/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>579021

Pray for him & let the priest know about the vandalism

>>579021

Sarcastically tell him how his edginess will surely bring down the whole of Christianity. Then tell the priest that there's been a vandal and I would offer to help clean the spit from the statues.

>>579023

Fpbp

>>579021

Also, if Christ conquered death and the cross, he can handle one fedora. Don't worry about Christ, worry about the kid's soul.

>>579021

Tell him the upside-down cross is the cross of Saint Peter

>>579021

Also,

> he doesn't know about the St Peter's Cross

i have anger issues, so it would probably not end well

>>579021

He won't have a red hand for long.

>>579023

Best FPBP

>>579021

Follow him around for as long as I could saying stuff like "Oow so edge! Hey everyone this guys so chad! He's so much cooler than going to church! Fagot." as loud, and annoying as I naturally could.

If I were lucky I could get him to sissy hit me, and then we'd go to town boi!

I’m not even mad just embarrassed for him lmao

Probably end up beating the fuck out of him tbh.

I'd probably drag him out.

pray for my wrathful nature brothers

>>579047

This.

The problem is that he is a believer, he just can't even acknowledge it. He knows there is a God, but he just can't accept it.

Otherwise, what sane soul would go into a church (which they hate) and vandalise it?

Given that we have just had St Stephen's day, the only real thing would be to pray for him and ask that the Lord doesn't lay this charge against him.

Who has that comic about a demon turning a cross upside down and a /christian/ anon giving him shit about it still being a Petrine cross and not a satanic symbol?

>>579021

I'm not upset at all as he's targeting representations of Christ, not Christ himself. Christ even doesn't consider it a death penalty anymore according to Matthew 12:31-32:

>31 “Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven.

>32 “Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven … "

It's clear to see what his intent was though. His intent was to be all edgy by aligning with Satan to "fight against tha holy establishment" because of some metal lyrics and Reddit posts, not realizing that God doesn't consider it offensive anymore. He's embarrassingly foolish.

>>579065

Lost it.

Ideological atheists are like MGTOWs. Talk about how much better off they are without God, but they also seem to do nothing but whine about religion.

>>579055

I find it hard to convert blasphemers once they perish

>>579055

>>579092

>sources: two jews

hmmm

>>579021

I am almost people like this are under demonic influence.

>>579119

I think they are

>>579046

I think that would be hilarious.

>>579021

If caught red-handed I'd probably try to stop him and maybe use violence if he doesn't.

>>579023

/thread

though I am a bit wrathful person, but anyways…

>>579021

Beat the shit out of him.

Id crucify him see what it feels like to be a roman

I would perform a citizen's arrest, call the police and ensure that the entire congregation called the district attorney's office and demanded prosecution for hate crimes. Let him enjoy the liberal machine working against him.

To those saying they would react with violence: When Jesus was taken in the garden, to be led to trial and the cross, he told his people to put away their swords and he healed the ear of the one who was struck.

Jesus commanded this of his people when he, himself, was being taken to his death. Do you really believe that he would want you to react with violence to someone spitting on a mere statue?

>>579354

Jesus did take a whip to people screwing around in the temple though, on the other hand.

>>579357

Not exactly the same thing. He drove out the money lenders. The modern equivalent would be destroying a bank owned ATM in the church lobby.

>>579354

nice analogy, would you offer condoms to the home invaders raping your wife as well?

>>579354

Jesus also whipped the fuck out of people and smashed up all thier shit when they disrespected the temple.

It would be charitable to smack this guy up a little or at least give him a good tongue lashing. Just like as a child if you keep calling your mother a whore (unjustly), it might be charitable for your father to smack you a bit. This is to be loving and instruct you that your ways are wrong. People who do foolish things like this need some instruction, and we do so out of love.

From the Lives of the Saints, let's read about St. Polycarp:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/lots/lots036.htm

>When the apostate Marcion met St. Polycarp at Rome, he asked the aged Saint if he knew him. "Yes," St. Polycarp answered, "I know you for the first-born of Satan." These were the words of a Saint most loving and most charitable, and specially noted for his compassion to sinners. He hated heresy, because he loved God and man so much.

>>579021

depends.

did he entered in private property?

>>579366

>spitting on some statues = someone raping my wife

Seriously?

>>579371

Saying something, yes; but using violence against a non-violent act is a sure way to spend a couple years in prison.

>>579360

You've pigeoned-holed that scripture into a far more nuanced position than it need be. You think it was the specific act of money-lending but a Christian could see it as driving out any blatant disrespect.

