>>25192 I understand and sympathise with this attitude. It's humbling, sobering. Still, a more sensible bet would be for us to cultivate our own intellectual class. If we did so, and the Lord allowed it, we could experience something like at least a spark of the Patristic Age again. It was just as rife with heresy, but also with no shortage of men of knowledge that were full of the Spirit.

>>25192 This is a good point. Anyone considering seminary should be certain of its theological orthodoxy ahead of time, since many have drunk the coolaid of secularism. At many if not most seminaries today your teachers will, instead of teaching you how to lead God's people and defend the faith, attempt to do everything in their power to destroy your faith and convert you to damnable heresy. It is unlikely in 2023 they will even tolerate a believer, should they fail to shipwreck your faith.

>>25195 In the early 16th century when scholars and men of that sort still seriously believed and were not Marxists.

>>25210 17th*

>>25210 Erasmus was Catholic yet the reformers didn't see an issue with using the Textus Receptus he published as long as the work was good, not that much good comes out of today's liberal seminaries. Modern academia wants to be loved by the god-denying secular world so that even if there are Bible believing Christians within their institutions they force them to shut up or face demotion unless they toe their lines that the Bible is a manmade creation, that God doesn't exist, that what scholars produce is always right like their denial of (what they call) the long ending of Mark or John 7:53 to 8:11, and that everyone else has to bow down before their credentials because they're indisputable geniuses. Yet none of that is worth anything because the castrated Bible translation that they produce, the New Revised Standard Version, is literally one of the worst-selling in existence with the only thing saving it being that they lobby liberal denominations to buy it in bulk to fill empty pews. The sad part is that historically orthodox Christian colleges like Harvard and Yale were hijacked by their perversion and conservatives need to assert their right to the institutions of their forerunners: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RBSOGG7amM

>>24182 I watched the related video on the channel you mentioned though which points out that Paul may have been counting from the weaning of Isaac in Galatians 3:17 which wouldn't work with this proposal, so I think some additional work needs to be done with what Paul meant by 450 years in that verse.

>>24183 After considering a few events for what the 450 years was referring to, it feels like it would best suit the period from Moses' birth until Samuel began his public ministry after the Ark was 20 years at Kirjath Jearim in 1 Samuel 7. 80 years for Moses' life, 40 years in the desert, 8 years for Joshua's conquest, and 322 years of the Judges.

I had an epiphany recently. Virtually all evolutionist arguments will inevitably allege that X trait of a creature developed for Y purpose, they'll pretty much always use the phrase "evolutionary purpose". What I realized is that when they do this, that means we win the debate. Because supposing that something has a *purpose* presupposes what? That it was *designed* for that purpose, not that the thing randomly magically appeared on its own for no reason. Evolutionist arguments actually suggest intelligent design and evolutionism is essentially an irrational superstition that unwittingly posits some kind of magic causes creatures to suddenly and fundamentally change when they "need" to. I think this is something to keep in mind when dialoging with atheists and something to pounce on whenever it comes up, so we can show them their worldview actually doesn't make any sense.

>>25081 Yes, and this has long been recognized by researchers. Specifically within origins of life research, the concept has been derisively-termed 'The hidden hand of God', relating to investigators setting up initial conditions, etc. in their labs, that are completely irrelevant to the initial conditions on Earth's surface ~3.8Gya. >when they do this, that means we win the debate. Not quite that simple IMO. When men can look out at this vast and truly amazing creation spread out all around us, and still say unironically in their hearts 'There is no God!111', then you're dealing with a serious psychosis condition, indeed a spiritually-depraved one. No amount of argumentation, nor directly observable, objective facts are going to sway someone in such a state. My recommendation isn't to focus on 'turning' the ones adamantly opposed to God (or indirectly to you for proclaiming Him), and rather focus on the ones who are unsure. They are far more numerous, and indeed far closer to God already.

Also, some paywalled or partially-walled whitepapers like https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09018329908585155?needAccess=true&journalCode=sold20 may need to be accessed through sci-hub but that's beyond the scope of what I can automate atm.

>>25026 Nice hacking Anon. BTW, the '[Embed]' string thing can be dealt with by a) you using codeblocks, and b) BO making a minor tweak to his custom.css to accomodate that. Good work.

>>25026 If anyone who's already done this wants to make a torrent I'll seed it.

>>25043 Hey Thanks. >BO making a minor tweak to his custom.css to accomodate that Any ideas how to do that? I've no experience with CSS.

