/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>583679

Praise be to God! I was worried that our supply of Anderson threads was getting dangerously low.

>>583679

Oh for fuck's sake. Will you faggots make an Anderson dick riding general already?

>>583683

What? I don't sympathize with him, what he's saying in that sermon is completely insane.

>>583679

>Who on earth breast feeds their 14 year old children?

you read that wrong.

<Here’s the thing though. Women who breastfeed their children they’re 8, 10, 12, 14 year old son is sometimes going to catch sight of his mother’s breast because she’s taking out the breast and feeding the child.

he's saying the 14 year old son will see the mother's breasts while she's breastfeeding her other child, not that the 14 year old is being breastfed.

your other points are garbage too, but that one was the most glaring, and i didn't have to whip out scripture to point out its flaw.

this is one of his better sermons tbqhwy, he makes a lot of good and interesting points in it.

>>583679

He makes up his own rules and calls violations "sin". He also declares people as unsaved when he's really mad at them. I used to watch a lot of his sermons, because he preaches hard against degeneracy and is entertaining, but I'm convinced now that his organization is a cult.

>>583692

All right, so what is wrong with children seeing their parents naked?

>>583680

Father Spyridon too :)

Why does he use the word 'gender?' Doesn't he know the concept was invented by communists and is fundamentally anathema to Christianity?

>>583687

>That image

Mods, mods, moddity-mods-mods

>>583697

>What's wrong with going swimming naked?

>there is nothing immodest or inappropriate about taking of your clothes […]

after the fall, being naked in the presence of others is shameful, disgraceful (Genesis 3:7, Isaiah 47:3, Nahum 3:5, Ezekiel 16:37, tons more)

>It's been considered perfectly normal for the vast majority of history

absolutely irrelevant

>What's wrong with being naked around your family?

it's shameful, dishonoring (Genesis 9:22-26)

in the sermon he makes the case from scripture that the Bible defines nakedness as being from your ass to your thighs front and back, and that breasts are covered for the sake of modesty, rather than hiding your nakedness.

so some woman (including your mother) exposing her breast to feed her child isn't something bad.

>>583679

>What is wrong with Steven Anderson?

He has some good videos, but he's way too full of himself. Like how he constantly calls people reprobates, acts like his interpretation of scripture is always fact, and how he calls himself a prophet.

>What's wrong with being naked around your family?

It would be pretty weird to be naked around anyone but your wife/husband, tbqh.

>>583680

>where they throw anger tantrums and scream about homosexuals

There's nothing wrong with being angry over things like homosexuality, but the way Anderson acts while preaching is definitely disrespectful. If you're going to be a pastor, you shouldn't act like a screeching autistic child all the time, especially over relatively small things.

(((the vast majority of history)))

The crux of the issue is this, when people use corrupt culture defiled by sinful human nature as their foundation instead of scripture.

>>583680

>this video… again

>Post last edited at 01/04/18 (Thu) 10:37:35

hmmm….

>>583680

>He has a huge superiority complex and actually thinks he has the authority to interpret Scripture in any ways he wants

tfw describing every founder of every protestant church ever

Come home to the people who WROTE the Bible, the One Holy, Apostolic Church, the Orthodox.

>>583680

>give me attention, i'm a mod

(You)

>>583710

>but the way Anderson acts while preaching is definitely disrespectful.

>If you're going to be a pastor, you shouldn't act like a screeching autistic child all the time

what you call autistic screeching, others would call passion.

i could understand why some people wouldn't like that style of preaching, but i do.

>>583710

>>583680

>He also calls himself a prophet.

Sanderson calls anyone who preaches either a prophet or a false prophet. His interpretation of the word comes from the instance in Proverbs where Lemuel's mom says that she's prophesying and then just explains to her son about a Godly woman.

Anderson doesn't claim any predictions of the future or anything.

>>583679

>What's wrong with being naked around your family?

Leviticus 18:6-20

>>583709

>>583731

For sexual purposes, you clown, that's a different thing from just being naked around them. A reasonable interpretation isn't "family members should always be clothed around other family members".

