/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)

QTDDTOT Anonymous 03/28/2022 (Mon) 15:32:23 No.6836
Questions that do deserve their own thread. You know the drill. Questions that don't deserve their own thread go in their own threads. Questions that do go here.
Kind and faithful people alike have free will. Do sinners have it though? After all, what leads them to sin is often their weakness and ignorance. I ask this because, as we know, sinners will not be simply separated from kingdom of God, but they also will be severely punished for all their sins (unless they repent, of course).
Is it questions that deserve their own thread, or questions that don't? I'm confused.
>>6845 Obviously "don't".
>>6846 You must be dyslexic.
>>6836 >Questions that do deserve their own thread. >do So shouldn't I just make the thread?
>>6846 >OBVIOUSLY "don't". >*flushes with embarrassment* >*huffs angrily* >*stews over his typing mistake*
>>6847 >>6850 I'm not OP though. It's just some, you know, common logic?
>>6852 >*stewing*
Wait, turns out I DO have dyslexia, and wtf is wrong with you, OP? Dammit.
>>6839 degeneracy is akin to a kidnapping. they blindfold you, cuff you, and ruin your life.
Open file (656.32 KB 779x540 34348734786.png)
Hello /christian/ I know there's a book recommendation thread somewhere but I'd rather ask here. I've to make a monograph for uni. Luckily I got to choose a subject and I want to write about the history and development of Christianity in Philippines. Problem is, I can't find decent books about it, and the ones I did find are hard to get (no PDFs around, can't buy them either) I'd appreciate it if anon could pass me some related material if he has any, or happens to find any. God bless
>>6839 In my experience, being in a state of great sin is akin to being disordered spiritually, physically and mentally. It can often feel like one is at war with one's self. As the Lord said "The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak" (Matthew 26:41). For the longest time, I struggled heavily in my battle against lust and pornography, and though my mind and soul desired freedom, I continually gave into sin, and it felt as if a force would overtake me and lead me inexorably into sin again and again. It does feel like you lose free will. I don't think one really does though. They are just disordered and under control of their irrational passions and desires. There are two things one can do at this point though. They can either refuse to give in mentally and spiritually to sin, and they can struggle and wage war against their sins and sinful tendencies, or they can just assent to it, and give in, becoming more debased and controlled by the irrational passions, becoming more disconnected from God, and even more enslaved by sin. No one ever loses the ability to repent though, in theory.
Is God black? That would explain why He was absent during Jesus' childhood.
If you swear an oath to God and have broken it are you still subject to that oath, or is it considered ended as it was broken? Should one still attempt to fulfil it even if it is "legally" broken? Since swearing oaths is in some denominations a sin can you be forgiven of your oaths (I imagine you can be forgiven for swearing them, but can you be forgiven *of* them, as swearing it was arguably a sin?) If oaths are not to be forgiven forthright can they be forgiven in another way, or traded? (For example lets say you swore not to cut your hair, could you switch that to instead be that you cannot drink things other than water, for example? ((Is there some ritual where you may ask God for permission to do this, or would it be a more informal pleading?)) What if the oath is to do something sinful? (hopefully unknown as such at the time of swearing) Is it a greater sin to keep the oath and carry out the sin or to break the oath so as not to commit the sworn sin?
Open file (22.93 KB 1439x877 Dei Gladius.png)
kinda want to make a board centered around Christian politics. what do you guys think? would any of you be interested?
I was talking this stupid occultist about how Aleister Crowley was a satanist and he insisted that he wasn't and that occultism wasn't satanic either. I know he was wrong, because he praises Satan in his books as making Gods of humanity, what i want to know is why did he disagree? Why do those who practice magic believe that it's not a tool of the devil, and they do believe in the devil?
>>6918 An entirely new board? Wouldn't a containment thread work fine?
Anybody know that story in Genesis where Abraham conquers a city by convincing them to circumcise, then attacking it after their men are temporarily weakened by the circumcision?
>>7350 Chapter 34. And that wasn't Abraham, it was doing of Jacob's sons.
>>6909 >If you swear an oath to God and have broken it are you still subject to that oath, or is it considered ended as it was broken? Depends on an oath. Was it supposed to be a one-time thing on a specific day, or was it for a period of time, perhaps a lifetime? If the former, then I'd say it's ended and broken, if the latter, then it's still in effect, just like marriage. >Should one still attempt to fulfil it even if it is "legally" broken? If it was something good, like praying for someone, then why not. >Since swearing oaths is in some denominations a sin can you be forgiven of your oaths? If oaths are not to be forgiven forthright can they be forgiven in another way, or traded? I can only speak for Catholics - as far as I know, a private oath can be taken off of you by your confessor. When it comes to public oaths, like marriage or priesthood, then it's either impossible or you require a higher authority (usually the pope or a bishop). >What if the oath is to do something sinful? (hopefully unknown as such at the time of swearing) Is it a greater sin to keep the oath and carry out the sin or to break the oath so as not to commit the sworn sin? God never wants you to commit a sin and it is never permissible to commit a sin, so any oath that would require you to sin is invalid.
Making a vow, an oath, in the first place is an abomination before God. We're not living in old testament era.
https://historyforatheists.com/2018/12/jesus-apocalyptic-prophet/ >For over a century, scholarship on the origins of Christianity has been dealing with a fundamental issue – the Jesus in the earliest Christian texts is presented as preaching an eschatological message about an imminent apocalypse. >Despite ongoing rearguard actions, the idea that the historical Jesus was a Jewish apocalyptic prophet remains the most likely interpretation of the evidence. >Jesus was a Jewish apocalyptic prophet Can a /christian/anon here debunk this?
>>7357 >>Jesus was a Jewish apocalyptic prophet Apocalypse means revelation. So that statement in and of itself checks out.
A lot of Christian threads here: https://16chan.xyz/fascist/catalog.html
>>7373 Many posters are wrong.
>>7373 The Davidic Covenant necessitates his descent from Judah. People saying he wasn't Jewish are deluded.
>>7373 Define what you mean by Jewish. Do you mean the ethnic group? Then yes Jesus was a Jew, as our blessed Lady of Sorrows and Mother of God, Mary, was a Jew. If you mean the Religious group, again we need to see what is meant here. Do you mean the ancient Hebrew Faith which was almost entirely based in the Old Testament? Yes, on technicality. He would quote from the scriptures, followed the faith before he knew he was the Son of God, though there is a question on if after he knew, he could be a Hebrew (the religion), asking if God can be a follower of himself. If you mean the modern Jewish religion, which dates back to the writing of the Talmud. Then no, because how could Jesus follow a religion which denies him as the Savour of Man and Son of God, founded 300 to 600 years after his death? the modern Jewish faith, Talmudism for a lack of a better word, is what you classically think of when you grapple with the fact that Jesus was a Jew. Because while that statement is correct, there are at least four different definitions of the word Jew: The Ethnic Group, The Ancient Hebrew Faith, the culture, and the modern Talmudic faith.
>>7374 Prove that Jesus was Aryan then.
I'm somehow still catholic, but i consider myself protestant/evangelical, i don't believe the pope has valid authority. I'm going to get baptized tomorrow by my protestant friends, i was originally baptized as a child by a catholic priest, when i do get baptized for the second time, do i stop becoming a catholic (or what is left of it) completely?
>>7479 I think you're caring too much about these tags. Largely the tags are pointless since you'll probably never meet two Christians who have the exact same beliefs and mode of being regardless if they go to the same church. I don't know why you want to get water baptism again, that's not really necessary. You can consider yourself whatever you want it's just an easy way for people to know some general ideas you have I guess. But Jesus just isn't going to care about your church building so much as who you are. Although since the cult of Roman Catholicism is a bureaucratic system created in the 4th century to punish true christians I think you probably can stop "being one' based on their decision and not your own.
Open file (5.35 MB 476x265 jelly.gif)
What on Earth is a jellyfish. Look at this thing. It's got no brain or nothing just... look at it.
>>7513 Kinda cool looking tbh. God created far more bizarre creatures IMHO. One of his obvious goals through the billions of years of life was to load the planet with the maximum biomass possible, tuned specifically for each age of the Earth through history (Sun's luminosity, oxygen levels in the atmosphere, etc., etc., etc.) All this diversity (in the true, non-pozzed meaning of the word) was to prepare a nice habitat for humans, and to provide for our advanced civilization of today. It may not seem much like, but all this (and much, much more) has been orchestrated by Him to facilitate the rapid conquest of evil, while still allowing men to fully have free-will during our brief window of time here (~100k years).
Open file (149.88 KB 1500x1073 bedbuggenome.jpg)
Right. Now look at this motherf***er. I always thought of bedbugs as purely satanic, diabolical creatures because they posses ALL traits of evil: 1. Bloodsucking, as blood is their nutrition source. Blood was always associated with soul. 2. Persistent, pervasive and with ability to evolve to resist counter-measures and reappear en masse after being exterminated. They will never leave mankind alone no matter what measures are taken against them. 3. Extremely infectious. Just one pregnant bedbug, and the whole place is going to be screwed sooner or later. 4. Extremely disgusting. 5. Are as tiny as Evil is before God, yet still outrageously Evil and numerous. Legion is their name. 6. STUPID! They suck blood from humans at night without even caring that they may be unable to move away from ingesting so much blood and ultimately end up squashed to death en masse, not getting to live or feed, but dying and shitting the bed. But some survive. This is what stupid, mindless Evil is like. 7. You are forced to throw away and burn things entirely because of them. You start fearing and voiding whatever/whoever can be a carrier. And other traits. It's very hard to believe that God loves them and created them purposefully. Instead, I feel that bedbug, not goat, wolf or whatever, may be an absolute true perfect representative animal for Satan and his children.
>>7520 Mosquitos and parasites and things are pretty bad. And in the creation it constantly says God created things and said they were Good. (Hebrew: good, pleasant, agreeable) The reality is animals are not really described in Genesis. We have to assume whatever we want to assume about them. If all creation was friendly at the beginning then blood sucking insects would have to rely on nectar, fruits and things. Can a mother mosquito make babies without blood but with nutrients from elsewhere. I don't know, maybe. https://www.thehealthsite.com/news/mosquito-laying-eggs-without-a-blood-meal-what-does-that-mean-for-evolution-13901/ Meat eating animals we know don't need meat, the same way we don't need meat in fact meat is not really that great. Fruits and vegetables are what God made for us to eat. Noah after the flood is when meat eating began at the very least for man. As food becomes scarce animals rely on whatever they can get, including eating others and sucking their blood and then that just becomes who they are. Crocodiles and lions do not need meat and lots of vegetarian animals have sharp teeth. But what does a scorpion need a stinger for. I don't think anyone can know for sure when it comes to the animals. Genesis talks a lot about man, those things are for sure and certainly the animals in the garden must have been friendly. God could have created animals to be deadly, would he call that "good" I guess maybe I don't know that God thinks it's good but we just don't know it glosses over the animals. The Bible doesn't talk about where the souls of abortions go and it doesn't tell us why there's a parasite that lives in a child's eye ball in Africa or whatever. IS all this going to be in the new Heaven and new Earth. We'll see. Eternal life with Jesus either way is something I'm really looking forward to.
>>7468 He wasn't. What I meant was that people who claim that are wrong.
>>7520 >>7522 And yet, as demonstrated by the disastrous aftermath of the Five Pests campaign, destroying them clearly throws the little structures of Creation out of whack. These things are all there for a purpose, even if not readily apparent.
>>7522 >Mosquitos From the perspective of a bird or a bat they sustain life. From the perspective of man... maybe it would have been best to avoid and not inhabit mosquito infested locations? Maybe it would have been best to have left those places untouched and live our lives elsewhere?
>>7522 >Meat eating animals we know don't need meat, the same way we don't need meat in fact meat is not really that great. Hi Mani
>>7553 The only thing you should be eating is organic plant based food. Watch out for meat, seed/vegetable oils, sugar. Almost all food PRODUCTS are nothing but cancer. Yes, fruits and vegetables are all grown in bad ways as well but it's still better. For any product that has more than one ingredient the top three should be good, you should be comfortable eating a cup of that indignant alone. Would you drink a cup of canola oil on its own? Anyone who hasn't started, start eating healthy today. It limits you to about 1% of all food in the store but it's good. Bananas, oranges, trail mixes. A while ago I finally found a almond and flakes cereal with no added sugar, it tasted great. Why on Earth do they have to poison so much food, it's fine without all the added junk. Jams usually have sugar as their number one ingredient. You don't need to add sugar to jam. How much time are kids wasting in school being taught useless garbage when they should be being taught how to grow their own food. Actually they'd probably mess teaching that up the same way they messed up teaching healthy eating with their retarded food groups and pyramids.
I was thinking we have lawyers today. In Israel they just had leaders following and teaching the law of Moses. And even in medieval Europe the men of the law were religious people not secular layers as we have them. What exactly does Jesus want. He says to listen to the scribes and Pharisees because they know the law very well. Should every country be following the mosaic laws for their legal system. I definitely can't believe usury exists the Bible is against it for good reason. It's just greedy and evil what usury does to the common man. Yes. What laws did Jesus want, the laws of the nation were a very important part of the old covenant. Jesus never really taught about laws so much. Jesus knew his message would be rejected largely by Israel and was to spread all over the world so maybe it kind of makes sense not to have spoken about national laws. In the same way he didn't speak much about commandments. If you're a christian leading a country you already know what kind of laws there should be. Muslims and Hindus and Talmudics have national laws. I think in a sense that's why there's never been a Christian nation. Really has there ever been? Some people romanticise medieval Europe Christians. We do know Jesus said among you there will not be kings ruling over you like the gentiles. What is Christian law? It is kind of interesting that Jesus never really taught on that because the new covenant if everyone was in it, I mean if everyone was a born again Christian you technically probably wouldn't need a legal system. Is Heaven going to have a legal system. Even if Jesus did teach a system of laws would any country have followed it. And the Catholics say: "The true church came up with Christian law don't you know that." We see some rules and ideas for the Church in the New Testament. Is the church suppose to take over the whole nation. Again Jesus was aware of the future. He knew that was impossible. The church was always going to be an enclave within nations around the world, And you really get that sense. In fact it's probably just another proof of who Jesus was. If Jesus wasn't divine knowing the future he probably would have taught about legal systems and how to organise a nation but he didn't because he knew there was no point, he spoke to his followers, his disciples "among you this is how it will be." No ambitions other than the Gospel spreading around the world. But no ambitions for a great nation.
How do I get closer to my local church? I see a bunch of different non-clerics reading scripture during mass I feel like wanting to be part of them as a community of sort (is that wrong?)
>>7597 Readers? Well, you start asking around, helping where you're needed. You might get offered or called on, if you don't volunteer yourself at that point.
>>7541 >browser Shitty JS site, IOS and Jewgle links, nothing of substance. Gay and avoid. Use UG-chromium, Nyxt or Firefox with <https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js <https://github.com/pyllyukko/user.js >search Same as above, no insightful info. Avoid. Use SearX or Brave search. Do not use any of these, do not recommend any of these, to anyone. If you're concerned about clicking naughty stuff, setup a local recursive DNS and filter out the undesired content.