>>25060 >Any ideas how to do that? I've no experience with CSS. You might try experimenting with your custom.css file, and trying out the code settings sections in this CSS example: >>>/agdg/522

>>23315 >How do you convince people that homosexuality is wrong? There's no need to "convince" anyone. The scripture is plain, they just don't care about God or His laws (first five books called the law, specifically) or Christ and His message (e.g. Mt 5:17) and therefore they're not worth your time. Period. /thread

>>23538 >it posts this image on a website that hosts porn the irony

>>23561 gay >>23562 very original

>>23470 King

>>23470 >They used the idea of a gay gene to get acceptance even though the science behind it was bunk. I read into that one time and all I found was some mentions of genes that were more prevalent in gays, and maybe increased the likelihood of gayness, but nothing that could be called an actual CAUSE of that. The "born that way" argument doesn't even work in their own framework because they still accept/talk about the existence of bisexuals, even though the entire premise behind it is 100% choice.

>>24881 i dont find the idea that christians were suffering from mass delusions or psychosis very plausible. i also personally believe that the field of psychology is a very suspect science in general and that mental illness is mostly a recent phenomenon(its certainly been on a dramatic rise in the past century compared to before(one may note the corollary that atheism is also on the rise this past century)) i think psychoanalysing people from 2 millennia ago is unreliable anyway >Paul as a Gnostic, or someone who entirely misinterpreted the Gospel/Christianity. the other apostles didnt think so if someone has gone through robbers and shipwrecks to get a message to me, im naturally going to take his message much more seriously and as being more sincere, its not "persecutory mania" most of that post takes for granted that Pauls writings were either written by someone else, written later, dishonest or delusional which i dont accept it seems like suppositions based on very little to me

>>24881 I have no idea why you are so troubled by this brother, after glancing at it it's clearly the same kind of circular, anti-evidential, speculative, anti-Christian drivel you expect of secularists. In fact, this combined with a single post from your idea has me a little suspicious that this is concern trolling. Maybe Paul and Jesus were lunatics. Maybe they were raving madmen and everything they were saying and believing was the product of a deranged mind. *Or*, maybe Christianity is true. I suppose to determine which it is we'll be needing the other side to present their evidence and make their case to establish their historical claims. Unfortunately this is always where the wheels fall off for them because they have no evidence and they have no case, consistently the only response I have ever encountered to this incredibly basic challenge to the secular history of early Christianity is "how dare you question us". That's it. Appeal to authority is all they have. Their fiction is derived from a method that starts by prejudicially assuming what Christians have always believed is false, coming up with excuses for why all the evidence which exists doesn't count, and finally deriving history on the basis of nothing but divination of their own farts. Learning to deal with appeals to academic authority are something which anyone getting into apologetics needs to do because it now stands as the foundation of atheistic apologetics in general (atheists are less "freethinking" than papists). Such appeals to "the Science" or "scholars say" are invalid because appeals to academic authority are 1. fallacious 2. elitist 3. obscurantist 4. arbitrary and 5. self-contradictory. Now, this particular fiction (and all those like it) are dripping in the presupposition of naturalism. This is why, for example, they refer to the prophecies of Christ as "psychosis" and claim they were never fulfilled. Of course that *must* be the case because we know that supernatural things like prophecies just don't happen because we know God doesn't exist and we know nothing but matter exists. This is an obviously circular argument. Once again: maybe Paul and Jesus were madmen, *or* maybe Christianity is true. You also see the style of preaching typical of liberal heretics when they as good children of their father attempt with serpentine dishonesty to deceive believers into joining them in apostasy (the pervasive intellectual dishonesty of liberal theologians is likely a consequence of the moral bankruptcy of the godless worldview they have embraced). This comes out when he says "Over the years, I have become convinced that the issue need not be feared or disdained by people whose faith is strong and free of affect." By "the issue" he means the outright denial of the truth of the Christian religion and by "feared or disdained" he means disagreed with. The purpose of such rhetoric is to obfuscate the anti-Christian nature of what they are saying while also portraying their false claims as merely reasonable; if you disagree with them then you're just running away from the truth and being irrational and emotional, don't you want to be reasonable and scholarly, just deny the Lord. Liberalism is syncretism with the false religion of atheism. Liberal churchmen are priests of Baal, and enemies of the true faith. Machen was right, liberalism and Christianity are religions in contest.

