/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: 5120

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Board Rules
More

(used to delete files and postings)


Open file (111.91 KB 595x765 luther strode.jpg)
me again,sorry 01/05/2022 (Wed) 13:10:38 No.2508
Recently I've grown obsessed with being militarily,phsyically powerfu for the sake of the Church and of my holy catholic religion and lifestyle. I want to rack a high kill count of fairly defeated enemies.Didnt Sampson kill 1000 enemies? didnt David kill 10,000 enemies in war? Didnt one prophet kill 400 baal prophets? Is this desire holy,or fermented by the devil/prelest? Should I learn to shoot firearms, survival,military tactics? I wont do anything illegal or unfair just in Just Wars or self-defense
Open file (32.03 KB 256x256 5U2CQ9fA.jpg)
>>2508 It is a holy desire in an age so disgusting as this. Just focus on bettering yourself and praying the rosary daily. The devils 100 years of control are running out and soon our time will come, so prepare yourself for the battles ahead.
>>2509 what's the 100 years thing,is it in revelations? or a private vision?
Open file (226.18 KB 402x612 ClipboardImage.png)
>>2510 Pope Leo XIII received a vision of Satan and God having an debate while he was praying. Satan proclaimed he could destroy the Catholic Church in 100 years and God allowed him to receive these 100 years. The pope then issued the St. Michael Prayer to be said after every mass. Said prayer was removed by the Vatican II church... In any case, our Exorcists say the demons are panicking because their time is running out.
>>2511 ...NO the bible literally states that Jesus could literally come at any time like a thief in the night. Believing in visions is a liar for not even Jesus himself knows when he is going to come. Nor do the angels or demons the only one who knows is God himself.
Open file (220.13 KB 650x935 david chad.jpg)
the modern world,nay, "the world" itself just doesnt appeal to me anymore. I dont,however,seek the peaceful life of the monastery,I want the Office of a warrior. OT saints werent less holy or more barbarous than post-jesus saints, i firmly believe that. >ok, david did some bad stuff but he repented..and who didnt do bad stuff at some point?
>>2519 Read the Matter of Britain and the Matter of France and stop blogposting until you finish them.
>>2519 > "the world" itself just doesnt appeal to me anymore. >I want the Office of a warrior. Pick one.
>>2523 no.
Open file (8.68 KB 223x226 pepe nervioso.jpg)
>>2511 >Said prayer was removed by the Vatican II church... When I was in (catholic) scout group the priest used it after mass ended,was he in the wrong?
Is it valid to repeat a certain bible verse many times in hope of "acquiring the power" ,ie, obtaining what the verse is about? for example a verse about abraham having cattle if you want cattle(abundance/resources)?
>>2567 >Is it valid to repeat a certain bible verse many times in hope of "acquiring the power" ,ie, obtaining what the verse is about? Yes. >for example a verse about abraham having cattle if you want cattle(abundance/resources)? No, because as we say in the Lord's Prayer, "Let Thy Will be done," not our own. It is God's discretion to give, and His answer addresses what He sees in our needs, not in our desires.
>>2569 how DARE you say that you defeatist gloomer
>>2567 No. They aren't magic words. You can use them as a mantra, though - a source of contemplation and a way to always return your mind to God. A particular verse or prayer running through your mind at all times is a powerful focus and can dispel the unwholesome thoughts that an idle mind mighy produce, especially under the duress of temptation. Further, quoting Scripture in your prayer is an intensifier. They really aren't magic words, though.
>>2573 >idle mind >temptation nigga im on nofap I dont give succubi the time of the day
>>2574 Thats well enough for you, but I still have to deal with Pride, Envy, and Wrath. And let me tell you, friend, nothing gets those three going like brooding, ruminating, and cogitating. Protip: if you start imagining anyone impaled on a stake, it's probably time to pray.
