/christian/ - Christianity

Discussion of Christianity, the Church, and theology

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

sportschan/sp/: Superb Owl, February 12 @ 22:30 UTC/5:30 CST

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

no cookies?
Board Rules

(used to delete files and postings)

John 3:16 KJV: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

QTDDTOT Anonymous 03/28/2022 (Mon) 15:32:23 No.6836
Questions that do deserve their own thread. You know the drill. Questions that deserve their own thread go in their own threads. Questions that don't go here.
Edited last time by christianjanny on 01/08/2023 (Sun) 17:43:41.
>mistranslated Translation is not a perfect 1:1 process. Unless you're reading the original, there is always something lost. Therefore, one could argue all verses have been mistranslated to some degree. >Missing The Bible is the best attested to document from all antiquity. The issue it has is not of missing verses, but of added verses.
>>18270 i remembering watching something about catholics adding new verses
>>18271 >catholics adding new verses I wouldn't pin it on any particular denomination and not out of malice. Things were hand copied 1000 years ago and people wrote study notes and reflections just like we do today. Sometimes study notes were added to the text mistakenly. There's no grand conspiracy. Luckily, we have very early copies and tons of different genealogies, called text types, to compare to. So we can remove or correct copy errors that worked into the text.
>>18271 >>18275 when the friends of daniel the prophet where in the oven they prayed my bible just say they prayed, and my orthodox study bible says the prayed and then it puts what was their praying making the chapter like 40-46 verses
>>18320 That's from an ancient Greek manuscript which the Jews rejected as non-canon.
Why didn't I hear anything like the attached video growing up? I think the information in this video mostly on the historicity of Jesus's life, death, and resurrection is important for Christians to know, but I don't think many Christians outside of apologists know about this sort of info. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67uj2qvQi_k
which parts of the bible are the ones that are supposed to convert me to christianity?
Open file (1.77 MB 2560x2739 este.jpg)
is this a good list? im currently using it, i want to be able to be kinda at a "pastor" level and idk if this is enough, what would you add? what would you change?
>>18372 What marks a good pastor is not how well read he is but his wisdom, humility and love. That said, if you want to be learned, this is not enough. At the very least, you're going to want to add in the works of Plato and Aristotle so you can properly understand the philosophy behind the formulation of Christian doctrine. I can't speak for every book on that list but, for the ones I have read, I wouldn't take anything out. I would also go older rather than younger. There's an awful lot of words printed about Christianity every year and very little of it is useful. Also take a focus on things written by important people to your church. eg if you're a Lutheran, you should obviously read Luther's writings. As well as that, reading about the history of the Church in general would be good.
>>18372 Aren't there like courses for pastors?
>>18372 I would remove all the Romanist garbage from there, and anything by CS Lewis, and add some good Reformed theologians. For example under beginner add The Potter's Freedom by James White, under intermediate Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin and Commentary on True and False Religion by Huldrych Zwingli, and under advanced Institutes of Elenctic Theology by Francis Turretin.
Open file (35.69 KB 400x400 kil.jpg)
I need to become rich,but it isnt even my own desires anymore. It's to help my aging parents, and possibly my brother's toddler and the whole extended family in general. Im convinced(convinced,I tell ya) that tithing my salary directly to the poor; to the poor, NOT to the priest("pastor") will make me richer. So far,its kind giving results,but maybe everything is a coincidence? Should I tithe 20% of my income to the homeless mothers with kids,to disabled elderly,etc? As I said, I dont want to buy bling bling for me, we need to move to another city and prepare for the societal-economic equivalent of getting suplexed unto hard concrete.
Open file (9.73 KB 188x268 but.jpg)
is it considered slothful time-wasting to take 20 minutes cold showers? Let me explain: it has been proven that icing the testicles for 20 minutes a day may,over time,boost testosterone to a whooping 200% Is it actually my duty as a male to be male-er? is it even an ascetic endavour to endure 20 minutes of cold-showering every day?
>>18396 What's wrong with Lewis?
>>18387 thanks, my church is pentecostal so i think they dont have anyone that special, im trying to lead more to a non denominational perspective >>18396 thanks for the recommendations, kinda offtopic, but are you an scholar? you have been making good contributions in the thread >>18391 >say god loves you and talk fast and loud so people clap to you >that will be 300 bucks
How fallible should the contents of the Epistles be considered?
>>18403 To what end would you want to see them as fallible?
>>18404 They were written by mortal men.
>>18398 Your spiritual problem here is not the cold showers. It is your autistic obsession with testosterone levels.
Open file (15.81 MB 640x360 Bobbit_worm.mp4)
Hello Christians, Why did God make this?
>>18397 uhh, if u wanna be rich to help ur family then tithe to ur family, if they're christians then its still tithing to the church since theyre members of it.
Open file (50.72 KB 640x445 portrait.jpg)
Should I stop using so many hours/energy/life planning to acquire secular knowledge? And,highly related,seeking to use money and work for money,which I will ,then,invest in more advanced education(to earn even more money,,and connections). Im obsessed with geological history,biology,psyhics and cosmology, religious antrophology etc. >the imitation christi basically told me all of this is BS and useless how do I trully acquire internal austerity and asceticism? I feel I should spend my time reading spiritual books and praying.
Open file (278.37 KB 788x1226 Virgen_de_guadalupe1.jpg)
Thoughts? I was intrigued after hearing details about this image and was disappointed to see how little material there is on it. I only found one short book available to me and several blog posts and videos on the interwebs. Caths are pointing out all the fine symbolic details, some unexplainable naturally. While atheists say it's creation story is but a legend made up decades later, the panting has a supposed human author, and it's miraculous origin and properties are even doubted by some clergymen involved. I couldn't find any reasonable discussion on it.
>>18398 It's your duty to worship God. Whether you should strive to be more masculine is a non-issue. You're already a male. You're not being overly effeminate are you? If you want to change your behaviours for the better then just go and do it. >is it even an ascetic endeavour to endure 20 minutes of cold-showering every day? It is if you make it so. Subjecting yourself to meaningless pain isn't ascetic. It's ascetic if you use that pain to draw closer to God. If you spent 20 minutes praying under a cold shower and you did that every day without fail (not just when you feel like it), that would be ascetic. Praying can never be considered slothful time-wasting. >>18400 Well you should still study up on the Pentecostal movement and read books by important figures even if their names aren't thrown around much among people. >say god loves you and talk fast and loud so people clap to you >that will be 300 bucks I don't mean to be unnecessarily contentious but if that's what becoming a pastor means in your church... well, if it were me, I'd find another church.
>>18422 You should ,first acqui're nowledge on,proper punctuation,,(
>>18410 Because it's bad ass obviously
>>18441 Based.
>>18424 The painting you see is a masterwork of its era and context but supposedly not the original one according to the clergy, it is a replica (or a better copy) of something which is sealed deep inside the Mexico City Basilica. Tests have been made and some impossible details have been attributed to it like the floating paint over the textile and micro landscape painting inside the eyes but no evidence has been shown unlike the Shroud which has multiple studies with high quality images on it. The origin story is extremely suspicious in nature given the context (lack of faith by locals, cunning clergy who got greedy after the event) and the subsequent use of the movement, the Guadalupana, has transformed into a cult itself where the Virgin is generally seen above Jesus and even God which eventually derived in conflicts and was even used as war banner in incidents which ended famously in genocide in the name of it (Third Yaqui War where the yaqui native americans defended staunchly their lands and the image of Jesus over the federal government symbolized by the Guadalupe belief system and military use of her image). But who knows, it might have been a legit event that was corrupted by the church very soon after.
>>18407 Mortal men can produce impeccable works by the grace of the Holy Spirit.
Open file (97.00 KB 1083x437 Bje5Oj4nlg.png)
its this true?
>>18493 >OT passage that is clearly polytheistic No, it's not true
This is less a question and more my thoughts. I have been struggling to read through the Old Testament. I'm up to Numbers and I'm skipping Leviticus until after I finish Numbers. Anyway I open Numbers tonight and I don't even finish the first chapter before I find out the Israelis casually had over 600,000 soldiers in their newly formed army. Each division is composed of some tens of thousands of young men ranging from thirty thousand to over sixty thousand. With an army of 600,000 they would have conquered the entire ancient world back then. And this is whilst they are refugees travelling from Egypt to fucking Israel of all things. They clearly pulled the numbers out of their ass. This is probably one of the most blatant pieces of propaganda I've seen so far and the Old Testament appears to be full of exaggerations and political propaganda on their enemies and themselves. I'm actually questioning if Sodom and Gomorrah was really gay or is it just the case of the jews labelling their political enemies gay as usual. The whole thing with the two kings in Genesis reminded me of the sort of political nonsense you see about Trump or Putin. On one hand I'm tempted to just continue on to the New Testament but I feel I should finish the Old Testament first. Reading the Old Testament is making me more antisemitic than I was previously. I did like the story in Exodus about God getting fed up with Moses being a beta at the river and trying to kill him in a wrestling match so his balls drop. That's how I see it anyway. Wrestle him for a bit so he mans up and stops relying on Aaron to speak for him.
Open file (40.04 KB 386x386 riddler.jpg)
>>18496 >600,000 >he doesn't know what happens to them yet
>>18496 If you read from a purely secular rationalistic mindset, that precludes miracles and the supernatural, you're gonna have a bad time. Also the precise number of people in Numbers 1:46 is also repeated and reinforced earlier in Exodus 12:37 and Exodus 38;26.
>>18496 Every man capable of fighting would have been considered a soldier.
>>18496 You should be interested in "Ancient israel at war" by osprey publishing. They discuss the numbers there as well as the levy system etc. Also keep in mind that Bible wass written centuries after the events took place.
Open file (34.61 KB 279x402 movieposter.jpg)
Say you're faced with a choice like in the movie on pic related. Several people are to face prolonged torture and slowly bleed out. They're unbelievers and don't suffer as martyrs. You can prevent it by committing apostasy. What is the correct (catholic) thing to do? To not apostasize would be extremely selfish, but then again, the Church teaches that you can't commit evil to prevent greater evil. Apostasy is a deadly sin and you can't be sure of being able to repent before dying.
>>18565 To love your neighbor as yourself is only the second greatest commandment, the greatest is "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, soul, mind and strength".
>>18579 Confirmed for not having seen the movie.
Heya guys. I'll do my best to condense what happened to me. Basically my parents forced me to get vaccinated against my will, and I'm planning to run away from home. I gathered many things that I'll need to survive out there. > For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. Matthew 6:14-15 So forgiving others is a pre-requisite for the Lord to forgive me. But how can I forgive my parents after they forced me to do that? How can I comprehend that my TV-addicted parents were simply victims of propaganda? How can I gain such mentality to forgive them while I'm going to run away from them?
>>18679 Oh, are you the guy from the best thread on this board (that unfortunately slid off)? The one where you posted about how belief in Christ positively affected you?... It's good to see that you're doing relatively well! Anyway, it's hard for me to give a good answer, to the main question (if you have to forgive your parents, and how can you do it) but one thing I can say is that I don't think the vaccine is that bad. I didn't take it, but I don't think you have high chances of dying or getting paralyzed or something just from having taken it. And what's completely unlikely is the vaccine being "the mark of the beast". That's "Obama is the antichrist"-tier honestly. Also, I don't think running away is a good idea. If you really want to quickly get away from them, I think it's better to start flipping burgers and renting a small apartment, or something like that.
>>18679 Anon, regardless of if you are who I think you are, don't run away. I ran away from home as a kid and I was homeless for way too long. It's not fun being a homeless teenager. You'll be broke as hell and money will be the only way you can survive. You'll have to do some incredibly gross and embarrassing shit like going the entire duration of your homelessness giving yourself whore's baths in public bathrooms. I had to sleep on the floor of a pubic bathroom every night because it's all I had for me. Also, there's repercussions for being a runaway. You'll probably fail whatever semester of schooling you're in if you manage to be away long enough because as a runaway of you go to school they'll have police pick you up. Chances are, though, that your parents care about you a lot more than mine did. They'll look for you and what will happen when they find you, which they will? Will they make you start seeing a psychologist or even admit you into a shrink ward? Maybe you need those things if you can't ground yourself in reality enough to see the amount of peril you're putting yourself in over a damn shot. Don't do some shit you're going to regret, especially not for the rest of your life. My running away permanently ruined my relationship with my parents and especially my grandmother which, when she died sooner than expected, made me hurt so much more than I could've ever imagined. Don't do that to yourself.
>>18679 Or maybe you're a propaganda victim.
>>18496 > I'm actually questioning if Sodom and Gomorrah was really gay Bible doesn't say it was "gay", more like all types of sexual sin
>>18689 Jude 7 "Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, having indulged in the same way as these in gross sexual immorality and having gone after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire."
Why wouldn't it be true that God wasn't against homosexuality, but pederasty?
>>18679 Believe that Jesus is superior to demons tricks: >And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.” Mark 16:17-18
>>18706 Pederasty is homosexuality...
>>18733 Castrate your neck >Shields children from the evils of lust >less focus on loving men and women You're a bit inconsistent here. Do you know the difference between lust and love?
Open file (681.09 KB 1185x1029 heretical.png)
>>18748 If we take away the clearly fake coat of paint of "it's because I love God, duderino", you're nothing more than a literal tranny who wastes his days spreading child sexual abuse/mutilation/torture tranny propaganda on porn-hosting websites. Subhuman commie trash like you is the reason why retarded memes like Christianity being jewish/leftist/commie/anti-racist and larpagans exist. >Google translated Latin nonsense Pure neo-chuuni. You've been watching too much Luke Smith...... Oh, I'm gonna coin that word! Neo-chuuni. It's like chuunibyou, but specifically related to trying to be "based and redpilled".
Open file (397.36 KB 827x1223 bait.jpg)
>>18752 Tu es asinus ad lyram. It's only nonsense because you ran it through an instant translator. It is genuine Latin, though certainly grammatically poor after years of neglecting the skill. It's only fun for ousting arrogant young men like yourself. Mea alma mater parienda me cum armata potentia lingua. Tua apologia ab irato est fibelis. Tu es contra legum Dei et tua delicatio non absolvo tu. You're another one of the cattle who are enticed by faith only for how it can serve you, and your flagrant sin is openly unbecoming. Your passion is better suited where it won't poison you with what you're calling your "redpill."
>>18708 Castration isn't theologically bad, it's honourable. Jesus died a virgin, and eunuchs are respectable. >>18726 Pederasty is homosexual paedophilia; the latter was associated with the former in Biblical times. But we know you can be gay without raping children, so that interpretation (of the Bible not denouncing homosexuality ipso facto) makes sense to me.
>>18757 >You disgusting pervert Tell that to Jesus? >>Matthew 19:12
>>18760 It's literally the word of Jesus Christ...
>>18762 He implied it was honourable. >[T]here are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. >Let anyone accept this who can. Sure, He didn't explicitly say it was _good_, I guess, but He urged people to accept it - to look at it favourably. I don't understand your emotionally charged response. Blasphemy? Well, if you put words in my mouth like you just did, _maybe_. But the implication remains the same even with your words.
Open file (13.17 KB 216x225 mm unimpressed.jpg)
Open file (1.98 MB 1920x1080 my hand slipped.png)
>>18757 >Maybe you know that but I don't Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare.
>>18753 It's nonsense because no fucking one speaks dead meme languages except neo-chuunis who got overexposed to Luke Smith. >>18755 Jesus was a virgin not a tranny. >But we know you can be gay without raping children Anon.... >>18759 >>18763 You're as good as interpreting out-of-context bible verses as larpagans.
>>18793 PS: Why did the janny wipe the images on my two previous posts, 18742 and 18752? Did he find them tangentially unsettling? Did he think their large filesize would slow down page loading for people in third world countries or TOR users? Who knows. I assume it was just some kind of accident/error.
Open file (182.23 KB 769x631 vaccine_doom.png)
Open file (498.41 KB 1080x1785 BHDZOXXlIXIF.png)
Open file (326.43 KB 1601x2690 giv.jpg)
>>18681 The one and only. If you still miss the thread, there's an archive out there. https://archive.ph/1H2xQ Unfortuntately the pics, audio and video involved aren't available for full display. It's not only the vaccine, there's more to it. I don't want to monopolize this thread but basically I never had a choice regarding my parents. I didn't do art because my parents asked me to not do so. I didn't release any book because my parents asked me to not do so. However, I take a course so I can be a slave for corpos because my parents asked me to do so. And there are more things, like discriminating others while they talk against discrimination. A small apartment would be nice. >>18684 My parents are beyond saving, they are happy to live with their own discrepancies in order to virtue signal happily in their religion of science or narcissistic apathy or whatever word they choose as claim of "the good side of history". But beating the dead horse aside, I think I'll take my chances on this one. >[...]the amount of peril you're putting yourself in over a damn shot three. FTFY As I stated above, it's not all because of the vaccine, it's because of choices and their psychotic behavior. I never had a major choice in my life. I can't stand listening to them claiming how good they are while they were manipulating me, expecting me to do things for them like an obedient vassal. The desire of running away finally outweighs my desire to be a writer or videogame designer all together. Articles and people say that it's good to take a week or two before making a life-changing decision like running away. I've got 11 months. 11 months to plan everything. I have a choice. I can choose to break my chains and die standing or I can choose to live like a slave with my morale slowly going down. I can choose to do radio silence and go on my own with absolutely zero communication with other boards or I can ask for help in other sources of communication in particular with Christianity and Bible scriptures to understand life better and be closer to God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit with the help of others. >>18725 I'll study this scripture. Thanks.
>>18793 Moving the goal post. >>18794 If I had to guess it's because they were schizo posts and relied on defamation as a method of backing up arguments that were simply just your disagreement. >>18797 I can't help you then, anon. I wish you the best with what you're doing. Hopefully you can get help soon. I know what it's like to be a spiteful child, and I know that there's a future for you where much of your life won't be founded on that hatred no matter how bad they are. I hope you find it sooner than I did.
>>18755 Eunuchs are disgusting m8.
I believe twice this last day I looked up sexual material; but I did not masturbate, and after too long for both instances I stopped looking at the material. I believe I stumbled, but I do not believe I fell. Is this "stumbling" in itself sin? Should I repent? And if so; how?
>>18867 It is sinful to willingly expose yourself to such things. You did not just "stumble", you fell. For future reference, like Paul says, you have to FLEE from sexual immorality. The best way to keep yourself from jacking off is to just never indulge even slightly in the first place. Pray to God and ask Him to forgive you. sincerely, and change your behavior
>>18869 You fell and sinned too since this website is filled with porn. >But I dont look at it! Like Paul says, you have to FLEE from sexual immorality.
>>18869 I want to add on to the advice of this anon. The Greek word for flee that Paul uses doesn't merely mean run away, but also to seek refuge from. So they are right that you should flee from sexual immorality, but for your better understanding you ought to conceive that in being sin it is like a deadly beast or a wolf. And knowing that sin has the power to carry you off to death, you shouldn't dare go near it, however tempting it may be. As much as God is willing to demonstrate his mercy, the devil seeks opportunity to condemn. That you might draw near the devil's bait and avoid his trap one time, does not mean that you will be able to when he draws you near in a weaker state of mind at another. Make a habit of pursuing virtue, and you will have no reason to doubt your standing before the Lord.
Open file (7.06 KB 209x241 jew-nord-profile.jpg)
discussion for christian identity;merely analysis and discussion without endorsing it. How big is the movement and does it pose a real problem/danger for USA communities? is it a fed honeypot?(im not from usa) >im interesting in tracing their Dual Seedline theology and Mud Beast doctrines from a historical where-when point of view I also know for a fact theyre a more evil offspring of brit-sh israelism.
>>18902 This is probably the best exposing of the seedline doctrine I have seen and it's written by a proponent of Christian Identity as well. https://missiontoisrael.org/didshe-pt1.php
Open file (15.18 KB 181x279 british power.jpg)
does catholic Modesty compell me/should I, buy a larger size of clothes(shirt,even pants) now that im getting broader and bulkier? I feel Im very thinly clothed since Im getting heavier due to lifting heavy. How do I get clothes that are modest yet not hip-hop baggy ?
>>18906 Potato sack and a rope
Open file (35.69 KB 400x400 kil.jpg)
>>18903 >satan-cain seed is a talmudic doctrine Whom do they (orthodox jews)identify as cain-spawn,tho? Is it same stuff with military rabbis wanting to genocide "amalek"(gaza people)?
Wait, are there more trolls in this board than Christians? Asking for a Friend.
Open file (456.37 KB 918x878 konata stare.png)
>>18793 >You're as good as interpreting out-of-context bible verses as larpagans. Okay, what did Jesus mean then? >>18853 That's not what Jesus thought. Or St. Paul, who said they (and unmarried celibates) were more likely to go to Heaven, because they could focus more on God instead of God and marriage.
>>18919 be careful anon, I dont even do black magick and I have a succubus stalker ever since I do nofap
By definition, Christians believe the Nicene creed. Jehovah's witness is just another man made religion out there. Christians are taught to love their enemies per the word of God. Those that hate may believe the Nicene creed but deny the teachings of God's church are heretics. So know that the JW are pagans (not Christians, not Jews, but pagans) and the Church teaching is to shun them, but we are not allowed to hate them.
JW started because the founder wanted to sell his "blessed" grain. LOL
>>18934 The ramblings of gnostics is not something I concern myself with. Why don't you make like the original gnostics and kill yourself?
>>19062 Jesus and St. Paul were gnostics?
>>19083 Gonna have to press X to doubt your claim that Jesus promoted abandoning the physical world there. And to elaborate, anyone who claims that castration elevates humanity because it "allows you to better serve God" is a gnostic, because the foundational principle of gnosticism is that the divine and the physical are conflicting states, and that therefore you better serve the divine by choking off the physical world. In reality, the best way to exalt the divine is to fulfill your physical obligations by having and caring for a family. You are not devoting more time to God by refusing to engage in the physical world; you are cutting yourself off from your place in the grand scheme of the beautiful physical world God created and denying yourself the opportunity to understand creation by experiencing it. God is not best served by endless navel gazing which never produces anything of value due to the people engaging in it having no connection to the physical world and therefore rambling away with half baked theories. God is best served by people living in His material reality and listening to the lessons it provides, acting on those lessons, and building large communities that exalt them.
