/t/ - Theology

Christian Theology

Mode: Thread
Name
Subject
Message

Max message length: 4096

Files

Max file size: 5.00 MB

Max files: 3

Captcha
E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


(321.74 KB 550x669 joseph.jpg)
Meta Anonymous 10/16/2019 (Wed) 04:26:11 No. 1 [Reply] [Last]
Praise be to God! Please read the board and global rules. >>>/t/ is for on topic discussion >>>/l/ is for casual and off-topic discussion Our sister board is https://8kun.top/christianity
Edited last time by boanerges on 12/23/2019 (Mon) 15:06:58.
55 posts and 8 images omitted.
>>1375 I'm somewhat new :)
>>1376 Hello, fren :)
I don't think I want to associate with any church as they each have their flaws and good points but isn't it okay to just have faith in God and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, follow His teachings and stand with The Bible? I'm very confused so..help please.
>>1394 You have to join a church. You are free to choose a non-denominational church, but you're biblically instructed not to forsake the assembling together with other Christians. This is a separate matter from your justification, so don't worry about that
>>1395 BIBLE PROJECT IS PEDOPHILES EVERYONE HERE SEE THIS https://christchannel.xyz/t/res/1353.html

The Psychedelic Gospels The Secret History of Hallucinogens in Christianity
Wow Joe Rogan is it you?

(4.82 KB 222x222 Christian_Identity.png)
Christian Identity Anonymous 11/23/2019 (Sat) 21:10:02 Id:b413fa No. 927 [Reply] [Last]
"Christian Identity" is a heretical cult that you should give no respect to. It is judaism for whites. The key claim is that the Christian religion is not universal, but uniquely for white people who actually have the sole credible claim as descendants of the old testament Hebrews. This second part is only a natural outgrowth of the first conclusion. If I think only certain people by virtue of their ancestry get eternal life, I'm going to do my best to try and force the idea that I'm one of them. Our job as Christians is to dismantle the idea that salvation was only given to a certain race. As everyone from the outside can tell, CI adherents only reached their exclusive ethnic position on blatant eisegesis. Salvation open to all nations: >Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” (Matt 28:19-20) >After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, and palm branches were in their hands; (Rev 7:9) >Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness. Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “All the nations will be blessed in you.” So then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer. (Gal 3:6-9) >you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth. (Acts 1:8) At this point the CI apologist might say "yes, all nations can be blessed with salvation, but non-whites are not nations at all because they are not people". To this we Christians first say "shame on you, you disgusting heretic"; then we ask "why is that?". On what basis can they make this claim? Why are we ostensibly the same species? Why do we seem to share distant ancetry? How do you account for the Christian love apparent in Chrsitians of other races? Who is it we're to be witnessing to at the remotest part of the earth if those people aren't really people?

Message too long. Click here to view full text.

>>927 I really don't get Christian Identity. They preach the same magic blood bulls*** that the Jews do. It's such a silly sect.
>>927 Bump

(81.16 KB 615x923 1574377421642.jpg)
Anonymous 11/25/2019 (Mon) 16:47:32 Id:585e99 No. 982 [Reply] [Last]
Why does /pol/ try so hard to say "racemixing" is a sin and want me to marry one of these harlots? Why can't I marry a chaste Asian Christian and be happy? They always quote Old Testament Leviticus laws about worshiping other gods from foreign wives, but that has nothing to do with race, but everything to do with pagan religions.
25 posts and 9 images omitted.
(281.77 KB 680x672 1b4.png)
>>1383 >Stop using standards meme.jpg Taking your silly argument seriously its not my standard its your own. It is you self contradicting yourself. I did not write >They always quote Old Testament Leviticus laws about worshiping other gods from foreign wives, but that has nothing to do with race, but everything to do with pagan religions A christian did. These are your own standards not my standards. So by implication you have assumed that christianity must be sane or coherent or not totally self contradictory. For example its a christian complaining that other christian sects are literally quoting the bible on irrelevant passages and like crazies thinking they mean something different. This is the beauty of it, its not me saying these things its you saying it yourself. So unless you can believe that >They always quote Old Testament Leviticus laws about worshiping other gods from foreign wives can at the same time be totally about race mixing and is not about race mixing you have a problem. A problem the OP is complaining about.

Message too long. Click here to view full text.

>>1386 Disagreements between adherents to a worldview don't constitute contradictions in said worldview. Atheists disagree on lots of things, some atheists are feminists and some are ardent anti-feminists. Some atheists don't even believe in evolution or the big bang. This doesn't make the atheistic worldview contradictory to itself. It just means there are disagreements between atheists.
>>1382 just another dreamer dreaming he is awake. I will pray for you to awaken, oh silly sleeper.
>>1404 >some atheists are feminists and some are ardent anti-feminists Nice I will save this every time a christian tries to play a card >X atheist did this you are Y atheists now apologize for X !!!!! >atheistic There is no atheistic whatever. Atheism is not an ideology its not a thing. There are no holy books you can equally say: >Oh you non-christians you disagree with other non-christians all the time. >See this Muslim who is not a christian disagrees with this Buddhist who is also not a christian >Oh the non-christian world view. Going back to you you have a book and simple literal analysis should make everyone understand what the book says. If you have a splinter faction who insists that the lord of the rings is about intergalactic travel and features planet destroying star ships multiple times and planets are destroyed in the story like in star wars... You got some insane crazies there.

