/christian/ - Christianity

Religious discussions and spirituality

SAVE THIS FILE: Anon.cafe Fallback File v1.1 (updated 2021-12-13)

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 20000

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Board Rules

(used to delete files and postings)

Open file (170.71 KB 2448x3264 Pope.jpg)
Catholic/Protestant Slapfight Thread christianjanny Board volunteer 11/05/2022 (Sat) 15:40:18 ID: 5f869a No.20996
Due to several threads being dragged wildly off-topic by some anons' inability to hold themselves back whenever someone says the Pope is the antichrist or that Martin Luther destroyed Christianity, this thread will serve as a pseudo-containment thread for dialogue between Catholics and Protestants. Rules still apply in here, keep the thread on topic, do not make one-liner insults or ad hominems, keep it civil and respectful. Posts that try to start fights between Churches and drag the OP off-topic in other threads will be deleted, no matter how many there are.
Open file (184.56 KB 1280x720 1664502936714.jpg)
It annoys me to see when Christians fight over each other like calling any Catholic pedophile or Protestant fag lover. That makes us hypocrites.
>>18592 protties should calm down, catholic have faith in same god, doesnt that mean they're saved? they may be mistaken on works or ask for saints intercession in vain or kneel to eucharist thinking it is gods presence therewithin but they never intend to commit idolatry except for the simple minded.
>>18594 I don't think so. Anglicans follow a religion of man because King Henry wanted to divorce his wives in defiance of the LORD's teaching that divorce is wicked. Lutherans follow a religion of man because Martin Luther didn't like the Church's requirement for the Apostlolate to have a vow of celibacy. "Catholics"? There are about 5 different religions there. The Novus Ordo wanted to appeal to more customers, and replaced the mass with a popular protestant supper service, placing man before God. The FSSP wanted to keep the keys of the Church and yet appeal to those who think that all there is to it is the "Latin Mass". There are a couple of Latin Masses, the Tridentine Mass and the Dominican Mass, but the 1964 mass by the Freemason Bugnini is not one of them. Those who say such a mass undergo the curse of Pope Leo XIII. The SSPX also likes church property, so they say that an anathema may or may not be Pope. No way can an anathema, cursed by God and Church, be the vicar of Christ. They only say this because Lefebre stumbled for church door keys. The SSPV say the 1958 Bugnini mass and Sanbornist keep the right mass and follow church teaching to treat the Novus Ordo, FSSP, SSPX as anathemas. Still, they're heretics that follow the false Gospel of Aquinas and are into Mary worship. I don't mind heretics so much, you can still get the sacraments from a heretic; the problem is they won't give the true faithful the sacraments because of their heretical belief in the Gospel of Aquinas, who changed the Law of Moses into every sin and temptation being a mortal sin. Keeps people in the confession line and making church offerings, I guess
>>18599 We're all brothers in Christ, Anon. You think they're wrong, they think you're wrong, and in reality we're all grasping for truth in our own flawed human way. Have some humility.
>>18599 Off-topic, but could you briefly elaborate further on the "Gospel of Aquinas?" I am unfamiliar with this concept.
>>18594 >catholic have faith in same god, doesnt that mean they're saved? No, see >>18255 >ask for saints intercession in vain or kneel to eucharist thinking it is gods presence therewithin but they never intend to commit idolatry It doesn't matter what lie they tell themselves, their intention is very much so to worship objects and dead men and that is an abomination which God hates.
Open file (199.55 KB 1024x768 Luther.jpg)
>>18599 >Lutherans follow a religion of man because Martin Luther didn't like the Church's requirement for the Apostlolate to have a vow of celibacy. Papist lies, what a surprise. If that was intolerable within the church why do you permit the Eastern Catholics to have married priests? The only thing Romanism believes in is slavery under the Bishop of Rome, something commanded in none of scripture, and it was that Luther pointed that the Pope has no special power but is a mere man whose word should be heeded only as much as it reflects what God has given to us in the Bible that you vainly excommunicated him. Yet he was protected by the God-fearing German princes, who came to the truth spoken in scripture and spurned the errors of the Roman church as the Moravians did a century earlier, and Protestant Europe was blessed of God for its obedience.
>>18628 >Protestant Europe was blessed of God for its obedience. By engaging in decades long wars? LOL >Yet he was protected by the God-fearing German princes They were merely using religion as a way of attaining power and taking away the power of Rome leaves a huge power vacuum. Purely political just like all your posts.
>>18634 >By engaging in decades long wars? God gave the world to the Protestants while the papist nations dwindled into poverty and obscurity
>>18634 >taking away the power of Rome leaves a huge power vacuum Cope. Even at the height of the Great Church Rome was but one of five patriarchates of the Pentarchy. That the Bishop of Rome was highly respected was out of the perennial orthodoxy of its office holders, and not due to some innate superiority. The Christian world did not wait for decrees from Rome to operate, and neither should it. The dogma of papal infallibility is the culmination of 1000 years of conceit from the Vatican when autocephaly was and is the ancient and orthodox mode of church governance.
>>18609 I think it's important to not mistake some mortal for the Lord Jesus Christ. Every word of the Lord in the Bible is important, nothing was idle banter or useless words. The LORD Says he gives the Keys to heaven to Simon and renames him Peter, so be it! The Lord has spoken. The LORD gives the Apostles the power to forgive sins on Earth, then that is needed. It means we cannot forgive our own sins. The LORD says feed his sheep, give to the poor, and love our neighbors, then we should do so. None of this "Faith alone (Luther said I don't need to be nice to people like the LORD said) LORD says don't divorce, then don't divorce. Simple as that. >>18610 What I mean by the Gospel of Aquinas is the Summa Theologica, a huge work done by Thomas Aquinas. I noticed that many Catholic catechisms conflicted; These conflicts were caused because one came from the Bible and the other came from the Summa. Things that were not a sin under the Law of Moses was a mortal sin according to Aquinas. The loving God, who gave us rules to live a better and happier life and rules to prevent us from hurting others were perverted by Aquinas into twisted devilish "everything is a moral sin, including your very thoughts! The God of Moses is a loving God, as affirmed by the LORD Jesus Christ. The god of Aquinas is some lawful evil god that sends all to hell unless they get the sacrament of penance every day. It got so bad that one priest's homily said if you help your fellow man and are doing it because you love people rather than out of fear of God that you've gained nothing. In a very real way, Aquinas created a new and false gospel. His logic is poor and his premises are only those that a human might assume. Too many priests believe this false gospel. But Catholic faith is from the Bible and the infallible pronouncements of the True Popes. NOT Aquinas and not Marion apparitions, >>18628 The Bible says we have a leader of the Church established by the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt 16:18). Luther rejected the Words of God. The Lord Says we are to be kind to the poor. The words of God were rejected by Luther, who claimed he didn't need to do good works, but just have faith. But if you have faith Jesus is LORD then why do you not do as he asks?! The Bible says Christ established a Church lead by Simon Peter. The Church by divine guidance gave us the Bible in two forms: the Latin and the Greek. Luther throws out the religion of the Church established by the LORD and says all he needs is the Bible. I don't want to pick a fight, but if you reject the Word of the Lord, you reject the Lord. >>18645 >God gave the world to the Protestants while the papist nations dwindled into poverty and obscurity Did not Satan try and temp Christ with wealth in Power? The LORD said the meek shall inherit the earth and that the rich man would find difficulty in getting into heaven. The Lord did not say that the Kingdom of heaven only goes to the rich and the (in)famous.
>>18648 >The Bible says Christ established a Church lead by Simon Peter. The Church by divine guidance gave us the Bible in two forms: the Latin and the Greek. Luther throws out the religion of the Church established by the LORD and says all he needs is the Bible. You rob Paul to pay Peter. Luther merely preached the Gospel as proclaimed by Paul who spread it across the whole world. And no one in the New Testament wrote in Latin.
Open file (134.46 KB 1000x563 pope-gaudy.jpg)
>>18648 >The LORD said the meek shall inherit the earth and that the rich man would find difficulty in getting into heaven. The Lord did not say that the Kingdom of heaven only goes to the rich and the (in)famous. And who is the richest man but the Pontiff of Rome? Who proclaims his manmade traditions in halls embossed in gold, gold robbed of innocents across the world?
