims of science.

>Post-Christian Christianity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qG_ZUWiM_50
When the surrounding culture changes, one approach that has been taken by many churches over the centuries is to capitulate to the new thought-forms and change the message of Christ to suit the world. This was true of nineteenth-century liberalism, and it is true in many churches today. In this session, Dr. R.C. Sproul explains the dangers of following the ever-shifting tides of contemporary culture and calls the church to walk in the ancient paths.

File: jesus2.jpg (129KB, 940x1280px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 940x1280px

>Back to Basics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXcLCPtWu08
In every age and in every nation, the church is tempted to capitulate to the values and ideals of the surrounding culture. In every age and in every nation, the solution is the same: repentance and faith. To be faithful, the church must recover the Gospel of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. In this message, Dr. R.C. Sproul looks at the essentials of the Gospel and explains why it is necessary in every generation to re-emphasize the centrality of these basic truths.

>A Gnostic Gospel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZic4LngKis
Americans are incurably "spiritual," but this spirituality expresses itself in ways that are incompatible with biblical Christianity. It expresses itself in ways that are essentially Gnostic. The American church has not been immune to the influence of this American Gnosticism. In this message, Dr. Peter Jones compares this private, mystical, and inward religious mentality with the corporate, doctrinal, and visible faith of orthodox Christianity.

>Struggling with Sin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuTPylRXKd8

File: IMG_1251.png (363KB, 348x349px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 348x349px

>>2783139
Correct. He knows.
Give this man a drink

File: jesus3.jpg (60KB, 500x629px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 500x629px

>The Riddle of Living Water
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8T2lUPpfgs
This video is an in-depth Bible study focused upon living water. I start by systematically discussing the Gospel of John's many mentions of water and drawing out much of the meaning that God inspired in the text, by showing the selections in their proper context. I then show the connections between John's living water theme and various Old Testament passages that shed light on what is meant by John. After this, I move on to connect John's writings about living water in Revelation back to his Gospel as well as other various Old Testament passages. After finishing with John I discuss a handful of other places where living water shows up in the Bible, both in the Old & New Testaments. Finally, I close with a thorough discussion of the creation event found in Genesis 1 and my take on how living water is essential to it.

>Does The Bible Condemn Masturbation?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnajIzZGE5o
In this video I discuss whether the Bible condemns the act of self masturbation or not. I first look at the opinions of some more popular YouTube videos that have addressed the topic, pointing out that they all agree on one thing. That is, they all agree that the Bible never speaks to the issue. Is that true? No, in my humble opinion. To prove this point I go to a text in Matthew 5 and show decisively that even Jesus Himself directly attacks this type of practice, essentially undermining any argument that would seek to allow for this type of behavior in the Christian's life. Don't be deceived Saints of the Lord! Be faithful Bride of Christ, to your Husband to-be!

>>2783666
Your devil trips betray you. Those are all real people.

>>2783675
Following the Jewish Messiah is the Jewiest thing a Jew can do. Paul was Sanhedrin level Jew, and followed the Jewish Messiah.

File: jesus4.jpg (36KB, 474x345px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 474x345px

>Dualism: The Illuminati Religion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUkiBz9rYEs
In this 'Conspiracy Theory of Everything' type exposé on the Illuminati, Gnosticism and Luciferian beliefs I reveal for the first time the hidden and zealously guarded religous beliefs of the Elites. I begin by outlining their basic beliefs about Dualism and the Great Work and what all these doctrines entail. I then attempt to prove my outlandish assertions by reviewing four of the most Gnostic entrenched pieces of content available (The Matrix, Tron Legacy, Lego Movie & ES4: Shivering Isles). I also offer a large list of other similar content. After this I examine occult symbolism and cultural trends showing that the same doctrines appear where ever the Illuminati have any influence. Some examples of topics covered are: Freemasonic Symbolism, Baphomet, 9/11, The Emerald Tablet, LGBT, Evolution, Chimeras, Transhumanism, Race Wars, Prince ect. ect. In the final section of the video I go about refuting the many beliefs revealed in the first two sections, as well as offering a superior alternative to those beliefs which is found in the Gospel of Christ contained in the Word of God, the Bible.

>>2783744
It's not hard to say at all. I say it quite easily.

For some reason you have in your mind that the bible is not a reliable source of information.

Where do you suppose that thought originated?

>>2783744
Jesus would still be God if He did no miracles; however, the miracles were one of the witnesses that He is God. No miracles, one less witness.

>>2783744
>For example, Moses parting the Red Sea sounds absurd.

Agreed.

God causing an east wind to blow so hard that it pushed back the waters and uncovered the plateau at the Al Aqaba crossing into Saudi Arabia is much easier to understand, as that is easier than creating the universe, which God also did.

>>2783767
What an absurd assumption.

And yet, is that not exactly what God is doing? Making a way for imperfect human beings to become perfected new creations in Christ Jesus?

>>2783780
>Not of the American Evangelical tradition,

Check yourself, m8.

>>2783964
Most of them are Catholics, and thus not saved at all. Like this guy, who also has no clue what salvation is. >>2783976

>>2784018
Salvation was offered first to the Jews. They rejected it. It was then offered to all who believe.

This is revealed as a mystery by Paul, that it was always going to be this way.

In other words, God has no Plan B. Plan A is all there is.

File: 1434697595150.png (3MB, 2560x2420px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2560x2420px

>>2782942

File: jesus5.jpg (57KB, 500x665px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 500x665px

>Worst Objection to Theism: Who Created God?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKKIvmcO5LQ

>Digital Physics Argument for God's Existence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4FRgas

>The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM

>Quantum Physics Debunks Materialism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C5pq7W5yRM

>The Introspective Argument
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4l1lQMCOguw

>The Teleological Argument
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Yt7hvgFuNg

>What Atheists Confuse
Part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbLJtxn_OCo
Part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj0lekx-NiQ

>Is Atheism a Delusion?
Part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ii-bsrHB0o
Part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnBTJDje5xk

>Atheists Don't Exist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDX6F_O5XB0
http://www.crisismagazine.com/2015/atheists-dont-exist
http://www.letusreason.org/apolo7.htm

>>2784098
There's a great Youtube channel, "one more for Jesus" or something like that.

A phenomenal number of Jews do not know that Jesus (and the New Testament) is entirely Jewish in origination.

