>>25083 >Use a website like https://archive.fo/ Bad idea IMO. Check into archive.today BO. I'd much more-highly recommend the venerable archive.org (AKA Wayback Machine), which has clearly stood up to the Globohomo to fight censorship. So, I'm a student of (and proponent of) so-called Day Age Creationism, that is, science apologetics; which treats the revelation of God as being from two 'books'; the special & inspired revelation of the Holy Scriptures, and the general revelation of nature -- the handiwork of all His creative acts. (cf. The Belgic Confession [1]) This position is most well expounded by the modern organization Reasons to Believe [2]. The position I've just described, while both Biblically & scientifically sound, is nonetheless a quite controversial one for so-called Young Earth Creationists. Question: How do you plan to deal with controversy ITT BO? 1. https://www.crcna.org/welcome/beliefs/confessions/belgic-confession#toc-article-2-the-means-by-which-we-know-god 2. https://reasons.org/explore/publications/nrtb-e-zine/historic-christianity-s-two-books-of-revelation

>>25084 What's wrong with archive.fo? They all run the same software, is each archived page only saved on that one instance, or is it mirrored across the rest of them? As for controversial pages, I think it would be best to lean towards including it, but with a possible disclaimer* that it has been deemed controversial for X reasons. Works that are blatantly heretical or anti-Christian will not be included.

>>25085 >archive.fo Two words: >cuck >flare Two other words: >globo >homo Use archive.org. They have proven themselves combattant against blatant legal censorship demands. --- As to the basic topic of my question: there's nothing at all controversial about any of Day Age Creationism from the Christian perspective. Its both completely Biblical, and rationally sound. However the Young Earth Creationists (of which there was at least one regular posting here in the past) takes umbridge at the very ideas that >A) The universe is literally billions of years old >B) There was animal death before the fall of Adam & Eve Again both of these are Biblically-sound positions, and also clearly affirmed by observational evidence in the creation around us as well (the two 'books'). And since neither of these are foundational issue for the Christian faith (as opposed to say, the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, or the Triune nature of God -- both of which are foundational), then I have no issues of significance with them claiming the universe is only 6'000 years old as a fellow Christian. (But since that YEC postion eliminates the potential for Evangelism in general however, it is important issue.)

>>25086 bash Name Server: ns3.archive.org Name Server: ns1.archive.org Name Server: ns2.archive.org Name Server: ns-global.kjsl.com Name Server: ns0036.secondary.cloudflare.com Name Server: ns0208.secondary.cloudflare.com DNSSEC: unsigned URL of the ICANN Whois Inaccuracy Complaint Form: https://www.icann.org/wicf/ >>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2023-07-11T18:21:12Z <<< Both sites use Cloudflare, and archive.org has come under a lot of pressure to remove copyrighted material and I don't need that fear hanging over my head. Several sites archiving the same content makes it harder to remove.

>>25087 Fine, you're majoring in the minors. Do as you see fit. Back to the (slightly modified) question: How do you plan to deal with (unecessary & inflammatory for little doctrical reason) controversy ITT BO?

>>25088 If there's going to be walls of text posted arguing for/against something in the archive then it will be moved to another thread where it would be more relevant. I may then add it to the archive with a small disclaimer saying why it's controversial.

>>25089 OK, sounds reasonable. Thanks.

>>25086 >he doesn't know about archive.org removing non-kosher content https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/7/23341051/kiwi-farms-internet-archive-backup-removal *removed direct link

>>25092 Haha, that one I actually agree with ! :^) Now, please tell us all about how archive.today refused to comply and instead fought tooth&nail against their masters the Globohomo to preserve this valuable human treasure of a site.