>>18648 Why do you keep typing Lord in all caps? If you want to use the divine name then do so >The LORD Says he gives the Keys to heaven to Simon and renames him Peter Actually He gave the keys to all of the apostles >The LORD gives the Apostles the power to forgive sins on Earth, then that is needed. It means we cannot forgive our own sins. We never could forgive our own sins, nor can any man, the forgiveness is not theirs to give because they are not the one whom we have sinned against. The apostles (more properly the Church) were given the power to forgive sins inasmuch as they declare the forgiveness of sins. In the same way, they were given the power to retain sins. Does the Romish priest have the right to refuse to forgive the sins of the one who confesses to him? He surely does not, but to the one who does not repent of his sin, the Church retains it to him. >The LORD says feed his sheep, give to the poor, and love our neighbors, then we should do so. None of this "Faith alone (Luther said I don't need to be nice to people like the LORD said) Do you claim to have given enough to the poor or loved your neighbor enough? I sure don't, if I am to be judged on the basis of my own righteousness I can already smell the fires of hell. The only way I can stand before a holy God is by the mediation of another who suffered for my sins in my stead. >LORD says don't divorce, then don't divorce. Simple as that. But when He said that, He added an exception, "except it be for sexual immorality", which was also added by the law of Moses as the only permissible ground of divorce. >The loving God, who gave us rules to live a better and happier life and rules to prevent us from hurting others >evil god that sends all to hell Who will define the love of God? Will sinful man do it, or He Himself? An unjust weakling God that allows sinners to get away with their evil without consequence might be very appealing to those same evil sinners, but it isn't the God of the bible. Your God seems to be very wrapped up in man and pleasing him, but the God of the bible is concerned chiefly with His own glory and has little concern for evil men to whom He shows incredible grace and mercy just to allow them to exist in this world rather than to fall out of the womb straight into the pit of hell as they deserve, so great is their sin against Him. Do you expect to enter His presence and not have to answer for what you have done to His creation? The purpose of the law was never so that man could reach his fulfillment through it, it was always precisely the opposite, its purpose was to be a failure so that sinners could see their need for Christ who fulfilled it perfectly. Romans 7:7-11 "What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! Rather, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law. For I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, 'You shall not covet.' But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, worked out in me coveting of every kind. For apart from the Law sin is dead. Now I was once alive apart from the Law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died; and this commandment, which was to lead to life, was found to lead to death for me. For sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me." >But Catholic faith is from the Bible and the infallible pronouncements of the True Popes It is amazing that anyone would put the word of God and the word of men on equal ground, let alone men as manifestly wicked and heretical as the bishops of Rome. Now Rome was once a true church of a true church, having been established by Peter and Paul who invested considerable effort into establishing its orthodoxy due to its central position in the empire, benefiting many churches alongside it through it. This archetypal quality preserved for centuries, which is why Irenaeus was still able to use it long after as the archetypal example of a Christian church in Against Heresies. Paul had prophesied the man of sin would sit in the temple of God (which is the Church) and declare himself to be God, exalting himself above all things which are called god. The pope's incomparable presumption in matters of religion are well known, how he essentially exalts himself as the font of religion above every object of worship, it makes no difference to him whether the god in question is Vishnu or Yahweh, he will suffer no competition. Likewise he has declared himself to be God by claiming for himself titles proper to the whole Godhead; he calls himself Holy Father (a title proper to God the Father), he calls himself Head of the Church (a title proper to God the Son) and he calls himself Vicar of Christ (a title proper to God the Holy Spirit). >The Bible says we have a leader of the Church established by the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt 16:18) According to Matthew 16 this leader is named Jesus Christ. After questioning Peter who men said He was, the Lord then asked him "but who do ye say that I am?" and Peter answered "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" and Jesus blessed him, saying "Blessed art thou Simon bar Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven". The Lord was not rewarding him when He followed by saying "and I tell you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church", as if though the declaration had no relation to the previous words, but was continuing the same thought. Now I can't deny that "petra" and "Petros" in this verse are one and the same, but while the papists conceive that petra is a reference to Petros in reality Petros is a reference to petra; that is, Peter (who was already called so before this moment) is only given such an esteemed title in reference to this moment where he is the rock, and every time he was called Cephas it was a reference to this moment. Peter is the rock not in his singular person but as the man who confesses that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, and it is upon this rock that the Lord has built His Church. It is as if the Lord said "I tell you that you are a rock, having been so blessed to have me revealed to him by my Father in heaven and to have rightly confessed me to be who I am, and upon this rock which you now are I will build my Church". >The Church by divine guidance gave us the Bible in two forms: the Latin and the Greek The Church gave us no bible, the bible was given to us by God. It is His words and not the word of any church. He did not give it to us in Latin, but in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. >Luther throws out the religion of the Church established by the LORD and says all he needs is the Bible. When we say "the bible alone" we do not mean to exclude everything else in Christian life, we do not abandon the Church, we mean only that the bible is the only God-breathed word, the bible alone is infallible, and the bible alone is the font of religion. The word of God is the only foundation of our faith, but the Church is a grand cathedral built atop it. >Did not Satan try and temp Christ with wealth in Power? Did the Lord Jesus not rebuke him because it was His already? When He rose from the dead did He not say "All authority has been given me in heaven and on earth, therefore go and make disciples of all nations"?
>>18663 The Pope isn't individually wealthy, and is (relatively, as all things) meek in his consumption.
Open file (219.92 KB 1600x1184 Reformation.png)
>>18714 Were these guys commies?
>>18717 >trying to demolish the rest of the church Rome isn't part of the Church, she is apostate. God commanded "Come out of her my people" and I assure you they repeated that command >the Catholic church failing to resolve the issues that caused them to break away Those issues (which continue to this day) consist of damnable heresy and profane idolatry
>>18704 The Pope is an office and an apostate one
>>18720 Read 1 John
>>18727 Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also. As for you, let that which you heard from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father. And this is the promise which He Himself made to us: eternal life. These things I have written to you about those who are trying to deceive you. Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.
>>18667 >Why do you keep typing Lord in all caps? If you want to use the divine name then do so >The LORD Says he gives the Keys to heaven to Simon and renames him Peter Actually He gave the keys to all of the apostles No, the LORD gave the keys only to Saint Peter. 13 When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?” 14 So they said, “Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not [g]prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth [h]will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” Christ is speaking to Simon and renamed him Peter, NOT to the other apostles who didn't know who he was because the Almighty had not revealed the divinity of Christ to them. Only Saint Peter was given the keys to heaven, through Peter God would tell us what is and is not a sin. It hurts me to hear protestants twist the plain meaning of the LORD. I don't even want to get into it. Insults and semantic arguments, claims that the LORD was babbling about rocks, I've heard them all and it's just painful. If you're problem is that I capitalize LORD to distinguish from a "Lord" of the house of commons, you argument is weak.
>>18774 You're literally a popeless papist lmao
Today there is no Pope. The seat of Saint Peter has been vacant at least since 1958, and it had to be corrupted before that for Vatican II to be passed. Catholics have been lead astray and deceived by wicked Freemasons and their false "Marian apparitions" that has lead to the blasphemy of Mary worship and rejection of the sacraments of the church. "Pope" Pius XII, who surrounded himself with Freemasons like "Cardinal" Bugnini, elevated Mary the Mother of Christ to a divine being, claiming she had never sinned and even was free of original sin without the sacrament of Baptism. This divinity of Mary the Mother of Christ was necessary to get people to be deceived by Freemason "Marian Apparitions". Imagine believing that a magic brown scrap of cloth - a talisman, is a free ticket straight to heaven. That's heresy. The Catholic belief is in the forgiveness of sins through confession, repentance not magic talismans!
>>18777 The LORD promised the Church will prevail until the end times. Well....
>>18779 what if, Rome isn't the true church and this just a sign of nothing
>>18774 >through Peter God would tell us what is and is not a sin God alone has the authority to define sin and He did so in His law. The pope of Rome has absolutely no authority to add to His law. >It hurts me to hear protestants twist the plain meaning of the LORD And it hurts me to know papists do not read the bible, they only believe the lies they've been told. It is obvious you have never actually read Matthew since you have not read just 2 chapters later when the promise given in 16 is fulfilled and the Lord gives the keys to all of the apostles together "Truly I say to you (plural), whatever you (plural) bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you (plural) loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven." >Insults and semantic arguments, claims that the LORD was babbling about rocks, I've heard them all and it's just painful. The idea that the plain meaning of Matthew 16 has something to do with the management structure of a medieval corporation based in central Italy is incredible, and would have been quite a shock to the early Church, almost as incredible as making the claim while refusing even to pretend to defend it. This is not what a "plain meaning" is my friend, this is called a tradition of men, which one is utterly consumed in so that they take it for granted and reading the text of scripture so presume it they insert it wholesale into a text which knows nothing of it. You see the papacy here only because that is your tradition, but nobody without already being familiar with it has ever derived the papacy from this text, because it is not there.
Stop acting like threads aren't always derailed by some catholic kvetching like a jew about protestants. Every single time, something that has nothing to do with denominations at all, something that Christians don't even disagree about, some catholic will show up to kvetch about prots.
>>18956 It's the same thing on 4chan too, especially the Bible threads on /lit/ when those were still allowed.
>>18780 Today Rome isn't the True Church. I agree.
>>18781 Bible says that God the Son will send the God the Holy Ghost to guide all the Apostles, but we will here the facts on faith and morals that we will hear the keys to heaven only from Saint Peter. OR do you deny the divinity of Christ in Matthew 16:18 and worship Martin Luther?! God made Simon Pope (called Father because God works through him and we recognize that) and renamed him Peter, then gave ONLY Peter, no other apostle, the keys to heaven. God did not give the keys to heaven to Luther or Henry the adulter and head chopper. You might argue that the papacy ended with Peter, but God the Holy Ghost says NO!. How do you know this? Because Peter named his successor and in matter of faith and morals this comes from the Holy Ghost. If you are against the Pope, you reject Christ and you reject his church. Now, why then to I say that there hasn't been a true Pope at least since 1958 and Pope Pius XII is suspect? Because many Popes, including the council of Trent, say every Pope after Pius XII is an anathema, cursed by God and shunned by the faithful. Why is Pope Pius XII suspect? Because he changed the mass which was forbidden under curse by Pope Leo XII, because he gave the fund for Charity to the Rothschild, because he didn't excommunicate Freemaons like Bugnini and allowed him to change the mass. It's not that you don't read the Bible, you just ignore the parts that you don't like. You even ridicule the Word of God in your post! You disagree with Jesus and his plain words, and put in your own! This kind of thing is why Christ came, to remove the Talmud and the religions of man (like Lutheranism and Anglicanism) and restore the Talmud and the Law of Moses.