Virtually every saved Jew I have ever met or spoken to has said that they read Isaiah 53 and suddenly realized Isaiah was talking about Jesus, not the lies they were told by their rabbis.

>>2784191
Lost pagans are lost. Plain and simple. No matter how much money they have.

>>2784536
Neither of you know, actually.

the original sin is the same as the unpardonable sin

Unbelief

File: jesus6.jpg (65KB, 779x744px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 779x744px

>Persia in Bible Prophecy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCr3YEGGgr8

>Archeological Discoveries that Prove the Bible is true
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxHYh3QZbTI
http://www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology.htm

>Evolution: The Greatest Deception of All Time
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMr278CMAIA

>Kent Hovind debunks Evolution (18 hour Creation seminar)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shyI-aQaXD0

>Evolution is a myth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gjvuwne0RrE

>"You j-just don't understand evolution!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V2eXu8RY20

>Darwinism's Downfall
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IHO-QkmomY

>Why Leftists Believe Weird and Immoral Things
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oETivbBtlAE

http://www.creation.com/
http://www.icr.org/
https://www.trueorigin.org/
https://www.answersingenesis.org/
http://www.creationwiki.org/Main_Page
http://www.evidentcreation.com/TRM-Logerr.html
http://www.davelivingston.com/tableofcontents.htm
http://www.newgeology.us/presentation32.html
http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/dragons/
http://www.strangenotions.com/gods-philosophers/
http://www.reasons.org/articles/articles/fulfilled-prophecy-evidence-for-the-reliability-of-the-bible

File: family.png (48KB, 400x437px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 400x437px

A. Four Sons of Ham:
1. Mizraim (Egypt)
2. Cush (Sudan, Ethiopia)
3. Put (Lybia)
4. Canaan (Hivites, Jebusites, Arvadites, Girgashites, Amorites, Arkites, Sinites, Hittites,
Sidonians, Perizzites, Zemarites)

B. Five Sons of Shem:
1. Elam (Arabia)
2. Asshur (Assyria)
3. Lud (Lydians)
4. Aram (Aramaic, Armenia, Mesopotamia, Syria)
5. Arphaxad (From which Abraham descended)

C. Japheth's Descendants (14 Nations came out of Japheth):
The immediate descendants of Japheth were seven in number, and are represented by the nations designated Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Mesech, and Tiras; or, roughly, the Armenians, Lydians, Medes, Greeks, Tibarenians, and Moschians, the last, Tiras, remaining still obscure. The sons of Gomer (Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah) were all settled in the West Asian tract; while the sons of Javan (Elisah, Tarshish, Kittim and Dodanim or Rodanim) occupied the Mediterranean coast and the adjacent islands.

Seven Sons of Japheth
1. Javan (Greece, Romans, Romance -- French, Italians, Spanish, Portuguese)
2. Magog (Scythians, Slavs, Russians, Bulgarians, Bohemians, Poles, Slovaks, Croatians)
3. Madai (Indians & Iranic: Medes, Persians, Afghans, Kurds)
4. Tubal (South of Black Sea)
5. Tiras (Thracians, Teutons, Germans, Scandinavian, Anglo-Saxon, Jutes)
6. Meshech (Russia)
7. Gomer (Celtic)

File: Faith.jpg (32KB, 321x317px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 321x317px

>Detailed Documentary Exposing Catholic Church (8 hours)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bVEXZ38Vs8

>The Real History of the evil Roman Catholic Church
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LClaSilFlA8

>The Jesuit Agenda Exposed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTo2wbfvT9E

>The Real Bible Version Issue
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHcf3E8qOqA

>The Catholic and Islamic Connection
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ll0otULYzms

>Detailed Documentary Exposing Islam (3 hours)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk_VwZxN9bA

>Muhammad the World's Most Evil Man?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efRRknDAuHc

>Evidence Muhammad was Demon Possessed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FywOhaY-GEA

>Original Sources Koran Stole its Stories From
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhaLDYo0Kl8

>Allah = Satan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTi1FZkoEsM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86PL9wueH-s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLoUq8vybzY

>Why the Quran Was Revealed in Arabic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rigMARKrNDw

>Why We Are Afraid, A 1400 Year Secret
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y

>Black Hebrew Israelites Debunked
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpVJzLFQ9ro

>Zeitgeist REFUTED & DEBUNKED
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFI6m6Icav4

File: information.jpg (1MB, 1814x1396px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1814x1396px

>Noah - The Truth is Bigger Than You Thought
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lktmmd7YnD8

>Birth of All Occult, Tower of Babel, Nimrod, Abraham
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S80z3kC31uw

>AGE OF DECEIT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjmFm8PIz8M

>Mystery Babylon series by William Cooper
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iCLykzJ0d8

>The Choice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-SzIJngWqE

It is important for Christians to understand our enemy, Satan and the secret societies that control the world.

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge" - Hosea 4:6

>>2784308
>there is nothing to suggest that there was a stage where something like protestant theology was the norm or even existed
Completely false.

Can you expand or discuss this? I always thought the early church lined up with the Apostolic ones via the evidence of the Church fathers

Most churches today are corrupt, compromised, lukewarm, liberal and 'new age'.

If there is no good local church in your area, I suggest looking up Charles Lawson on youtube.

A great godly, righteous man that preaches the Bible, Christ and hellfire.
His sermons are moving and the man is filled with the holy spirit.

>>2784658
It's complicated, so please be specific

>>2784658
The Christian Church for the first three hundred years remained somewhat pure and faithful to the Word of God, but after the pseudo-conversion of Constantine, who for political expedience declared Christianity the state religion, thousands of pagans were admitted to the church by baptism alone with out true conversion. They brought with them pagan rites which they boldly introduced into the church with Christian terminology, thus corrupting the primitive faith. Even the noted Catholic prelate and theologian, Cardinal Newman, tells us that Constantine introduced many things of pagan origin: "We are told in various ways by Eusebius, that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own...The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church." An Essay On The Development Of Christian Doctrine, pp. 359, 360. This unholy alliance also allowed the continuance of the pagan custom of eating and drinking the literal flesh and literal blood of their god. This is actually how transubstantiation entered the professing church.

Catholics = Pagans

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROM5EpCQUlg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWdSi0Xw4u0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4CRvAPzxjI

>>2784690
What of the Orthodox though?