>>24884 >a single post from your idea Your ID*

>>24802 >How do I know whether or not I should practice Judaic law or not? Christ said he is here to fulfill the law, but he also said he would not abolish it. the only aspects of the Old Law youre meant to follow as a Christian are the Moral Law and, if you want, the feasts and Saturday Sabbath.

>>24802 >How do I know everything written is scripture or not? I presume you meant 'everything written in scripture is [legitimately Spirit-breathed, inspired] scripture'? You might start by investigating the ICBI statements on that very topic Anon. [1] >1. God, who is Himself Truth and speaks truth only, has inspired Holy Scripture in order thereby to reveal Himself to lost mankind through Jesus Christ as Creator and Lord, Redeemer and Judge. Holy Scripture is God’s witness to Himself. >2. Holy Scripture, being God’s own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God’s instruction, in all that it affirms: obeyed, as God’s command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God’s pledge, in all that it promises. >3. The Holy Spirit, Scripture’s divine Author, both authenticates it to us by His inward witness and opens our minds to understand its meaning. >4. Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God’s acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God’s saving grace in individual lives. >5. The authority of Scripture is inescapably impaired if this total divine inerrancy is in any way limited or disregarded, or made relative to a view of truth contrary to the Bible’s own; and such lapses bring serious loss to both the individual and the Church >sauce:

>>24899 lol

>>24828 dont look right or left, look up.

>>24828 The people who are still throwing around terms like "SJW" and calling themselves "anti-SJWs" in the Year of Our Lord 2023 largely haven't moved on from 2014-era Gamergate paradigms. They occasionally dress it up with rhetoric, but most of them oppose feminism or "woke ideology" because they want to play video games with big boobs and lolis. The more noble of their ilk either went down the pipeline from sex pest libertarianism to the so-called "alt-right" and then beyond or they simply grew up. Those that remain spend their time defending their porn access.

My 2 cents. D&D/Rock/Games/Anime/whatever are fine and "Christians" who "fight" those things are in fact silly. However, they're not a good representation of Christianity as a whole, and people who hate Christianity just because of them are even sillier.

>>24828 >Just some guy Well yeah, that guy is kind of known for it. A fair amount of gamergate-adjacent ecelebs suck for various reasons. Some are anti-Christian this guy specifically is because he's pro faggot, maybe even a faggot himself, some because they're just grifters. Usually the former is also the latter. The skeptic community didn't start Gamergate, it's members simply jumped on board. That's not to say they weren't real Gamergaters, only that they didn't make it. I think this is a bit of an oversimplification though. Some "anti-sjws" anti-Christian, others are not. The fact of the matter is that the majority of sjws ideology is anti-Christian, and consequently every Christian is "anti-sjw" by default. >>24839 If there's one thing wrong about Gamergate it was certainly their desire for "fanservice", however the feminists who pushed for censorship of said fanservice did so for the wrong reasons not to mention they also demonized "conventional attractiveness", made female characters masculine and vice versa, and pushed for fat positivity. There's also the question of to what extent censorship should be enforced.

>>24850 >If there's one thing wrong about Gamergate it was certainly their desire for "fanservice", however the feminists who pushed for censorship of said fanservice did so for the wrong reasons I agree that the push for censorship was not done out of honest or noble intentions and that Gamergaters were absolutely right to call them out for it, but their counter was fundamentally the same as the "just let people enjoy things" crowd. You see this a lot with people who defend their posting of lolicon hentai. I suppose they were right about what was wrong but wrong about what was right, to use a cliche.

>>23480 I wonder the same thing, I don't see how piracy is a sin at all. Software should be free when it comes to evil corporations.

>>23633 for one theres the principle of Deuteronomy 25:4 also though, when it comes to free software, you're usually the product. not the software. especially when we're talking about evil mega corps.

>>23633 Not that anon but I feel that a lot of the stuff that I would have to pirate I don't actually need or want and there are free / libre open-source alternatives for the stuff that I actually need to be productive.

>>23469 This is one of the most salient pieces of advice I've seen on this board. You really do have to give yourself a sort of 'factory reset.' If every path you take leads you to the same place, it's time to move. Change your brain, become a new person to friends and family. You are in control over yourself and your identity, don't let your old self hold you back from becoming new with God. That's what I'm trying to do now. If rebuilding yourself is what it takes to keep these things out of your mind, do it. Sexual sin is always regarded as particularly damaging and you are encouraged to not walk, or turn away from it, but FLEE from it.