I don't know if this is the sort of thing that you're looking for, but I do have a torrent file of a handful of Fr. Hesse talks. I know the Internet Archive has a lot of his talks but, from what I could tell, about half of these were either not present in their archive or were present in an incomplete form. magnet:?xt=urn:btih:2ef8585f506132fc90194a5b58ada8e41e70de97&dn=Father%20Hesse%20Exposes%20Vatican%20II&tr=udp%3a%2f%2ftracker.torrent.eu.org%3a451%2fannounce&tr=udp%3a%2f%2ftracker.opentrackr.org%3a1337%2fannounce&tr=udp%3a%2f%2fopen.stealth.si%3a80%2fannounce&tr=udp%3a%2f%2ftracker.coppersurfer.tk%3a6969%2fannounce&tr=udp%3a%2f%2ftracker.justseed.it%3a1337%2fannounce

https://www.ccel.org/ Christian Classics Ethereal Library https://www.newadvent.org/ 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia https://orthodoxwiki.org/ Orthodox Christian Wiki

http://www.sovereignredeemerbooks.com/ historic Hyper-calvinist books and pdfs

>>25097 What makes this hyper-Calvinist?

>>25095 Thank you SSPXanon. I have another mirrors. https://archive.org/details/FatherHesse https://mega.nz/folder/7h52AYBY#6bmPr3KwWvgvsB2yBV7fkg -- https://fisheaters.com/

>>25101 >criticizes Calvinism for things that confessional Calvinists don't hold ???

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

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

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

>>25193 KJV only

>>25101 "Sometimes I worry that I have never not introspected moribundly too much enough"... This man, he hurts his cause. You either already agree with him, therefore appeals to nobody new, or you sign off the moment you see his tricky verbiage which is just that - a trick. There is no direct doctrinal rebuttal in there. What a waste if you've genuine reasons to oppose calvinism. >>25209 To be fair anon I love KJV but I don't have the big brain IQ for transposing the original Old English automatically into modern in my head all the time... it dissuades me from reading anything. I want the real blueprint but frankly I need a version for dummer dum dums. There is a "New" King James Version... does anyone know what the least bastardized versions are among modern English?

>>25654 Orthodox Study Bible is NKJV which honestly isn't that bad at all. It is nice to have even if not Orthodox because it also has Septuagent.

The practice of spiritual warfare. From an Orthodox perspective, but Christians of any denomination may be able to find helpful tools here to add to their arsenal. https://www.unseenwarfare.net/

This link contains one of the largest reference materials for the bible for archaeological, literary, etc. evidence I've seen: https://pastelink.net/2w1ne I think ya'll would benefit from it

>>25654 >what the least bastardized versions are among modern English? Depends. The (((academic))) standard is the NRSV. The favorite among Catholics is the RSV2CE. The Orthodox like OSB which is really just an edit of the NKJV. Protestants are all over the place, but the ESV is the one generally used in interfaith debates and dialogs.

>>25903 The Berean line is pretty solid unless youre a spastic who is diehard for your denominations translation.

>>25654 I'm a KJV fan. It feels like a better investment to memorize scripture when you've got a standard, and no one in the English-speaking world is going to dispute with you that the KJV is a standard (400+ years). The multitude of new translations makes memorization of them seem futile. What if I spent years memorizing scriptures out of the 1984 NIV and now they've updated it? And furthermore, is quoting memorized NIV scripture as useful if the person I'm speaking to reads the ESV? There's power in speaking the Word of God word-for-word to someone who has the same words in his head. There might've been other English translations in existence 150 years ago, but the overwhelming majority of Christians were reading the same translation: the KJV. When someone quotes the NIV to me, I can't discern whether it's memorized or just paraphrasing. Also, reading the KJV helps with bolstering my knowledge of English. I learn new [old] words, and learn original uses of words whose meanings have changed.

>>25906 tell me what a besom is without looking it up

>>25909 >"22For I will rise up against them, saith the LORD of hosts, and cut off from Babylon the name, and remnant, and son, and nephew, saith the LORD. 23I will also make it a possession for the bittern, and pools of water: and I will sweep it with the besom of destruction, saith the LORD of hosts." Isaiah 14:22-23 KJV From the context of something God is sweeping with, I'd guess "a broom". Whether my answer is correct or incorrect, it still helps my learning. When I come across a word I don't know, I take it as an opportunity to look it up (which I will do after I click 'reply').

>>25918 Nice

>>25918 Broom of destruction +1

Christian Book Collection Downloads https://archive.org/details/@christian_book_collection