>>7618 But its Christian! It has to be good.
Is it necessary to speak when praying? Can't I just think what I want to say to God instead of saying it?
>>7657 I personally never speak out when I pray, but my prayers work just fine.
>>7718 >your Ah, you outed yourself. He's yours too.
>>7657 99% of the time I do it in my head as well and haven't had any problems.
>>6918 >>7102 I change my mind. I think a containment board for that might be necessary.
>>7777 Checked.
>>7817 I concur. Secular christianity is all over the place.
These so called cultural, gnostic, etc "christians" are simply heathens who will not be saved. Building Heaven on Earth? Ha-ha.
>>6839 >>6874 >It can often feel like one is at war with one's self. One of my falls that happened a few years taught me something very important about this that I'll never forget. It was after approximately six weeks of nofap. I had also been praying multiple times a day for months at that point which I think helped me understand this. I started experiencing temptations again and the internal conflict that goes with it that anon describes. After several days I gave in but I realised something awful: it had been my will the entire time to give in. That whole time it had not been my will fighting against the flesh, I had been fighting my own will. My problem was not a lack of willpower but too much willpower! The enemy had traitors manning the gates. I tell you the meaning of "not my will but yours be done" became crystal clear at that point. Let our wills submit to God's. It also made me depressed for a long time because I realised how bad things really were. I think it was a valuable lesson though. So to answer your question, yes, unrepentant sinners have free will in the sense that they can act according to what they really desire.
>>7827 Thank you for this good post, anon. It gives me some things to think about. At this point, I have basically realized that I can have zero success in nofap without God, and as soon as I became prideful or sure of myself, I slip and fall.
>>7351 Eversince I started reading through the Bible that story has stuck with me. What's the meaning of it? I know it was revenge for Shechem raping Dinah. But Jacob's sons negotiated with Shechem and offered to become one if they circumcised. I don't know, seems kind of treacherous.
>>7854 The commentary I read suggested that it was a lesson about how Jacob's initial passive reaction to the whole thing ended up making it worse in the end by leading to his sons' actions in using deceit and slaughtering all of Shechem out of rage at the crime that wasn't punished. It also hints at the future conflict between the Israelites and the Canaanites since Jacob laments how the incident impacts their reception by the tribes of the region. If the wise don't act the impulsive will take justice into their own hands.
>>7854 >>7854 Just because an event is in the bible doenst mean it was ok. Its just men doing fallen things. The verses themselves say it was 'deceitfully' and Jacob complains to the sons that these actions will make them hated by all. The eye for an eye law gets introduced to prevent these ludicrous over the top revenges. Mankind was just too awful.
Do boards on this site have archives, or are they lost once they dissapear?
>>7957 It's lost forever.
>>7957 Amateurs can (and do) make backups of /christian/ and other IBs. The LynxChan software, can create archives of any threads that 'fall off' the catalog, but it's not activated on Anoncafe. Don't know why, since it's pretty simple & basically transparent, cost-wise.
>>7597 If you have time in your schedule weekday masses are usually much smaller and mostly composed of more serious regulars. At the church I used to attend it was essentially on a volunteer basis who would do the first reading. Showing up more often is enough to get noticed by the volunteers and the priest(s).
>>7975 Is it possible to create a local archive of lynxchan threads complete with images? I had a search and there appears to be some scripts for archiving but I didn't understand it. What's the retard-proof way to do this? >>8009 Unless anon goes to a packed cathedral, it's likely that there's something that needs doing he can volunteer for. Often these are printed in the notices if you have those: "People are needed for such and such..."
>>7961 Shame, the salvation theology thread was really interesting.
>>7657 https://youtu.be/mJsegFqwwT0 Father Spyridon mentions here how angels and demons cannot see or hear our inner thoughts. True or not I usually pray speaking quietly, as a way of proclaiming my faith and allegiance to God. Sounds kind of silly I know.
>>8086 >I had a search and there appears to be some scripts for archiving but I didn't understand it. A much simpler approach is just to use a specifically-crafted wget command from the terminal: wget \ --recursive \ --no-clobber \ --page-requisites \ --html-extension \ --convert-links \ --domains anon.cafe \ --no-parent \ https://anon.cafe/christian/ The downside is that the result will be an utter disorganized filepile, just like LynxChan's design overall is. >What's the retard-proof way to do this? There is none AFAICT.
How do I not get consumed by anger at those who purposefully shit up this board and those who take their bait?
>>8233 And why would you be consumed by anger at the schizo? It's glowclown who is desperate enough to waste all free time on amusing new ass-dancing techniques, not us. His time is wasted, not yours. We just continue exposing, humiliating and ignoring the thing as we did hitherto. >those who take their bait? He replies to himself A LOT. Don't be fooled by that. But that's not really important. The board is here just to serve the purpose: let us fellow christians talk and share, and this does deserve more attention. May God embrace you.
>>8143 Which one? If it was deleted recently it can still be found on web caches.
>>8263 Why would it be deleted though? It must have been wiped out by others threads.
>>8264 That's what I meant: if it fell off the board.
>>8264 BO haphazardly deletes threadsthe nigger thread in his paranoid hunt to take down the schizo.
>>8299 We seriously need just a q&a day with BO. With the hope of productive change coming out of it, to boot.
>>8143 If you know the exact subject of the thread, then I can post an archive up to catbox for you of it, such as I have. >Protip There is no thread on anon.cafe/christian/ named 'Salvation Theology' since at least 2020-10-04 17:09:12.
>>8301 >We seriously need just a q&a day with BO. With the hope of productive change coming out of it, to boot. >hope There's no hope with the current bo, /christian/ needs a strict bo that rules with an iron fist, i am tired of seeing low quality garbage, mudslime nonsense, bait and tranny fetish threads.
>>8301 I think he's doing a good job overall. I refused to take the job, b/c I knew what a potential shitshow the job would be particularly w/ the two spergs from /fascist/, recently-booted from the site, who were still actively spewing niggerpilling & other venomous horseshit here. The fact he undertook the job at all deserves a lot of credit and approval IMO. He needs our support, and honestly, it's a man-sized challenge trying to manage something like this. Only the Holy Spirit has the wisdom to do such properly, we simply need to support the BO in prayer that His guidance will be clear, and that the BO has the proper willingness to obey that holy guidance. But yes, I think your suggestion is a good one, and I'd gladly participate in such
>>8307 how do you apply?
>Shits /christian/ with niggerporn and bait >Users complain >Applies for janny position 4d chess
>>8308 There was no 'apply' in my case. The board was 'ghosted'. I believe the Holy Spirit told me to take over. I disobeyed, as mentioned. If you're seeking such, then the basic requirement is that you have an Anoncafe account first. Then the Admins or BO can transfer the board ownership over to you: >pic related How that gets worked out isn't in my department Anon, apologies. >>8309 Alright I kek'd on that one. :^)
Open file (585.98 KB 1448x1080 15457599003.jpg)
I hear you're a racist now, /christian/. How did you get interested in that type of thing? Should we all be racists now? What's the official line the Church is taking on this? Only, the farm takes up most of the day, and at night I just like a cup of tea. I mightn’t be able to devote myself full time to the old racism.
>>8313 (>>6836) BO, please merge this thread into QTDDTOT.
Hey /christian/, I just wanted to share this heartwarming story and song. God bless https://youtu.be/IZeWPScnolo
>>8311 ok cool, i have a account already If the BO wants to transfer board to me or whatever my username is AntichristHater
>>8321 >"...this heartwarming story and song." Heh, now you wouldn't be trying to le ebin trole us, now would you Anon? :^)
Probably at least 95% of people dying right now are not saved Christians. I would say 99% if you include babies. People go to Hell without Jesus. Revelation says people in Hell will be judged and then Hell will be thrown into the lake of fire forever which Jesus said was prepared for Satan and his angels, so not originally for man. It's not clear if during the white throne judgement if some from Hell will be taken to Heaven based on their deeds. 1. If NDEs are real it would seem people can come to Christ even after death when they meet him, many people including Atheists come to Jesus after an NDE claiming to have met him or some Heavenly thing they are born again, it would seem. NDE information also says no child 6 and under has experienced Hell or a "life review". 2. If Purgatory is true, that really just clears everything. 3. I've also heard people believe that all life is actually going to be resurrected anyways and taken out of Hell. 4. Some believe decent people will live on the New Earth (Jehovah's Witnesses for example). 5. People in Hell maybe can be saved at the white throne judgement. Jesus says people can come to him very late and that he doesn't judge people who don't believe him. It's very easy to accept Jesus and have your sins forgiven. People choose to go to Hell. Out of the 5 options I believe there is definitely some safety net for decent people who just don't really accept Jesus fully in their life. I don't have a question.
>>8323 Then you need to address the topic with him in the /meta throd Anon (>>144). I personally have no knowledge that he's disinterested in continuing as BO. But you've take then first steps to explore that possibility. If you manage it, you'll have my prayers. You'll certainly need all of the believer's here's prayers haha! :^) Cheers.
>>8326 There are some mysteries there, but you can be certain that no one will enter into Heaven based on their good works (as you seem to be implying). >It's very easy to accept Jesus and have your sins forgiven. People choose to go to Hell. I'd say you have this correct, but you left off pointing out the cost involved: All of Him, for all of you. He humbled Himself even to death for you. You give up everything. But, you gain everything!
>>8329 No I never implied that. Some might say what's the point of the white throne Judgement. The Bible says people will be judged based on their works and then sent to the lake of fire. Why mention them being judged based on their works, why mention them being judged at all, are they not already condemned if they are in Hell. If people can be brought out of Hell at the white throne judgment it could be based on their works but they need to believe in Jesus and accept him to go to Heaven which many certainly could at least acknowledge him by that point. If decent people gain some kind of everlasting life without Jesus it would have to be related to living on the new Earth.
>>8326 >people who just don't really accept Jesus fully in their life. >decent L M A O
>>8330 Muslims like you belong to hell.
>>8331 There's plenty of decent Yoga people in the world. The meditative type who have "overcome their desires" I mean you can pretend to not know what I'm talking about that's fine. The idea I'm looking at is: what chances do unsaved people (%95 of the world) have. While purgatory would be the best chance, I'm not even sure if Catholics say it's for non-christians, just "bad christians"
>>8335 I'm aware of the mainstream interpretation of the white throne judgement. It is not clear if all in Hell are sent to the Lake of Fire. Is it implied likely, yes. But I am talking about ALL possible opportunities for decent people. and I'm going to keep using that term. Plenty of decent people could accept Christ after death or be sent to the new Earth. Those are beliefs Christians have, and I have listed them.
>>8330 >If people can be brought out of Hell at the white throne judgment I believe you're misinterpreting the text Anon. Hell has no exits. Sheol is the place of holding for the dead, Gehenna is the everlasting lake of fire. The books are opened. Judgement occurs. Anyone not found written in The Lamb's Book of Life is cast into the lake of fire. The New Heavens and the New Earth are created, and all those washed in the blood of Christ will join God and the Angels there for all eternity. >If decent people gain some kind of everlasting life without Jesus it would have to be related to living on the new Earth. A) there are no 'decent' people. Satan, Adam, & Eve saw to that all the way back in the garden of Eden. B) All our """righteousness""" is as filthy rags before the infinitely pure & holy LORD God. C) Only believers (AKA Christians) enter into the New Earth, as mentioned above. What happens in the New Creation is anyone's guess, only God Himself knows His plans fully. But you can be sure it will literally be beyond all of our imaginations for it's profound glory and amazing creativity! :^) Cheers.
>>8332 ...okay.
>>8338 Hell has no exits? and here I thought Jesus brought souls out of Hell to Heaven after his crucifixion proving the power of his sacrifice. Hmm. But that was just Paradise the good side of Hell depending on how you want to interpret that. The idea people can be brought out of Hell during the white throne judgement is an idea and I'd say there isn't a strict line against it. So it is one of the 5 possibilities regardless of how it ends up going.
>>8341 > I thought Jesus brought souls out of Hell Hades =/= Gehenna
And theb there's even: 6. No one goes to Hell because Jesus died for everyone 7. Souls are destroyed and not tortured forever which which might technically be better But I find these the least likely. I believe option 1, I think people can be saved shortly after death by meeting and accepting Jesus. There's just a lot of evidence for NDEs being. Certainly the experiences happen I think everyone has to accept that. If they are hallucinations why are they so "after-death like" rather than being like any drug hallucination. I just think there's a lot of reason to believe with modern medicare constantly bringing people in and out of death, not everyone leaves their body but I think many do and they meet Jesus or "a great light that loves them" and when Jesus says people can come to him very late making others in Heaven jealousy or upset I think it's possible he was talking about after death conversion. It might all just be not true. But from everything I've seen from all the research into these death experiences I'd be more surprised if it wasn't true. I think it's the only hope someone really has. Many rotten wicked people who hated God alll their, when they see Jesus and feel judgement on them they'll still reject him.
>>8343 Well you just said Gehenna is the lake of fire, which as far as I know has no relevance to anything because it's currently unused. Hell will be thrown into it along with Satan and his angels later. Hell is where Jesus went and that's where he freed awaiting saved souls from the old covenant and that's what I said. If you say Hell has no exist no escape well people were delivered from Hell, that's what I said. Yhough again I think it was the Paradise side of it where Jesus mentions Abraham was.
>>8338 Also the idea that there are no "decent" people. When Nathanel said Jesus's hometown was basically a ghetto, Jesus said there goes an honest man. A man with no deceit. I'm sure Nathanel lied and deceived in his life. It's perfectly fine to call people decent or call them wicked. There's wicked people in this world. It doesn't' mean you're "better" than them. Everyone sins, but there's people who are very honest and good yes they sin but I just don't see a problem calling them "decent", not perfect not cleansed that's a completely different thing. In the old covenant there were decent people. keeping the commandments working hard for God. Those people still exist. Good people who need Christ. It's true you shouldn't think yourself better than others because you could have been that murderer given the same circumstances and you get angry and it's the same thing. And this is related in part to saved Christians who still call themselves sinners, I don't agree with that either. I'd need to ise my computer and do a word search but I don't think Christians in the new testament ever called themselves sinners after the Holy Ghost. Maybe they did.
>>8347 There was no "paradise" side of it. There was a portion without torment but that is not a paradise
>>8349 >I don't think Christians in the new testament ever called themselves sinners after the Holy Ghost "It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all." 1 Timothy 1:15
>>8350 The reason it's called Paradise by me and others who agree is because "Paradise" is used by Jesus when he tells the thief that's where he'll be tonight. I really need my computer for word search but I don't think Jesus ever uses "Paradise" before that. The thief I believe did not go to Heaven right away but first spent time with Jesus in the "good" side of Hell including the first night so Jesus said tonight you'll be with me in Paradise referring to Abraham's side of the underworld. Paradise was the holding place until Heaven just as Revelation says Hell is the holding place until the Lake of Fire.