>The Christian Church for the first three hundred years remained somewhat pure and faithful to the Word of God,

Have you got better evidience for this part because the church fathers writings who predated Constantine by 1-200 years seem to demonstrate that during that 300 years the early church was thoroughly Apostolic

>>2784678
>It's complicated, so please be specific

Why do the Church fathers, support an Apotolic view of the faith? What evidence is there that the early church was simmilar to protestantism?

>>2784703
Their beliefs are no more biblical than the papists.

Water does not wash sin away.
"Holy chrism" does not allow the Holy Spirit to enter into you.
Water baptism in their church does nothing but get you wet.

There's literally no schism anymore; the pope patched things up and they're working together on all things One World Religion.

>>2784703
Eastern Orthodoxy (Greek, Russian, ME, etc) is just Catholicism-lite.

Instead of a pope they have patriarchs.
They also put more emphasis on creeds.

Still has the Mary worship and occult/pagan mysticism that has nothing to do with Christ or the Gospel.

>>2784703
The early church is in the bible.

Going outside the bible for information to make decisions about the bible is absurd.

>>2784718
Is there going to be a part 2 of your post?

>>2784703
>>2784713
Oh, and fuck you, Malaysian muslim. Fuck you a thousand times.

>>2784724
>>2784727

>>2784713
>What evidence is there that the early church was simmilar to protestantism

How about try reading the book of Acts and Paul's letters?

All the early Christians believed through faith alone (with works being proof of that saving faith).

>>2784713
>Why do the Church fathers, support an Apotolic view of the faith?
By Apostolic, I'm guesssing you mean Cathodox. Not one jot or tittle from the first half of the millenium supports Romanism or Easternism. The distinctives of those two are directly contradicted by the testimony of the early church. Many things they would point to that were held by many in those days are also held by high church Protestants like Lutherans.
>What evidence is there that the early church was simmilar to protestantism?
There is a great deal of evidence based off patristic citation. I could link you to some quote lists, but apart from that you would have to do some serious reading to see the evidence.

thoughts on the "read scripture" series?

they animate the entire bible, it's basically scripture for dummies.
the art style is really good though.

https://www.youtube.com/user/jointhebibleproject/videos

>>2784727
Im not him hence the lack of HAA HAA HA BFTO ect.

Im hoping that without his autism here a better discussion can be had.

>All the early Christians believed through faith alone (with works being proof of that saving faith).

The issue is that the records of those who personally knew and were taught by the apostles suggest otherwise.

I want to know why there is a dissonance betweeen the protestant description of the early Church and the writings of the earliest christians

>>2784739
>he distinctives of those two are directly contradicted by the testimony of the early church.

Any good quotes or particular examples?

>There is a great deal of evidence based off patristic citation. I could link you to some quote lists, but apart from that you would have to do some serious reading to see the evidence.

Better than nothing, hit me with it.

>>2784753
>The issue is that the records of those who personally knew and were taught by the apostles suggest otherwise
That's simply false. I have seen much citation, but to this day I have never seen a single thing from before the eve of the 2nd millenium that contradicted sola fide.

File: This triggers catholics.png (344KB, 1000x773px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1000x773px

Hell: Universalism, annihilation, or eternal conscious suffering?

I'm leaning annihilation because it is more consistent with old testament. The idea of eternal fire just seems like an offshoot of pagan ideas of Tarturus and Hades

>>2783046
>>2783076
Though as a Christian I do not believe that Catholics are not Christian, but there are a lot of flaws in their doctrines that were established by some early church members.

>>2784753
Protestants go back to what the Bible actually says, the New Testament church.

Catholics go by what people a couple hundred years later say, which tend to be different stories than what scripture says (and what Paul warned us about).

The churches were already going apostate and deviating from the truth while Paul was still alive.

Are you going to trust "church fathers" or the infallible, inspired Word of God?

>>2784769
>that contradicted sola fide.

I was thinking about all the odd stuff like the veneration of saints, real presence in the Eucharist and role of Popes and Bishops

>>2784753
>I want to know why there is a dissonance betweeen the protestant description of the early Church and the writings of the earliest christians

Didn't I tell you to fuck off, muslim?

>>2783122
>original sin
>literal interpretation
Having looked through original sin doctrine, it became apparent that the traditional view held by St Augustine of Hippo is hopelessly flawed due to faulty exegesis of Romans 5:12, believing that the transmission of Adam's guilt was also given to the rest of the human race.

>>2784785
They think Mary saves them.

Does Mary save anyone?

>>2784787
>The churches were already going apostate and deviating from the truth while Paul was still alive.

So when did this fall happen? Are any early writings of the Church fathers of any value

>>2784801
No she doesn't nor is she sinless as well, one of the biggest goofs in biblical theology due to original sin.

>>2784766
http://www.apuritansmind.com/justification/the-early-church-and-justification-compiled-by-dr-c-matthew-mcmahon/
http://thecripplegate.com/the-church-fathers-sola-scriptura/
https://onefold.wordpress.com/early-church-evidence-refutes-real-presence/

>>2784790
>veneration of saints
Did not exist in hte patristic era
>real presence in the Eucharist
Is not incompatible with Protestantism (see Lutherans), nor was it unanimous.
>Popes
Did not exist in the patristic era.

>>2784776
Hell as annihilation is more peripheral than essential doctrine, unless you are more hardline fundamentalist it's not a biggy.

>>2784807
thanks

>>2784798
Of course it's flawed. It's wrong.

P: God does not lie.
P: God is not mistaken.
P: God is omniscient.
P: God told Adam and Eve they would die the very day they ate the fruit.
P: Adam and Eve lived for centuries after that day.

C: Adam and Eve died the day they ate the forbidden fruit.
C: Adam and Eve, once spiritually dead and lacking the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, could not give birth to children in God's image, but only in their own image.

Genesis 1:27
So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.

>>2784806
Then they're lost goddess worshiping pagans, and not Christians.

>>2784776
Eternal punishment.
These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Matthew 25:46

>>2784818
Either you are right, or Jesus is right and you are wrong.

Gonna go with the latter.

Matthew 25:46
And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

>>2784787
I used to think annihilationism was stupid because the idea of eternal suffering is so ingrained our heads and pop-culture when we think of the Christian hell.

But then I stumbled upon
http://www.rethinkinghell.com/2013/03/got-questions-our-answers-are-more-biblical/

And it makes great cases for conditionalism/annihilation.
People suffer for their sins and then cease to exist. They don't get tortured for eternity.