>>2570 Fine then God will grant you those things if you have the maturity with which to handle them, that your purpose in achieving them is not for the glory of your own but of the name of God and the church, and that if you do receive them you will not go back on your conduct and become a worthless reprobate. You must every effort to gain it on your own, that you are not testing God's will, that you know the places wherein you have no power and require His deliverance, and that once it is given to you you acknowledge that it was the gift of His grace in thankfulness. All in all, that your Christian life may be taken as a testimony to God's power and abundance before the world, that your achievement was not viable except for Him, to amplify the majesty of Jesus Christ for ages upon ages.
>>2575 >if you i HOPE thats a generic "you" and not a "you" as in personally ME
>>2590 > the places wherein you have no power nigga i do semen retention, git gud. are you saying that ON TOP of being unmarried I dont /get/ to "have power"? > that your achievement was not viable except for Him, im not a robot. I have free will. I have merit.
>>2603 There is an honored phrase which applies to all Christians: "He who wishes to be served must first serve."
>>2602 Well, yes. I said "you," but I really meant "I." It would have been clearer if I'd said "one," but I think that using "one" makes one you me sound like an ass.
>>2603 >>2603 >nigga i do semen retention, git gud. are you saying that ON TOP of being unmarried I dont /get/ to "have power"? The places were you have no power in the goal that your trying to achieve stupid. You already have power over your loins, so you need no further assistance there, and you can assign your time to something else. On top of that, God isn't a merchant where you exchange one favor for another. You shouldn't want a merchanting God over your life and the universe anyway. >im not a robot. I have free will. I have merit. And the free will to rebel against God for your own selfish ends. Remember that God knows your perfect path and future. You don't know your end. For your own perfection, it is imperative that you listen to his exhortation. Remember He knows the innermost corners of your heart and mind. If you have any doubt about Him, those are obstacles to your ultimate goal of glorification. He filling you with his power is the only path by which you can go beyond the boundaries of human merit and accomplish the supernatural.
>>2615 sir, I just want to be a soldier. nothing supernatural about that. I would rather join the taliban than the western troops which include the island-snatching british,tho!
Open file (38.06 KB 500x500 metaphysics_of_war.jpeg)
>>2616 >sir, I just want to be a soldier. nothing supernatural about that. Warfare for its own sake is degenerate. Warfare for material gain is degenerate. Warfare is either steeped in the supernatural or it's just a bunch of savanna apes hitting each other with ever more complex sticks. You have free will. You have merit. And you still can't do everything. The point isn't that you're a powerless insect. It's that, once you reach the limits of what you can accomplish on your own, God bridges the divide to push you farther.
>>2616 The Taliban are what they are because they submit to Allah while the West submits to nothing but its own ego. Islam literally means to have surrendered to (Allah). You can be greater than them by submitting to Jesus Christ.
>>2626 It really goes to show how much the Taliban could accomplish even when following a false conception of God in their struggle against godless America. Now just imagine how much Christians can accomplish.
>>2616 Anon, the supermatural is all around us. From spirits, to angels, to demons, to our triune God Himself. Even our choices and actions have a supernatural cast to them. Know the example of Gerazim and his master.
>>2669 6 million for realz this time
>>2616 >sir, I just want to be a soldier. nothing supernatural about that. Wealthy people who are your seniors will exploit you and for this make a good fortune out of you. >>2626 >>2669 >The Taliban are what they are because they submit to Allah Nah the taliban are just CIA/mossad spooks acting as a boogeyman to US burgers.
>>2508 its a bit of a tricky debate, Jesus commands us not to pick stupid or petty fights but Jesus Himself took a stand and fought back against gross evil (think Jesus and the moneychangers) as long as you dont get caught up in things like revenge i think it would honor God but the best way to know is to read the Bible
>>2726 >Nah the taliban are just CIA/mossad spooks acting as a boogeyman to US burgers. That's ISIS.
>>2738 Rejoice for the Taliban, for they have returned a barbarous kind of justice to Afghanistan.
>>2740 Unironically better than corporate globohomo control of their land. I wouldn’t want to live there though.
>>2748 You might get a pass if you're Irish, but yes, Afghanistan is a place for the Afghanis otherwise.
