***Christian General Thread***

>>36368241
Why doesn't God prove his existence to each individual? Like visiting them in a dream.

Nearing the end of the last thread I started feeling lethargic and wasn't able to respond to everyone's post so in this thread I'll try my best to answer all of your questions to the best of my abilities.

>>36368288
God reveals himself to who he wants and not to others. Even if you knew god existed it wouldn't mean you'd be saved. In the bible, the Israelites knew god and heard him but despite this, they were some of the most stubborn and intolerable to god.

>>36368241
Do you think i deserve to go to hell?
t. athiest

>One enters into heaven through faith alone, for Christ had already died for our sins and so what could we possibly add on to that?
So why should I follow the commandments if all I need is to believe in God? I can live an amoral life and go to heaven as long as I still have faith? How do you reconcile this with Bible verses like James 2:24?

>>36368361
It's not for me to say. That's god's responsibility.

>>36368373
Good question! I deliberately not include the answer so that people can ask this question and I can respond to it. The reason why I do this is because I believe that through conversation and effective questioning it can cause you to think deeper about the truth of the gospel. Ok, I'll begin.

Yes, we are saved from faith alone apart from works. This is an undeniable truth of scripture Jut look at this verse from Romans in the Bible

>For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.
Romans 3:28

But then this make one wonder. Doesn't this contradict James?

>You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.
James 2:24

But what one must first understand is that there are two kinds of faith. One is false faith, the type that even the devil has, then there's true faith; the type that brings forth good fruits IE proof of it's existence by doing good works. A better verse to understand this would be on James as well.

>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=james+2:14-20
James 2:14-20

So what does this tell us? It says that if you have faith but it does not bring good fruits then it is false. A truly saved man will do good works not to get something out of God since his heavenly place has been set for him since he has been saved by the blood of Christ but rather that we do it out of love. You treat your children nicely out of love not to seem good to them, and so we do the same for god. We love God and so try to please him. Theoretically, you could be saved and go out on a murder spree, but you wouldn't do that due to your love of God.

Hope that answered your question.

You are probably not Fateanon, but give me future prediction anyways.

>>36368666
Those devil digits. Ok here's your prediction.

The end is near.

File: 2xMebb8.jpg (344KB, 1365x2048px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1365x2048px

>>36368666
Also, who is fateanon? I just found this pic, thought it was cool and saved it. Also self bump!

>>36368700
Damn i hope you are right, sounds fun.

>>36368726
A (fem?)anon that predicts others futures from time to time. She uses pics of that freckled girl you used to start the thread.

>>36368773
Aah, ok. Do you have any questions about Christianity?

Another shameless self bump for the thread!

It sounds stupid but in order to be deemed "saved" by god do I have to be doing stuff like going to church every Sunday or memorising scripture from the bible?

>>36369106
hey good question to answer that read>>36368600

Hey!

Up until recently i was an athiest, after taking a good thorough look at the universe and everything in it, i realised that the level of complexity and beauty in it is down to intelligence not to random chance. So right now i would consider myself a deist. However (and im sure you get this question a lot) why should become christian? most of my family is catholic so i have an inherent leaning towards cristianity, but i'd like to know for definite why choose Christ over the many other religions on earth? Sorry if i gave you a lot to answer i understand if you cant answer it all

I don't really know much about the bible or anything, but I was wondering if it is possible to get kicked out of heaven. If there is some action that can get you kicked out of heaven and sent to hell. for example, Satan rebelled against God and was cast away from heaven. Assuming that after a person dies and goes to heaven, they keep their free will intact, wouldn't everybody eventually make a decision that gets them kicked out of heaven? If life after death truly is infinite, and even the most circimsantial event exists that would get you kicked out of heaven exosrs,wouldn't human nature dictate that eventually everyone will be kicked out of heaven at some point?

I guess my point is that after trillions of years or whatever, wouldn't even the saints make a decision that gets them sent to help or purgatory or what ever?

>>36368814
Right let me thing some

Why do you think God cares about humans? How can you solve the contradiction between free will and god knowing everything that is gonna happen? Do you not believe in evolution? If you do, whats Gods purpose on that? Can not baptized people go to heaven? Why does God does all of this? I mean, why does he creates and tests creatures, whats the point on that. Isnt using an old book an awful idea to get knowledge about the world? Why is God so faint/weak? I mean he appears to some people from time to time and nothing else, he clearly died or something. Why do you call that God? Your God sounds more like a benevolent spirit, which is pretty nice but is not a force of reality. Do you really think that God is omnipotent? If he is, isnt he being sort of cruel? Creating creatures that will fail and testing them to watch them fail, so scary. Is going to church neccesary? Wait you answered this one let me check. I did not understand that answer, is it necesary to be saved or not? Why should we want to be saved? Because of heaven? Doesnt that make christianity a sort of hedonism on which you only bet for your future comfort?

I can think of more but those are the ones for the time being. Im just curious.

>>36369470
Phone fag here, sorry for the poor proof reading, but I think you can understand what I'm asking

>>36369304
>why should become Christian?
That's a hard one to answer. From my point of view, it's because I believe it is true, but that answer doesn't really work for everyone.