Stop acting like threads aren't always derailed by some protestant kvetching like a jew about catholics. Every single time, something that has nothing to do with denominations at all, something that Christians don't even disagree about, some protestant will show up to kvetch about catholics.
Catholics and Protestants will never get along. We belong in different countries, seperated from each other. That is the natural order. Catholics get out of Protestant counties >UK >USA >Germany >Scandinavia >Netherlands all protestant countries, built on the blood of protestant soldiers. Catholic immigrants go back home to your hot sweaty mediterranean climate, next to the arabs.
>>19010 There are lots of pagan and godless trolls here. I wouldn't lay it all on the Protestants to try and start division.
>>18963 There is absolutely no such thing as the papacy in scripture as has been demonstrated to you before. The office was established by the dragon, not the Lord. The pope is referenced by the bible several times under the titles of man of sin, son of perdition, beast, and Antichrist.
>>19020 Jesus Christ built His church on Simon Peter, making him the "rock" upon which he built his church on. Then he gave ONLY Saint Peter the keys to heaven and promised that this church, with Peter as the head Bishop. will prevail until the end of time. Thus, Peter named a successor and successors were named. The office of the Pope (aka Father of the Church through which God the Father revealed that Jesus was his only Son) was established By the Lord. See Matthew 16, which all protestants and orthodox deny, thus making them (at best) Heretics.
>>19020 Also, see John 21:15-17 ''15 When therefore they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. 16 He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. 17 He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.'' The sheep of Jesus Christ is his Church. Only Saint Peter was given the charge to feed the sheep of Jesus, again making Saint Peter the head of the Church of Jesus Christ.
>>19020 Papists are completely brainwashed, most of them are way too far gone to be saved. All they care about is their godchurch and their godtradition and their godpope. They don't even know their own church doctrine most of the time either. They're fucking retards.
>>19806 False witness is kinda bad, bro. One of the mortal sins. One of the mortal sins that the Jews used to murder Christ. Pretty sure that even a "fucking retard'', as you call the Sheep of Christ, have the best shot of heaven. Those of us who are blessed with some intelligence are to lead the sheep to the right church. Christ said we must come to him as Children, so the people you hate so much, and show this wicked disdain, are the people Christ came for. Their sins are often made in ignorance because there is no "Church Teaching" (the clergy) as far as I can find. Things so wrong, even the ones who do this must know it's false I quote scripture, and what do I get back? The son of God was joking. The Son of God was babbling about rocks. The Son of God was talking to all the Apostles, when it's clear he was speaking both in Matt 16 and John 21 just to Peter. Christ did not die on the cross to give us a free pass on sin And why have they been telling me these outrageous thing? These bald faced lies about scripture? Because the Protestants believe in "Sin Boldly" - that they can sin and need no sacrament of penance to gain forgiveness. The Lord gave the Apostles the duty of hearing confessions and holding the sin or not. The Protestants throw out the word of the Lord there too, and believe they can do anything they want like my Pentecostal friend who visited Mexican prostitutes and was having sex with a 13 year old girl. Christ Crucified on the Cross with the Two Thieves show you must repent Luther was wrong. Only the repentant sinner on the cross was saved. The other thief wasn't. Christ was right there crucified with them. This showed that Luther lied for love of sin; both were thieves but only the Repentant one was Judged by the Lord worthy of heaven. Look for the Church that Christ Established. Rule out the Protestant and Orthodox who reject the LORD I did it backwards. Rather than looking for the religion that suits my beliefs, I went looking for how can I tell which one of the over 3500 christian beliefs was the religion Christ gave us. Whatever that Church was, it had to be consistent with John 21 and Matt 16. So, the Protestants and Orthodox was left out. The Religion of Christ and the Western Church So, the Church is one of the 5 catholic religions. All are deep into Mary worship, which is blasphemy. the protestants are right about that. It isn't taught in Catechism, but you get bombarded with it at Mass. Church teaching is that you can recieve the sacraments even from a heretic, tho. Novus Ordo - the New Order The Church teaching of the earlier Popes is that the Novus Ordo are to be shunned for changing the mass. Do I believe them? If the older popes are false, then the church after that is false as well. So, yes, the Novus ordo isn't the Church. The Novus Ordo dragged the FSSP down with them by making them renounce the Council of Trent and also become an Anthama. They believe in the false Popes. SSPX: needs nice Churches The SSPX doesn't know if the Novus Ordo is an anathema or not. What seems to matter with the Novus Ordo, the FSSP and the SSPX is who has the deed on the Church property. The Church property is just a building. But the people who goes to these two churches (FSSP and SSPX) need a nice church because That's what the people who go to these churches want to see. The SSPV SSPV at least has the deeds to their own Church; small and falling apart that they are, and know that the Bergoglio and every "Pope" since Pius XII is a false pope. They do, however, say a changed mass. The Tridentine mass was changed at the Bidding of the Synagogue of Satan, to hide all sign of the Jews crimes for false witness against Christ before Pilate. The Sanbornist I don't know what else to call this group; they say the unchanged Tridentine Mass. They have their own churches, or make use of someone's garage. This is promising, as a valid Mass said in a Barn or crypt is better than a false mass said in Saint Peter's Cathedral. (I can't believe Bergoglio brought is pagan idols before the Alter of God where the body of Saint Peter lies The Sanbornist are, however, Deep into Mary worship and the false Gospel of Aquinas that makes everything a sin. Christ and the Popes made it clear; sins are an injury to God or Man. "Forgive our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us". I can tolerate the Mary worship, it's heresy and again a priest can be a heretic and the sacraments are still valid. It's the part where they won't give the sacraments because of the false Gospel of Aquinas, who made even THINKING about sin, which we know to be temptation, is a Mortal sin. (yes, the SSPV and the SSPX does this too) Well, if they won't feed the Sheep of Christ because of their false Gospel and deny the sheep the body and blood of Christ, then they're not doing the work of Jesus Christ. So, even if you accepted the Words of the Lord which you don't because of your love of Sin, there is no Church teaching to show you the way to heaven
>>19808 >mortal sins only 10 words into this long old post and you've already started spewing unbiblical unchristian bullshit ALL SINS ARE MORTAL the wages of ALL SINS are death that is the whole point of the Adam and Eve story the idea that some sins aren't "mortal" is total bullshit
a man who did nothing wrong his whole entire life, apart from one lie to someone at some time, is just as doomed to die, as a man who is a serial killer and rapist and blasphemer. We all fall short of the glory of God (since Adam and Eve) and we all deserve to go to hell (the second death). But Jesus Christ died on the cross even though He never ever sinned and therefore could not possibly die. The reason He died on the cross is because He took on our sins in that moment. But then He overcame death on our behalf. He paid the price for our sins and gave to us freedom and life everlasting if we believe in Him. "mortal" sins as opposed to non-mortal sins is a total fabrication invented by later priests as a way to corrupt the minds of their congregations. And its worked with you, your mind is corrupt. You cannot accept that Jesus wasn't being literal with Peter creating a monarchist priesthood. The Church was collegiate and Peter was a first among equals. Like a Prime Minister is equal to the cabinet but the first. The Pope is like a President and unbiblical. Read the book of Acts for fucks sake.
>>19834 Mortal sins are the sins in the Law of Moses, given to us by God Almighty, are punished by death. Ergo, "mortal". Murder, adultery, sodomy etc were all punishable by death. Venial sins were the sins that made you unclean and your penance was good for God's forgiveness. It's right out of the Bible. The only difference is that Christ is our judge. >>19835 Yes, yes. No debate there. But Mortal sins require confession. Just attending mass is sufficient for the forgiveness of mortal sins, as at every mass (of the Tridentine Rite, at least) the Priest gives God's blessing to forgive venial sins. We believe Christ in Matt 16 and John 21, thus Peter was the first Pope, successors are from God saying the Church will last to the end of time, and God gave Peter the keys to heaven; That is God is our judge and God gives the teachings on faith and morals to his vicar on earth. The vicar says there are mortal and venial sins as in the Law of Moses. Anyone who denies this denies the Bible and denies the Lord. end of story. Bible says so, I believe it, you can hate me all you want and I expect that because the Lord said you would hate me for saying so.
>>19012 All of Christianity today is unlike the Christianity of our forefathers.
>>18592 OP is a muslim
>>19863 this, it clear to all intelligent posters that OP is indeed a muslimtroll.
>>19881 Op made one post. You accuse him of being a pagan. You have no proof he's a pagan. He doesn't say to cut off our heads, like the wicked Koran says to do, instead he makes a reference to love our neighbors, our fellow sinners. Recant before God of false witness.