>>8351 Yeah. I stilI don't like it though. Partly of course because you get the people trying to seem humble "ooh I'm such a filthy sinner." Jesus says be perfect as your father in Heaven is perfect. Sinners don't go to Heaven. Are your sins not cleansed. Then they say, Well I am cleansed of sin but only by hiding in Christ but technically I'm still a sinner so. Well mmm. But I do want to do a search because I'm pretty sure Paul also says things along the lines of "back when you were sinners." "before Christ you were sinners." I know I'm thinking of a verse or more at least similar.
>>8313 That would be an ecumenical matter
>>8358 heh? what? wazat?
>>8352 >"Paradise" is used by Jesus when he tells the thief that's where he'll be tonight And He's talking about heaven. This was His response to “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom". Is His kingdom in hell? >I don't think Jesus ever uses "Paradise" before that I don't see why it woud matter considering paradise is a word which has meaning. >The thief I believe did not go to Heaven right away but first spent time with Jesus in the "good" side of Hell including the first night so Jesus said tonight you'll be with me in Paradise referring to Abraham's side of the underworld. In the thief's perception it would be the same night. >Paradise was the holding place until Heaven A place which is at best no better than our current state is not much of a paradise. Also, the New Testament already gives a name to that place: Abraham's Bosom >>8353 The word sinner like most words could be understood in multiple ways. The sense you are thinking of would be strictly inaccurate to describe a regenerate Christian believer as, as such 'sinners' have their hearts under the dominion of sin, whereas the saints have had a new law written upon their hearts against which their members, in service to another law, rebel. In this sense you are correct, we are not sinners.
Open file (95.47 KB 541x600 dante_purgatory_01.jpg)
>>8336 >The idea I'm looking at is: what chances do unsaved people (%95 of the world) have. >While purgatory would be the best chance, I'm not even sure if Catholics say it's for non-christians, just "bad christians" Read Dante. Non-Christians are excluded from the Catholic beatific vision but their level of punishment depends on their secular works. It's a punishment on its own because the good unsaved sought good on their own accord, but will never receive ultimate satisfaction in fellowship with God in heaven.
Open file (89.21 KB 256x400 6781112.jpg)
Has anyone read "Nature's eternal religion" by Ben Klassen?
>>8422 Is there any particular reason why we should?
>>8422 why should I care about the word of a fallible man?
>>8336 >unsaved people (%95 of the world) have Approximately 2.38 billion people practice some form of Christianity globally. This means that about one-third of the world's total population is Christian. Some argue that Islam is a Christian heresy. If this is true, than nearly half the world can be called Christian, given that there are 1.8 billion Muslims (24% of the world population) and 2.38 billion Christians (30% of the world population). However, while the Islamic religion acknowledges Christ, it cannot truly be called Christian because they don't worship the trinity. >Gen 26:4 >I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky, and I will give them all these lands, and through your offspring all nations of the earth will be blessed,
>>8422 >atheistic wignat trash from a dude who committed suicide No thanks
>>8444 ...Now, are you solely using that image about the "numbers technicality," or about the people expressing skepticism about a book which literally has a crossed-out cross on the front cover? I've already had one goofy misunderstanding on this board today, I'd like to steer clear of another.
>>8450 don't respond to namefags
Open file (32.43 KB 1280x720 bane_pain.jpg)
>>8305 I just manually archived the board again since it's been some months since that happened. It was extremely painful and I probably won't do it again: https://web.archive.org/web/20220418001153/https://anon.cafe/christian/catalog.html https://anon.cafe/christian/catalog.html
>>8476 Thank you anon.
>>8476 Yes, I've done this myself for our board, multiple times (we have >150 threads). Anyone who's never gone through this doesn't appreciate the difficulty involved. I'd suggest you just keep a personal local copy using one of the various means that are much less painful. Having automatic archives activated here would make everyone's life much simpler in this regard. Literally just the flip of a switch by the site Admins to activate, too.
>>8606 >>8608 Who is this guy and why should I click this?
I was picking my friend's brains for which kind of church I should join. I've heard Lutheran churches are pretty open to anyone. I was using this website https://www.churchfinder.com/ but that doesn't really tell me anything about the churches. I don't want to end up in a church where they drape Jesus in a rainbow flag and the pastor talks about the importance of trans rights. What's the best way to probe my local churches most efficiently to find out if they're for me without having to show up on THE DAY and sit through a whole sermon only to realize they're not for me? >just go to your friends' church They live several hours away. I'd prefer something in about a 30-minute drive. >What kinda church are you looking for. Honestly, I'm wanting to go more to social interaction with like-minded people my age to get together to shoot guns, play video games, do TTGs, hike, swim, and do other fun activities. I'm not super religious but I'm not against indulging for the sake of being part of a community. I'm heavily autistic so I don't believe I'll ever manage to get myself to "believe" per se but if I'm in church then I'm at least in the proximity of those who do and maybe god can work his magic with me if I give him a chance. I doubt it though. In either case, I don't think God would want me to socially isolate myself (unless he told me to) just because I like sleeping in on Sundays. I won't fall prey to cart before the horse syndrome here. No sense worrying about the sincerity of my belief before I've even set foot in a church.
>>8693 Look for churches from the major fundamentalist denominations, things like the OPC. One of them is bound to have something near you
>>8693 Join either a confessional Protestant, Orthodox, or traditionalist Catholic church if you're looking for that. All the mainstream Western churches at this point are liberalized.
>>8693 Also here's a Youtube channel where he basically interviews every denomination and they all give their reasons as to why you should join them specifically: https://invidious.kavin.rocks/c/ReadyToHarvest/videos
What do you guys think of psychedelic medicine, and shamans?
>>8720 Idolatry?
>>8720 /islam/ should stop falseflagging.
>>8736 What? I asked because I was wondering if you guys find treatments like ketamine, lsd, and others to have any compatibility with Christendom. Not muslim, just genuinely curious where you think that line should be crossed.
Open file (70.96 KB 351x435 39-2.jpg)
Engaging with unsaved Christians is the worst thing in the world. I don't mind people against Jesus, that's easy, but when you engage with someone who thinks they are already a Christian my heart can't take it. Especially when they try arguing with you in front of non-christians you want to convert and it's just so bad. "oh yeah I'm a disciple of Jesus, I think I'm saved." As they curse sh*t f*ck. I just want to crawl in a hole. It's just. Why did Jesus make me an evangelist I can't even hand things out directly to people I just leaving Gospels randomly around my city hoping people find them. But yes, non-born again Christians, like trying to argue with my old self. I don't know what to do.
"I hate Chrisianity and Jesus because I hate Jews." Anyone notice this is a genuine thing said by real people. It's probably just the 4chan circle but they are still real (maybe) people behind the computer who at a certain point almost seem to accept God's existence but refuse him because of da joos. What is that? Where does that even come from? Jews are negative 5 percent of the population. I don't know if I've ever met one in my life. What is that!? That's like hating the rare BoogaWooga tree frog deep in the Amazon jungle. How do you even get to that point... what?
>>9022 its the Loser Effect™ its when youre so beaten down and desperate that youre willing to latch onto anything if it adds meaning and purpose to your life or helps you to understand the world better.
>>9022 The pharisees are a brood of vipers, true then and true today.
Open file (189.14 KB 578x510 shining forced.png)
>>9012 >saying naughty no-no words, oh no! Unelss they're taking the lords name in vain, I don't think there's any verse in the bible that specifies particular phonic noises as being sinful. You're basically giving words more power than they deserve like niggers do with the word nigger. I tried searching for verses that come close to doing that. "Ephesians 5:4 ESV / 803 helpful votes Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving." For that verse, it's open to interpretation but I feel that's less about specific curse words and more about sexual jokes and speaking with a mean spirit. >"I'd like to turn her inside out" >"I bet her snatch smells like fish" >"You think guy fucks his horse? He's always smiling at stalls. I think he does." that sorta shit. Then you have >Hosea 4:2 says no swearing They're talking about oaths/pomisies "I swear on my mother I'm telling you the truth" again, not a curse word. I don't curse in front of women and I have disdain for women who curse but I'm not so concerned about phonic exclamations that I never curse myself. Not that I curse all that often but when I'm with my bros and we're gaming I'll often curse with a smile in a light hearted manner. "Fuck, I'm dead" "You lucky bitch!" "You fucker! I'm gonna get your ass!" that sorta thing. I'd be more concerned with the lewd jokes I make but those are usually reserved for online discourse on image boards. The ones I unfurl for my friends are typically more tame.
>>9137 It's profanity. It is obviously wrong. No born again Christian would say swearing is okay. In fact no one I've ever met thinks swearing is okay. And there's endless verses against profanity. I Timmothy 6:20 II Timmothy 2:16 Hebrews 12:16 Colossians 3:8 Colossians 4:6 Ephesians 5:4 James 3:8-11 Largely from the New Testament it is a new expectation. Ask yourself would Jesus say "F'ing sh*t N*ggers!" and would you talk that way in front of him. Just stop doing it, why are you holding on. Stop it.
>>9139 >I Timmothy 6:20 "Timothy was to avoid the ungodly, worldly and empty talk of those who only want to pick verbal fights by opposing the truth." Don't lie about people? Nothing to do with swearing. >II Timmothy 2:16 "Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly." Again, nothing to do with swearing. I'm reading this as talking about there being no god or talking with those about there being no god. >Hebrews 12:16 "See that no one is sexually immoral, or is godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold his inheritance rights as the oldest son." Sexually immoral- i.e. Don't fuck farm animals, don't cheat on your wife, that kinda stuff. Again, nothing to do with the "evil no-no" words I figure the rest either are similar to this or equally unrelated to curse words. >Ask yourself would Jesus say "F'ing sh*t N*ggers!" No? He didn't speak English. I can guarantee you when he accidentally hit his thumb with a hammer while working on his carpentry he probably shouted the Aramaic equivalent of "MOTHERFUCKER" or "SHIT". > would you talk that way in front of him. Jesus was a man of the people. Supposedly he knows me better than I do so if anyone would understand my vulgar flavor of dry humor courtesy of my autism it would be him. If he hit me with a blue shell in Mario Kart, I'd definitely call him a bitch or asshole. I'd have to hang around him to gauge his sensibilities but he seemed like pretty chill guy as long as you weren't an overt asshole. >Just stop doing it, why are you holding on. Stop it. No. I have freedom of speech. I wasn't there but I'm willing to bet Jesus wasn't holding his tongue when he kicked those kikes off the temple steps trying to do the modern equivalent of payday loans and sqeezy finance. I wouldn't be surprised if he'd said something along the lines of "Get the fuck out of the temple you hook nosed kikes! You slimey underhanded fucks!" in Aramaic. Naturally, they cleaned it up a little in the King James version.
It's nice you chose to only respond to the verses where you could find translations that help you continue your sin. But the KJV is the only version you should use. If you don't let go of your filthy language idol, I don't know. God only corrects so many times, when you are offended by his corrections he'll eventually leave you alone.
>>9143 >I wouldn't be surprised if he'd said something along the lines of "Get the fuck out of the temple you hook nosed kikes! You slimey underhanded fucks!" in Aramaic. I'm worried about you. And if you smoked would you try to explain it away as acceptable to God as well. Every born again smoker knows he has to give up smoking to follow Christ, before even reading the Bible. "oooh it's not specific enough being a drunkard isn't the same." It's an addiction we know it's bad. "oooh the Bible says no filthy language but is it really talking about mother f'ing cock sucker! I mean I can still say that right." ...No. Your speech should be full of grace and Christ-like, alright. The reason preachers don't curse the reason you yourself wouldn't curse in a Church is because it is bad. The reason everyone even non-christians know swearing is bad is because it is. You don't need it and Jesus can take it away, it's actually not apart of you at all that comes from the devil.
>>9144 Show me the exact words then instead of dumping a bunch of verses then. Surely it should only take one or two verses to put me in my place. >If you don't let go of your filthy language idol I'm not the one treating phonic noises that have no significance outside modest cultural relevance in the past 500 or so as magical invocacations that disturb the holy father himself. >>9147 >drugs and alcohol what about junk food? I don't smoke or drink, but I do indulge in carbonated sugar water style beverages so I know about addiction. Anyway, why the side track? Are you saying >bad language = biological vices >"this guy is addicted to saying "fuck", he's had one one fuck too many. Too many fucks over the limit" An amusing notion, but a ridiculous one none the less. >"...No. Your speech should be full of grace" That's like your opinion my dude. >and Christ-like Again, christ was man of the people. If he is the messiah you supposedly adhere then I am your brother from another mother. >you yourself wouldn't curse in a Church is because it is bad I wouldn't curse in church because there's a bunch of olde ladies, women and (hopefully) children. >the reason everyone even non-christians know swearing is bad is because it is. They know there are cultural taboos around specific phonic noises. Our modern curse word vocabulary is barely 500 or so years old. Again, the notion that these words have some mystical power is retarded. The rational argument would be that the words (in certain contexts) could be especially offensive in certain situations, for instance saying them at church. However, trying to police language with a complete removal of context for any given word is again, retarded. Can you not say Dam because it shares a homonym with Damn if you're a hydroelectric engineer? >it's actually not apart of you at all that comes from the devil. Evil comes from the devil. I learned "curse" words in 5th grade. If you want to discriminate socially against those who use specific language you find offensive, that's on you. I discriminate when it comes to people who drink and smoke too much so I have my own hangups respectively. I'm not going to suggest people who drink or smoke are damned to hell as I'm not the one who will judge them in the end. I commune with jesus directly, probably not as often as I should, but I do. I'll make sure to let you know if he leaves me a post-it about my foul language. I reckon he'll talk to me about my porn habits before he bothers with my mouth noises.
>>9153 >I'm not going to suggest people who drink or smoke are damned to hell as I'm not the one who will judge them in the end. Well the Bible says drunkards are going to Hell. That's why when you are born again and worked through by Jesus he'll rid someone of their drinking smoking drugs and cursing. If you don't think A-hole, which is a word you used, is not considered filthy language then what can I say. The Bible is very clear about filthy language and profanity. You can try to use different translations and skirt around words "filthy language doesn't have to mean cursing come on now." but you wouldn't use this language in church, you should not use it ever. The internet is so bad because I can't communicate with you. I'm not arguing with you I'm telling yo, stop trying to defend your way of speaking when it's ill, it's not good. Like I said God will not correct you at a certain point and if you don't want to listen to me I won't correct you either anymore or ever again. You can start a whole church where people curse and swear and you stand up and preach with F bombs. See how many true Christians won't instantly be put off by that, not even Christians just anybody because no one thinks you're a Godly man when you speak like a gangster and you are not being a light to the unsaved. Cursing is not a English invention. Peter began cursing when he denied Jesus it's not a pleasant endorsement. So I know it's the internet and that means you can easily ignore what I tell you and continue to believe what you believe. But I tell you you will let go of that language when you really well I just don't think you're frankly born again which I hate saying but how it is.