>>18753 As a certified Latin expoort®, I can confidently tell you are writing gibberish; stop this instant.
Open file (436.18 KB 1001x1068 1662855263689.jpg)
>>19108 Brazilian Also, here's an archive of the greatest thread on earth since I wasn't able to save all of it on archive.org. The pdf is for compatibility but it sucks. The .mht is an actual archive file that you can open in your browser and it works pretty well (though no icons). https://mega[dot]nz/folder/XmAilBhL#VQniKSYTWj7Z4L-4ajrCIw
>>19322 you probably put viruses in it you are a bad person.
>>19108 That isn't Pepe, that is Apu Apustaja.
Open file (5.00 KB 190x266 sad kitty.jpg)
Sometimes I get in a state of mind like: "I sinned and I feel bad about it; maybe if I sinned more God will punish me like I deserve". I find such thinking perverse, please help.
>>19630 Hi there, Devil here, how would you like me to torment you so you stop having a temptation to sin more?
>>19633 In Jesus's name stop doing stuff like this, it isn't funny.
>>19644 It's not funny, I think you should really invest some time in learning the older greek translation of the book before you try to judge my actions and words through your modern lense.
>>19650 >Criticism of trans folks is not allowed Stop breaking the rules of /christian/ you spic, before i rangeban you.
>>19653 I am trans? I hardly see how acting as an adversary or accuser is a bad, unchrist like act. Did not the redeemer act as such among the wretched he spent most of his time with? If that does not get through to you troll with funny name, then realize accusations were exactly what Jesus hurled at the corrupt rulers of the Jewish Church and they are the lowest of the low in the eyes of the lord. Fair be it for I, a woman of Belial, to question Christ the Redeemer, though you seem to desire to.
Were the founding fathers Christian or freemasons or both?
>>19633 >>19650 >>19644 >>19653 >>19656 Role playing as a spiritual being of pure evil isn't ok.
>>19751 Freemasons, and at the higher ranks you find out that they worship the devil. At the lower levels they just try to find you a job in a mutual back scratching agreement.
Open file (8.07 KB 250x201 Blini Kot Question.jpg)
>Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. > “Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the Lord your God has commanded you. 13 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 14 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns, so that your male and female servants may rest, as you do. 15 Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day. What are the precise meanings of "work" "rest" and "labor" in the Lord's eyes? What is the line between "work" and "non-work", "rest"  and "non-rest", "labor"  and "non-labor"?
Open file (1.60 MB 1920x1080 e0104_c.png)
How many rosaries a day should I pray if I want to get a cute sweet teenage Japanese trad Christian maid wife willing to have many children? This question is at least 40% unironic.
>>19844 None. The Lord God is not a genie who grants you babes on earth.
>>19844 173 for 5 days and you'll receive one 14 days after 23 for 5 weeks and you'll receive one 32 days after 5 for 5 years and you'll receive one 55 days after Any less than 5 per day and you will not receive her except in the fantasy in which you stroke your tiny little chin hairs gazing upon this beautiful maiden. >>19846 Objectively untrue. God is everything, including a piggy bank, a genie, a chicago style deep dish pizza, a fairy, a witch, a shaman, a beautiful perfect babe on earth, and even your neighbor's cat (cleverly disguised with the anagram for God).
Can you be platonic friends with women How deeply should you connect with women I never had good female relatives and I never had female friends or coworkers
>>19859 >Can you be platonic friends with women Why not? Although... >How deeply should you connect with women ...it's better and more based to start a romantic relationship with one, including marriage and procreation. >I never had good female relatives and I never had female friends or coworkers I think there are plenty of other ways to find good women. First thing that comes to mind is going to church. I think you might find very good women there! Well, the most important advice (as cliche as it sounds) is don't give up. Thinking stuff like "I'm too autistic to find a woman" is sure a way to not find one. Anyway, please don't fall for the celibacy [euphemism for homosexuality] meme let alone the whole fucking "eunuch" [euphemism for tranny] meme.
>>19859 >Can you be platonic friends with women For the most part, the only women that you can be platonic friends with are either: a) Relatives or... b) Women you are not attracted to (such as seniors or women who are not traditionally physically attractive.) Thus, if you want a female platonic friend, talk to the nice old ladies at church, or hang out with a girl that isn't your type romantically. >How deeply should you connect with women With co-workers and women in general who you have the potential to become attracted to, it's perfectly fine to be an acquaintance with them and be friendly and kind and on good terms. However, don't go beyond that with a woman who you can potentially become attracted to. As soon as you try to make her your male buddy whom you would go to the movies with and hang out with and spend extended dedicated time alone with, more than likely romantic feelings developing are inevitable. It's just the way we men are wired. I know. I've had negative experiences with women myself, and tried to have a platonic relationship with a girl, and ended up developing feelings for her anyway. I wanted so bad to have a female platonic friendship that I tried to push my romantic feelings down deep inside, and all it did was just hurt and cause complications. TL;DR; Get your platonic fulfillment from guy friends, and women who you won't become attracted to. Treat women you're attracted to as either acquaintances, or potential wife material to court.
>>19865 Hot.
Do Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 contradict each other?
Why do you think it does?
>>19869 Absolutely, the second account of genesis is the older.
What is the extent of Zoroastrian's influence on Judaism and later Christianity?
>>19899 None. The stories, ideas, and beliefs that make up Judaism and Christianity existed long before Zoroastrianism.
Open file (282.94 KB 797x905 1665604637630329.png)
Would theoretical human-rat hybrids have souls?
Is there an interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7:5 that doesn't conclude allowing coomerism within marriage, and a silent approval of counterception?
>>19925 I don't think it's meant to promote coomerism (some people seem to think it is apparently). I think it's just kinda stating the obvious which is that plain old sex isn't really lust if it's with your wife.
>>17655 God's name isn't Jehovah. And when you look into etymology, you'll see they're insulting God with this name, they're ignorant to it from their cult programming, but it's still being said by them. https://biblehub.com/hebrew/1943.htm JWs leaders apparently knew it wasn't Jehovah at one point, and they stuck with that anyway. "LORD" or "Lord" also isn't the Most High's name. >>17679 Trinity isn't from the scripture, it's from Babylon. >>18978 >By definition, Christians believe the Nicene creed. No. You're just another brainwashed cultist.
Open file (9.52 KB 250x250 1628294825652.jpg)
>go to weekday mass >sit in front pew >no one else is there except one or two eucharistic ministers >suddenly a bunch of children and teachers from the school connected to the church file in >look behind me and see that the only people other than myself here are from the school >mass begins and they have kids do the readings and prayers of the people >everyone just goes back to class after mass Are all weekday masses like this? I just wanted to go to church but I feel like I've intruded on some school's private event.
>>20022 >I just wanted to go to church What were you looking for?
Heh. You probably went on a Holy Day of Obligation or the feast day of the school's patron saint. The school children otherwise wouldn't have been there.
I never set foot in a Novus Ordo "Mass" Never going to, either. So, week-day mass near a Catholic school? I used to go to a 1964 Latin mass on week-days because all the Sunday masses was full. They were turning people away at the door. You had to book in advance for Sunday. It was full up 5 minutes after they accepted reservations. If I had signed up, I would have bumped an entire family, so I went to Tuesday Mass instead. The parish priest pretended that there were Sunday masses available. The other priest chided me for missing Sunday mass, even if I confessed it on Tuesday. That rebuke stung. There was a Catholic school for the German parish, now a Novus Ordo down the street. I went to the old Slovak church with a Latin Mass, and you could see the German parish from the lawn of the Slovak Church. It was falling apart; portland mortar doesn't last thousands of years like Roman mortar. The Archbishop of the diocese wanted to tear it down. It was very sad. Not that I'd mind mass even in a barn, but the church has literally fallen.
>>20025 60 years ago, students at Catholic schools attended mass every school day.
>>20027 Definitely not. Everyone in my family for generations has attended a Catholic primary school, myself included, and I've never heard that.
>>17679 >Trinity isn't from the scripture, it's from Babylon. The Trinity is scripture. Jesus Christ is the Son of God the Father (Matt 16:16-17) , who sent God the Holy Ghost to Mary Matt 1:18-22) to make her the Mother of Jesus Christ, God. So, Father, Son and Holy Ghost. >>18978 Me: >By definition, Christians believe the Nicene creed. >No. You're just another brainwashed cultist. Cite your scripture or sit down please. Matt 16:16-17 16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. Matt 1:18-22 18 This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about[d]: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. 19 Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet[e] did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly. 20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,[f] because he will save his people from their sins.” 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”[g] (which means “God with us”).
>>19009 I wouldn't know. If the JW came (I guess there are 4 different flavors of JW now) and I answered the door, Mom would correct me if I didn't slam the door in their faces. I wasn't used to being impolite to anyone. I would just give a polite "no thank you", shut the door and say they were selling magazines. Since they were pushing "The Watchtower", yeah, I was not lying all that much...
>>20030 They're supposed to attend mass everyday. I remember that from Saint John's Catholic school, which I only attended on weekends for Catechism but we went to mass in the school chapel. I remember the nuns teaching us when to kneel before the alter, dip our fingers in Holy water, and the go to the pew, kneel right knee again, and take a seat. Oh well. I have no idea what the Novus Ordo do now. It wouldn't
>>20031 >it's the peter tard
I found some one who uploaded almost all of Lenon Honor's conspiracy videos, the only ones not uploaded were his weakest videos about how all Gods are the same/the devil. He's not really a Christian but he exposes the satanic media system and his documentaries are unforgettable. Even if you don't agree with everything he says i recommend you take a look. https://www.bitchute.com/channel/b9fkHFLN8Cg9/
Open file (117.92 KB 474x296 ClipboardImage.png)
This is not exactly Christianity related but I'm curious about you guys' opinion... I started playing/reading Katawa Shoujo (with "adult content" disabled in the settings, of course) the other day and it made me think...... what would it be like to have a disabled girlfriend/wife? By disability I don't mean like mental disability/disorder/illness like autism or depression, but more physical/motor disabilities like, blindness, deafness, deformation, missing limbs, etc. I think it seems kind of romantic because my role as a good boyfriend/husband would be really reinforced as I'd have to protect and help a girlfriend/wife like that a lot more, and accepting someone like that through the power of love sounds beautiful & stuff, but on the other hand that'd obviously be a lot of inconvenience and work especially if the disability is genetic and I'd have kids like that (but again, all that could be negated if the love was strong enough?). What do you guys think about this? Sorry if this post is too dumb, I'm just a young & dumb 18 year old with too much imagination...
Open file (30.35 KB 1038x1551 20160216-1.png)
>>20090 >(with "adult content" disabled in the settings, of course) >I'm just a young & dumb 18 year old with too much imagination ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡ °) >what would it be like to have a [physically] disabled girlfriend/wife? Just like having any other. The love is the same. Not exactly the same thing, but my lover has tourette's syndrome. It's mostly under control but there can be unique issues, mostly mental, to work through. Generally if they've been living with it for a while they can probably take care of themselves unless they've really been coddled which must haven't as the task of taking care of disabled children is incredibly difficult. >I think it seems kind of romantic because my role as a good boyfriend/husband would be really reinforced You're only as good a couple as your support and love for one another is strong. Getting caught up on the specifics of what makes a good lover beyond just being there for her and loving her can lead to issues. Your relationship will be defined by your dynamic, don't manufacture a cheap one. >I'd have to protect and help a girlfriend/wife like that a lot more People (usually) love independence and autonomy. Especially in people with disabilities, they (usually) really want to be taken seriously as individuals as opposed to just being taken care of. >on the other hand that'd obviously be a lot of inconvenience and work If you really love her, this won't be too much of an issue. The inconvenience may not be fun but it will be very worth it no matter what and the outcome will make all the pain of the work go away. >especially if the disability is genetic and I'd have kids like that I can't speak too much about this. It's simply not a worry I have. As long as you're a good parent your kids shouldn't really come up with too many issues and will have a full life ahead of them to figure it all out too. Of course good parenting is way easier said than done. Shortcuts in parenting are very tempting. >What do you guys think about this? Just don't fixate on it >Sorry if this post is too dumb Not dumb and neither are you. Pretty good thing to be curious. Keep it up and we might have to promote you, anon.
Lmao, they almost entirely scrubbed this thread for no reason. I wonder why and when.
Also, so I'm not just shitting up the thread: Christian identity is really just all identity and very little Christian. It was more or less built from British Israelism, which is a batshit doomsday cult with beliefs not dissimilar from Nation of Islam and Black Israelites. If you're interested in learning more about the British Israelites, I'd suggest checking out the work pretaining to it by Dr. Matthew Baker (uh oh, juden alert, extremists clock out here) on the YouTube channel "Useful Charts". The guy grew up within the cult and has spent most of his adult life being critical of it. The guy has a PH.D. in Religious Studies where he focused on Christianity (he can read Greek and Hebrew) and wrote his dissertation on atheism (basically he knows his shit better than any of us). I'll link the video at the end of this post. Digression aside, christian identity is ultimately founded in huge leaps in faith, like most fringe wackadoo ideologies, so disproving it is very easy (something which Dr. Baker did in his video) but ultimately pointless as they won't acknowledge that they're wrong until they somehow come to that conclusion themselves. Until then they'll only double down intensely (like we can see the neo fuckers do on this board). On a side note, I'd like to give a brief mention of "Positive Christianity", the state religion of the Nazi empire. The belief is actually less insane than whatever concoction of jenkem huffing and water logged tablets Goebbels came up with, which is surprising to you I'm sure, but was officially not reliant on the apostolic creed or even Jesus himself as the religion viewed Adolf Hitler as the "herald of a new revelation". Sounds like a phrase I've heard Mormons use and hell it really sounds like they got some inspiration from Islam as well, which makes sense given that Hitler admired the Muslims more than he did Christians. I've attached some pictures to this post. Dr. Baker's Video: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=HaKpI7tpryc
Zionists hate it because it exposes their lies. Prophecy proves that whites/Caucasians are descendants of Biblical Israelites, but it has no bearing on salvation so it's not a "threat" to anyone. The only people who see it as a "threat" or as "dangerous" are zionists who would lose all the billions of dollars sent to Satan's counterfeit Israel in Palestine.
>>20214 I'll elaborate a little further myself, Genesis 12:3 refers to God's chosen, Israel loosely means strive with God. The Messiah made it clear, as well as the apostles, that Israel is those who accept the Messiah. Yet this verse is used to justify blind allegience to a rogue terrorist genocide state whose military regularly targets Christian Palestinians over Muslims or any other Palestinians with their bombing campaigns in response to a rock being thrown. Seeing the counterfeit Israel in Palestine openly reject Christ and God, they're obviously not chosen by God. You could just look at everything Satan's counterfeit Israel does, compare it against scripture, and see they are of the devil and not of God. Christian Zionism is a heresy and it needs to stop. Jewish supremacist apologists need to read the Bible.
>>20216 For Catholics, the definitive Bibles are the Latin and Greek texts of Jerome. If you showed up at a Catholic School with a King James Bible the Nuns would grab it from you and burn it. Mom took my older Brothers to a Billy Graham revival; and she got an ear full! I bring that up because many keep looking for "Dead Sea Scrolls" looking for scripture, having rejected the Bible of the Early Church. Who gives them these "ancient" scrolls? Jews. The deal in such things. You know Jews, they say Christ is burning in a vat of hot semen in their wicked Talmud. Those guys are the one's selling counterfeit scripture. Catholics? Not even supposed to deal with Jews; just to pray for their soon to be lost souls.
>>18910 >Who do Jews identify as cain's spawn Probably so called "goys", but the truth is I don't really know. That's an interesting discussion in it's own right. I'm not willing too dig through that blasphemous talmud in order to find it either.
Not a question but James & Lea Dinonno from Philia Ministries are closing their Christian channel, they used to post a lot of Christian content including video exposing the satanism in the modeling industry (the wife used to be a model), as well as other educational content. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTSCnCrFtJo
>>20358 I don't think you know what TOR is. Looks like pretty genuine question and advice to me too so I think you're just a schizo retard.
>>6836 are wet dreams a horrible sin? if yes what can i do about it? im trying to get away from sexual sins and this keeps happening
>>19860 who are you? why are you so despesperate to make us have sex? why are you doing this?
>>20370 >are wet dreams a horrible sin? A sin requires consent. I gather you didn't consent to these dreams. No consent means no sin. According to Saint Pius X, a sin is against God or someone else that causes them harm. No one harmed, not a sin. In looking through Denzinger, not a sin. Since no one is harmed, it's not a grave or horrible sin. The Lord said Love God and Love your neighbor were the intent of the 10 commandments. No one harmed? Not a sin, but may be a temptation. Now, if you listen to Aquinas, yeah, he says they can be a sin if you were having sinful thoughts during the day. But, he's not the Pope, and inventing new mortal sins is creating a new gospel, so I don't think we should listen to him. Aquinas makes most venial and even some temptations into mortal sin. That's not the Gospel taught by Christ. >if yes what can i do about it? >im trying to get away from sexual sins and this keeps happening
>>20374 Oh, and if you believe in the Bible and the Popes on religion and mortality, you're likely to find that the local parish priest won't give you the sacraments. Trying to be perfect will drive you nuts. Our God is a loving God, not some lawful evil Cthulhu.
>>20374 > I gather you didn't consent to these dreams. No consent means no sin. but im sure i consented what happened in the dream, i saw a woman and i went to fornicate with her wdym with the last green text?
>During John Calvin's rule of Geneva, women found guilty of adultery were punished by being drowned in the Rhône river. Is there any truth to this? The source on wikipedia is sketchy but it sure is funny.
If God controls everything and God is perfect does this mean that everything is perfectly placed and has a purpose to teach us something? Or else why would a perfect being put a tree somewhere without some purpose to it? I sound like an atheists, but i'm not, i'm just wondering if there is purpose in everything according to the bible.
>>20671 Look at the universe... human understanding is doesn't even scratch the surface. I gave up trying to second guess God Almighty long ago. Now? I just try and figure out where's the Church he founded 2000 years ago, and what he told us to believe.
>>20671 >i'm just wondering if there is purpose in everything according to the bible. I'd suggest reading Ecclesiastes for your answer Anon. This is an incredibly deep topic, and one way beyond the best of us humans. God is transcendant and trying to personify Him down to a human-scaled 'god box' is misguided to say the least. >Aslan isn't a tame lion, you know.
Open file (167.93 KB 1800x1116 calm.jpg)
You ever see lots of negative stuff in the world - be it related to the politics of today or the destruction of religion's reputation by fundamentalists and literalists - and you just don't wanna lose your calm? Forget about all you've heard, 'cause it's time to religiously relax to something heavenly... (✿◡‿◡) ...but anyway what's your favorite relaxing Christian music mix? Here's mine: https://youtu.be/Sl-S8ufY8uo
>>20729 thank you anon very cool, happy Halloween to you too!
Open file (86.06 KB 800x533 rhino shoulders.jpg)
hey anon who became an eunuch. I want to know if you can build muscle still, if you have (NOT) developed femenine traits or shrinked your benis. I myself,dont want to lose my PP or balls. However as a fanatic of longevity, I will appreciate insight unto what biological effects losing the reproductive system would have,on a male.
Open file (27.14 KB 442x338 IMG_5855.jpg)
>>20754 I can still build muscle. I work out regularly, though it's all bodyweight exercises and jogging. I started doing this because the significantly lowered metabolism caused by lowered testosterone made me start gaining a bit of weight. I'm not quite as strong as all my male peers but I'm stronger than quite a lot of men considering how lazy people are. I have not developed female traits. That would only come with taking estrogen. My voice has become a little higher, but it's still firmly in the male range and wasn't I had heard might happen. Your mileage may vary of course. Spoilers for talk of genitals: My flaccid penis has shrunk considerably. My erect penis has had no notable changes. From time to time getting an erection can be slightly painful, but maintaining it is not. I still retain some sex drive though it is significantly less than when I still had my testicles and I attribute it more to love for my wife than just physical, lustful desire as it's now moreso only the emotional/relational element that arouses me. I can't say too much about longevity or youthfulness yet, although I have had some luck particularly with my skin clearing up and being less oily (although drier at times and needing moisturizers).
didn't he admit to being a troll lol, he posted a PDF file of his thread before being deleted and it said he was actually pagan. all such posts had (You) next to it too
anyone saved the pictures of the procedure?
>>20755 you can always take TRT (testosterone replacement therapy) if you wanna feel 'normal' again.
I dont want to lose my balls+benis but I seriously conside infibullating my prepduce to prevent erections and even prevent wet dream thus. I am for a solid ,long streak,of absolute semen retention to maxx out my power as a man.
>>20763 What? >>20764 Nah, no desire to. I'm a lot happier as I am now. >>20774 What? Dude, just learn to cope with it or take something that suppresses testosterone. Don't intubate your but sack or whatever that sounds awful.
Open file (459.08 KB 893x1094 Garden of Eden.jpg)
>Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day Was this Jesus?
>>20777 Yes.
No it was the Father, see the link for more information. https://www.gotquestions.org/God-walk-garden.html
>>20729 do u wanna be my friend on IRC
>>6836 jews need to leave America and Europe immediately, but what should we do with them?Israel obviously belongs to the Palestinians.
>>20816 If you kick and unwelcome guiest out of your house, the standard approach is to just see them to your door, and shut the door behind them. Let them sort it out for themselves?
Does Christianity have some unique view on demons that other religions or beliefs systems don't have?
Where does it say that God is all powerful? Not trying to be heretical I'm just curious because I've heard it all my life but have never seen a source.
>>20953 Thanks
Open file (831.75 KB 503x1568 acts bible.png)
Lot of work put into this, I think it might very well be perfect in terms of order. I have many reasons for every single thing. I won't be around to answer any question BUT I suggest everyone try reading the New Testament in this order it's very interesting. Mark also wrote Hebrews and that is without a doubt now in my mind I mean the New Testament literally tells us. I do have to believe Clement ultimately and I put Paul's visit to Spain in 62 AD, that's all we can do, I don't know. Reading this way also makes things a lot sadder. Going from the first Roman imprisonment to II Timothy it's like... rough. And you realise when Nero's persecution started Paul broke his plan in Titus and charged into Rome to be with the Assembly. However the most pressing issue, why on Earth are so many early Christians convinced Peter was at Rome? WHY? It just couldn't have happened. There's no way, the best possible time would be during the early pastoral period and then he dies or leaves before Paul writes his letters and doesn't mention it. Hebrews makes it clear Peter is dead by then.