Open file (978.66 KB 600x800 Untitled.png)
How exactly does one verse (that doesn't say anything about popes, papism, coinstantine, rome, catholicism, the vatican, a hierarchical organization which bows to its worldly leader they call "father" and kisses his hand in worship, etc.) justify all of the Roman Catholic man-made traditions and rituals and idols and false gospel and sins and abominations and violations of God's laws and commandments, exactly? >but muh gates of hell wouldn't prevail And they haven't, your cult is not of God and its endless abominations proves this. Even when your roman cult persecuted and tortured and murdered the saints in fulfillment of prophecy (some of whom were killed simply for owning a bible), there was still a remnant which remained. Protestantism was an improvement, but it wasn't enough, it wasn't a full return to God and Christianity as practiced by the apostles and early Christians (despite all the catholic cult lies on that, you can hear the same sort of nonsense from JWs, neither of which are based in truth). Modern fallen apostate Protestantism (e.g. smooth-preaching mega churches, 501c3 image of the beast, etc) further fulfills prophecy and points to the Catholic Cult's own fulfillment of prophecy as the whore of babylon, the mother of harlots, which is proven in countless bible studies again and again and again. The bible plainly states Christians worship God in spirit and in truth, not in a catholic cathedral full of hypocrisy and abominations like sun worship and idol worship and vain repetitions and mary worship and lies and all of it. There's just so much sin in that cult, it's endless. There are even still catholics who will defend indulgences and they actually think a cash-4-heaven scam is anything Christ would've done. Why are catholics so brainwashed? Trying to get through to these people is worse than talking to atheists. And all they ever do is cite that same single verse and ignore the entire rest of the scriptures and all of the violations of God's laws and commandments and all of Christ's teachings if it doesn't align with their cult doctrine (as if the average catholic even knows what their own cult really teaches, what their leaders have said, and what their currently active doctrine is). That verse doesn't even contain what they constantly claim it does, they literally do not have eyes to see it would seem. The blind leading the blind.
14Remind the believers of these things, charging them before Goda to avoid quarreling over words, which succeeds only in leading the listeners to ruin. 15Make every effort to present yourself approved to God, an unashamed workman who accurately handles the word of truth. 16But avoid irreverent, empty chatter, which will only lead to more ungodliness, 17and the talk of such men will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, 18who have deviated from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already occurred, and they undermine the faith of some. 19Nevertheless, God’s firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: “The Lord knows those who are His,”b and, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord must turn away from iniquity.” 20A large house contains not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay. Some indeed are for honorable use, but others are for common use. 21So if anyone cleanses himself of what is unfit,c he will be a vessel for honor: sanctified, useful to the Master, and prepared for every good work. 22Flee from youthful passions and pursue righteousness, faith, love, and peace, together with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. 23But reject foolish and ignorant speculation, for you know that it breeds quarreling. 24And a servant of the Lord must not be quarrelsome, but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, and forbearing. 25He must gently reprove those who oppose him, in the hope that God may grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth. 26Then they will come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, who has taken them captive to his will. There are going to be people in the church who worship the devil (in all denominations, not just catholic). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD1pFtEEs9A
>>20036 First you accept red letter scripture as Gospel or not. If you don't, fine, You reject Jesus Christ. If you do, then we can move on. Christ established a head of his church in Matthew 16 and John 21. God re-names Simon as Peter, says Peter is the rock (play on words as Peter means rock) upon which he will build his church, thus naming him and only him as the head of the Church. Not the other apostles, he's talking to Simon Peter. God also gives peter the keys to heaven. No, the keys don't mean that Peter is our judge. Christ is our judge. The paraclete that Jesus sends (the Holy Ghost) will work through Peter. Last in this chapter, we find that the Lord declares that the Church will last until the end of time. So, it didn't fall apart with Peter's death. By tradition, the head of the Church created by Christ is called the Pope. Get over it, that's the name. The same why the Church of Christ is called "Catholic". Just a name. Means "Father" God then comes back after the crucifixion in John 21 and tells ONLY PETER to feed his sheep, three times! Not the other apostles. Now if you believe Jesus Christ is God, and you believe his words, then you believe God made Peter the head of his church. You also believe that because God promised us his church would last until the end of time that God meant for there to be a head of the Church. Yes, the Vatican has been infiltrated by Freemasons (anti-God protestants) and corrupted to wickedness. The faithful were warned NOT to follow them at the Council of Trent. Pope Leo XII told us that those who change ONE WORD of the mass is cursed. "Pope" Pius XII is a questionable Pope because he did many things against the faith, like advancing Mary worship which is blasphemy. He also allowed Bugnini to change the mass, even though "Cardinal" Bugnini was a known Freemason and wasn't even a real Catholic, much less a bishop. It's like Protestants get into the Church, corrupt it, and then denounce it because they wickedness they're doing with their puppets. It is the end times, I'm sure of it. And those who ridicule the word's of Christ with their devilish deceptions would do well to repent of this sin and recant. Pearls cast. Now we see if they're picked up by men or swine.
>>20040 Matthew 5:17 is in "red letters".
>>20036 >Why are catholics so brainwashed? Man, you hit all of the bologna charges the ignorant accuse Catholics of. Have you considered, perhaps, you're the brainwashed one? Oh of course not. You're you and couldn't possibly misunderstand or be deceived by anything.
>>20052 >the crusades and inquisitions never happened
>>20057 OP literally said nothing about either of those.
>>20062 Yeah but the catholic church has a history of attacking people including Christians or making Christianity look bad more than other denominations..
>>20062 >>20036 >Even when your roman cult persecuted and tortured and murdered the saints in fulfillment of prophecy (some of whom were killed simply for owning a bible)
>>20042 Catholics don't read the bible
>>20111 Of course they do, they're just tricked by their church into doing what it says not to do.
>>20036 Man, it must suck to follow a religion that only defines itself in opposition to Catholicism. It's like you've never had a genuine spiritual experience and never will. Sad.
>>20123 They are like the Demon legion; they strike like a viper, but there are thousands of heads. Strike one down and they simply will shrug it off "not my religion". The Religion of Christ is found only in the Bible and the teachings of the head of the Church, the Church Father known as "Pope" This teaching is infallible, guided by the Holy Ghost. This teaching is indefectable: God doesn't get it wrong, doesn't need to fix his word or change his mind. Our job is to save as many deceived souls as we can. Many have demons in them, and by bringing up the word of God, they will be uncomfortable and angry. They were lured away from the true faith by the promise of some sin like adultery or usury or love of hate. Some believe that they can sin freely, even boldly, as they are saved just by saying "Jesus Jesus!" as if Christ didn't already tell them that is NOT going to work.
How many times does God have to say it before you do the will of the Lord? How many times must Christ be crucified to bring you His word for you to give up your own will and submit to God's will. God's will be done!
>>20147 >How many times must Christ be crucified Once, because we don't celebrate your pagan masses.
>>20160 The Holy Mass is about the sacrifice Jesus Christ made for us on the cross. We were told to do this in remembrance of Him. Demons search the entirely of the world, working with Jews, to find heretical text that serves their sins, and then deny the scripture declared infallible, cannon and inspired by God in the early Church. IF the Church fell in the 4th century then there was no Church for Luther or Henry to "reform" over a thousand years later, and the promise of Christ that his church will prevail against the gates of hell was not a kept promise. The Christian Bible IS what the early Christian Church gave us over a seventeen centuries ago. >>20111 >Catholics don't read the bible Every Catholic reads the Bible, and has a Bible in their home. I have three; the Latin Vulgate, the Douay-Rheims, and the Knox. I suspect the Knox as it was translated after the fall of the Church WE know you lied about Catholics not reading the Bible. You know we know but it's not us you're trying to deceive, it's the person intrigued by Christ that is seeking the truth.
>>20167 >The Holy Mass is about the sacrifice Jesus Christ made for us on the cross. We were told to do this in remembrance of Him. We were not told to sacrifice him again and again every Sunday according to some pagan philosophy by which Christians are held to partake in cannibalism.
>>20171 >We were not told to sacrifice him again and again every Sunday according to some pagan philosophy by which Christians are held to partake in cannibalism. Good thing that's not what Catholics do either then, eh?
>>20173 If you reject the body and blood of Christ, you will not find heaven John 6:55-59 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 1 Corinthians 11:24-30 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. 27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.
Big difference is that the faithful read the bible and look for the true religion. Going from the search for God, you can't miss Matt 16 and John 23 as clues for what the Church is. The fallen look for or invent a religion that suits themselves. Want to divorce? Invent the Church of England (and loot churches, rape nuns and murder priests). There are now 3500 different protestant religions. Want to be a sodomite? There's a religion for that! Want money? Got a religion for that too! Everything that the devil has promised in his Temptation of Christ in the desert there is a protestant religion for saying it's okay. This is the many headed beast spoken of in the Bible. You debunk one of them, 10 more heads sprout. And yes, there are at least 5 false "Catholic" religions. Corrupted by love of money, trashing the vow of poverty, and Freemason deception. Keys to the church building door was more important than the keys to heaven for 3 of those false churches. But the faith is still there in the Bible of Saint Jerome in the 4th century and the teachings of the Popes. "The Pope" is just the name of the office of the leader of the Church established by Jesus Christ, it means "Father". Matt 16, John 23
Catholics are subhuman retards.
>>20242 I don't agree with Catholics either but that is not a Christian answer to them.
>>20036 Well, about that image.... given that the Body of Christ, the Holy Eucharist is at the center, they clearly mean the radiance that is Christ and not sun worship. Why even bother with such lame falsehoods? Since it brings upon your soul the sin of false witness. Not that I support these false priests; they're all doing a changed mass that is forbidden by the Council of Trent and Pope Leo XII
>>20245 Most of the people here are Jews and Sodomites but I repeat myself. Some get pretty disgusting, they're clearly not Christians.
>>20245 Every single catholic is a liar and they lie about literally everything.
>>20242 Shut the fuck up nigger, Protestants get the rope.
>>20404 Council of Trent says we are to live apart from the heretics, Jews and pagans. It also says YOU'RE FORBIDDEN TO HARM THEM. Because the Bible says that some with find error in their beliefs and come to Christ, and each soul is precious to the Lord.