NOT A SHITPOST SO DON'T ACCUSE ME OF CUCKCHANNERY I must preface this with the fact that I am not really a religious person, though I do staunchly believe in Jesus Christ, resurrection and the existence of our Christian God. From the little I can remember about it, masturbation is a sinful act. But what happens if someone spontaneously ejaculates or has a wet dream, completely dissociated with their willingness to do so? Is the sinful act a mental one or a physical one, or both?
>>9155 Lust for other women in the dreams is just a result of being a lustful person. Jesus surely wasn't having sexual dreams. Sexual dreams are a sin, often we unconsciously sin even when we're not asleep. Though frankly I've never once cummed the bed, I don't know how that's possible, sounds like a medical condition to me when people say that, might want to get your weiner checked on.
>>9156 Don't forget demonic influence. Incubus/Succubus are types of demons that cause ejaculation during sleep through lustful dreams. >>9155 For a sin to be mortal, it has to be committed with full knowledge of it being a sin and the full consent of the sinner. Therefore, lucid dreams and induced dreams aside, something that happens in a dream can at the least not be a mortal sin. Therefore, unless you imagined indecent women, or wished for a wet dream, or listened to erotic audio recordings while falling asleep, it's at least not as bad as masturbation, which is a mortal sin.
Open file (116.81 KB 640x480 171.jpg)
My new Bible is finally arriving tomorrow. Hopefully it'll be the perfect size and feel and look for good. I love Jesus so much and everything he has done. Hurraah! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiJu7FQla3Y While I was praying somebody touched me! Only Jesus matters! And I never want to sin again and I am so refined by him, everything he has done. How can the truth be so good and why would any reject it. People don't know how good the truth is. It's hard to imagine true life that we will one day live. Even the apostles used "hope" language because no matter how many miracles you see, processing the truth of eternal Heaven is difficult. Where we look back and see just the extent of the evil wickedness and senseless babbling about this and that. My pastor says never let the sacrifice and Gospel become mundane to us, let it be wonderful news every day. The good news has to be remembered for what it is, this Earthly dusty life will be over. The reward not of Heaven but of being with our saviour and worshipping and loving him forever to see him and touch him, I will do everything you command Lord you are my Lord and because you have saved my life it belongs to you I am nothing without you, you have bought this junk and glorified it and made it whole in you and praise the Holy Ghost the Comforter you promised 2,000 years ago still with us today that gives us peace. We all owe you everything and love you and are only capable of love because of you and- I'm kinda going off at this point I just wanted to say I was really happy about my new Bible it's just taken so long and I don't like the Bible I currently have so I'm going to drink God's words a lot more. I kind of want physical copies of the extrabiblical books. I think Jasher we have is the real book of Jasher I know it's a colonial era translation from an ancient hebrew document and that sounds sketchy but well I won't get into the whole arguments.
Jasher is very interesting if true specifically it explains more of the flood the ark and the real reason Noah cursed Caanan. And there's even seemingly some Sumerian evidence to confirm it.
>>8606 >>8608 LMAO, Irenaeus and augustine BTFO'd. That channel is a goldmine, christcucks coping rn.
>>9218 No one is watching your cringe Atheist mythology videos. Atheist mythology was debunked a decade ago when we started finding dinosaur tissue. The fossil record has no evidence for evolution either. And it is impossible to create a living cell without design. Planets don't form themselves out of dust, that is science fantasy. It is no different than the Greek and Romans and their science fantasies. You guys are just looping back around to it, it's embarrassing. I have a giant list for deprogramming new age athesit mythology if you want to see. https://vimeo.com/359394949 https://vimeo.com/359396189
>>8606 >>8608 >>9218 >Genetically Modified Skeptic is a Youtuber who was raised in an Fundamentalist Independent Baptist family. He believed in biblical inerrancy and Young Earth Creationism when he was younger but became an atheist after going to college Prots were a mistake. He was born in a frying pan and tossed into the fire.
Can someone explain the necessity of the Trinity and why it fixes theological problems that other belief systems aren't able to?
>>9238 its just different forms of God
>>9238 All you need to know is that rejection of the trinity is heresy of the highest form. Unitarians and other groups need to repent.
Is excessive self-hatred a form of pride?
>>9286 Yes. Because you refuse to believe you can be saved, when every man can.
>>9238 >Can someone explain the necessity of the Trinity Christians accept the Trinity because it is in the Bible, Old and New Testaments alike, and because it has been the teaching of the apostles and their successors since the very beginning of the Church. This is sufficient reason to believe in the Trinity in the first place, but we can go deeper than that. If God is entirely self-sufficient in Himself, and God is love, it only makes sense that the Godhead is an eternal union of three persons in a relationship of love - Father, Son and Holy Spirit, one of nature and substance, of the same will, receiving one worship, and differing between themselves only to the extent that the Father is the monarch of the Godhead, the principle from which the other two are logically (not temporally) dependent - the Son begotten from the Father, and the Spirit proceeding from the Father. A unitarian God who dwelt alone from eternity could not be God of Love, as far as I see it. Love is relational and mutual. The Trinity is also a potential solution to the philosophical problem of the one and the many, and how they relate. >>9240 It refers to three distinct persons in the singular Godhead.
>>9295 And no topic could be anymore pointless. People started saying trinity because it's quicker than saying the father, son and holy ghost. No one disagrees with these three things being God, there could be a zillion different aspects of God we don't know about. And yet people pretend to argue about trinitiy, people love pretending they disagree just so they can argue, it's amazing. "I don't like the term trinity waaaah" well don't use it then. Truly it is the absolute bottom of the barrel in disgusting wasting of pointless Christian bickering.
>>9297 >And no topic could be anymore pointless The topic of the inner relations of God? Pointless? No topic is of more importance theologically, hence why the Church spent centuries fighting heretics of all types. >No one disagrees with these three things being God The interpretation is everything. If one thinks that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are just 'modes' of one God, or that the Son is of a different substance of the Father, they are heretics of the highest order. One has degenerated into Jewish conceptions of God, the other has committed blasphemy, claiming that Jesus Christ is not God. Both of them have left Christianity.
>>9297 >No one disagrees with these three things being God, Muslims, Jews, and Unitarians reject it and say that Trinitarian Christians are pagans.
>>9298 Point. less. but continue to believe you disagree with others. I without hesitation despise all this stuff. Christians always find excuses to fight over nothing. Even now you're pretending because you're desperate to create division. No one actually cares. No one has any different views. "B-but JWs believe Jesus isn't God." great you find someone then. But that's not even who you bicker to. I've seen it enough times. Literal arguments over a term not theology. You want to use the term trinity or not, I don't care. The Bible says The spirit of God is obvioisly God Jesus is God. There's nothing to argue about. BUT YOU PEOPLE WILL WASTE SO MUCH TIME ABOUT NOTHING! It makes me insane more than anything to not only see arguing but arguing when everyone already agrees but they have to pretend that they don't just to annoy each other. That's half the discussions of this board as well.
>>9299 Non-christians disagree with christians who would have thought. And NO. UNITARIANS DON'T DISAGREE. THINK FOR ONE SECOND. Use your brain for a split second. They agree with the trinity. They just don't want to use the term because because they are insane. "uhhh we're a denomination that believes God is one." Just like the Bible says, just like everyone agrees on. The trinity is a short form way of saying father son and ghost which are indeed all one. the father is in the son the son the the father so on and so on. Shut up. Shut up. Never talk about this again. Of all the stupid stupid things Christians waste time on, this takes the cake. I should make a denomination called Jesus is Son of God. I believe he's the son, does that mean I don't believe he's God, no. But I'm gonna argue about nothing uuuuu argue argue waste time oooh yes uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu. Hockey pocky, the most insane case of mass histeria, the idea people disagree that God is one but can be described by three aspects, probably more like I said, probably an infinite number.
You're all totally insane and I hope you enjoy spending hours engaging in pretend theological debates. oooh yes sit in your university chair and play pretend. Insane. Crazy people. nothing but senseless bickering. actual nutters. you all need a docotr, get you brain checked out and if I ever see this "debate" brought up again I'm shutting this website down.
>>9300 >>9302 Figuring out the nature of the Master of Reality seems an important matter. At the very least, figuring out how to properly address Him seems a good way to avoid insulting Him. Don't you usually try and find out how your boss wants to be called before you talk to him?
>>9303 Absolutely nothing to do with anything. The "trinity" is a short form of "father son holy ghost" that is the end of the story. there is zero debate about anything.
You all make me upset and rent my clothes.
And I tell you another thing. All Christians pray to the three aspects of God. All of them. No matter what they pretend to believe. they pray to the father they pray to the lord Jesus, they often pray Lord in general meaning god as a whole. and if they're they also pray to the UFO goddess Martian Mary. Name a single actual debate that takes place with the trinity, there is none everyone who is a christian agrees on God being Jesus ghost father see it's so tiiring to type that every time so I can say, trinity.
Okay? Any smart annoying remarks desperate to continue your pretend bickering? Any remarks at all, hmm?
>>9299 >Muslims, Jews, and Unitarians reject it and say that Trinitarian Christians are pagans. Ironically, in saying this, they are the heathens.
Is there like a Christian twitter. Would that be a good idea. Some kind of Christian thing. There's a million Christian dating sites. Or like a Christian video site. Christian tumblr.
>>9305 >The "trinity" is a short form of "father son holy ghost" that is the end of the story. there is zero debate about anything. How one interprets this is extremely important. Amazing how flippantly you dismiss inquiries into the true nature of the Lord. If someone says that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not all equally God, and are not separate persons in the Godhead, they are heretics. It's that simple. If one says they are three different beings, they are heretics. Heresy is not Christianity.
Open file (26.60 KB 282x251 explain-the-trinity.jpg)
>>9311 I see you've chosen to continue your pretend theological debate with others who will also pretend to debate with you. I pity you. Find me one person you actually disagrees with you and behold for I shall come in amazement.
>>9311 After some thinking I think it's okay that you want to debate such things. It's okay and I don't want to hurt your feelings but give you kisses.
>>9312 >Find me one person you actually disagrees with you Jehovah's Witnesses Mormons Oneness Pentecostals Roman Catholics (b/c filioque) Unitarians
>>9314 *kiss* *kiss*
Open file (1.36 MB 1032x1332 St. Arius.jpg)
>>9312 >>9311 The son by being begotten by the father is not coeternal with him, thereby i can assure you the son is inferior and subordinate to the father.
Open file (580.63 KB 2417x2560 20200824_042614-scaled.jpg)
>>9301 Why do they call themselves Unitarian then, instead of Christian? It's because they are sectarians: >They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. 1 John 2:18 Unitarians don't even believe in hell. They don't care what the Bible says even though you pretend like they do.
I don't suppose there are any books that affirm the bible while siting scientific information that agree with the bible, but not using the bible as it's ultimate source?
>>9323 i dont know of any but if youre looking for one to convince athiests with then id recommend you dont waste your time. Athiests will never believe Christians, they just gotta learn for themselves.
>>9312 Is that modalism though?
>>9316 What is John 1:1
>>9324 It was more for myself to learn more about Christianity from a scientific perspective.
>>9331 NTA. The closest thing you'll find today is RTB Anon. https://reasons.org But they are very devout in their Christianity, and Sola Scriptura is a founding principle of the ministry. So the 'Book of Nature' is subordinate
Open file (390.85 KB 793x900 hololive uruha rushia.jpg)
>>9333 >SIX DAYS ISN'T LITERAL IT'S NOT IT'S NOT! Bwaaaahahahaha! But they don't believe in theistic evolution? What kind of nonsense is this. Evolution is dumb but the universe is still billions of years old? When will they learn. The only reason pagans want the universe to be as old as possible is because they think with enough time octopuses and Banans can have a common ancestor. Paul warned of false science. Even early Christians were trying to meld truth with Roman and Greek paganism. Whatever the pagan science fantasy is of the current season. This website agrees with Adam and Eve but denies 6,000 years and they believe humans have been around 100,000 years? Do I even want to know how they accomplish this. Humans have not been around any longer than civilisation has been here 6,000 years. The age of the Earth. There is not a single argument left for the old universe theorist. Muh star light and Muh radiometric dating are done for. Give up Mr. Cruz it's over and accept the Bible.
It reminds me of the people now especially Chinese Christians who are going with the 40,000 year old Earth. "Carbon dating is the most reliable method and 40,000 is what the dinosaurs and mammoths and stuff date at." Well 40,000 is better than the millions they used to teach but they just don't get it, as they inch closer to the obvious truth. And those dates come because of the pre-flood world's atmosphere and environment. Everyone agrees the world was a tropical place with GIANT animals, camels twice the height of a man. Ancient humans had bigger brains and better teeth than us. This ended with the flood 4,400 years ago. The admit this sometimes for places like the Sahara desert, wow yes the tropical jungle of the Sahara suddenly vanished and the entire fossil record top to bottom is 98% sea life, clams and shells from mountains to valleys are world was flooded. It's really all just basic and obvious when you listen to the Bible it is never wrong, everyone who tries to differ from it plays catchup.
You can see how fossil layers formed during the flood sideways. this wasn't a sudden event it took a year of waves and sediment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFST2C32hMQ That's why we have sediment layers. Moon dust didn't rain down gravel and then ok now we're doing sand next. The sediment layers are organised the way they always organise themselves in water. And I have much less boring presentations explaining it. When you find jellyfish and squirrels buried together it's not because there was "Once an great ancient inland sea that swallowed land animals up from time to time and then vanish in but a night in yon far ancient past when doth yea Dinosarious roameth yon Earth" It's because of the flood. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oc9II-XY12g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOcndUvedGc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd5-dHxOQhg It's so obvious that sometimes I forget that many people actually don't believe the flood or young Earth. The flood more than anything has been proven by endless things, we're digging up the boat right now, resting right where the Bible said. It's just so insane to think most people are going to die believing lies.
>>9323 To not use the Bible as the ultimate source is to shoot yourself in the foot, it's revelation from God, after all. That said, there are good books on Intelligent Design out there, like 'The Design of Life' by Dembski and Wells, but even then they do not affirm Young Earth. I'd recommend also to look into the work of Dr. Jason Lisle, who deals with science the Genesis narrative, and also makes it clear that none of us are presuppositionally neutral - all facts are interpreted within a paradigm. That is why evolutionists and those who follow the Bible will look at the same facts and come to completely different interpretations.
>>9323 Go outside, all you will find here are $chizos and retards with little to no understanding of science and the historical method.
>>9346 >I'll call them stupid, that makes me smart Classic. I've never once heard someone defend their anti-science atheist religion and it's because they've never had their own views challenged before. Instead they will always rely on name calling, because their evidence is zero and part of them knows that. They deny science and they deny history, very basic history recorded by our ancestors and they lust instead after their own imaginations. Peter said in the last days they'd be willfully ignorant of the age of the universe and the flood. You can only ignore facts for so long, no one wants you to reject God believe it or not. No one is "coming after you." Some day you will die and if you had ignored everything to that point you're in trouble. The truth is actually good news you know. There is a strange thing no one has ever been able to explain, why do people hate the truth, if it is good news.
https://bibleprophecytalk.com/?powerpress_pinw=1680-podcast I mentioned already in this thread but I wish there was a proper Christian video site. Christian media site. Anything to keep away from distracting things when you use Youtube or any other site. I also feel better when I hear Christians talk about non-christian things because I feel like I'm not being constantly lied to or hearing from someone with an agenda.