It makes sense because
>Bible supports it, many verses actually point to annihilation
>God is not a sadist
>It just makes sense. You reject Christ's sacrifice, so you will have to pay the debt of your sins yourself. Paying debts does not take forever. It can take a long time but eventually a debt is paid. In this case, the sinner suffers until the punishment is done and he ceases to exist.

>>2784839

You discovered that people don't like the harsh reality of the bible.

Congratulations.

>>2784832
>>2784835

>>2784839
>so you will have to pay the debt of your sins yourself.

How do you suppose you would do that? The sin you're being punished for is UNPARDONABLE.

It is the sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

It is UNBELIEF.

>>2784803
see "A Tale of Two Churches" series on youtube.

it was an incremental thing.

over the centuries the church became more and more corrupt until the point when it was spiritually dead and the reformation was bound to happen to revive the true faith.

>>2784308
>There was only one group in the beginning, and the theology of the New Testament is deeply rooted in the Old Testament.

This is deeply disputed by scholars.

>You don't get these in the 2nd century

this is clearly wrong, while the distinction between priests and bishops does not appear until then there were clearly priests in the first century

>>there is nothing to suggest that there was a stage where something like protestant theology was the norm or even existed
Completely false.

Then where were these groups? Where are they're graves, where are they're writings, where are the mentions by other groups? The church fathers as preserved today were all proto-orthodox or slightly heterodox depending on what list you go by.

>>2784850
Calling the Catholic church "the church" is an abomination.

>>2784853
I swore I told you to fuck off, you demon possessed Mohammad worshiper.

Not too bright, are you.

>>2784835
>Either you are right, or Jesus is right and you are wrong.
as I said periphery, do I rest my salvation on the doctrine of hell? I don't even believe in annihilationism cause I know there are bigger issues to lay down. So no.

>>2784845
There is not a single verse in the Bible that says you suffer for eternity.

This idea came from platonism and is just as retarded as the idea that satan is a red horned figure with a pitch fork.

How about you read the Bible instead of believing in pop-culture?

File: 1492595820387.png (75KB, 1437x909px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1437x909px

Superstition is the greatest shame of western civilization.

Keep playing your little games, it won't last long.

>>2784864
Call me silly, but people who do not agree with Jesus are not generally Christians.

Why call me Lord, and not obey me?

--Jesus of Nazareth

>>2784859
>Get btfo
>F-Fuck off...

Protestants foiled again.

>>2784870
0/10 poor bait

>>2783046
You don't know what goes on in the heart of another man. Who is truly good inside.

>>2784853
>This is deeply disputed by scholars.
I couldn't care less about their worldy-wisdom. They would present their position as the scholarly one, because they have made the Christian scholars to lose automatically.
>this is clearly wrong, while the distinction between priests and bishops does not appear until then there were clearly priests in the first century
You clearly don't know the difference between a pastor and a priest. In the first century, until the sacerdotal priesthood developed, every believer was a priest (1 Peter 2:9)
>Then where were these groups? Where are they're graves, where are they're writings, where are the mentions by other groups?
They are known as the early church fathers
>proto-orthodox
You might as well tell me you wear a fedora

>>2784865
Just gave you one, and so did another anon.

Here's a few more.

Revelation 19:20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.

Revelation 20:10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Revelation 20:14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Revelation 20:15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

>>2784865
>There is not a single verse in the Bible that says you suffer for eternity.
>>2784832
>>2784835

>>2784871
>Call me silly, but people who do not agree with Jesus are not generally Christians.
Did I disagree with Jesus? I didn't say. So why then are you putting words in my mouth?

>>2784872
>Protestants foiled again.

I can see right through you, mussleman. I can hear the demons in your head mocking you. I can smell your failure.

>>2784874
No one is good

>>2784883
>Hell as annihilation is more peripheral than essential doctrine, unless you are more hardline fundamentalist it's not a biggy.

That's you dude. It's not doctrine at all. It's a lie from the very real pit of hell, and yes, it's a biggy.

>>2784874
I do.

Nobody but Jesus. None are good but God.

Simple.

>>2784871
>>2784889
It's definitely important, but don't be so bold as to make it essential.

>>2784880
>>2784881

http://www.rethinkinghell.com/2013/03/got-questions-our-answers-are-more-biblical/

read the article you retard.

matthew 25 has already been addressed, it does not talk about eternal torture.

>>2784776
They weren't wrong about that; they had demonic teachers. Hades was divided into two parts, a good and a bad. There just wasn't a river, and neither portion was eternal.

The people in Paradise in Hades were led to heaven by Jesus at the resurrection, and the people in torment/Tartarus are awaiting their turn to be cast into the lake of fire.

Forever.

>>2784880

where the worm does not die
and the fire is not quenched

>>2784889
>That's you dude. It's not doctrine at all. It's a lie from the very real pit of hell, and yes, it's a biggy.
this comments sounds more conspiratorial heresy than actually a disagreement in exegesis. If you can prove your case through exegesis that would be nice.

What does this mean

"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"

>>2784896
How about you use your own words like an adult instead?

>>2784896
Read the relevant Revelation passages.

Eternal

Day and night forever and ever

File: advanced.jpg (23KB, 217x208px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 217x208px

>>2784859
Protip: more than one person might disagree with you in a discussion.

>>2784889
http://lhim.org/topics/pdfs/John%20Roller%20--%20Doctrine%20of%20Immortality%20in%20the%20Early%20Church.pdf

I disagree

>>2784899
It's been proven above. Maybe read the thread, and the verses posted from the Revelation.

I'll help you because you seem dim.

When the devil is cast into the lake of fire, it's where the antichrist and false prophet are.

Not were, are.

And that's a thousand years later, and both of those are human beings.

If two human beings are in the lake of fire a thousand years later, what is your evidence of annihilation again?

>>2784887
Is God telling you I'm a Muslim?

>>2784905
Is that in the bible? No?

Then you believe carefully crafted lies, don't you.

http://www.rethinkinghell.com/2013/03/got-questions-our-answers-are-more-biblical/
http://www.rethinkinghell.com/2013/03/got-questions-our-answers-are-more-biblical/
http://www.rethinkinghell.com/2013/03/got-questions-our-answers-are-more-biblical/

You eternalists seriously need to read this article and understand what conditionalists/annihilationists believe before spouting passages that have already been addressed and answered.