Open file (26.51 KB 625x626 Not even bait.jpg)
Open file (94.01 KB 765x442 heretics_btfo.jpg)
>>20421 Council of Trent was convened by cucks Hitler the Nazi Party and Mussolini showed what how based and redpilled Catholics should behave The only good non-Catholics are dead ones bring the Inquisition back DEUS VULT Anyone who disagrees with this post is a soyboy heresy enabler. PS TILLY DID NOTHING WRONG we should kill all Prots and let God sort them out
Open file (917.84 KB 468x352 lurk moar.mp4)
Open file (98.73 KB 1024x682 95 theses.jpeg)
505 years ago today, the Babylonian captivity of the Church ended
Open file (120.22 KB 1080x574 hussite wars.jpg)
jan huss has entered the chat
Who will be the next true Martin Luther for our own times, or are the Two Prophets in Revelations the last ones to come?
>>20771 We only gain salvation through the Jews and you're spouting this hateful nonsense. https://christoa.com/2020/07/06/salvation-through-the-jews/
>>20771 >Jews hate the Catholic church So i guess that makes working with satanic secret societies like the Jesuits something good then.
>>20771 >>20783 (me) To build on this, some Jews in the Old Testament even rejected God and He still stood by them, because He loves them and it was through them that He carried out His mission in Christ. To hate them like this today is not only disgusting but antithetical to our mission as Christians of spreading the faith and salvation. Make no mistake, even an unconverted Jew can still reach Heaven. There is a difference between knowing and understanding, and still ultimately rejecting, Christ and growing up in a different faith. Jesus condemned the former (a conscious act against God), not the latter (what the Church calls "invincible ignorance"). God is merciful, and judgement is up to Him alone. To call them satanic is disgusting and insulting to both Jews and God. Jesus said it was the Jewish God that was the One True God, and only through them can we know Him. And to think this has changed due to them not seeing the Messiah, through no fault of their own, is ridiculous. >Jews especially hate the Catholic Church and love deception and division. Meds. Now. Do not let your preconceived political biases cloud your faith. God is merciful and we should always err on the side of mercy, not hate. Your politics are incompatible with the Faith.
>>20784 The biggest satanic society are the freemasons, who are protestants. >>20783 Taking the word of God out of context for wicked purposes? The Lord clearly called them the Synagogue of Satan. God can rise sons of Abraham from rocks, if He wants.
>>20806 >>20807 >God is merciful and we should always err on the side of mercy, not hate. Stop playing at mortal judgement. :)
>>20806 >The biggest satanic society are the freemasons, who are protestants. It's not that Freemasons are protestants, it's that Freemasons have infiltrated the Christian denominations.
>>20815 Being a Freemason means ex-communication from the Catholic Church. It is a moral sin. Those who don't repent and confess it means damnation. What Protestant religions excommunicated freemasons?
>>20821 >>20821 >Being a Freemason means ex-communication from the Catholic Church But there have been reports of Freemasons in important Catholic Church services. Even if you rule out the Freemasons for Catholics they still have other secret societies like the Jesuits and the Knights of Malta. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxTBZoltWsk
>>20822 Cardinal Bugnini was a known Freemason and Pope Pius XII not only did not excommunicat him, but allowed him to change the mass. Changing the mass was forbidden at the Council of Trent. Either Bugnini faked the pope's deathbed signature or pius XII was a suspect Pope
>>20824 All popes are suspect
>>20841 Then you believe Christ lied (Matt 16, Ezekiel, and John 21) and you are not a Christian.
To expand in the idea that there are suspect Popes... Christ promised that the Church will prevail until the end of time. Clearly as he was talking about the Church founded by Simon Peter, he was talking about the Church Teaching, the clergy. There are clear signs that the Gates of Hell have prevailed, all that is left is the Church militant (Souls on earth who keep the faith) In the end times, we are told to be baptized and keep the faith. It looks like the end times.
>>20844 No Popes in those verses
>>20848 You excommunicated the Alexandrian church of Athanasius in 451 over a miscommunication and then you claim that he's Catholic when its convenient
>>20844 No sir Jesus Christ did not establish a papacy, there was no papacy until the middle ages
>>20854 The particular quote is massively ironic too considering the circumstances involved defying the entire church including the bishop of Rome for the sake of divine truth in scripture
>>20850 Pope means Father, as in the head of the church. You would have us believe that Jesus Christ was just gibbering. That's a wicked perversion of the words of the Lord. >>20863 >>20864 The head of the Church was created and named by Christ. If you deny Jesus, you're not even Christian.
Those who deny Christ for the promise of unrepentant sin are not Christian and will not see heaven, by their own choice.
>>20867 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
>>20873 Why do you enjoy twisting the words of Christ to poison them against the Church?! Saint Paul explains about Church Fathers in the Bible. Are you saying you're above Saint Paul, the Bible, and the LORD himself?!
This "call no man Father" thing is the poorest excuse for sin ever. Christ also says don't divorce, which causes harm to others, but the Protestant religions were founded upon divorce.
>>20880 >>20881 Your church is divorced from Christ
>>20899 And you make things up. How can you deny the words of Christ in Matt 16 and John 21, and then say it is the catholics who are "divorced from Christ"?! Goodness, divorce is a PROTESTANT sin, the Church doesn't allow divorce. Don't confuse the Catholic Church with that pagan Bergolio. Pagans sacrificed children to that wicked idol of his.
>>20914 Do you think mindlessly repeating "Matt 16 John 21" while irrationally disregarding the refutations of this scripture abuse will fly on judgement day? You will stand trial before the holy God, you are standing on the precipice of eternity, so I demand to know why you do not spend every moment in overwhelming terror of the wrath of God?
>>20916 "irrationally disregarding the refutations of this scripture " You denied Christ, and pretend to be the Lord our Judge? It's very important scripture; to deny it means Christ doesn't know you and you don't know Christ. How can you claim to believe in Christ if you simply don't believe him?
>>20917 I asked you a question sir, do you have an answer for it? Why you do not spend every moment in overwhelming terror of the wrath of God?
>>20921 You're question was loaded with your gleeful presumption that I was going to hell for believing the words of Christ in the Bible in two passages that you have a wicked contempt for. I accept the judgement of God as perfect. If I am damned to hell, then that is where I belong. If I am accepted into heaven, I shall try to be worthy of that judgement. There is no salvation outside the Church. All I can tell you is that the Church of Christ is not among the 3500 protestant religions, or the Orthodox because they reject the word of God and deny the Church of Christ. Of the 4 or 5 known Churches left, the Novus Ordo & FSSP is an anathema, the SSPX is also an anathema, the SSPV and Sanbornist are not an anathema but are heretics who believe in the false gospels of Aquinas and in personal revelations. So, even if you accepted the word of Christ, I couldn't tell you where to look for his Church. Yes, I worry that I don't see his Church because I am not saved. You're are sure you're saved but outside his church and deny his word and thus His divinity.
>>20924 >You're question was loaded with your gleeful presumption that I was going to hell No sir I said nothing of the sort, nor do I feel gleeful at the prospect. >If I am accepted into heaven, I shall try to be worthy of that judgement. Do you believe you are worthy of that judgement?
>>20925 >>20925 >Do you believe you are worthy of that judgement? Yes, I know where you're going with that, and it's of the devil. Of course no one is worthy of heaven. We are imperfect beings, and heaven is a place of perfection. You're right about that. Yet, the Lord Christ gave us a church to teach us, gave us priest who could forgive sins in his name, gave us priests who could remind us of the sacrifice of Christ at the Holy Mass. God gives us what we need. God told us we need to follow at least the last 7 commandments to love our neighbor. Think of it like a dog owner looking for a dog at the kill shelter. He looks for an even tempered dog that would be obedient, listen to him when he says come, and not fight with the other dogs. He's not going to take a dog that will kill the other dogs and think "master will forgive me for this". The good shepherd does not allow wolves to be part of the flock. The good dog owner look for a dog that will try and please the owner. To please the owner, the owner must train the dog what the owner wants to do. Likewise, God needs to train us in what we are to do; and that is why Christ created a Church on Simon Peter. The dog has to listen to the Master. The master says come, the dog drops what he's doing and comes to the master. The dog doesn't know why, but maybe master wanted to keep the dog out of the street because of cars, or saw something dangerous to the dog. That's why you just can't ignore the parts where Christ says or does something and do what you want instead. Telling people that they can sin because God payed the price on the cross is over the devil.
>>20929 and when your priest looks at porn/conducts himself with sexual immorality, and asks for money in order to belong to the church, and offers higher positions in the church on the basis of wealth i.e. Simony, and conducts the church business in line with Jewish central banking families - what did God mean by his One True Holy Catholic Church doing these things? Do you have any analogies which explains this? Why did the Roman Catholic Church which is the only true church since Jesus gave the literal keys (there were many keys on a keyring because heaven has many gates to enter) to Peter? The Greek and Russian and Coptic and Indian churches that were established at the same time are obviously illegitimate, as are all forms of Baptism and collegiate Presbyterian or Calvinist Churches. But I am struggling to figure out why the only true catholic church of rome had to take loans from Jewish banking clans in 1834? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_loans_to_the_Holy_See what did God mean by this?
>>20935 in case it isnt obvious, my post is sarcastic the roman catholic church is not a legitimate church, it is a satanic inversion of Christianity and full of pagan wickedness, part of the Jewish new world order with the British Royal Family.