One reason why I think that Christianity is true it because it's different. Most of the world's religions follow a similar linear path. There's a God; he is transcendent and far beyond you, if you do good things for him he will reward you, and then you go heaven. But Christianity was the first religion ever to say that you do not enter heaven through your works but rather through the gift of faith which God freely gives out to people. The most important thing about the cross is that it made two sides of the same coin go face up. Let me explain.

Justice. This means giving someone what they deserve. Now according to the Bible, the wages of sin is death, and once you have committed a sin, you have to enter into hell. But the thing is we've all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God IE heaven.

Mercy. This means giving someone what they don't deserve. If someone commits a crime he can be pardoned, it's not what he deserves, but at the same time it's merciful. This can be seen in the Bible when Adam and Eve ate the apple, they sinned and deserved hell immediately. I mean God didn't even have to ask them anything and should have struck them there and then. But out of his mercy, this did not happen, but instead, he decided to have mercy on them and pardoned their sin besides a light punishment... compared to the actual punishment they would have gotten.

So now you see how mercy and justice are kinda two sides of the same coin but how does this translate into the cross? Well, I'll tell you.

Cont...

File: 8VAmT9v.jpg (261KB, 1250x754px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1250x754px

>>36369304
>here's the rest of my response.
When Christ died on the cross, not only was it merciful but it was also just. It was merciful because we were not punished for our sins and so, therefore, did not have to die for the sins. It was also just because remember the wages of sin is death, and he died. And so both justice and mercy were exercised in a single loving act. An act that could only have been done by God and no one else.

do you christfags really think you're this important you need your own general? It's pathetic. Imagine if there was an atheist general, it would be retarded, just like this. Hope you niggers go to hell

>>36369740
>once you have committed a sin, you have to enter into hell. But the thing is we've all sinned
You Christtards are literally as dumb as the dude who paypals 4 grad to Nigeria to avoid being "audited" by the """IRS""".

>>36369470
>>36369521
Yeah, I got the message, and it's a good question that I have thought about a lot. The thing I will say is that I don't "fully" know, but at the same time I highly doubt. What I mean by this is in the bible it talks about God preserving us.

>My sheep listen to My voice; I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one can snatch them out of My hand
John 10:27-28

So here it says that once we are under gods wing, it is set and done. The reason why I would say Lucifer fell would be because it was predestined by God. But that isn't the case for humans since we were predestined to be saved by God in heaven for ever and ever. I guess what I'm trying to say is that the devil was an anomaly and in scripture, it says the rest of us are not gonna fall.

File: jeyzaz.jpg (32KB, 468x240px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 468x240px

MUHHHHHHH JEYYYYYYZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZZ

>>36369501
>Why do you think God cares about humans?
Because I believe in the bible and the bible says it.

>How can you solve the contradiction between free will and God knowing everything that is gonna happen?
It's not a contradiction. Knowing the future does not mean there is no free will just that I have knowledge about something.

>Do you not believe in evolution? If you do, whats Gods purpose on that?
No, although some Christians do and prove it from the Bible. I haven't looked too deeply into it but know there are those who believe it.

>Can not baptised people go to heaven?
Yes, the thief on the cross when Christ was crucified went to heaven while never being baptised.

>why does he creates and tests creatures, whats the point on that
he doesn't do it to test us but to save people but he can't save people if they all go into hell immediately so he gives them a life to live so they can return to him. Remember God wants to see you in heaven.

>Isnt using an old book an awful idea to get knowledge about the world?
Yeah, that's why we pray and try to build a relationship with Christ. I suggest you read>>36369740 and >>36369762

>Why do you call that God?
It was his purpose since the beginning of time.

>Creating creatures that will fail and testing them to watch them fail
God creates us all for a purpose some people's lives are so we can learn from like the pharaoh who died in sin while other we are to emulate like the life of Moses or the prophets. I suggest reading Romans 9.

>is it necessary to be saved or not?
Yes, to enter into heaven.

>Why should we want to be saved?
Do Wanna you burn in hell forever or be with God forever?

>Doesnt that make Christianity a sort of hedonism on which you only bet for your future comfort?
No that's not what hedonism is. On earth and in heaven we will do god's will because we love him. But I won't feel like a chore like it does sometimes here on earth, but rather we will do it for joy. An Islamic heaven is hedonistic.

File: 1473378237531.jpg (73KB, 400x594px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 400x594px

>>36369776
Don't say the end word. This is a good Christian thread and /pol/acks are not welcomed.

>>36370177
Wait, you really believe in the burning hell?

File: FUoYDBo.jpg (190KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1920x1080px

>>36370214
Yes! Originalo desu ne

>>36370269
Thats really dumb anon. I dont want you to feel bad but its like really, really stupid. Sorry. Im out of this.

File: 1474363635256.jpg (28KB, 625x416px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 625x416px

>>36370295
Well, sorry to see you leave. If there are any other questions you want answered then feel free to ask.

File: 8q367.jpg (60KB, 500x495px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 500x495px

>>36370177
>>Why do you think orcs exist?
>Because I believe in the Fellowship of the Ring and the Fellowship of the Ring says it.