Message too long. Click here to view full text.

>>1417 >I will save this every time a christian tries to play a card Please do. It's a composition fallacy. >Atheism is not an ideology its not a thing Atheism is an affirmative position that there is no God (literally, absence of theos) If you don't want to call it an ideology, fine whatever In exact contradiction with the secular narrative, you the atheist are proving yourself to be the immature & emotional one who can't carry intelligent conversation. Imagine my shock.

(229.46 KB 480x360 Christieanity.png)
Christieanity is proven to be fake. Anonymous 01/12/2020 (Sun) 13:17:29 Id:2bda9c No. 1381 [Reply] [Last]
So hello. I'm an atheist. Christianity is proven to be fake its literally impossible for it to be true. In the spirit of constructive debate tell me what exactly would convince you that Christianity is fake? What evidence do I have to provide? If you can not answer this it shows a deeper problem with you, regardless of what evidence is shown you will continue to believe absurdities. Its a waist of my time to show all the numerous evidence if you will not accept anything. If this statement is confusing to you I give you a example the moon, we all accept the moon exists. Now what would it take to prove to ME that there is no moon? You try to answer this. For me it is simple if for 1 year i did not see the moon in the sky and tried it every night I seriously question or even conclude that the moon does not exist (at least now).
9 posts and 5 images omitted.
(49.22 KB 500x333 mancurtain.jpg)
>>1393 So lets talk about the wizard of oz. Lets say we see a guy behind the curtain moving machines and the wizards voice tells us to pay no attention to that guy. Do you think the wizard is real at this point in the movie/time? I mean considering that its a fantasy movie with witches(who objectively can summon fireballs from their hands) you expected the wizard to be real in the beginning of the movie. And we all did see the fire and the green head of the wizard of oz. At what point do you think the wizard of oz is fake? Lets play devil's advocate. After all correlation is not causation so maybe the guy is saying the same words accidentally in sync with the wizard of oz? When will it become to absurd to believe the wizard is real? You tell me. Info dump Oscar Diggs is the name of the human who pretends to be the wizard of oz (I needed to check it on wikipedia) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wizard_of_Oz_(character)

Message too long. Click here to view full text.

This is one of the reasons why these methodologies are a no go from the start. However I'm not here to debate methodologies with you or their validity, I'm just talking to myself and presenting myself to maybe inspire you to finally give me the subject you want to give me the exact criteria I must meet to prove to you that Christianity is fake, wrong (you get the idea). If there is nothing I can do that will disprove christianity for you there is no point in wasting our time here. Just simply say it officially. Let me give you some inspiration, so lets say time machines are real and we have one, we go back in time place some infra red cameras around the tomb of Jesus and you can see that the disciples are stealing the body. Only they don't know we can see it because they are stupid primitives who don't understand what infra red or a recording cameras are. Would this convince you Christianity is fake? I want you to answer this! How about if we have a cyborg insect fly that has a infra red micro camera on its head or some ultra sound camera and we can controlled it like a drone (perfect spy look this future tech up) and we monitor the tomb this way and we can see the disciples stealing the body and follow them to see where they dump it and after that we can come ourselves and see the dead body of Jesus and see it rotting the entire time and we place cameras to record this corpse 24/7 and we see wild animals eating the rotting flesh of Jesus. Will this prove to you that christieanity is fake? What will dude? What will? How about if we took a DNA sample of the blood of Jesus (plenty of that during the crucifixion etc) and DNA analyze the corpse we found and corroborated is Jesus to show that the DNA is identical?

Message too long. Click here to view full text.

>>1381 >In the spirit of constructive debate tell me what exactly would convince you that Christianity is fake? What evidence do I have to provide? This is the toughest question an atheist has ever risen. God and religion are abstract, trying to prove any religion is fake is like trying to prove that math isn't real. I really don't think anything could convert me away from Christianity aside from, as the previous anon said, a supernatural experience that would reveal that another religion is the real religion. Reason being is that I philosophically agree with the church so strongly that even if I were to completely lose faith in the existence of God (how that would happen I'm still not sure), I would continue to practice Christianity. So I think what you're really trying to do is prove that abstract objects do not exist. >>1399 >Let me give you some inspiration, so lets say time machines are real and we have one, we go back in time place some infra red cameras around the tomb of Jesus and you can see that the disciples are stealing the body. Only they don't know we can see it because they are stupid primitives who don't understand what infra red or a recording cameras are. That would probably convince me that The Resurrection was fake. Good luck pulling it off. >>1399 >How about if we took a DNA sample of the blood of Jesus (plenty of that during the crucifixion etc) and DNA analyze the corpse we found and corroborated is Jesus to show that the DNA is identical? I really don't know if I would find this convincing. If Christ is an all-powerful God, he could easily change his DNA to match or not match the DNA test. >>1399 >How about if I show myself to Jesus and using technology(flamethrowers projectors and pyrotechnics) convince Jesus that I'm god? And Jesus starts worshiping me? That would probably convince me too. Again, good luck pulling it off.
>>1402 >Nothing will change my mind So want to be official with it simply say it. However ... Self contradiction time! >That would probably convince me >That would probably convince me too So what is it? Is it literally impossible for me to give you any evidence or are there ways to convince you? I'm actually asking. >good luck pulling it off The examples are impossible to do and require time machines. Earlier you told me nothing will convince you however these examples will??? What is your argument? And rethink your life if you did not think of the time travel example before.

