/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>851577

Happy 14th birthday

>>852021

Give me the best history books about this. I always hear that Protestantism led to (((capitalism))) but have never had sources.

>>851230

this image is so funny no historian ever believes this

>>852401

Some protestant faiths require a belief of something easily falsified.

You can't change that, but you know the religion is false.

>>851437

>>851437

Do you really need to incorporate your giantess fetish into your religion, fam?

>>851437

I would use them as toilet paper

I'd make a nice safe little doll house for them and make nice meals for them, but before they get to eat, they have to listen to lessons out of various catechisms like the Catechism of Saint Thomas Aquinas.

when they become good Catholics and are back to full size, I'd let them out.

I don't care. The only good thing he did was not start any more wars.

>>852384

Good pro-life president whom we'll all come to miss very soon.

it was a good run

Lying orange prostitute, could have and should have done a lot more to expose the evil/darkness in this country to the light. He kept the people with money happy. winnie the poohed the rest. On to the next scumbag.

>>847198

>Modern Catholics are bad that means Catholicism is bad

>>852391

Both of those are present tense and say the same thing so logically yes.

I feel like the internet's trying to turn me into a demon, especially cuckchan and reddit.

>>851567

btw why are Catholics in the US so progressive? In Brazil the Catholic church has always been pretty reactionary.

Here is Paulo Ricardo, he is one of the priests with the biggest internet following and he has 1million + viwers with an entire series about cultural marxism, each video has like 200k+ views or something

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJi7CugwzVw

>>852397

>I feel like the internet's trying to turn me into a demon, especially cuckchan and reddit.

On the other hand, it was on cuckchan /pol/ in a /cg/ thread that I learned that the Latin Mass and traditional Catholicism per the pre-Vatican II faith still existed.

Until then I thought the Gates of Hell prevailed, and the Church was over. That was wrong.

>>817044

What counts as sane traditionalism?

this thread is full of blasphemy and all manner of impiousness

>>851695

https://iranintl.com/en/iran/iranians-have-lost-their-faith-according-survey

Been talking to some iranians and other people egypitans some other african etc… Etc…

Trust me mate is happening and there are probably a whole to more but don't know because

1.They don't want to get killed or getting killed for forgetting or missing something

2.And to be beaten by a mob.

3.A lot of them probably secretly left and never made it to survey.

To start a holy war now when this is slowly happening in turkey and even saudi arabia because I heard their was a panic when a lot of people left it.

>61% of the people born into religious families, 60% do not say their daily prayers.

Remember just missing one prayer hell even one prayer not praying to momo is enough to make you a kafir and thus apostate execution should be enforced.

Christian underground churches despite their persecution are thriving to start a war (when we have no reason to) means interrupting what's happening and exuberate the problem, the last time the u.s attacked or did some screwed up things which allows rise to terrorist groups and to enforce islam onto others when it was slowly dissipating, really makes one wonder why the ME has internet censorship laws as well similar to china.

Also this isn't even mentioning Jesus coming into dreams of muslims and that being enough to convert them hence why some muslim soccermoms on facebook just told to ignore them.

Look Christians manage to spiritually conquer the romans there is no reason to doubt it would happen to the middle east, africa, china, north and south korea etc.. Etc…

I would get if it's christians getting persecuted on the same tier like the armenian genocide but times 50.

Heard the bible is like #1 over there.

>why dont we go and convert muslims

Because we are not muslims we are told to spread the gospel not pick fights and force them that is more their thing when the whole peaceful thing got abrogated and changed into violent verses.

>Why dont we go and convert muslims.

It depends how much you value your life or how dedicated you are to the LORD with an acceptance that there is a possibility of you getting killed.

>>851664

Christianity is fading everyday in Christian countries, and you want to use your energy to convert Muslim majority states?

>>851664

How about we reconquer the West first. Everyone here is an atheist or Christian only in name.

>>851943

Honestly I think saying sola is a bit incorrect in describing the doctrine, at least for Luther. It's more of scriptura prima where scripture is the measure of doctrine.

>>852282

He chose the word sola for a reason

>>852218

>My church is independent, baptist, follows the New Testament and precedes everything you just mentioned in terms of historicity.

The New Testament didn't exist until Saint Athanasius compiled it, therefore if your church is founded on The New Testament, you're church had to start with Saint Athanasius and not Jesus.

>It is God's word, not the word of man.

The Bible is God's word and it was written and compiled by men in His Church.