The Bible supports annihilation, not eternal torture.

>>2784913
>Got Questions? Ministries
They get nearly everything wrong.

>>2784875
If your unwilling to consider research outside the bible, and more specifically your interpretation of it than there is nothing to discuss, but I will keep posting to show everyone how stupid and uninformed your position is.

>You clearly don't know the difference between a pastor and a priest

in this case a product of your imagination

>They are known as the early church fathers
Catholic and orthodox sight them all the time only to be told they are unbiliblcal, an anachronism as there was no universal agreed biblical text in the 1st and second centuries.

>You might as well tell me you wear a fedora

First muslum and now a fedora. Seems name calling is your only way of dealing with opposition

>>2784896
Ok, I read the relevant section. Problem is, the same word for eternal is used here in the Greek. If the life is ceaseless, the punishment is also ceaseless.

>>2784910
you seem to believe I take a hardline position when you know nothing about my positions, I'm not well acquainted in the doctrine of the afterlife whether I introduce myself first to eternal damnation or temporary/annihilation, so quit with the accusations and insults.

>>2784923
It's not ceaseless.

The punishment is eternal in the sense that you cease to exist, forever.

>>2784921
>If your unwilling to consider research outside the bible
I am unwilling to consider biased anti-Christian research done for the purpose of discrediting the Christian faith
>but I will keep posting to show everyone how stupid and uninformed your position is
Euphoric
>in this case a product of your imagination
Thank you for demonstrating your complete ignorance of Christian theology, thus disqualifying yourself from patristic study.
>an anachronism as there was no universal agreed biblical text in the 1st and second centuries
Half-truth. Most books were universally agreed upon, only the apocrypha were a major dispute. The apostolic fathers' writings would only be considered canon in the regions where they were from. The more a father knew about the Jews, the less likely they were to accept the apocrypha as canon, and vice versa.
There is also the citation of the New Testament as scripture within the New Testament.
>First muslum
I did not say muslum (sic).

>>2784939
Is the life ceaseless?

Book of Revelation.

What interpretation do you take?

>Futurist
>Historical
>Preterist
>Idealist

Futurism is popular in protestant circles today. You have pre-tribbers, post-tribbers, etc.
Most of the events of Revelation all happen in the end times.

Historical was what the protestant reformers believed in. The Papacy was seen as the antichrist, and the historical view sees Revelation as a progressive thing throughout the ages. Muslims, Napoleon, there are all sorts of connections which do make sense.

Preterist is the catholic or skeptic view. Everything already happened and has been fulfilled in the days when John was writing the apocalyptic. It's mostly imagery of Nero, Rome and the persecution of Christians, etc.

Idealist sees the book as nothing but symbolism and metaphors, things that happen in the spiritual world and not applicable to ours. It's basically the stance of a guy who doesn't care or want to know about the book. It's the agnostic view of Revelation.

>>2784939
Also, that is not eternal, that is cessation. If the punishment is completed, it is not eternal, they do not continue to be punished. You have to twist the meaning of eternal to justify this position.

>>2784961
>>Futurist
>>Historical
>>Preterist
>>Idealist
I suppose a bit of historicist and of futurist. Is that partial-preterist?
I believe that some of the prophecies have already been fulfilled, but that most are at the end of time.
>Futurism is popular in protestant circles today. You have pre-tribbers, post-tribbers
You're thinking of Premillenialism

>>2784913
What was the state of the Old Testament saints, before Christ?

>>2784956
Most people researching this subject academically, or at least a plurality of them in the US could probably be called liberal Christians.

>Thank you for demonstrating your complete ignorance of Christian theology, thus disqualifying yourself from patristic study.

sight me one academic source arguing there were not priests in the 1st century church. The patristic studies agree with me.

>>2784962
Ceasing to exist forever is not eternal?

Another problem by saying people will suffer for eternity (besides making God look evil) is that you're implying sin will remain forever.

We are created beings, our sin is finite. We accumulate sin throughout our life time. Every day we sin, but we don't sin for eternity.

For people who do not have Christ as their advocate/lawyer, they have to "pay off" their sins. Since their sins are finite, there is only a finite amount of time they have to be punished.

God will renew the universe, a new perfect creation, restoring the Edenic paradise conditions. The lake of fire cannot possibly exist at the same time, it will be burned away with the old creation and sinners cease to exist after the conscious punishment has been dealt.

>>2784987
>Most people researching this subject academically, or at least a plurality of them in the US could probably be called liberal Christians
Liberalism and Christianity are mutually exclusive religions.
>sight
Cite*
>sight me one academic source arguing there were not priests in the 1st century church.
How about you even so much as google what a priest is, kiddo.

>>2784961
Futurism is a lie perpetuated by Jesuits.

The book of Revelation is historical. It has something to say about every era since Christ. It is applicable to everyone, and most importantly identifies the Vatican/RCC as Mystery Babylon.

Idealist is not really a serious stance and thus disregarded.

Preterism is weak and not really defendable.

>>2785001
>Ceasing to exist forever is not eternal?
Oh, it is, but it is not eternal punishment.
>Another problem by saying people will suffer for eternity (besides making God look evil)
Justice is not evil.
>you're implying sin will remain forever
Show me one scripture that says reprobates stop sinning after death.
>Since their sins are finite, there is only a finite amount of time they have to be punished.
They keep sinning while being punished. Rebels will rebel.
>God will renew the universe, a new perfect creation, restoring the Edenic paradise conditions
I don't think you realize it, but that would eradicate the Christian hope. Adam was capable of sin, the glorified saint is not.

>>2785022
God destroying your soul is an eternal punishment.

How can you not see that?

>>2784850
>see "A Tale of Two Churches" series on youtube.


When does he start discussing it specifically Im into the second video and hes still talking historical concepts of time.

>>2785005
If you mean to imply that use of the Greek word presbyter indicates that early "priests" were just elders of a universal priest hood and not officials charged with certain ceremonial duties and teaching authority you are wrong.

>>2785036
Yeah, it's very long and you'll have to bear with it. It goes up to like 50 episodes.

But it covers the centuries very detailed and slowly.

Church history is a complicated matter, you can't just sum it up. Read some books if you really want to know.

>>2784961
Historical.

The "locusts" referred to the rapid Islamic invasions.

The antichrist was wounded when Napoleon deposed the pope for a short while.

Praise the Lord, even Jesus Christ the son of God.