>>36370506
Ok i'll give you this >>36240702

Since the bible has been translated many times through many eras and lingusitic periods how can you prove the intentions and signified statements are authentic as to their original intent

>>36370622
Because we have earlier manuscripts which we translate from. You remind me of Bart Ehrman. You assume that the bible was being transmitted they would copy and burn or destroy the original manuscript they copied from. But this is not the case at all. When the bible was being transmitted some people would use earlier manuscripts, not copies of copies of copies. Also, we can reconstruct almost the entire NT by just the quotes from the church fathers who lived in the first century and we also have 1st corinthians which scholars know was written by paul or tarsus.

Also, we translate from the original greek it was written in. see. p52 and study how we get different bible translations such as the ESV, RSV and KJV

File: 2.png (2MB, 996x3150px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 996x3150px

>>36368241
https://www.youtube.com/user/AominOrg/videos
Approved this message.

>>36370750
>>36370622
Paul of Tarsus - not or Tarsus*

>>36370596
>-b-but if it isn't real why do people believe in it

The fact you thought that was a remotely viable argument is proof that Christianity kills brain cells.

>>36370798
Staw man. You didn't even respond to the post and only tried to answer one since you know you couldn't answer the other one.

File: 84a7471bdeae6a9814fd0acf06bc14c4.450x400x17.gif (129KB, 450x400px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 450x400px

>>36370765
Hey, you listen to aomin like I. Hellow fellow brother!

>>36370750
>we have earlier manuscripts which we translate from
...which are in turn translations of translations themselves.

The original manuscripts do not exist anymore. Even the most hardcore of apologists will agree on this.

>>36370750
thanks for the answer but as a catholic

I wasn't much for blaming everyone suffering on fallen angels and humanity. I guess religion isn't for me. All the random tests trials plagues, god's never responsible is he? Free will dicatates that only man and the devil are responsible fror suffering and the role of god is some sort of a future warping guidance Councillor.

It almost feels like if this story was crafted in the modern day to suggest a canon of human history it would be laughed at.

Christians seemingly change as time goes on so do their views on what to care about. Its hard to be religious when you know people went to heaven for doing deplorable actions.

I dont care that it was a diffrent time and all, that hardly changes anything. If you cant condemn previous actions of chrisitians as wrong based on the timeframe and circumstance they fell in who do you blame in all this.

Never was one fall old school meme worship.. Never understood why they needed the trinity to be one god either, since its very much 3 distinct entities but I guess there is only so much you can get out of some guys in the desert.

>>36370815
>repsonds to post
>Y-y-y-you didn't respond to the right thing
Mmmkay.

If vague, tenuous predictions made in the Bible is your argument, it's even worse than the one I was responding to.

>>36370844
No, they don't. !st Corinthians is directly from Paul, and I can prove this using Christian, agnostic and even atheist scholars.

Also, yeah they are copies, but that does not mean that they are corrupt. They were written in the times of the apostles. The apostles were still alive during the writing of these since they were very soon. They are very early copies.

>>36370879
Again with the straw man. You don't directly respond to the text and walk around it. Also, there are also other countless predictions in the bible.

>>36370892
>Corinthians is directly from Paul
I was unaware the the entire text of the Bible was Corinthians.

>they are copies, but that does not mean that they are corrupt
It doesn't mean they aren't.

>>36370919
>responds to post
>Y-y-y-you didn't respond to the right thing
>responds to other part of post
>Y-y-y-you still didn't respond to the right thing

Then how about presenting your argument yourself instead of deflecting responses like a toddler?

File: tfwtoosmartfourspooks.jpg (21KB, 264x334px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 264x334px

Cease your spookery this instant

>>36370919
>there are also other countless predictions in the bible.
Like the one that predicts the value of pi is 3.2?
What an amazing, infallible document.

>>36370925
>I was unaware the the entire text of the Bible was Corinthians.
Paul met and even spoke with the Jerusalem apostles and learned from them to reassure him that his message was that of the apostles. Also, the copies of the new testament were written at the time of the two disciples we even have early church fathers who knew the 11, excluding Judas, who even wrote regarding them.

>It doesn't mean they aren't.
Like I said earlier it was written in the lifetime of the disciples. Also there are people right now who are alive who are older than some NT manuscript and also people quoted the NT in the first century, which we can use to almost reconstruct the entire new testament.

>>36370949
you said
>If vague, tenuous predictions made in the Bible
Do. you know what you're even talking about? If it was so vague then they wouldn't have to push the dating up as to explain for the prediction. I bet you couldn't even quote the verse that said so could you.

>>36371046
Heh? What are you talking about please expand.

>>36370879
Fucking cringy atheists.

>>36371165
>If it was so vague then they wouldn't have to push the dating up as to explain for the prediction
Literal retardation.

Did it ever occur to you that the dating might have been done in a time frame that wouldn't have been impossible without miracles because miracles don't happen, and your fantasy of the bible being clairvoyant simply just doesn't support reality?

>you couldn't even quote the verse that said so
...That said what?
The bible predicts tons of retarded shit. Want a list?

>please expand.
No him but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill

File: 1410807270440.png (26KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 640x480px

>>36371331
>totally an argument
;^)

File: 1490381247244.png (524KB, 852x1559px) Image search: [Google]

524KB, 852x1559px

>>36368700

It is. August 21 (bowling green eclipse) and September 23 happening.

See you in September.