>>2740 They may as well be the vine of the Sadducees while modern Jews are the vine of the Pharisees. The Muslims literally have a mosque on the former Temple Mount and enforce a version of Old Testament ritual worship.
>>2766 True, dubsman. But I think that Mosque has been there for so many centuries for God to have a laugh at the rabbis expense.
>>2766 Islam is best understood as a Christian heresy more than anything. One can see possibile parallels in the Ebionites and similar groups. Muhammad had contact with a heretical Nestorian monk as well. Not to mention that they are a judaizing strain.
>>2768 That would be according them the honor of being considered Christian when they don't believe the crucifixion happened at all.
>>2770 Islam most likely originated as a heresy in the Christian milieu, and became more divergent as timed passed. One early source on Islam from Syriac Christians, dated ~644 A.D. is pretty enlightening in this regard. It is the dialogue between the Syrian Patriarch, John of Sedreh, and the Emir of the Hagarenes (which was an early term for Muslims). The Hagarenes in this short dialogue are depicted as having accepted the Torah just as the Jews and the Samaritans, and the Emir is depicted as having some learned Jews in his service who scrutinize the claims of the Christians regarding the Trinity or Christ in the Old Testament. There is zero mention of the Qur'an or Muhammad. In the writings of John bar Penkaye, we learn that the Hagarenes worshiped the One God in accordance with the Old Law (Old Testament), and that they followed the instructions of a man named Muhammad, who was said to kill anyone who violated his instructions. Interestingly in these earliest attestations, there is zero evidence that the Muslims were regarded as any sort of new religion, but they were seen as the descendants of Hagar and and Ishmael. By the time of John of Damascus (675-749), we see him writing of Islam and referring to it as a heresy and to Muhammad as a false prophet, referring to his book that he claimed to have received from heaven. Many of Muhammad's doctrines were taken from Middle Eastern heresies and other ideas that had been addressed by early Church Fathers. Their ideas on the crucifixion are identical in many respects to that of the gnostic heretic Basilides, who taught that Jesus was saved from the resurrection and that God disguised Simon of Cyrene to look like Jesus and had him crucified in His place. And of course many of the NT-era stories in the Qur'an were lifted directly from apocryphal and pseudo-epigraphical writings that never made it into the canon, such as the Protoevangelium of James, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, and many others. Other Christian texts such as the Cave of Treasures and various forms of Jewish aggadic texts can be found in the work as well. So it's sort of a weird thing. On the one hand, it's almost undeniable that Christianity (in heretical forms) was a great influence on the formulation of Islam, but there was a great Jewish and non-Pauline undercurrent that seems to have been below the surface and was attested the most in the earliest sources, and of course the works-based salvation of Islam is still readily visible to even casual observers today. Regardless of how one analyzes it, Muhammad is an antichrist and the tool of demons, and is almost certainly one of the false prophets that Jesus warned of.
>>2771 At this point we can't know for sure because they've destroyed any works even remotely suggesting that anything but the Islamic narrative of Muhammad receiving divine instruction from heaven occurred, and threaten anyone suggesting that it was birthed out of pre-existing doctrines.
>>2775 The whole truth will come out eventually, and is gradually trickling out even now. The field of Qur'anic studies and critical readings of the text remains young, but even the last decade has seen some major revelations come out, none of them flattering to Islam or its narrative. As much as they tried to destroy everything contradicting them, their own texts and narratives have the seeds for their own destruction. Not that it matters, sadly, because Islam is built like a mafia. If you leave Islam, they'll kill you.
>>2775 >>2771 Now here's an irony: how certain are we that Mahomet existed?