Catholics can go lick Jamal's feet in hell.

>>2785028
Jesus doesn't say it would be an eternal punishment, He said it would be eternal punishment.
>>2785040
Not an argument.

>>2785050
>you can't just sum it up.

I know but its certainly not something needs 5 hours of talk about cyclical history and Darwinism.

>>2785105
Darwinism is a myth.

>>2785101
I dont have to respond with an argument when you didn't present one of your own.

Do you guys believe in Biblical inerrancy? I've decided that I don't.

>>2784080
Baptist. It's an awful denomination full of awful people, but at least they're somewhat self-respecting Christians. The Mormon religion is full of blatant bullshit, and Jehovah's Witnesses are the absolute scum of the earth.

>>2785148
I was simply acknowledging the reality. Do you have a problem with reality?
>>2785152
Why have you decided not to believe the bible?

>>2785311
I believe the Bible. I just think it was subject to the personality of it's writers and that some of the old testament was exaggerated.

>>2785320
But Jesus referred to the Old Testament as God speaking and held the Jews accountable to it as if He had personally spoken it to them

>>2785334
Post the verse and lets look at it analytically.

>>2785311
This whole thread you've been denying reality in favor of your belief in biblical inerrancy.

>>2785342
http://biblehub.com/matthew/22-31.htm

>>2785389
I believe God spoke through Moses and the other writers of the Old testament. It's still humans writing it though.

>>2785409
Yes, men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. Is God capable of speaking falsely?

>>2785427
Is there a verse that specifically says this? I'm genuinely curious.

>>2785434
2 Peter 1:21

>>2785453
"For Idid not speak on My own initiative, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and what to speak"

This is another example. I don't think that the prophets just chose what to write willy nilly. I think the holy spirit motivated their efforts and that the writings were divine. Nevertheless, it was still written by men. For example, it was accidentally written that jesus was dead for three days and three nights. He was actually dead for three days and two nights.

>>2785480
That's not an error, that's just the Greek method of reckoning. A single moment of one day or night is reckoned as the full day or night.
Again, can God speak falsely? Or was God too weak to ensure the word was exactly how He wanted it?

>>2785490
That's interesting to hear but my point still stands. There are people who are much more convincing at arguing against inerrancy than myself.

>>2785500
Shouldn't a Christian place more faith in the word of God than the wisdom of the world?

>>2785523
I don't have the blind faith it takes to believe inerrancy in the light of the natural world that God created contradicting scripture.

>>2784888
>>2784891

No, we don't know the heart of other people. That's the whole point of why God, Jesus Christ, rebuked judgement of others. Because we don't see who people really are.

I'll correct myself though-

We don't know who is truly 'capable' of good or 'capable' of doing better or 'capable' redemption or improvement. Or...better yet, who has the capacity for these virtues.

So you can't say Catholics aren't this or that. You don't see into them to the degree God can see into them. The whole point of Christ telling people that many will claim "Lord, Lord" but Christ will tell them, "I never knew you"....proves that it goes beyond knowing the name of Jesus Christ. It's who the person is on the inside that matters most. If a place for righteousness is inside of him, then righteousness has a place in him. If a love for justice and fairness is inside of them, than that's exactly that.

I'm not saying people are good, but that there are genuine and honest people. People who love righteousness, albeit still in the flesh, still fighting the flesh, but the love of righteousness is in them. Which is why we aren't permitted to judge because we simply don't see the whole story about the individual.

It's "dust your feet off and walk away"...not "linger outside their house with a bullhorn announcing and applying judgements on this or that house hold."

That's the point I was trying to make, only because I see so much gossip and infighting with Christians. When, all we can do is test fruit to determine motives and intent. In order to test fruit, you have to spend time in the presence of who you are attempting to discern.

File: rev-week07-large2.jpg (186KB, 750x623px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 750x623px

>>2784961
> things that happen in the spiritual world and not applicable to ours.
Things that happen in the spiritual world are in every sense applicable to us. I certainly hope you aren't discounting Revelations as a work of non-historic allegory; if anything that is the primary, though not exclusive, way it should be read. We have argued for millennia whether the events of Genesis actually happened, but only blind fundamentalists consider it a purely historical work, because that discounts it as an allegory explaining the human condition. Revelations is obviously a symbolic work, to think that in the future kaiju are going to sprout out of the ocean raining hellfire is absurd. For centuries we have been debating what these symbols apply to, but the fact that they can be applied in such varied contexts, ranging from the pope to Napoleon, speaks to the universality of a figure like the Antichrist. Certain passages, such as the description of the Beast's heads and horns and the number of the beast, show that John clearly had historical figures in mind. However, any of these symbols also blatantly relate to spiritual concepts. Take, for example, the Dragon and the Beasts.
cont.

>>2785550
He said we would know people by the fruit they bear in Matthew.

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

115KB, 495x686px

>>2784961
Satan, the highest spiritual force opposed to God, is and inverse of the Father (although not an equal as he can only match the woman). The first beast, one of two emissaries on earth, bears the full power of the Dragon, and survives certain death, earning him the admiration of the world. The second beast performed miracles from heaven to sway the faithful to worship the first beast, and gives life to the lifeless idols. It is clear that these three are a perversion of the holy trinity and how men can be swayed by those who imitate the lord for their own name. Men will worship those who can prevent death as opposed to the one who can end it, and those men are given power by those who can make men worship idols as if they were living. But to pin a specific historical figure as the beast, even if John calls out Nero, is to exclude the possibility that future men may be just as cruel as Nero, who's archetype is the Beast. As Solomon said, there is nothing new under the sun. History repeats itself, and it will until Babylon truly falls and Christ truly returns.

>>2784900
A letting go of the world. The concept of Idolatry is a broad topic. You can be chasing objects and in that chasing, you might miss someone who may need help. So focused on yourself and acquisition that you miss the bigger the picture.

Plus Peter said something pretty interesting. "The earth was shaped by water, but will be judged by fire."

Glaciers formed the surface of the earth and the sun will eventually scorch all life off earth.

It kind of attributes to the scripture you posted, as a point that nothing on earth will even last forever since it's all been meant for destruction, heaven on the other hand will have everything....minus the corruption of duality and evil etc etc

>>2784405
Be gone heathen

>>2783964
We are all not worthy of salvation. It is by His grace that we are saved.