Message too long. Click here to view full text.

(12.79 KB 208x243 1574596254523.jpg)
>>1416 That's some other anon. What he says regarding philosophically agreeing with Christianity is my exact same position. But if you'd read my previous messages you'd already know that. Here's what you wanted: Yes, I'd renounce my religion if you built us a DeLorean and were able to show me that Jesus was just an ordinary man, who didn't rise from the dead. >And rethink your life if you did not think of the time travel example before. I didn't think of it because it's an absurd idea and to be quite frank, childish. Considering you're the one peddling the atheist pill shouting "science", you should know the prevailing scientific consensus that time is relative, but events in the future are not necessarily predetermined. Note that this actually ties in excellently with the Christian idea of God. We believe that God knows all potential outcomes of the future, but what happens in the present is our choice. >There are other ways to establish proof of the past that don't require time travel. Enlighten us. >Can you think of- Find me an sentient alien civilisation. Unlike a time machine I imagine it's actually possible. By finding other sentient lifeforms, the biblical idea that humanity is made in God's image (basically that we're special) will be heavily called into question.

(77.94 KB 934x521 The-Shroud-of-Turin.jpg)
The Shroud of Turin Anonymous 11/21/2019 (Thu) 14:45:14 Id:6ba2f5 No. 813 [Reply] [Last]
Red pill me on the Shroud. Is it really Christ or is it an elaborated hoax. I have seen documentaries from both sides but I am still on the fence. They say the burden of proof rests with those attempting to say it isn't Jesus through attempts to replicate it. Didn't they create a very close replication by saying it was some type of early photograph?
16 posts and 3 images omitted.
>>846 Yes, that sounds exactly like the sort of controversial thing a modern false prophet would say. Just like joesph smith.
>>847 I personally don't agree with that. I'm just very fond of the writings of Maria Valtorta and wanted to share this little titbit.
(235.19 KB 1920x1080 1574228709759.jpg)
>>813 shroud of Turin is the single biggest LARP in history
>>846 If I remember right Saint Paisios of Athos saw a blue-eyed Christ.
>>848 Yep, exactly like Joseph Smith. Same thing entirely. No false equivalency here. :))))

(174.11 KB 680x935 catholicapu.png)
Help Anonymous 11/18/2019 (Mon) 02:15:09 Id:b2552b No. 752 [Reply] [Last]
I'm a zoomer and I have always considered my self "Christian" but I have no clue what brand of Christianity I fall under or I should choose. As of recent, I have been identifying as catholic but frankly, I have no idea.
37 posts and 4 images omitted.
>>1400 I say level 7 because I have been sent on numerous missions by God now. Level 1 missions from God are easy like resisting temptation. Level 2 missions from God are a bit harder like visiting the sick. Level 3 missions from God are even more difficult such as spreading the gospel to random people (anxiety always runs) Level 4 missions are even harder having to let someone homeless stay with you. Level 5 missions are even harder by losing jobs for the expanse of the gospel. Level 6 missions are even harder such as losing family members for the expanse of the gospel. Level 7 missions (the mission I just did) are missions that you risk your life for and puts you under immense pressure from God. In other words taking the risk of being perhaps a martyr for the gospel.
>>1401 However, at level 7 missions the grace puts you in a state of being where you can actually perform miracles. (Also don’t forget your commandments, it is also wise to eat kosher foods look for foods marked with a U and check the animal well being standard). But at level 7 my father who is 66 had prostate cancer and received roughly only 10 treatments (we figured the doctor was giving too much radiation, thus another trial I had to complete) anyway even so I laid hands on my father with olive oil prayed over by Nigerians I give money to and my father no longer has cancer. Now most of you are still on the breast milk of Christianity. What you fail to realize is that God is giving you a task to complete on Earth to make it better no matter how hard it is because ultimately we as His apostles must act. My missions of spreading the gospel, baptizing in the Trinity, and exposing all of these different things finally led me to where I am now. At the expanse of even losing colleges and jobs for the sake of Christ. This is why I can perform miracles now. My fathers PSA is now a 0.4 which means no cancer, this should be impossible to man but not to God. There are times during my missions I thought I was going to collapse and I had no one to assist me, either.
>>754 Satan.
>>756 Being against Jews is satanic.