>>36371883
>Did it ever occur to you that the dating might have been done in a time frame that wouldn't have been impossible without miracles because miracles don't happen, and your fantasy of the Bible being clairvoyant simply just doesn't support reality?
What the heck are you talking about? Multiple scholars have said that the dating of the Gospel of Mark should be dated to the year 40. The year 70 was chosen because in the gospel of mark it talks about the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple which happened in the year 70 ad. You wrote nothing of importance just conjecture and to be quite honest it felt almost desperate.

>No him but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill
I was wondering what the circumference of a circle has to do with the bible. I know what pi is for gosh sakes!

>>36372462
>schizophrenia.jpg
It takes a true Christian to interpret a blurry crescent as the harbinger of Armageddon.

i hated christfags, and then i read the bible and i thought it was a really good piece of literature. I dont hate them as much but im still not a believer.

>>36372742
That's great to here. If there are any questions you want answered then feel free to ask.

>>36372706
"Although some scholars disagree, the vast majority of researchers believe that Mark was the first Gospel to be written, sometime around the year 70."
http://www.bc.edu/schools/stm/crossroads/resources/birthofjesus/intro/the_dating_of_thegospels.html

You wrote nothing of importance just conjecture and to be quite honest it felt almost desperate. :^)

Is it true that Jesus Christ is the anti-christ?

Revelations 22:
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches, I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

The morning star is also a term used in reference to Lucifer

I don't know how to quote bible verses sorry

>>36372856
>"Although some scholars disagree, the vast majority of researchers believe that Mark was the first Gospel to be written, sometime around the year 70."
Ok, that's not how you do research. Frist of all you have to understand the intention behind why they dated it to that time. Even I found that and all I did was click on the first link I found and not actual research. But when you do in fact look deep into it and understand the reasoning behind this dating then a new picture emerges.

The way they came to that conclusion was in the gospel Jesus foretells the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. The temple was indeed destroyed in 70 AD. The scholars read the prediction of the temple being destroyed and assume that it indicates knowledge of the destruction of the temple which took place in 70 AD, therefore, the document in question could not have been written before 70 AD.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/the-early-date-of-marks-gospel

>>36370834
James probably the only apologist who unironically has a theology based on scripture, while knowing about the ECFs and biblical evidence.
Most evangelicals are jokes.

>>36374109
Yeah, felt the same way too. He has such a high view of scripture.

File: 1322531108494.png (265KB, 334x393px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 334x393px

>>36373092
>that's not how you do research. Frist of all you have to understand the intention
christianscience.txt

>not actual research.
>patheos.com/blogs/
Good lord, just stop

>>36368241
For such a desolate nihilistic place, it's odd and somewhat encouraging to find people after God.

What denomination are you by the way? Not to condemn or praise, curious

>>36374372
I'm a reformed baptist. How about you?

>>36374422
Orthodox. I shunned faith and God for a long time due to it being forced on me by society and family, but have with maturity and introspection found it again.
What's your testimony, if I may ask?

>>36374198
>Good lord, just stop
Didn't even engage with the text just laughed it off because you couldn't answer it. The blog post even uses historical sources and the one you posted wasn't even a summary. But again engage with my arguments. Even in your post you wrote

>"Although some scholars disagree, the vast majority of researchers believe that Mark was the first Gospel to be written, sometime around the year 70."

But why do some disagree? And it is probably more than some, considering the fact that he felt the need to mention it, and why the year 70. Again you're beating around the bush and not answering me.

>>36374198
Also, look at their certificate page. They're far from qualified to talk about NT transmission.
http://www.bc.edu/schools/stm/crossroads/certificates.html

>>36374542
I was a Christian originally but then left because my family left and so I kinda just went with the flow but when I turned 13 I became more conscious about god and stuff then became Muslim. Most of my mid teens was me going from religion to religion and after 4 years, when I was 17 I became a Christian again and now I'm 18 trying to learn and study more.

>growing out of the atheism meme

Feels good, friends

why do you believe in Jesus when Amun Ra did all the stuff he did, but 3000 years earlier?

>>36374542
>just laughed it off because you couldn't answer it
Then tell me which exact move you want to be addressed in this apologetic gymnastic routine.

>But why do some disagree?
Because they're too incompetent to make a name for themselves off of anything besides controversy.
Same as all the creationist """scientists""" who disagree with established tenants of biology.

>>36374566
>>They're far from qualified to talk about NT transmission
>but a blog with no external sources, dates, review, credentials, or
Christian """"sources""""

I want to do my daily prayer, but I'm just too sick for it.

>>36375085
>Then tell me which exact move you want to be addressed in this apologetic gymnastic routine.
Jesus foretells the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. The temple was indeed destroyed in 70 AD. The scholars read the prediction of the temple being destroyed and assume that it indicates knowledge of the destruction of the temple which took place in 70 AD. Therefore, the document in question could not have been written before 70 AD.

>Because they're too incompetent to make a name for themselves off of anything besides controversy.
Same as all the creationist """scientists""" who disagree with established tenants of biology.
Making assumptions about people and not reading things from their point of view.
Also, answer the second part of that same sentence where I said

>and why the year 70. Again you're beating around the bush and not answering me.

This is a tactic know as the strawman fallacy.