>>583712

What about during the early church? Did they have designated swimming wear back then?

>>583731

These verses here; seems pretty cut and dry.

>>583733

The bible consistently talks about nakedness being shameful. Why look upon your father's shame? Also in Genesis 9:21-27 Shem and Japheth are blessed for treating their father's nakedness with proper respect.

>>583736

>>583737

>>583756

"uncover the nakedness of", as used here, is an euphemism for marriage or sexual intercourse. You can see this clearly in Lev 20:17:

>And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath uncovered his sister's nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity.

"take" obviously means to have sex with. Why don't we try replacing "uncover" with both interpretations?

>And if a man shall have sex with his sister, […] and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath seen his sister naked; he shall bear his iniquity.

>And if a man shall have sex with his sister, […] and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath had sex with his sister; he shall bear his iniquity.

The first one doesn't make sense at all. Why would it say that it's a bad thing to have sex with your sister because you see her naked? That's the least of their problems. Furthermore, if we look at Lev 18:9:

>The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.

This is saying it's bad to have sex with your biological siblings even if you didn't grow up with them. Why would it even be worth pointing out "whether she be born at home, or born abroad" otherwise?

This interpretation is also the one given by all study bibles.

>>583771

you're replying to my post, but i didn't use the Leviticus passage.

i agree that it's sometimes used as a euphemism for sex/marriage.

but, i don't think you can interpret the "uncovering nakedness" of Genesis 9:22-26 as Ham butt-raping Noah.

Genesis 9:23 talks about the other brothers turning their face away to not see his nakedness.

>>583679

Salvation by magic swimming trunks? I thought that was more of a Mormon thing.

Anderson is a legalistic idiot. The clingy wet dresses he proposes women wear would be a much greater occasion of sin for me than the typical thot beach wear would be. The whole point is to have fewer people go to hell over lust.

Naked but sex-segregated bathing would make more sense, too bad those places have been invaded by faggots in the west.

>>583790

>The whole point is to have fewer people go to hell over lust.

Burpeeist dont believe that,they're OSAS

>>583679

Preety sure he is a crypto kike who was placed to eventually false flag against real christians. The little doctrine I've seen him discuss is rooted in the KJV, but he has all these weird (((coincidentally))) unbiblically beliefs like what you are pointing out in OP. Normally I would have assumed he is just a young christian but how long has he been doing this now?

>>583709

>>583784

>being naked is shameful, disgraceful

>don't think they would fuck noah

Read a dictionary and see https://archive.fo/qJZ1Q . Also see the definition in leviticus 20:18 and ezekiel 23. It is not a inheritenly a sin to be naked, as in without clothing, for God created adam without such things, only for adam to disobey God to even care for such. But to uncover nakedness, as in to have sex with, is all listed all over leviticus 18 as a no no for christians. Although this gets into that theory that satan literally fucked eve, I don't know about that one to be honest

>>583710

>constantly calling people reprobates

Well he is correct and true. Even if his backing in scripture is off very often from what little I have seen of him.

>>583679

>What's wrong with going swimming naked?

Nobody wants to see you naked OP. Stop it.

>there is nothing immodest or inappropriate about taking of your clothes to go swimming

Yes there is, nudity is always immodest by definition.

>What's wrong with being naked around your family?

It is simply weird, why would you want to be naked around your family?

>>583799

>Read a dictionary and see

i view you as having the same credentials to interpret scripture as the 1828 edition american dictionary of the english language.

them just asserting it has the same weight as you just asserting it to me.

>It is not a inheritenly a sin to be naked

i agree, it's shameful, not sinful.

http://honorshame.com/sin-and-shame-relationship/

(if you actually click the link and read it, and come to the bold section in the first paragraph, remember that all oranges are fruit but not all fruit are oranges before thinking i am an idiot.)

>>583815

>i view you as having the same credentials

Literally who cares because of 2 peter 1:21, do you think the apostles had (((credentials))) from the babylonian government of the time to preach? No they didn't. Nor is it mandated in the Bible either.