Christ gave many keys to his apostle, becuase the keys are the teachings that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, the Son of God. Thats what Peter said and thats why Peter got the credit. But all of the apostolic Churches, from the church of Saint Thomas in Goa (India) to the Church of Saint Aristobolus in Britain, apart from the roman church are legitimate. It is abhorrent and a denegration of Christianity to call true orthadox Christians heretics while believing in a church that encouraged mary worship, banned bishops from being married to a woman (a ban they overturned later), sold indulgences and posistions in the church to the wealthy, burned poor christians at the stake for translating the latin bible (itself a translation of the holy tongues of Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic), and literally whored itself out to babylon in 1834 to the equivalent of 4 billion dollars in todays money but stupid catholic falsehoods will have you disregard all of the above and continue to follow a church which protects paedophiles and encourages sodomy.
>>20929 Right, and since you are unworthy, why do you not dread that fateful day, knowing you have fallen short and will be burned forever? The only reason I don't fear it is because another, one who was worthy, stood in my place and died for my sins so that I would not. Romans 4:5-8 >And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”
>>20929 You have it completely backwards. You don't make yourself pleasing to God by your own efforts, God makes you pleasing to Him by regenerating your heart into one that desires sanctification by His life, suffering, death and resurrection. If you have the mentality of "I'll do my best, and God will take care of the rest," you literally believe the "gospel" of the Mormons: https://youtu.be/SoRx5eB7h0A
>>20929 I have to speak more on this, because your illustration of salvation as being like a good dog eligible for adoption at a pound, perfectly illustrates how Roman Catholicism perverts, twists and distorts the simple beauty of the Gospel. The subtext of your analogy is that you must be a "good dog" or else God will not save you from the pound. That you must become a "good dog" by your own efforts, before God will even consider the possibility of saving you. This is of the Devil and completely contrary to the Gospel. The book of the prophet Hosea is an Old Testament book that is a powerful foreshadowing of the Gospel to come in the New Testament. In it, God commands the prophet, Hosea, to marry a prostitute in order to both rebuke Israel for their spiritual prostitution, and also to be an illustration of God's love and loyalty to Israel in spite of their spiritual whoredom: "When the Lord began to speak by Hosea, the Lord said to Hosea: “Go, take yourself a wife of harlotry And children of harlotry, For the land has committed great [a]harlotry By departing from the Lord.” So he went and took Gomer the daughter of Diblaim, and she conceived and bore him a son." -Hosea 1:2-3 Gomer then ran off and committed adultery some more, and was reduced to slavery. What did God command Hosea to do?: "Then the Lord said to me, “Go again, love a woman who is loved by a lover and is committing adultery, just like the love of the Lord for the children of Israel, who look to other gods and love the raisin cakes of the pagans.” So I bought her for myself for fifteen shekels of silver, and one and one-half homers of barley. And I said to her, “You shall stay with me many days; you shall not play the harlot, nor shall you have a man—so, too, will I be toward you.” For the children of Israel shall abide many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred pillar, without ephod or teraphim. Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God and David their king. They shall fear the Lord and His goodness in the latter days." -Hosea 3:1-5 Notice also how Gomer is bought back for 15 shekels of silver. The normal price for a slave is 30 shekels of silver, and is also the price that Judas paid to betray Jesus. Think about that: Gomer is so damaged and used up, that she's literally sold at half price. She's not only not a "good dog," she's only worth half of a "good dog." Yet God still loves her and wants to save her. The fact is, we are all "bad dogs," none of us are "good dogs" (Romans 3:9-12 and 23.) All of us deserve to be "put down" at the pound. As the first half of Romans 6:23 states: "For the wages of sin is death." But the Good News is the second half of Romans 6:23: "but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Notice the word gift bolded, along with Romans 11:6: "And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work." Gomer was the dog equivalent of an old, worn out, mangy mutt that deserved to be put down. God did not buy her back because she was "good dog," but bought her out of His mercy and love: "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." -Romans 5:8 Notice also that God, speaking through Hosea, did not make demands on Gomer's behavior, until after He had bought her back: "So I bought her for myself for fifteen shekels of silver, and one and one-half homers of barley. And I said to her, “You shall stay with me many days; you shall not play the harlot, nor shall you have a man—so, too, will I be toward you.”" Hosea -3:2-3 God does not save us because we are "good dogs," He saves us in spite of the fact that we are "bad dogs," and it is Christ Himself by the power of His regenerating grace that makes us into "good dogs." We do not become "good dogs" and then we are accepted by Christ; Christ is the one who makes us "good dogs" in spite of the fact that we are "bad dogs.": "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure. -Philippians 2:12-13 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. -Ephesians 2:8-10 Works are not what save, but are the natural fruit of a regenerated heart that has a true saving faith that is not dead, as outlined in the book of James. If you want to be able to stand at the Judgement, stop relying on your own worthiness, and truly put your faith in the work of Christ, and allow Jesus to make you truly good.
>>20996 Why is he staring at me?
"Protestant friend, let me in, let me in~"
Good idea Janny. So if specific bait threads show up such as (>>20735, and others) show up, then go to the management dropdown for the OP post and choose 'Merge', and supply this thread OP's number (20996 in this case). This works well for threads, but sadly the S. Lynx has decided to not include the exact same functionality for individual posts. >t. the Protestant vol here.
>>21016 >there is another janny Didn't even know. Lynx is not the best IB software and I am quickly getting a disdain for it. Doesn't help the server is in Romania either.
>>21016 That isn't a bait thread
>>21021 >low-effort OP >clearly intended to rile up Catholic insults As much as I dearly love the great German, White man Martin Luther, tbh I don't think much that OP's efforts. It is a bait thread, and even I could have done a better job at it had I chosen to.
>>21019 >I am quickly getting a disdain for it. Doesn't help the server is in Romania either. Two things that a) aren't in your control, and b) are the clear choices of our gracious hosts of Anoncafe. I would suggest forbearance and patience dear brother in Christ. Let's all just 'make the best of a bad job' as Puddleglum was fond of saying, yea? :^)
>>21022 It was intended to celebrate the Reformation, papists getting upset isn't my problem, I did not think about the possibility nor did I care, nor do I care now.
>>21025 Then next time put in a little better effort into your thread OP. What would Martin Luther do?
>>21025 >celebrating a divorce
>>21026 >What would Luther do? Put up a blatant funpost on the local church door and cause an international controversy?
I miss when there was only one pinned post
>>21033 Kek, fair enough Anon. :^) >[begins typing furiously]* >>21034 Agreed. This one at least is strictly-temporary simply to get the other vol's attention (and the rest of the community notice that such derailings have a destination ahead).
I would like to defend having images of God, Angels and the Saints. I know some of you are strongly against it, but I always feel like you are fighting a strawman when you imply people think they are saved by the image. A picture or sculpture can just be a store of information like a text. A crucifix can basically just be a fancy postit-note on the wall saying "Remember God loves you!". It depends on the observer how they treat it. I dont think most Christians with a crucifix on their wall believes the wood and metal it is made of will save them. Unlike the actual icon worshipers in biblical times who put food in front of statues believing it would come alive and eat it while they werent looking. Dont you think there is a distinction there? I think pictures can be just as beautiful and inspiring as text stories about the same. Can't it just be a different way of retelling the same stories as the bible? Many pictures in Catholic churches are exactly pictures of things that happened in the bible. To me, a picture of a specific person without context is just a reminder of their entire life. I do pray towards the crucifix even though I know God is everywhere, I never really thought about it, but I think that is just to make the conscious decision of facing him. I dont imagine he is actually caught inside the crucifix or limited in any way by it.
>>21051 But Protestants do use crosses?
catholics went downhill when they started persecuting the knights templar >In September 2001, a document known as the Chinon Parchment dated 17–20 August 1308 was discovered in the Vatican Secret Archives by Barbara Frale, apparently after having been filed in the wrong place in 1628. >It is a record of the trial of the Templars and shows that Clement absolved the Templars of all heresies in 1308 before formally disbanding the order in 1312, as did another Chinon Parchment dated 20 August 1308 addressed to Philip IV of France, also mentioning that all Templars that had confessed to heresy were "restored to the Sacraments and to the unity of the Church". Generally the popes have always had a weakness in that they cowtowed to secular (typically the French and Spanish) authorities. The loan that the Vatican took from the Rothschild bank in 1834 is another major red flag. I will say though that there were many good popes albiet some very bad popes have marred the institution. The concept of a papacy has a tenuous biblical basis which is why even the Orthadox christians don't agree with it, let alone the more radical wing of calvinists and baptists. Lutherans are just catholics that protested the church of the time, and Anglicans are catholic in all but name - Henry VIII was the second English king ever to write a book and it was a slamdunk of Martin Luther's theology for which Henry VIII got the title "Defender of the Faith" bestowed upon him shortly before he himself broke with Rome because the secular Spanish-Austrian Emperor who had been attacking Rome in his Italian wars with France wouldn't let the pope agree to a divorce of the English king (who was married to the Spanish-Austrian Emperors aunt). While the papacy stuck to its mission of helping christendom unite against the muslims, jews and pagans it was a glorious institution and worthy of respect. When they started getting involved in gay power struggles between Paris, Madrid and Vienna they lost the plot and frankly deserved to lose half of Christendom to reformers.