>>2783985
I've dealt with them. I've also dealt with convicted murderers, rapists, really aweful people. The thing is, there is no sin that is too great for Jesus's offering.

How do you figure out which religion and which denomination is correct?

>>2786308
Yes.

you fuckers genocided the Cathars for no reason

>tfw if the Gnostics had been listened to we'd be living in a utopia

File: 1474969356981.png (119KB, 225x227px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 225x227px

>>2786451
>for no reason
I'm no Catholic, but come on

>>2785534
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.
>>2785550
>We don't know who is truly 'capable' of good or 'capable' of doing better or 'capable' redemption or improvement
Yes we do. The answer is no one.
>So you can't say Catholics aren't this or that. You don't see into them to the degree God can see into them
I don't judge them by their hearts, I judge them by their anti-Christian confession, and in accordance with the apostolic command, I let them be anathema.
>People who love righteousness, albeit still in the flesh, still fighting the flesh, but the love of righteousness is in them
There are no such people.
>>2786308
The bible.

Thoughts on The Society of Saint Pius x?
Thoughts on Chesterton?

>>2787270
Catholics aren't Christian

>>2787361
Yes they are

>>2787212

>The bible

Which no Protestant actually follows, making them just as doomed as Catholics.

>>2787691
>>2787700
Wrong

>>2787733
No, you're wrong, Satan.

File: Hierarchy (Jesus Approved Edition).png (264KB, 747x1592px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 747x1592px

Reminder.

>>2787759
Why isn't Catholicism on that list?

>>2783046
The upside down cross is the Cross of St Peter.

File: 1487055087865.jpg (219KB, 1273x1024px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 1273x1024px

>>2787766
>the patron saint of your village's church is St Peter
>huge upside down cross above the gate
>21th century americans will believe it is a satanic temple

File: >Romans.jpg (530KB, 469x5000px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 469x5000px

>>2787763
Romanism you mean?

>>2787777
>>2787777
>>2787777
>>2787777
nice

>>2787759
Reminder that Jesus was a jew

>>2787794
No, that's retarded.

>Jesus is God
>Jesus, as God, is perfect
>Jesus, being perfect, cannot have imperfections
>Ergo, Jesus cannot have an imperfect cut jew-dick, without which he cannot be a "Jew".

File: Yeshua.png (1MB, 638x796px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 638x796px

>>2787794
And?

>>2787804
Simeon is laughing at you as we speak.

In what cases would Gd withhold repentance?

>>2787933

None except maybe explicitly rejecting a direct miracle.

See Pharisees rejecting all the shit Jesus did.

>>2782942
Would anyone be interested in a thread going through the Summa? Theologica or Contra Gentiles. Doesn't matter. We could go through each question a week at a time. It would be a good way to define some of the terms in the whole religious discussion. The idea of God from a Christian tradition is vastly different than the one that has been popularized.

>>2787804
>>2787811
>Jesus is God
>Jesus was a jew
>Therefore, god is a jew

>>2787969
*Son of God is a Jew

>>2787995
>Jesus is not god

that's fucking heresy and you're a fucking heretic pagan

>>2787966
How many hours would it take?

>>2787966
I'd be interested in Contra Gentiles, especially if it has any anti-Jew parts. I find that Jews, at least for religious discussions on 4chan, are a major annoyance, always Jewing it up about how we don't read the Old Testament, or do read it but get it wrong.

>>2787969
But Jesus wasn't a Jew. Jesus, being God, is perfect, and that is incompatible with being a Jew.

>>2787966
I'd enjoy it but covering the whole summa would be near impossible. Start with one thread for each of the five proofs and see where it goes. Most of the success hinges on how much shitposting an explicitly catholic thread will draw from certain protestants, but if civility can reign on both sides it would be excellent.

>>2788004
The Son is not the Father and furthermore if you really want to get technical with it, the Jewish human being Jesus of Nazareth was merely the incarnation of the Son who Himself preexists creation meaning that He existed before Judaism was even a thing.

>>2788022
If I'm being honest, shitposting on the Summa could bring shitposting to a whole new level.

>>2788021
If you want to argue that Jesus isn't a Jew then you have the burden of proof, and that proof includes explaining away massive swathes of the New Testament and basically all of the Old Testament. So have at it.

>>2788065
No because it always devolves into the same tired old memes and none of them have anything to do with metaphysics so it would be a complete derailment.

>>2788050
Nestorius pls

>>2788116
>If you want to argue that Jesus isn't a Jew then you have the burden of proof, and that proof includes explaining away massive swathes of the New Testament and basically all of the Old Testament. So have at it.
I've already proved it. Jesus was perfect. A perfect person can not, by definition, be imperfect. You wouldn't make me jump through the same hoops if I made a claim that

>Jesus wasn't a liar
>Jesus wasn't incontinent
>Jesus wasn't a downie

"Judaism" is an impossible, imperfect, horrifying racist ideology. To claim that Jesus was a Jew is to claim he's imperfect, which is like saying that you have a square circle.

>>2788181
>he thinks trinitarian theology is Nestorian

Can you be a Christian but not believe in God or the religious stories? I want to be one.

>>2788210
>Jesus of Nazareth and God the Son are two different persons
>not Nestorianism

This whole thread is a heathan, heretical thread. There is no god but Kek and Pepe is the prophet of Kek.

>>2788212
>Can you be a Christian but not believe in Christianity?
No.

>>2788223
The persons of the Son and Jesus were perfectly united in the incarnation but that has nothing to do with the nature of the Son prior to the incarnation.

Nestorianism is the belief that within the incarnation the human and divine natures remained separate.

>>2788191
Which is contradicted by the historical facts of the Bible, I.e. Jesus was ethnically jewish, descendent from Jewish royalty, preached as a rabbi in Judea, claimed to be the embodiment and fulfilment of the Jewish law, and at one point literally summoned the two greatest prophets of judaism for Peter. I get i'm never gonna convince a neo-nazi troll that jews aren't inherrentlt imperfect but don't go around blaspheming to make a point. The mere fact that Jesus offered his redemption to the Jews and that some of them, the apostles, accepted is proof that they are capable of perfection, that and common sense.

>>2788236
>the Jewish human being Jesus of Nazareth was merely the incarnation of the Son
How is that not Nestorianism? Is God the Son a Jew?

Jesus and God are Jews, but Kek is perfect and non-Jewish. Praise Kek

>>2788250
God the Son existed before the Jews or any other people were created, so in an ontological sense God the Son has no ethnicity. However God the Son incarnated Himself in the Jewish person Jesus of Nazareth.