>This is built on the false predicate that men authored the sacred Scriptures. It says in 2 Peter 1:21, that: "the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

>This is built on the false predicate that men authored the sacred Scriptures.

>"the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God

>holy men of God

>holy men

It says right there in your own quotation that men had something to do with authoring The Scriptures.

Wow, that was a lot of things wrong with your post. Fortunately, they have all been set on the right track now.

>>852373

>The New Testament didn't exist until Saint Athanasius compiled it

You think he wrote it?

>The Bible is God's word and it was written and compiled by men in His Church.

Agree.

>It says right there in your own quotation that men had something to do with authoring The Scriptures.

They did not author God's word, they were actually inspired by the Holy Spirit and spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. Just as my quote which you just wrote says (before you cut out the part "as they were moved by the Holy Ghost"). The authorship of God's word belongs to our Lord.

>Wow, that was a lot of things wrong with your post.

Such as what? I agree that God inspired apostles and prophets to give us his Word. "And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;" - Ephesians 2:20. That means God authored it. Then men recorded it. They did not author it though. You would say this only if you believe there is no God behind the inspiration of the word. This is a thing which many today openly do not believe, so they credit men with authoring the Scriptures.

Now what was wrong the the guy above me's post? First, he thinks my church has no way of knowing what books are divinely inspired or not. That question was addressed.

Second, he thinks men "created" the Bible - He calls it "their creation" while leaving God out.

Third, he thinks Catholicism which added apocrypha was correct and that we rely on that decision. But the simple fact of the matter is they included apocrypha, non-inspired material, wrongfully, and the church does not follow that mistake thus easily proving there is no reliance. Because they were wrong in the first place. It would be great if they were right instead of wrong, but that would still not prove anyone was relying on them, becaPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>852380

>>You think he wrote it

No, he SORTED through about 3,000 different books claiming to be the word of God, like Enoch, gospel of Judas etc, and compiling it into 1 book.

As>>852183 said, you are a false church that will lead you to hell. AS Orthobro pointed out, the book was not in existence overnight, it took a couple centuries just to get the scripture settled. scripture which Protestants perverted with false lies and doctrine errors. Yeah Protestantism will lead you to hell, as you have proven.

>>852170

>Actually that would be the movable nu. I said optional, which has a far broader meaning. But again, wouldn't expect you to understand this or to grasp the point at hand here.

You're actually retarded, the word Ιησους cannot contain a movable nu, and an optional nu and movable nu are synonyms. Please learn what you are talking about.

>Leaving out the diacritics? You're killing me. You need to add the smooth breathing mark Ἰησοῦς and the circumflex or you're not even speaking a foreign language whatsoever. All you're doing is vomiting up indecipherable gibberish letters. If you're not presenting every single thing with its complete conjugation table, nobody on earth is going to know what you're talking about or take you seriously.

What even is this autism. The earliest Bibles did not use diacritics, and neither did the Church Fathers. And you can't conjugate a noun, please learn what you're talking about.

>So again, the s or the nu being present or not is in no way affecting what I am and have been saying here. Clearly, those are all spellings present, and that's not even getting into nomina sacra for Jesus.

Again, there can be no movable nu in a singular noun. Please learn what you are talking about. But you argument was that Jeremiah and Ieremias are different, when in reality they are the same except for the latter having the Greek case marker.

>But you should probably be aware that the transliterated names of the prophets are not actually the same as the Greek forms, and they even occur distinctly in the case of Jeremiah. Comp. Matth. 2:17, 27:9 (Ἰερεμίου Ἰερεμίου - transliterated)

Are you being serious? You literally don't have a clue about Greek do you? The genitive of every masculine and neuter noun ends in ου, and Ἰερεμίου is just the genitive form of Ιερμιας. It's not a different transliteration, it's how Greek declension works. Please educate yourself.

>Acts 7:11, 13:9 (Χανάαν Χανάαν - translitPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>852367

Brutal

>>852367

>What even is this autism. The earliest Bibles did not use diacritics, and neither did the Church Fathers. And you can't conjugate a noun, please learn what you're talking about.

I never said that you could.

Again, where did I say that, quote, "every variation of Jesus is false except the original Ιησους." I never said it. In the above post, you specifically accused me of it. The rest of this is just straw men of things that were never said.

>I.e. the actual names are Jeremia and Elia.

Nope lol. Not according to every single topical dictionary and encyclopedia on the subject.

