>>25558 Its not her that's keeping me away from that confession but my own self. As I've said I wasn't even raised Christian, so the idea of confessing something so personal and shameful in front of someone I've come to greatly respect feels deeply uncomfortable. I would have better luck I suppose if the confession was the stereotypical box, where you can't see but only hear the Priest but sadly that is not the case here. I was also a bit unclear on her suggestion in regard to "finding God". It wasn't a clear cut "Find God" command, bur rather a series of suggestions after a very eventful Friday and Saturday had me nearly end myself. "Why don't you head to that church in town if you need help?" "The people here are nice, why not return?" etc. As for driving me away from God? You've helped me made up my mind on at least one thing. Should whatever this be seek to tear me from God, I'll assume it was either hijacked or it isn't her to begin with. She brought me to God's light from a very long and dark shadow, and any effort to rip me away from that would go against it.

>>25559 It's hard to say this politely, but Celestia isn't real. If you are getting messages through something claiming to be Celestia, it's assured that it isn't Celestia, but something using her voice and image because you respond to it and already have an idea of what Celestia 'is'. It's something that wants to utilize the positive associations, or comprehension of positive concepts, you already have through Celestia. Whether it's an ultimately good or bad thing is up for you to discern, but I'll note, 'Celestia' apparently didn't help you much in terms of avoiding suicide as much as turning towards God did. You know? The message here is more important than the packaging.

>>25554 >Lev. 18:23 My earnest assumption is not that you want to 'know' a horse. You likely aren't interested in Princess Celestia just because the character is a little pony. You likely have incredibly positive feelings towards the personality designed for the character. You may see Celestia as strong, encouraging, compassionate, caring for others, etc. and gravitate towards those personality traits. They may be what you're looking for in others or want for yourself. It's similar to how someone would like Fluttershy for being a shy yet caring personality or Twilight for being an intelligent and determined personality. And here's the thing: To like those personality traits is not a wicked thing in itself. You're putting a lot of shame and guilt on yourself for being drawn to this character designed to be likeable. Talking about only being good enough for hell and not caring enough about yourself to change is difficult for anyone. Allow yourself to separate your interest in the character from your interest in personality types. However, there's a problem: Celestia is a fictional character. Your attraction to the character cannot be reciprocated because the character has not, does not and will not ever exist. The character was designed literally to sell merchandise and products to little girls. It is a parasocial relationship that is keeping you from embracing true connections with people in your community. It's unhealthy and certainly not what God wants for anyone. That likely will not mean anything in itself, so allow me to pose an alternative: >Would Celestia want you to go to Hell for her? >Does Celestia want you to feel so tortured and miserable, afraid to tell anyone or go to confession? >Would Celestia enjoy seeing the other characters absolutely despise themselves over what you're currently going through? If "Yes," then Celestia is absolutely the worst influence I could possibly imagine, and you need to turn away for your own sake.

>>25554 Listen anon the Oxytocin in your head is making you huff the burning bush. It offers a skewered/altered/warped sense of reality. It feels real good to do it. And that you found God through doing it is genuinely, really really very good. But it's like fattening and feeding the goose until it waddles away. That the goose was real or imagined does not matter particularly. The withdrawl is worse than a death in the family. Faith in God is better than it. My experiences have been wholly horrible, to the point where if I eat a meal and the meal's fookin shite I'm still saying "thank you God" in my head. I could have had nothing at all. I could still have nothing at all. I understand the reluctance to go to confessional too. I just wouldn't do it because I expect perfect forgiveness from God, but not from similar flawed beings to me. Society is comprised of these people who regularly make a social death of others that is more or less than they deserve. My life is not complicated by it, because my denomination doesn't maintain it as a doctrine or tradition. Maybe the other anons are correct about it and I'm in no place to advise you. But I've seen so many Catholics like the mafia or the gypsies treat it like a frivolity to go in and absolve themselves when the grace of God has not affected them in any other measurable regard. I'm sure these arguments have been made before. Maybe my ego is wont for protection. It doesn't matter to me. God knows what I did when I lashed out. For all these arguments I have I've never heard firm rebuttal.