What kind of Christian are you and why? Anonymous 12/18/2019 (Wed) 01:13:40 Id:915f0c No. 1254 [Reply] [Last]
(Please keep any and all debate civil and respectful of each other's viewpoints. Thank you and may God bless you. Also please forgive me if my English is bad since it's not my first language.) I'm Orthodox for various theological reasons. I respect the traditions of the Roman Church but I simply cannot find any good reason to accept the doctrine of Papal Supremacy/Infallibility. It just doesn't make sense in the context of the entire Church. No doubt Rome was the center of the Christian world, and yeah it was the first among equals but I think what our Roman Catholic brothers & sisters in Christ don't understand is that Rome's place in the Christian world was a privilege. Don't forget that it wasn't just St. Peter at Rome, it was St. Paul too. Plenty of other sees claimed direct Petrine succession as well. That made them extremely important and so we have Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. Rome is first among equals because of double traditions about St. Peter and Paul, as well as the obvious fact that Rome was the capital. From the beginning Rome did overreach, and technically as See such as Rome can do this if invoked. But there cannot be overreach, and Rome did do this from early on, and the eastern fathers were quick to rebuke but the same attitude was returned. Rome flat out threw away the third canon of the Constantinople I. One of the reasons for the pentarchy was to prevent any one see from gaining a supremacy over the rest of the Church. As for Protestantism, well, there's a lot. With our Roman Christian brothers it's mostly ecclesiastical, but with Protestantism its more soteriology and their whole idea around the Bible. You guys do realize that when St. Paul is speaking about works, most of the time he is speaking about the law of Moses. He is not saying faith alone is what saves us and that good works don't play a part in that. It seems that Protestantism is mostly about cherry picking a bunch of verses without putting them into much context, similar to how our Roman friends like to cherry pick quotes from the Church Fathers to prove something about the Pope without explanation of the context behind it. It's funny that Protestants believe in Sola Scriptura when not a single verse in the Bible says that faith alone saves and that scripture alone is the only authority, actually it literally says the opposite. Please read James 2. I find the Protestant reasoning of James 2 laughable, it's like they're missing the point and then they refute themselves. Without getting too complicated here, essentially their position is that true faith produces works and therefore works is apart of faith. Well no duh, nobody disagrees with you on that. You forget though that when we do works were are receiving grace. Faith and works are all a part of grace, works helps grace increase because works produces faith and faith produces works and they both merit grace. This is why the New Testament speaks about sanctification, Protestantism cannot logically accept this and so often we see huge rationalizations in their theology. I do respect my Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ to be true genuine followers and worshipers of Christ but that Protestantism is a giant misinterpretation of Christianity.
3 posts and 1 image omitted.
Old world orthodox. Just born into it i guess. Papism sounds stupid and protestants even more stupid. Orthodoxy seems like a natural third position
I've been born into a new world sect, and by miracle left it and accepted orthodoxy. I believe that the reason I am here now is that I have been guided by the grace of God and any other reason I can give is only secondary to that. I trust God that he had not permitted me to simply be tossed from one ring of delusion to another, because otherwise I would really have no home of faith in which I belonged.
>>1259 His criticism is absolutely correct, historically. You can read your theology back onto the Scripture and the Fathers but you cannot reasonably answer how the Church at large misinterpreted the Fathers for 1,500 hundred years. It is because the Church wasn't mistaken (I don't mean the Romans exclusively), Luther was.
>>1366 >read your theology back on scripture and the fathers Like taking it at it's word? >cannot reasonably answer how the Church at large misinterpreted the Fathers for 1,500 hundred years There's an extremely reasonable answer that's readily admitted by everyone: mistakes accrue over time
>>1369 >like taking it at its word Except you don’t. If you did, you wouldn’t have to reinterpret the fathers to fit your positions. >mistakes accrue When did God abandon the church?

(343.27 KB 891x605 Tissot_Jethro_and_Moses.jpg)
/pol/ - Politics Anonymous 11/08/2019 (Fri) 17:45:32 Id:ba1fa5 No. 683 [Reply] [Last]
Dedicated politics thread.
26 posts and 2 images omitted.
>>1347 >gross oversimplification But saying that Jesus was a classical liberal because he said to love your neighbor isn't? Just considering all of the laws in the old testament that would get you killed for breaking them, I think its obvious God wanted SOMEBODY to exercise authority over everyone else whether it was a king or a high priest.
>>1347 >The word is more properly translated as "kingdom" singular and immediately refers to the eschatological world government that will be overcome. Even still the word translated "kingdom" could easily be applicable to republican nation states. I forget who first said this but all forms of government are monarchies in disguise. It's the oligarchs that rule Russia like kings, and the plutocrats that run America. Clearly they aren't benevolent, like a Christian king would at least have the pretense of being, but they are still where power is today. >As a counterpoint we should remember that it was the Israelites who wanted a king against God's better judgment This is true, although there are a few places in the New Testament that seem to affirm the role of a monarch and that they are ordained. >Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: for he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. The beginning of Romans 13 here builds on Jesus' words in Matthew 22:21: >Render therefore unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s. 1 Peter 2:13-17: >Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: as free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king. John 19:10-11 presents an interesting case, where Jesus says the authority Pilate has over Him was only granted by God the Father: >Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above.
Monarchies contradict the biblical precedent in Acts where the system of governance of the early church was based on the principle whereby the Apostle Matthias was chosen and then elected in order to replace Judas. It is clear from this precedent alone that Democracy is Divine and through Divine Democracy christians should politically rule themselves through God's ever loving grace in a single Christian Orthodox State where all matters be solved according to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit from the Bible. Only through a geniune Christian State based on Divine Democracy will it be possible to begin waiting for Christ's second coming. God wills it.
>>1351 An elective council isn't the same thing as a mass democracy. It's also worth remembering those apostles were first chosen by Jesus and apostolic succession isn't subject to a mass public vote.
>An elective council isn't the same thing as a mass democracy. It's also worth remembering those apostles were first chosen by Jesus If it worked for the first 120 Christians (Acts 1:15) it might as well work in a mass democracy, for it was not by the hands of men that Mathias was chosen, but of the works of the Holy Trinity (Acts 1:21-26) through the Apostles. >apostolic succession isn't subject to a mass public vote. Apostolic succession isn't any less a man-made idea than monobishopship or even the monarchical bishop. If these things are subject to human hands and human validation then it's at least fitting for Christians to subject it to an open and public vote, just as it did happen with Mathias, and let God decide who's more worthy to become elect, be it bishops or rulers of entire countries.