>The earliest Bibles did not use diacritics

It doesn't matter whether or not this is true because you do not have them. The manuscripts do. But I see that you miss the entire point of my highlighting your irrational fixation on grammatical rules as an attempt to ad hominem. You miss the original point of my post. You sperging out about the (actually correct) use of the term "optional nu" has nothing to do with my original point entirely.

>But you rejected it as it was not Ιησους.

Then you fail at reading comprehension. Don't tell me what I did or did not reject. I know that better than you.

>Your issue was not with Yeshua, but with all variations of Ιηεσους.

I specifically said it is not though. I specifically stated in my post before you that the original spelling is relevant. The word is sometimes spelled with a nu at the end, and sometimes not. You get that, right? If not, then disagree with that.

>>852369

Missing charity.

>>852376

That too

>>852348

>The reason i didnt want to go to confession yet was that i wanted to wait until i could control my self. Thanks for the response

Sometimes I think the same thing. No confession than no communion. No communion no gift of grace from communion.

May as well confess, get the priest's instruction, take communion, and keep working to avoid the sin and praying for grace. The worse case is that the sin is held in confession and you're then no worse off than you are now and that is very unlikely tho' it has been known to happen and if it did, you might consider finding a different confessor.*

* This last part isn't clear to me. This is the advice I heard from a Priest, but there is the little matter of jurisdiction!

>>852371

> No confession then no communion.

fixed

Cont…

Eventually I mustered enough courage to go in. If I remember correctly, I asked God to help me. I was pooping my pants from sheer nervousness. I didn't know what to say, or do, or think. The first time I went in to see a priest, I asked the secretary if I could speak to one, and she led me to him. I've seen him around the university before, but I never met him. I told him my story, and how I've never confessed before (he then told me what I said above; that we confess before receiving our First Holy Communion). I explained to the priest that I don't know how to confess: what to say, or do, or things like that. If I remember correctly, he told me to just say all the bad things I've done. He gave some examples. I confessed everything. AND THIS WAS FACE TO FACE. It was his in office, and we didn't have any confessionals. If I'm speaking plainly, I was scared. I was shy to tell him that I masturbated because I didn't know what he would think of me. I later learned that he's heard much worse confessions, and that masturbation is one of the many common confessions he's heard. I confessed everything I could remember. I remember us speaking for an hour/hour and a half. Usually he's busy so it was great that he had that much free time for me to just pour everything out. I believe it was God's work. After that, I kept on going to confession for less serious sins (I was still chaste after the first confession). After your first ever conscious confession, the fear of it just goes away. You no longer feel shy or anxious or nervous about it like the very first time.

I eventually fell back into masturbation after a good streak of not doing it(masturbated 6-7 times in one sitting). I went to confess to him again, telling him that I did it for that amount of times. After that session, I told myself that I will never do it again.

Fast forward to today, and by the Grace of God, to Him be Praise and Glory for ever and ever unto ages and ages, I have been clean from this repugnant sin for nearly 3 years now. I apologise for the wall of text anon, but I wanted you, and any other anons hesitating to know that IT'S OKAY TO FEEL THIS WAY BUT THAT YOU MUST DO IT BECAUSE IT MUST BE DONE. DO NOT FEEL DEFEATED BECAUSE YOU ARE AFRAID. Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>852309

I disagree with the other posters about couching your deeds in fancy language like "sexual sin" and "incontinence". I believe you should just state these things plainly.

Also, in accordance with the Council of Trent, you must not only confess what sin you committed but also how many times you did it in order for the confession to be valid. Fr. Ripperger says that it's acceptable to just try and estimate the number if you don't know it precisely.

Anyway, from all eternity, God knew every sin man could commit so He won't be shocked into disgust and, as they say, your priest has "heard it all before".

I think another way to rid yourself of your anxiety is to consider the end-game. In the end, at the end of time, everyone who ever existed will be raised from the dead and God will reveal the lives of every person that ever existed to every other person that ever existed. There will be no secrets left. In your eyes, going to confession right now would cost you respect right now. But, your deed will be exposed anyway. What will also be exposed is whether or not you confessed. Ultimately, as a recipient of His mercy or sufferer of His justice, you'll be glorifying God one way or another.

It's possible though that no amount of talk will help here. By sheer brute force of will, you might just have to do it.

>>852329

>and is more secure

That literally means nothing if everyone perceives it as weakness and permission to continue hurting you. Insecurity isn't a sin. Behaving in a way that results in people damaging you can be and usually is a sin.