>Christian """"sources""""
Pheme Perkins, a Professor of Theology at Boston College where she has been teaching since 1972, and most likely wrote that link you posted stated that

> It was probably written c.AD 66-70 during Neros persecution of the Christians in Rome or the Jewish revolt as suggested by internal references to war in Judea and to persecution.

It was due to the fact that the Jerusalem temple was about to be destroyed in the year 70 that they then concluded that it was most likely that that was the time they wrote the gospel of Mark of course not taking into consideration that Christ might just have had made a prediction, but then again when you're an atheist scholar you can't come with the presupposition that miracles can happen.

>>36375256
It doesn't matter. There is not specific position one must take to pray. You can do it in your head. But the fact that you are motivated to pray means that you love god and have a desire to exalt his name, which is great!

>>36375076
Proof

>>36368241

It's not exactly a christian question. But how do I cope with someone who unwittingly screwed me over because of his own cowardice?

>>36375390
Proof? It's just as much proof as the Bible, but it was written before it.

>>36375526
You said that the story of the gospel was copied from the ancient Egyptian god RA and now I'm asking for proof. Also, I already knew what you were gonna say and was waiting for a response and rebut. But clearly you just watch any video that says anything against Christianity and so you believe it without any research.

>>36375582

You, christian guy, answer me. How do I cope with getting screwed over through no fault of my own?

>>36375582
Just go look up anything on the Book of the Dead and you'll find it. I didn't watch any videos on it, I just used Google. Here's one article http://www.krschannel.com/Amun_Ra.html

My point is, you're saying one book that said some stuff isn't as accurate as another book that said some stuff. The Book of the Dead, however, was put out 3000 years before the Bible. There's also the story of Gilgamesh, which was far before the story of Noah.

>>36375623
Sorry, I missed your question but before I answer I want to know are you Christian? But if you're not then I would echo a quote by some far east philosopher

>Holdong on to anger is like holding onto a piece of molten metal, you're only hurting yourself

I paraphrased but still. What I would say let it go. But that's not always easy. Let me give you another analogy. Let's say some kids bullied you in school what would be a better revenge, beating the crap out of them and getting a physical revenge or working hard becoming successful and pulling up to them in a Bugatti while they are struggling to pay the insurance in their ford focus? Basically what I'm trying to say is it's how you use that anger but if you're a Christian I would have given you a completely different answer.,

Christ-Anon, I refuse to join Christianity because they are against evolution and science in general.

>>36375820

Oh, no, I didn't mean anger. I meant that I want to deal with consequences of their actions. How do I survive?

>>36375733
I haven't got time to refute an entire website and all its point but link me to an unbiased site that teaches about ancient Egyptian theology and also is about specifically RA since you brought him up.

>>36375909
>I meant that I want to deal with consequences of their actions.
Damn. Sorry but you're gonna have to give me a green text or something of what happened.

>>36375957

A whole bunch of people in the past have decided to not spend a single second of their entire lifetime on development, and instead massively reproduce and play fake social and economical games. Now, instead of being immortal, I will die.

>>36368600
Yeah, the problem of being saved by grace and not good works still remains. All you have to do to go to heaven is believe that Jesus died for your sins. As long as you believe that, no matter what, you will go to heaven.

That's why Catholicism and Orthodoxy are not as bullshit as Protestantism.

>>36376124
Ok, still confused but what I think you're trying to say is you were treated badly which affected you in the long term. What I'll say to that is try to just improve your life by taking on better habits and bettering your life through hard work and what not. It'll be hard at the start, but in the end, you'll look back and thank yourself for doing it.

But in scripture, it tells us to forgive others because god forgave us for no reason. The weight of sin is heavy we cannot possibly pay the penalty, that being hell, and so god forgave us for a huge debt, that being sin and so he expects you to do the same. I mean the guy died for people who didn't even like him.

>>36376253
I don't think you understand. Our way is the only possible answer how can you add anything on to the death of christ he died for "All" sins so what good works could add onto that? We believe in faith alone but sanctification follows almost immediately and because of this it has led many good godly men to do amazing things like die to keep the message of the gospel alive!

>ITT: People justifying their monotheistic cult that ripped off other Mediterranean religions

>>36376348

I am a practical man, I think about my future. I will die. Don't tell me how to distract myself, tell me how to survive!

>>36376434
>ripped off other Mediterranean religions
Proof.

>>36376462
>I am a practical man,
That's great! just improve your life by taking on better habits and bettering your life through hard work and what not. It'll be hard at the start, but in the end, you'll look back and thank yourself for doing it.
>Don't tell me how to distract myself, tell me how to survive!
Just did. But you'll have to dig through dirt before you can reach gold.

If I'm not answering your question adequately then please explain better to me so I can better answer your points.

What kind of Christian are you OP? Catholic here! Thanks for the thread, god bless.

>>36376545
I am a reformed baptist. Also, I want to start studying catholicism but there's always one thing that I can never understand One big difference between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism is the value of faith alone as opposed to works, faith and God's grace working together in a synergistic way to bring about your salvation, which would be the Catholic view.
This then brings me to my question. What was Christ's purpose when dying on the cross. As a protestant I believe that he died for my sins, all of them and for once and for all and so there is nothing I can possibly do to add on to that perfect sacrifice. So then I ask you if you believe that we must do good works to stay saved and committing mortal sins, which Christ died for, can make us lose that salvation then what did Christ accomplish on the cross then if there are things that we can do to lose salvation and there are sins that we must repent for. Didn't Christ die for all sins?