>>9351 You can always start a PeerTube site yourself. Only peer with other Christian-oriented site.
>>9356 According to all histroy the flood happened. The oldest human writings from the Sumerians talk about Noah and people living hundreds and hundreds of years before the flood and every civilisation mentions their account of the flood and even the tower of Babel. But we are to assume ancient people were simply stupid and wasting time or didn't know their own history happening to them. Everyone agrees humanity spread from the near east where the Ark landed. Of course evolutionist try to say money men stsrted in Africa then went to the middle east and spread out. I've posted some things on this board, well, a lot of things by this point. I have yet to see a single reason why you believe what you believe in fact I don't think you knew what you believed or why before you cam here. I have to make your arguments and explain your religion to you. Ad far as I know I am the only person on this board who has defended Atheist mythology by bringing up their desperations. All evidence points to the Bible. Whether it's archeology, historical writings, fossil layers, the solar system. Weeks ago I brought up the Atheist arguments since you never do and I showed why they are wrong. This isn't a problem of facts. We already know that. It doesn't matter because people choose what they want to believe. I know that not only will you ignore and not believe anything I saw not look at anything I link or talk about. This isn't a brain issue it's a heart issue where you are not trying to find truth but defend a religion because you have already made your decision. So I know there's zero point in arguing with you. Trying to tell you about nature, it won't change anything. Why don't you believe in Jesus? All evidence points to him being resurrected. This is good news. People have testified for ages about the Holy Spirit. What is your real hang up with Jesus? Humans are not smart. The modern world wants us to disconnect with who we once were just a few generations or less ago. We have a purpose and place, the devil is desperate to trick the world otherwise he has always done this. "Well Jesus is old and weird why do I have to follow him and worship it's like tots weird and stuff." Jesus is the Saviour of the world and when we believe on him we can see Heaven. He was a very loving person that spoke of things only God would speak. John 7:45-48: Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him? The officers answered, Never man spake like this man. Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived? Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? Believe on Jesus not on what the rulers tell you to believe sitting in their rich chairs these people don't care about you. Jesus cared enough to die for you even when you'd disrespect him he saw into the future every man. Sacrifice is an odd thing, many things are odd in our world. Things are not simple nor is life and soul and redemption. Jesus is the only way and has only ever been the way. The true Gospel has survived.
>>9359 >>9349 >Aristotle stated in the History of Animals that all beings were arranged in a fixed scale of perfection, reflected in their form (eidos). They stretched from minerals to plants and animals, and on up to man, forming the scala naturae or great chain of being. BTFO'd by Aristotle (Pagan) >Al-Jahiz writes in Kitab al-Hayawan (IV,68) "Lice are black on the head of a young man with black hair, light on that of a hoary old man." This is a very clear example of micro-evolution. Al-Jahiz furthermore describes the struggle for existence and natural selection.[35] BTFO'd by Al-Jahiz (Muslim) >As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation. BTFO'd by Nicozisin (Father George) (Eastern Orthodox) >had baby Charles baptised in November 1809 in the Anglican St Chad's Church, Shrewsbury WTF charles darwin got baptized You only have dogma not truth, and shoehorn facts to fit it. You do not see the world as is, but instead you filter it to suit your sick fantasy.
>>9362 Are you sure you're replying to the right person? I'm not sure what you're trying to say. I was going into explaining the Gospel and you have distracted me.
Your soul controls and interfaces with your body, if you feed it ill things it will become ill. Once you detach from your body you're in a whole other realm. There is no such thing as consciousness from the brain. The brain is the player the reader of consciousness the soul. If your brain grows into one feeding off ill things you feed your soul that. https://streamable.com/3jx2hh https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOFGKhvWQ4M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnTVPCwPjhI You need to have love and understanding of Jesus the true Jesus Christ. By reading his words what is he telling you. What does God tell you through the book he has given. God likes matter he invented it he has planned an entire story. Why isn't the world all just blue and red sentient triangles? God has likes and dislikes he has a mind and designs. Why how is anything possible, it is only possible by thought, consciousness intelligence from spirit the soul. You're not a star fish.
>>9366 Dogma, dogma, dogma.
>>9368 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gefA3f0n3OY Now how did Jesus become the most important man in the world, being a peasant preacher for three years talking about Heaven and Hell. He told the truth. C.S. Lewis says, No man trying to be original will become original it's only the man who desires to do a good job and tell the truth who becomes really original and doesn't notice. Against persecution like we've never seen Jesus' words spread across the entire planet as he said they would and as he warned people would hate his preachers for telling basic truth. When Jesus spoke of things that seemed mythologically crazy we believe him, people believe him like no other man because he is telling the trurh, as he said he speaks of what he knows he speaks from his Father. The greatest truth teller and perfect man was born to presents and killed after three years of proper ministry. He didn't matter what came during his life or after it his words could not be silenced. People went right away within a single generation reaching across europe and into India, the actual speed of the Gospel was near instant whether it was accepted or not. It was in the New World before Columbus, someone brought a Hebrew inscription to North America I think most people know many Europeans especially from Portugal already knew of the far west lands. I get off topic. Jesus was the only Holy man who ever lived. The only real Son of God as the Pagans often claimed themselves to be despite all their many fake Godly idols to tell stories and excuse their sin. It was Jesus alone, humble who is the messiah promised to bless the world. When you experience him there is nothing else that matters. If you reject gim in ignorance than you will keep all your many Gods of money of porn of hatred which will fade away and be laughed at as myth with no historical basis. We don't have historical documents of Zeus walking the Earth No one is going to argue for his miracles. You will become just as fake as the pagans before you when you reject God's love and when you don't even take the time to understand it. The great miracles God has done with his people are all proven and seen today, the ones that can be. This is the real God. But he is no God looking to satisfy your intellect, he could not care less, he wants to know who you really are as a person and do you desire to be with him and his only begotten Son.
Here is the summary of why the Bible is so trustworthy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZkQ1szEvLQ And here is the Gospel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgUWg3ZY_C8 Close your pages and just listen to the Gospel with an open heart give yourself to Jesus for a moment. He is alive and he does know you. Just take some time from your life and seek eternal life. The reward of not being in Heaven but having a Father in Heaven and living and worshipping Jesus forever in peace and joy and perfection. You will not want sin in the light of righteousness that can be given to you. Jesus must accept you, so seek and ask him. Ask God if he exists, he's not going to be offended he'll be glad to see you take a step and guide you to further steps.
This also are summaries of the realities of the resurrection. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQmpk7IMO8I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8fKZ9QyHH4 The Gospel message: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBEoI2u6kII This might be over bearing. But I want to see you in Heaven atheist-kun. I don't want you to let go of this opportunity.
H-hey what are you doing. Reopen that porn page... S-stop praying. Don't watch that sermon, why are you ignoring me. Why are you repenting again, God hates you he'll never accept you, stop it. Why aren't you listening. Are you going to that prayer spot outside again? I told you God's not listening, you're not a real disciple. Why won't you watch a movie or something. Remember when you used to play video games all day, wasn't that more fun? If you don't stop praying I'll give you a cold. Guess what, you're not really saved, that experience was a delusion. Remember that time you committed the unforgiveable sin against the Holy Spirit, that's what you did! That's what you did! Y,ou can't be forigven. Are you listening to me, Hello!? Put the Bible down! You only read to try and look good to God. Did you know you're a monkey, you're just a monkey why don't you jump up and down like a monkey, it's science, monkey. That person makes you sick, you should hate them. Are you going to sleep, don't think I won't be here when you wake up. Why won't you hate God, Hell is totally going to be better I-I can't wait it'll be filled with real souls that listen to me.
>>9376 nice post
>>9 306 A sound endorsement, Moishe. >>9314 All correct, though Catholics who forgo the filioque leave the schism. >>9315 Do you think you're some sort of nanny? Let it be remembered that millions of men lived, fought, and died. on the question of the Trinity throughout the ages. To call it a triviality is fundamentally ignorant at best, dishonest at worst.
>>9369 >Now how did Jesus become the most important man in the world Because of roman support(costantine) and western colonialism, if it weren't for whites shoving their middle eastern rabbi down the throats of the colonized christianity wouldn't have left the middle east.
>>9398 >if it wasn't for whites- That's it I'm sick of this board. It's bad enough the fake christians talk like this but et tu Atheist-kun? I thought we were making progress. You come here clearly because you want to know the truth John 3:11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. I mean you read one sentence of my post and that's great and all. I tell you it is all the truth and the Gospel is good news which you ignore for no real reason. Everyone wants you to go to Heaven and everyone wants you to die to yours sins. It is up to Christ to choose you and he can through your faith but ye have anti-faith and the spirit of your Father the dark one clouded over you. I'd be surprised if you make a change here. But you are at least making the effort by coming. If you had any questions they can be answered I can tell you you aren't going to die and you're here because you're uncertain of that. The Lord can make you certain we are the only ones in this universe made for us. I have a lot of prepared things that might convince you. But given the hardness of your heart you need a deep and physical love and you need to know the real Jesus by first reading his words.
Is anyone bothered by the term "God bless" I can't tell if it's because it seems like just a cultural christian term or it sounds like it demands of God there's never a please or may in front of it.
Open file (2.98 MB 6000x4000 4.jpg)
Story! A few days ago during a sermon I realised the Ghost wanted me to delete my anime folder, very clearly told me, I never thought much about the folder recently. It's the last hold out from my previous life. I had been sorting it out cutting it down every time getting rid of more and more HARAM images. I didn't delete the folder right away when the spirit told me to. Then for three days each time I did my major prayer time I couldn't focus and the spirit kept telling me to delete the folder. Then finally I started to go in and try to pick out just a few images, I didn't listen and I ended up masturbating when I hadn't masturbated in weeks. So I was being warned quite obviously of that conclusion. So very stupid and the lesson of course is just listen and do. I wanted to make excuses that some of the images were useful it's so unfortunate and dumb. It's now my third major Christian life blunder. Even now I'm only finally able to delete all my anime images because of writing this. I probably could have still kept some other ones if I had just listened right away and deleted the main folder. Anime was a very large part of my old life for a very long time and I think it's finally done. I could tell what the problem was, I was treating this thing as more important than Christ essentially. I was holding on to this idol despite Jesus telling me to let go, testing me, seeing what I value more. Thought that'd be and interesting story and warning if there's anything in your life that you know is a prickle right now. Anime images are great I can express my emotion surely online with them, well, if God tells you something there's a reason, you gotta do it. I'm not trying to say you need to get rid of your Christchan images by the way, this was just a thing for me that happened. I'm gonna collect food images now! Seriously though dumb dumb dumb I was.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHYQk0tkyik Never actually heard him speak before. Thought he'd sound totally different but he sounds genuine.
>>9421 The "may" is implied. Saying "God bless" and "may God bless you" mean the same thing
>>9421 >All correct, though Catholics who forgo the filioque leave the schism. They are quite ambiguous on the filioque these days. Many Eastern Catholics don't include it in their creed, and some even venerate people who are considered heretics by Western Catholics. This position of Rome towards these churches would seem to be at odds with the interpretations of the filioque put forth at later councils like Florence, which go as far as to essentially reduce the Trinity into a Father-Son dyad. This isn't too surprising given the Catholic push for ecumenism with even Muslims nowadays. There is an Orthodox understanding of the filioque, and hopefully Catholics will come closer to it and abandon the heretical interpretations.
>>9435 Did you just put a random series of words together?
>>9439 No. The point is clear - the Catholic Church doesn't care about its own history and doctrines. The filioque is at contrast with the writings of the Fathers, and later documents from the Catholic Church don't profess the Trinity at all, but a heretical Father-Son dyad. This issue was large enough to cause the East-West schism, but the Catholic Church today is in communion with Eastern Churches who continue to not use the filioque and continue to venerate anti-filioque saints who Catholics consider heretical historically. It's a complete contradictory mess. This lack of concern for history and doctrines is made even clearer with the fact that the Catholic Church today has been engaging in 'Abrahamic' ecumenism with Muslims and Jews. Multiple popes have prayed towards Mecca, kissed Qur'ans, said that Muslims are inheritors of the promise of Abraham, etc. That said, there are non-heretical interpretations of the filioque that have foundations in the writings of the Fathers, but Catholics would need to repudiate councils such as Florence and others that have heretical formulations to get back on the right footing.
>>9441 If you're saying the Catholic church is evil indeed it is. Certainly the top of the church, it was a political power and bank first. A megachurch like we see today, they persecuted true christians and their big names are always non-christians like Augustine who supported prostitution and said to allow certain evils so that certain good not be lost. What? I'm shocked anyone thinks the Catholic church is a force of good, it never was and never has been in fact you'll notice Catholics won't even defend their church. It was bad in the past and the tip people are bad but you know maybe it's right about some stuff today. No. And if you're a symbolism guy the Catholic church is out right demonic. Catholics should just go to the Orthodox church if they want that kind of phony feeling church. Also I have nothing against Catholics or Orthodox I'm just saying how I feel I don't really care as long as you're saved and Jesus is making you more like him.
>>9442 >nothing against >phony Youuuu're not very good at tact, are you? Meaning not readily apparent does not mean there is none.
>>9447 *burps on you*
What matters is not the past, nor the future, you don't know the future. If you're thinking of meeting Jesus in the future then he might surprise you today. If you're living with your parents and thinking: well I'll have my own place some day and read my Bible more and I'll do great things and have money to give to the poor, something like that. Think about what you can do in the now. Take out the garbage for mummy, do all the dishes. Be an annoying good person, even if your parents are ill towards you. They shout and scream about how terrible the house is, maybe they want to be angry, they'll only realise how foolish they've been when they have nothing to scream about, they'll see their own imperfections. Jesus was a perfect child, can you imagine how annoying that would be for his siblings. His brother James didn't want to follow him until after the resurrection. Be an annoyingly good person. The devil should be annoyed. If you sit there not attending to the opportunities then the devil loves you, he can't defeat you but you're nothing to him. If you start fixing your home with good deeds the devil will despise you.
>>9442 You realize augustine was a pleasure seeking Hedonist, then a pleasure-hating Manichean, then a Christian. His comments on vices like prostitution come from his time as a hedonist. He is known for being reluctant in giving up wordly things, famously saying "O lord, make me celibate, but not yet". Augustine wrote some very good works on Christianity, and you shouldn't discard his ideas solely based on his hedonistic, anti-Christian early life.
>>9524 okay.
>>9524 Anyone who hates Augustine for that would have to hate Paul in extension to be consistent since he helped kill Christians in his earlier life.
If you look at a pdf of the original kjv Bible 1611, they spell his name as Jefus Chrift. and Holy Ghoft. Fhall instead of shall, and they use the S other places. In fact I notice words just totally spelt differently than how they are in modern kjv Bibles. Like they say starre instead of star. I thought this was suppose to be the definitive infallible version of the English Bible never to change. Gosh people think the version we have today is harder to read, but the real original is even less like modern English.
