[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]

/christianity/ - Christian Theology & Philosophy

If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. - 1 Peter 4:14

Catalog  Archive

Name
Email
Subject*
REC
STOP
Comment *
File*
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive
* = required field[▶Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webp,webm, mp4, mov, pdf
Max filesize is16 MB.
Max image dimensions are15000 x15000.
You may upload5 per post.

| Rules | Meta | Log | The Gospel |

File: 40a8f9cc598252e⋯.jpg (87.76 KB,1200x630,40:21,Pope-Francis-Slaps-Woman.jpg)

f8188e No.11781 [Open thread]

The audacity of this guy. Tells people to be patient and to import millions of violent throat cutting maniacs. Slaps a worshippers hand and shouts at her instead of giving her a second of his time. To be clear, the woman was absolutely wrong in grabbing him. But there is nothing that justifies this reaction. Personally, it was hard and heartbreaking to watch. Almost brought tears to my eyes even. Can you imagine being a devout worshipper of Christ, waiting for a chance to meet his representative on earth your whole life, and then being treated like a dog by him? Just how long are you catholics going to put up with this absolute heretic?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WySwhj2SwE&feature=emb_logo

17 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

fde595 No.11912

>>11795

lel

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

319626 No.11914

>>11898

Isaiah 52:7

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

029e3e No.11938

Any real catholic knows he is not legitimate. The legitimate pope still lives, however. You can't have more than 2 popes alive at the same time.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

199d81 No.12010

>>11938

There were three in 1409

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

63548f No.12667

>>11783

>>11783

>>>/christian/ (AKA /catholic/)

you have to go back

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 4d489612a8468e3⋯.png (91.24 KB,400x333,400:333,1549561832352.png)

86f88c No.12594 [Open thread]

I am very happy. I moved but I have found a great new church to join.

God is good. I'm thankful that the Christians who moved here before me planted churches and a Christian culture for me to inherit and add to.

Are you a member of a church? It's hard when you're not

1 post and 1 image reply omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

86f88c No.12638

>>12608

If your local anglican church is in communion with Canterbury I wouldn't bother. That church is past the point of no return.

See if it's in one of the dissenting denominations.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

1381e9 No.12644

Test

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

b90003 No.12646

>>12638

Aren't all churches pozzed these days though? Plus I have a cathedral within 10 minutes train journey of where I live. Seems kind of nonsensical that God would forsake us for just going to a church where some of the higher-ups that I'm likely to never meet do some kind of evil? I would've thought that I could go there, sing his praises, partake in prayer and glorify him, and if the leader of the congregation says something degenerate/wicked I could just go and pray for God to forgive them and to express my disagreement with what they say.

What do you guys think

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

86f88c No.12648

File: a1e47db606a388e⋯.png (778.9 KB,928x1058,464:529,1568292969419.png)

>>12646

>Aren't all churches pozzed these days though?

No

> Seems kind of nonsensical that God would forsake us for just going to a church where some of the higher-ups that I'm likely to never meet do some kind of evil?

He won't forsake you, just like he won't forsake you if you sat at home going to no church at all. It is still not acceptable to support the heretics with your time and offerings.

It's bad, and it's not just the higher-ups. It's every level, laypeople to rector to bishop to archbishop.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

b90003 No.12659

>>12648

He really is a massive faggot isn't he. How difficult is it for a Christian to just be a Christian

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: fc3b0677732417e⋯.jpg (316.04 KB,1280x944,80:59,winter-or-flood-nicolas-po….jpg)

7a09f7 No.9703 [Open thread]

In the bible it says that only Noah and his family survived the great flood. Is it possible that this is only hyperbole and the great flood was exaggerated?

I ask because in Numbers 13:32-33 the bible describes Israelite spies finding the descendants of the Nephilim.

My first thought was it was just Israelite spies were exaggerating to avoid conflict, however, this is unlikely as the bible itself says:

"he descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim".

How could there be decedents of the Nelphilim on the earth in the time of Moses if no one but Noah and his family survived the flood?