>>852331

Yeah but revenge takes time. Time you could spend being the best you can be and isn't that the worst revenge on your enemies.

What they really want to do is stop you from shining, bring. you down to their level.

That being said dangerous people like mass-murderers must be stoped.

It depends on your enemies resources also doesn't it. If pure evil inbred through incest for generations brain-damaged traumatized idiots steal and get money it's a problem for honest people.

Life is TOTAL warfare always.

But we gotta just get work done I suppose… Also, you revenge something then their kids might take revenge on your kids and then there is war and so on forever.

But some people wanna be killed, death by cop. Maybe just give it to them, the relief of death.

>>852337

An unchallenged criticism is perceived as damning evidence against your reputation by default no matter how trivial or absurd it is. You already cease shining in the masses eyes the instant someone says "Did you seriously just use ketchup instead of mustard?" You have two options since never getting criticized is impossible: either respond in a way that debunks the claim/shows how angry you are at the claim or lose social status because only "unpog virgin tard faggot nazi incel bigot loser weirdo nerd chuds" get criticized in the eyes of the irrationally souled masses. You're already dragged below their level the instant they open the same hole they use for drugs and their sexually perverted crimes against nature.

>>852347

What do you mean about sexual perversion? And crimes against nature?

I think sex can be healthy.

And I think God does change his views on matters. He did update his religion by sending us his son Jesus.

But he can't do that all the time.

But now with condoms and the like I think it may be so that GOD does not dislike for us to have partners sexual before marriage as long as it's respectful and the like.

>>852365

He's pretty obviously Logos. His creation, the universe, is logical and understandable by rational humans given enough time and development. What do "atheists" claim God is?

>>852336

I have no idea what Church teaching is on that. I'll leave that up to God. Since I don't know, I believe it is best to treat everyone as having immortal souls and not as animals.

Babies who are baptized go to heaven if they die before the age of reason (was 8, N.O. says 14? What happened to all the children who were 9-14 who died before 1964?)

>>852358

A soul is either permanently rational or irrational from birth. However, sin can still lead a rational soul to hell. God's decisions don't hinge on N.O. but I don't think that particular topic is worth rebelling against the present Vatican for.

>Inb4 a sede calls me an actual demon for saying that.

Cobra Kai is a pretty good TV show, it's an amazing TV show compared to all of the garbage on TV these days.

Some of the fight scenes are way over-the-top, but the acting is pretty good, the dialogue and over-arching plot is decent, but my favorite part of the series is the character Johnny Lawrence, a man who is trying to fix himself and do the right thing. He's a great actor, very underrated. It's ashame that his only roles have been in Karate Kid films before this TV series.

>>852192

Cobra Kai the only TV show taking jabs at woke culture. No wonder why journalists hate it.

>>851884

No, christians really shouldn't support the depravity of netflix. That'd only benefit the leftist camp, which is the enemy of everything that's good in the world.

>>852354

Cobra Kai didn’t start out as a Netflix show. Ironically youtube red channel the show originally for being politically incorrect. Netflix just brought the show because it was popular and they wanted a manadlorian. Netflix probably will ruined cobra Kai with that said.

"But if that policy be carried out the final results must be that such a

nation will eventually terminate its own existence on this earth; for

though man may defy the eternal laws of procreation during a certain

period, vengeance will follow sooner or later. A stronger race will oust

that which has grown weak; for the vital urge, in its ultimate form,

will burst asunder all the absurd chains of this so-called humane

consideration for the individual and will replace it with the humanity

of Nature, which wipes out what is weak in order to give place to the

strong."

Matthew 5:5

Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.

"et me explain: Man must not fall into the error of thinking that he was

ever meant to become lord and master of Nature. A lopsided education has

helped to encourage that illusion. Man must realize that a fundamental

law of necessity reigns throughout the whole realm of Nature and that

his existence is subject to the law of eternal struggle and strife. He

will then feel that there cannot be a separate law for mankind in a

world in which planets and suns follow their orbits, where moons and

planets trace their destined paths, where the strong are always the

masters of the weak and where those subject to such laws must obey them

or be destroyed. Man must also submit to the eternal principles of this

supreme wisdom. He may try to understand them but he can never free

himself from their sway."

Genesis 1:26

Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

>>852290

>>852147

> Third Reich was completely anti-Catholic, but it was a hardcore Protestant state.

This is incorrect