>them just asserting it has the same weight as you just asserting it to me.

Did you read ezekiel 23:10-24?

>These discovered her nakedness: they took her sons and her daughters, and slew her with the sword: and she became famous among women; for they had executed judgment upon her.

>And when her sister Aholibah saw this, she was more corrupt in her inordinate love than she, and in her whoredoms more than her sister in her whoredoms.

>She doted upon the Assyrians her neighbours, captains and rulers clothed most gorgeously, horsemen riding upon horses, all of them desirable young men.

>Then I saw that she was defiled, that they took both one way,

>And that she increased her whoredoms: for when she saw men pourtrayed upon the wall, the images of the Chaldeans pourtrayed with vermilion,

>Girded with girdles upon their loins, exceeding in dyed attire upon their heads, all of them princes to look to, after the manner of the Babylonians of Chaldea, the land of their nativity:

>And as soon as she saw them with her eyes, she doted upon them, and sent messengers unto them into Chaldea.

>And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their whoredom, and she was polluted with them, and her mind was alienated from them.

>So she discovered her whoredoms, and discovered her nakedness: then my mind was alienated from her, like as my mind was alienated from her sister.

>Yet she multiplied her whoredoms, in calling to remembrance the days of her youth, wherein she had played the harlot in the land of Egypt.

>For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.

>Thus thou calledst to remembrance the lewdness of thy youth, in bruising thy teats by the Egyptians for the paps of thy youth.

>Therefore, O Aholibah, thus saith the Lord GOD;Behold, I will raise up thy lovers against thee, from whom thy mind is alienated, and I will bring them against thee on every side;

>The Babylonians, and all the Chaldeans, Pekod, and Shoa, and Koa, and all the Assyrians with them: all of them desirable young men, captains and rulers, great lords and renowned, all of them riding upon horses.

>And they shall come against thee with chariots, wagons, and wheels, and with an assembly of people, which shall set against thee buckler and shield and helmet round about: and I will set judgment before them, and they shall judge thee according to their judgments.

>http://honorshame.com/

(((paragon group LTD)))

Nice bait, care to post the scriptural point you are trying to get across? Or is this only bait?

>>583825

you completely misunderstood my credentials comment.

all i meant was having another person back your bare assertion gives it no extra weight:

<Bill says ham raped Noah!

<Jim thinks so too!!

it doesn't matter if Jim (random dictionary) agrees with Bill, or a hundred other people agree with bill, that has no bearing on whether or not it's true, so their assertion carries the same weight to me.

>Did you read ezekiel 23:10-24

yes, but i don't understand what you're trying to show me.

i've already said that uncovering nakedness is sometimes used as a euphemism for sex.

i don't think it would be in Genesis 9:22 because the next verse uses the same expression and talks about the brothers turning their face, turning your face if you're butt-raping someone isn't going to stop a butt-rape.

it would be really bizarre if this is used as a euphemism in one sentence, and then something literal in the next, an incestual rape scene is not a proper place to put a cute literary device.

>(((JEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWS!!!)))

fair point, but having a better understanding of honor/shame cultures can really help aid your understanding of the Bible.

i obviously need to brush up on it too, since i can't really articulate what i'm trying to express to you without posting some random blog.

>>583836

>all i meant was having another person back your bare assertion gives it no extra weight:

You are completely correct there.

>yes, but i don't understand what you're trying to show me.

>an incestual rape scene is not a proper place to put a cute literary device.

Eh you make a point there I did misunderstand, I thought you didn't understand that nakedness sometimes is used to refer to having lain with someone in the Bible. Usually a women.

is nudity bad in men's locker room?

its standard everywhere isnt it?

God isn't anti-nudity, He's pro-modesty.

There's a time to be unclothed, there's a time to cover your shame.

John 21:7

>Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his fisher's coat unto him, (for he was naked,) and did cast himself into the sea.

vs

Exodus 20:26

>Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.