11 posts omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9e98a3 No.12520

There was a mass extinction event 12000 to 13000 years ago. The humans had an iron age technology but were not widespread. So it is conceivable a flood wiped them all out. This is more probable if humans were confined to one island perhaps Antarctica. In addition 6000 years is not enough time for humans to have spread all over the world and diverged genetically as much as they have but 12000 years is.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

369ae6 No.12521

>>12520

12000 - 13000 is not compatible with the Biblical timeline

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

0b597d No.12535

>>12496

>All this nonsense about giants being some sort of hybrid offspring of angels and men comes from Enoch

I have heard that the "sons of God" has been used to describe angels in the Bible several times

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

575e53 No.12633

>>12535

>John 1:12,13

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

>Hebrews 1:5

For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

The Bible never says that angels are the sons of God. It actually says quite the opposite.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

baddc5 No.12635

>>9703

>if no one but Noah and his family survived the flood?

We don't know for sure but leviathan and behemoth may be antediluvian creatures who survived, other creatures may have survived as well.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 6f502d0499224d6⋯.jpg (85.43 KB,640x640,1:1,93f6b77cae97b3ae5a64c7ec0a….jpg)

File: dfdd58b5a082e2c⋯.jpg (7.43 MB,6000x4000,3:2,512.JPG)

File: 633b22e7522a5ae⋯.jpg (73.19 KB,634x671,634:671,article-2418617-0049e46600….jpg)

File: dba2d49f1fe00b5⋯.jpg (13.49 KB,300x225,4:3,ayrton-300x225.jpg)

File: c547432b8e253bf⋯.jpg (130.05 KB,427x641,427:641,featherstone.jpg)

6c215d No.12628 [Open thread]

https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/63021078/pictures-at-the-end-facil

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

File: a821dfe5492d6f4⋯.jpg (23.95 KB,236x326,118:163,fd58586c498d8142e511ae20ae….jpg)

c3e327 No.12243 [Open thread]

Jehovah is God Almighty, there is no other. The trinity doctrine is fake. Worshiping Jesus is blasphemy! Jesus is the only begotten son of Jehovah Almighty, he is his chief archangel and was instructed by Jehovah to create the universe but all worship and glory passes through Jesus to Jehovah and Jehovah alone!

"IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD, AND THE WORD WAS WITH GOD

AND THE WORD WAS A GOD

AND THE WORD WAS A GOD

AND THE WORD WAS A GOD

AND THE WORD WAS A GOD

AND THE WORD WAS A GOD

AND THE WORD WAS A GOD

JOHN 1:1

Read the Greek it says the Word is a god which the Bible uses for angels, Jesus is not God! Trinity believers are polytheists! You worship 3 gods admit it when the Bible says there is only one true God who exists outside of all things. We worship only one true God, we are monotheists, trinity believers are polytheistic! Jesus is a creation of Jehovah and exists in a created state. Repent! Repent of your idolatry and worship Jehovah alone. Jesus will lead you to Jehovah through his loving force the Holy Spirit, but Jesus wants you to worship Jehovah and Jehovah ALONE!

“I am Jehovah your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.

YOU MUST NEVER HAVE ANY OTHER GODS BESIDES ME

YOU MUST NEVER HAVE ANY OTHER GODS BESIDES ME

YOU MUST NEVER HAVE ANY OTHER GODS BESIDES ME

YOU MUST NEVER HAVE ANY OTHER GODS BESIDES ME

DEUTERONOMY 5:6-7

2 posts omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

cb701a No.12247

It doesn't say "the word was a God", koine Greek doesn't even have an indefinite article. That is a deliberate mistranslation only found in the JW version to enforce a doctrine after the fact.

This is a Christian board. Christianity is trinitarian. You are not a Christian, so if you want to post here do it respectfully, especially if you want to debate.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

35a0a0 No.12250

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>12247

>>12246

these

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

c81284 No.12591

>>12243

>Jehovah

Is a mode of God that is inherently selfish.

> The trinity doctrine is fake

It is alightly corrupted by my estimation. The spiritus sancti can be transferred from pater to filius. Saying they are God, all three of them, only makes sense to me if you add another -o-.

>Worshiping Jesus is blasphemy!