>>23633 Software should be free, but it isn't, by law, and we should obey those laws, arbitrary as they are. One sin does not beget another

>>22473 No Catholic doctrine states statues will save you, they are there to elevate people's minds to God and the lofty realities. As to buddism i dont know much about it but i never heard about them attributing saving powers to statues, could be wrong.

>>21803 Schopenhauer is basically Western Buddhist. Yes, it is not a very cheerful religion. They do crusade against Muslims though, so can't be all that bad.

>>22438 No, Buddha is only a teacher ("rabbi", if you wish). A true Buddhist would tell you that Jesus, of course, was a Buddha, too, as it is a state of being above mere humanity, but below true divinity. Pagan gods they (Buddhists) usually deemed inferior and not worthy of worship.>>22438

>>24592 >No Catholic doctrine states statues will save you Idols are carried around and relics heavily guarded, you are wrong. The buddhism i know preaches of life being pretty bad so the best move is not to play, in that non-playing they retire from life aka go to a monastery, try to do the least bad things they can and help people when they have to go out for some reason, that being crops, needs or getting money for those things. In the meantime doing nothing at all the entire day and trying not to do anything bad they managed to invent tons of stuff or develop things other mystics left them in their visits, like paradoxically martial arts used by the military later on. Some monks often got into this and tried to pretend killing bullies was better than letting them go around bothering people so their morality heavily varied over time. At the end of the day they pretended to do nothing so they couldn't sin and thus get a chance at going up or reincarnating as something better next time, all the while practicing their spirituality. One thing they did better despite being trained killers at times was not going around converting by force entire tribes like some misguided christians did. He who has ears to hear let him hear, no need to shove it in their face by force or repeat all day the same verses.

>>24630 >one thing they did better despite being trained killers at times was not going around converting by force entire tribes like some misguided christians did. >he doesn't know Meanwhile Christianity converted the whole of the Roman Empire and beyond while under official persecution for three centuries and without bearing the sword. Somehow that utter historical miracle is overlooked as something unremarkable.

Jesus left a Church, and gave her the Holy Spirit to guide her. If you are separated as a lone sheep you are easy pickings for the prowler. Treat your dislike of other people as a cross, and Jesus said to carry the cross, not evade them. As to the real church, you may read the Church fathers and see they have the sacraments. St.Ignatious of Antioch which was a direct disciple of the apostle John says: “those who hold heretical opinions about the grace of Jesus Christ … refuse to acknowledge that the Eucharist is the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins and which the Father by his goodness raised up” So, you should become Catholic and get the sacraments. If there is no Catholicism in your country, be whatever sacramental Christianity is there, Copt, Orthodox, etc. And remember this by Paul: '...conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.' The Church dictates what is truth, the Church dictates what is the correct way to interpret the bible. If you read it by yourself, disregarding how the saints and theologians read it throughout the ages, you'll gain some erroneous views. Some go so far as denying the divinity of Christ due to their own faulty and blind interpretations.

>>24118 >The Church dictates what is truth, the Church dictates what is the correct way to interpret the bible This should be all you need to hear to know to stay away from Rome

>>24079 You should go out and talk with priests, elders, other followers, etc. Christianity in society is way different and it will give you perspective on all sorts of topics which you might not even have stood still with. Seek and you shall find.

>>24079 >I've come to understand the secrets of the heavens and the earth Prelest. Pray for humility. >This world is a corrupt world and I do not have it in me to trust other people with a topic I view so delicately. Say what you will about the world, but you cannot curl up in a shoebox until you die then try to declare that a life. Even those called to the monastic life share it with their brothers or sisters. If you are called to be a hermit then by all means do so, but do not claim the privileges of the hermit without paying a hermit’s dues. >I fear that I am pursuing the wrong path, there are countless years of history behind the churches, and they all fight one another over what is and isn't true. You have Christ the Redeemer on your side. Your final judgement will be a compassionate one that takes your circumstances and heart into account. Therefore, go out into the world and do your best. Even churches within the same denomination will differ. Don’t be a little bitch about it: Find your church by shopping around.

>Jesus left a Church, and gave her the Holy Spirit to guide her. If you are separated as a lone sheep you are easy pickings for the prowler. This. Even if you have trouble getting along with people, there is growth in making an effort. In addition, once you have kids, you absolutely need to have them grow up among the people of God lest they are lost to globohomo well before puberty.