>>2787 I think someone existed who propped himself up as a prophet, but the nature of this figure was much different than what we are being told, I think—not in character, of course, but in chronology and the series of events. Mainstream scholarship, for whatever reason, is far too uncritical of Islam sources. For Islam the primary sources are the Qur’an, the Hadith (The Sayings of Muhammad), the Sira (prophetic biography) and Tafsir (Exegesis). The Qur’an itself doesn’t tell us anything though. It’s almost entirely disconnected from reality and rambles on and garbles Biblical material. Every variant Qur’an but the Uthmanic codex was destroyed too. The Hadith are almost as useless as well. Sahih al-Bukhari, the most ‘authoritative’ collection of Hadith, weren’t compiled until nearly 150 years after the death of Muhammad. We all know that a game of telephone in the same room between a few people can go awry, so now imagine 150+ years of the telephone game. Al-Bukhari himself was born in Bukhara in modern Uzbekistan too, way far from Arabia, but allegedly traveled around gathering reports and personally choosing what he thought was most authentic. Other collections of Hadith are even later than al-Bukhari. Muslims today use them like they’re direct quotes from Muhammad though, and the Qur’an would be useless without these. So that in itself limits what we can *truly* know about Muhammad. The earliest surviving account of the Sira / Prophetic biography comes from Ibn Hisham, who was born 201 years after Muhammad allegedly died in 632. He apparently draws on Ibn Ishaq, whose account doesn’t survive. He was born 72 years after Muhammad died, and died in 767 AD. Tafsir (exegesis) doesn’t tell us much either. They’re entirely reliant on Hadith to understand the Qur’an, the Sira literature. These are later works. Tafsir al-Tabari, 9th-10th century. Ta'wilat Ahl al-Sunnah, 9th-10th century, etc. These are the earliest ones. The exegetes regularly demonstrate ignorance of the originally Biblical material in the Qur’an, and have been said by some scholars to perhaps be inventing stories from the material they have when they can explain it (but having no answers when it comes to other things like the mysterious letters at the beginning of the Qur’an’s suras!) The earliest non-Islamic reference to Islam is from the Doctrina Jacobi, a Christian text. The text mentions the ‘Saracens’ invading Palestine. The Jews were said to rejoice, and a prophet appeared with them, “proclaiming the arrival of the coming Anointed One and Christ.” The events of this section happened in 633. But Muhammad was said to die in 632 in Medina, way south in the Hejaz in Arabia. What is going on here? Especially when we link this to the dialogue where Jacob of Sedreh reports that the Hagarenes follow the Torah, and that the Emir was surrounded by learned Jews, or John bar Penkaye who says essentially the same thing. The earliest Islamic coins had images and sometimes Christian crosses on them too, but immediately with Abd al-Malik (reigned 685-705), coins with no imagery and the name ‘Muhammad’ were rolled out en masse. Some have even argued that the references to ‘Muhammad’ in the Dome of the Rock (built 688-692) refer to Jesus (Muhammad simply means ‘Blessed One’ or ‘Praised One’. Something weird is going on. That is for sure.
>>2801 The History of Pseudo-Sebeos from the 660s portrays Muhammad as calling the Arabs to retake Palestine, understood as the rightful inheritance of the descendents of Abraham. Pseudo-Sebeos writes that the awareness of their Abrahamic descent was triggered as a result of an influx of Jewish refugees from Edessa. That Muhammad promised his followers possession of Palestine, ‘a fine land flowing with milk and honey’, is also apparently reported by a later Syriac source that probably preserves parts of the lost eighth-century chronicle of Theophilus of Edessa. Similar to the Doctrina Iacobi, this text has Muhammad himself lead raids into Palestine. Islam was a messianic movement founded on the conquest of Palestine by the Ishmaelites. It was essentially a 7th century ‘WE WUZ KANGZ’ movement that tried to establish the supremacy of Ishmael over Isaac.
>>2801 >>2808 Bizarre. What's the significance of them saying he died in Mecca instead of closer to Palestine, then?