It is certainly idolatry, but many Israelites had a tendency of reverting to it, so having him as the figurehead made things easier.

>>12243

>Jesus is the only begotten son of Jehovah Almighty, he is his chief archangel and was instructed by Jehovah to create the universe but all worship and glory passes through Jesus to Jehovah and Jehovah alone!

This statement does not make sense to me.

>Read the Greek it says the Word is a god which the Bible uses for angels

And the word angels denotes messengers.

>Jesus is not God!

No, but he was Good.

>Trinity believers are polytheists

If you are talking about Catholics, I agree! My Arian perspective only delineates the mechanism for transmission through generations.

>Repent

Oh wow..

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

38ba59 No.12601

>>12246

>>12247

>>12250

/thread

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

cb701a No.12619

I spoke with some JWs today. What is our trinitarian answer as to why Jesus is called the firstborn of all creation (Col. 1:15)

JWs argue that this means Jesus was created. I'm finding answers that say "firstborn" is equivalent to "Lord" here, referencing his role in creation.

https://biblehub.com/commentaries/colossians/1-15.htm

https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-first-born.html

JW bibles don't say "For by him were all things created,", they say all other things, because they think Jesus is created.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 7b4f23982280e43⋯.png (676.37 KB,1200x1236,100:103,1200px-Seal_of_the_Federal….png)

d60be2 No.12615 [Open thread]

The Gospel

>the world is fallen - this is a universally accepted truth that shows itself every single day by people having the innate urge to correct a perceived moral wrong in society or the human condition. Your very job as a glowie speaks to this as, if the world were not fallen, then you would not be employed

>the Bible provides us a narrative that perfectly explains the current condition of the world

>in the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth, and He created Man in His own image (a being with free will and dominion)

>He gave unto Man the Earth, and tested him with just one rule: do not eat of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil

>tempted by Satan, Man ate the fruit and committed the first Sin, which means to break the design and desires of God

>God removed Man from Paradise and left him to be his own desires ; i.e. left him as sovereign over a fallen world

>the cost of eating of the fruit, however, is death. God will some day come back to pay that debt unto Man

>however, God is righteousness and loves Man, and so He set out on a plan to ransom Man and return Him to Paradise

>God spoke to Man through His Prophets for millenia, setting apart a peoples, the Israelites, to pave the way for salvation unto the world

>God gave us glimpses of this plan throughout many an ordeal, such as what was celebrated on Passover: the "passing over" of God's wrath from those Egyptians who sanctified their homes through the blood of a Lamb and ate of its flesh

>He told us a Christ - a "Messiah", meaning an anointed one; meaning a King will come unto the Earth and bring salvation to God's people

>when the world was finally at the desired place, God Himself came unto the world as the man, Jesus of Nazareth aka Jesus son of Joseph aka Jesus Christ aka Jesus the King

>He came unto the world to preach to Man directly, eye to eye, and to show him the Way to repentence: to trust in Him and Him alone, so that His righteousness lived as Man may account for the unriPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

d60be2 No.12616

I would like to address a common heathenry within the ranks of glow in the dark agencies: Mormonism / LDS / Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints.

As of these current years, this cult likes to call itself Christian and begin its advertisement with half truths presenting what appears to be a shared language and worldview with Christians. For example, the first taste of their heathenry that they may share is asking if you have accepted Christ. Or, it may be a video presenting a familiar Gospel story. As with any other Satanically-inspired organization, it is their job to trick you into forsaking the real Lord Jesus. In order to shown that they are in fact NOT Christian, I will try to show the big differences.