Who is right? Well, that's a matter of prayer and seeking but allowing that BS doesn't seem Christian to me.

>>579436

It's actually a matter of whether or not you take the Bible literally. It literally says: [Matthew 21:12] And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

You either take it literally or you do not; but you can't have it both ways.

>>579448

John 2:15-17

And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise.And his disciples remembered that it was written,

>The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up

Jesus beat up people because of zeal for the dignity of the place of worship. You either take it literally or you do not; but you can't have it both ways.

>>579454

>money changers

>sold doves

>house of merchandise

Nothing about spitting on statues. You either take it literally or you do not. You can't use it as an example if it doesn't fit.

>>579448

It's not a matter of taking it literally- it doesn't say -why- Jesus did it. That's>>579455

Perhaps you don't know what literally means. I could just as easily say you're only allowed to use a whip if your name is Jesus because that's what happened in the scripture.

You're interpreting the scripture when you say -how- it applies. There's nothing there saying what parts of the scripture to emulate. Maybe we should only whip people in the temple of Solomon, or only on Tuesdays, the point of interpretation is to understand -which- of the facts in the scripture apply to our present actions and -how- to emulate our lord.

You think that the important fact was that they were money lenders because you hate bankers, I get it.

Others think the important fact was that they were disrespecting the place of worship, regardless of their chosen profession, that it was an example.

I take it just as literally as you, we're simply applying the scripture differently. This is called interpretation. However, you're arguing that someone other's interpretations aren't "literal" shows how little you understand of your own interpretative methods.

Now, if you want to use additional scriptures to make your point and show that I'm not reading wholistically or in context, that's a valid point. Your "literal" issue, however, is not a valid rebuttal.

>>579455

>Nothing about spitting on statues.

Well to be fair, there weren't any idols in the temple.

>>579457

My original example was >>579354

Do you believe that Jesus, who would not defend himself nor have his body defended by violence, would advocate violence against someone who spit on a statue?

I would try to stop him non-violently and let people know.

>tfw he's gonna remember and regret all these actions while burning in the fires of God's wrath unless he repents (he won't).

>>579479

>non-violently

>>579460

>who would not defend himself nor have his body defended by violence

In a single instance because the will of the father was for him to be apprehended

>would advocate violence against someone who spit on a statue?

Hard to say. Certainly Jesus would not want a disproportionate reaction. I haven't been moved by the Spirit such that I can answer with certainty, but by no means do I think Christians are forbidden to use violence in pursuing what it right and Godly.

>>579496

This, Peter was allowed to carry a sword.

>>579496

Yes, I'm sure, but we're talking about OP. We're not talking about righteous war or just defense. There is a VAST difference between an army marching on your neighborhood and some fedora spitting on a statue.

>>579509

And there's a big difference between drawing and quartering the fedora and spitting on him and backhanding him to the face.

>>579483

>getting arrested for assault and making christians look worse than the fedora that spits in holy water

>>579527

Are you just looking for an excuse to hurt someone? That makes you no better than the fedora.

>>579591

>That makes you no better than the fedora.

I acknowledge Christ as my Lord and Savior, try to live my life in his love and through the wisdom of the scriptures and you say that a difference in interpretation in a single instance means I'm no better than a fedora?

Dude, better check your salvation.

>>579580

Valid point here; definitely worth considering how the incident will look to the greater public. That's why getting him arrested for vandalism while our younger, female parishoners cry about how they feel spiritually raped by him will probably get better results.

>>579592

If you are genuinely seeking a reason, as so many others ITT, to cause real physical harm to someone who has done nothing more than spit on a statue, then you are not seeking the wisdom of Christ.

You're just looking for an excuse to unleash your rage (sinful wrath) against someone who needs teaching.

>>579597

Spitting in someone's face and a backhand does not cause them -real- physical harm, at least not in the harm that matters an hour-later sense. It's a statement, just like his spitting in the Holy Water. It's a sign of disrespect, just like how he treated the church. There's a little stinging in the face, true, but I'm not talking beating him black and blue. Punishment should fit the crime.

All of that pales in comparison to his actual punishment which will be an eternity in hell. Perhaps a couple swats on the butt as a child could have given him some respect for authority.

You shouldn't accuse your brother's of wrath, or accuse your brother's of seeking to maim, or accuse them of being no better than a godless heathen without knowing it for sure. All of that comes from the evil one, Satan, the accuser. Keep your accusations to yourself unless the words can be construed no other way- it's unproductive and unChristian.

I have no problem with debating the merits and social ramifications of physical response, but if you are looking to teach your brothers, do so without making a mockery of their position and assuming evil from them.