>>9574 yes. And I see every modern kjv bible is actually based on a revision in the 1700s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiIHYKuzlaI Are pragmatic Christians dangerous? Are they doing more harm than good. Although slowly Jordon Peterson is kind of accepting the reality of it. As far as we know Roger Scruton never turned to Jesus truly. A lot from the generation went from being a gamer to being an anti-SJW to being a philosophical conservative. The next step for these people you would hole would be just to become a real Christian.
Open file (300.28 KB 893x1260 KJV_editions.jpg)
>>9576 The 1769 revision was based and standardized the printing of the Bible in English: https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/changes_to_kjv_since_1611.html Here is a list of every single major editorial revision between the KJV 1611 and the modern KJV: http://www.bibleprotector.com/400yearsKJBeditions.pdf The update of spelling and punctuation didn't violate the integrity of scripture. American backwater Protestants think that the KJV didn't receive any updates, but the KJV we have today is actually significantly refined from the 1611 one. The 1611 thing is more of a label since they all use the 1769 one anyway, with the Cambridge version being more consistent than the Oxford one. You can check the difference on Bible Gateway where the Authorized Version is the Cambridge edition but the regular KJV is actually the Oxford, they're the same 98% of the time.
>>9579 >The next step for these people you would hole would be just to become a real Christian. Being a cultural Christian is stupid and I don't get why people like Peterson can study the Bible but then sidestep around believing in God because without faith, it might as well be another storybook, and that is the way the atheist scholars take it. You have no real argument in a debate about the superiority of Christianity or the Bible if you don't affirm divine inspiration.
This is a painting of Matthew from ancient Palestine.
>>9579 Peterson converted thousands, just by showing that the bible stories have great knowledge in them. That modern materialistic myth that the bible is just nonsense was dispelled in people's minds, and they became open to scripture and then God. That Peterson himself never fully commits doesnt change the fact that he was a positive influence on souls. >>9594 What does their clothing matter, we also have chinese clothing Jesus and Mary paintings.
>>9596 Oh very fun person you are
>>9579 Peterson is a false teacher until he fully accepts Christ. Thousands of Christians are being influenced by his Jungian occultism
>>9604 >Thousands of Christians are being influenced by his Jungian occultism Still better than following some homopedo roman church
Open file (3.72 MB 640x800 Clawz SG - Flux.webm)
Jesus said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." I'm sure you all know which passage I'm talking about. I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity is not a pacifist religion and there are numerous examples of people being put to death for their sinful behaviors all throughout the Bible AND Church history so what did He mean by this? File unrelated.
>>9707 You need to consider the situation in its full context. Let's go by it passage by passage, fair warning I'm not a proper theologian and encourage others anons to correct me. I should not and do not replace a properly ordained priest. lets start at John 8:2, as 8:1 is meaningless without prior passages. >Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him and he sat down and began to teach to him two important things, first Jesus is doing this early in the morning, both the teacher and the students consider his teachings to be the most important thing one could be doing in the morning. Secondly it states all the people, not all the Jews. Which means there very well could have been Romans who wandered in half curious and got engaged in the wisdom of the Lord. >The Scribes and the Pharisees brought a women who had been caught in adultery; and making her stand before all of them, During his teachings the Scribes and Pharisees interrupt the Lord's teachings, imagine if during a sermon you stood up and shouted at the priest "Yeah well what about X?" Whatever point they had is made moot by their interruption and rudeness towards the Lord, by speaking out of turn they completely disrespect the teachings. >They said to him, "Teacher, this women was caught in the very act of committing adultery Addressing Christ as Teacher is dishonest of them, as they do not regard him as a teacher of any sort. This is a trap they lay for him as to mock him and what he teaches, and you'll see the trap in the next verse. >Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. What do you say?" This is the trap. Our Lord has been preaching the virtues of forgiveness and mercy prior to this. Now the Pharisees think they have one up on him as the law of Moses is cut and dry, stone the women and offer no mercy to her. They wish for him to either break the law and have him arrested or go back on his teachings. >They said this to test him, so that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. And here John agrees with my statement, they want to have Jesus arrested. Do note that it is unknown what Jesus wrote into the ground but for whatever reason John thought it important to note that he did, perhaps a wiser anon can enlighten us. >When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them "Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." This is how Jesus not only disarms the trap, but wraps it around the neck of the Pharisees. He has given them full permission to stone the women, but only on the condition that one among them be without sin themselves. The Lord, being the only one without sin, has told them to do it, so they can not even command him to do it. >And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground The focus John has on this writing points towards it being important, but I am not a wise enough man to figure out why. >When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders: and Jesus was left alone with the women standing before him. They see the trap that Jesus has expertly disarmed and wrapped around their neck, and admit defeat by withdrawing. The elders, being wiser with age, do this first but none of them are prideful enough to think they are without sin, and so all go away. >Jesus straightened up and said to her, "Women, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" With the Pharisees gone, technically nobody is accusing her anymore. With no accusers left there is nothing to stone her for. Though Jesus could change this at any moment by accusing her himself, and being without sin, he could cast the first stone. Here he is the ultimate Judge of not just her body but her soul. >She said, "No one, sir." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again." This is the most important of the entire passage, and the last one. With all of her accusers having left, Jesus can without breaking the law set her free. He does this, granting mercy and forgiveness. Yet this does not come without cost, as he gives her condition. She may go her way, but she is to sin no more. This is teaching that second chances are very much a Christian concept. Should she be caught again in Adultery he will not save her, for she was given a chance to learn. That is the meaning of this Chapter. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is only a call to non-violence if you read it in isolation. In truth it is a call to give a second chance and offer forgiveness. Forgiveness is not given without condition, but it is given regardless. As we all live in sin, we should not be quick to judge but instead offer forgiveness understanding that we too are sinful beings trying to be better, and to fall to sin doesn't need to be a permeant status. Think of how many Saints, in the days of ancients and the modern era never would have had a chance to do the Lord's work had they not been given a second chance to straighten themselves out. Only the Lord, with his infinite wisdom and knowledge, can truly know if a person is serious when they repent, because not even the repented can truly know until their death if they actually meant it.
>>9609 >following Baal is better than Tammuz!
>>9715 >theyre the god
>>9710 Did Jesus use his power to send the crowd away? Later on they wouldn't have any problems either with crucifying Him or stoning Christians for having done nothing wrong to them at all.
>>9742 No I don't think so. Keep in mind that the Pharisees were not as united as you may think, as per John 9:16. Some would go on to accept him as the Lord and become what we know today as Christian Jews, for not all of Jewry denied him. Those that did deny him first had to come to grips with their own sin and be driven to desperation, for few men will immediately resort to murder to solve problem. It is a temptation that comes to them slowly and seemingly with reason, for mortal sin is insidious and always seems reasonable at the time.
I went to a new church and the preaching was all about Calvinism. The pastor disappeared so I couldn't ask him anything. Like every argument in the world people ignore what it's actually about. No one questions that salvation is given to people by the decision of God. The question is why does he do it. And when yoh ask a Calvinist why he was chose he says, "I don't know" and to some extend that's okay to say. But clearly there is a reason. Did God blindfold himself and throw darts at a list of names? People can be saved at any time for any reason. But reality is how many sinners who hate Jesus are going to be saved versus people who choose to seek him. Then they say, Ah but God has to give us the will to seek him. The idea that God puppets us I would like more clarification about, is this all the time? Do we have any free-will before or after salvation? And then the monkey rench, II Peter 3:9, Peter says God is not willing any should perish but all should come to repentance. Perish in the New Testament clearly means Hell, dying in your sins. If it is God's will then what reason doesn't he save everyone? The answer is because of man's will. Some don't choose God. I know why I was saved, because God is so merciful and saw use in me. I also repented and believed the Gospel, was it my choice to repent and believe the Gospel truly? If not what's the point of telling people to believe the Gospel and truly repent if they literally can't without God, well the reason is God puppets me to random people until I get to the person I was predestined to tell and then they get saved? I think the overall message of the Gospel is you yourself need to make a choice and with grace that choice leads you to the Father and then to the Son, you can't believe on Jesus without first believing in a God. Paul can be saved The two problems, Salvation is not random and we are not puppeted by God into Salvation. Although of course God knows who is going to be saved. There's a lot more to talk about, the issue is it gets into the concept of omnipotence, God knows and sees all, very hard to grasp. Does God however puppet the universe? Well if he does something in the universe such as creating it he then knows what the domino effect is, therefore he created knowing everything that we and himself would do so even if you say he doesn't puppet it he clearly created being content with everything that would happen UNLESS he chooses not to see certain things, which is possible. Anyways I don't think it's right and we should stand believing anyone we see can be saved if they repent and believe and God chooses them which he is very likely to do in that case. God already knows if that person is going to Heaven or not but his decision is based on that persons free will to come to him. The bottom line, if God is not willing any should perish he would force everyone to desire him and save them, but he doesn't because not everyone comes to him seeking truth. But I couldn't talk to the pastor and I know Calvinist have their verses, I'm not even sure if I want to get to the bottom of this because personally I have never heard anyone articulate clearly their opinion on this and I just believe God chooses us based on what he wants and what he sees us doing with our free will if that be seeking him and while only God can bring us truly to the Son, we make the first step and we also choose to follow the step he offers us. The Father might bring everyone to the realisation of the Son but you can still reject it, I think God has helped many many atheists seem him and have given them many chances, but they just don't want to have faith, they reject the offer and therefore reject the Holy Ghost and so long as they do that of their own prideful decision God will reject them despite his urging. The unforgivable sin in the world to come.
I forgot to finish my point about Paul. He was almost forced into Christ though again could he have rejected Jesus even after seeing him? I'm sure he could have, but in a sense it's pointless to bring up because God knew he wouldn't reject the vision. So... I don't know this is the issue. We have free will but based on that free will God does things around us something something, or God puppets us. It's really just bothersome and some might say oooh you really need to be firm in doctrine, I'm not sure that this boils down to doctrine it's arguing about whether I can go back in time and kill my grandfather. Then after Paul is Cornelius who the angel says essentially because of his good deeds he is given the gift of hearing the Gospel. Did he do those good deeds himself and found favor in God? I think so and God said okay here's Peter now believe and I will fill you with the Holy Ghost.
>>9764 >>9768 Seek a psychiatrist
The issue with Calvinism is quite simple. The saved are saved and the damned are damned. There is no changing this. If I believe myself to be saved, what point is there in improving myself, for would I not be a holy man? Would I not be a living Saint should I believe myself to be saved in a doctrine in where man has no control over this? Conversely if I am damned, what use is there in God? Why would I ever work towards him if there will never be forgiveness of my sins? Why would I not do the works of Satan and hedge my bets that he will reward me if God has shut me out forever? Calvinism brings only evil, for the saved will never work to bring good, and the damned will work to only bring evil. Had I been raised a Calvinist I know myself that I would believe myself to be damned, and work to bring great evils upon the supposed saved for no other choice would be given to me. Thankfully this never occurred, and I came into proper doctrine which did save me and continues to save me from sin.
And lastly the famous verse Ephesians 2:8: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: I always read this very clearly as, you are saved by grace because of your faith. And that is the heart of the Gospel, if you believe it then you can receive grace. Faith the grace and faith we bring. Frankly faith is rarely something I pray about because I feel like if there's anything we are responsible for it is faith, we bring that to the table God enjoys seeing that, he doesn't give us it, he can help us have faith of course by miracles or leading us places, but our free-will is our faith. But the verse says not of ourselves! Yes. Salvation is not of ourselves, salvation is the topic we cannot save ourselves that's why we need faith in God that he can save us that he can do everything and when we believe that we can receive grace.
>>9772 >If I believe myself to be saved, what point is there in improving myself, for would I not be a holy man? I'm pretty sure that Calvinism has a subtlety where if you think you're saved but you live out none of it in your actions, you'll be punished as a hypocrite at the judgement. This doesn't deter your average Calvinist from being full of it, though.
>>9772 Yeah bottomline Calvanism where we are puppeted into salvation the biggest issue is that simnners and people going to Hell is all on God. People in Hell can literally blame God for being there because it was all up to him, they can say, Well how come you didn't give me the will to seek you. Hell was prepared for the devil and his angels, men go there by their stubborn and wickedness. I really really wish I could have questioned the pastor to see what he said specifically I think on what II Peter says, that's the biggest monkey rench I believe against the no free-will grace is random blah blah blah ideas.
>>9777 And further blaming God for being in Hell is simply NOT the Bible. When Lazarus is in Hell he says warn my brothers and Abraham doesn't respond: Well God might save them who knows. He says they already have the knowledge of sin and God and therefore it is up to them. Yes God chooses who to save but he saves LOGICALLY based on the person. In Revelation when it describes people being eaten by demonic scorpions and all this it says the people still did not repent and turn to God. It's the message of the Bible to repent not sit around and hope God gives you the will to repent although again we ultimately conclude there, if you believe freewill is all under God and we just are moved only by him and either accept or reject based on what he determines in us then there's no point discusing with such a person because they believe we are all robots and are discussion is predetermined so... We go to Hell of our own faults and will, that is also why I disagree with original sin. By default we go to Heaven, but the moment we sin which is inevitable we go to Hell. Babies don't sin which is why babies would go to Heaven. Death was brought in from the sin and fall. But whether it's Adam's sin or our own that first condems us it is odd to place blame on God unless he controls our will which there's almost no reason to believe that and many many reasons in the Bible to believe we are in control, though generally we try to let the Spirit control us, but it's our decision God wants it to be our decision. If I make a learning AI in a videogame, that AI I know all the code for, but I do not decide what it does within it's code.
>>9775 While true, that merely promotes doing the bare minimum to be saved. Why bother with going out of your way to help others, to do graceful charity, when you just need to not be a hypocrite? Like I said, there is no point in Improving once saved. None of this, of course, does anything for those already damned, why wouldn't they continue being evil?
>>9710 Thank you, Anon. That was very helpful.
>>9710 Context is, was, and always will be key.
>>9788 "We don't know who's damned, but we know that we're saved" I think is how they approach it.
>>9768 >He was almost forced into Christ though again could he have rejected Jesus even after seeing him? I heard of a story secondhand about an atheist who was attacked by a demon and the guy called out for Christ, and the attack stopped. What did this guy do afterwards? Continue to be an atheist. One's free-will is never compromised.
>>9822 I used to laugh at claims that Harry Potter would normalize Witchcraft, but the people who said this back in the day appeared to be 100% correct. Wicca and New Age occult practices are more common than ever.
>>9850 It's was the same with sex and rock 'n' roll or satanism and rock music, the old Christians of the satanic panic were right, people just forgot about them by the time their prediction became real.
>>9879 Yeah at this point I take the people saying this stuff seriously and echo their claims. Similar to this is ideas like the slippery slope. It's very real.
The reason why God's covenants with Israel contain temporally, geographically and culturally specific things is because it would be easier for the people that would become Israel to accept them by their free will and so God wouldn't have to force anyone to follow them. Do I have this right?