>>2788274
Are God the Son and Jesus of Nazareth one and the same?

>>2788291
After the incarnation yes but prior to the incarnation Jesus the man had not been born yet.

>>2788316
So before the incarnation God the Son and Jesus of Nazareth are different persons?

>>2788325
Jesus of Nazareth did not exist before he was born so he wasn't a person at all.

>>2788329
So Jesus of Nazareth did not exist, but God the Son did? That's Nestorian. The orthodox answer is that since God the Son and Jesus of Nazareth are the same person, He existed before His birth, as God the Son. The Son before the incarnation and after the incarnation are the same person, so the pre-incarnate Son is Jesus.

>>2788227
Why are you Christians so intolerant?

File: christ b8.png (55KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 625x626px

>>2788361

>>2788350
You have a faulty understanding of Nestorianism which is the belief that within the incarnation the human and divine natures remained separate.

Nestorianism has nothing to do with the ontological nature of the Son prior to the incarnation.

Also since you're attempting to speak with authority on the orthodox position, are you even a Christian?

>>2788371
>You have a faulty understanding of Nestorianism which is the belief that within the incarnation the human and divine natures remained separate.
What do you mean "remained separate"? They were never separate, His humanity did not exist prior to the incarnation.
The heresy of Nestorianism is the confusion of nature and person, which is what you are confusing.
>are you even a Christian?
Yes

>>2788242
>Which is contradicted by the historical facts of the Bible,
No it isn't.

> I.e. Jesus was ethnically jewish
A nonsense term

>descendent from Jewish royalty,
Ehh, iffy.

> preached as a rabbi in Judea,
No, he preached Christainity in Judea.

> claimed to be the embodiment and fulfilment of the Jewish law,
Yes, so?

>and at one point literally summoned the two greatest prophets of judaism for Peter.
Again, so?

None of that makes Jesus a Jew. Judaism is a stupid, imperfect belief that one can be as perfect as God while still being man. Jesus never did that, because he was God AND man united. Ergo, Jesus was not a Jew. Jesus never taught people that they should be doing this, ergo Jesus never taught Judaism.

And claiming the apostles were perfect is just incorrect. They, at best, started imperfect and were redeemed from their Judaism to Christianity, and even that process had more than a few bumps along the way.

>>2788395
I mean that Nestorious believed that at the creation of the human Jesus his human nature remained separate from the Son's divine nature.

The orthodox belief is that as soon as Mary became pregnant by the Holy Spirit the human and divine natures of the child she carried in her womb were perfectly united.

Jesus of Nazareth's "Jewishness" is part of his human nature and the Son did not have a human nature prior to the incarnation.

>>2788427
>remained separate
Again, how can something remain as something it never was?
>Jesus of Nazareth's "Jewishness" is part of his human nature and the Son did not have a human nature prior to the incarnation.
I didn't say He was a Jew prior to the incarnation.

>>2788438
It can't which is one of the reasons why Nestorious was wrong.

>>2782942
Sometimes I read a really nice, complex argument in favor of theism and I go "you know, I don't agree, but I can see how someone would find this reasonable". Then I read christians debating about absolute theological nonsense, I think about early christian history, how nonsensical the whole supernatural apparatus is and I remember why all that pursuit of rationality is just a pretense.

>>2788403
>Judaism is a stupid, imperfect belief that one can be as perfect as God while still being man
Again, burden of proof lies on you because your defenition of Judaism, the religion, differs from everyone elses. If you want to claim that's a quality of Judaism, then we can argue, but if you claim anyone who believes perfection as man is achievable, which includes anyone who believes Adam was perfect prior to the fall, I.e. Christians, then I can dismiss you because I don't have time for an entire history course.
It isn't nonsense to say that Jesus's bloodline extends from David, making him ethnically jewish and royal because thats literally the opening to one of the gospels. I say rabbi as the jewish word for teacher, that does not mean that he teached rabinnical judaism, a pretty obvious point. And, again, you need to do more than dismiss his connections to Jewish law and prophecy to sway my opinion, especially if that means Jesus was the embodiment of an imperfect law, the last in a line of imperfect prophets, and proud of both these facts.
To clarify, I don't claim that the apostles are perfect, I believe that they accepted the road to perfection, as you put it. If you claim the Jews are imperfect that is correct, but if you were to claim that any person other than Jesus was perfect then you are incorrect because, as you believe, because man is inherently fallen. But perfection of man, if you believe in Adam and if you believe that Jesus was fully human, is possible if your will is that of God's. To be as perfect AS God is like saying an apple can be as perfect as a tree, both can be perfect but that entails different things for both. God is perfect. Man is perfect when in accord with God's will. Anything else is drawing on lesser powers and therefore imperfect, something the Jews fought heavily against in opposing false gods. If you want to argue why this is false, please do, but please actually argue it instead of simply stating it.

>>2788501
But you can't come to a normative outcome from a non-normatice premise. If there is no rationality, there isn't a metric to judge it by.

>>2788611
normative*

>>2788225
Kekistani exegesis, e'rybody

>>2784776
You know God is real but you never reach his embrace, illumination is too far.

File: The mother of God.jpg (531KB, 1806x1247px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 1806x1247px

I am the Prophet who carries the Egg of Word-Flesh, he whoeth will bring upon the heaven. I am El-Mary, Queen of the empryen.

I bringeth the way of word and sword, to move the bones of the universe and the wheels of the zodiac, time will hath no other master then he who is Word-Flesh

>>2788668
"...and I only got 3 shifts at Target this week. The Queen deems this lame."

>>2788684
>"...and I only got 3 shifts at Target this week. The Queen deems this lame."
Kek

>>2788684
wut

>>2788770
He's saying it sounds like the kind of shit an entitled 20 something with massive delusions
would say

>>2788878
Aside from the zodiac all of it's a basic, if bizarrely worded, marian prayer. Just let /x/ be /x/

>>2788878
Christ is the Word made flesh heretic

>>2788611
Who said there is no rationality.

An atheist friend of mine believes that Christianity is inherently racist.

What's the best way of convincing him that Christ has infinite love for people of all race?

>>2789683
There are loads of black and asian Christians
That would work

>>2789683
Tell him anti-racist is a codeword for anti-white

>>2789907
I don't think you really believe that.