>>25554 >>25563 Sorry if I've not been succinct enough... Once you've fattened and fed the goose enough it will have fled ungratefully, typically over a 3 year cycle, although after a time it can return and repeat again into another one. You could take Abilify and trust big pharma if the alternative is suicide, but better treatment consists of "treatment through doing" which is to improve yourself and to go on dates and to prove to yourself that you have value. I've tried not to communicate with mine in any affectionate way possible. It helps that I have weak imagination and it's my own monologue that does the trying hard. You may have Atlas personality disorder as well, as the basis for an attachment mechanism. It lends itself well to simping if the limerent object were manifestly a real woman. I don't know how to treat it. I just try to keep the fat, overfed, greedy, ungrateful goose metaphor in mind and try to restrain it enough that a very giving nature is only manifest as "Acts of Service", that cause "Positive Dread Game" in a woman as opposed to contempt for trying to pay in kind for being an unworthy prescence before them. If it means anything positive to you, I have had these experiences and they were incredible but they have stopped being purposeful. I'm just trying to keep separate my experience of life from it now. Addiction is just an artificial pain relief in the end.

The devil needs to draw people away from Christ, and the most effective way he can think of is to hide his wolves in sheep's clothing.

>>23681 Go and look at the modern Quakers on youtube. Go and look at anything said by an Anglican/CofE bishop in the last 20 years. Take a look at what modern methodists are up to. The only reason I don't go around calling these people evil is because it's not effective as a strategy to go around calling these people evil. If you managed to make one final push to try to save even one of the CofE schools, the teachers' union would try to obstruct or sooner close down or sue you. Churchill fought most of Europe over lesser grievances than this. His grandson invites in all the mohammedians and believes in worse things than nothing. These people sometimes, sometimes only rarely, openly state that they want to see you hurt or that they want to see you killed - mainly that they want to see you shut-up forcibly. You can't commune with them. You can't convert them. Their way is the law and your way is an illegal anachronism. If Protestantism isn't dead and doesn't deserve to be called as much and to their faces no less, then how should we go about arranging for 10 as likeminded as us to be present in the same room in one place together? We're scattered on the wind and lost like diaspora. So I don't believe the quakers when they say that we need meetings. Seclusion is what I ask for and am occassionally given, and I'm glad whenever it is to have had any.

The simple truth is, at the end of the day: Christ is everywhere, as is his father, as is his spirit. You can be Christian when you are rich and when you are homeless, with an untouched stone as an altar or a church. It does not matter the circumstance or the denomination. God makes the call, Jesus saves, you have your life to live according to what is sensible. You grow and as you grow you grow your faith.

>>23143 Thanks, Pete/Pietr/Pierre holy man I thought I was going to hell, but then I don't see or intend the rejection of Catholicism as a sin. I know they're there for sure, but then it looks like a ritual larp and their confessional looks like an excuse to steal some more of my paving slabs. I'd never want into there, and I'd be without God if that's all there had been presented before me. My entry point was Svedenborgsen, who was absolutely not a prophet by the way just a laymen preacher huffing some more burning bush, followed by the quakers and their long time ago insistence on doctrinal correctitude. Modern quakers are trash mind you it's the plain variety similar to the Amish you're going to want. You'd take the Amish over a Catholic anyday - you know you would, and it doesn't help to get jealous or pout or to declare you won because you're the only one who gets to interpret the rules. Let the Pope think that perhaps, but he's lost whole fleets of ships to "God said I'm right" before. You do understand that even if America is a republic and not a monarchy that their bloodlines and origins go backwards into monarchist family trees and to kinglier times, right? They are about as damned as the Sultanate of Belize is holy. I'd go further while I'm blustering actually; I'd say that for anything you can not render 100% proveable, "swearing no oath" applies. I'll argue with the quakers as well if what I haven't got is certainty, the non-violent element being one such example. It overlooks the passages covering the need to pay reciprocity. Saint Nicholas beat the heathens with a fist. The quakers just argue with it because Jesus wouldn't do it. I don't agree with simply letting other mortal men fight in your place.