>>36376514

Are you trying to gently guide me to my own death?

>>36376348
>god forgave us from some abstract sin he decided we made

What a passive agressive bitch.

>>36376649
Dude I mean like, we're all gonna die anyway. Might as well the path as smooth as possible. But if you're a Christian on the other hand then you have something to look forward to.

>>36376420
I believe that if you claim to follow a religion, you should follow its teachings.

I see many people that claim to be Christian, and that are Christian solely because it is the dominant religion here. Yet, I see many of them fornicate and engage in decadent behavior. Yet, they go to church each Sunday and pay no second thoughts. They were baptized. That gave their two seconds to accept Christ.

To emulate Christ should be the goal, but yet it is overshadowed, ironically, by his grace. Since his grace is the only barrier to heaven, it allows those to do the bear minimum to call themselves a Christian; actual values are thrown out of a window.

>>36376474
Take a look at Egyptian mythology. Also, Zoroastrianism, which contains the idea of a messiah and what is essentially the trinity.

>>36376685
Sin has always been a sin, that being doing anything against god's will. There was never a time when a particular mortal sin was not a mortal sin. It is as old as God himself, and so anything that isn't for god's glory but rather for self is in this sense a sin

>>36376644
I get your point, my english isn't that well and my knowledge isn't that great about Faith. But, when you for example mastrubated and go to church on sunday to recive Jesus, you're not in a good state. (Mortal sin) when I go to confession and I truly have regrets. I need to do something back in return for god in order that he forgives it. Like praying. Just view it this way: you go to the church and you are dirty because of the sinning. I know this answer might not be the best but I can't really explain it in this language. What you can do is ask a (better) catholic than me!

>>36376698

I wouldn't have to die if people didn't have your attitude of "we're gonna die anyway"/magic undeath. It is people like you who forgo education and technology for more sex, social contact, "property", etc etc. Human history is a huge conspiratory murder of me, by you.

>>36376701
>I believe that if you claim to follow a religion, you should follow its teachings.
Yes, but we do it out of love and not compulsion since God already died for our sins, and we cannot add on to that perfect atoning work on the cross.

>I see many people that claim to be Christian, and that are Christian solely because it is the dominant religion here. Yet, I see many of them fornicate and engage in decadent behavior. Yet, they go to church each Sunday and pay no second thoughts. They were baptized. That gave their two seconds to accept Christ.
That is what I would call false faith that does not bring forth fruits, and so therefore on the day of judgement there will be people that would say "didn't we cast out demons in your name and prothecy" and christ will say to them "go from me I never knew you"

>To emulate Christ should be the goal, but yet it is overshadowed, ironically, by his grace. Since his grace is the only barrier to heaven, it allows those to do the bear minimum to call themselves a Christian; actual values are thrown out of a window.
No, unless you do truly not love god you will do his works. Paul believed in this and did not the the bare minimum, the 11 disciples believed in this a did not do the bare minimum but rather it was the spirit of god working within them and motivating them to work hard.

>>36376870
>I wouldn't have to die
What do you mean by this? Also, you're gonna have to give me more info. Your situation seems really unique to me.

Anglican here
I have sort of warmed to the idea that Jesus died to save all, so hell isnt really a thing anymore and satan is more of a concept that sums up all evil in this world, but I can see why certain individuals would be punished. I feel like most people on this earth are good but have sin so it would be different for them to go to heaven than for a christian too. Moreover, if a christian was married to a staunch athiest It would be cruel for them to be seperated especially if they were both good people.

>>36376734
>Take a look at Egyptian mythology
I have and it's nothing like the gospel

>Also, Zoroastrianism, which contains the idea of a messiah and what is essentially the trinity.
Actually, Zoroastrianism is closer to Islam since they have the same view of sin as Muslims do. But this claim about Zoroastrianism being the trinity is completely wrong they are pure unitarians and not at all Trinitarians.

Can any christfags help me wrap my head around the ontological argument? Isn't it basically "if you can imagine something this perfect, it HAS to exist"?

>>36376974
I don't get it either but then again you could look up William lane Craig videos since he's the one that mentions it a lot

>>36376917

I fear death. I believe my ancestors have:

1) Made their civilization big enough to make my birth statistically possible

2) Spent a lot of time, lives and resources simply to increase birth rates, then feed the newborn, then wage wars, then REPEAT THE SAME CYCLE several thousand times.

I believe that if they were smarter then I wouldn't have to fear death. I blame them for me existing and not being immortal. And I want to survive.

>>36376974
Christfag here
I have never actually heard of this justification before, care to elaborate on what you know? some more it sounds like an interesting chain of thought.

>>36376948
Zoroastrianism has the "Ahuric Triad," which consists of Ahura Mazda, Mithra and Apam Napat. Ahura Mazda is the greatest of the three.

And their influences of Egyptian mythology are there; they aren't exactly a carbon copy production, however.