Open file (89.42 KB 900x518 umayyad coins cross.jpg)
>>2842 It's almost impossible to say , since the Syriac and Armenian Christian sources cited above are far earlier than any of the Islamic material, which all comes from a century later. It's almost impossible to know what these people were thinking or where they were getting a lot of their information from, and in how faithful of a form that it was being written down. Like I said above regarding tafsir, some scholars like Gabriel Said Reynolds have even made claims that the exegetes of the Qur'an were in some cases creating exegetical fiction of aspects of Muhammad's prophetic career (which is of course a very different claim than 'Muhammad didn't exist' - which I don't believe). The picture gets even more problematic when we read Syriac texts such as the Chronicle of Khuzistan, written in the 660s. The relevant portion of the Chronicle says this: >In the city of Istakhr, they made Yazdgard from the royal lineage the king. With [Yazdgard] the kingdom of the Persians [would] end. He set out and came to Mahuzē and appointed a general named Rustam. Then God brought against them the sons of Ishmael, [who were as numerous] as sand upon the seashore. Their leader was Muhammad. Neither walls nor gates nor armor nor shield withstood them. They took control of the entire Persian Empire. The Arab conquest of Persia began in 633 and lasted until 654 AD. Muhammad could not have bee the leader of the Arabs invading Persia, because the invasion did not begin until a year after his death. At the very least, it seems like Muhammad was alive a year or two longer than Muslim sources say. And to cast even further doubt on the exact nature of early Islam, we know that Muʻāwiya, the first Umayyad caliph who reigned 661-680 AD, did stuff like the following according to the Maronite Chronicle, a Syriac Christian source from the mid to late 7th century A.D. - >In the year 971 [660/61 c.e.], the eighteenth of Constans, many Arabs assembled in Jerusalem and made Muʻāwiya king. He ascended and sat at Golgotha. He prayed there, went to Gethsemane, descended to the tomb of the blessed Mary, and prayed there. Why is this caliph, if he is anything like modern Muslims, praying at Golgotha and Gethsemane if Muslims were said to believe that Jesus was not crucified? Why did the coins of Muʻāwiya's reign all have the cross on them? The Maronite Chronicle also says the following: >He struck both gold and silver [coinage], but it was not accepted because it did not have a cross on it. This is somewhat of an enigmatic reference in the scholarship. Who did not accept the coins? One interpretation is that Christians in the area did not accept the coins without the cross, the other interpretation is that it is of course Muʻāwiya himself who did not accept cross-less coins, because all Umayyad coins from this era have the cross depicted on them. It's all so weird, because early non-Christian historical references, while sometimes filled with slander against Christians ('the Eucharist is cannibalism!'), all seem to support the basic historical facts about Christianity - i.e. that Christians were followers of a man who was crucified and came back to life and refused to worship pagan idols. We don't have any of this nonsense about Muhammad being alive when he should have been dead, Muhammad seemingly invading multiple places at the same time, numerous references to the early Muslims following the Torah, or Muslim caliphs praying at Gethsemane and Golgotha and sending out coins with Christian imagery on it for decades afterwards. And all of this is really the tip of the iceberg.
>>2845 >Umayyad Starting to think that the craziest of the historical revisionism began with the Abbassid Revolution. No wonder they hated the contemporary regime that much, if they were even more transparently Christian heretics.
>>2847 It certainly looks like prior to the Abbasid Revolution that the Umayyads were some sort of Arab supremacist movement. It seems like those who embraced Islam but were non-Arab were still second-class citizens still had to pay more taxes and were barred from many things. This might be because the ‘we wuz kangz and true sons of Abraham’ mindset was still strong in the beginning, even if forgotten by later Islamic history. This changed after this period. I’ve found some more sources pre-Islam which talk of active or rising Ishmaelite consciousness among Arabs in the centuries before Islam as well, often instigated by Jews coming into Arab regions.
>>2873 Man, I wish I'd known about this when I was studying Islam in college. Would have given much-needed context for why the Abbassids happened beyond generic comments about "decadence" and "pictures."
>>2879 Unfortunately Islamic studies are still in their infancy compared to Biblical studies. They've been trying and trying to tear apart the Bible for nearly two hundred plus years now, but only the Qur'an relatively recently. Even the most basic of studies into the Qur'an has caused the entire thing to collapse, especially in light of the Muslim claim that the Qur'an is some eternal perfect book that is the verbatim speech of God. Jay Smith is worth being familiar with if you want to learn a lot more of this stuff. Sometimes he is a little over the top in what he claims, but he's fundamentally right about a lot of what he says regarding manuscripts, Islamic revisionist history (such as what I have been posting) and much else: https://www.youtube.com/c/pfanderfilms/videos
>>2881 Interesting, thank you. Between the racialists and those funded by Saudi Arabia, the study has been deliberately slowed in places.