The Christian:

>His Scripture is representative of the Biblical Canon: the new and Old Testaments. There may be importance given to Deuterocanonical works of the ancients that cover Christian theology, but these do not alter the foundations nor are they given the same importance

>He worships God and God alone: he rejects polytheism, and rejects the mere existence of other gods

>He accepts the Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit

>He views himself rightly as a creature: that is, a creation of God, and understands his place

The Mormon:

>His scripture includes the Biblical Canon as well as extrabiblical canon given greater importance than the former as shown by its given precedence where it directly contradicts Biblical Canon

>He is a polytheist who believes denies the Trinity (three persons in one substance) in its actual definition and will claim to believe in the Trinity as defined by the cult

>they believe that everyone is a god, created through God the father ("Father God") having sexual intercourse with a goddess

>they believe that everyone has a chance to earn their own planet, goddess wife, and god children just as Father God earned

>ergo, they believe that Father God was once human just likPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 44446d1231611ea⋯.jpg (27.81 KB,500x400,5:4,59871f4982e71aec0dbf3d53dc….jpg)

7d7824 No.12189 [Open thread]

How could you believe when not only do you not have a single shred of evidence for your beliefs, but all the evidence we do have points against your beliefs.

14 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

d303ff No.12593

>>12318

> Can't actually respond to the meat of the argument and instead attacks semantics.

Come back when you have an actual argument.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

6a4065 No.12600

>>12189

Why?

It's not as if there's any reason why I ought not believe in Him. After all, right and wrong are nothing but abstract constructs, meaning that nothing can truely be wrong.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

73f5bd No.12605

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

Watch this video OP.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

b95b14 No.12613

>heh let me post this picture detailing two competing worldviews with deep historical sources as exactly the same despite not knowing anything about them

>I'm gonna go ahead and ignore the entire body of philosophy of the last four thousand years and say there's no proof for G*d lmao

You played yourself, fedora

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

f8cef6 No.12686

File: 33a9ce50454bb22⋯.jpg (279.63 KB,540x705,36:47,shitty zoomer image.jpg)

>>12190

>>12203

>You're more than two millenia late, trollyman.

>trollyman

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: a3c86c5b9061d3f⋯.jpeg (47.39 KB,831x545,831:545,24ED7329-3001-4F3B-9E48-9….jpeg)

cb5f64 No.12595 [Open thread]

As the title says should we rename planets after angels/prophets/saints instead of pagan deities? In Exodus 23:13 it said “Pay attention to that I have said to you, and make no mention of the names of other gods, nor let it be herd from your lips.” when we named planets after pagan deities we are force to mention their names and this becomes unavoidable for Christians who want to be devout and I see this as being unnecessary as before the west pretty much globalized the world, different countries and cultures had named the planets differently from each other and I don’t see why as a Christian dominated society that we couldn’t do the same especially since we are not talking about historical records, relics, or another person’s religion or spiritual beliefs

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

16c147 No.12596

File: 54e9fd286806f3c⋯.jpg (35.67 KB,364x344,91:86,hmmmm.jpg)

get into a lot of conversations about planets, do you ?

find those conversations confusing because you mention the name of that big gas giant with the rings, and suddenly the guy you're talking to begins to loudly shout the praises of the deity you've mentioned, kills a chicken and starts scrying through its entrails looking for augurs ?

no ?

then it's probably alright to call planets by their commonly accepted names, seeing as the roman pantheon hasn't been actively worshipped in nearly 2 thousand years

also: do you think it's possible you've misunderstood the biblical injunction not to have the names of foreign gods on one's lips, seeing as the same bible mentions several heathen gods itself, with the expectation being that these same stories about B'aal worshippers getting slaughtered would be read aloud, and perhaps there's an inference you're missing along the lines of 'not swearing oaths' in the name of such idols ?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

8e9950 No.12599

You wouldn't be able to stop there rather you'd then have to extend it to the names of the days and months of the year and to all the moons, constellations and asteroids as well.

>I don’t see why as a Christian dominated society that we couldn’t do the same

The names are a part of the West's pre-Christian heritage.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

3115eb No.12604

Pretty much what the other two said.

Since whatever deity it's named after hasn't been worshiped in over 2000 years there's there's no real harm in it as now it's just a nod to the West's heritage and culture. At the absolute worst it will make you look up the mythology and history behind the name.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

fa16ff No.12606

>>12595

It would be impossible to get everyone on board, we don't live in a Christian age anymore, besides just because someone names their kid Jesus or calls their parent Father doesn't mean you pray to them.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

4e17f0 No.12609

File: 04e30c92ebc23b0⋯.jpg (179.07 KB,1920x1080,16:9,wp4498268.jpg)

Using Roman names for the planets and using Greek terms in theology is a flex tbh.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: ead8e59e46218e2⋯.jpg (26.5 KB,500x750,2:3,23e164dab71b5057cd0ccbd035….jpg)

800508 No.8827 [Open thread][Last50 Posts]

Is Mary the Theotokos (Mother of God)?