(126.51 KB 1024x768 scr.png)
United Methodist Church is expected to split over gay marriage, fracturing the nation’s third-largest denomination Anonymous 01/05/2020 (Sun) 00:29:00 Id:752f24 No. 1360 [Reply] [Last]
http://archive.is/MzrA9 >Leaders of the church said they had agreed to spin off a “traditionalist Methodist” denomination, which would continue to oppose same-sex marriage and to refuse ordination to LGBT clergy, while allowing the remaining portion of the United Methodist Church to permit same-sex marriage and LGBT clergy for the first time in its history. >The plan would need to be approved in May at the denomination’s worldwide conference. >The agreement pledges $25 million to the new “traditionalist” denomination, which will break away from the United Methodist Church. In exchange, Friday’s announcement said, the new denomination would drop any claim to United Methodist assets, such as church-owned agencies. >Any local church that wants to join the new conservative denomination would have to conduct a vote within a specified time frame, the announcement said. A church would not need to vote to remain United Methodist. Churches that vote to leave could take certain assets with them, including their local church buildings in some cases.
>>1360 This will probably occur more as time passes with the cultural divide ramping up in other denominations, unless they have their own conservative branch.
>>1372 I don't think so. The UMC is really the only mainline denomination with any substantial evangelical/conservative remainders. What's more likely is an evangelical denomination having a group of liberals schism away from them.

(161.98 KB 1280x720 bear.jpg)
Nah j/k Your Mom 01/05/2020 (Sun) 02:49:57 Id:7ab9b1 No. 1367 [Reply] [Last]
I figured out how chans work recently! It's weird because I'm a software developer and I've built a lot of apps but never quite understood the social aspect of chans... it makes sense to me now! Just wanted to say hi!
👋 Hi
>>1367 Let me guess, you can scrape the json for ip's.
>>1370 I don't give a s--- about that

(42.07 KB 689x500 1570303470698.jpg)
Should Catholics Be Posting Here? Anonymous 11/24/2019 (Sun) 21:22:46 Id:84428a No. 971 [Reply] [Last]
Don't mean any disrespect to Protestant bros. I'm told many of you will make it to heaven because you truly accept Jesus and shun sin and repent of your sins deep in your heart, and you don't know that The Holy Catholic Church is God's one True Church. This is more of a question to Catholics bros. I'm kinda new to the Roman Catholic Church. Parts of the catechism say we are open about our faith, other parts say no forbidden books. Christchannel is kinda in between. I'm about six hours out of the confessional and now I'm wondering if I didn't lose sanctifying grace already by posting here and reading stuff. There's no way anyone here can shake my faith: The Catholic faith was established by Our Lord and I'm not going to be fooled over some trivial issue of dogma.
31 posts and 6 images omitted.
>>1333 What quotes?
>>1335 I believe it was regarding the Eucharist.
>>1361 Such as?
>>1363 Do you expect me to reconstruct a conversation from months ago?
>>1364 I'm asking for substance behind the claim that CARM is selective to a point that anything from them should be dismissed

Intercession of Saints? Anonymous 11/22/2019 (Fri) 15:22:08 Id:740aa3 No. 873 [Reply] [Last]
Before I start, I want to make it clear that I am Lutheran, not Roman Catholic nor Orthodox. I have a question, that I hope someone can satisfactorily answer for me: Why is it OK to ask someone who is alive to pray for you, but it's wrong to ask someone absent from the body (i.e. dead) to pray for you? >pic unrelated
45 posts and 4 images omitted.
>>1172 I'll agree that those examples don't necessarily teach that the soul enters heaven apart from the body So where was Dismas when he was in paradise with Christ? And where did David's son go before him?
>>1164 >what is the witch of Endor Gg
>>1181 You take a step way off the deep end but your intent to criticize wrongful platonic influence in early Christianity and especially the Roman church is right. If you're not a Nicene Christian, you're not Christian. The fact that spiritual terms have tangible terms is not proof that the spiritual use is incorrect, that's a non sequitur. You cherry pick verses that don't require a view while coincidentally ignoring others that do, like on hell. If hell is merely a place where a person is burned once then they disappear forever, how is it that there is eternal torment in the future when no new sinners can be thrown in, when there's a new heaven and new earth? How do you explain this verse? Revelation 20:10 (ESV) 10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. "They will be tormented day and night forever and ever" How do you answer this? You say God isn't spirit, but you ignore when the Bible explicitly says so: John 4:24 (ESV) 24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” Do not get your theology from edgy self-important schizo blogs like that of southern protestant, and when you do don't pretend you're actually a classical Protestant. The two of you need to make up a name for your cult like "Christian identity" did.
>>873 In a different vein, many of the criticisms I've heard from Protestants revolve around an understanding of the Church that is rather individualistic, rationalistic, and materialistic--how could the dead possibly hear or help us? It is quite ahistorical.