>>20965 Oh I forgot the theme song of Acts. TRIED TO SAY THE LORD HAD RAISED HIM! Greatest timeline verse in the whole Bible! (Philemon 1:23-24) Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, greets you, as do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, my fellow workers. YES! The whole team the good ol' boys rolled up in Rome for another adventure! I love that. And then 4 years later Paul's like "Demas betrayed me, all from Asia forsook me, Alex the coppersmith cheated me out of my money. Everyone's a heretic. I'm going to die. Only Luke is with me." And even the people Paul doesn't accuse of not defending him there's a certain tone to it, the ones who left. There's a lot of undertones of the persecution like Ephesians 6:21-22 which a lot of people always put Ephesians in the first imprisonment... HELLO! II Timothy Paul mentions he just sent Tychicus. And none of the good ol boys but him are even mentioned in Ephesians, Ephesians is as much as Paul's death letter as II Timothy and there's other hints as well. Unless I'm missing something it's totally ridiculous to put Ephesians as first imprisonment. Also for those who don't like Biblical study and want to instead hear what the very smart Academic college kid "scholars" believe for the timeline. I made a version for that too, here you go. And yes this is real.
Actually cause I do want to explain, Paul and Peter are cancelled from writing Hebrews because of Hebrews 2:3-4. Paul would NEVER include himself in the group of people who didn't hear Jesus speak, he says himself he met Jesus, says that Christ spoke through him, says he got the Gospel not from man and so on. Knowing Paul he would have wrote: "Don't you remember what I ME PAUL told you about these things! According to MY Gospel! And MY many miracles! Foolish Judeans! Behold I send Aristarchus with this letter to you! I myself shall come to inspect you soon!" Also Paul said all his letters had his signature I think that's the best evidence he did not write Hebrews, the Bible has all solutions to everything within itself. So Paul is simply out, Peter is out. Luke was a gentile why would he be writing Hebrews. I was listening to this: https://www.jmtour.com/personal-topics/audio-files/the-epistle-to-the-hebrews/ And he mentioned the fact Hebrews is clearly written to people in Judea but outside of Jerusalem I agree and OH! Who do we know lived in Judea? Who is a second generation disciple a nephew? Paul would never refer to Timothy especially at this time as just "our brother Timothy is out of jail" Hebrews seems to speak as if the audience doesn't really know Timothy all that well, he's just saying he's one of our brothers here and we're coming back to Judea soon. And I think they would have returned just before Romans invaded Galilee. (Rome 65 AD) "Only Luke is with me. Take Mark and bring him with you [Timothy], for he is useful to me for service." (Rome 67 AD) "Know that our brother Timothy has been freed, with whom, if he comes shortly, I will see you. Greet all of your leaders and all the saints. The Italians greet you." ....WHO COULD IT BE!? Who else was in Rome to write Hebrews!? I think unlike everyone else who abandoned Paul, Mark and Timothy came and stood with him and were arrested but never killed. I know people like Luke living after these events, I think he may have died in Rome I don't know. It's an utter shame Hebrews says nothing about what's going on, in terms of timeline stuff. But that's also very unlike Paul. And the mention of the bonds: Mark was in bonds and HIS home assembly back in Judea sent him comfort. Why doesn't he mention Paul's death? It's already over a year past, so they already knew. Information back then was not as slow as maybe some think. I think the reason people don't think about Mark is because he's described as sort of like a kid in Acts and he bails on the first mission. But by this time he was an elder. THIS WAS PETER'S RIGHT HAND MAN, Peter called him his son. Mark is actually super important. His Gospel also people say was for gentiles but it actually includes many "so the scriptures could be fulfilled" things and it comes off more as an inbetween of gentile and Jewish which is fitting because it was after Matthew before Luke. You can feel the transition of the church. You say "Well Barnabas' author sounds a lot like Hebrews." It does doesn't it. Also Barnabas is crazy, last time I was here people were arguing about food laws in the Bible. Read Barnabas he figured it out in the first century. Obviously don't eat rabbits means don't have oral sex in the new covenant... makes sense to me I don't see any argument against that. So is the issue settled? Yes. Yes it is. I really hope I'm done with the New Testament timeline. I never wanna see it again! Okay see you in a week when I've changed everything again.
>>20965 >>20968 >>20969 are you ok brother? its anything stressful in your life?
>>20973 No. But I know people think because of how I type and my style of jokes, it's just my personality. So don't worry I'm actually fine, though this week was some backsliding. But overall this year has been a lot of progress. Eternal life is ahead.
>>20977 glad to hear that really, i thought you were a troll for a moment i beg you pardon me i hope you keep doing discussion
Here are some facts about child sexual abuse regarding the clergy. Public school has more molestation than the Catholic Church.
>>6836 how should i respond to birthday gift and wishes if i dont like celebrating my birthday? i know there isnt too much in the bible regarding birthday so i dont want to fall in sin saying it is good or bad i really want my family to stop making this demostration but saying it just makes them mad
So do the Satanists or do the Jews control the world? I think the both intertwine but there are sometimes where there are Jews who are not Satanists and sometimes where there are satanists who are not Jews. I don't know who is in control over the other, i just know that Jews are not as powerful as /pol/ says, there are many intelligence agencies, secret societies, globalist rich families who are not Jewish, but they're all on the same team. I have no doubt that the Jews of today worship an New World Order anti-christ who will unite the world, but there are many other groups that believe in some anti-christ character that will also unite the world. What do you Christians think? Do you know any books on this subject of comparing conspiracy theories of Satanist vs Jew?
>>21098 The only real conspiracy too my knowledge is the antichrists rise to power and the events leading up to it. I have no clue who is behind that although I'm near certain the U.N will play an important part. I guess you could say world leaders are in on it to some degree. All the other stuff is either the natural result of moral decay or petty interpersonal squabbles.
God rules in the affiars of men ofc, not creatures. He will soon 'walk out on stage' and the curtain for this world will draw closed.
>>21028 >how should i respond to birthday gift and wishes if i dont like celebrating my birthday? With gracious kindness, ofc.
>>21101 Why did you merge the thread?
>>21107 >Do you know any books on this subject of comparing conspiracy theories of Satanist vs Jew? Because your basic question didn't merit it's own thread. Additionally, your OP seemed suspiciously like gaslighting bait. In either case, this is the correct destination thread for such.
>>21112 The basic question was if Satanists or Jews run the world, asking for books was just a bonus question in case anyone had anything. >your OP seemed suspiciously like gaslighting bait. How so? what was i trying to convince the audience of ?
Open file (531.83 KB 1000x1131 ClipboardImage.png)
When I look at it rationally, I might actually be a kinder person than the average... but I'm not sure why but I feel like I'm evil, while all other people are good but just corrupted (by various degrees) by sin... anyone else?
>>21126 Just to give you a heads-up OP, this thread will be merged into QTDDTOT soon (>>6836).
it's hitting real hard rn bros
>>21149 "Quit being a bitch, I bore your sins while nailed to a cross nigga" -Jesus Christ
>>21126 Yeah we're all evil but I am a retard also which means in some ways I am a child forever which is supposed to be a holy thing but eh it's dangerous too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igoUrZwkuZc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qb5Wc36dyX4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2hTrfaJWD0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5GvznrlZaA The interfaith stuff more and more I realise it's going to actually be a real thing within the next few hundred years. Most people are already universalists. Pretty much everyone is. It just makes sense as the world has been recently globalised we're going to have more global universalism. ONE LOVE! ONE HEART! But ignoring what God wants and just thinking about what we want. Interfaith stuff will make it easier for the antichrist to come in and slurp people up.
>>21160 >Interfaith stuff will make it easier for the antichrist to come in and slurp people up. This. But I would go further and warn the authentic Christians that persecution is coming on a scale never seen before. Of all the so-called """Interfaith""" groups, we alone will be reviled and rejected while all others will be warmly-embraced (by all appearances, but not actually) by all the others. On the surface, this will simply be because we alone are the last 'rayciss bigots' who dogmatically claim that Jesus Christ is the sole, only, and single way both to God and to eternal life. The actual reason is that their father Satan is trying yet again to stamp out Christianity from the world. He will fail once again ofc, but take heed: all true Christians will be branded as "Terrorists against Humanity" and outlawed--eventually with KOS orders. Fair warning then Believers, love not this world nor the things thereof. They are all passing away, but both Heaven and hell are eternal. Remain in the faith steadfast to the end, and you shall receive an enduring crown of righteousness, and will shine like the stars forever!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0yzqBbYKeM The Yanuka has been a great example of one of the two dark witnesses but the genuine idea he's the false prophet or antichrist is I think ridiculous. But it's interesting to see orthodox Jews literally line up to kiss his hand in front of the wailing wall. We know now that orthodox Jews are willing to worship a guy like this. And for those not following Israel, I don't know which thing to link about the Yanuka, but he's a guy who is big in Israel essentially that's all. The "rapture is tomorrow" crowd like wallytron101 spend all day getting information about that. Israel is trying to go turbo for end times. They will have their Temple and false messiah and persecute Christians like never seen before and even some people around the world will come to see the messiah, but a lot of people will not care about any of this until the day of wrath. The "Hebrew calendar" is drawing near to 6,000 and frankly I think satan might just wait for that to bring up his own son, his own messiah. I like that Paul mentions the reject of the love of the truth. That is perfectly said, Jesus died for your sins, what more love could you want and yet people do reject that love and they will accept a new messiah, the Bible says their is another Jesus and he's going to preach exactly what people want to hear which for whatever reason is not that someone paid for all your sins. Because people don't want someone else to pay for their sins because they are not bad people, they deserve Heaven and they're better than you, fine. People don't want to admit that not only do they need forgiveness but that the brutality on the cross had to pay for it. Anyway I just wanted an excuse to post Paul's latest release, I don't know if anyone has been keeping up with his latest stuff and new album, I'm thinking of doing a lyrical analysis of his controversial new song "I was predestined for this"
Why is it so wrong to fantasize about traditional women? Just because they don't actually exists, because it's an impossible incel fantasy, so what. I've given up trying to resist porn, no worthy woman will ever want me, so i may as well embrace the whores who actually have something for me. My lust has gotten me intro trouble and it's a miracle i'm not in jail because of it, but it's all i have, i can't stand being in a miserable relationship with a woman, they're so cruel and awful creatures. I don't think i can ever leave porn, and i don't want to anyways, but i know that eventually it will destroy me if i don't. My Christians friends talk about the damage that porn does and know about my vice an try to talk to me but i don't give a response, it's too shameful to talk about masturbation and porn with people i know, they might try and change what i have left. I don't really watch anime anymore, because it's too lewd but the waifu culture is still in me. I think to myself "this is just because i have no girlfriend, once i get one i'll leave porn" but my friend (who had a porn problem and got a divorce because of it) says that the habit doesn't go away once you get a girlfriend.
Open file (100.24 KB 750x1000 platonists.jpg)
>>21194 because it's a flavor of idolatry
>>21197 How? How does fantasizing to traditional woman conflict with obeying God? Sounds like it would go hand in hand. When I say fantasizing I don't mean lusting after them, just appreciating their inner beauty.
>>21126 I've decided to look this up on the internet but the resolutions were all basically "love yourself"/"believe in yourself"/"blah blah blah yourself"/etc... But... I don't want to do any of that. I feel like that's egocentrical, and egocentrism is something that I hate myself and consider evil for. What can you guys say?
>>21202 As humans we are subject to temptation and will naturally fall at times but despite that we have a natural desire to do good, in whatever form that takes. Focus more on your desire to do good and even try to manifest it in real life instead of dwelling your mind on sin
Open file (79.87 KB 640x496 dreams.jpg)
>>21199 Because you set your heart to focus on the object of your own imagination's creation and not on the possibilities that God extends to you in the reality of His creation.
>>21202 >I hate myself That's being egocentric too.
Open file (1.09 MB 1240x641 Untitled.png)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aejRL3TyV0 There is a new switch game about Christianity here is a preview of the gameplay, it's a puzzle game.
>>20965 I want to explain every so often. Revelation has to be written before I John and John. I'm not sure why often people think John and I John is before Revelation because if that's true Revelation is a fake document obviously. Not only is Revelation fake but all of John's stuff is then fake. John receives information during his Revelation experience. Information which finds itself in I John and John. Therefore Revelation had to come first, otherwise Revelation is just a creative bit of theological fun. For example the idea that Jesus is the Word of God, John learned this from his Revelation experience. That's why he becomes obsessed with it. Even though Jesus refers to himself as many things "I am ___" in John, Jesus never says "I am the Word" which is a huge part of John's philosophy. So why didn't Jesus ever say that? Because John never heard him say that. John's not making stuff up, he's going only by what he saw and heard and knew. He can't make Jesus say something he didn't say. Also a good time to say the John who wrote the New Testament documents is not John son of Zebedee the apostle. It's another disciple of Jesus named John, he was part of the Temple priesthood and lived in Jerusalem which is why John's Gospel takes place so much more in Jerusalem. Early Christians are clear that Revelation was written in the 90s (Domitian) not the 60s (Nero) and John would not have been exiled to Patmos during Nero's persecutions which were exclusively in Rome. Plus Papias who was a hearer of John works better for the 90s date. Why is the number 7 special both in John and Revelation if John's revelation experience came from God and he's not just making stuff up. Revelation came first, so John experienced the seven spirits, seven eyes and so on. This left an impression on him to record seven different "I am" claims of Jesus. For example I once saw the name Aizekl come to me in fiery writing, now I use that name often for things, leaves an impression. And we see this very often where John—who understood many things already—was shown in fullness all things and learned a great deal. Therefore he included it in his letter and account of Jesus. His theology grew after Revelation which is why we find the same ideas in Revelation in I John and John, they are God's ideas not his. I agree it is weird that Revelation has a lot of John referring to himself, but there's a few reasons why that might be, but I don't care to go into them. But one being of course because he wanted to make sure there was some authority to this letter. In fact in his Gospel even though he never names himself he does make it clear that he was a direct disciple of Jesus in order to give his Gospel authority unlike any other Gospel other than Luke which establishes he has some authority on the matter (due to the fact Luke and John are the two last written Gospels and at that point you needed to have authority to write a new account which was apart from the two established ones Matthew and Mark). Likewise he does refer to himself as Elder in his two short letters and in his long letter gives himself authority calling the audience children. John wanted people to know this Revelation experience wasn't just some random letter from nobody. And indeed when the assemblies received the letter John become even more prominent and they gathered around the old man to get his account of Jesus which we have early christian testimony for that sequence of events. Revelation is written as if someone is writing in Greek but wanting to write in Hebrew which fits John and the situation he was in or maybe it was originally written in Hebrew and the translation to Greek was done extremely literal. Revelation talks as if the end is on the doorstep. Yet we know with God a thousand years is nothing, he lives in eternity. Further: John's Gospel mentions the armies of the Easter having 200 milling horsemen which is a possible army size now a days but at the time he was writing there weren't 200 million people on the planet and Revelation has a very globalised outlook which hadn't come to pass yet. III John and II John are written while John was a big shot, which is why he was targeted to be exiled: Because he was an involved Elder as indicated by the letters, III John was written before II John because II John ends with an Amen and it's possible John just forgot about the Amen in his earlier letter and decided later to start adding Amens to the end of his letters, it's even possible they were written within the very same time frame and he's ending both letters with the end of II John.... yes that's the thought process. John had to be somebody to be exiled and these letters help with that and the additional Amen makes II John probably later as he ends Revelation and I John and John with Amen.
>>20965 I did try to solve the "Pastoral letter issue" myself and the "Spain issue"... WHY!? Why does Paul never talk about going to Spain while he's in Rome? He writes three letters and all of them not only don't mention Spain but he says he'll be returning to Macedonia soon. WHY!? I'm gonna lose my mind. You know why? Because Paul never died in Rome in the mid 60s AD. There I said it! He probably survived and went to Spain then. "Well maybe Clement is just wrong about him going to Spain." How? It's only 30 years later and Clement is that confused? Now the pastoral letters indeed seem to make no sense. But they can be made to make some sense. One thing that would really help is if I understand sea travel more at this time. I kind of looked it up a bit. But I need to understand when and how they could travel at different seasons in the different areas and how long each trip exactly took. I believe it's clear that Timothy and Mark and in Colossae when Paul writes II Timothy. Why does Paul ask Timothy to go all the way to Troas just to get a coat he left there? ...Because Paul's a donkey's butt. I'm sorry to use such crass language. If you send me a letter telling me to go to a completely different city just to get your jacket, I'm peeved. Of course I'm aware Timothy and Mark likely had to travel north first through Troas. In order to explain the weirdness of the Pastoral letters I essentially have Paul travel in a simple clockwise circle around the Aegean Sea. It actually makes a lot of sense. He SENT Timothy to Ephesus while they were in Macedonia. The last we hear of Mark is him going to Colossae in 61 AD and then Paul calls him and Timothy to Rome in 65 AD. Now in II Timothy Paul mentions a lot of cities but he does not mention Colossae, he clearly implies that Timothy when he receives this letter will not be in Ephesus and since Mark and Timothy are both called the letter must be going to Colossae and Timothy must have went there for some reason around the time Paul went to Miletum and travelled west. But again, Paul could travel from Miletum right across to Corinth. So why is he telling Timothy to go to Troas before coming to Rome. His coat is that important? "There's documents he wants too." I don't care! I would not be friends with Paul, he sends me a letter like II Timothy telling me to go out of my way for his coat and come to Rome where christians are being killed. Paul's writing about how everyone has abandoned him and is fleeing Rome and how he's about to be executed and he's telling Mark and Timothy abandoned everything and get your butts over here telling them to hurry up before winter. "Everyone is scared to defend me because they might be killed along with me... Timthoy and Mark on the other side of the Empire, hurry up and come defend me." It also helps illustrate Mark as writer of Hebrews.
>>21231 To be clear Luke probably began writing Acts when he arrived in Rome, he might have even stayed in Rome the whole time, he probably didn't start writing Acts in 62 and finish 65 for many reasons. Theophilus in Rome, patron, Demas blaah. And aside from humour, I'm struggling hard with my new job, lovers if indeed lovers ever see. No amount of scripture and prayer makes me feel like my job is worth anything and only serves to take time away from God. I've been awake 24 hours and will be awake 48 hours working a 9 hour shift, and this is part-time! What rubbish. My assembly was so obsessed with me working and now so obsessed with my work. Secular work is all people think about. I just want to be with Jesus all the time. I don't care about money, I don't feel anything from this job, I am a maid of the Lord yet I'm not serving good news, just clean pots. What do I do? I don't know. I'm saved in Christ and waiting for Paradise, it's taking a long time. This world is slow and dreadful and constantly at every moment wants to take you away from God. And some people work full time! HOW can you work full time. The term itself is heresy! Full time!? I don't want my full time dedicated to secular work, I want my full-time for God. Does God want me to do this. I need to pray more on this, scripture tells me it's okay but it doesn't feel right you know.
Anyone else disappointed by the pitiable state of this pagan world?
>>21396 The world will always be against Christ, we're not of the world, so there is no point in longing to be a part of the world.
>>21396 Disappointed, yes. Surprised? No.
>>21396 The bible clearly states you need to be religiously affiliated.
Open file (15.93 KB 226x223 download.jfif)
Do you know who Abaddon is?
>>21432 the abyss? what about it?
>>21431 It doesn't. It encourages fellowship and admonishes forsaking it, but it doesn't say it's needed for salvation or following Christ. Many Christians have no good options, but people like you would just berate them for not attending apostate churches or the whore of babylon's cathedrals full of abominations, both of which would damn their souls. >>21396 It's a result of the militant secularization of government schools as well as adopting lies like evolutionism to "compete" with communist jewish states like the USSR back in the Cold War (they literally adopted evolutionism into schools not on any scientific basis or any proof of it, they did it to copy a communist genocidal shithole run by christ-hating jews). And they're not public schools because the public has no say in what's taught in them.
anyone here ever read Unsong?
>>21459 I only read the Holy Bible like a good Christian.
>>21459 Pretty demonic. Why would we, fren?
>>21465 have a friend who's read and is really insistent on getting me to read it because "im a Christian and all that", but i get odd vibes from it
>>21467 Demonic writings like these considered harmful, obvs. If you are, in fact, a Christian, then why would you even waste time with it, Anon? Surely there is a mountain of other, positive things you can focus on instead? Maybe you should consider finding better friends?
>>21459 What's that??
Open file (42.59 KB 552x416 supertard.jpg)
The retarded were called "christlike" in the middle ages. The meek are destined to inherit the earth. The foolish and weak are chosen by god to shame the powerful in this world. think about it. Could Jesus have been mentally retarded? It would certainly fit his humble status and innocence.
Why are evangelicals so right-wing? They were funded and promoted by the CIA in our countries to counteract the (godly) theology of liberation.
God is not a communist
Open file (338.09 KB 1000x1000 ClipboardImage.png)
>>21514 Get back to your LARPagan shithole, you fucking shill!!
>>21510 You for sure are.
Is being meek necessarily the same thing as being passive-aggressive?
>>21522 No, not at all Anon. Meekness is closely-tied to humility, which is closely tied to the big one: Gratitude. >tl;dr Being meek simply means you resist pride in your heart, replacing it with gratitude instead. Hope that helps, Anon.
>>21514 Liberation theology is just communist who've infiltrated the Catholic Church. It's been a long time coming. They were a serious problem in Weirmar Germany, supporting the communist and all the wickedness.
How do i prove that Jesus was God without the Bible?
>>21533 Why would you?
>>21533 God told me in prayer to follow Jesus, that was enough for me.
>>21534 Most non Christians don't care about the Bible, so you either have to prove the Bible is legitimate through historical sources or use logic to prove your claims.
Open file (145.41 KB 311x438 ClipboardImage.png)
>>21537 Refuted by Greg Bahnsen
>>21539 Who?
>>21541 >doesn't know who Greg Bahnsen is Just...
>>21539 What is refuted by Greg Bahnsen?
>>21542 literally who? i dont follow many new age Biblical related people so i have no clue who this is or why theyre important.