>>22934 The conflict between different christian branches and denominations is mostly pointless, and result from political divides more than ideology. Each individual has their own relationship with God, and any 2 christians from not just the same denomination, but the same church community will probably disagree on major points. All religions are like this, not just Christianity. For new converts, don't obsess about what "the Best" book or practice is, just follow the general guidelines. You can always read and compare different versions if you want. Anyone who says having Bibles from other denominations is a sin is an idiot. Christianity is about knowledge, not ignorance. The same for prayer and church services. The real conflict christians face is atheism in all it's forms. The rejection of God leads to narcissism and hubris, which is the orginal concept of evil (it was Lucifer's sin after all). Without God there is no real belief in morality, and all evils can be justified. Look at the over 1 billion people who have died the last century as a result of socialism and communism. Other religions at least believe in something. Even Muslims can be allies against atheists. The problem with pagans was that they believed in superstitions and used human sacrifice and cannibalism to solve simple problems. This is why pagans converted to Christianity, they realized burying their children alive to help a wall stand was stupid, not fear of colonizers. Neo-pagans who blame war and genocide on Christianity don't know anything about history. The new age "I'm spiritual but not religious" people who like crystals and sage are the new actual Pagans, they just don't realize it, but at least they don't eat their children. They are borderline atheist, but can probably be educated and converted more easily than actual atheists. Most satanists just had bad experiences with Christian communities and are lashing out, or are atheists and think they are being edgy. The "real" Satanists who believe in Satan and murder people are probably the last real pagans left. tldr Don't worry about what Christianity is best, the real enemy is atheism. Even other religions can be allies in that fight.

I think my values were skewed by opposition to state religion in general and persuasion/mockery over legal persecution. The one about Jews deserving everything bad that happened to them over the past X years would get a much stronger answer if it was limited to ~1990 years. >the cow is a sacred animal How should this be answered to reflect a view of "All life, including animals, created by God is sacred, but man has dominion over animals and the cow is only more special than other mammals in the sense that it provides useful goods."?

>>24950 Considering the question is clearly being asked in a pagan idolatrous sense, the answer depends on your view of the worship of animals.

heres mine friends

>>25546 Didn't know there were fellow Orthos here. If you got all those 100% on the first go I am jealous. Picrel my vanilla version.

>>25083 >different versions of the Bible There's one Bible, you shouldn't be promoting "versions" of it. One Bible that has been translated and preserved in many languages. God said he'd preserve his words, and he has, so get a real Bible. >Church fathers Gross. If you really /need/ to appeal to mere mortal men instead of GOD ALMIGHTY and GOD'S WORD, then call them founders or members or leaders or something. You have one Father and "church" is never capitalized in any of the English translations of the Bible. "chruch" is only ever capitalized in translations of "versions" of the Bible used by apostates and heretics and whores and harlots.

>>25191 >There's one Bible I take it then that you, yourself, have already mastered Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek then? Ofc, then there's the minor issue that we literally have no original scrolls extant. >tl;dr You trust the Great Shepherd to herd humanity. He's quite able to shepherd His Word 'into all the nations', friend. :)

>>25191 >the Holy Spirit doesn't speak through individual mortal Christians You deny the words of the very scriptures you claim you defend

>>25193 KJV only

>>25481 >Stop thinking about streaks and stop counting days altogether. Relapse is not masturbation or looking at porn, its letting lust back into your heart and life. ^This is real wisdom and understanding. Attempting to control your actions is futile if you're still an adulterer-at-heart. Even if you succeed, you'd just be a whited sepulchre... "which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness." Matthew 23:27

Letting the living seed of the Word, through the Holy Spirit, is the grace of God to live a holy & redeemed life I believe. That seed is incorruptible, and through it you have new life in Jesus Christ. God bless you richly, Anon.