(675.58 KB 1275x1650 FBI-pedophile-symbols-page1.jpg)
Benedict 01/03/2020 (Fri) 21:03:35 Id:70d61f No. 1353 [Reply] [Last]
Hello Christ chan. I cannot give out my real name because as you know this is a chan and I do not know who is who here. I have been sent by mission led by the Holy Spirit of God to expose a pedophile ring in Michigan City, IN. The cops are not doing anything about it nor is the FBI. We are on our own here. The link has been left below.I need everyone to check this out here as it is my mission from God to expose these evils and darkness. The place from what I found is ran by Ivy Tech community college in Indiana I am unsure who else is with them. It is time to post to the chans and see what you boys come up with. DO NOT POST TO /pol/. TOO MANY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ARE ON POL. HAS BEEN SHARED TO LAW ENFORCEMENT NO ONE ARRESTED YET. UNSURE IF UKRAINIAN CATHOLICS ARE INVOLVED. Leaks: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14_XCE7osdzvTVyLLQ_OEVhKQBOyHLw669zLiIenBu_g/edit
Did you repost on purpose
>>1353 Pizzagate called, they want their pedophile logos back

Ghosts Anonymous 01/04/2020 (Sat) 06:27:17 Id:00d8a4 No. 1355 [Reply] [Last]
I know the common Catholic teaching on ghosts is they are people in purgatory, but what about the Protestant teachings on ghosts? >inb4 ALL GHOSTS R DEMONS REEEEEEEEEE This is a thread for ghost discussion not demons who larp as ghosts discussion.
>>1355 >>inb4 ALL GHOSTS R DEMONS REEEEEEEEEE I think the only other protestant perspective is that ghosts aren't actually real.
>>1356 Well that's a shame. I was hoping they would have a diverse array of perspectives given the thousands of different denoms.
>>1356 >ghosts aren't real when speaking of visible apparitions, not hullicinated, pretty much this for us protestants.

(712.36 KB 1311x1280 anti gospel anti christ.jpg)
Papa Frank Anonymous 12/23/2019 (Mon) 19:09:18 Id:ad5e62 No. 1315 [Reply] [Last]
This is indefensible
6 posts omitted.
>>1326 He is talking about ALL proselytization, aggressive or not. This is wrong. We are biblically instructed to go and preach the gospel. Nobody claims that testimony witness isn't also effective, evangelists should be doing both.
>>1327 This then opens an important question that really determines the matter: is preaching the Gospel the same as prosletyzing? I believe inherit to the word prosletyze is the implication of a certain degree of force. An attempt to convert someone. What if a man 'converts' without holding true conviction yet in their hearts, but out of even a slight amount of pressure? They aren't really Christian. Also, is preaching the Gospel: just the good news of Christ's redemptive work, even all the way to open-air a work of prosletyzation? People must personally encounter, be convicted and choose Christ themselves in the end. We can maybe help that, but definitely not determine it. I found an article of his in similar vain to this, can be for more discussion https://www.ncronline.org/news/vatican/francis-chronicles/without-holy-spirit-preaching-becomes-proselytizing-pope-says
>>1328 >I believe inherit to the word prosletyze is the implication of a certain degree of force. That's a mistake. Proselytization usually does not imply any force. A better term is "evangelism" and my favorite from the Baptist world is "soul winning". The metaphor given in the new testament is indiscriminately throwing seeds of the gospel and hoping they sprout where they land. We should tell anyone who will listen.
>>1328 >I believe inherit to the word prosletyze is the implication of a certain degree of force. You believe incorrectly, as not only is that not connoted by the word, but the context of Francis’ statement makes it abundantly clear he is talking of all evangelism whatsoever
>the crusaders had conquered the Muslims and then a line of all the Muslims was queued and the priest was in front of it and a soldier. The priest in front of the baptismal font and everyone came — read that passage — he asked: "Either the baptism or the sword." This has happened in history! Lol no, this degenerate doesn't know anything about history. The crusaders never attempted to convert Muslims, the Muslims had noted the rulers were tolerant of their beliefs and allowed them to live their lives and keep their religion. I don't know why he also thinks that proselytizing isn't consistent with Christianity or Catholicism, did Christ not order his earliest disciples to spread the word of God? The modern Vatican is a disgrace, he has allowed Muslims and Jews to pray their songs and desecrate the hallowed grounds of the Vatican. This man is no Christian, he is the embodiment of secularism.

