/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>679950

They want to believe in an afterlife, but they're still edgy "God's a meanie" fedoralords.

i do the same thing (mostly on /pol/, /lit/, /x/) and even though the gn*stics are irritating i am grateful for the opportunity to publicly btfo them

>>679951

Yes. They are drawn to Christianity but they want hipster points. Gnostics are no different to western Buddhists. They have little regard for the actual faith, they just want people to think they're spiritual without the baggage that comes with being a Christian in the west today.

Because they value their intelligence over faith.

Gnosticism is a very sneaky heresy because it plays directly to an individual's pride in their earthly knowledge.

Salvation is a gift that's free and open to all? No, no, no.. it has to be hidden knowledge that only a high IQ individual as myself can attain.

It's a seductive pitfall for sure since they believe that they're on our side striving for salvation but they deny the father with whatever menagerie of false gods they believe in.

>>679969

>find some friends who will read and discuss with you by the phone or in person.

Don't forget what the word of God says Hebrews 10:25.

"Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching."

So I hope you're going to church. And yes you should continue to do the things you mentioned also.

>>679950

It's a substitute for Christianity that works really well if you don't have a real knowledge of Christianity.

>You're a Sethian chosen by God unlike those lying kikes!

This plays on feelings of resentment created by the zionist heresy.

>God of the OT is evil and Jesus is his enemy!

This plays on the heresy of assuming the God of the OT wasn't Jesus.

>The serpent was good and brought wonderful gifts and knowledge to mankind!

This plays on just plain not understanding the Adam and Eve story.

I fell for it for a short time because I was raised to believe all those heresies FROM YEARS OF M***G CATHOLIC SCHOOL. I now have no faith in any institutions. They're all owned by jews. Nothing is to sacred for Satan to enter. Delusions and visions taught me more accurate theology than those jewish infiltrators.

>>679970

>Salvation is a gift that's free and open to all? No, no, no.. it has to be hidden knowledge that only a high IQ individual as myself can attain.

Don't be a fool. It's easy to spend your whole life a brainwashed Satanist who thinks he's a Christian if don't look for real Christian knowledge on your own.

>>680023

>They're all owned by jews. Nothing is to sacred for Satan to enter.

Try reading the Authorized version. It is not subverted by Satan or Jews. They will try to say otherwise.

>>680028

>Try reading the Authorized version. It is not subverted by Satan or Jews.

I can't believe that. The books Luther removed were done at the request of jews, and many of them are very problematic for zionists.

>>679950

Did that on /b/ the results were satisfying. Atheistards actually started arguing with each other about who hates religion more. Every other post is reddit-tier "God can't real cuz I not see it" pseudo arguments.

https://8ch.net/b/res/8183784.html

>>680028

It was sobverted by Anglicans so it's shit from the start.

>>680031

>The books Luther removed were done at the request of jews,

Not added by anyone until the Council of Trent.

>and many of them are very problematic for zionists.

Zionists didn't exist until around the time of Scofield gaining popularity, that that was because of his study bible. Classical judaizers are destroyed by the New Testament alone, see for instance 1 John 2:22-23, Galatians 3:16,29; or the entire chapter of Galatians 4; 1 Thessalonians 2:15, Hebrews 8:6-10, Titus 1:10-11, Revelation 2:9 and 3:9, Mark 13:6-13, John 8:43-44.

Implying that the New Testament doesn't already refute all forms of judaizing is itself a problem. It would be like a sect that added Main Kampf to the Bible and complained that removing it gives you Zionism, that argument in itself would suggest that somehow the Bible doesn't already do this.

What i find annoying about gnos is, didnt paul address this heresy?

>>680052

>Not added by anyone until the Council of Trent.

Council of Carthage, 397 AD

It was also determined that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in the Church under the title of divine Scriptures. The Canonical Scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two books of Paraleipomena, Job, the Psalter, five books of Solomon, the books of the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Daniel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two Books of the Maccabees.

>>680079

He died before it get started for good, but he and Peter BTFO proto-gnostics in Rome. But John spent half of his life fighting them.