I met some spiritual evangelists and twice they caste out demons from me, and now i have no motivation to do porn, i've only been clean for a day but i have zero feelings to use it. Also i was delivered from anger from this situation i got into where i was harassed from a job, now i don't feel anything about it. Since i'm quitting porn forever i cannot go to image boards anymore, but i will check up on this one from time to time since it's usually free of porn. I would say if you can look for someone who can deliver you and who has delivered people before, or pray to God to bring you to someone, because most likely your problem is spiritual.

Just deleted all the porn off my computer this morning (again). I've repeated this cycle so many times it just feels normal now. I did it so nonchalantly this time and the last, but I've practically already resigned myself to fail again. Really, I'm beginning to think it's not that big of a deal so far as it concerns myself, but rather I'm just sick of disappointing God. Who cares if it's bad for me? What matters is that I'm not choosing to do the "good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." But the real twisted part about all this is that I don't even know if I believe in God, and I've denied his existence for the past two years at least just so I could avoid having to think about it, yet despite that, I've always felt the desire to conform myself to his will, and I've never been able to shake the odd feeling I get whenever I choose not to wear my cross, like somehow if I give up that meaningless habit of wearing it all the time, that would be it, and I would be cutting any last ties I have with a God I don't believe in.

>>25543 Do you truly not believe in the existence of God, or is that just a coping mechanism to alleviate feelings of guilt over sin? I'd wager most atheists weren't convinced by evidence, rather, they wanted relief from guilt. Sadly, there is no relief for them where they've sought it. There is only self-deception and willful blindness until judgment. We're all sick of disappointing God, but use the pain to make much of Christ. We want to be sanctified and sinless; but, subconciously, is it so we can feel justified by our sinlessness? We should always keep our focus on why we're justified before God: it's because of Jesus' perfect sinless obedience, death, burial, and resurrection as an atonement for us sinners. >"[...] But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:" Romans 5:20 KJV Read that whole chapter. Obviously we don't want to sin, but as a practical matter, I would rather remain a sinner if it kept whole trust in Jesus as my justification. Jesus did more than buy me a second chance. He paid my whole way. Give glory to Him. Thank Him for accomplishing what you could never do.

Methodist literature has been interesting. The separation has led me to seek out historical works, biographies and sermons. "The Garden of American Methodism" was a very nice book on methodism's start alongside the Church of England and how they shaped America after the Revolutionary War. I have the "Autobiography of Peter Cartwright" on my computer but have to carve out the time to begin.

I finished recently the first two volumes of the Book of The New Sun by Gene Wolfe. My first read through so I felt like I was beat over the head having to stop every other sentence to google all the obscure words Wolfe uses. I will definitely get the Lexicon to use for the next read through. I picked this up because I had heard that Wolfe injected his Christian devotion into the work in a similar manner as Tolkien. Great story thus far but a difficult read through on the first go unless you are a vocabulary savant. 35 sec Lore video https://yewtu.be/watch?v=EM7osLML_E4