>>21537 What do you mean history and logic? What's that? Where idd that come from? Why should we accept that standard, says who? This is the problem, and how we ought to be arguing. Demands for evidence of Christianity is irrational by definition, since it presupposes that Christianity is true. The reason why I think logically is only because God thinks logically and made me in His image, so being in His image I think like He thinks. We should not grant some set of brute facts to the unbeliever from which we reason together with them, because they stole those brute facts from Jesus. So the unbeliever doesn't accept the authority of God's self-attesting word, so what? If they renounced logic would you refuse to use that too? Imagine if someone pulled a knife on you, and you warded them off with your gun, they laugh, take a step forward and say "I don't believe in the efficacy of guns". Are you going to conclude that if they don't accept it it must not be true and throw your gun away, or will you start applying that weapon to them and see how it works out? >>21545 The idea that we should surrender our Christian presuppositions and reason with the unbeliever from neutral ground. There is no neutral ground, and there is no neutral person. Instead we should be arguing from the impossibility of the contrary.
>>21551 >The idea that we should surrender our Christian presuppositions and reason with the unbeliever from neutral ground. There is no neutral ground, and there is no neutral person. Instead we should be arguing from the impossibility of the contrary. Does he have any books where he does this?
>>21552 Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith.
>>21551 based presuppositional apologetics enjoyer
>>21551 listen man, as someone who has engaged in argument my entire life im just telling you how it is. Few people if anyone are gonna listen to you simply because Jesus said you were right. In their minds Jesus isn't real and thus nothing He says matters. At most it might cause them read to the Bible but that is best case scenario. also the example you gave is a false analogy, bullets dont care about feelings or beliefs but minds do. If i dont believe Jesus is real then no amount of you reading the Bible is gonna change my mind. Youre comparing the physical world (where physical actions have physical consequences) to the mental world where belief in something has a literal impact on how it affects you. As stated before, best case scenario you thumping someone in the head with the Bible might raise some curiosity about the Bible and they might upon reading into it discover its truth and just regard it as another "wise" religion like how many regard Buddhism or Taoism or maybe theyll do some research into Jesus and find the proof on their own BUT what will most likely happen (and something ive seen time and time again) is they'll get annoyed at you spamming them with the Bible and will either ignore you or grow to disdain you and your kind (meaning Christians) which not only hurts your testimony but also the testimony of others.
Open file (51.89 KB 850x400 van til quote.jpg)
>>21557 >bullets dont care about feelings or beliefs Does truth care about those? What is our objective in apologetics? Is it simply to convince the unbeliever? If that's all, then according to framework I should simply tell them out right lies every step of the way to trick them into conversion. While we have a moral duty to convince others, our first duty is to God and His truth. What I am saying is to tell them the truth, whether they accept it or not is against them, because their rejection of the truth is not legitimate nor is it genuine ignorance but deliberate rebellion against the God whom they know by nature. If what you want is practical success the best way to accomplish that is by faithfulness, since it is God who grants success. >thumping someone in the head with the Bible I'm not saying to mindlessly quote scripture at them, I'm saying not to accept their rejection of it. This two-step apologetical method is found in Proverbs 26:4-5 "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou should become like unto him. Answer the fool according to his folly, lest he should be wise in his own conceit". So don't answer the fool according to his folly, don't accept his way of reasoning and his presuppositions, or else you're as foolish as he is. Instead, answer him according to his folly, show him how his worldview has made him a fool. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, but the fool hates knowledge. So when the unbeliever tells you that he can't believe the bible because there's not enough evidence for it or whatever else, you tell him (not in so many words) "I don't accept your rejection of the bible, but given your stated worldview, you couldn't know anything at all". So if he says there isn't any evidence to support Christian belief, we do not surrender our Christian belief, accept his standards and reasoning, and then try to work our way up to God from them, instead we demand of him given his worldview how that argument is the least bit coherent? What evidence does he have to support his belief that all beliefs require evidence? If he thinks Christianity is illogical, ask why we have to be logical given his worldview? And when he gives you an arbitrary answer like "it just is that way" you throw it back in his face, "in that case, it just is that God exists". Take the unbeliever's presuppositions all the way off a cliff. Show him that under his worldview the fact you two are even arguing makes no sense whatsoever, even to debate he has to stop reasoning like an unbeliever and reason like a Christian instead. This is what is meant by the impossibility of the contrary: the negation of Christianity is logically impossible according to itself.
>>21564 originally i had a big long post laid out to address this but ive decided to shorten it since things were getting too complicated and long. >What is our objective in apologetics? to convince unbelievers of the Bible using logic. Addressing your last statement. you make good points here. Giving into the fools request for historical/physical evidence of God/the Bible does open you up to him just denying them or digging up some article online "disproving" them. In that regard it would be best to show that proof to them after they are already believers as to strengthen their faith rather than to convince them. That being said logic is still required in order for you to convince someone but i think youre already aware of that as it seems we originally misunderstood each other. Some criticism tho, while your method of approach is good it meets a standstill after you show them how illogical their current world view is. You've proven them wrong but you havent proven yourself right. My suggestion would then be to follow it up with some kind of logical proof that points towards the Christian God. Example: >"why do you need evidence for me to be right?" "because thats logical and just the way it is" >"well if its 'just the way it is' then perhaps God existing is 'just the way it is'" standstill in the conversation >"I know my God is real because I've seen the fruits of His labor, I've seen the nations He's built off the back of His values and I've even felt it myself how He has changed my life. Nations have fallen, religions have fallen, yet for 4,000 years the word of God has built up empires of holy men. The Bible works and there's millennia of proof and personal testimony to account for it. What do you have to lose? Money back guarantee." nice pic btw
>>21569 >to convince unbelievers of the Bible using logic. Is God's authority contingent on the unbeliever granting Him the right to be called "logical"? Does the unbeliever have a right to stand in judgement of God? Is God on trial? The whole point of what we are arguing is that the unbeliever must start all of his reasoning in light of the revelation of God. If we argue that scripture is to be accepted on the basis of this or that thing aside from itself, we are in a sense telling the unbeliever that they should believe we're right on the basis that we're wrong. Our duty is not to persuade the unbeliever, we were neither commanded of that nor are we capable of it. The purpose of apologetics is to demonstrate the unbeliever's false religion to be false and give a platform for the proclamation of the gospel. >Some criticism tho, while your method of approach is good it meets a standstill after you show them how illogical their current world view is. You've proven them wrong but you havent proven yourself right So if I'm understanding you right, what you're saying is once you've driven the unbeliever off the cliff and left him nothing to stand on, what is your positive presentation for Christianity? That is, once we have demonstrated that secularism is intellectually indefensible, how do we show that Christianity specifically is true? Well since we've been talking about logic, one of the three foundational laws of logic is the law of the excluded middle, which states that either a proposition is true, or its negation is true. So don't you see in light of it that if you prove the negation is logically impossible, you have also proven the proposition is true? The form of the argument is basically as follows Premise 1: C is a thing presupposed rather than proven Premise 2: the presupposition of C is necessary Premise 3: not-C is self-contradictory according to its own standards Premise 4: not-C is impossible Conclusion: C is true If atheism is logically impossible, then that is proof that God exists, since it is impossible that God does not exist. The whole point of the transcendental argument for God is to show that autonomous reasoning is absurd, reasoning must be theonomous instead, thinking God's thoughts after Him. The unbeliever can give me a basis for neither order nor disorder, but I can give him both if he starts with my God and the revelation of my God. And the contrary is truly impossible, since the false religions of man destroy themselves just as atheism destroys itself. So one way to answer this objection when it comes from an atheist is to give him an example of that fact, for example let's assume Islam is true. If Islam is true, the quran is the word of God, but the quran says the bible is the word of God, and commands me as a Christian to judge it on the basis of my bible, so I do that and find by Islam's own standard that Islam is false. So if Islam is true, then Islam is false, just like if atheism is true, atheism is false.
>>21575 I'll answer this tomorrow as I'm going to go to bed soon
>>21569 >to convince unbelievers of the Bible using logic (Atheist) unbelievers just twist logic to serve their own ends. You can't "convince" them of anything unless they are actually open to the slightest possibility of believing in God. Agnostics are a different situation.
>>20816 >jews need to leave America and Europe immediately, but what should we do with them?Israel obviously belongs to the Palestinians.
>>21575 after pondering this conversation off and on throughout the day i think i have realized a flaw in this conversation. We're both talking about two completely different situations in which we would be talking to a unbeliever. In my original post on the subject matter i made my claim with the mindset that we were talking about agnostics who believe in a god but not God (Yahweh) whereas you seem to be basing your claim off discussion with athiests. in that regard you are right, in order to convert a atheist you must first destroy their atheist worldview and a big part of that is not conceding ground to them by playing their game. Its a zero sum game when debating atheists on this issue, any ground you lose is ground they win which means you need to prove them false rather than prove yourself true which would require you to step down onto their level and jepordize your argument. when it comes to convincing people that God (Yahweh) is the true God tho i believe (and i anticipate youll likely agree) that i am right and that we must use anecdotal, historical, and logical facts and arguments to convince unbelievers that God is the one true god. Hopefully this clears things up, if you still disagree then feel free to tell me.
>>21590 yes, related: >>21594
>>21594 I'm glad to see we agree about so much, you always want more agreement than disagreement. What I'm gathering is that you are talking about the scenario of what we might call a 'seeker agnostic', someone who doesn't know that God exists but wants to (not a philosophical agnostic, that's a form of atheism where they say they don't know that God exists and neither do you because it's impossible to know it). That isn't really an apologetical situation so much as a simple evangelistic one, we aren't arguing against a contrary worldview in that scenario just showing them that ours is true. But here is the vital question: when we provide evidences, are we giving them as external proofs which independent of the foundation of Christian faith justify Christian belief, or are they a demonstration of the internal coherence of the Christian worldview? That is, are we saying on the basis of autonomous reasoning, Christianity is to be accepted? Or are we showing that if you adopt Christian presuppositions, everything makes sense and clicks into place? It ought to be the latter in all cases, both the apologetic and evangelistic scenarios. This is what we ought to do in the argument with the atheist as well, since then we are showing both that his worldview can't make sense of anything and ours makes sense of everything.
>>21596 im glad to see we agree on most of this too. as for your question i would say that depends largely on the proof. Demonstrating to someone the positive affects of following God's commandments and then reinforcing it with other claims about how the religion is one of the oldest in the world and yet works the best would fall under proving Christianity is legit without external proof and in my opinion this is the strategy most likely to work on an unbeliever since its much harder to dispute and can be backed up by the believer simply adopting the Bible's values and trying it out for a while to see what happens. Things such as historical evidence of Jesus, etc while not necessary or helpful in most scenarios depending on the situation can sometimes be necessary. So it kinda depends although personally if i was a evangelist i would stick to using resources that prove Christianity without relying on external proofs since external proofs can easily be disregarded by unbelievers by them simply cherrypicking articles or social media posts on the matter that agree with their preconceived beliefs. in other words i would lean more towards agreeing with you here since its alot harder to disprove logic and the Bible than it is to cherrypick articles online.
>>21597 there's something id like to add to this. the best arguments make use of pathos, ethos, and logos, in the case of the example i gave historical proof of the Bible (such as the success of past peoples and nations) would be ethos, logical proof of the Bible (using logic to explain how Biblical values work in a way that creates superior people and societies) would be logos, and anecdotal proof of the Bible (such as personal testimony and daring the unbeliever to give it a try) would be pathos. while logos could suffice on its own at convincing a unbeliever the other two greatly help bolster the argument by providing more than just logical credibility to your claim and by providing a clear path by which the unbeliever can see for themself. So because of that i think both external proof and internal proof of the Bible can be necessary for convincing unbelievers of the Bible and i think its up to the individual evangelist whether or not the situation warrants it and how much of each they should use.
>>21599 I will say tho that out of all of the arguments used to convince someone historical proof (ethos) is probably the least useful and most risky since (depending on what is being discussed) it can be much easier to disprove or refute than pathos and logos but sometimes it's necessary to boost an argument past the finish line. User discretion advised.
>>21596 >That is, are we saying on the basis of autonomous reasoning, Christianity is to be accepted? Or are we showing that if you adopt Christian presuppositions, everything makes sense and clicks into place? While I think the latter is right for theological reasons, what are the vulnerabilities of the former? That it presumes that human autonomous reasoning is sufficient on its own to bring one to faith?
Could proto-indo-european be adamic language given by God from which all other languages sprung? What could be the consequences if we return to it and start calling things their true names?
>>21604 The foremost problem with the former is it grants the unbeliever the right to judge God. It basically says to the unbeliever "Here your honor, as you can see this evidence exonerates my client, now won't you please believe in Him?" Intellectually, it is absurd. Let us use the example of the atheist whose entire worldview and style of reasoning we have just destroyed; now does it make any sense after destroying that to appeal to it? We just told him he couldn't know anything at all that way. There's also a significant epistemological problem with this, because if the word of God is the final authority as it must be, then its authority is derived from nothing but the God who spoke it, who has all authority by nature. So it is dubious to suppose that the bible passes this or that test and then gets to have authority because of it. And yes, autonomous reasoning cannot attain to divine faith because that faith is the repudiation of autonomous reasoning. Jesus gets to say how we are to think, autonomy denies this and relies instead on darkened, futile, foolish human wisdom. See 1 Corinthians 1 and 2.
>>21616 >The foremost problem with the former is it grants the unbeliever the right to judge God. It basically says to the unbeliever "Here your honor, as you can see this evidence exonerates my client, now won't you please believe in Him?" Won't the world do that regardless, given it judged (and condemned) the Lord Himself when He was present on the Earth? I suppose it's inefficient at best and counterproductive at worst to argue for God on the world's terms, since the world's terms are faithless and perverse. Even if you can win an argument, winning hearts to believing faith is another matter entirely. >Intellectually, it is absurd. Let us use the example of the atheist whose entire worldview and style of reasoning we have just destroyed; now does it make any sense after destroying that to appeal to it? We just told him he couldn't know anything at all that way. This is true. In these sorts of arguments there is a presumption that if the atheist can somehow advocate for his disbelief in God that therefore God would not exist, as if God's objective existence or non-existence were dependent on human acknowledgement and not a matter of fact. >There's also a significant epistemological problem with this, because if the word of God is the final authority as it must be, then its authority is derived from nothing but the God who spoke it, who has all authority by nature. So it is dubious to suppose that the bible passes this or that test and then gets to have authority because of it. Yes and as you mentioned earlier, leads to a heresy of higher criticism on a secular humanist basis. >And yes, autonomous reasoning cannot attain to divine faith because that faith is the repudiation of autonomous reasoning. While I agree that reasoning cannot attain faith, I wouldn't say that faith is the (complete) repudiation of reasoning but that it gives definition to the limits of human reason. We are at least expected of God to use reason in the ordinary operations of life and even reading and understanding the Bible requires some sense of reason. In the outline of the operation of faith given in Hebrews 11, verses 1 and 3, >Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen... Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." Paul says, "through faith we understand," which ties into your point in >>21596 that "if you adopt Christian presuppositions, everything makes sense and clicks into place." That I feel is one of the great and unique hallmarks of (sound) Christianity, in that Christian faith doesn't call you to be a mindless slave to an aloof, incomprehensible and even irrational god like the Muslim Allah, it calls you as an individual by the grace of the Holy Spirit to liberty and friendship in the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, who was God-Man on earth and present among sinners for their salvation. Faith circumscribes reason as through it we see that true understanding of life and of existence is communicated of God alone, in contrast to the sheer squalor begotten of human reason's attempts to advance a secular metaphysics. (In writing this I realized that atheism is effectively the Tower of Babel of our days.) Human faculty is properly shown to have a place, and that place is as the servant of faith, and not its master; reason's clamoring for primacy is repudiated. Lastly I think it is important to note that we should avoid the perennial error of holding that faith can be reasoned into (as was imagined by the Pelagians), for even if we are able to make it plain to an unbeliever that Christianity is veracious, the desire to accept the truth has to be present in that person's heart by God's providence. For we do not save ourselves, but receive the gift of salvation from God as per Ephesians 2:8, and we know not how the word sown in his or her heart develops (Mark 4:26-27). So regardless of whether we see an immediate effect from our presentation of the gospel, we should persist in witness.
>>21623 Logic should be used in conjunction with the Bible to show people that the Bible is truth. Such as using logic to show how the Bible works or using logic to show how in the past the Bible has worked etc. Would you agree?
>>21606 Look at OG Babylonian language. That and Hebrew are probably the closest we're gonna get.
>>21627 The authority of logic depends on the Bible, not the other way around. People need to be shown that outside of a Christian worldview ‘logic’ is meaningless
>>21630 But logic is tied to God. You could even say God is the primordial intelligence. And as humans the Bible says we are made in the image of God. The difference between Gods logic and human logic is that God has infinite insight and knowledge whereas mankind's is limited. We should use the Bible to fill in for our lack of knowledge, when necessary, so that we can logically decide it is true. >People need to be shown that outside of a Christian worldview ‘logic’ is meaningless The problem with this line or thinking is that people could just substitute the Christian God for pagan ones therefore we must use logic and the Bible to prove that only the real God exists.
>>21635 *Logic the Bible, anecdote, and history.
Convert me.
>>21623 >Won't the world do that regardless Yes but that is called rebellion. We should have no part in it. >I wouldn't say that faith is the (complete) repudiation of reasoning but that it gives definition to the limits of human reason. I do not say we repudiate reason but *autonomous* reason, we do quite the opposite of repudiating reason itself, rather faith establishes reason. When I reason, I ought to do so retaining God in my knowledge and thinking His thoughts after Him. Reasoning is autonomous when it is self-glorifying and presumes its own sufficiency and supremacy. At the first attack of the Enemy Eve sinned before she took the fruit, the moment of her sin was when she considered the serpent's words, to put it hyperbolically, when she failed to beg the question. Because by considering what the serpent had told her instead of rejecting it, she questioned God's self-attesting word, put it on equal ground with the serpent's lies, and made herself the judge; so that even if she had concluded in God's favor she nevertheless would be guilty. >>21635 >We should use the Bible to fill in for our lack of knowledge, when necessary, so that we can logically decide it is true On what basis is logic to be accepted? I agree man is made in the image of God and this explains his reasoning capacity. How do we know this? We know it because of the word of God. There is a difference between knowing something, and being able to justify knowing it. In principle the unbeliever couldn't know anything at all, but in practice he knows things not because of his own capacity but because of the image which God has bestowed upon him; even though he in his quest to escape from God has adopted a worldview which in theory would blot out all his knowledge, he cannot help but know the truth, because God has shown it to him. He only possesses a sensus communis by virtue of the sensus divinitatis, an immediate revelation of God implanted in the soul of man. Therefore, conceiving of God's word as something which is added to our knowledge we have on our own is absurd, it is the foundation of all our knowledge. Logic and sense-perception are derivative authorities founded in the authority of God the Creator, who revealed Himself in scripture, apart from whom they have no foundation. >The problem with this line or thinking is that people could just substitute the Christian God for pagan ones We can destroy the pagan religions in the same way as atheism. Religion exists on an axis between the poles of atheism and Christianity. The closer it is to the truth the more arbitrary it will have to be to excuse its rejection of the truth, and the further away it is the more inconsistent it will be. We may say that there are properly no pagan religions, every false religion is counterfeit Christianity which is dependent upon Christian presuppositions to exist for which they are without an excuse before God.
Also for a demonstration of the apologetic method I am advocating for and of the fact it is our most effective response to atheism, and really just mandatory for anyone interested in apologetics https://youtu.be/tDHkheBeTRE The Great Debate: Does God Exist? Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein
>>21545 The authority of God's Word does not depend on logic or historical argument. That is refuted by Bahnsen. Same with all ideas that attempt to use lower means to ground the authority of Scripture, or Christianity. Unbelievers are darkened in their minds and warped through sin. Scripture makes this very clear, the argument is not about the facts. The argument is about paradigms. Only the Christian paradigm is congruent with reality. The Scriptures say to answer a fool according to his folly lest be he wise in his own eyes, i.e. we show the fool the vanity and foolishness of their worldview, while also not answering the fool according his folly, lest we ourselves become foolish i.e. by arguing according to his godless worldview.
>>21640 >Therefore, conceiving of God's word as something which is added to our knowledge we have on our own is absurd, it is the foundation of all our knowledge. not to an unbeliever. Even if you can get them to acknowledge that a god exists using that as your argument will lead to you only being met with "But what about *insert other god*, couldnt they have done the same thing? How do you know yours is real and not theirs?". This is why you have to point them towards the Bible, the Bible gives us laws and commandments, show logically how those laws and commandments work and show logically how man, especially given the circumstance of mankind and even more so the Israelites at that time, could not have created these laws and commandments on their own. I hope that makes more sense. Use logic to fill in the gaps of human knowledge and understanding so that the truth of the Bible is as plain to see as possible. Because to anyone with eyes the Bible is obviously real but not everyone has 20/20 vision and has yet to fully understand, so we must explain it to them using logic.
>>21646 >not to an unbeliever And? So what? If you believe in God, if you believe in Jesus, act like it. Allow the Holy Spirit the privilege of being wiser than you. What I've been trying to hammer away on is that the unbeliever's belief system is invalid and self-destructive. We are reducing their objections to the Christian faith to impotence and irrelevance. That they refuse to accept God's self-attesting word is to our advantage and not their detriment, because it is this fatal flaw in their worldview that we exploit to the destruction of their false religion. You are throwing your gun away because the criminal doesn't accept its efficacy >Even if you can get them to acknowledge that a god exists using that as your argument will lead to you only being met with "But what about *insert other god*, couldnt they have done the same thing? How do you know yours is real and not theirs?" I know it because those unbelieving systems of thought are as self-destructive as the atheist's unbelieving system of thought. It is as if you thought I was saying to the atheist that his problem was a refusal to acknowledge some pagan god like Krishna, and that if he does so then his autonomous reasoning is magically no longer absurd. Whatever strange abomination "a god" is, it is not something which a Christian apologist ought to be defending. I am only interested in defending the Triune God of scripture and the true Christian religion. When I say that we argue from the impossibility of the contrary I mean it is the contrary of Christian theism which is impossible and not "generic theism" (whatever that is). When this objection is raised by an atheist, it is erroneous because it requires that all religions are identical. As if the options are atheism and some kind of indistinct religiosity that answers all questions the same way regardless of the name. So when this problem is raised we can respond to it by pointing that out, we can also respond by giving them an example like I said before. When I'm arguing for the Christian worldview, I am not taking a piecemeal approach to it, I am arguing for the whole thing; existence of God, Lordship of Christ, infallibility of the bible etc etc.