Was Mary immaculately conceived? Is she sinless?

Is Mary the Queen of Heaven?

Was Mary's body taken into heaven?

Is Mary the greatest creature of God?

Is Mary a perpetual virgin?

Did Mary not feel pain at the birth of Jesus Christ?

Is Mary the mother of Christians?

Is Mary the Mediatrix? Is she the Co-Redemptirx?

Who is Mary?

70 posts and 12 image replies omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

4be75c No.12534

>>12487

These jokes are always dead on arrival. The punchline is destroyed by the entire premise, i.e. virgin birth

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

d42dfa No.12536

Is Mary the Theotokos (Mother of God)?

No. Being the mother of God necessitates the she is prior to God, which is blasphemous.

Was Mary immaculately conceived? Is she sinless?

No and no.

Is Mary the Queen of Heaven?

No (Jer. 44)

Was Mary's body taken into heaven?

No.

Is Mary the greatest creature of God?

No.

Is Mary a perpetual virgin?

No. (Matt. 1:25)

Did Mary not feel pain at the birth of Jesus Christ?

No.

Is Mary the mother of Christians?

No.

Is Mary the Mediatrix? Is she the Co-Redemptirx?

No and no.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

6e8c07 No.12563

>>11578

You argue that Jesus was never commanded to sin by Mary.. But wouldn't that then also require MARY'S PARENTS to be sinless and never commanded for her to sin?

If not, then why does Mary need to be sinless to never command Jesus to sin?

Also: Matthew 10:

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come 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. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

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. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

You are obligated to RESIST SIN even if your parents command you to do so. "Honor your parents" does not mean "Always obey your parents".

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

34cce1 No.12580

File: 69e8057047c5cf9⋯.jpg (3.81 MB,2872x3527,2872:3527,Untitled-1.jpg)

>>12536

>No. Being the mother of God necessitates the she is prior to God, which is blasphemous.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

44d10b No.12588

File: 4a026cdaa101b5f⋯.jpg (108.47 KB,1536x1536,1:1,10238467960.jpg)

>>8827

I think she had some help from the holy spirit.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 1cde3c1c4c8d2fd⋯.jpeg (180.04 KB,1000x1200,5:6,50B63FA1-5111-4350-A3ED-2….jpeg)

2cc3bf No.12578 [Open thread]

What is your most foundational Christian belief? I think I might have to say biblical inerrancy, but prior to that, I believe God is Logos and Logos is is revealed fully through Jesus Christ and to an extent through nature and there is a sense in which the Bible is Logos in book form. So I almost rest easy (not easy enough) thinking my biblical inerrancy comes from my Christology. I would think many Protestants would believe in Sola Scriptura on a very foundational level, but I only believe in Sola Scriptura to the extent that I don’t ~know~ if any source of doctrine, rule of faith and practice, etc other than the Bible is God breathed. That is to say, I feel like I’m straddling the line between Catholic and Protestant or even Baptist if we consider that distinct from Protestant. I am not trained in rigorous thinking and would appreciate seeing others’ answer to the first question to help refine my own beliefs. Secondarily, I hope it may even shed light on how united we are.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

661d70 No.12581

Christ is the cornerstone. The foundational belief of Christianity is the gospel.

You have to know that you're a sinner needing a savior, and that the God-man Jesus is that savior.

Scripture is how we arrive at our knowledge of God, but you can be preached the gospel and believe without ever encountering a Bible.

Sola scriptura is our belief that scripture alone is the final authority in doctrine, as opposed to our feelings or additional revelation or the decree of the pope.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: fbb498463a99308⋯.jpg (4.06 MB,4032x3024,4:3,20200125_140020.jpg)

ab2330 No.12449 [Open thread]

Lads… should I?