>>21051 Our sinful flesh has a tendency towards idolatry. It's a risk not worth taking. It's why John signs the end of his first epistle with an admonition: "Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen." From a practial perspective, you might know the image or crucifix is not actually deity... but would you trample or spit on it? The answer for any Christian I know would be "no, I would not", which raises the question: why not, if it is not God? Because you love and worship the God it represents. You can see the problem now. This response wouldn't be different from pagans and their idols in any meaningful way. And while spitting on your crucifix seems outlandish in this era, it wasn't historically for nations that persecuted Christians. Watch the Scorcese movie "Silence". Put simply, if I love the true God, I don't want to risk placing any value on a trinket or painting. It's a risk/benefit analysis.
>>21114 >Watch the Scorcese movie "Silence". I watched that movie and couldn't help but notice that all the problems they encountered wouldn't have been consequential if they were Protestant, and the ending ironically promotes justification by faith despite the author being a Catholic.
>>21115 That's what I thought when watching it, too. If the Jesuits never brought any images or crosses there would be no way for the government to test them. However, considering it now, I'm sure the government would've come up with some way. Demanding a denial of Christ would put any Christian in the same ordeal.
>>21115 >>21114 The message in that movie is wrong, cant apostatize because a voice told you to.
My opinion is that you should believe in whatever is the main denomination of your country...... However if you're in the US it gets a little more complicated and ambiguous, sometimes even on state-level, so... become Orthodox, I guess! Alongside with only transacting with Monero and using a Thinkpad with Artix Linux and terminal programs. (Will anyone get this reference?)
>>21114 This is incorrect. Idolaters believe power resides physically and manifestly inside of the idol, not symbolically.
>>21141 Isn't a relic an idol then?
>>21142 No, relics have power bestowed by God, they aren’t powerful unto themselves. Also they aren't worshipped.
>>21144 >No, relics have power bestowed by God, they aren’t powerful unto themselves. So has a relic ever lost power or are you just posing a hypothetical that isn't actually true in practice? If relics can lose power how does one know whether a relic is still effective? >Also they aren't worshipped
>>21141 "And the Lord said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves: They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt." -Exodus 32:7-8 I didn't want to make a wall of text, but in verses 4 through 6, Aaron fashions the golden calf and declares a feast day unto the LORD and the people celebrate and bring offerings to the calf. The whole thing taken in context likely means that the people believed the golden calf was a representation of the LORD. If they believed the calf was itself a god, and not just a representation of a god, how could they believe it brought them out of Egypt when they had only fashioned it afterwards?
Just remembered this, in further support of >>21114 "And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that David his father did. He removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan. " -2 Kings 18:3-4 The serpent that God told Moses to craft in the wilderness ended up becoming an idol, and it was right in God's eyes that it be destroyed. Humans have a tendency towards idolatry, and whatever small legitimate benefit one may derive from icons - it is not worth the risk. At the very least, consider the souls of future generations: you might properly use a statue as a historical reminder, but a few generations pass by and other people are now worshipping the thing. Someone on these boards posted a video of a statue of Mary accidentally falling off its carrier onto the floor, and Catholic women screaming and wailing like their only child died. No one would be wailing over a history book hitting the ground.
Please excuse me. I couldn't help but notice that your definition of "god" wildly differs from my own. I am also of the belief that the Vatican is corrupt and therefore should not receive our support.
Open file (6.00 MB 640x360 1668541057043513.webm)
>>21251 There are pedophiles everywhere, The difference is that one denomination focuses on the Bible, and the other focuses on the church (which according to Catholics has authority over the bible), the bible and pedophilia is not compatible. Our two examples is one camp and someone in a position of power in the Vatican using a symbol that is declassified by the FBI.
I like him.
>>21264 >excuses for pedo protestants while throwing stones at Catholics.
>>21308 You're wrong.
>>21297 Why?
>>21310 You implied that Catholics don't focus on the Bible. Holy Mass includes reading the two passages of the Bible each Sunday, with a homily about those two passages. So, Catholics do focus on the Bible, and believe all of it and not just the parts they like while rejecting the words of God that they don't approve of. Yes, there are pedophiles everywhere, but the wicked would have you believe it is only Catholics. Yes, the gossip is that Bergoglio is a pedo. It's hypocrisy to not see the sins in your own church. As a child, I was molested by a protestant. I've known other folks who were molested by protestants. >>21311 I don't know him, but I am pretty sure he's not Catholic.
>>21319 >Holy Mass includes reading the two passages of the Bible each Sunday, with a homily about those two passages. So, Catholics do focus on the Bible, and believe all of it and not just the parts they like while rejecting the words of God that they don't approve of. I know, grew up catholic, but i'm protestant now. Catholics clearly put more value on the church than the Bible. An Catholics are so delicate about talking about denominational differences. But how else will we find out who is right? >Yes, there are pedophiles everywhere, but the wicked would have you believe it is only Catholics. i agree. >Yes, the gossip is that Bergoglio is a pedo. It's hypocrisy to not see the sins in your own church. As a child, I was molested by a protestant. I've known other folks who were molested by protestants. That is why i said there are pedophiles everywhere, this is going to sound like i'm lying just to match your molestation story but i had a long "relationship" with a catholic woman (who was a family member) when i was 10 years old, that is not why i'm against the catholic church. I am against the catholic church because they work with violent secret societies and promote Ecumenism. You can find pedophiles in leftism, rightism, atheism, islam, it's everywhere, i hope that you're bad experience wasn't the main reason why you're against Protestantism, i can see that an experience like that could have led me even further away from Christianity itself.
>>21319 >Holy Mass includes reading the two passages of the Bible each Sunday, with a homily about those two passages. Every church does this. Functionally you guys do not go to Mass for the sermon but for the Eucharist which is construed as a sacrifice in which you eat and drink of the living flesh and blood of Jesus. The sermon is a secondary factor. If you don't see this as being the case you probably attend a Second Vatican Novus Ordo mass which is effectively a high Protestant liturgy. It was explicitly at Martin Luther's instigation that the Christian world, for better or for worse, turned away from the medieval design of the Eucharist being the primary focus of a church service towards the sermon being of equal if not greater importance. And this was because Luther, aside from his theological views that the Eucharist was not a sacrifice, saw that snippets of scripture being read in church Latin once per week were not understood by and failed to have any effect on the spiritual character of the congregations of his day. Education in religion at the time was so poor that late medieval / early modern peasants who were officially "Christian" didn't even know the Ten Commandments, and consequently moral laxity was everywhere. The Reformation was intended to bring a greater level of spiritual depth to believers and after this end Luther published pamphlets explaining basic Christian doctrines and translated the Bible into the common language, and elevated the status of the sermon in the church service to provide for greater contextual exposition of the word and for the minister to lead the souls of sinners to repentance in hearing it. Was it successful? It was successful enough that Catholicism conceded to adopting it (with the exception of the traditionalists) in principle in a grotesque shotgun marriage after railing against it for the better part of four centuries.
>>21321 You find out who is right by reading the Bible and looking for the qualities of the Church of Jesus Christ. Specific qualities are mentioned. If you reject that because of your love of sin... well, nothing I can do about that. I'm against all religions that don't have the qualities of the Church described in the Bible by the Lord. My protest was against the claim that only pedos are in the Catholic church. No, the wicked are everywhere, and the Bible does not excuse this sin against children as someone said. That is the second protestant that has thrown that out that I've encountered. >>21327 I know "Every Church" does that, (even tho every church doesn't, there are 3500 different denominations out there). I'm just tired of the "Catholics don't read the bible" Canard. Catholics get an indulgence "under the usual conditions" for reading the Bible. There is this protestant fantasy that Catholics don't read the Bible.
>>21114 >>21148 I think your argument about the bull is really good, I will have to think about that one. I would spit and trample on it if reason told me it was the right thing to do. Which is a very rare situation. The only situation I can think of where that would be the case, is probably if someone was actually treating it as an idol right in front of you. For example if someone says the bible in their hand is literally God, and they really mean the specific book they are holding. Then you should first try to convince them with reason that it is not the case, and if they don't listen to reason, you should destroy it in front of them to prove it. > Consider the souls of future generation Isn't that like saying, "Dont drink wine, because future generation might become drunks"? Just teach your children about idolatry.
>>21319 >You implied that Catholics don't focus on the Bible. They focus on two verses and ignore literally everything else. >Holy Mass includes reading the two passages lol. Some ritual/tradition where you read a little from the Bible means Catholics are experts on scripture. Get the fuck out of here with that nonsense.
And you know what most catholics do after their 30 minute mass ritual which isn't in scripture at all since scripture was just a common gathering/meal where they literally broke bread? The catholics go back to the world, typically watching uppity blacks who hate America get overpaid to play games like football or basketball. So much for their holy day of the sun. I really don't get how catholics are so deluded. One single verse from scripture, they'll take it and claim it means specifically their ritual traditions and every nuance of it and anyone who says otherwise is "heckin anathema from christ because they just heckin are okay" because their cult's doctrine is that their cult leader "pope" (father) is the vicar of christ. So sick of these fucking freaks and their nonsense. Every single "Christian" board or forum is flooded with God damn catholics who lean on the understanding of their cult leaders because their cult leaders are their gods, rather than leaning on God Almighty. It's the only reason I can imagine someone could be so incapable of understanding the plain and simple truths of scripture. Even the nature of God, His Wor,d and His Spirit is extremely plain to see, but babylonianists will never see it because they worship Tammuz through Lent and Ishtar who they think is Mary. And all the historic proof I could post relating to Tammuz or Ishtar would just be ignored entirely because all catholics care about is their God damn cult.