Furthermore, the Epic of Gilgamesh has a worldwide flood in it.

>>36375364
>>36375364
>Jesus foretells the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. The temple was indeed destroyed in 70 AD
And Nostradamus predicted the London Fire.

>The scholars read the prediction of the temple being destroyed and assume that it indicates knowledge of the destruction of the temple which took place in 70 AD. Therefore, the document in question could not have been written before 70 AD.
According to who?

You and the mouth breather that runs the pathos blog are literally just butthurt because you think the set date's contesting Jesus's clairvoyance, but I haven't seen a SINGLE source that's used that as a reason for dating the book to around 70 AD.

>why the year 70
> It was probably written c.AD 66-70 during Neros persecution of the Christians in Rome or the Jewish revolt as suggested by internal references to war in Judea and to persecution.
That's the answer to the fucking question. From the source you yourself deemed credible. Why are the fuck are you whining about me dodging the answer?
And why are you trying to refute it with
>nuh-uh! It's dated because athetits hate jezus!

>the presupposition that miracles can happen.
>the presupposition that miracles can happen.
>the presupposition that miracles can happen.

This is pathetic for any sort of scholar, let alone one whose study is on the existence of miracles.

In what sort of fever dream does a confounded synoptic dilemma with your own doctrine provide any sort of validity to the Bible?

>>36370177
>Because I believe in the bible
Why do you believe in the Bible?

>>36377093
God is defined as the best possible being -> Such a being exists even in the minds of those who deny it -> Such a being must exist in the mind and reality ELSE there is a GREATER being which exists in reality (god)

I think
I really don't get it

>>36377069
Ok, now I think you're feeling a sense of entitlement. You as a human are not entitled to anything, especially immortality. Once you undertsnd that like I had, then your feelings about things change and you no longer chase after things you don't need to. But then again I doubt they would have discovered immortality anytime sooner. Right now science is evolving at a faster rate than any other time in history so yeah. probs wouldn't have had immortality anyway

If you fear death understand christ give you a reason to not fear death and have rest since he carried your burden so you wouldn't have to.

>>36377210
That doesn't sound like an argument you'd ever want to use.

>>36377210

But we didn't deny it until you told us about it. We read about it and understand it like any other concept, and to use that argument would mean that any idea we have is real.

File: 876546789.gif (968KB, 245x245px) Image search: [Google]

968KB, 245x245px

>>36377245
>You as a human are not entitled to anything, especially immortality.

>christ give you a reason to not fear death

>>36377245

I as a human am not entitled to live? It is a direct responsibility of everyone who had even the slightest role in my birthing. Or do you want to say that I am bad for not wanting to be pointlessly created?

Don't christen me. I fear death because I understand it, not because I am unsure about it. I see the complete destruction of self in it.

File: smag.png (307KB, 562x507px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 562x507px

>>36370596

>Religion that spread like cancer through murder and crusading
>Mass murder is okay as long as it justifies the fact that it's now a big religion because of it
>Believing it has to be true after millennia of the religion being forced on civilizations, not by god but by pure dogmatism.

>Christian values at it again

>>36377363
what gives you special status as a human??

>>36368288
Mat 16:4 KJV

A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

>life is empty and meaningless
>unhappy with nihilistic world view
>read apologetics
>read scripture
>makes no fucking sense

It would be nice if there were some purpose and meaning in my life. I want to believe, but no argument is compelling.

>>36377420
that explains that he doesn't give proof
but not the 'why'

and it brings me to one of my biggest gripes with a lot of christian organizations: they'll try and use secular proof that their path is right. "Well the human eye is just so complicated, it could not have evolved." "The bible is totes historically accurate, so it has to be valid." "Well the concept of a god exists in every culture so there must be SOMETHIng."

aren't you just supposed to take it on blind faith?

>>36377406

The fact that I didn't give my agreement to be birthed and killed. The fact that someone used me to get a few years of instinctive parental pleasure. The fact that I was made for the benefit of a transhuman machine.

>>36377167
>And Nostradamus predicted the London Fire.
There are a whole set of other things that prove it's from God from the visions 500 people saw to the old testament predictions that come to fruition up until today.

>According to who?
The exact same source from you showed me

>http://www.bc.edu/schools/stm/crossroads/resources/birthofjesus/intro/the_dating_of_thegospels.html.

But when you look at how he came to that conclusion you realise it's because it predicted a future event and so, therefore, it was to explain something that supernatural.

>haven't seen a SINGLE source that's used that as a reason for dating the book to around 70 AD.

"The Synoptic Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles: Telling the Christian Story" written by Perkins, Pheme a Professor of Theology at Boston College said so in the book.

>as suggested by internal references to war in Judea and to persecution.
Look the later dating of Mark was due to the fact that it was a prediction not because of other reasons like archeology or quotes from the early church fathers.

>This is pathetic for any sort of scholar.
I know it is.

>>36377472
Faith is initially a choice. A lot of people turn to Christ out of sheer desperation but once they start to really feel and experience the blessing and guidance of God that solidifies it.

Give God a chance. Pray when you're alone. Think about wrong you've done in your life. Ask yourself if the way you're living is right, consider any hatred you hold to other people, consider your lusts, consider your selfish desires.

>>36377168
good question. just look at this:>>36240702

>>36377295
Why is that confusing you?