2 posts omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

688bc8 No.12456

>WATCH ME DO A SICK GRIND ON THE FACE OF SAINT MICHAEL

No.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

7c26b2 No.12475

File: 41d554be53da45e⋯.jpg (162.11 KB,600x874,300:437,k6ximl2fcsx31__01.jpg)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

ec46de No.12553

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

Careful OP, that's a dangerous slippery slope you're about to go down.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9196fd No.12574

>>12475

Damn if that isn't the most humiliatingly honest thing which I'm sure Jesus would actually say.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

2c275a No.12579

Don't listen to these naysayers, OP. You should make every part of your life as Christian as possible, and if you enjoy skateboarding, then bring a little bit of Christianity into it. Can't think of a single biblical or Christian-traditional reason not to skateboard as long as you using it as a vehicle towards immorality. And while others may see it as desecration of icons, God knows your heart, and as long as you aren't doing it because you enjoy destroying Christian artwork, rather are instead just enjoying representing Christianity while you engage in your hobby, I'm thinking the Lord will know that.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: e6f1f7909f57216⋯.png (224.6 KB,1200x630,40:21,foundations_restored.png)

534390 No.12493 [Open thread]

Has anyone heard about this? I've known about Hugh Owen and the Kolbe Center for awhile now, but I just found out about this 17 part documentary they made about the history of evolutionary theory. The first two episodes are free (just enter a fake e-mail and you can watch them) and it goes into some interesting history. I didn't know about the occult influences on Descartes and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.

https://foundationsrestored.com/free-preview/

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

53befd No.12571

Watched the free preview and about 7 hours of lectures from them on Sensus Fidelium. Had me, and engineer who has studied some on similar topics, convinced.

I'll be buying the series at some point. If it is good I'll be trying to get it shown to the church.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: bc36561e0df0e27⋯.jpg (176.87 KB,665x812,95:116,holytrinity.jpg)

442d20 No.12558 [Open thread]

Hey, can somebody on here explain to me what this picture out of the Book of the Holy Trinity means and what the latin(?) text says? Also how the trinity compares with Non-Duality (advaita vedanta).

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

b3d515 No.12560

Could you provide a source and more information

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

442d20 No.12562

sauce: https://luna.manchester.ac.uk/luna/servlet/s/h19fi5

originally found it on some alchemist website while searching for non-duality pictures/tattoos.

also see wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buch_der_heiligen_Dreifaltigkeit

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 44d9a04072068c8⋯.jpg (32.92 KB,454x566,227:283,1402886271124.jpg)

61e3ae No.12397 [Open thread]

>a cop is chasing down a suspect of a crime

>suspect pulls a knife the cop points his gun at him

>suspects says there isn't enough evidence to convict him and he will just get off and hurt more people (for arguments sake lets assume this is true.)

>suspect drops the knife and agrees to go quitely

>cops shoots him

what is /christianity/'s take of this sort of scenario

5 posts omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

618156 No.12442

Only God can punish crimes that haven't happened yet. We aren't omniscient. Preemptive justice is not justice.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

a40e4b No.12443

>>12442

Only God could be argued as morally right in punishing sin that hasn't happened but he is never Biblically depicted as doing so.

Follow the rabbit hole on this topic and you arrive at the hard to swallow redpill of open theism.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

2034ad No.12470

There is ample evidence to convict the suspect of both resisting arrest and threatening an officer; neither entail capital punishment, nor does hurting a person or threatening to hurt more. The cop, on the other hand, had agreed to let the suspect go quietly, so he both killed the unarmed suspect and broke his oath.

Thus the cop is clearly in the wrong. Why would a Christian take on this scenario differ from any other?

>>12439

>The cop can't use his words in court unless he made that statement under Miranda and in the presence of his lawyer during a legal interrogation.

Miranda is irrelevant here. The suspect was armed and was not under arrest, and the cop was not interrogating the suspect.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

57f39d No.12541

>>12397

The only thing dumber than OP's phrasing are the replies itt.

Let's distill what he really means: someone knows with basic certainty that a serial murderer will escape justice and almost definitely kill again if this person doesn't take this chance to kill them now. Is he justified, even though this would technically be illegal?