>>9908 The things specific to Israel were added to them because of their transgressions and rebellion against God (Galatians 3:19), and because in many ways, Israel was held to a higher standard than the rest of humanity until the coming of Christ, and were to a be a holy nation which would deliver to the Messiah as a light to the nations. In many ways you are probably correct.
>>9850 I would argue that that isn't Harry Potter, but the overbearing reaction towards it and the various satanic panics prior. Because they freaked out over it, people wanted to rebel because they had become tyrants of morality. In this fight, Those that follow God properly only stood to lose, because either the self-righteous and heretical tyrants would prevail and tighten their grip, or they would lose and God would be driven away from the people. This is why heresies are so dangerous.
>>9954 Either way, it normalized witch and magic in the popular consciousness of a generation, leading to the present state of things.
>>9954 I can't say you're completely wrong. The reaction (justified as it was) certainly could have led to a greater counter-reaction. The ground was already laid though in the decades prior for pagan ideas like this to spread. Just look at the fringes of the far-right nowadays. It is full of antichrists who pretend to be pagans. This stuff is everywhere.
>>10021 Glownigger, pls. You stick out like a sore thumb across both these boards here. Back to basic training with you. -10 demerits for pure-diversity tactics. Leftism has practically 100% adherence to these demonic ideologies, and has been since day one. They vastly outnumber these so-called 'right-wing larpers' you speak of. Why no 'fair & balanced' mention of their far greater degree of evil. <<<out.
Open file (163.70 KB 1920x1280 acorns-ga4dcfde62_1920.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnrzCRXmu0c Reminder Jews do indeed worship a Roman Fortress. It's not mentioned here but apparently Simon the Hasmonean physically removed the original section of mt. Zion throwing the earth into the valley to connect the lower and upper sections. And while it may seem funny that the Jews worship a Roman Fortress and the evidence is so obvious but they have to deny it becuase... How embarrassing. I don't even think it's funny. Just, wow, that really is embarrassing. Jews worship a Roman fort, Muslims worship a literal rock at Mecca. It's a rock from the rock worshippers that Muhammad evolved the Arabs out of, it's embarrassing.
Open file (3.19 MB 4078x3059 2.jpg)
>>10039 >Leftism has practically 100% adherence to these demonic ideologies, and has been since day one. I don't disagree. >They vastly outnumber these so-called 'right-wing larpers' you speak of. I don't disagree. The problem is that LARPagan ideas are heavily shilled for among traditional / anti-left circles nowadays though, and this is an attempt to smuggle in satanism. NatSoc and Satanism have a long and intertwined history.
>>10119 I really need to point out the fact the girl says "I am evil for having an abortion but I need to think about my education." We are so defeated. The devil has completely destroyed civilisation, he has penis slapped it so hard. The things he's gotten people to accept and believe and live for.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3H-IkiBtms Gene Kim crushing the Calvinists once again, no one can stop the man, wild card, truly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRgPKrD31fU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8e8regQmXg This Orthodox character is really good, I thought the Orthodox guys usually did believe in original sin though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cU2L1_hWVw Paul Washer knowing you're really saved or not. Something that would be really helpful for a lot of people who come here I think.
>>9581 I still haven't looked anything about this up but it wouldn't be surprising. If the star in the sky was actually a comet with a tail that was in the sky 70 days the comet tail would essentially act like an arrow to guide the Magi. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52hVgs5ykFc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4zVMvW7yE4 Gene Kim he just can't keep getting away with it. He's outta line. The moose is loose. "Calvinist are incredible losers, and that is very unfortunate, and that is very sad." Well they were predestined to be that way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdNZtduV2AY I know the Zeitgeist movie is old now and no one even remembers it but it tricked a lot of people when it came out. It's actual lies on screen in your face I think it just goes to show the desperation Atheists will go to to try and delegitimize the truth. From all the fake piltdown mans to lying about when the Gospels were written or whatever, the devil never sleeps. He is desperate to fool people. The Devil knows he's going to the lake of fire he just wants to see how many he can drag down into eternity with him, he ain't wanna be alone a 'tall.
>>10080 >>10119 >>10124 >>10125 >>10126 >>10127 >>10130 >>10131 >>10137 >>10140 >>10184 Stop spamming chink and shitskin channels.
>>9579 I love that Dave Rubin talk between Jordon Peterson and Ben Shaprio. A fake Christian and a fake Jew talking about religions they aren't apart of.
>>10185 This is why you aren't in Christ yet. Not that you care I suspect.
Does anyone have that old article about that Japanese Christian mascot for some Christian organization?
Open file (86.34 KB 615x616 Oh no.jpg)
>>10188 >why you aren't in Christ yet Oh my, does christ want me...... in him.....thats very..... naughty...
>>10285 He did a little mistake. Christ is supposed to in you.
Open file (18.38 KB 300x306 Oh my.jpg)
>>10287 Is this what must be done to be saved, to have christ in me....
>>10290 It is never too late to let him in.
>>6836 opinion on Leviticus 19:34?
>>10427 the only issue i could see with it is people misunderstanding it as implying you should let foreigners stay in your country. Foreigners couldnt own land in Israel so the verse is talking about temporary travel.
>>10427 It means don't abuse or take advantage of foreigners living in your country. A violation of the commandment would be to deliberately target such foreigners for low paid work with shitty, abusive conditions and then threaten to have them deported if they complain. But it's a good thing nobody does that.
What happened to the suicide thread? Did anon actually off himself?
hi, i'm new to christianity so i've got a few questions how did Satan rebel if all angels have perfect will? and how come God uses angels at all instead of doing it himself? also i'm kind of confused about sin and such, God made us and knew exactly how things would go down, so how come he allows people to sin and get condemned to hell and such? i feel like i have an intuitive reason as to why, but i can't put my finger on it thanks in advance
>>11098 >how did Satan rebel if all angels have perfect will? angels dont have perfect will, they have free will much like humans. >how come God uses angels at all instead of doing it himself? to my knowledge He only uses angels when its more convenient >God made us and knew exactly how things would go down, so how come he allows people to sin and get condemned to hell and such? good question, and one few people know how to answer. In order to find out youll have to first understand the "Philosophy of God" or "Balance Theory" which is basically the idea that God is a perfect balance of many positive yet conflicting virtues. For example Justice and Mercy, its impossible to have 100% of both at the same time so therefore they must be balanced. Long story short, God loves humanity thus He created us but He also knows that not all humans will love Him back so He needs a way to get rid of those who dont, but at the same time He still loves them and this is where Hell comes into play and also where things become blurry because we dont actually know for sure what Hell is. In my opinion it is not a eternal punishment but rather a eternal destruction of the soul. This theory not only coincides with the beliefs of the early Church fathers (to my knowledge) but it also doesnt contradict the morality of God. So basically God destroys the souls of the non-believers which balances things out.
Edited last time by AntichristHater on 05/14/2022 (Sat) 20:28:20.
>>11098 >how did Satan rebel if all angels have perfect will? They don't. AFAICT from scripture, they aren't the same in 'free' will as us humans are. They are servants of the Most High. That's why there's no salvation for Satan and the 1/3 of the angels who rebelled with him against God -- they usurped their estate. >and how come God uses angels at all instead of doing it himself? I don't find that to be nearly as interesting a question as the more fundamental one IMO: >How come God uses human beings at all? Plainly, God is entirely self-sufficient. He has perfect society and love among Himself, and he has no lack of anything whatsoever. Apparently, He's pleased to use 'these jars of clay' to perfect His will on Earth. https://www.biblehub.com/2_corinthians/4-7.htm I think it's a sovereignty thing personally. 'Adam' literally means clay. >tl;dr Man has authority on the Earth God fashioned him from and gave to him to rule over. >God made us and knew exactly how things would go down, so how come he allows people to sin and get condemned to hell and such? Very deep, very fundamental question Anon. Free will is like that. Having a robot that repeated I love you! whenever you clicked the remote wouldn't be real love now, would it. OTOH, since he means to take us Believers out of this 'playpen' (to wit; this life, this universe) and help us stand up straight, it's important that we pass the test in this life by this most powerful creature Satan, first. That way in the New Heavens and the New Earth, it will be literally impossible for us to sin again after we've been test with this life, and with the refining furnace of Jesus Christ's own judgement and cleansing. I hope that helps Anon, cheers.
>>11098 Because they rather do their wills than do God's. Knowing the consequences doesnt change anything, plenty of people also know the consequences and they still choose hell. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nt_eTbkrR-g
I'm deciding on visiting a church. I'm not sure of all the denominations, but the Catholic doctrine is perhaps closest to my heart (out of all that I know of), Orthodox coming second. Does denomination matter, if so, which is the true church? Then touching on Catholicism itself, there are many smaller organizations in the Church itself: Benedictines, Franciscans, Norbertines, etc. What's with that? A Norbertine church is the closest to me, should I start attending and get baptized there? One thing I don't like and fear about Catholic churches is their worship of the Pope, and even worse of the Pope of this age, who I believe is a heretic, then again I've heard some interesting opinions that the current few Popes weren't the real Popes, but "anti-popes" of the end times fulfilling the prophecies (vaticancatholic.com and mgr.org). Could Anons share their knowledge on the matter with me and enlighten me?
>>11146 >Benedictines, Franciscans, Norbertines, etc. What's with that? Those are monks.
how do i fast when i work a physically demanding job with long hours, without depriving myself of energy and nutrition
>>11153 I don't know the answer to your question but i'd say to ask your doctor because you can get permanent issues from fasting incorrectly.
I've had it with god and his shit. I told him to stop being such a niggerfaggot and to start helping me. Undoubtedly he won't, because he's very incompetent, with the iq of a nigger. I've had it with his shit.
How can god tell us he'll punish us, when it's him that created us, and him that created this hell-earth instead of a proper planet to learn on, and it's him that created non-whites and women. Why should we be scared of him, when it's him committing all the evils against us. he is the one abusing us.
Why follow god's laws, if he can't even have the slightest courtesy of shining some light into your life. Why doesn't he follow MY laws instead of being such a nigger.
If we need physical stuff to survive, then why doesn't god provide any to me? Why has he taken away everything I had(job, house, money, health, appearance, and everything else)? Even Job had a happy ending. But apparently none for me.
I'm done talking to god until he stops being such a faggot. The ONLY thing I asked of him is to shine a little bit of his light in my life. But he never does. Everything is always shit.
God will help you. You just have to take your meds schizo.
>>11190 Romans 9:18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. Everything good comes from God, so if there is anything good in your life then God has blessed you. For example your lively hood is a blessing.
why is God a trinity i still dont get it? like why not a duality or a quaternity or such
>>11254 There's no necessity in God. He doesn't 'have' to be any way whatsoever. He is triune because that is what He has chosen to be since eternity, and this is what is revealed in the sacred Scriptures.
>>11254 Because there are only three distinct persons described in the bible, if there were only two it would be a duality.
>>11268 >use Tor >go to the Israeli site like anon wants >ACCESS DENIED I suppose their paranoia is well-earned tbh.
>>11268 I'll believe it when I see it. No doubt this is a sign of the times though.
People fall away from God, because He doesn't shine any of His light in their lives. They struggle and follow God's laws, and understand them, but then God just sends the world and it's demons after His sons. This makes them believe that He either doesn't exist, is incompetent, or is somewhat evil. I curse God every day. I didn't ask for any of this, and I revoked His permission to keep me on Earth. But still, He never speaks to me or does anything positive in my life. I'm not asking for material things - I just want Him to show me that He exists, and that all of this is still part of His plan - but He never answers. I'm completely alone, but I suppose it's better to believe in the possibility of God's existence and that He's looking after me, than to have to face the reality of the world being cold and brutal and realistic.
>>11271 >I just want Him to show me that He exists, and that all of this is still part of His plan maybe this is apart of His plan.
are there any other non-cannon books that talk about the end times like Revelation?
>>11271 Stop cursing and blaspheming the God that loves you and created you, and maybe things will go better for you.
>>6836 What does the word "violence" mean in the bible?
>>11279 2 Esdras
>>11298 do you mind giving me the run down?
>>11303 >II Esdras (or IV Esdras) was written in Hebrew, but only various translations from a lost Greek version are preserved. The Latin version (in which chapters 1–2 and 15–16 have been added by a Christian hand) at one time was printed at the end of the Latin Bible. The book consists of six visions attributed to the biblical Ezra (who is, at the beginning of the book, erroneously identified with Salathiel, the father of Zerubbabel, a leader of the returning exiles from Babylon). The tragedy of his nation evokes in the heart of the author questions about God’s righteousness, the human condition, the meaning of history, and the election of Israel; “Ezra” does not find consolation and full answer in the words of the angel who was sent to him, which also contain revelations about the last days. In the fourth vision “Ezra” sees a mourning woman; she disappears and a city (the New Jerusalem) stands in her place. In the fifth vision a monstrous eagle appears, the symbol of the Roman Empire, and a lion, the symbol of the Messiah. The final victory of the Messiah is described in the last vision of the man (Son of man) coming from the sea. https://www.britannica.com/topic/biblical-literature/II-Esdras-or-IV-Esdras
Bible books in order of completion. [[Enoch]] Job Genesis Exodus [[Jubilees]] Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua [[Jasher]] Ruth Judges I Samuel / I Kings II Samuel / II Kings I Chronicles Proverbs [Wisdom / Wisdom of Solomon] Song of Songs Ecclesiastes I Kings / III Kings Obdias / Obadiah Joel Amos Jonas / Jonah Osee / Hosea Michaeas / Micah [Tobit] Esaias / Isaiah Naum / Nahum [Judith] Sophonias / Zephaniah Ambacum / Habakkuk [Prayer of Manasseh] II Chronicles II Kings / IV Kings Psalms [Baruch] Jeremias / Jeremiah Lamentations Jezekiel / Ezekiel Daniel Aggaeus / Haggai Zacharias / Zechariah Esther [I Esdras] [[II Esdras]] Ezra Nehemiah Malachias / Malachi [Sirach] [III Macabees] [II Maccabees] [IV Maccabees] [Maccabees] Matthew Mark Luke John James [[Didache]] I Thessalonians II Thessalonians I Corinthians Galatians Romans / I Romans II Corinthians Acts Ephesians / I Ephesians Philippians / I Philippians Colossians Philemon I Timothy I Peter Titus II Timothy II Peter Hebrews Jude I John II John III John [[Barnabas]] [[III Corinthians / Clement]] [[II Ephesians / I Ignatius]] [[Magnesians / II Ignatius]] [[Trallians / III Ignatius]] [[II Romans / IV Ignatius]] [[Philadelphians / V Ignatius]] [[Smyrneans / VI Ignatius]] [[Polycarp / VII Ignatius]] [[II Philippians / Polycarp]] Revelation [[Diognetus]] [[Sheperd of Hermes]] [I Martydom / Martyrdom of Ignatius]] [[II Martyrdom / Martyrdom of Polycarp]]
Revelation should come before Clement.
Oh I guess I didn't even bother sorting the 4 good news accounts. Well it's a work in progress but I do want to sort the Bible into a better chronological order than how we usually have it. It should be sorted by the end date of each book. So even if it was written later wherever it ends that's the priority yeah.