Why does God give us free will? Why not just make us love him?

>>36377601
There are any number of religions which claimed that their message would be preached throughout the lands.

>>36377402
Christ never went around killing people for their beliefs but rather spoke to people and engaged in dialogue. Sure there were bad representatives for Christians other the ages but if you really wanna learn about how a Christian should act then just read the 4 gospels. They're not that long and you could probably read them in a weekend.

>>36377601

Not that guy, but you blamed me, a pragmatist, for being "entitled" to immortality, while you believe in Christianity primarily because it allows you to not fear death.

File: 1487202632619.jpg (85KB, 920x960px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 920x960px

god damn these threads are funny
it's like when the missionaries come to botswana and give books to starving niggers

>>36377629
He does read Romans 9, it's not too long and come back.

>>36377694
Yeah, so what? The gift of faith is a free gift that no one is entitled to but out of god's love he gives it anyway.

>>36377726
I'm a phone posting scum.
What does it say

>>36377654
You're argument doesn't so much refute it but rather not impress you enough. In that case refer to the second point I made.

>>36377601
>Why is that confusing you?
Because I can't comprehend how someone could be so unfathomably stupid that they chastise the desire for immorality immediately before hocking their plan for becoming immortal.

>>36377762
Basically, all men are depraved and cannot come to god so god elects people and basically forces them to love him because otherwise, they wouldn't have and then they are saved. That's the TL;DR. Also, if you wanna learn more google TULIP of Calvinism.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiMq7PWjK_TAhVIEVAKHZmJAzoQFgglMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.biblegateway.com%2Fpassage%2F%3Fsearch%3DRomans%25209&usg=AFQjCNHZegqWb-qGVu3oIM8tf2h2X7x-MQ&sig2=QMM2tZMW9a_14wS2f-Hifg

>>36377753
>That's completely contradictory though.
>Yeah, so what?

Conversations with Christians in a nutshell.

>>36377762
>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%209
Here's the actual link

>>36377753

It's an optional gift, no? Yet you would never choose the nonexistance over it. So why blame me for not wanting to die?

>>36377880
>Conversations with Christians in a nutshell.
How is that a contradiction? Even in Christianity, we don't believe that we are entitled to anything besides hell but out of god's love, he decides to save us anyway. I believe in Christianity because it's true not because in Christianity primarily because it allows me to not fear death.

>>36377601
First argument is not an argument. Most religions claimed that they would be spread across the Earth.

How do you know Mark's gospel was incorrectly dated?

>>36377927
>It's an optional gift, no?
No, once god has chosen you he will not fail in bringing you to know christ. Remember all are depraved and do not love christ and so if we were given the option no one would accept christ and so he basically forces people to love him by changing their heart from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh.

>>36378000

By accepting christian faith, you instantly reveal your normal, human fear of death. By repressing your fear, by disbelieving the finality of death, you reveal that you can't accept death until it knocks on your door; you accept even the silliest idea so easily because you are entitled to your life. Entitled to the point where you believe that a world where you die for good is impossible.

So don't call me a coward, or an egoist. You aren't an angel yourself.

>>36378034
>How do you know Mark's gospel was incorrectly dated?
I was just having an argument with some guy about this and I really can't be asked but basically, if you read Pheme Perkins book "The Synoptic Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles: Telling the Christian Story" who is a Professor of Theology at Boston College. You realise that he came to this conclusion because he came with the presupposition that miracles couldn't happen and so therefore saw a prediction in mark and pushed it up to the year 70 when the predicted event happened.

>>36377565
>one testimony of the visions 500 people saw
fix'd

>The exact same source from you showed me
Are you just fucking around now?
Quote a single line that suggests that.

>haven't seen a SINGLE source that's used that as a reason for dating the book to around 70 AD.
>"The Synoptic Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles: Telling the Christian Story"
The guy "Telling the Christian Story" dates a text based on the impossibility of miracles?
Gonna need the full line on that one.

>>as suggested by internal references to war in Judea and to persecution.
>>Look the later dating of Mark was due to the fact that it was a prediction
You can't refute a scholar with "nuh-uh", buckaroo.

>I know it is.
If you're false flagging, this entire conversation makes a hell of a lot more sense.

File: 1492210673057.png (1MB, 800x1280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x1280px

Why would a god care about people believing/rejecting/being indifferent to him? It makes zero sense to me, especially since it's said we're made from him. Does anyone besides enthusiasts care about bugs/bacteria that are invisible in our daily life? Leaving aside the impossibility of there being a creator inside this universe, why would he single out a cluster of organic that's less important to him than plankton to volcano?

>>36378163
> You realise that he came to this conclusion because
Wait a minute

This entire retard argument is because you THINK he dated it that way because he doesn't believe in Jesus enough?

Give me the EXACT TEXT to support this, you buffoon.

>>36378000
>Even in Christianity, we don't believe that we are entitled to anything
>except the ability to gain immortality though our imaginary friends

You're right, I can't see how anyone would find that contradictory at all.

>>36378071

Wait, so an atheist is an asshole for not wanting to die... Yet you aren't because your friendly neighborhood god told you so? Boy, aren't you special.

>>36378235
Christfags truly are insufferably stupid