/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>656215

He's pretty great on the history of the jews. On theological and political matters, I'm not a fan. His defense of Catholicism is, "My mother drunk or sober." However that wasn't the opinion of Rome when it separated from Antioch and Jerusalem. It's that subservience to hierarchy over all else that rubs me wrong. It's further reflected in his stance that citizens should not own guns; he mocks the idea of an insurrection against the state. Again, more slave mentality.

Really smart guy. Knows about the winnie the poohed up nature of both capitalism and socialism. Got his book Lobido Dominadi, excellent read.

>>656222

never knew he was pro gun control

>>656223

he's not "pro gun control", he's "what does this have to do with anything?"

I'm tempted to agree with him, what exactly does Christianity have to do with gun control? It's used to drive a wedge into popular discourse, nothing more.

"yeah conservatives hate abortion!"

"well, perhaps fetuses are children, what else will they become?

"yeah conservatives love guns!"

"well, that's pretty stupid, i'm from new york!"

>>656222

>His defense of Catholicism is, "My mother drunk or sober."

His defense is the Church Fathers and the 2,000 years of apostolic succession, Jones never actually dedicates any of his time or energy to fighting protestants, and why should he? People like Stevie Anderson are too much of a joke to ever mount a real counter-offensive towards the Jews, and Protestants can barely formulate that masturbation is evil without sounding Catholic.

"It's that subservience to hierarchy over all else that rubs me wrong."

https://www.amazon.com/Pope-Francis-Context-Arrived-Buenos-ebook/dp/B0721KX2BV

>>656228

>he's not "pro gun control", he's "what does this have to do with anything?"

While he doesn't talk about it a lot, he does have a position on it. He is pro gun control. He has affirmed this in the comment sections of YouTube videos and its a major point of contention between him and his subscribers, myself included.

>Stevie Anderson

If I were trying to discredit Christianity, I would select the same person. Classic strawman. While he's no theologian, Anderson should get credit for producing Marching to Zion, which is a great redpill for American Evangelicals.

Forgot to mention, EMJ also believes that Muslims are worshiping the same God as we are, but under a different name. Not sure how he reconciles that with biblical teaching. 1 John 2:23

>>656241

>If I were trying to discredit Christianity, I would select the same person.

Funny, who else would you choose? Do you know where you are? Stevie Anderson is becoming a voice thanks to his silly movies and skill with PR, he will soon be the face for angry Baptists who don't want to conform with progressives; a very powerful up-and-coming bloc.

>While he doesn't talk about it a lot, he does have a position on it. He is pro gun control. He has affirmed this in the comment sections of YouTube videos and its a major point of contention between him and his subscribers, myself included.

Then allow him to be pro gun control. Where does Scripture speak about guns? What are gun-rights in the context of Heaven? Just like Martha's wage-slavery, even that will be taken away from you, you know this. Jones' position is quite rational, ignore gun-control as an artificial issue, and all of a sudden a major wedge the oligarchs force on us becomes null.

You can't deny this, these people have think-tanks whose entire existence are to study ways to control democracies.

>>656242

Sure, Islam is a Christian heresy. The Jews worship the same God, yet do not have Him because they do not know Jesus Christ.

Same situation with the muslims. Jones is trying to exploit an apparent weakness in the Quran (I feel), it acknowledges Christ as a prophet yet comes up with looney-toon logic to explain away the Gospels. Any Muslim with a brain can be convinced of Jesus Christ, I think this is what Jones is banking on.

>>656242

>1 John 2:23

This verse isn't crystal-clear in what it's trying to say, and there are other possible interpretations.

You can't just say that it proves that "This means that anyone who doesn't believe that Jesus is God, doesn't worship God" without first explaining how you got tbia from this verse.

You have to explain how you deduced this belief from this verse.

>>656339

It's crystal clear what it means if you read the preceding verse, 1 John 2:22. If you deny the Father and the Son, you are anti-Christ. If you deny the Son, you also deny the Father. This leaves two necessary outcomes:

1) Allah is a different/false god worshiped by Muslims, or

2) Allah is Jehovah, and Muslims are disingenuous in their worship.

The zeal of Muslims willing to die in jihad convinces me that they are sincere in their worship of a false god.

>>656363

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)

>>656242

What does that even mean to say that Muslims worship a false/different God? Yes, 1 John 2:22 etc but they are clearly arguing that they worship the God of Abraham.

>>656290

> The Jews worship the same God

Judaism sees Islam as less heretical than Christianity. Do you think there's a single Jew who will tell you that Christians worship the same God? Jews will concede that Muslims worship the same God, but it's still heretical yet as far as gentile religion/cultures go it's not bad. Keep in mind Jews and Muslims got along for the longest time until the 20th century. Jews thrived in Muslim countries.

>>656364

Quick rundown on the Bundy standoff?

And Afghanistan is not a war meant to be won. It was meant to install some military bases close to Iran and maybe pillage some precious metals.