Open file (281.59 KB 461x882 ClipboardImage.png)
>>21646 can we collectively agree that this disgraced former should leave the board for good? his shallow and superficial conversations here about evangelization have nothing to do with him growing as a christian, he's just here to promote his glowop cult where he's got a church of his own. the following is from his website: The Empirial Church of God What is the Empirial Church of God? The Empirial Church of God (or Church of God for short) is a religious school and belief founded within the Empirial organization. Its goal is to properly understand both the scriptures and the truths of the Bible. It does this by engaging in debate and study of the Bible and the beliefs and philosophies expressed within it similar to a Jewish schul or the early churches of Christianity. The end result being a more pure understanding of the Bible similar to that of the early Christians, untainted by modern man. What are some of our beliefs? We believe that the Bible is itself the only authority over the church and that all religious beliefs should have reasonable foundation on its word We believe in the sanctity of God's word and although we recognize that not every version of the Bible is correct we still believe that God's word will be preserved out there for the masses to see We believe in following the moral laws and commandments of the Bible including both the New and Old Testament We believe in Balance Theory, the idea that God is a perfect balance of many positive yet conflicting virtues. We believe in Saturday worship. We believe in Annihilation Theory, the idea that lost souls will be destroyed in Hell We believe in the preservation of nature and in defending ones homeland, all gifts given to us by God We believe in love, kindness, and mercy Aswell as salvation through the sincerity of ones faith. And many, many, more new and exciting beliefs and discoveries we are finding every day! So why don't you join us by contacting: TheOfficialEmpire@protonmail.com and asking to become a member of our Church (he posted with this email on this board while being a vol) being a christian and evangelizing is not about seeking people to join your fake church where you put pictures of yourself dressed up like a glowie on streetlamps. you are rebuked for your heresies. stop drawing attention to yourself and your fake church
based AntichristHater69 making the tranny seethe
>>21651 you posted earlier saying "i'll be your girlfriend anon :)" projection much? you've made about 10 low effort shitposts here. nobody wants dour, jaded bitter faggots like you around here. fuck off and die and take your low quality posts that contribute nothing to the board with you
>>21649 Could you give an example of what you're saying? I play unbeliever you play evangelist and you show me what you're trying to say?
Open file (15.50 KB 730x133 ClipboardImage.png)
>>21669 unbelievers mock christ, just as you have done earlier in this thread
>>21669 Could you be more specific? What confuses you?
>>21671 I just don't understand how you plan on converting someone to Christianity specifically (not how you convince someone of God). It doesn't make much sense to me, atleast from what I understand so I'm wondering if we could reenact a conversation to showcase how your idea works.
>>21671 the guy fancies himself as the head of his own fake church and he doesn't understand basic truths about evangelization. he's not worth the effort of trying to dumb down a perfectly reasonable post to his level. he's not here to participare anonymously like everyone else, he's here to promote his blasphemous heretical fake church and glowop political movement that advocates terrorism. you'd think being disgraced in to being removed as a vol would be enough for him to get the message, but even after he's been told by the people running the board to stop namefagging he's channelling his inner cockroach. stop wasting your time with this attention seeking faggot
>>21672 because your 'plan' on converting people to your fake church is to promote terrorism, give a list of the various heresies you've decided to endorse and drop a protonmail email address so people can get in touch, with the promise of new, exciting beliefs you discover every day!
>>21671 Never mind I think I understand. You're basically saying to show how bad all the false religions are and use this to prove Christianity. Is that right?
>>21675 >false religions like the fake church you're peddling?
Open file (1013.45 KB 837x966 1659765966645.png)
>>21672 >doesn't make sense to me if a pimple ridden user who uses his online persona to promote about terrorism and brag about killing white people and calling them snow niggers doesn't understand something it's probably a good sign
>>21641 A book by itself is not evidence of anything.
>>21693 Is there something wrong with believing something without evidence? >>21675 I'm not saying we have a burden to chase down every last false religion and destroy them in the atheist's sight as some kind of long winded attempt to satisfy his demand for proof, I'm saying that we can do that and we may help answer his concerns by letting him know we are capable of that. Another valuable way to answer the objection that we haven't proven ourselves right when it comes is to point out that in saying that he has effectively conceded that all forms of secularism at that point in the conversation are lying dead on the floor, and the only possible way Christianity could have a contender would be through one of the religions of man. So we may ask him, in the mean time until he discovers the 'real truth' (which surely is anything *but* Christianity, make no mistake there is suppression of the truth even when they offer this objection) which he being a reasonable and truth-seeking modern man surely desires, rather than wishes simply to give himself an excuse to continue holding a worldview which he has just admitted is false; while he does hold a worldview under which he himself now admits he couldn't know anything at all, will he stop behaving like he knows things? Will he stop paying his taxes or caring about his family or drinking water when he gets thirsty? Has he lost the nose on his face? And since he does effectively now admit not only that God does exist but that he has really known it all along, as he has depended on God from the very start, does he not feel at all concerned about the judgement of God upon him for his rebellion against Him and his suppression of the truth in unrighteousness, does he not feel the pressing need for a way to be reconciled, a Savior? At this point I think it is also appropriate to make a raw ad hominem attack depending on our personal knowledge of him and say something like "You know the reason I think you don't want to be a Christian is simply because you're a homosexual and you don't want to have to own up to God about that".
>>21699 ok, i think we're in agreement.
>>21703 stop namefagging
>>21729 Seek help Anon...
>>21730 where should i get help from? maybe reddit or facebook? this is an anonymous imageboard. this faggot acted like a tyrant while he was vol and has alienated countless users from the board with his rampant faggotry, he calls white people snow niggers and he encouraged users of this board to raid /islam/ and post cp there. he promotes his glowop website that promotes terrorism, including his fake church on this site. it's disgusting and this filthy swine needs to be gone. we should not tolerate someone here who told people to participate in cp raids while he was a vol, the whole board was put on notice after he did that,
>>21699 >Is there something wrong with believing something without evidence? It's fideism. We have plenty of reasons to believe in God without appealing to that.
>>21752 *or more precisely stated, without having to appeal to that, or being exposed to refutation on that basis
>>21732 >and he encouraged users of this board to raid /islam/ and post cp there. >who told people to participate in cp raids Do you have irrefutable proof of this Anon? If so, I will Perma-on-sight. The last thing we need is to cause this kind of trouble for our gracious hosts Anoncafe.
>>21764 all been discussed at length in the meta threads chobitsu although ach and the current and previous bo have deleted half of it. go catch up on the threads and you'll see it all
>>21764 everything has been available for months at https://anon.cafe/meta/res/15642.html but here, i'll do your job for you https://archive.ph/qFRH3#selection-9741.0-9743.1 in this thread users are talking about raiding, posting cunny ach calls it based, replies to >>15189 and gives him permission to conduct the cp raid the global mods chime in at >>15240 telling the bo and ach that the whole board is now on notice because of this
>>21764 how about posting with his username, theofficialempire where he promotes terrorism, has manifestos promoting some glowop where he wants to overthrow the government, posts his name and face everywhere? why the fuck do you allow this bum to show his face on the board, posting in every page 1 thread and namefagging in every single one?
>>21752 How is pointing out the self-refuting nature of empiricism fideism?
>>21771 you gonna do anything about this rampaging terrorist masterminding cp raids chobitsu? or are you just gonna ignore it and sage the thread?
Open file (163.07 KB 683x714 John-14_6.jpg)
>>21639 Do you have need in your life? Are you disturbed by the present state of the world? In death, do you want to have definitive assurance that you purposefully lived? These questions find their answer in the one true and living God, who defines the whole of our human existence, from beginning to end: Jesus of Nazareth, which was God incarnate in man, and who redeemed humanity from its vices in a substitutionary and atoning sacrificial death in a Roman crucifixion in 33 AD. By His blood, our deficiencies before the divine and the eternal are pardoned, and we are incorporated as one body through Him into inheritance of His coming kingdom, in which there shall be no death nor suffering. His coming was testified to by prophets sent before Him, and the good news of His words and deeds was spread throughout the world by His companions, the apostles, His disciples, and the saints which believed. Their witness is communicate to us in the infallible word of God of the Bible. The faith which they held proceeded to convert the whole of the Roman Empire, Europe, set forth into the New World, Africa, Asia, and beyond, becoming the world's largest religion. The resilience and the beauty of its truths have inspired billions to achieve far in excess of what they thought was possible of themselves: and you too, may be a participant in this timeless endeavour, should it be given in your heart to believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is your God and Saviour. To conclude our prayers, Christians say amen, which means truly, or so be it; thus for your conversion, let us say, amen.
>>21767 >>21768 >>21769 >>21773 LOL. Don't get ur pantsu in a knot Anon. :^) All we really needed was (>>15240), but thanks for the effort. If I feel it's warranted, I'll suggest a permanant perma-sweep for this anon or any other individual behaving thus. Just be patient, Anon.
>>21775 >If I feel it's warranted you said you'd permaban ach if shown proof, here are archived threads that have been out there for a good few months detailing all of his prior behaviour, why the sudden change of heart?
>>21773 Please take your meds
>>21771 My problem is not with the identity of fideism but rather the method that was expressed. I do not see a good end in (what seemed like) arguing that Christians hold our faith on no empirical grounds, being that God is real, and has real impacts on the world. We believe that Jesus Christ was a real physical man, who performed real physical miracles, had a real physical death, and a real physical resurrection. We don't believe that the Bible is just a story that we hold on faith independent of any factual basis. If we are to express that our faith is held purely on faith and nothing but faith alone, with no external validation whatsoever, the anti-theistic crowd would charge that our religion is nothing but a mere mental construct, nothing special among worldly philosophies such as post-modernism, perspectivism, or moral relativism; it also gives space for heresies to sprout such as Quakerism, mysticism / gnosticism, and other subjective dogmas like the spell of antinomianism the Massachusetts Puritans had to deal with in the 1630s.
>>21777 didn't you mean to say 'Please take your meds, Anon.'? i'm on to you waifufag, i saw you post christ chan earlier
>>21775 update These constitute irrefutable proof that the incident of raiding /islam/ with CP clearly did happen. >>>/meta/15667 >>>/meta/15671 >>>/meta/15672 >>15240 The remaining task will simply be to establish beyond reasonable doubt that it was in fact the namefagging Anon in question, who was the primary perp. >protip: screencapps are not proof :^) Again, patience pls. Knowledge about this offense is new to me.
>>21782 lol, not me fren. calm down. :^)
>>21786 >namefagging Anon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk we're reaching ESL levels like nobody has seen before. >The remaining task will simply be to establish beyond reasonable doubt that it was in fact the namefagging Anon in question, who was the primary perp. >screencapps are not proof :^) you wanted to know if he encouraged cp raids or not. no idea why you don't want screencaps but there's an archive of him posting in that thread with mod tag on, just use the link i provided or go on wayback machine, people in the meta thread are also sharing post numbers of anons posting and discussing cp, but the previous bo and ach did some damage control and deleted them from /christian/, so screencaps and archives are all we have, but it's right there, he tells that anon to 'go ahead' and participate in the cp raid that's being discussed in the thread. with mod tag on. >>21787 at risk of sounding too mean i already figured that out after i saw he'd written many paragraphs of coherent english
>>21780 >My problem is not with the identity of fideism but rather the method that was expressed But the way you (mis)characterized my apologetic method here is just a description of fideism. >I do not see a good end in (what seemed like) arguing that Christians hold our faith on no empirical grounds, being that God is real, and has real impacts on the world. We believe that Jesus Christ was a real physical man, who performed real physical miracles, had a real physical death, and a real physical resurrection. We don't believe that the Bible is just a story that we hold on faith independent of any factual basis. If we are to express that our faith is held purely on faith and nothing but faith alone, with no external validation whatsoever What is going to be this external standard of validation, and on what basis is it to be accepted? How is it able to stand above and in judgement of God's self-attesting word? When I say Christian faith is not empirically derived I do not mean it has no evidence, the whole point of presuppositionalism is that absolutely every last thing that exists is definitive proof that God exists. What I mean is that I do not begin from a position of neutrality and then bend my knee only once God has satisfied the demands upon Him, I have to start with belief in God in order for that evidence to even be intelligible. I am not saying accepting Christian faith requires setting aside your reason, I am saying rejecting Christian faith requires giving up your reason altogether. The bible says that unbelievers are "without excuse" for their rejection of the truth, in the Greek literally "no defense". The unbeliever has no defense against God because on his worldview he can't form a rational argument for or against anything at all, let alone against God, so if he comes to God's court that way he loses. On the other hand, if he comes to the court with these Christian presuppositions, he is obviously guilty for his rejection of the God on whom he depends even to argue against Him. Those are the options we present to the world, there is Christian rationality and there is absurdity, and there is no third thing. >the anti-theistic crowd would charge that our religion is nothing but a mere mental construct, nothing special among worldly philosophies such as post-modernism, perspectivism, or moral relativism Of course they will, and they will do that to you too. What led you to think unbelievers were reasonable? "They became futile in their thinking and their foolish hearts were darkened" "The word of the cross is foolishness to those that are perishing". Our concern is not with convincing the unbeliever, but holding him without excuse. I have neither a duty or a capacity to change his heart, but only to shut his mouth. It is after we have shown his worldly wisdom to be foolish that we may pray for the Holy Spirit to grant repentance to them, for unless the Spirit of God brings conviction of sin I speak to the wind.
>>21788 >no idea why you don't want screencaps b/c i myself am a sh*tposter from way back. 'ovar 10'000 hours in mspaint' is a thing. >many paragraphs of coherent english Kek. I wish you'd tell my 4th-grade English teacher that, Anon. BTW, I'm hiding your IP for now ITT (too distracting), with this caveat: your own spergouts against the namefag Anon are more evident at this stage throughout the data, than a clearcut-evidence of your claim against him. We shall see, just relax.
>>21790 > I'm hiding your IP for now ITT (too distracting), with this caveat i wont even bother to tell you what caveat means. go ahead and censor my posts because you don’t know anything about the board you’re moderating. why don’t you hide his post since nobody wants namefags?
>>21789 After your elaboration in this post we are pretty much on the same page. The (mis) characterization stems from the one line response to the other anon which was suffering from a lack of detail. >What is going to be this external standard of validation, and on what basis is it to be accepted? How is it able to stand above and in judgement of God's self-attesting word? I see it as God's manifest action, in conjunction with His self-attesting word, regardless of human judgement concerning it. As in the Old Testament, Isaiah calls for fire from heaven on Mount Carmel, demonstrating the superiority of the Lord in contrast to the impotence of Baal. Or in the New Testament, we have events such as the Father's declaration at the Baptism of Christ, and the Transfiguration, attesting to His divinity. Everything in creation to this day still affirms His existence. Of course, this is something that is only seen through faith as you elaborate, and as you say, >I am not saying accepting Christian faith requires setting aside your reason, I am saying rejecting Christian faith requires giving up your reason altogether. >Of course they will, and they will do that to you too. What led you to think unbelievers were reasonable? I do not (hold that they are naturally reasonable), but in an evangelistic setting we do not know who among the presently (visibly) unbelieving have been elected to conversion, repentance, and salvation. The reprobate will never accept God regardless of our preaching, however this rejection does not come from any deficiency of reason on the part of the Christian religion; rather as I have heard it said once in a sermon, our faith is most reasonable, and this is self-evident to those (by the working of the Holy Spirit, not by their own natural faculty) that hear and are convinced by the gospel.
>>21786 >>21787 >>21790 Email me now. christianjanny@proton.me.
>>21804 Emailed you, BO
Can anyone prove that the modern jews are descended of Esau?
>>21804 I emailed you with my mod application
>>21884 I'm not really in the mood to address everything here but the bottom right of that image is stupid but also technically true. No Jesus did not practice Judaism, atleast not how we think of it, that's because Judaism in it's modern form didn't come about until after Christ had already died centuries later. But the basic texts and even some of the ideas which modern Judaism (orthodox not reform) is based on one of been shared by the Judaism that existed in Christ's days. The biggest difference between the Jewish faith during Christ's time and Judaism now is the Talmud and the conversations held within which (to my understanding) essentially expanded upon some of the beliefs of Judaism of old. The irony of this all here is that Christ came and expanded upon Judaism of old using God's wisdom and true intent and thus created Christianity where as many came and expounded upon Judaism of old and thus created modern Judaism. In other words, modern Judaism is what Christ did to old Judaism but instead done by man. Once you consider that things start to make sense, it's also highly ironic but as we all know God loves His ironies.
>>16981 This is a grand post. God bless.
>>17749 Love God more than the body and whatever tempts you, knowing that God will fulfill all you need more than you know. Matthew 6:31-33, >Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. But do not fight against God if it is His will for you to be married, or unmarried. 1 Corinthians 7:8-9, the words of Paul the Apostle, > I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn. >>17981 Was not the Apostle Paul a celibate? Although you may have a harder time getting a good rapport without a wife, there shouldn't be condemnation against you for being unmarried. Regardless, everyone, both those who have had many wives and those who have had none, are called to preach and teach the Word. And remember, 1 Peter 2:13,20, >Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; ... For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.
Open file (3.74 MB 640x448 baptist.mp4)
What can I do as someone who knows that Jesus is real but doesn't really know much about Christianity outside of the basics I learned growing up and as someone who is a homosexual who is currently in a gay relationship. I know I'm a sodomite. Do I just accept that I will be burning when I die?
>>21931 The Lord always accepts a repentant sinner coming to Him in faith. Read the New Testament
Anyone know a good KJV New Testament to get? I have a large print Cambridge KJV bible but would like just an NT to go with my textbook size Brenton Septuagint... Don't like red words, want decent size print (not giant), hardback or maybe leather, does leather stay open? Idk. thx.
>>21931 I second this: >>21933. The quickest way to learn about Jesus is to read the words he said. "But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his [Jesus'] disciples, saying, Why do ye eat and drink with publicans and sinners? And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." -Luke 5:30-32 "...Jesus saith unto them [the chief priests], Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you." -Matthew 21:31 Recognizing you're a sinner is what every single Christian did. Take heart! Jesus came to save us from our sins.
Open file (119.27 KB 1280x720 Why are u gay.mp4)
Open file (51.10 KB 750x920 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (55.79 KB 750x1000 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (50.30 KB 750x1000 ClipboardImage.png)
>>21931 One of the first things you should do is RTG (Reading The Gospel)
>>21931 Read Ezekiel chapter 18, read Isaiah chapter 55, read the proverbs and the psalms. For the last two books, read at least one proverb each day and a few psalms too. >>21934 I don't like red-letter printed bibles either. It's entirely editorial and it emphasizes some scripture over other (2nd Timothy 3:16) and it's not entirely clear at some points in scripture whether it was Jesus who said it; and not all red-letter printed bibles have the same text printed in red as a result.
>>21941 True, and it just seems kinda gaudy to me. And evil looking just because my brain's associated them over the years. Idk how it came to be printed in so many of the bibles... So if anyone knows a good KJV NT only bible publisher that is a pure translation ans isn't going to fall apart lmk.
>>21944 Any reason you only want the NT? You'd be missing out on so much. Are you looking for a pocket bible or something?
>>21946 Yeah I use a septuagint for OT so don't need all the extra pages. Would like something small and comfier to read in bed.
Open file (68.44 KB 350x428 gideons_kjv.jpg)
>>21947 You might consider those vintage pocket New Testaments printed by the Gideons. They used the KJV for most of the 20th century, so there's plenty (I think the organization uses a different translation these days). Usually the New Testament with Psalms and Proverbs added, no red letters. The covers are not leather, and they're too small to lay flat by themselves when open. They're pocket-size.
>>21948 Thx... the text looks a bit small from the pictures I'm seeing... but the more I think about this maybe I don't really need one lol. the one I have should be alright for bed I think. More importantly I have questions about where to begin reading. I've read some of Genesis before but got bored part-way through... Now I'm finally starting to read again beginning with Job and I'm not bored with it. what should I do after Job? I guess go back and read some more OT. maybe back to the Torah and get through more of it... I understand the NT is most important for Christians and many of the old laws were sort of overwritten with the coming of Christ. I think I would want to read more OT backstory though. And when I begin the NT, where do I start... the gospels? I read Mark is believed to be the first written gospel, but most bibles put Matthew first. Where to start and why? Thanks :)
>>21931 All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Realize that we must turn to Jesus, and forsake sin. Break off your relationship, and trust only in Jesus, and everything will be okay. God bless.
>>21954 Pretty much everyone reads Matthew first because it is the best general purpose introduction, but I think it may be useful to read them in Mark - Matthew - John - Luke - Acts order. Mark literally begins with the sentence that it is the beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Matthew adds genealogical information and additional details and John adds depth about Jesus' purpose and mission. Lastly Luke and Acts are a compilation work by the same author, Acts picks up immediately where Luke leaves off and details the events of the early church.
Sinning is satanic right? I've heard of Satanist who ritualistically indulge in their sins.
>>22119 >going against God and following the devil is satanic pretty sure you answered your own question
>There is no such thing as sexual orientation (gay, bi, straight, or otherwise) >There is only sex within and outside of wedlock >The purpose of wedlock is a sacramental rite to love one another for eternity in the eyes of god with producing children as a secondary, but fiduciary duty if possible >Gay sex isn't wrong for anything related to sexual identity but because it violates this oath to god >One may experience love for someone of the same sex, but this is not the same as the love of a marriage >As the Greeks wrote extensively on, there are many forms of love and the gays are misconstruing things because they do not understand this >A union of man and woman incorporates all 7 types of love under the Ancient Greek philosophy Philautia; self love which is required for all forms of love, Pragma; long-lasting dutiful love, Ludus; Playful love (sometimes considered flirtatious love), Agape; spiritual/selfless love, Storge; unconditional communal love (like that of a parent and child), Philia; brotherly love (does not imply familial bond), and Eros; Physical love >A homosexual union does not incorporate all 7 types of love and always lacks agape (understood to be the same love we feel for God when applied to a Christian philosophy) and almost always lacks storge or pragma >Most homosexual unions are either primarily a combination of Eros and Ludus which is completely heretical to the church (people who are homosexual for sex), or is a form of Philia/Pragma that has been misconstrued as being the same as the sacramental love because of the modern times we live in >That is, 100+ years ago the primary "love" that a homosexual would feel is what a man would feel for a lifelong friend/brother-in-arms, or a woman would feel for an intergenerational friend of the family >But those forms of love have been forgotten and the homosexual tries to replace it with lust because they don't know any better (outside of the obvious hedonists) >Therefore the homosexual needs "correcting" to understand that you can feel those forms of love for one of the same sex while understanding that it is NOT a romantic love and engaging in sexual activities with another violates this bond. >There can be love between man and man or woman and woman but it is NOT the same as the sacramental union of man and woman; the "romance" one feels in such a relationship is a byproduct of bad actors/a godless society telling us that all love must take a sexual/erotic form in order to violate the sanctity of marriage Thoughts?