Not a question but good news: >The guys over at Bible Hub (publishers of the Berean Bible translations) are working on aligning a version of their Greek NT with the Robinson-Pierp Majority Text. After that, they plan on modifying the Berean Study Bible translation to account for all of the big variants and flipping the footnotes so that the Majority Text is in the main text. They don’t have an official timeline yet but it’s in the works! >per someone at Bible Hub they hope to have the digital edition ready by early 2023. https://archive.ph/Lzs02
Letter of James to the Jewish diaspera 45 AD The letter written by "James the Just" brother of Jesus to Jesus-believing Jews scattered around. Written around a decade after the death and resurrection of Jesus. John writes that Jesus' own brothers did not believe in him, however Paul writes the resurected Jesus later appeared to James. James was a major leader along with Peter in the Church at Jerusalem. This letter was written before the council of Jerusalem 50 AD mentioned by Luke in Acts of the Apostles. The council confirmed that Jesus was saviour for the gentiles and Jewish traditionalism was not needed for salvation and both Jews and gentiles were made equal and capable of receiving God's Spirit. Peter says circumcision and the law of Moses are not burdened to the gentiles. James' letter is therefore still very traditionalist in works and law as related to salvation though does not contradict Christianity but statements were made clearer by Paul's later letters. The letter is a message from a major Church leader to the rest of the church which at time was reletivly small and vastly Jewish. Written to those who had known Jesus over the 3 years he taught and 10 or so years since as believers and Apostles with the divine gift speaking other languages preached and sent out the Good News. James' loosely references many of Jesus' parables and teachings before any of the established accounts were written but likely small basic sayings and events of Jesus may have been written down by the Church to be remembered at this point. in 54 AD Paul references Jesus' death and resurrection for sins as being in writings. James does not mention the death and resurrection of Jesus but does however refer to himself as a servant of God and Jesus who he calls Lord rather than Messiah and alludes to his return indicating he clearly saw Jesus as divine. The letter along with the first half of the book of Acts represents the early period of followers of Jesus before Paul's missionary Journeys which began 47 AD. The fact the religion survivded those 15 years proves how real the ressurection was. If they all lied about the resurection and if Jesus performed no miricles you'd think the whole thing would die out pretty quickly. The alternative reality is these people kept meeting together lying to one another, agreeing to all be in on a lie for years and years while being attacked and loving a man who apparently mislead them for 3 years. But the truth is James like the others were assured at last Jesus was Lord by his resurrection, as a simple healing here or there could easily be dismissed as it was by his enemies surely it's hard to call a human healer the God known to the Jews, the great invisible supreme God nor was Jesus what many Jews demanded in their cultural way at the time from the Messiah. Jesus' did not build an empire like Muhammad or even a small nation in fact Jesus to the outside observer failed. Jesus despite leading a humble life also made the greatest claims one could make especially by humbly referring to himself by proxy as Messiah and God, as Judge of the world and as all righteous people being gifts to him. His early followers staying the course for 15 years are testament to his truth by resurrection and it's steady growth truth of the Holy Spirit. As Paul and Peter remark he showed himself to a select few and about 400 total had seen him alive again. James died 62 AD being stoned to death in Jerusleum asking the Lord to forgive his attackers.
Open file (5.23 MB 6000x4000 46.jpg)
I think it's about time Christians stop listening to secular skeptics when it comes to chronology of the New Testament. Matthew was an accountant, he probably was interested In recording the events and sayings of Jesus while they travelled. Though it was no doubt a team effort especially after Jesus ascended. Matthew and the other apostles wrote it in Aramaic and of course Matthew wouldn't put his name on the copies because why would he, so he can get famous or get stoned to death. But early Christians of the later century attest to his authorship. Paul references Jesus dying for our sins in being "writings" and while you can get that from the Old Testament and Matthew he then says according to the "writings" he died and rose three days later which has to be a reference to one of the accounts of Jesus. Matthew Mark and Luke record Jesus saying he would raise in three days. Matthew was probably written 50 AD at the very latest but probably closer to just a few years or less after Jesus. The only reason people say otherwise is because they don't like that fact, but if we really believe the account of Jesus then it follows there's no reason why Matthew wouldn't be written while the memory of Jesus was fresh in fact the outline of Matthew likely written while Jesus was alive. Mark shortened the account for gentiles and added what he knew. As far as we know Matthew could have shortened his own account taking out all the prophetic references for gentles. Another reason for an early date frankly is I think Matthew seems a bit rushed and sloppy trying to prove Jesus was messiah. He stops to reference the scriptures but many times Jesus' own words which fulfill prophecy just slip by Matthew and I think Matthew sort of stretches a bit with trying to relate things from scripture as messianic. Afterall one really doesn't understand all that Jesus fulfilled and referenced why and how simply by reading the New Testament. You still need to read the old prophets to understand. Matthew was written to prove Jesus was messiah more so then the other three. But honestly he could have done a better job, I think it was written early in a rush for the Jews rejecting Jesus. The Didache quotes Matthew and I'd put that at 65 AD. What we call "Matthew" was the main source, it is literally the Q document, written and finished by the Jerusalem church with help from some rabbis like Nicodemous. We need to just think the obvious instead of starting from the secular skeptic ideas and working down. Traditionally 37 AD has been used, I'd say could be even earlier. Look at the arguments elsewhere. https://www.bibleodyssey.org/tools/ask-a-scholar/when-was-the-gospel-of-matthew-written.aspx >Well it's based on Mark which was written 60 AD Says who? Why would you think that? >It has well developed Christology therefore it's late. What? These are the people who say there are no early Christian writings, so how do you know how quickly "Christology" was developed. >Matthew 22:7 references a city being destroyed therefore it must have been during the Jewish Revolt. ... Matthew 22:7 is a parable... ""ask a scholar"" These guys are clowns. These are the people you trust when you as a Christian go around using terms like "pre-Markian" stop believing idiots who hate Jesus. Doubt is a sin, a crime, these people are doubters.
>>11387 I think parts of Luke were produced first tbh because it's not as organized as Matthew, then Matthew formalized it for the church in Jerusalem, Mark was a shortened version of Matthew, and later on the proto-Luke was incorporated into Luke the Evangelist's compilation with Acts to provide a thorough account of the history of Christianity (like he says at the beginning of his gospel) for the gentile church that was superior to Mark. So "Q" was written into Luke and we don't have a copy of it because scribes thought it was just an incomplete copy of Luke and either finished it or threw it out. If you look at a list of the content of reconstructed Q the material is basically continuous in Luke while it's fragmented across multiple chapters in Matthew. Lastly, there were shortened manuscripts of Luke around in the early second century that were abused by Marcion, giving the proto-orthodox church reason to be suspicious of retaining any Q document as a possible heretical redaction.
A single year is a long time, let alone a decade, you'll have some documents written by then after seeing Jesus ascend oh might just write a bit on that. If written decades later Matthew would have been much more thought out and really hit every point of the Messiah he could. "What do you mean Matthew could have been more thought out it is literally written by God." Hmm. Be reminded that scholars believe Daniel was written in 2nd century BC simply because prophecy can't exist despite the fact at 2nd century BC Daniel still references the future collapse of Rome and there's still future events in Daniel so from their perspective Daniel is fake prophecy that in truth was history but randoms parts of it is guess work of the future just a few certain parts. Okay. And I see Christians accept all these dates and "oh all the scriptures were written during the return to Jerusleum" or whatever and they just wrote all this stuff all the specific ages and geneologies in Genesis 5 and so on just made up. And it just became truth. It's all ridiculous and these scholars shoot themselves in the foot they're gonna regret not taking it seriously. We read documents from 2000 years ago about Jesus but the idea that people were reading Moses from 1500 years ago is somehow impossible. Your ignorance will be your stumbling block. Foolishness let me catch no one speaking this foolishness from "academics" oooh yes ooh must bow down ooooh yes New Testament scholar ooooh.
>>11420 I think Luke and Acts were written close together which means Luke is later since Acts of course has to been at least past 60 AD. Luke says in Acts that he already sent his Gospel account of Jesus to Theophilus. Calls it a former account and I just feel he probably wrote to this patron Theophilus and then was commissioned to write more shortly after. Luke and then Acts probably a year or two later. Theophilus being a patron of course by how he refers to him. Of course Luke being first makes a lot of sense if Theophilus paid for Luke to write his Gospel. 1. Why would Theophilus need to do this if other Gospels already existed. 2. How cheap would it be for Luke to take already existing material and send it to Theophilus. Although being the events in the Gospel are true what exactly is expected in terms of differences. 3 years is not very much time although yes John says Jesus did tons of things. Luke was likely not a witness to Jesus so all he can do is go by what was already written and what witnesses could add for him. In such a case why would Theophilus ask someone like Luke to write an account of Jesus anyways. If Theophilus asked him then all he could do is go off other writing and reports and he does have a lot that isn't in Mark or Matthew. Theophilus could have just been a bit dismissive of the Gospels demanding one be written specifically for him or he could have been a great guy wanting to get this stuff written afterall both Like and Acts which were written to him didn't disappear into history, Theophilius could have desired to get them mass produced.
>>11443 My guess: He found the other gospels somewhat sparse, and the material that's unique to Luke is precisely what he wanted. So he paid Luke to go around and interview witnesses and write down what they say and combine it with other accounts for as close to a full history as possible.
Open file (96.19 KB 800x600 Ignatius-of-Antioch.jpg)
Friendly wood elf with book of level 4 healing spells says worship your bishop.
Silence lay person! You speak out of turn in front of your Bishop. You shall be denied Eucharist 3 weeks for your insolence. Deacons, bring me the rod of punisbments and flail of penance.
I've nearly sorted everything. As for Hebrews now. Why is the letter without authorship. It is unlikely to have lost the name by accident. To the point people say Priscilla wrote it and her name removed because she's a woman but there's problems with that idea. I see the main context here: "Know ye that the brother Timotheus is released, with whom, if he may come more shortly, I will see you." This person was clearly writing to someone or people, you don't just send a letter those days with no name and only this for context outside the sermon. 60 AD: Paul and Timothy are under house arrest in Rome. 61 AD: Paul and Timothy don't mention being prisoners. And they are with Luke and Demas now. AAAAH I just thought about it while typing this. I know what happened. Demas was never mentioned in Acts. Paul and Timothy go to Rome. Luke implies he was there with them. Demas is mentioned three times and look at the evolution. 60 AD " Markus, Aristarchus, Demas, Lukas, my fellow-workmen!" 61 AD "Salute you doth Lukas, the beloved physician, and Demas;" 64 AD "For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia." "Luke the beloved... and Demas." and then a few years later Paul has no good words. Acts is a very optimistic book which is why if it was written after Paul's death it wouln't mention his death plus the patron he wrote to may have already known and wanted more info after hearing of Paul's death. Being optimistic I think Luke snubbed Demas from any mention in acts because of what he did. "ooh it's not like everyone gets mentioned there's so many peolple, what about this Aristarchus character mentioned in Paul's letters huh!?" Oh but Aristarchus is mentioned in Acts, three times despite never doing anything, just mentioned as being there. So is it possible Luke didn't want to mention Demas on purpose because of his actions Paul alludes to. AND IS IT POSSIBLE that the name of the author of Hebrews was removed because it was..Demas. *lightning strike* dun dun dun. Demas went to Rome to retrieve Timothy, while at Rome he wrote Hebrews. He didn't mention Paul because he didn't care about him. Unlike every other Paul letter Hebrews addresses no churches or people it claims no authority makes no acusations. Demas' name was removed because he went apostate. Well at least he abandoned Paul and who knows. There's a few other things but it's just a silly theory that came suddenly, other people have probably thought about it I don't know. I do know I'll put Hebrews as 61 AD and at this point I think looking at all the arguments I have sorted out the New Testament book timeline well enough and I think it is much better when you read them in that order.
I don't know if there's something I'm missing that just debunks my theory right away but Paul mentions Demas as a fellow workman along side big names like Luke and Mark he was clearly not a small fish. And the Church chose him to go to Rome to retrieve Timothy or meet up with Paul and Timothy and once they were out of prison he probably just wanted to go back home. He was some kind of preacher or pastor or evangelist. Have we not seen those fall away from the faith. I believe the Bible always gives context if you look hard enough. Here we have an example of a preacher loving the present world and abandoning Paul whatever that really means. Paul wrote that in his death letter. I used to place it just before Nero's persecution but obviously it was during and so Demas couldn't handle the persecution and left Rome and maybe became a backsliding Christian. Not repenting for running from persecution and if he did write Hebrews while in Rome and didn't mention Paul clearly he didn't like him and he justified himself leaving him. Ain't that a fun theory. The Bible giving us an example of Demas people. He also could have written it at one other point but yeah. The timeline stuff givin me a headache, I should start doing Bible Prophecy next because Daniel and Revelation are easy peesy. I also wanted to mention the problem of Revelation when it was written.
Domitian is the king mentioned in Revelation and not Nero. Of course we have historical reference that that's when Revelation was written. Domitian is also just as antiChrist like as Nero. However it is strange since historical reference also says John gave Revelation to the Churches after his banishment ended which was after Domitian died. So to the Churches the King that still is wouldn't be a relevant passage anymore. It's possible the spirit of the antiChrist is what is mentioned, Ceaser in a general sense is the sixth king who is. "But Nero = 666!" Nonsense, the way you calculate this is illogical. "But the beginning of Revelation says it must come to pass soon." Well of that applies to the whole of Revelation it never happened, the literal translation is behoove to past which is more like it must come to past so long as conditions are right and so since the seven churches repented they avoided judgement. But that's all that had to come soon. The first section of Revelation are the things that were to come to past shortly which was about the seven churches then it makes a clear change into the prophetic vision. We know the seven churches repented after receiving John's Revelation because they all came to him afterward desiring him to write his own testimony of Lord Jesus. The main historical reference is in a commentary of Revelation by Victorinus in 259 AD who speaks with common certainty of when John wrote. The other problem for a 66 AD Nero date is that Timothy was still leading the Church in Ephesus. Paul's final letter didn't indicate complete failure and debauchery of the churches like Revelation describes.
As for the pool in the Gospel of John. John says "there is a pool in Jeruslum by the sheepgate". If he wrote this after 70 AD it wouldn't make sense since Jeruslum was completely leveled by the Romans, there was no longer a pool. In fact an eye witness Jewish rebel fighter at the time says literally nothing of Jerusalem was left besides the Roman fort which destroyed it also known as the "Temple mount" but that's another story. Should we expect John or anyone around him to know this and insist on saying "there was a pool". They knew of the destruction of Jerusalem but not the extent of it that it was total. There is also perhaps no need to mention the destruction of the Temple. The letter of Barnabas mentions the Temple destruction but only in its own section. When he recounts Jesus at the temple he makes no reference of its destruction. Likewise John doesn't mention the destruction when recording Jesus. From Barnabas' letter we also know Jewish Christians understood the Temple was old and dead already and unimportant.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms

no cookies?