>>75 This is giving me half gangsta vibes half STALKER vibes

>>67 >>68 Believe as you see fit. God does not need me to defend Him, he will defend His own honor on the day of judgement. I urge you to repent and believe before your time is up so as not to fall into His hands as a rebel against His cosmic law rather than as a sinner pleading for his mercy, which he gives expediently to those who seek it.

>>69 Listen bro, I believe in God but He has a lot of defending and explaining to do Himself. I don't care about that cliché'd old ranting about repenting, love is supposed to be a two-way street supported by clear communication between the two parties. What kind of Stockholm syndrome do you need to have when you endure all that suffering but you still believe He's without faults? If anything I've got some design improvement ideas for Him after he wiped us all out and tries again.

>>70 >but He has a lot of defending and explaining to do Himself Then you do not truly believe in Him, but in the Sugar Free, Socialist, Post-Modern version of God. God is PERFECTION. Philosophically speaking, He is above mortal comprehension and era based moralities. No matter the religion, you're going to find that this is the way He does business. In Modern Christianity we just accept He has a much more hands-off approach to things.

>>71 Perfection is a joke, anyone who actually has a job can tell you that.

>>70 >Listen bro, I believe in God but He has a lot of defending and explaining to do Himself. What makes you think you're even in a position to even understand what the world from God's perspective even looks like? None of us even knows what our neighbors do behind closed doors. We barely even know the details of our own lives and yet you think such creatures as us are able to even stand in a position to demand God defend Himself? We are the sinners who must justify our lives to God, explain to Him why we have been liars, why we have hated and gritted our teeth and deceived and murdered and raped and committed atrocity after atrocity against one another, generation after generation and did so happily and with gladness in our hearts to do so. > I don't care about that cliché'd old ranting about repenting, Repentance is the heart of the gospel. If you are too prideful to humble yourself before God and recognize that you are in need of His forgiveness then you do not know Christ or have any idea why He had to go to the cross on our behalf. > love is supposed to be a two-way street supported by clear communication between the two parties. Where do you get your idea of what love is or isn't? Is it your own invention? Are you using the prevailing idea of love that you find in your culture? Or do you derive your notion of what love really means from the God who framed the universe and who invented the very concept of love in eternity past. You have your cart in front of your horse, God sets the standard and what is true and right is defined by consistency with that standard. You would not even have the capacity to conceptualize the idea of love if it were not in God's purpose to allow humans to express and know love. to think that you then have a greater understanding of what love is than that God who invented love and supplied our capacity to know it then you are a fundamentally irrational person. > What kind of Stockholm syndrome do you need to have when you endure all that suffering but you still believe He's without faults? Because I have spent some time to search my own heart, to understand my own motivations with the decisions I've made and actions I've done in my life and I know that I am a sinner, I am evil, fundamentally there is a part of me that is broken, always has been broken and until the resurrection to come always will be broken and I have no excuse to give to justify myself in front of the High Judge of all of space and time. I have no evidence to bring forth to excuse my thoughts and deeds, I have no clever arguments that makes the things I've done or desired good. I am without excuse and I need God to have unconditional mercy on me or I will be justly and rightly condemned to hell. If you do not see that the same is true for you then your pride is getting in the way of you seeing how bad things really are. > If anything I've got some design improvement ideas for Him after he wiped us all out and tries again. And this line confirms that thought. Humble yourself, repent and have faith.

The day of the Ascension is coming close. My Paschal season was fine, all things considered. I attempted to read more of the bible, since I am quite lacking in that department.

>“Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” >"Well, that's you isn't it Jesus? Here's a stone, let's see how good your throwing arm is." >And Lo, Jesus did hit the woman square in the face.

>>40 >Are you a Protestant? Not him but is that even a question?

>>40 >>41

>>41 Don't make assumptions. Even if it appears to be the case, in which case, prepare, but do not make the final judgement.

>>43 Yeah, I could be a Jansenist.