I've been reading a whole bunch of stuff, mainly Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion, but besides that, a lot of Bavinck, Kierkegaard, and Luther. One passage in the Institutes of Christian Religion which really made me think recently, was one where Calvin once again quotes Augustine (he quotes him every other page) speaking about predestination and grace, and he related it to the man Christ, rather than the God Christ. It made me realize that I don't consider Jesus a man enough, and regardless of whether or not I understand that he is fully man and fully divine, it's tough for me to hear someone speak of the manhood of Christ without having an initial negative reaction, even though I know there's nothing wrong with recognizing his manhood. But rather than lessening my respect for Jesus Christ, I discovered that thinking more upon his fully human nature only amplified how I already felt about him. It is good to know he is fully man and fully divine, but I think it's something entirely different, and something I haven't attained to yet, to truly understand what that means. >We must devote an additional Chapter to the solution of this question. For there are some men, more subtle than orthodox, who, though they confess that Christ obtained salvation for us, yet cannot bear the word merit, by which they suppose the grace of God is obscured. So they maintain that Christ is only the instrument or minister, not, as he is called by Peter, the Author, or Leader, and “Prince of life.” I grant, indeed, if any man would oppose Christ simply and alone to the judgment of God, there would be no room for merit; because it is impossible to find in man any excellence which can merit the favour of God; nay, as Augustine most truly observes, “The brightest illustration of predestination and grace is the Saviour himself, the man Christ Jesus, who has acquired this character in his human nature, without any previous merit either of works or of faith. Let any one tell me, how that man merited the honour of being assumed into one person with the Word, who is coëternal with the Father, and so becoming the only begotten Son of God. Thus the fountain of grace appears in our Head, and from him diffuses its streams through all his members according to their respective capacities. Every one, from the commencement of his faith, is made a Christian, by the same grace, by which this man, from the commencement of his existence, was made the Christ.” Again, in another treatise, Augustine says, “There is not a more illustrious example of predestination than the Mediator himself. For he who made of the seed of David this righteous man, so that he never was unrighteous, without any previous merit of his will, converts unrighteous persons into righteous ones, and makes them members of that Head,” &c. When we speak of the merit of Christ, therefore, we do not consider him as the origin of it, but we ascend to the ordination of God, which is the first cause; because it was of his mere good pleasure, that God appointed him Mediator to procure salvation for us. And thus it betrays ignorance to oppose the merit of Christ to the mercy of God. For it is a common maxim, that between two things, of which one succeeds or is subordinate to the other, there can be no opposition. There is no reason, therefore, why the justification of men should not be gratuitous from the mere mercy of God, and why at the same time the merit of Christ should not intervene, which is subservient to the mercy of God. But to our works are directly and equally opposed the gratuitous favour of God and the obedience of Christ, each in its respective place. For Christ could merit nothing except by the good pleasure of God, by which he had been predestinated to appease the Divine wrath by his sacrifice, and to abolish our transgressions by his obedience. To conclude, since the merit of Christ depends solely on the grace of God, which appointed this method of salvation for us, therefore his merit and that grace are with equal propriety opposed to all the righteousnesses of men.

>>25517 >but it doesn't change the religion No, there's a very clear delineation between Judaism & Christianity in the New Testament. Christ Himself is the 'scandalon' (rock of offense in the Greek), and was anathema to the Jews. They literally killed Him over His claim to be equal to God the Father. With all due respect, I believe you're allowing your modern sensibilities to cloud your judgment on this matter. Judaism and Christianity are very distinct religions today, regardless of the deeper truths of God that extend back past before the time of Abraham. I'm also skeptical of the claim that believing Christians are somehow 'Israel' today. Jesus & the rest of the NT are quite clear that we are distinct groups, and that we have been "grafted in" as additions, not replacements. >tl;dr Just ask an orthodox Jew what he thinks about Jesus Christ, Anon. :^) >>25518 >'Judeo-Christion' is a political term not a theological one. Fair enough. But I know of a lot of nominal Christians in the evangelical Protestant branch who claim that that phrase is both completely-real, and applies to themselves directly. There are plenty of Jews themselves who are promoting this idea as well. Please understand I'm not disagreeing with you you Anon, simply pointing out the reality on the ground in many Christian churches today.