If you use your liberty for an occasion to sin, or to cause someone else to sin, you're doing evil in the sight of the Lord. Steve Anderson recommending his congregation wear swimsuits that cover more instead of less isn't "legalism," it's a call to be separate and pure.

>>583865

>John 21:7

Where does the Bible explicitly sanction all of Peter's actions? Or anyone other than God. Sometimes during a Biblical narrative of what happened, people are doing wrong things. Just because they are described as doing it doesn't implicitly condone that behavior.

>>583887

I agree, Peter was a sinner like the rest of us.

All of yall submit to God and use His word to better please Him.

>>583679

Westboro Baptist Church is run by people who knows about laws. They are in an association with some experienced lawyers who quickly take legal action against anyone who punch or threaten a member of that "church". Those people know what they are doing by being attention whores.

>>583920

Even though I'm a catholic, Mr. Hovind has a lot of wonderful material.

>>583705

All he said was that there was hope it could be the case, he insisted on holding to the possibility of hell and treating it as a danger

>>583680

>discourages people from listening to pastor anderson

ok fair enough

>encourages them to listen to someone who calls himself "father"

why do c*tholics always do this

>>583679

His problems pretty much begin and end with him not being Catholic. Otherwise, he's fine. :^)

To be fair, he's wrong about all gays being reprobates, the Bible literally being God, and I think he's been becoming far too prideful as of late. I pray for Anderson because I think he's a legit believer and think he does lead many to Christ, and as such he's under constant attack.

>>584511

>Bible literally being God

If you follow him you'd know that's not what he believes. He was overdoing it in that 10 years old sermon that all catholics pick on, but he doesn't truly believe that.

Nothing wrong with Steven "repentence is works" Anderson

>>584946

Pastor Anderson is like small child. Watch this:

>going to church is works

>reading the bible is works

>believing in God is works

>>584963

The first two are works but the last is just a state of mind.

>>583722

You got me there for a second mate, cheers.

>>584964

all three are your duty.

Works is something you do that impacts the world positively, how is reading the bible or going to church make the world a better place? It makes you a better person God willing, but not the world around you, that's up to you, that's works.

>>584976

People don't exist in a vacuum a person improving themselves affects the people around, without exception. That's besides the point though, since I don't agree with your definition of works. Works are any action, they can be evil, good, somewhere in between. Reading the bible is an action, going to church is too, but believing is merely a passive state of mind.

>>584946

It is works

Jonah 3:10King James Version (KJV)

10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

>>584991

0/10 not amusing

You can do better dude.

>>585132

>by faith OR works

I laughed nice job

>>583705

>>584090

I'm watching his video about that and by far he didn't say something to be laughed at. In fact, what he said about his thought is just a repeating of words of St. Maximus the Confessor and his view of hell is literally identical to the Orthodox one (hell being state of soul instead of boiling cauldron. Then again, Catholic church doesnt teach that either afaik). I just dont see, whats wrong with his statement. I dislike his position about Adam for example though, but on the mentioned subject, he has reasonable arguments. As for the meme pic, its violation of 9th commandment. Stop accusing him for what he didnt say.

cant believe I just defended a Catholic youtuber

Promoting miscegenation, once saved always saved, and that sodomites cannot repent are the only three issues I have with him. The former is the worst offence, becaues he deliberately denies eugenics because of "muh skindeep" and "muh ebil ebolution :-DDD", and I disagree on evolution, but racial differences don't have to have a connection to the satanic teachings of evolution. He should accept that, despite we sharing a lot of common DNA among us, is that it is the concentration of purity of one's race that determines one's compatability to another race. Promoting increase of genetic defects and psychological problems for future offspring is one of the most selfish and wicked things somebody can preach.

>>585492

it's weird that that's your biggest complaint against him, since outside christian identity cults, a priest/pastor discouraging interracial marriage would be pretty rare.

does yours?

>>585492

Those second two issues are both dealing with God's sovereignty and the fact that what He has said, once said, will come to pass. Once the word has gone out on a matter, it's final. But the natural man will struggle to accept that.