>>22150 Based and basedpilled
>>22150 pretty based
Open file (70.09 KB 678x944 Embarassed Frog.jpg)
>>22152 >>22153 I'm glad you feel that way but I meant more your thoughts on my approach to the gay question in respect to Christian theology since my approach is supposed to be a largely non-confrontational approach to the gay question in a modern society.
>>22154 its not outright offense or (for lack of better word) triggering but it still holds lots of truth. Your usage of the seven forms of love according to the greeks is unique and i imagine will help persuade people who otherwise wouldnt care. If i could add anything to it i would probably add more pathos in the form of emotional appeals aswell as maybe some more ethos in the form of data referencing the effects homosexuality has on the body and mind. To elaborate on the pathos i would recommend making a appeal toward "mental clarity". As stated in your post homosexuals are essentially just confused. So by making this come off more as you lending a helping hand would probably help sell it too especially for people who are struggling with homo thoughts but have made the switch yet. This could act as reassurance to them and help show them how they arent gay just confused.
>>22154 One thing I just noticed though -- why is self-love required to love others? Wouldn't it be the opposite, the more you love yourself the less you love others? But anyway, yeah in general your approach sounds pretty realistic and I've actually been having thoughts in general kind of like that but you put them out in a more elaborate and organized manner.
>>22156 I was more fleshing out the logical argument, but you are correct that there should be more of an argument to pathos and to some extent ethos. I agree. >>22157 >why is self-love required to love others? How can you love another if you can't even be at peace with yourself? Marriage involves your other completing you, and ultimate self-love is not necessary, but one cannot begin the path of loving another if they can't even love oneself. That is devotion without self-respect. Of course there is such an extreme self-love as narcissism but that isn't meant to be implied in self-love.
>>22160 The secular concept of "self-love" is not something for a Christian to focus on nor cultivate: https://www.gotquestions.org/self-love.html If one has low self-esteem/self-hatred issues, the solution is not to learn to love oneself more, but to love God all the more, and to derive one's self-esteem from their relationship with God: https://www.gotquestions.org/self-hatred.html
>>22321 Come to think of it, "self-love" noticeably parallels with the bugmen's religions of choice like hinduism and buddhism, where any gods aside from you are metaphors for something about yourself and basically you are your own god, and the goals of those religions are reaching -- by yourself -- weird spiritual states when you don't care about anyone or anything anymore (nirvana, etc). Yeah, while this post >>22012 doesn't specifically mention this point, it really is true that not all religions are equal (and Christianity is the most unique and beautiful one).
>>22321 >>22323 I am not allowed here so you are going to have to come to /shelter/ if you want to continue this conversation with me.
>>22323 >Christianity is the most unique and beautiful one I'm a unique and beautiful snowflake yayy! God loves me even though I hate myself <3
Why did God invent autism? Or anti-social personality disorder for that matter? Why give some people such a massive spiritual disadvantage? If somebody is incapable of loving others, than is it not impossible for them to be a good Christian? Is it not like shooting a person in the legs before a race, and then punishing them for not finishing?
>>22331 "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved? And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible." -Mark 10:25-27 Your question would make a good thread, considering we'd have to define "autism" and "anti-social personality disorder", and then debate their origins/causes. >Is it not like shooting a person in the legs before a race, and then punishing them for not finishing? God is omniscient, and perfectly capable of weighing all the innumerable factors that lean upon our every choice. But then, being a good Christian is about trusting in God to conform you to the image of Jesus Christ - to finish the good work he began in you. Don't stumble right at the outset by thinking it's impossible for someone with mental hurdles. You're not doing it in your own strength. With God, all things are possible.
>>22333 >God is omniscient, and perfectly capable of weighing all the innumerable factors that lean upon our every choice. So is heaven filled with those most everyone would consider unchristian, but God deemed to have done good enough given the circumstances he placed them in? I am unfortunate to not have been placed in worse circumstances, and get more leeway?
>>22335 All the human citizens of Heaven are forgiven sinners. No one enters by his own good works: "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." -Ephesians 2:8-9 Your entrance into Heaven was paid for by Jesus Christ. You appropriate that gift through faith (trusting/resting in the fact that Jesus is the Son of God whose perfectly-obedient life, death, burial, and resurrection made you right with the Father). But whether you receive rewards or suffer loss depends on your works: "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad." -2 Corinthians 5:10 "If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire." -1 Corinthians 3:14-15
>>22335 Matthew 10:32-38 32 Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. 33 But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven. 34 Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. 35 For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 36 And a man's enemies shall be they of his own household. 37 He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me. 38 And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me. 39 He that findeth his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for me, shall find it. end quote We all get a cross to bear. It is up to us to bear it best we can, and it is for the Lord Jesus Christ to judge us. I trust the Lord's judgement, and if I am damned to hell, so be God will be done. If I am damned by the Lord, then that's a perfect judgement. None of us have earned heaven. If we go to heaven by the Lord's sacrifice and his mercy. I also wouldn't presume to make rules for the Lord on judgment. That's as bad as godless liberals trying to dictate how science and engineering should work in God's creation.
>>22344 >>22343 I don't consider that fair, loving, or good. The only reason I'd be Christian is out of fear. The relationship would be coercive. Being motivated by fear would be doing it wrong, so it would futile. I don't think God is a loving God. His standards are different from mine. I don't feel guilty about "my" "sins". I don't think being Christian would improve my life, and that isn't the point of it anyway. So why should I be Christian?
>>22347 >I don't consider that fair, loving, or good. The only reason I'd be Christian is out of fear. Not sure how you feel fit to judge God and your own creation. God gives the life to the living. Those who reject heaven for hell, every single one thinks they know more than God who created them from nothing. I like life. I hope to do God's will. I give thanks to God for the blessings of life and all the blessings I've received in this life. If someone gives you a great gift, and asks you in return not to harm others, and you "don't consider that fair, loving, or good." then you have pretty much condemned yourself and made your choice. What kind of heaven would it be if you were going around harming others and denying the judgment of the omnipotent creator?
>>22348 >Not sure how you feel fit to judge God You believe we were made in God's image, meaning our moral judgment is the same as God's. God is often compared to a father. So why should I not compare him to anybody else? If a doctor were to torture a patient for not taking their medicine, I would consider him cruel, not loving. If a human father were to place their child in hell for disobedience, I would consider him cruel, not loving. >asks you in return not to harm others That is far from being the only thing God expects. >What kind of heaven would it be From what I've heard about heaven, I'm not interested in it.
>>22347 >I don't consider that fair, loving, or good It's not fair. We deserve Hell, but instead, we receive a love we cannot fathom: "For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly... God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." -Romans 5:6,8 >The only reason I'd be Christian is out of fear "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom..." -Proverbs 9:10 >Being motivated by fear would be doing it wrong Being fearful when there's a true danger is smart. But remember that fearing judgment is only the beginning. There's currently mercy and a complete pardon extended to anyone that wants it. >I don't feel guilty about "my" "sins". Your problem is an incorrect perspective. Read Romans 1:18-32, and Romans 2:1-16, to see God's explanation of how humans arrived at that incorrect perspective. Every person holds a limited amount of God's standard intrinsically, it's just been corrupted through sin and self-deceit. If no one ever read you a single Bible verse, you still haven't perfectly lived up to your own standards (which are an imperfect corrupted version of God's), and God would justly damn you on that basis. If you don't feel guilty, then there is no message here for you. The religious rulers of Jesus' day didn't feel guilty either, and "...Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you. For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him." -Matthew 21:31-32 Everyone in Heaven is a pardoned sinner. I have a feeling when we die and get a clear picture of the holiness of God, we'll understand just how filthy and unrighteous we really are. This is what the prophet Isaiah said when he was given a vision of God's throne: "...Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts." -Isaiah 6:5
>>22351 When executing a person, it is merciful to give them a quick death, so they do not suffer unnecessarily. If God were merciful, he would do the same, and simply erase sinners from existence after death. Is this a corruption of God's standards? Would it be better to give people a long, painful death? Do you think that is the more merciful choice?
>>22352 I've never been dead and don't know what either heaven nor hell is like. And again, you are but a tiny speck in the cosmos of God's creation, who are you to second guess the judgment of the all knowing God? Some Church Father's say that pain is part of the punishment of sins, that even tho' you my be bound for heaven, divine justice means you should suffer for your sins. Christ, after all, was scourged and tortured for your sins, why must God suffer for your sins but not you? Do you put yourself up greater than God? You are God's creation. Church Fathers teach us that it is better to suffer for your sins on Earth than in the afterlife. Again, I've never been dead, so I wouldn't know. I'm going to go with the Bible, and the Lord who was Crucified.
>>22356 >who are you to second guess the judgment of the all knowing God? I have the ability to second guess God's judgment. Authority has nothing to do with it. >why must God suffer for your sins but not you Must doesn't apply to God. God doesn't need to do anything. His suffering was also temporary, unlike Hell, as people usually think of it.
>>22358 >I have the ability to second guess God's judgment. Authority has nothing to do with it. Understanding has nothing to do with it, either. >Must doesn't apply to God. God doesn't need to do anything. His suffering was also temporary, unlike Hell, as people usually think of it. It's hard enough to remind people that if they believe Christ is God, that they would be hanging on his every word. When people think of reasons to be bitter about hell, and yet seek hell, well.... I'm not smart enough for people smarter than God Almighty, creator of Heaven and Earth.
>>22352 different denominations believe different things. I believe in Annihilationism and that God punishes the sinners for their crimes then kills them off. The Bible says that punishment will be a lake of fire, fire burns then it destroys. It doesnt burn forever.
>>22363 >It doesnt burn forever. Did you read the Bible? >His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will clear His threshing floor and gather His wheat into the barn. But the chaff He will burn up with fire that never goes out.” Matthew 3:12
>>22361 >if they believe Christ is God, that they would be hanging on his every word. Out of fear. Not adoration, or love. Love tinged with fear, is fake.
>>22368 And I'm not smarter than God, I'm smarter than the mortal, human men who wrote the bible.
>>22367 I don't know what universe you're from but in mine fire doesn't burn forever.
>>22374 Why would you even try to apply the laws of physics of this universe to heaven?
>>22369 > I'm smarter than the mortal, human men who wrote the bible. A bold claim, the proof of which I don't even care to see as it's an appeal to self authority fallacy. And the Bible was divinely inspired, so it's not even correct claim.
>>22369 God in the Holy Spirit wrote the Bible.
>>22384 >>22386 >the Bible was divinely inspired According to the people who wrote it and believe in it. You are convinced that God would be interventionist in only allowing divinely inspired text into the bible(which is not all the text written with the intention of being included). In other situations, God takes a more "hands off" approach and you have to interpret how that's part of his plan. Some sects, have slightly different versions of the bible. These divinely inspired men, could have written that God does anything, and would you not question it because "who am I to question God"? I'll question him again. He could have written the bible himself, and rained copies from down the sky. Or even better, have everyone be born with the bible memorized. They would still have freewill, but they would much better prepared for the test of life. A lot more people would probably pass.
>>22388 So, you're just here to brag and feed your ego by trolling the Christians? Sad little life, that.
>>22388 >These divinely inspired men, could have written that God does anything Biblical inspiration =/= secular inspiration. The word inspiration derives from the word spiration, meaning breathing, as in respiration. Scripture wasn't written on a whim because men had a good idea, it is literally θεόπνευστος, God-breathed. God being the true author, who is the same across time, place, and culture, produced works that all attest to the same reality of God and His faith and actions, thus only one intended output of consequence could been written. >freewill Why do you think free will matters? Do you suppose that you are somehow free as it is?
>>22405 >Why do you think free will matters? ask God.
Is suicide always a bad thing? Unless God provide me, I imagine my life ending in a very lonely and painful way due to many reasons, but with many goals accomplished that right now I want to accomplish, including holiness and other things that will praise god. Having accomplished the virtues and goals that I want, but now as a old and sick man, could it be sin to commit suicide and let all my fortune to charity? I would literally have nothing more to do on earth and the rest is just pain and suffering.
>>22450 Thou shalt not kill. >I imagine my life ending in a very lonely and painful way due to many reasons, There were many martyrs in the church who suffered death alone and in pain
Open file (567.96 KB 1568x1045 68fac9878d6ac5bc.jpeg)
>>22450 you will die when you die, your time is not up.
“Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in.” ― Mark Twain Matt 15:17 But she said: Yea, Lord; for the whelps also eat of the crumbs that fall from the table of their masters. end quote And if it was not for the prayers of dogs for us to enter heaven, none of us would go in. Who would the dogs have to play with?! Prove me wrong.
https://www.christianartgifts.com/KJV-Compact-Large-Print-LL-Purple This is the greatest English Bible available that I know of and suggest everyone get it. Now is the time for everyone to say "Yes Christmas is pagan and Jesus wasn't born on this day... but that's okay let's celebrate his birth anyways and have christmas trees and stuff... don't be so negative!" My assembly does all the christmas lights and trees and stuff, and it upsets me, am I a negative thinker? Nay, I'm just too smart for Christmas. You're a grinch, girl and you don't do cards 'cause you don't endorse pagan holidays. You can reply it's the solstice honey, you should rely on Jehovah's son and give some gifts, girl, but you're far too smart 'cause you know it's from saturnalia The Didache's really weird statement of the prophets signs, I've only ever heard it explained once and you can find it here Page 34 http://www.tracts.ukgo.com/didache.pdf In other words in the first century prophets were basically travelling wizzards and they would come to an assembly in some town and gather the people together and perform a sign Gandalf fireworks style if I am to understand. Further proof the didache is extremely early maybe even more than 64 AD. In fact... I'm getting bold, the bold is coming out I might move it to the 50s. Cascually mentioning the superpowers early christians had. Of course in the 2nd century Celcus was still trying to explain away how Christians had superpowers from demons not God. But the vibe of the Didache is very James like, I don't believe like some crazy people that the Didache is part of the letters from Acts 15 but that is one of the issues, why doesn't the didache say where it's from or who and how much of the letter has changed over time, I would say probably not much at all, if you're going to add to the Didache why don't we see more clear high christian theology but the fact the letter is anonymous means it's certainly written by a second generation Christian like Hebrews. John was "anonymous" but clearly let everyone know he was an elder and disciple of Jesus in fact the only reason he writes anonymously 4 times is probably to fit in with the current Church letter style. With second generation Christian stuff like Barnabas, Hebrews, Clement we don't really see this name dropping authority or much authority certainly not the Paul-style of "Do what I say or you're a heretic. Anyone who doesn't listen to me throw them out in the cold, don't give 'em their coats confiscate their coats." But I don't know I think I might be right just giving Didache 64 AD then because it is very second generation-like but I feel like it also has a post 70 AD feeling to it as if Jersluem isn't around anymore.
Open file (6.14 MB 854x480 shroud coin.webm)
SORRY! Gomen. UwU >>22456 >quoting from the Catholic (barf) Holy (NOT) "Bible" (if it be lawful to call it a Bible) Real whelp hours. Top whelp. Meaner than a junkyard whelp. Will our whelps be raptured with us? A whelp is a man's best friend. Don't eat my whelp! Beware the furious whelps! Very good very nice yes. I've got a whelp house for me in heaven but that's far too good, but I don't mind a whelp's house in Paradise and being servant to someone as well. I kind of want to go now. I want to go NOW! This world is difficult to get through because I'm an idiot and let it get me down and distracted and every person in this world cares so much about this dying world that has at most 300 years left. On sunday preacher talked about God's peace, indeed. And then I drove back on my moped and someone got rude at me for being on a pathway. Like when people get mad at someone for being on a bike on a sidewalk. The only person who could be such a way is someone who thinks this is the only life they have. Calm down. It's one thing to mention it but to genuinely be upset I don't know. So my peace was tested. That's my story from yesterday and I wish I could have brought peace to the person, maybe by not reacting in an equally rude matter is enough. But people want to create conflict in every situation where there is an opportunity. I've also been grumpy-rude to people who don't fully understand the truth of Jesus and God and I can be grumpy and confrontational to them for not following the rules, well maybe they don't even know the rules. I didn't even know you couldn't ride a moped on that particular path but it turns out there is a sign, but the person was rude about it. Certainly I hope I am not rude when I tell people about the signs of the Bible which they break which they don't even know about and so on. I'm a little whelp (If it be lawful to call myself a whelp). If you quote the whelp Bible in front of me again I'll make a whelp outta you! Redeeming the time, because the days are evil. So writes Paul. Pay careful attention and know what the Lord wants. I will, I just want to do right and go home to my whelp house on the corner of Least of Heaven Street, near the statehome for the ugly. The days aren't just evil but they are long and I want to leave my tent and go home already. I'm impatient sadly and care little about any argument of anything else. And my witnessing falls on deaf ears.
Open file (267.93 KB 897x630 sem_tz49.jpg)
Fight off anime boobs? Secular work all day? Unbelieving wife? Terrible family? No terrestrial friendships? And you may feel that you are alone penniless and old. But do not feel discouraged! Just lift your tear filled eyes, and through the upper window you'll see me standing by. The Storms may rage but fear not, for Noah I am nigh! And through the upper window you'll see me standing by. I am of course a advocate for the ground site of Noah's Ark https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f4uF4Va9gI But the famous mountain site I was reading about as well https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2940-noah-s-ark-has-been-found-with-high-probability-on-mount-ararat#7426 Honestly I never really heard any arguments for the mountain site it just seemed too good to be true. It'd be nice if we put actual resources and media attention into stuff like this but instead I guess we have better things to do. Jumping into million dollar pools filled with jello for views or something. But reading some of this yes how on Earth would they fake that. You are happy if you just remember our Father. If you just think about him and that nothing can tare you away when you are in his fold. We'll get through this. Burn out my life for Christ. Sometimes you just don't know what to do. Indeed. Not what am I going to do what are you going to do Lord? I trust in you, you can fix it. I lay down, I'm like chinese young adults, I'm laying flat. Except instead of let it rot I'm saying let it be made whole by the Lord. You know what your problem is!!!!! You don't have things set right. If you set things right God works, but if you have things festering around then it kills you slowly. Why don't you actually set things that you know need to be set right, right. Get rid of that thing you know you need to get rid of, change that thing you know you need to change and say that thing to that person and so on. You need to be set up to be used and then be happy. I have never felt the joy of the Lord more when I had nothing. Very well, I will do such things now.
>>22464 For 700 years, this was the only Christian Bibles. For 1200 years, it was the only Bible in Western Europe. if You hate this bible, then you hate the early Christian church. The Christian faith did not spring from Martin Luther smuggling his nun out of the convent in a pickeled herring barrel and then breaking his vows before God. Not even going to read the rest of this hateful post. What's wrong with you protestants that you harbor such hate when the Lord told us to love our neighbors? I made a little joke about the goodness of dogs, and this hate spew is the response?
Open file (700.08 KB 1476x570 1671497418056-1.png)
>>22466 I don't think you really read my post and I don't really know why you're talking to me about Bibles and Martin Luther and saying a bunch of untrue nonsense. And don't reply to me unless you reply to something I actually talked about! Of course I replied to you without replying to anything you said either... but I'm cool and you're not! Wait, you just said you didn't read my post. You didn't read what I said and then you said some random nonsense to me that has nothing to do with my post! That's the problem when you don't read someone's post who is agreeing with you and yet you reply to them with anger and nonsense. In fact if you did read my post you'd know that what you're doing is kind of what I was talking about, about the grumpy rudeness. You don't even seem to be being silly or having fun I think you genuinely are upset at something unrelated to anything about my particular post. I saw this image on christ-chan.xyz and it was really funny. That websites sucks by the way (if it be lawful to call it a website), worse than here.
>>22466 I have to reply again because I forgot that I made fun of the Douay-Rheims Bible, I actually did forget. I want to publicly apologise for saying "barf" and "NOT" like a valley girl towards the Douay-Rheims Bible and then quoting Josephus at it, really just poor taste. I mean Josephus wrote a book called "Life" to defend himself against the current tabloids and rumours about him, the subtitle was if I remember something like "Let this pain Passover me" "In the rain I blow my shofar" "They're all at the feast of weeks but I'm still here" "They broke the Temple, but don't now break my heart" and the cover of the book was a drawing of Josephus' face half of it shrouded by darkness and a single tear from his eye and a single leaf blowing in the wind. This is all real by the way look it up. So I understand this is not a man to be quoting, I mean it's of poor taste no doubt. So I just want to apologise and if I may give my reasons because you know I saw Matthew 15:27 and said "What translation on this pickled Earth uses the term whelp here?" And sure enough the only one that does is the Douay-Rheims and so I saw this as an opportunity to poke fun at it. I want to say I use the Douay-Rheims all the time in my Bible software, I have four translations I check and Douay-Rheims is one of them because it's really the only English translation of the Vulgate. But the term whelp is very funny. But I see now the error of my ways, the term whelp is NOT funny at all and anyone who thinks that really should be strung up by their gills. AND... AND... to call the Douay-Rheims the "whelp Bible" Now this is indeed at least five more weeks in purgatory let's make that clear. I want to apologise if my words gave any offense to the Douay-Rheims family or the estate or whoever owned the copyright which expired recently on the Douay-Rheims. I wish I greedily held onto Bible copyrights because christians are not a family and money money money, Good work Thomas Nelson in the UK. WHO KNOWS what terrible things would happy if the KJV was public domain!!!!?!?!?!?! I mean it would be anarchy, behold, wild beasts would roam in the streets, I man yes it is public domain everywhere else but I mean get real. And if you DARE... HO... IF. YOU. DARE. Use their font for your own Bible they will destroy you they will drag you through the mud they're put you in the pillory. So I do apologise for my comments on the Douay-Rheims Bible and making fun of the term whelp and using it to make my own point and also for talking about other things. I will strive to be better in the future. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsWsZx3mZZc
>>22468 Does christ-chan.xyz host porn like this site?