>>25519 >With all due respect, I believe you're allowing your modern sensibilities to cloud your judgment on this matter. Judaism and Christianity are very distinct religions today I get what your trying to say. But I feel that you are mistaking what is identified as Judaism today, Rabbinic Judaism, with what was practiced during the time of Christ and the Apostles, ie 2nd Temple Judaism. The consensus is actually beginning to shift and show that during that time there were multiple sects of Judaism being practiced. The most well known sects being the Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and the Christians. The Christians being the only ones that accepted Christ as the messiah of course. However, as the others fell away after the destruction of the Temple, Christianity survived and continued the 2nd Temple liturgical practices with some modification to place emphasis on Christ. Nowhere at this time was anything resembling what we know today as Rabbinic Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism came about much later primarily as reactionary movement against the growing influence of Christianity among the remaining Jewish population. There was no complied Talmud or Masoretic text at the time of the Apostles. And these texts would not appear for another 500+ years. The Judaism today is not the Israelite religion. The Israelite religion is Christianity. Another good video that debunks the claims of Rabbinic Judaism is Marching on Zion. https://yewtu.be/watch?v=8cVL0ViBB7E >They literally killed Him over His claim to be equal to God the Father. That does not invalidate the fact that the religion was the same. It simply reiterates what we already know, that some Jews refused to see Christ as the messiah and the Son of God. >Judaism and Christianity are very distinct religions today I agree with this, because Rabbinic Judaism is much younger and lacks direct continuity with the 2nd Temple. I just want to emphasis again that for the Apostles, while there was a change in some practices and views within the religion with the coming of Christ, the religion stayed the same. Our worldview is the same, and our worship is directed toward the same God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. We don't say that Abraham and Moses have a different religion from each other just because the pre-incarnate Christ revealed different things to each of them, or that their worship patterns were different, one with an altar outside and one with a tabernacle. So in that respect Christ revealing Himself to the Apostles doesn't change the religion to a distinct separate religion, it simply deepens the fullness of our religion. Everything that the prophets foretold, the apostles believed and witnessed through Christ. This was the acceptance of the faith of their fathers, that the prophets were correct and God is now among them. >Just ask an orthodox Jew what he thinks about Jesus Christ, Anon. An orthodox Jew practices Rabbinic Judaism. Again this is a much later reactionary innovation. >I'm also skeptical of the claim that believing Christians are somehow 'Israel' today. >and that we have been "grafted in" as additions, not replacements The Gentiles were grafted into Israel. Israel is the spiritual body of Christ, the Church. Galatians 3:28-29. This claim that your skeptical about, has being the overwhelming consensus view of Christianity, Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox, until only recently in the 19th century.

>>25523 Hey you seem to be quite well informed on these things and my interest is in the early Quakers, basically do you know if they have any biblical authority on refusing to call their worshipful meeting houses "churches"? I know they have expedient reasons for doing so, but I don't really know if they have biblical proofs for doing so. I miss decorations and embellishments and big pipe organs. Also if you're going to have a structure that is not primarily used/owned for humble ploughwork then in what way is it any different from the other buildings whose main function is worship? Semantic autisimo is not sufficient for me to hold an idea as a divine necessity.

>>25524 To be honest I am not very familiar with the Quakers. You may have to fill me in a bit on this, but I guess I would want to know how they are defining "Church" that they would refuse to use that to define their place of worship? Is it a reaction to the idea of a controlling hand of "Big Church?"

>>25525 Basically this. But they said people who were humble shepherds made better adherents and were used to prophetise more as the result so we should get back to that somehow. Funny thing is I don't know any Quaker groups who even in fine weather would take their meetings outside any more. I assume they view dedicated church buildings as just another ritualist extravagance like all the other Catholic stuff. It's not an outrage or anything to come to this conclusion it's just that the idea of permanence of a meeting house where it's sole job is a meeting house makes it sound a lot like a church house doesn't it. A lot of them were just accomodating homes that a Quaker lived in, but I think if you're going to have a permanent structure it should be used for humble work foremost and praying in it should be it's secondary purpose. It's that or you're not respecting what the decree was trying to put across. Modern Quakers are a co-opted white guilt activism worse than Anglican/CofE (maybe "no leadership lol" lets it all get in idk) so the plain conservative variety have retreated to the hills to form tiny pockets that barely hold onto continuity. I should see what happened to the Moravians and see if their outcome has been any better. If I'm to keep on the topic of the thread and on the original followers from Judea, what other yard sticks besides faith and obedience can be used to measure belief in the first place? I expect good conduct/good works, but I've come from the prostitutes side of converting to Christ and my head is still just a fishbowl full of sin with a bubble of faith in there.