I'm gonna say yes, he's clearly justified. The laws of the nations of men exist to protect the good, not only would obeying them in this instance unambiguously accomplish the opposite, but would contradict the law of Christian charity, which supersedes it. (And yes, killing a would be murderer before he can further condemn himself is charity both to him and his would-be victims)

To dispute this is like saying you wouldn't shoot someone attacking your family if you couldn't prove in court you were justified, or worse, that you wouldn't if the law were disgustingly pacifistic and ONLY police could legally engage in violence in any circumstance (this is the pathetic trajectory the western world is on, so don't think this is so implausible). That's just cowardice.

And to all the "you can't know for sure" fags

1) The scenario is that you know he's guilty and planning further violence with maximal certainty. If you want to be totally intransigent about the supposed "unknowable" nature of human behaviour (which is nonsense), then everything else in the world is just as unknowable, better stay in bed all day, your whole life might just be an illusion.

2) He surrendered the benefit of the doubt in committing his previous murders, and execution is a perfectly proportional and just punishment for (mass) murder even if he WEREN'T going to kill again, so the risk is basically non-existent.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

3576ad No.12550

>>12541

>Killing a man who is not engaged in violence because you feel certain he will murder in the future

This wasn't part of the scenario but I say absolutely not. You are not omniscient to have the necessary certainty to enact capital punishment. Murder and attempted murder are crimes in levitical law, general attitude predisposed toward murder or even statement of intent to murder are not. Punishments follow crimes.

>Perform an execution for a witnessed murder when you have certainty the courts will fail

Permissible maybe, not an obligation.

I agree that the state isn't given some mystical monopoly force on violence, even though Romans 13 describes a system where the responsibility to execute is given to the state and there isn't a Christian objection.

The need execute murderers as given in the noahic covenant is a blanket rule.

>He surrendered the benefit of the doubt in committing his previous murders

False confessions are common and should still be investigated because of the gravity of the punishment

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: e4b7992c5b91e02⋯.jpeg (5.29 KB,225x225,1:1,Unknown-7.jpeg)

e5a422 No.12525 [Open thread]

So, please forgive me if this is a stupid question, it's been a very long time since I looked at anything about Catholicism and I'm only starting to get back into religion myself.

Anyway, if Pope Francis decided to blatantly say that Jesus was homosexual, would that have to be counted as fact by the Church? I think I remember that what the pope says has equal standing to Scripture, and since the Bible never explicitly states Jesus to not be homosexual(I think), wouldn't that statement be considered fact? If this specific example can be refuted through Scripture, forgive me, but the principle of the question remains the same.

Is a Papal Decree still equal to Scripture even if it is utterly ridiculous?

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

a74be7 No.12526

>>12525

Not a Catholic myself, but as far as I am aware, that sort of thing only refers to ex cathedra dogmatic definitions. Since the First Vatican Council under Pope Pius IX, there have only been three of these:

>Papal infallibility

>Immaculate Conception

>Assumption of the Blessed Virgin

Also, an ex cathedra dogmatic definition can only be made regarding a belief already held by the majority of the faithful.

So, to reply more directly to your example, not unless most Catholics believe Jesus was as your example states. Which would be blasphemy.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

2ab1b2 No.12527

> explicitly states Jesus to not be homosexual(I think)

It implicitly states that he was not, since homosexuality is named a sin and Jesus was sinless

>>12526

I've never heard that it has anything to do with majority opinion

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

e5a422 No.12529

>>12527

>It implicitly states that he was not, since homosexuality is named a sin and Jesus was sinless

That makes sense. So how about we change the assertion to, say, Peter being homosexual. He was not without sin, and I don't think that his sexuality was ever mentioned.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

10784e No.12530

>>12529

The onus is on the one asserting.

We have Romans 1 which seems to say that fags will never be saved, so Peter as a saved Christian (even leader) could not have at any time been a fag.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

d2b06a No.12537

>>12530

You're missing the point mate, he's just using those as an example of something ludicrous that the pope could declare and become accepted as fact by the church

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


Delete Post [ ]
[]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]
| Catalog | Nerve Center | Random
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]