Who built the mysterious staircase in Loretto Chapel? Was it St. Joseph? https://youtu.be/TgAvqwWeA8U?t=288
>>22479 I checked it out and just got an nginx landing page (and no TLS support)
This has been bugging me for weeks now. Are animals self-aware? If so, does this not contradict divine omnibenevolence, since they mostly suffer and don't get a salvation, not even an immortal soul? If self-awareness is a sort of a spectrum, why should we conclude that it's only humans that are self-aware enough to deserve an immortal soul? Or that human soul is immortal in the first place, and not just a function of a more developed animal brain? If not, on what basis do you assume they aren't? If they are only morally indifferent meat robots, is it fine to boil pigs alive so they taste better, as they did in the middle ages? Morally it would be of no more concern than making marmoalde. I'm sure most christians would deny this, but either it's true or their religion has a huge problem to overcome.
Open file (147.45 KB 1250x831 C8NXW1-scaled.jpg)
Did The Devil write Codex Gigas? https://youtu.be/wFVP6LHLa3c
>34 subscribers >17 views This is your Youtube channel, isn't it?
So, the early Bible of the Church included an image of Satan to help explain the evil and wickedness. Ergo, the Bible (which is part of the Giant Book) is satanic? Nice try, Rabbi.
Open file (138.73 KB 323x452 ClipboardImage.png)
Maybe this question does deserve a separate thread, i don't know, but I'm pretty new to this subject of free will, can anyone please write a tldr on why it would and why it would not exist, from a Christian/biblical/theological perspective, and what are the implications and "side effects" of each of those 2 views?
Open file (1005.60 KB 2988x4008 luckyhit.jpg)
>>22646 The only way free will (in the way people commonly mean it) could exist is if it has a supernatural source. If the world is purely material, then everything has been predetermined from the moment the material world was set in motion. You'd have the illusion of choice, but the calculating apparatus of your physical brain will produce the same result given the same input and conditions, every time. There might be a million variables you could never identify, but they still affect by fixed operation the way your brain calculates, thus giving the illusion of free choice simply because you are unable to conceive/identify the millions of variables involved in each one of your "choices". I don't know if you're familiar with the side game "Lucky Hit" from the Shenmue video game series, but you drop a ball from any location at the top of the board, and it falls, bouncing through the pins and lands in a slot at the bottom. You try to make the ball land in the circle symbol. Because it bounces like crazy and can end up at the other side of the board you dropped it from, it appears to be random. But rationally, it is not random. It's just too difficult of a physics problem for you to calculate at a glance. Given an identical drop under identical conditions, the ball will fall the exact same way every time.
>>22652 > If the world is purely material, then everything has been predetermined from the moment the material world was set in motion. Physics wise, the idea of a mechanical, determinate world was destroyed with the discovery of quantum mechanics. God has a finger in what happens in this universe. And not just the past going forward. My advisor showed that it is not unphysical for the future to have to meet the boundary conditions of the past.
>>22671 You'll have to dumb it down for me, as I don't have a physics background. From what I'm able to glean from Wikipedia, quantum mechanics is the study of the physics (the rules) governing atomic and subatomic particles. "The uncertainty principle implies that it is in general not possible to predict the value of a quantity with arbitrary certainty, even if all initial conditions are specified." My gut reaction is that they're not able to predict the momentum of subatomic particles with certainty because they cannot measure and/or identify all the affecting variables - not because there are no objective rules governing the physical universe at the subatomic level. Put another way: there are still hard rules of this material world, we just have to discover/revise what we thought the rules were. This wouldn't disprove a determinate universe, it only suggests that WE can't presently (or may ever be able to) determine outcomes at that level with 100% certainty. >God has a finger in what happens in this universe. I agree with you, I was just explaining the no-supernatural, materialist perspective. >it is not unphysical for the future to have to meet the boundary conditions of the past. This is interesting, but over my head. Could you explain further?
>>22646 To quote Dr. Hugh Ross >"...conscious free will that every human being possesses is not physical. It does not have its origin in physics and chemistry. It is spiritual. It is our spiritual nature that makes humans different from all other life on Earth." [1] There are abundant evidences to the non-material nature of human free will. It can be argued that it's fruitless to argue that claim from a scientific position since it is, a priori, supernatural in nature (that is, it's transcendent beyond matter, energy, space, time). Yet common sense tells us that free will is very real nontheless. I think any parent today could reasonably have much to say on the topic of their own children's free wills! I hope that helped Anon, Cheers. :^) 1. https://reasons.org/explore/blogs/blog_channel/could-our-lives-be-a-computer-simulation
>>22674 >common sense Where is this in the Bible?
>>22675 Where is the word "Theological"? It's obviously pertinent to the discussion at hand given the intangible nature of the topic under discussion, Red Herring-kun.
>>22674 I read that article, and I would ask him: If free will exists, why doesn't everyone who hears believe the Gospel? Who would voluntarily choose Hell? Is it simply a matter of having different levels of information, like buyers and sellers in the stock market? Did I choose Christ because I had more information than someone who rejected Him, and have thus made a better-informed decision? If so, universal salvation depends solely on better education. It's a difficult question. I don't have the answer, I'm just brainstorming.
>>22677 Not that I could possibly presume to answer in Dr. Ross' stead (BTW, he will field your question directly at his social media contacts). But I think the simple answer is that Biblical faith comes into play. Some people simply refuse to believe that He is. The tl;dr for such an insane perspective IMO is here: >"The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers so they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God." [1] >It's a difficult question. I don't have the answer, I'm just brainstorming. Indeed, it is. But the Truth is out there! :^) 1. https://biblehub.com/2_corinthians/4-4.htm (BSB)
Free will. Some people will choose sin. In fact, most people would chose sin rather than heaven.
>>22675 A lot of it isn't common because the world's wisdom is foolishness with God. 1 Cor 1 has some stuff on this, starting around verse 18. It used to be common, people used to read the bible instead of porn magazines and antichrist newspaper lies. Schools in America were only ever allowed to be funded by tax payers because they were founded to teach kids literacy and the Bible, so they could read the Bible and learn about God. Now it teaches kids how to sodomize each other and the antigod, antichrist jews/fags/lgbts/etc (synagogue of satan, which is more than just today's so-called jews btw) wanted even to teach FIRST GRADERS about anal sex, and since they didn't want to be honest about this, they called it the "don't say gay bill" to give people the impression it was about le heckin oppressed faggots rather than preventing faggots from spiritually raping kids in government schools. So yeah, that's modern "common sense", destroying children in government schools.
how can i form myself to have a university level bible knowledge? seeing the curriculum of one of the universities they have things like psycology, sociology, history, bible theology, church hisstory etc, how can i "compete" by merely reading the bible and some good books?
>>22698 find someone or a group of people who are well versed in the Bible and talk to them about various theological questions. Look things up, research, etc. Thats what i do.
Open file (622.76 KB 960x720 pope_anderson.png)
What happened to all the Steven Anderson fans? I feel like they used to be a lot more numerous, both on imageboards and on the Internet in general.
Open file (440.94 KB 540x360 bible god.mp4)
Open file (871.26 KB 540x360 bible god 2.mp4)
>>22708 Probably this is what happened
>>22698 Psychology and sociology is mostly vain philosophy and total malarkey to put it mildly. And history changes whenever it doesn't suit someone's narrative or agenda. You're really not missing anything when it comes to those topics.
>>22681 Humanity without God has no inclination but into sin. That is why "common sense" never was, is, or will be enough. It was "common sense" for the cultures around ancient Israel to engage in sacrificing children to Baal. "Free will" deliberation is a concession to human vanity, because there is no other alternative to salvation but through Jesus Christ; it imagines as if one has the autonomy enter into heaven by another door. All other doors lead to hell: salvation is an obligation and not a matter of preference. If someone thinks their "freedom of will" is more important than accepting the gospel, they have condemned themselves. It is as senseless as pondering whether to stay in a house that is engulfed in flames when the fire brigade is at your window to rescue you. Why would someone even fathom that? Perhaps they desire the things of the house moreso than their own lives. For some the sight of the rescuer alone is enough to convince them to depart, for others they are so hysterical that they have to be almost dragged out kicking and screaming, but are saved nonetheless. But indifference or willful rejection mean certain death.
>>22712 He would fit in just fine with the schizos here.
>>22712 The Bible is the word of God, but the physical book can't be God. If it was, then every Bible printing house is creating God. I'm not sure if that's what he meant, I'd have to hear the context. Not that it matters, I wouldn't advise listening to Anderson anyways. He doesn't seem to have any love for the lost. He'll wish the deaths of homosexuals rather than pray for their salvation. And he does seem to have a focused disdain for that sin alone, as if it's somehow the worst one by orders of magnitude. I don't recall scripture making that distinction. Homosexuality was punished with death, but so was adultery.
>>22708 I tried finding his Youtube channel to see what he's been saying recently, but discovered he was banned years ago. I guess that's why he's not as popular. Out of sight, out of mind.
>>22726 I remember when that went down; it was chided as "Bible idolatry". I can sort of see how he got there - It is said that Jesus the Christ is "The Word of God". But like much of his theology, it was his personal confusion. I don't think he meant wickedness. >>22737 If I recall correctly, he offended the wrong people. But then, YouTube that's easy to do. They were about to cancel Father Jenkins and "What Catholics Believe" as well. To be honest, much of WCB wasn't part of the Catholic religion but was political and value based.
Open file (1.69 MB 255x264 nothing.gif)
Another thought about it is Clement SHOULD have mentioned Peter going to Rome. Clement mentions Paul's travels. If he's going to mention his travels why not Peter's unless as is obvious Peter did what Jesus told him to do and what Paul said he would do: Peter tended to the assembly in Jerusalem his entire life. The last time Peter is mentioned in Acts is being at Jerusalem and his two letters are clearly written from Jerusalem. So the total is this: There are six church letters in the NT written from Rome. 61, 61, 62, 65, 65, 67 AD. None of them mention Peter at all. Paul's letter to Rome does not mention Peter being there 57 AD. Ignatius letter to the Romans 108 AD mentions Peter and Paul issued commandments to them and I think that's the best possible evidence for Peter having any connection to Rome. Why every Christian in the world by the end of the 100's AD associates Peter with Paul and with Rome I do not know I think that's a mystery. Obviously we know why Eusebius wanted Peter to be in Rome, Eusibus is a notorious clown though he's living in his own letter to Abgar honk honk world. Based on Ignatius I think Peter probably had correspondence directly just to Rome... I don't understand. I can't figure it out. 1) What is with Peter and Rome. 2) What is with Paul and Spain. These two things just don't fit with the New Testament timeline. "Well maybe your timeline is wrong." Nooo, noooo, I think it's more likely history is wrong. You can put Paul going to Spain 62-63 AD. You can put Peter in Rome 65-66 AD. The problem is that that is stupid.
Regardless of anything we all assume Peter and Paul were both dead by the time Hebrews was written, the author speaks as though the first generation Christians are now gone. And we agree this was written shortly after Nero's persecution and it was written from Rome. AND we assume that Paul (and maybe Peter) along with many other important people died during this time in this city. So why the heck doesn't Hebrews mention more about these things. Hebrews was written a year later and a year is a long time I mean all the important deaths are old news. He's not informing the Judeans about what's going on in Rome he's helping them out with the problems they themselves are facing. And I say "the author of Hebrews" out of respect but it's obviously Mark, I think I've proven that it's Mark end of discussion. But even after a year why doesn't Mark mention more about what's happening in Rome, Why doesn't he mention anything helpful for the timeline!? It's as if he doesn't care. You know when I read a Church letter in the NT I read the opening and the ending to figure out what's going on, the whole middle section is filler we all know that the where and when is all that matters! Are people really reading the filler!? Hebrews is the first Christian document written a year after the end of the Apostolic age, the first second generation Church letter. Mark could have cleared up a lot of confusion but he didn't do it. What a jerk. Just tell me what happened, stop giving me useful theology and speaking the word of the Lord to me and tell me meaningless timeline information instead!!!! It's literally my porn, I can't be deceived by porn if I spend my time doing timeline stuff hohoho. I've been struggling very hard the past two months since I got married. I wanna talk about it but probably not worth it here, I hopefully can get help at Assembly but I doubt it and that's kind of the problem is that I'm doubting everything all the time, I doubt my prayers will be answered I doubt God will help me. But I say not what can I do but Lord what are you going to do, change me please and help my marriage. I'm a practical person, so I need practical needs or maybe I need more emotional intelligence. You notice a lot of people even born again christians some times seem to care a lot about the religion but not so much about whether it's true as importance. A lot of people almost don't seem to care what is true or not but what is practical and in that way I am not practical. But I need structured things that will help, or maybe god can do it all and by "maybe" I mean yes he can and even if asked in Jesus' name will. I'm sure that if you just focus and seek Jesus and the Kingdom of Heaven everything else will work out because yes indeed the Lord says so. So I guess that's the answer when I feel like I can't figure out what to do. Yes if we just focus on that and I want to focus FOCUS FOCUS, I think that's another part of "watch" in the Bible is "focus" and we focus by watching out and cleaning and being careful of evil and quick to the good and harken to whatever the Spirit says and it's never too late.
>>22708 we grew up
Open file (96.47 KB 800x445 yk94nnfq.jpg)
Does God love gamers?
>>22864 God is a Gamer.
>>22869 What if I am just an NPC, put here to punish someone else? I kinda worry about that.
>>22864 Heckin' 'holesome 100 Reddit moment Keanu Chungus!!!1
Is listening to lustful music bad, it's hard to avoid as it's seems like that's all current music is.
>>22915 You're just going to cry to the catholic mod to delete everything once I call out your lies and hypocrisy.
>>22864 Why not ask God? >protip: His Word already answered you.
>>22915 In what way is it lustful? Does it cause you to sin? >seems like that's all current music is Then you need to look elsewhere. Don't expect the talmudic music industry to drop anything wholesome or edifying in your lap.
>>22915 why would you want to listen to lustful music? You indicate that modern music is very lustful and most modern music sucks so it seems like a self correcting issue. Find the music that doesnt suck and chances are it wont be lustful.
>>22931 I think to remember the text you replied to was different, has it changed? you are not alone brother
>>22899 Then become a vessel of the Holy Spirit instead of operating in accordance to the in-world scripting like non-Christians are limited to doing.
>>23013 We are what God made us to be.
>whatever your problem is, it can be fixed if your faith in God is strong enough >your problem is that your faith is not strong enough >?????? I'm not necessarily saying that's my situation, nor I'm trying to make some gaytheist point. I'm genuinely curious.
>>23067 "Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth. And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief." Mark 9:23-24 KJV "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17 KJV Pray that you'll be given greater faith, and read the Bible. The more you learn of the character of God in his word, the more you'll come to trust him.
Open file (103.74 KB 503x215 genesis bible.png)
Open file (4.20 MB 640x360 100 thousand years.mp4)
Not as advanced as the Acts Bible but it needed to be done (for me anywawys). I have no idea what I'm gonna do for Chronicles and Kings (cabbages and kings) I don't even want to think about it. I'm still struggling with my marraige. But it's getting better. phhhhhh. I haven't been able to post a new Trey Smith thing in forever, I'm sure everyone has already seen the new video though, he is afterall the funniest Christian alive currently right now. When he's in the museum looking at the Lucy skull UwU OmO. I was actually coming to this website to post something useful but forgot what it was. Mustard lovers, marry a born again woman.
MMMMMMMMM look at this. So awesome. Enough of this New Testament extra-biblical stuff. BOOORING! I'm going to start looking into all the extra genesis stuff, which there's a lot of which is just ignored. All these ancient tablets and civilisations that you never hear about talking about the same events because what a surprise it's literally just history. Genesis is the Hebrew version of history but there are many other versions which give additional interesting details. "Well I don't care about details anyways that's not impo-" yeah okay that's fine, I do find it interesting. I like Bible.ca's timeline but I don't think I'll bother as much with Genesis timeline but seeing if all these things are really so confidant such as the surviving stone letters between Nimrod and Noah which I read at one point I need to remember the same of the tablets but yeah they sound like that but at the same time they are weird, all the 2000+ BC stuff is really weird. Very different people in some ways. It's also annoying that when other ancient history clearly collaborates with the Hebrew history but "NONONONONON NO NO NO this isn't biblical no no no it's just a random made up story, ancient people were literally retarded and I hate them just die already, and if they ever tell me about the flood one more time I'll screeeeeeech." right. Well the storms may rage but fear not, for Noah I am niiiighhh~. Also how can I make christian friends who aren't too... you know. You know. You know the kind of people who listen to Hillsong worship music, you know what I mean. And I don't want Easter Orthodox meme kid friends either. I haven't been keeping up on Third Temple news. Just build it already, this world groans and is tired, let's speedrun the finale. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-j_1e13qlE Because the only person in my life is someone who isn't an Atheist but not a disciple you know so and I don't know what to do. How come there's so few just Christian people who aren't you know the type of people who have really weird creepy smiles all the time. I do understand I'm the odd one I know that but I don't know. Obviously I go to Assembly but I would like someone who I can I don't whatever. WE'RE ON THIS EARTH SO LONG! And the entire world is just one giant conveyor belt leading you away from God. Get me out of here! waaaah~! I can't run anymore my legs hurt. "Well it would help if you weren't drinking soda and eating maccers on the treadmill" Well the other thing is I'm very impatient. I see the glory of the coming of the Lord John Brown was John the Bpatist, but I'm literally running in place... I'm still earthbound for many more years and everything around me wants me to turn back. There's an old irishman at my assembly and he told me I need a BIG Bible, a little Bible like the one I have: "the devil is gonna make mincemeat out of ya" and I think he's right, he gave me a bigger bible with very good commentary. I still think you NEED a pocket Bible to carry obviously but a big Bible with commentary is good I confess and you can get new commentaries over your life BUT ladies and gentlemen I will not concede on the highlighting and writing part. Why do people write and highlight all over their bible!? it's fine if you do but I don't see the point I don't think I'm that extreme of a visual learner. Just feel like I'm ruining my Bible, I don't know. Don't let the devil make mincemeat out of ya! He's really gotten to me the past two months but I am getting back on track! This is my comeback arc and by mine I mean please help me Lord Jesus, Holy Spirit within me I have been ignoring you and I need help once again. The treadmill won't last forever and it's easy to do when you're fully in the light. But yes that's the important single thing I wanted to say, you should get a big bible, the Irishman told me so and I agree. He's a 73 year old man and was saved when he was 30. Which is very comforting that someone can be saved at 30, because sometimes I think I was so old because so many people get saved when they're teenagers. Do well love you all Mwah mwah mwah~
>>22998 >why would you want to listen to lustful music? cheesy rythm and different language can contribute
>>23101 https://youtu.be/wq2yKKrJqVM The Paster Noster. The prayer that the Lord said we need.
>>23100 >Enough of this New Testament extra-biblical stuff. BOOORING! >Immaculate conception of the God man, Jesus Christ >Miracle-working ministry that literally changed human history >Death, burial, ressurection of the God man, Jesus Christ >Kicks Satan's ass, takes the keys and emptys out Abraham's bosom on the way out >Poured his own prpitiatory blood on the very alter of God >Countless redeemed join Him in Heaven >Rise & fall of the Antichrist, in fact Satan and all his crew >Bad guys all go into the lake of fire...forever >Good guys all go into the New Heavens, Earth, Jerusalem...forever >Unfathomably-glorious consumation to the Romance of the Ages Sure OK fren.
If the purpose of executing murderers is to reset the balance, taking life from one who took it from another. Then how do you deal with Christian murderers? Assuming they're sincere in faith. Since Christ already righted their wrongs and reset the balance for them how should they be dealt with? The Bible doesn't seem to give a clear answer on this, perhaps it's because it won't be important till Christ returns but I'm still curious.
>>23110 >Then how do you deal with Christian murderers? Assuming they're sincere in faith. As with the famous Jeffrey Dahmer, by executing them ofc. Now b/c of the rampant kike brainwashing today, you have to explicitly qualify the word 'murder'. For instance it doesn't simply mean taking another's life. This is often misconstrued by leftists and other evildoers when disingenuously quoting the 10 Commandments back at Christians.
>>23110 I personally am against executions. It's tragic enough that a person or some people were killed, so why should we kill one more person... it won't reset the previous murder or murders.... I think we should rather imprison the people that commit the sin of murder, and then preach them the light of Christ, instead of eliminating any chance of them ever seeing the light of Christ......... or something like that. Including "Christian" murderers, because no remotely real Christian would commit murder.
>>23110 >>23111 >>23112 There was a time when people were starving. Death from starvation was a real thing. So, you're asking them to feed a murderer while good God fearing people starve to death. Now you're going to say something like "but the good will go to heaven, while the murderer needs to repent". But if you got food and a cot for killing someone and avoided starvation, you might kill just to go to prison. Just saying. the Church left it up to the state.
Is the night inherently "bad" or was that just a figure of speech?
Does anyone understand parenthesis. John 7:22 Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers;) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man. Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) John 1:38 Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith unto them, What seek ye? They said unto him, Rabbi, (which is to say, being interpreted, Master,) where dwellest thou? The Greek writing as far as I know does not have indications for parenthesis. In the third case it is obviously fair to put them, in the second case as well it seems odd Jesus himself would say 'let the reader understand' unless you read it all together as in the reader of Daniel's prophecies. But in the first case every translation in the world puts that part in parenthesis why? Is Jesus saying that or is it John commentating which is the only time you should use parenthesis is for situations such as the third case. I mention this because it would be a good example of John's realism. If the part in parenthesis is John commentating on Jesus almost correcting the record, then the idea John is making this stuff up makes no sense. John is inventing out of whole cloth Jesus saying this yet he also clarifies what Jesus is saying? But yes parenthesis aren't in the ancient Greek so I'm not sure I understand the point, generally if someone is talking you don't put part of their words in parenthesis. I don't understand then translators here. Jesus could very well be speaking everything in the first case but why have parenthesis then.