The biggest dangers for Christians as of now are three things: 1. Lack of care for understanding. People want ready-made narratives to feel a sense of the bigger picture, but the devil lies in the details. "You are a good person if you believe in this conspiracy anon, you hate evil, right?" - /x/ schizo who claims Jesus is the antichrist and empaths are psychic vampires. 2. Lack of care for common ground. Some people disagree with the exact doctrine or distrust mainstream "faith" institutions. A lot of Christians feel like they are crusaders for Israel and need to stomp out different viewpoints other than their internet scribble doctrine. Justly some feel repelled and stay MAGA-con, go roider Nietzschean or even pagan. They could have been your average Christian. 3. Nobody reads the bible on their own, nobody goes to mass, nobody goes to catechisms. People claim to be representatives of their faith, but they don't even abstain from meat on Fridays. But they will shout at you for believing in "Satanism" like paranormal research, alternative medicine or that the three Magi who came to Jesus' birth were starseekers of old. There has been a big emphasis on raw discipline, obedience and intellectual shutdown from the people who are the least likely to ever go to mass regularly.

1. Satanism is best or easiest defined as worship of ego and of the self. If you find a problem with that definition, please point it out. 2. Other religions of the world are false idol worshippers - not Satanists directly. If you find a problem with that definition, please point it out. 3. Conspiracy Theory means 'a group', 'to conspire', and 'to theorise'. There's some anon here who seems to have a problem with a theory not being the same as or as proveable as 'a law' but the reason these theories have traction is because there is evidence for them to such degree that they are almost laws - to the tune of "if you let go of this apple then it will fall". If you find a problem with this definiton, please point it out. 4. The OY VEY question - whether or to what degree 'THE' Jews are a problem, and whether or to what extent something should be done. Clearly Zionist Jews are a problem. At least in America they are. One state paying hundreds of millions of dollars to another state is outside the norm and the tax payers of such a country deserve to know why. The main thing I think should be done is to insist on talking about it specifically more. People may say to me the soapbox has been tried and has not worked, or the ballot box has been tried and has not worked, but consider that a spokesman for the president holds a press conference and takes questions every other day; the weight of obligation, to ask about Israel funny money EVERY SINGLE TIME can and should be placed on them. In this specific context the racial element is neither here nor there, and in this specific context the nature or degree of Satanic is neither here nor there. 5. If you are in the group telling me Judea has no specific or urgent problem to address, then I expect to ask why the world's Satanists and hedonists seem to all pick the same rock to study under or to hide under, and I expect you to redress me with an explanation. 6. There has to be a six :^l But srsly mitzvot obeying jews are ok

>>25487 1. Lack of care for understanding can be seen more in my opponents than it can in me, even if I don't care enough to remedy what I do not understand - I'm only just learning enough to shelter my own neck. My opponents include the Archbishop of York who cannot decide if God's love is manifested paternally or maternally or through some otherkins variety (until he is forced to backpedal not because of faith but because of vested interest in his career and the filthy commoner backlash). I don't see lack of care for understanding as a problem, unless you mean situations like these. 2. The common ground was not mine to disrupt. I get that you don't necessarily concern yourself with Protestantism but this affects Catholics as well. When your religious representatives proclaim God to be non-binary, what grounds for commonality do you expect is left to be shared in? 3. No way I never heard of no meat on Fridays... What is it, and why such a decree? No really, WHY. I don't care for starseeking because obedience to stellar bodies = worship of created works - I've heard women explain their cheating on a guy because Saturn was out of alignment and such. Lots of mental new age mysticism. I don't go to mass because I've watched every castle of faith fall or become corrupted. I act ashamed of my faith in fact. Letting this happen among other things. I don't evangelise or preach to people. Prayers are private seclusion for me.