>>656365

>but Muslims say…

>but Jews say…

WHO IS A LIAR BUT HE THAT DENIETH THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST?

KJV deployed for emphasis XD

>>656366

>Bundy stand-off

Similar to Ruby Ridge, Waco. In a characteristic overreach, Federal gov't decides to illegally invade on some self-sufficient Americans. A group of armed ranchers forced the militarized agents to retreat and give back the stuff they stole. The ranchers were later vindicated, with prejudice, by two separate courts. It also came out recently that the feds on the ground ignored a stand-down order and continued operations en rogue (bloodthirsty devils). The point with the Afghan war is the same. The feds could just nuke everybody and "win". But force is a gradual implementation, and when force is met with (armed) resistance, you force the aggressor to weigh the worth of escalation. I'm not saying a few good ol' boys could take on the federal gov't in a total war scenario. I'm saying that that's a strawman fallacy. The point is that you can't force ANY escalation unless you are armed.

InfoWars's David Knight did some great reporting on the Bundy situation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD61YFxUga4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwbIy5DJDFo

>>656334

>>656368

>>656365

I'm well aware of the Zorah and the Talmud and all the other fan-fictions, ostensibly, the true God of OT is whom they worship.

I am not equating worship = salvation here.

>>656340

Once again, it's a literal Christian heresy. EMJ is trying to find the common ground to not justify America glassing them into the ground, or do you believe Christ would accept wanton slaughter of innocents?

I know you all wish to score brownie points feeling like true Christians, but blessed are the peace-makers. We are the true sheep of the true shepherd, and we are bound to preach the Gospel to those outside the flock, not justify the American Empire glassing them.

>>656340

>you are anti-Christ

You don't have to be knowingly against Christ to be an antichrist. You can think and be convinced that you are doing good while in reality you are doing evil.

>If you deny the Son, you also deny the Father

It doesn't follow that you do so, again, knowingly - and if you don't know you are denying Father, you can still think you aren't. And if you think you aren't denying God, you can think you are doing Father's will. And if you think you are doing Father's will, then you can actively want to continue doing it; perhaps in such a peculiar situation you can be in awe of Father's glory and even want to offer Him some appropriate worship.

>This leaves two necessary outcomes:

There is a third option: Muslims worship the true God but they have a heavily distorted view of what He wants from us, to the point that they are actively working against Him, all the time thinking they are doing what He wants.

>>656389

It's almost impressive how many fallacies you managed to pack into such a short post.

>I am not equating worship = salvation here

Moving the goalpost. We're discussing identity. "Allah" has behaviors and attributes that God doesn't have. Keep in mind what is being referred to by "Allah": the God of Abraham who spoke through the Quran. If that didn't happen, then "Allah" doesn't exist. It's a character inspired by Christian scripture; much of Islam is plagiarized, no surprise there.

>EMJ is trying to find the common ground to not justify America glassing them into the ground

Ends justifying the means.

>or do you believe Christ would accept wanton slaughter of innocents

False dichotomy.

>I know you all wish to score brownie points feeling like true Christians

Strawman fallacy.

>we are bound to preach the Gospel to those outside the flock, not justify the American Empire glassing them.

False dichotomy.

>>656392

>You don't have to be knowingly against Christ to be an antichrist

It is sufficient but not necessary, and I never suggested otherwise. I was literally quoting chapter and verse.

>if you're wrong but don't know it, and don't know that you don't know it, but you think you do, then maybe you do, and so maybe just maybe you're right after all.

Ridiculous in and of itself, but further peculiar in that you're arguing with ``quotations from scripture``. The parts you're arguing with:

<If you deny the Son, you also deny the Father

are pure scripture, it's not even an interpretation. If you don't believe the Bible, you should probably find a different board.

>There is a third option: Muslims worship the true God but they have a heavily distorted view of what He wants from us

The distorted views make up the very essence of what is referred to by "Allah", that is, a god whose messenger is Mohammad and who spoke through the Quran. Take those distortions and falsehoods away, and there is no Allah. It's a total construct, inspired by Christian scripture and adapted for the purpose of dark age Muslim rape and conquest of Christian lands. Your claim is audacious and offensive to the countless Christians killed, raped, murdered, and enslaved by the Mohammadans.

>>656400

Ridiculous in and of itself, but further peculiar in that you're arguing with ``quotations from scripture``.

I am not arguing with the verse, but providing you an explanation - it's not complicated if you read it, I made it long and detailed only to avoid possible misunderstandings - of why exactly your interpretation of it is incorrect.

>>656222

>hating authority

>using the words "slave mentality" unironically

I wonder who is behind this post

>>656400

You accuse me of moving the goal-post, and then you move the goal-post! All I've said was Islam is a Christian heresy, and then you point out why it is a Christian heresy! Brilliant!

>False dichotomy.

How so? EMJ is supporting talking with muslims over allowing the USA to use Christianity as an excuse to alienate and bomb them, this is literally his thesis.

>strawman fallacy

banter :)

>false dichotomy

then, what should we do with the muslims? kill them for israel?