What do ya'll think of this: Right before a non-believer dies they get a vision of Jesus who tells them that they've been wrong; Jesus offers them a final chance to love Him and enter Heaven. If they accept His final act of mercy they die saved, otherwise they turn into a wolf and go to Hell
Open file (1.24 MB 1666x1994 papyrus66john722.jpg)
>>23133 >The Greek writing as far as I know does not have indications for parenthesis You are right there are no parentheses in the manuscript https://ia801901.us.archive.org/31/items/papyrus66/p66joh43.jpg https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.gr.1209 (page 1360 bottom of second column) https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-NN-00002-00041/230 (last lines of page 230, first lines of page 232) Compare https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/7-22.htm
>>23140 Interesting, but not what Catholics believe. In that case there was no way to remove the mortal sins from their soul. They could ask to be baptized. As long as the person baptizing them used water said "I baptize thee in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" and had the actual INTENT to do so, yeah. That would remove their mortal sins. That's why Catholic babies get infant baptism. No mortal sins are possible. If they perish, they go straight to heaven. Oh, you're gonna ask. Babies not baptized go to limbo, a place of eternal happiness but isn't heaven. One of my children was unbaptized (I hadn't found the faith at the time) and perished. That sin is on me. I don't think deathbed visitations from the Lord are practical, tho. God gave us free will, and the ability to choose in this life. God would have acted in vain (without reason) if he had us live this life and then revealed himself and gave us a last minute chance to escape hell. And literally, there was no way to accept Christ at the last moment.
>>23144 God is not constrained by human reason. Try harder.
>>23146 >God is not constrained by human reason. Try harder. This is a very low effort argument. If you're not capable of reason, why even make a post? Catholics believe in Reason. Catholics just don't trust reason. On the other hand, reason is what separates some of us from (most) animals. The age of reason - which was 8 in the old church and 13 in the Novus Ordo, is when the person becomes capable of sin, as sin requires knowing it is a sin, doing the sinful thing anyway.
>>23140 I think there are people who are worthy enough to stand before Jesus unsaved and saved with a final chance of forgiveness and this is not getting into the white throne judgement exactly. Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man. (Luke 21:36) The truly wicked people won't even get the chance to see Christ but be sent straight to fire. If you only go based on death experiences this seems to be true. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnmJLur8TCU And I don't think the Matthew 20 parable is exactly talking about after death conversion, but it is in part talking about late conversions of people. Jesus allows for very late conversions. There's lots of things from the Bible about after death but there's no clear indication of an after death moment to repent although most christians I think believe it's true and certainly want it to be true and death experience evidence says it's true. That's all. Wow this board actually banned me for my posts "schizoposting" clearly this place is run by a child. Never posting here again not that this is a real christian board and never took it seriously. Asking about parenthesis >>23133 means you don't belong here everyone.
>>23166 The only truly evil people in this life are those who hate Jesus, whom I call wolves. Wolves don't get this offer IIRC. The last choice is a last second conversion if accepted
>>23166 >I think there are people who are worthy enough to stand before Jesus unsaved and saved with a final chance of forgiveness and this is not getting into the white throne judgement exactly. Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man. (Luke 21:36) How does that scripture mean that you can sin in life and then on judgement day, receive salvation? The Lord is telling us to pray and watch so you can account yourself worthy in things in this life. Seems to say the exact opposite; don't get caught dead with sins on your soul.
I don't think that this idea of "last second conversion" is a valid one. The Law of Moses gave us commandments to follow in this life. . The Law of Christ offered forgiveness if we repent our mortal sins in this life. To then say that is all unneeded, that you can sin and this life and then in the second life, stand before Jesus and still be forgiven for the sins that you had no repentance for in this life, seems not only contrary to scripture, but to make the work of the Lord in this world pointless. Why create a teach us and create a church if it doesn't matter?
>>23170 It doesn't happen after death, the offer comes right before death. It's a final call to repentance, a last second thief on the cross. Few accept it anyways
Why is NKJ memed on? Isn't it just a direct translation from the early texts to English as opposed to other translations which were, at the time NKJ was published, the product of translations between multiple languages?
>>23186 It's """memed""" on b/c it's Old Elizabethan Englsh, which hasn't been commonly spoken for 400 years. And yea, it along with basically every other English translation of the times was basically nearly-directly derived from the martry William Tyndale's original Ye Olde Englishe translation created personally by him during the Middle Ages.
>>23186 The NKJ is kind of a frankenstein that doesn't satisfy either the modernist or traditionalist camp. It bills itself as a traditional translation that's supposedly based on the same Greek NT text as the King James, the Reformation-era Textus Receptus, but the editors actually produced a new edition of the Byzantine Greek text (Farstad-Hodges) which they used as the basis for the new translation. They then went back and re-translated those places where it differed from the TR to conform to traditional renderings. (Arthur Farstad planned a new translation from the new Greek text alone in the 90s but died after only finishing the Gospel of John). It uses similar wording to the KJV on purpose, which some see as unnecessarily archaic, while it no longer uses various Early Modern English constructions like thee and thou, to the gall of traditionalists. Meanwhile despite being in modern English, the use of a Byzantine Greek NT is considered farcical in academic settings, which consider the best Greek NT text to be the Critical Text (that was produced by academics using various debatable methods to hypothesize the "earliest" text based on the available manuscript fragments). Even if you consider a Byzantine NT to be acceptable, the Farstad-Hodges Greek NT was superseded by the Robinson-Pierpont in the 2000s which used digital solutuons that were unavailable in the 1980s to arrive at a text with a more consistent methodology (they were limited in their ability to analyze a large volume of manuscripts at the time). So despite probably being the best translation to come out at the time, it comes across as a counterfeit KJV with a vocabulary that's too stilted for popular use, while being invalid for academics.
>>23190 He's talking about the New King James, not the original one.
>>23192 Ah, I see you're correct. I misread, thanks. I like the NKJV. I read it and the ESB & BSB several times weekly, on average.
Open file (1.03 MB 6432x3216 visible confusion.jpg)
>>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. ?!?
>>23197 Just noticed that, thanks for pointing that out.
>>23186 What do you mean "memed on" exactly? I know that the NKJV is scorned by Critical Text advocates because it's based on the TR, and that KJVOnlyists turn their nose up at it because it's not KJV enough, but I've never really noticed the NKJV being particularly mocked on a large scale. Considering that it has been consistently in the top 10 of English Bible translation sales, month after month for years, it seems to be doing quite well.
>>23197 This has been a beloved running-joke for almost a year now. >>23200 Don't anyone touch it! It's one of the only spots of humor left on this board now.
>>23214 Too late. Sorry. not really
>>23216 Pretty please with sugar on it change it back.
>>23259 Another YouTube video about another new church with nothing said about their beliefs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Orthodox_Church Founded in the 20th century
>love the KJV >dislike Kikery >love the Old Testament Jews >admire Jesus >not a racist >except I hate blacks >but I like everyone else >really begin to believe again >can't avoid my revulsion towards modern society I feel cucked and I don't like it tbh
>>23269 At least you're back on the right path now brother. Now keep moving forward! :)
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/MXMd0t-LmmQ what do you think about this? i dont believe the gifts have ceased but yelling made up languages isnt one of them also it is justified to people to call themselves prophets? https://www.youtube.com/shorts/MXMd0t-LmmQ
>>23281 If you have to call yourself a prophet you probably aren't one, because if you were accurately prophesying events by the Holy Spirit it would be self-evident.
https://www.thechurchofwells.com/ is this church entirely heretic? they seem to be a cult but i dont found too many errors in their doctrines and they have callout another big pastors out
>>23299 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits." Matthew 7:15-16 "I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and blameless as doves." Matthew 10:16
>>23303 im honestly getting scare of my salvation for this case, every christian denom points to others and calls them heretics and every single one seems to have the absolute reason when looking at their arguments, and seeing it from their perspective the other christians start to look like crazy people. how can i made up my mind in this cases?
>>23304 >how can i made up my mind in this cases? By being born-again. If you're an authentic Christian, you're not going to be swayed ultimately from that faith in the end by anything that men or devils can do. Your faith will be tested, sure, but since Jesus Christ Himself is the author and finisher of that for you, you won't be moved off of it. Simple as. >tl;dr Stop chasing after doctrines and accept Jesus Christ & Him crucified.
>>23304 Follow what you believe in your heart to be true. God will listen, you'll be fine. (But it's the Catholic Church tbh.)
http://ecclesia.org/truth/comparisons.html Why did the Masoretic text become the standard over the Septuagint?
>>23314 Same reason why the Catholics have more books in the old testament than the protestants, I guess. Martin Luther thought he could convert the Jews, even after the rejected Jesus Christ. So, he edited the Bible to only include books in the Jewish Cannon. I'd suspect that the Jewish Cannot at the time was this "Masoretic text". History teaches us that Martin Luther was quite hateful of the Jews when Luther failed to convert the Jews.
>>23312 Give them this scripture if they want to find the one true faith: Matt 16: 16 Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. Then ask how each religion reads that. Catholics: The Lord is talking to Simon Bar-Jona, And when the Lord says "I say to thee" he's talking to Simon Bar-Jona, gives him the new name "Peter" as in Rock and made him the cornerstone of His Church on Earth and gave him the Keys to Heaven. This making Saint Peter the first head of the church and we call the head of the Church the Pope. Protestants will have to deny the word of God, and will say all kinds of things ranging from an obvious denial that the Lord was talking to Simon Bar-Jona to the almost blasphemous claim the Lord was speaking randomly about rocks. They have to deny this part of the Bible, they have to deny the Lord or they will be cast out of their social clubs were they make business deals. Key to remember is that they aren't going to say their real motivations. The believe what they want to believe, some will even become angry when you show them what the Bible really says, and what they'll have to give up to believe in Christ. It's their choice to believe or not.
>>23319 But the Masoretic Text was already in use in the Latin Vulgate for centuries before the Reformation.
What's the meaning of The Book Of Revelations?
>>23329 I'm sorry, I thought your graphic on the webpage said "Translated from Masoretic Hebrew texts 1000 A.D." for the King James Version and "Translated from Original Hebrew texts 285 B.C." for the Septuagint. So I was confused since the Latin Vulgate was 4th century. I guess your website means translated into English? Or into Greek? from Hebrew. I have no idea and I don't really care, since the Holy Ghost guided the creation of the Latin Vulgate. There was a papal encyclicals that made the Latin Vulgate THE divinely inspired Bible, and I don't question the faith.
>>23330 Beats heck out of me. I was hoping for someone to point out which of the 5 or 6 religions called "Catholic" was the true Church of Christ, so I could ask that question; but more importantly, receive valid sacrements.
>>23304 Jesus didn't call people to salvation via denominations: "Now John answered Him, saying, 'Teacher, we saw someone who does not follow us casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow us.' But Jesus said, 'Do not forbid him, for no one who works a miracle in My name can soon afterward speak evil of Me. For he who is not against us is on our side. For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward.'" Mark 9:38-41 Denominations exist because of worldly diversions. There is only one gospel and one Lord, God, and Saviour.
>>23334 >Mark 9:38-41 If you can cast out demons in the name of Jesus Christ, then you believe every word of Christ and don't think he's rambling about rocks or saying you don't need his church you only need his Bible (which didn't exist at the time). You're also doing the works that the Lord asked you to do and not saying "Master Master" and then not bearing good fruit...
>>23320 >Catholics: The Lord is talking to Simon Bar-Jona, And when the Lord says "I say to thee" he's talking to Simon Bar-Jona, gives him the new name "Peter" as in Rock and made him the cornerstone of His Church on Earth and gave him the Keys to Heaven. This making Saint Peter the first head of the church and we call the head of the Church the Pope. i believe that, but what i cannot understand is how this versicle becomes the catholic faith? why didnt they just take him as the first and only pope?
>>23344 >why didnt they just take him as the first and only pope? Because near the same scripture Jesus Christ promises that the church built on Peter will prevail against the gates of hell. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. So the Lord Jesus Christ promises that the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church. So, the Church will last. It didn't end with the death of Saint Peter when Saint Peter was martyred. Saint Peter passed on the leadership of the Church to Saint Linus. Now, what gave Saint Peter the authority to do that? Go to the next verse... 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. The giving Saint Peter the Keys make him the head of the church in that Peter's judgement on faith and morals becomes Infallible and Indefectible. Whatever Peter says on faith and morals will be bound on Earth and in Heaven. So if Saint Peter says, as a mater of faith, that Saint Linus inherits his chair, then it is so because the Lord Jesus Christ gave him that Authority. The Church says, by the authority of the Popes, that no one can name a Pope who isn't Catholic and isn't ordained in the Church.
>>23336 >the Bible didn't exist >what was the Old Testament Blasphemy such as this hath never been seen since the creation of this board hereunto.
Open file (42.78 KB 1080x720 1673521999487029.jpg)
Is liberalism and libertarianism satanic?
>>23351 The Bible, according to the early Church, was the cannon of 46 books that the Holy Ghost inspired and guided the Church faithers at the Council of Nicaea. This collection is infallible. if you say that there was a bible before the Bible, you are an anathema, so please don't say that.
>>23355 To quote John Adams. "Our government was made for a moral and religious people and is wholly unfit for any other." Liberty cannot exist without morality, otherwise you are a slave to sin and not free. Also liberty is a biblical principle since God Himself bestows upon us free will, but He also gives us a moral code.
>>23345 ooooh now i get it, it always confuse me how protestants change this, but what about the orthodox? i think they also use this text (honest question)
>>23361 The word Bible literally just means Book. The scriptures existed since the law was handed to Moses you illiterate Papist.
>>23371 >The word Bible literally just means Book. Semantic fallacy. We all know that The Bible is the Word of Christ and divinely inspired and infallible, and not any old book. Scriptures were not the Bible. There was the Torah, that the jews abandoned and replaced with the Talmud, but Christians rejected the Talmud as the work of man... sort of like Aquinas and Luther, and not of Christ the Lord.
>>23370 >but what about the orthodox? i think they also use this text I'm not orthodox or know the Eastern Church that well. All I know is that there was a split that was officially over something trivial, unofficially was about power, and that in the process they rejected Matt 16 etc. I don't see how the Church of Christ would reject one word of Christ, so I don't worry about them too much. There's dozens of them now with different beliefs.
>>22726 ^This was me. I ended up finding his website with sermons on it and watched about 10 of them: https://pastorandersonsermons.allthepreaching.com/dev/index.php I take back what I said about him not having love for the lost. He gets the gospel correct, and he and his church go out preaching the gospel door-to-door every week. If a tree is known by its fruits, I'm ashamed to say that's more love for the lost than I have.
>>23379 >He gets the gospel correct, How do you know he gets the Gospel correct? There are now thousands of different interpretations of the Gospels.
>>23377 >Scriptures were not the Bible. There was the Torah The Torah was God's word to the Jews. The Old Testament is called the Hebrew Bible. >that the jews abandoned and replaced with the Talmud, The original Jews were destroyed by Hadrian. Modern Jews are Khazar frauds.
Open file (40.33 KB 385x265 Cup Man.jpg)
Christian Denominations Family Tree | Episode 1: Origins & Early Schisms UsefulCharts https://yewtu.be/watch?v=uzuYZi749CM I found a very interesting; and I think, useful video series, made by UsefulCharts, on (once completed) will be on every major Christian denomination. I've watched several of his videos before, and he always seems to try to be as objective as possible; even if I don't necessarily believe in his non-literal (and "scientific") interpretation of Christianity. Please note, he's Jewish. And that also affects the viewpoints that show through. What I'm trying to say; is that I think his videos are easy to follow and useful resources to quickly grasp the basics of complex issues. Most of his videos are about monarch family trees.
Is it okay for a Christian to use Islamic banking? Is it even wise?
is going to two churches at the same time considered adultery? i go to a pentecostal (i love my brothers there, they converted me) and to a Baptist they have more people, individual teachings and more biblical based songs, but i cant stop feeling like im cheating on them (specially when i tried to avoid telling im doing it)
>>23444 IIRC they use loopholes to get around their no interest rules. I think they also only apply to fellow Muslims so there would be no strict benefit in using one as a non-Muslim. We need Christian banks tbh, or maybe credit unions since they would be non-profit.
When is a person "dead" theologically speaking? I remember reading an article a year or two back about a priest who found a man dead on the roadside after a car wreck and he still administered the sacrament of Extreme Unction. In medicine too you can have a person be legally dead yet still resuscitated somehow, and I imagine advances medical technology will manage to widen the window at least slightly where they can make your heart beat again after it's stopped. Do we just say, for lack of a better model, that you're dead from the point of view of the Church as soon as you're beyond resuscitation even in the most fantastical medical scenario?
>Moved recently, going to new church >Finally see how people in the local church I go do confession >Guided to a huge room that doesn't seem like its made for that at all >Two people came in and delayed confession before it started >Someone could very well overhear something midway I don't want to do confession there anymore, honestly. What is the correct path here? Going to a farther away church isn't optimal, and Perfect Contrition... Is there, but confession is optimal.
Open file (505.32 KB 974x1177 1675151204540039.jpg)
Serious talk here, would the Antichrist be this obvious?
>>23574 >Mrbeast is the antichrist he's preforming miracles1!1!1! >This SECOND beast preformed great miracles
>>23496 >When is a person "dead" theologically speaking? When the spirit returns to God who gave it. >I imagine advances medical technology will manage to widen the window It remains to be seen. If someone is resuscitated into a coma requiring life support then it's arguable that's just the flesh being artificially sustained. We may yet live to see man made horrors beyond our comprehension and 'zombies' like this could be one of them. >>23571 >confession in public Sounds like the self-criticism sessions of a communist party meeting. I'd be wary of confessing within earshot of the congregation. On the other hand they may be expecting you to do it if that is their custom and part of joining a church is learning to fit in so as to avoid needless contention. If so, keep your first confessions to the most generic descriptions possible like 'I have failed to trust God in all things'. I'm not familiar with confessional church tradition but spiritually I believe you should confess your sins in prayer to our Father in Heaven. Everything else, while it may be beneficial, is secondary. >>23574 I doubt he'll have a youtube channel. I doubt there will even be a youtube after the tribulation from which (by my interpretation) the anitchrist is revealed.
Open file (342.11 KB 733x820 manmade horrors.png)
Does anyone have any good Christian perspectives on neuroscience?
>>23594 Attempting to know everything one can about a gift one has been given, without abusing it, indicates an appreciation for that gift.
>>23583 I ( >>23571 ) should've mentioned I'm Catholic. Thank you for your answer regardless.
>>23594 >Does anyone have any good Christian perspectives on neuroscience? I'll presume the actual heart of your question is the artifacts of neuroscience research Anon? The answer to your question is Reasons to Believe. They cover this topic in some depth along with dozens of others that are pertinent to Anons in a post-Christian world. Here's a sample about Neuralink: https://reasons.org/explore/blogs/the-cells-design/will-elon-musk-s-neuralink-make-it-possible-to-control-electronic-devices-with-our-minds Here's another about our exceptional nature as homo sapiens sapiens -- ie Made in God's Image -- that is quite different from any other earthly creature. https://reasons.org/explore/blogs/the-cells-design/does-transhumanism-refute-human-exceptionalism-a-response-to-peter-clarke
how do i convert (or whatever the proper word is) to christianity, i know i sound like a troll but i was raised athiest and want to change that and i don't know what i should do - just start showing up to the local church or what? i'm sorry i genuinely have no idea lol
>>23634 You should find a bible-believing church (you'll be able to identify them by whether they affirm biblical inerrancy, obviously stay away from anything that calls itself "LGBT affirming" or something like that) and talk to the pastor, let him know you want to join the church and then just tell him your story, he should know what to do depending on the specifics. God bless, welcome to the kingdom brother
>>23634 >just start showing up to the local church or what? Pretty much. The path is you spend some time talking to Christians, learning about Christianity, etc until you're sure you really want to do this. There's no set amount of time. Just when you and your pastor think you're ready. After that you get baptised and officially join the Church. From then on it's the start of the Christian life. You don't have to do a lot at this stage. Just turn up and make sure you talk to the pastor or priest or whoever. Very likely he'll say hello to you first. You don't need to feel pressure to actually participate in the service. Sit at the back if you want.
>>23634 Talking to other Christians is a good way to start, do you have telegram or something? I wouldn't mind chatting. If not then just stick around here and as questions as they come.
>>23634 Begin by just asking God to forgive you and to reveal His will to you. Then read the Book of John in the new testament. Then ask Jesus into your heart to take over control of your life. Simple as. Then get connected to a Christian church that teaches the Bible unapologetically as the divinely-inspired revelation from God. Never stop praying, and God Himself will begin to direct your paths. >>23637 >>23640 >>23641 I know every one of you Anons have good intentions, but it's not opening the door of a church that gets you saved, it's opening the door of your heart to Jesus Christ that gets you saved. Prayer & Bible study crucial to this process, yet none of you mentioned this. Why?
>>23643 >none of you mentioned this. Why? Because 1) It's implicit in my advice to go to a church and talk to the pastor. I presume he will be in a much better position to answer question and give more specific advice on how to pray and read the Bible than a random person on the internet (me) can. I can't know what specific challenges anon is facing nor can I do much for him except point him to where he can get help and to pray for him. 2) I did mention it as baptism. Baptism is the turning away from the old man to follow Christ (it's literally in your baptismal vows). The Bible says baptism saves you as an appeal to Christ. 1 Peter 3:12. 3) Anon is just beginning to look into the faith. He needs advice on how to get the ball rolling and the way to get it rolling is to talk to other Christians in person. How do you expect him to understand what the Bible means? The last thing you should be doing is trying to do Christianity by yourself or turning it into an intellectual exercise. You MUST go to a church. Now having said that, I understand what you're trying to say which is that it's the inner spiritual transformation that's important not the physical act of walking through a church door or being submerged in water. But you can't summon up that transformation out of nowhere by yourself. God has given us the Church (community of Christians) so that, within it, we may be transformed by God. Just like God gave us prayer and scriptures for their purposes.
>>23643 It's hard to open your heart to Christ if you don't have the insight needed to understand the Bible. The best way to obtain this from my experience is through discourse.
>>23643 >yet none of you mentioned this. Why? I took for granted that someone repudiating atheism and asking for advice in joining the faith had already believed the gospel
>>23645 >>23647 >>23654 Thanks for taking the time to respond Anons. Let us all join together in prayer both for Anon's salvation, and for God's fully-established will in his life! Cheers.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms

no cookies?