>>680025

Not sure what you're arguing here. I'm speaking about the dangers of gnostic teachings.

Do you not believe salvation is a free gift?

>>680210

Salvation is free gift but as John teaches: Look to yourselves, that you lose not the things which you have wrought: but that you may receive a full reward.

>>680202

>It was also determined that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in the Church under the title of divine Scriptures.

Who wrote this sentence? Is it a quote from 397 AD? It sounds like this is written in the past tense about something that already happened, someone's retroactively implying things that the actual council doesn't actually say anywhere. I stand by my statement.

>>680280

>Who wrote this sentence?

Council of Carthage

> Is it a quote from 397 AD?

Yes.

> It sounds like this is written in the past tense about something that already happened, someone's retroactively implying things that the actual council doesn't actually say anywhere. I stand by my statement.

You do know how councils work? Bishops discuss, and after all is setted, they write their conclusions in canons and acts.

But even if you deny reality because you don't know history, there were other councils. Like Council of Rome, AD 382

"Now indeed we must treat of the divine Scriptures, what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun. The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis one book, Exodus one book, Leviticus one book, Numbers one book, Deuteronomy one book, Josue Nave one book, Judges one book, Ruth one book, Kings four books, Paralipomenon [i.e. Chronicles] two books, Psalms one book, Solomon three books: Proverbs one book, Ecclesiastes one book, Canticle of Canticles one book, likewise Wisdom one book, Ecclesiasticus [i.e. Sirach] one book.

Likewise the order of the Prophets. Isaias one book, Jeremias one book, with Ginoth, that is, with his Lamentations, Ezechiel one book, Daniel one book, Osee one book, Micheas one book, Joel one book, Abdias one book, Jonas one book, Nahum one book, Habacuc one book, Sophonias one book, Aggeus one book, Zacharias one book, Malachias one book. Likewise the order of the histories. Job one book, Tobias one book, Esdras two books [i.e. Ezra & Nehemiah], Esther one book, Judith one book, Machabees two books."

Both those councils were accepted by Nicea II as universal. And it was repeated on council of Florence. Councils of Hippo, Carthage (419) and Innocent I provide the same list.

>>680390

>Council of Carthage

I don't believe you. Still remaining on the same point. I happen to know that you're wrong on this, and to this day the EO and other groups still treat their apocrypha as secondary. The Tridentine council tried to pull off what nobody dared to do before, place non-scripture on equal footing with scripture.

>>680400

>I don't believe you.

In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort (psychological stress) experienced by a person who simultaneously holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. The occurrence of cognitive dissonance is a consequence of a person performing an action that contradicts personal beliefs, ideals, and values; and also occurs when confronted with new information that contradicts said beliefs, ideals, and values.

> Still remaining on the same point. I happen to know that you're wrong on this, and to this day the EO and other groups still treat their apocrypha as secondary.

EO look on Scripture is different. "Canon" and "Bible" are two different categories. For greeks, Apocalypse is not canon, for it is not read ar mass. But it's still part of bible, just as rest of LXX and NT are.

>The Tridentine council tried to pull off what nobody dared to do before, place non-scripture on equal footing with scripture.

You ignored contrary evidence like a total faggot.

Session 11—4 February 1442

[Bull of union with the Copts]

[Church] professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testament — that is, the law and the prophets, and the gospel — since the saints of both testaments spoke under the inspiration of the same Spirit. It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows.

Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; two books of the Maccabees

>>680400

The Council of Ephesus quoted the book of Sirach as "divinely inspired​ Scripture".

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.x.xvi.xiii.html

Also, the translations of the Bible made by protestants before Luther did his, included the deuteorocanonical as Scriptures. Just look at the Tyndale Bible or wycliffe's

>>680052

>Not added by anyone until the Council of Trent.

Don't be stupid. The Council of Trent was a reaffirmation of Catholic doctrine after the Protestant Reformation. The books were not "added" by the Council of Trent, it was a direct response to Luther removing those books and reminding Catholics that the deuterocanonicals are divinely inspired scripture and have always been considered such by the Catholic church.