/Orthodox/ Anonymous 12/15/2019 (Sun) 12:00:12 Id:99be87 No. 1220 [Reply] [Last]
Are there any old world orthodox here from traditional Orthodox countries, or just new world converts?
26 posts and 5 images omitted.
>>1263 > Sadly, the doctrine of justification by faith is virtually absent from the history and theology of the Orthodox Church. This is not exactly so. The saints of the Orthodox Church follow what we know from the Bible, namely that there is dead faith which can not save (James 2:26) and living faith which saves. And just as we can determine if a man is alive or dead by testing his breathing and pulse, so we can use the works as a test to see whether the faith is living or dead. At first this seems similar to what (some) Protestants believe but now the differences come. Living faith, according to the Orthodox, is not merely faith of words but something which is beyond our natural abilities and possible only by grace. "No one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:3), because only in the Holy Spirit one can have true understanding (and not merely declarations in words of the creed) how a simple man (Jesus) can be God (Lord). This living faith is nothing less than union with God. In Hebrews 11:1 Ap. Paul says that "faith is the actualization of things hoped for" and then continues with many examples of works (including wonder-working) produced by the faith of the saints during the Old Testament. The following is a short quote by St. Gregory of Sinai (from the Philokalia), related to Sola Fide: Even only the faith by grace, assisted by the fulfillment of the commandments, would have led to salvation if we had kept it in power, and we did not prefer the dead and ineffective faith to the living and effective faith in Christ. It is sufficient for the faithful to erect in themselves the image of faith and to arrange life according to the faith effective in Christ. But now due to ignorance the pious learn faith in words, dead and senseless, and not faith by grace. And the following are some excerpts from the Triads of St. Gregory Palamas, also related to Sola Fide (unfortunately they are not included in the existing incomplete English translation of the Triads): I would also regard our Holy faith as a kind of contemplation in our heart that transcends all senses and all understanding, since it transcends all mental faculties of our soul. By faith I do not mean a pious creed, but an unshakable affirmation in it and in the divine promises. Indeed, how do we see by it what is promised in the future never-ending century? By the senses? But faith is "the actualization of things hoped for," and there is no possibility to see the future things by the senses, which is why the Apostle adds, "and proof of the unseen things" (Heb.11:1). Then what? Will some mental power see what we hope for? But how can it see what "never came to the heart of man"? (1 Cor. 2:9) So maybe we do not see in the faith the promise by God at all, since this transcends all our mental and sensual abilities? Not at all! Even from the begining of the time everyone who actually sought the heavenly Fatherland, according to the divine Apostle, although they died without receiving the promises, but they saw and embraced them from afar. There is, therefore, both vision and understanding in the heart which is above all mental actions.
>>1279 (cont.) However, let us contemplate a little bit more about the faith and the divine and sweet for the Christians vision that corresponds to the faith; about the faith, carrier of the power of the gospel, the life of the apostles, the justification of Abraham; about faith, which begins now and concludes all righteousness, and by which "every righteous man will live" (Rom. 1:17), and the apostate will lose the divine favor, for "without faith it is impossible to please God" (Heb. 11:6); about the faith, which always saves our race from wandering in many ways and sets the truth in us and us in the truth, in which no one will shake us, even if he declares us to be mad (Acts. 26:24) because by the power of the true faith we are in a superintelligent frenzy, testifying by deeds and by words that we are not "driven by the wind of any doctrine" (Eph. 4:14), but we hold to the only Christian knowledge of the truth, and honor the simplest, divinest, and truly non-wandering contemplation. What is this faith? A natural or a super-natural force? Of course, it is super-natural which is why "no one can come to the Father except through the Son" (Mat. 11:27; John. 10:9), who has positioned us above ourselves, who has given to us a deifying simplicity and who has returned us to the unity of The Father, the Gatherer. That is why Paul "received the grace of conversion in the faith" (Rom. 1:5); that is why "if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved" (Rom. 10:9); that is why those who saw and believed in the Living One after the death and the One who leads to the eternal life (John 20:29) are less blessed than those who have not seen and who believed – because by the supernatural eyes of the faith they have seen and honored that which is incomprehensible to the mind, which, even if someone sees such thing, will not believe to himself. "This is the victory that overcomes the world - our faith." (1 John. 5:4) The faith first in different ways and at different times restored the fallen world, and then divinely transformed it, lifting it above the heavens and making the earth heavenly. What is it, which saved the seeds of the second world? Wasn't it the Noah's faith? What is it, which made Abram Abraham, "the father of many nations" (Gen. 17:5) likened to sand and compared with the stars? (Heb. 11:12) Isn't this his faith in the promises, at that time still inaccessible for the understanding? In fact, his only-begotten heir was laying before him, prepared for the slaughter (Gen. 22:9), and – what miracle! – he still continued to have an unshakable faith about numerous offsprings. So what? Would not this old man seem mentally defective to anyone who looked at the matter intelligently? But the outcome of the work, prepared by the grace of God, showed that the faith is not madness, but knowledge that surpasses all reasoning. [...] So is it from knowledge of philosophy the knowledge of God given to Christians, or from faith, which by the lack of knowledge abolishes the philosophical knowledge? But if it is from knowledge, then the faith is empty and empty is the promise that says "If you believe in your heart that Jesus is the Lord you will be saved" (Rom. 2:14). Therefore, it is not he who has knowledge about the things in his heart who has God by this, but on the contrary, he who believes in his heart that Jesus is Lord is he who has God sticked in him by imperturbable faith.
>>1279 >>1280 these are posts of exquisite quality
>>1281 Agree. >>1280 >>1279 Based.
>>1279 Another interesting quote by St. Gregory of Sinai: The grace is not only faith, but also effective prayer. For it clearly shows the true faith, the faith having the life of Jesus, being produced by the Spirit through love. Therefore the faith is dead and lifeless in those who do not see it working in themselves. One should not even call himself faithful, if he believes only in bare words, but has no faith working through love or the Spirit. Thus the faith has to be shown clearly by successful doing of good works, or one has to have the faith working in light and shining in works, as the divine Apostle says: "show me your faith from your works, and I will show you from my works my faith" (Jacob 2:18), - demonstrating by this that the faith by grace is revealed by works according to the commandments, just as the commandments are actually fulfilled and become bright by faith which is in grace. The faith is the root of the commandments, or rather the source that gives them water to grow. The faith is divided into two parts, into confession (of the faith) and grace, but it remains inseparable in nature.