>>28 Just a quick look into some of the texts listed under the Fiction section, and it's clear that Les Miserables and Paradise Lost are filled with heretical nonsense (e.g. in PL, an angel discourages Adam from building a temple due to it being "idolatry"). Otherwise, there's some decent texts. >>33 This is a much better chart.

>>37 i would like for our team to play again in the next cup i hope activity on this board picks up

>>44 You may also invite your friends from 8kun to join the cup (and eventually the board)

>>37 >inb4 shooting/bombing occurs at the stadium Shame they'll never script it. Would be a game no one would forget.

>>47 Sadly, PES modding is pretty good, but not THAT good. We could do stuff like that in WWE games.

seems it showed the pope did the right thing

>>8 I'm going to go for the boring answer and say it it can be but not necessarily, because words can mean a lot of things and people here aren't putting too much thought into their words.

>>8 Nope, protestants, at least those who hold to historic protestant positions and aren't just the unwashed masses of Christo-gnostic non denominationals, would reject that formulation. It honestly sounds more like an Eastern Orthodox position, although pinning down what the EO position on any topic is can be tricky since they have a more fluid understanding of theology in general than western Christendom (except on the Trinity, they are autistically Trinitarian, to their credit) A protestant take would be that God does in fact judge a mans life based on his deeds and he finds them all wanting. Only by the incarnation of the Son and the Son's propitiatory sacrifice as a substitute for man and the imputation of the Sons righteousness to that man does God find a man blameless. It is because we are in Christ that God passes his wrath over us and gives us His mercy because Christ was perfectly righteous and give himself as a ransom on our behalf. It's almost correct to say we aren't judged at all, Christ is judged and Christ being God is sinless and being Man can represent men in the court of God's law. Because we have our faith in Christ we are justified and counted among the people of God but the actual mechanism for being found to be blameless and saved from our sins is entirely in the hands of Christ and faith itself being a gift from the Holy Spirit our salvation entirely from start to finish is the work of God not in anything God has found in us apart from what He has done. What that poster said would be considered almost heretical from a protestant viewpoint. It borders on Pelagianism or at least semi-Pelagianism

>>13 But I thought human deeds and faith were required to at least hope for salvation, not just faith. Isn't Sole fide central to Protestantism? And again, what is glory versus vain-glory? >>9 That's what I thought, but I still want to make sure.

>>18 >But I thought human deeds and faith were required to at least hope for salvation, That is the traditional Roman Catholic and EO position. Historically protestants are strictly monergistic, meaning all of the work of salvation is done by God and we are recipients according to His grace and for the accomplishment of His purposes. > Isn't Sole fide central to Protestantism? It is, by Faith Alone we are justified. The natural question thereafter is what induces faith? Is it something which we exert on our own accord? Ephesians 2:8-10 tells us >8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— > 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. >10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. Our faith and our works both are from God, we cannot boast in and of ourselves of our own righteousness because apart from Christ we have none and indeed what righteousness we do have either in faith or in works are those which were prepared for us by God and not out of our own will. > And again, what is glory versus vain-glory? I'm not sure if you have some kind of point you're trying to make with this but by simple vernacular usage glory is honor and splendor which somebody possesses rightly and vain-glory is honor and splendor which is claimed but not earned or properly deserved.

>>20 What does it mean to say that Man was created to honor and splendor God? What does honor and splendor mean in this context?

>>15 The Webring to rule them all, The Webring to find them, The Webring to bring them all and in autism bind them.

>>15 >for some reason he doesn't think of them as his main core audience (despite them being thousand and thousands of them) He's said flat out that they aren't profitable. They don't buy ads and or click ads.

>>14 >>15 Are you sure? They act vastly differently compared to the kind of people you'd see on /qresearch/.

>>2 btw, if you guys need help moderating, please tell me. I'm from Eastern Europe, so can keep the place "guarded" while people are sleeping.

>>24 Thanks friend, I'm getting a bit dizzy lately trying to keep up with webring shenanigans, I'll update you soonish.