>>585492

> Promoting increase of genetic defects and psychological problems for future offspring is one of the most selfish and wicked things somebody can preach

Where exactly in the Bible or in Church tradition is it suggested that practicing eugenics is a commandment?

>>583680

pls

So does anyone here think he'll soften up as he gets older?

>>585972

he'll most likely be cranky "gtfo from my lawn" grandpa

>>584990

based and not a single reply, this kills the catholic

>>585987

The superior NIV doesnt say works.

>>585987

>>585525

>>585559

There are several verses in The Bible that speak against mixing different kinds of things, as well as nations, which, if translated from the Latin word "natio" means the begotten; species/race/lineage; tribe. The word "race" isn't found anywhere in The Bible because 400 years back, considering the language during that time, it is plausible that "race" isn't used because "nation" was the regular term, which was used indifferently and interchangeably in regards to nationality and race. Sanderson should consider the temporary linguistic aspect of his beloved KJB, before he rationalizes one important rule away.

>>586057

>latin

if you're a catholic, i'll just throw CCC 1935 at you:

<1935 The equality of men rests essentially on their dignity as persons and the rights that flow from it:

<Every form of social or cultural discrimination in fundamental personal rights on the grounds of sex, race, color, social conditions, language, or religion must be curbed and eradicated as incompatible with God's design.

discouraging an interracial Christian couple from marrying would be a one of those forms of discrimination.

the reason why it was bad to mix nations was because the other nations were heathens, it wasn't about keeping a pure jewaryan bloodline.

<3 Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.

<4 For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the Lord be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly. (Deuteronomy 7:3-4)

Ruth and Rahab were from foreign nations, and are part of the lineage of Christ.

>>583679

I see nothing wrong here

>>586057

Wasn't Timothy mixed?

I have less issue with interracial marriage and am more offended by the Jew-driven fetish stuff that's pushed politically on Jews' political enemies.

>>586067

Do you mean the whole class struggle ideology and the progressive jews re-framing world history as a microcosm of holocaust by nazis narrative? And how they want to exterminate christianity through demographics? Yeah that's pretty offensive. And a lie first of all. A whole empire of lies. But, these jews don't care about that, do they?

>>586039

No, that's Anderson's

>>586120

how would that work?

>anderson: whoa buddy, good night! is it true you've been volunteering at the soup kitchen? that means you were never saved!

>anderson: hey sally, i saw you helping an old lady cross the street, so you're not saved and you're going to burn in hell.

what'd he say to make you think this?

>>586142

> whoa buddy, good night!

Spot on, laughed heartily.

Until recently I thought he started all his YT sermons with "Man!" but I guess he's just saying amen to the prayer that's said before he starts.

>>586166

TO THE TUNE OF THIS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hy8kmNEo1i8

>>583724

Yup. My favourite passage in the Bible is the Table of Contents. Because they wrote that in advance on which books to include in the Bible.

The translations, research, and finding the Gospels were not done by Monks or anything especially with something like the common ground of an organization known as The Church.

>>583680

>Protestant

>superiority complex

Hmmmm…

>>583679

>be Swedish

>nakedness isn't even something we react to here

>seen most of my family naked at least once

>many friends too

>no one thinks it's weird

Well seeing the opposite sex naked is usually quite uncomfortable, family or not. But among men it's like meh. In fact, if you look away people might think you're a fag lmao.

It also depends on the setting. While swimming or in the sauna no one bats an eye but around the house would be extremely weird/gross.

>>583680

I thought we established the fact that the Dimon brothers are fakes?

>>591162

>>586166

Timestamp: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQViFffKPIc&t=3091

>>591348

underrated

>>584976

Being a better person doesn't make the world better overall too?

Not only because you are a better person now but you won't be doing evil while reading the Bible, you will also have more wisdom on how to avoid sinful behavior and therefore sin less making the world better.

>>591266

Thanks, I thought casual nudity was degenerate but if it's normal in Sweden it must be okay.

>>591404

Wearing a towel in a sauna is actual degeneracy.

>>591412

What do you wear in a sauna, then? A swimsuit?

>>591443

See >>591266