(103.06 KB 960x720 nativity.jpg)
Christmas Anonymous 12/15/2019 (Sun) 06:01:58 Id:45a597 No. 1215 [Reply] [Last]
Do you think Christ was really born on December 25? Was it just around there, or not at all, and just a convenient date to comemmorate it? Would it make any difference whether it was or wasn't the exact day?
>>1215 Unlikely to be the actual date since shepherds wouldn't be herding their flocks in the Winter. The time we celebrate Christmas isn't a matter that affects the core tenets of our faith, so I wouldn't worry too much about it.
>>1216 >shepherds wouldn't be herding their flocks in the Winter why not?
>>1220 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DHbOpS-N0c It was always December 25th in the West and January 6th in the East.
>>1215 According to Church tradition, our Lord was crucified on March 25th which is also the same day he was conceived. So he was born December 25th. The Armenians say he was conceived and crucified on April 6th though so they celebrate Christmas on Theophany in both the Julian and Gregorian calendar.
>>1215 Ehh, 1 in 365 chance. Doesn't matter, it's nice to celebrate Christ and have it a widespread custom.

(403.26 KB 1190x986 brazil lent.png)
Clerical Celibacy Anonymous 12/04/2019 (Wed) 15:00:33 Id:40bab4 No. 1160 [Reply] [Last]
1 Tim 4 >1 But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, 2 by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, 3 men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude; 5 for it is sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer. How can Roman Catholics justify forbidding marriages of priests given this passage? How can Roman Catholics justify forbidding meat on fridays given this passage? https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/search/image/0pvDcB3Adgwb9Sr0npD52Q/ It's one thing to recommend against married clergy, and it's certainly a good thing to advise weekly fasts, but declaring either one a sin is a rejection of Christian liberty.
1 post omitted.
>>1160 We don't forbid celibacy. Married men who wish to become priests are allowed to do so. As for unmarried men, the Catholic church just usually confirms the priesthood on men who have chosen to be celibate after years of discernment as a lifestyle choice beyond just entering the priesthood. No one's forced to do anything. >>1161 Catholics are supposed to practice self-denial on Fridays. This usually comes in the form of no meat, but it has been acceptable to substitute that for some other form of penance, such time devoted to prayer etc. On Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, however, it is required to abstain from meat, and knowingly not doing so is a sin. What Paul is condemning is the Jewish dietary restrictions. As Christ has fulfilled the covenant and instituted his own, these restrictions are nullified. There is a difference, however, between not eating meat because it's haram versus abstaining from it out of self-denial.
>>1160 Even priests eat meat on Friday. t. worked in a kitchen for some
It was politically expedient for the Latins--all the money the priest earned could now be funneled to the Latin Church. Indeed, they generally have a false idea of what self-abnegation means. Some are called to celibacy, but it's not something that should be imposed on everyone, nor was it before the Great Schism.
>>1197 The phrase used in the OP was "forbidding marriages of priests" which is explicitly what the Roman church does. You said it backwards though, you probably meant to say "require celibacy"
"It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman." 1 Cor 7:1

(254.84 KB 618x867 1576979349940.png)
Anonymous 12/23/2019 (Mon) 17:08:40 Id:44f06a No. 1309 [Reply] [Last]
>favorite book >can't quote a sinlge verse https://youtu.be/ERUngQUCsyE
2 posts omitted.
(112.43 KB 770x1200 DzyuQ7xWwAUbUCN.jpg)
>>1310 Yeah, super great Christian policy
(230.93 KB 1024x701 1574383695468.jpg)
>>1312 Lets give even more money to Israel!
>>1312 >>1313 And what republican alternative would have been better?
>>1314 >voting at all
>>1320 Regardless of our personal attitudes on voting there were only a handful of realistic possibilities, and Trump seemed to have been the best from a Christian point of view

Delete
Report

no cookies?