>>21444 How long have you been Catholic that you know this to be true? You say a mass is 30 minutes. No, it's about 1 hour for Low Mass, and 90 minutes for a High Mass. Catholics and Orthodox are the very definition of Christians. Some protestants, like Mormons, aren't Christian at all and their baptisms are not valid as a Christian baptism.
>>21449 >Some protestants, like Mormons Protestants != Mormons, and vice-versa. Know the difference fren.
>>21449 >Some protestants, like Mormons, aren't Christian at all and their baptisms are not valid as a Christian baptism. What was the purpose and value of this comment other than to incite annoyance and anger?
>>21444 >They focus on two verses and ignore literally everything else. Nothing is ignored. The teaching of the Bible is covered during mass over a year. One epistle, one gospel passage is recited in Latin, given in the local vernacular during the homily, and explained. Since the Church has the Keys of heaven the entire teaching of Christianity is taught in the Holy Mass. >Get the fuck out of here with that nonsense. I get the hate. Hate of Catholics is the only thing that all protestants share. It is ironic that you claim to be the superior expert on scripture and that all Catholics are ignorant of the world of God, and you not only have hate, you have hate for the Church that was founded by Christ. The Lord said we'd be hated.
>>21468 Mormons use the King James Bible, just like other Protestants. Joseph Smith and Martin Luther have a lot in common, but while both were mere men, Luther only broke his oaths before God for wanting a nun, while Smith wanted a harem that even included children. Sorry, that's the painful truth. Luther told people they could sin because the Lord paid the price. People as disposed to sin and they liked that better than repentance. No, the Lord paid the price for those who were faithful to him, those who reject his words are not faithful. If you believe he is God, you follow his church and don't believe he acted in vain when he gave his apostles (priests) the power to forgive sin, define what is held on earth as the keys to heaven, and created a church. Claiming he babbled or was musing about rocks or acting idle is blasphemy.
>>21472 The Lord said that spreading his word would inspire anger in those who would spread it. All the Apostles save Saint John were martyred, and that was not for want of those who hated the Christ's teachings from trying. Christ himself said it would bring division from family and friends. Protestant Churches (and to be honest, the current "Catholic" Churches) are more like social and business clubs. People are not willing to let go of this world. They want friends, they want prosperity. They want to be popular and liked, so they won't take up the true faith; they pervert the faith. They don't understand that the rewards from God are not in this life, but the next. It was the devil that promised Christ all those things in the desert, and Christ rejected them all. Protestants fell for it. The modern church fell for it too.
>>21478 So there was no other purpose and no value?
Open file (667.22 KB 480x287 wrong.gif)
>>21484 Try to save your soul has value to God.
>>21311 He makes reactionaries mad despite not even being as progressive as his rhetoric. Despite everything he's great at exposing the hateful in the Church.
>>21513 >pagan pope You can't put an pagan idol that the children have been sacrificed to on the alter of Saint Peter. That is blasphemy of the worst sort; the kind where God's wrath fell on the worshipers of the Golden Calf. Hellfire and damnation. And he denied the divinity of the Trinity as "just three person" before he was pope in Argentina. The talk he gave was in Spanish. A heretic cannot be made Pope. A heretic may be forgiven but no power on earth can make them a pope.
>>21526 meds
>>21513 >reactionaries Leftist values are incompatible with Christianity, it can kind of work with the right but even less so with the left.
>>21532 >traditional family unit is a product of capitalism How do you suppose these brain dead retards drew that conclusion?
>>21556 are you looking for a serious answer because i could tell you but its pretty retarded.
baptism is a work
>>21558 Please tell me, I'd like to know.
Even pagan American Indians back in the hunter gatherer stone age era had traditional families. If a man wanted to marry a woman, he had to move his potential father in law into his wigwam and feed him for a month. If dad thought he ate well enough and was treated well enough, he allowed his daughter to marry him. These godless just make things up. Honesty isn't in them.
>>21566 >These godless just make things up. More like, they find the one exception with some forsaken island tribe with absolutely zero achievements in the past six thousand years and then drum up a disproportionate commotion about how it supposedly "proves" our norms are meaningless constructs and that therefore it's okay to do away with them altogether.
>>21565 Ok, there's two primary reasons for this belief but basically it has to do with the social aspects of communism. Most common arguments used is that traditional families were being used to serve the capitalist system and that because they held strong beliefs of authority, morality, subservience, etc they also promote subservience to the capitalist system. The second (more modern) reason why its hated is because commies believe its oppressive towards women and children.
>>20938 You deny the words of the Lord Christ, who only gave the keys to heaven to Simon Peter. Christ founded 1 church with 1 leader, not 12 churches and not hundreds or thousands. Yes, following the words of Christ is the key to heaven, and the Lord gave us a church to teach us that way; he didn't give us Luther who tells us to sin boldly because Christ paid the price, and he didn't give us King Henry the Head chopper and looter of Churches. >>20949 Matthew 7 21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ The Lord tells us in Matthew 7 that the words "Jesus, Jesus!" are not magic words. Those who believe Jesus is the Lord will hang on his every word, and try and find his church which is a great gift to us. It's sad to see bible verse, the very words of the Lord in Matthew 16 and John 21 thrown out with contempt as insignificant. Christ came to this world to teach us, and not a single word was idle or in vain or a joke to be dismissed. And Jesus Christ true God and true man taught us we have to do things. He didn't give the apostles the power to hear confession and forgive sin in vain and with no reason. He didn't give the keys to heaven to Simon Peter as idle babble.
>>20964 >This is of the Devil and completely contrary to the Gospel. So says the Gospel of Martin Luther. Christ says that the branches that don't produce good fruit are cut off and thrown into the fire. >Wall of rambling text follows. Mind you, most Catholics today believe the Gospel of Aquinas, so it's a very common thing to do, pervert the words of the Lord. Luther preached an easy and effortless path. Aquinas made it impossible path that required constant confession, turning even temptation into a mortal sin. Both were inspired by money. Yes, the Church has a wicked lust for money. Priest take a vow of poverty but the bishops live pretty high on the hog, saying that they own nothing, the "Church" owns it.
Open file (486.71 KB 1408x792 200729-armada.jpg)
>>21573 Luther and Henry are right and your indignation will never change this. Protestantism is victorious forever.
>>21574 >Wall of rambling text follows. Translation: "I cannot refute any of this, so I am going to ignore it and continue to bleat out the same tired soundbites over and over again, because it is all that I am capable of doing to keep my incoherent worldview from collapsing upon me and bringing about an existential crisis." Afterall, it's what you do, time and time again, whenever you are rebuked and can't come up with an effective counter. Yes, your worldview is utterly incoherent. You play a game of "I have to be part of the One True Church™, but I don't agree with it's various heresies and errors, so I'll just continue to be part of the One True Church™, while shaking my head disapprovingly at all of the heresies and errors going on, and I'll be alright." The problem is that the One True Church™ promotes the various heresies and errors that you do not like down to it's very core. Don't like Mary worship? It's in the catechism. Don't like the fact that Roman Catholicism states that Muslims worship the same God as Christians, in direct contradiction to 1 John 2:22-23? It's in the catechism. And so on and so forth. You can stomp your feet and whine and blather about these heresies and errors and make a big stink about them all you want. But every time you worship in a Catholic church, every time you take their bread and wine, you are engaging in communion with said church. And by engaging in communion with said church, you are saying to the world "I endorse and approve of this," or at the very minimum "I tolerate this." So this is your totally logical and coherent position in a nutshell: "Sure, I assent to and tolerate the various heresies and errors of the Roman Catholic church by being a member of and attending and participating in and engaging in communion with and promoting and championing said church, but at least I don't like the heresies that I am endorsing and tacitly approving of through my continued membership and participation." Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. As long as you remain a member of and continue to participate in the Roman Catholic church, your protests against their various apostasies are rendered nothing more than empty and vain ramblings. Don't like the heresies? Leave. If you choose to stay, at least have the guts to be honest about the fact that said heresies don't bother you as much as you say they do.
>>21574 >Mind you, most Catholics today believe the Gospel of Aquinas, so it's a very common thing to do, pervert the words of the Lord. >Luther preached an easy and effortless path. Aquinas made it impossible path that required constant confession, turning even temptation into a mortal sin. >the Papacy is always right except when it makes decrees that run contrary to my own personal and *errant* reading of Catholic doctrine The Summa Theologica of Aquinas was literally placed next to the Bible and the pontifical Decretals on the altar at the Council of Trent.
praying is a work having faith is a work
>>20964 Ezekiel 18:20 The souls that sinners, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Roman's 2:6 (God) will render to every man according to his deeds. You are responsible for your actions and God requires you to resist sin. No wall of incoherent text wall needed because I'm not trying to twist the scriptures into meaning something they dont.
>>21589 Ephesians 2:8–10 (NKJV): For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them I can play the game of using one verse to state my general position as well.
>>21592 >created in Christ Jesus for good works >for good works You're not very good at that game.
>>21601 >Works do not save >We are created for good works >Said works are prepared for us to do beforehand >Works are the fruit of salvation, not what causes it You're not very good at reading comprehension.
>>21601 To put it another way, does the verse say: a) You will be saved once you do good works. or b) You have been saved by God's grace in order to do good works that He has prepared for you to do.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms

no cookies?