>>579601

>All of that pales in comparison to his actual punishment which will be an eternity in hell.

And YOU don't get to dole that out.

You need to calm down, stop being wrathful, and just clean up the statues. If you catch him in the act, you can rebuke him and ask him to help clean it up; but YOU don't get to lay the smack down. If you can't handle that, then maybe you need to join Islam's cause … those guys love to behead people and throw stones and blow up shit.

>>579608

You just:

>compared a slap to execution

>assumed minor violence is the product of wrath

>told a Christian if he doesn't agree with you to join Islam

Man. You really shouldn't be giving advice to other Christians. You seem far angrier than the people advocating a smack.

>>579610

Someone spits and you slap, then you are the one going to prison. Reacting with violence against a non-violent act is you being the asshole.

You need to talk to people, educate them, and be an ambassador for Christ. That is me rebuking you for your wrathful ways.

>>579611

>That is me rebuking you for your wrathful ways.

Not wrathful, not even anger. You are clearly angry and are accusing your brethren of wrath. Judge not lest ye be judged; wrath does not always exhibit itself with physical violence. Accusing your brother is bad.

I was debating the merits of a physical response. You are welcome to disagree and there are good reasons for disagreeing.

HOWEVER - ignoring the argument and simply accusing your brother of wrath is not a way to lead to truth, it is sinful. I'm rebuking your accusations and inability to look inward.

Reacting with violence against a non-violent act may be totally warranted. A man steals food from a starving family and refuses to give it back - you think there's no room for a little force there?

I'm not saying physical response is definitively right in this case but your way of arguing is sinful and wrong regardless.

>>579021

The real question is this: why would someone would risk an eternity in hell just for the momentary satisfaction of putting a blind fool in his place? Judging from his actions and words, I believe he did this either out of spite or foolishness. Regardless, he had something against God and took it out immaturely by committing petty acts of vandalism that mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. This is equivalent to your typical idiot who kicks over a trashcan and autisticly screeches in the name of anarchy. It's low, it's petty, it's short sighted, and it's quite sad really. I would just notify the priest and community of his actions and pray to God that he finds the path to Christ before his foolishness leads him further astray.

>>579021

Not a christian but, why are you all overlooking the fact that he admitted to spitting "in the holy water" and not just on statues. presumably the only such water within spitting distance lies in a font. Im sure it's cleaned out between baptisms but where im from it's considered assault to spin on someone or in their water. due to diseases and vulgarity.

>>579652

>Not a Christian

>Anglican flag

Hmm

>>579689

>woman

>>579699

>protestant

>>579580

I don't think any person with half a brain will think that stopping someone who is spitting on holy water makes Christians look bad.

I bet Christians looked pretty bad when they refused to pay homage to pagan gods. Maybe you should learn from them, coward.

>>579699

The Anglican church recognizes women priests, so she is allowed to say and do that.

I'm not saying that God recognize Anglican churches or women priests, of course.

>>579706

>defending women preists

>>579706

>>579699

>Non-catholic. I think we've covered the bases here.

>>579711

>thinking I did

brainlet.jpg

>>580404

>destroy altars to God that have been the practice for about 1,500 years

>hehe ya we're the real church

protestants…when will you learn

>>580405

Destroying religous symbols/icons for political reasons =/= being against idol worship

Nice try though.

>>579023

that too after beating him up

>>580493

One needn't destroy idols if one is opposed to what is perceived as idol worship. A work of beauty is a work of beauty, and to attack beauty is to attack the life of the soul. It is a quick road to the abyss.

>>579021

>implying that the sort of person who would do this would have the balls to do it with any witnesses around

The best thing to do is pray for him, but I'd probably fight him.

>>581455

>Posting pro-fag cartoon gif

>>581516

I will never forgive Savino for letting it happen ;-;

Lol he drew a petrine cross in a bible. Nice one, that really got us Christians riled up.

>>579595

Yes, because this liberalized passive outlook modern Christians have taken has truly helped save more people from atheism. The Church has been in decline due in part to passive "nice" alternatives to pious religious fervor.

Whilst pride is a cardinal sin, I'd argue that having severely lacking conviction derived from a pride-less outlook, is detrimental to building yourself as a man and shows extreme weakness. People naturally follow strong masculine leaders, letting yourself/faith be walked upon is cowardice.

I would ask him why he is doing that in a calmly arresting, genuinely curious tone.

>>589443

are you a baptist or muslim larping as orthodox?

>>589551

>Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

Romans 12:19

Seems silly let an edgy atheist lead you into such grave sin anon

>Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.

Psalm 37:8