>>2889 >funded by Saudi Arabia, >the study has been deliberately slowed in places. Populations are easier to control if they're mostly ignorant. It's what the Ottoman's did to their subjects and citizens. Books were banned for hundreds of years in their empire for example.
Open file (2.86 MB 432x236 Jews vs Catholics.webm)
>>2508 Prayer. Every day, between sets, between machines, between exercises. Do that, and the discipline will be yours to take. For everything material, though, it is YOU who must ignite the fuel.
Anything sordid to hear about the Shia? Or are they really the less crazy side of Islam?
>>3253 They’re crazy, but in their own way. Shia seem to venerate the household of Muhammad, Ahl al-Bayt. Some of the extreme minority sects believed that Ali, Muhammad’s son-in-law, was literally God. Most of them today believe that there is an imam hiding somewhere in the world who will appear in the End Times. Shia Iran today is the transgender capital of the world apart from Thailand. Every year huge numbers of them whip and flagellate themselves with knives over the death of Muhammad’s grandson Husayn ibn Ali. For some real insanity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extinct_Shia_sects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghulat
>>3276 >translims Isn't that thanks to a very weird literalist reading of something in the Koran about it being unholy for men to have relations with each other? >Ali as God Pretty sure that the Alawites have a cryptochristian thing going on featuring Ali as the Son. Which, in the context of discussion so far would make them a throwback to what Islam might have truly been.
>>3279 From a straight reading of the Qur’an we get the same view as the Bible—that homosexuals are unnatural and that God annihilated Sodom and Gomorrah for it. Iranians have evidently fell for the meme where if you chop off a man’s penis, have him grow long hair and put on a hijab that it magically becomes a XX-chromosome female and that having sexual relations with one isn’t sodomy.
>>3280 Sounds pretty talmudic.
>>3281 It is. Islam is legalistic works-based salvation
>>2801 >The earliest surviving account of the Sira / Prophetic biography comes from Ibn Hisham, who was born 201 years after Muhammad allegedly died in 632. He apparently draws on Ibn Ishaq, whose account doesn’t survive. He was born 72 years after Muhammad died, and died in 767 AD. We can do better than that, actually. Ma'mar ibn Rashid lived from 714 A.D. to 770 A.D. and was the author of Kitab al-Maghazi. This is basically the earliest surviving biography of Muhammad. It is almost certainly legitimate, because ibn Rashid studied under the tutelage of ibn Shihab al-Zuhri (677-741 A.D.), who was an elite descendant of the Quraysh tribe connected with the highest levels of Umayyad society. One of the teachers of al-Zuhri was 'Urwah ibn al-Zubayr (died 712 A.D.). What makes 'Urwah so important is that his father was a Companion of Muhammad, al-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam (died 656 A.D.) and his mother the daughter of the first caliph, Abu Bakr, and sister to Muhammad's favorite wife Aisha. That's a pretty strong and short isnaad from key Islamic figures to Ma'mar ibn Rashid. Worth noting too that ibn Ishaq had al-Zuhri as his teacher as well. Most of the key Islamic accounts are probably true in large part. We can't deny the idea that early Islam may have been more Christianized in some respects though.
>>3288 >almost Hmm?
>>3295 We're never going to be able to construct a logical syllogism that definitively proves anything in historical research, which is reliant on the reconstruction of unrepeatable events in the past. There's no strong arguments against the legitimacy of this document, especially given the connections of Ma'mar ibn Rashid to well-known figures. The reason why there is a dearth of written records about Muhammad in the beginning is because the Arabs scorned book-learning and were still mostly an oral culture, even in learning. Muslims would memorize hundreds and hundreds of hadiths, for example.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms
Delete
Report

no cookies?