>>25506 Losing the forest for the trees. Also this board is a psyop and the owners want you to be ignorant of occult powers. Don't bother digging into the same old things, research.

>>25507 1. They know what the doctrine is. They wilfully choose to subvert it. Not just ignore it - they lie and say it confirms the things they're pushing. You know this. 2. Their dogmatism, i.e. their willingness to excommunicate you for wrongthink is stronger than mine is. If they're pushing people out then there isn't middle ground to lean into. You know this. Your psy operation, produce evidence or examples please, and your examination of the occult maybe worthwhile except that it's less powerful than to do as you said and get stuck into the bible instead. There's no "I win" to any of this stuff here either, if it wasn't worthwhile to post I wouldn't do it. I'm not gonna sit here and flex piety on you as I tried to demonstrate prior that I haven't got any.

>>22819 Hes not wtrong. Most men are duplicitous faggots.

>Thread >>25418 on this subject is gone. I should have guessed so, it was full of insults and overly-emotional statements. No archive either. I'll have to find my previous genuine responses in my offline-notes. Will post momentarily, if I can find them!

I don't want Sunday to not be the sabbath as I don't want to believe so many people could be wrong. And I would like to believe that maybe the "it's Saturday" people are just misinterpreting whatever callender says the day changed. I fear heaping 'difficulties' on my life, despite knowing it is most likely wrong of me to feel this way. I'm also find myself (refrencing the patterns of my previous behavior and my current-emotions) too lazy, prone to procrastination, & afraid to verify for myself, the truth of the 'Sunday is incorrect' idea. I suspect these are flaws within myself.

Found this, it might be helpful: https://biblehub.com/library/watson/the_ten_commandments/2_4_the_fourth_commandment.htm https://archive.ph/QCYET I should next show you the modes, or manner, how we should keep the Sabbath day holy; but before I come to that, we have a great question to consider. How comes it to pass that we do not keep the seventh-day Sabbath as it was in the primitive institution, but have changed it to another day? The old seventh-day Sabbath, which was the Jewish Sabbath, is abrogated, and in the room of it the first day of the week, which is the Christian Sabbath, succeeds. The morality or substance of the fourth commandment does not lie in keeping the seventh day precisely, but keeping one day in seven is what God has appointed. But how comes the first day in the week to be substituted in the room of the seventh day? Not by ecclesiastic authority. The church,' says Mr Perkins, has no power to ordain a Sabbath.' (1) The change of the Sabbath from the last day of the week to the first was by Christ's own appointment. He is Lord of the Sabbath.' Mark 2: 28. And who shall appoint a day but he who is Lord of it? He made this day. This is the day which the Lord has made.' Psa 118: 24. Arnobius and most expositors understand it of the Christian Sabbath, which is called the Lord's-day.' Rev 1: 10. As it is called the Lord's Supper,' because of the Lord's instituting the bread and wine and setting it apart from a common to a special and sacred use; so it is called the Lord's-day, because of the Lord's instituting it, and setting it apart from common days, to his special worship and service. Christ rose on the first day of the week, out of the grave, and appeared twice on that day to his disciples, John 20: 19, 26, which was to intimate to them, as Augustine and Athanasius say, that he transferred the Jewish Sabbath to the Lord's day. (2) The keeping of the first day was the practice of the apostles. Upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them.' Acts 20: 7; 1 Cor 16: 2. Here was both preaching and breaking of bread on this day. Augustine and Innocentius, and Isidore, make the keeping of our gospel Sabbath to be of apostolic sanction, and affirm, that by virtue of the apostles' practice, this day is to be set apart for divine worship. What the apostles did, they did by divine authority; for they were inspired by the Holy Ghost.

>>25454 The Gospel scriptures themselves specifically spell out the days involved. 'The first day of the week' is definitely Sunday. As Christians, we have adopted it as our holy day, in honor of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. We're not Jewish, we're Christian, Anon.