/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

withholding the direct revelation of God to man for centuries was a crime against the Eternal, for which there is a reckoning

But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut off the kingdom of heaven from people; for you do not enter in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.

– Matt 23:13

What's the alternative?

>>736287

Man was mostly illiterate for centuries, there was no technology to make mass amounts until the printing press.

>>736296

now wait, before we digress into historical accounts of public literacy; are you agreeing with my personal interpretation of that verse; and that God says there is woe (damnation) to those who withhold His word from man?

>>736301

I do not believe the Word was withheld from man, Word does not mean written.

>>736319

i wasn't talking to you

>>736322

Yes you were, I was at the gym when I first responded. Thus a different ID.

Also, not an argument.

Okay but what about the ~31,150 out of ~31,170 verses the Vatican haven't "infallibly" interpreted?

>>736281

>Individual interpretation was a mistake

Are you telling me that $CURRENT_POLITICIAN_IN_POWER is not not the Antichrist after all?

>>736287

>withholding the direct revelation of God to man for centuries was a crime against the Eternal, for which there is a reckoning

What are you talking about? The Gospel is being read in church out loudly for everyone to hear it.

>>736281

Leaving the age of prophets was a mistake. The church fathers do just as much ass pulling as pastor Jim. Strange how those worthy of interpreting scripture went from prophets chosen by God to politically powerful Romans to whoever wants to.

>>736336

>at the gym

>posting on 8chan

I think you're doing the gym wrong.

>>736600

I do it how ever I want

>>736629

There have always been disagreements, the point is to stay as one Church through disagreements.

>>736642

Again in agreement with the goals of the Reformation, but not relevant to the topic at hand

>>736673

The reformation is just a label, the Church is always reforming.

>>736742

show me 1 (one) gay catholic wedding. pro tip: you can't. the opinions of a bunch of lukewarm cultural catholics means nothing

>>736744

Embed related

>>736750

thats two faggots LARPing and committing sacrilege, not a real wedding. also, there's literal hebrew in the description, this is kike bullshit

>>736744

If you can't see the writing on the wall when a majority of your membership is pro-faggot it's your funeral

I'll stay in my church where we preach the whole Bible

>>736793

I didnt make any accusation; I shared with you how self professing Catholics feel about fag marriage compared to other faiths

>>736756

Whats wrong, bigot? Afraid of two gay catholic men wanting to get married in a Catholic church?

I get it if you aren't Catholic, but you can't be a Christian if you hate your brothers like that. What would the Pope do? What would Jesus do?

>>736795

You don’t judge a faith by its practitioners, especially in this age.

>>736804

jesus would burn them in hell for eternity, so

>>736810

Mmmhm, what ever you say, crypto-prot.

Can someone give me a TL:DR of how scripture went from only a few hands to only priest to everyone having one? Something something printing press something something King James

>>736807

<Matthew 7:16-20 NASB — “You will fnknow them by their fruits. fnGrapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? “So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. “So then, you will fnknow them by their fruits.

>>736281

Turning faith into a money business was an even bigger mistake.

>>736840

I think the point the other anon was making is just that the average "christian" regardless of denomination is not a great example of christianity.

>>736756

>Real Catholicism has never been tried

>>736629

I think images like this are misleading. There are far more Cultural Catholics who don't go to Mass or believe in Catholic doctrine than there are Cultural Evangelicals who don't go to Church on Sunday or believe in Evangelical doctrine. In other words, Evangelicals who cease being Evangelical in practice are not very likely to still identify as Evangelical, whereas it is more likely for Catholics who cease being Catholic in practice to still claim to be Catholic. Also if you take those stats as face value proof of certain denominations being better, you might as well become a Jehovah's Witness.

Love your neighbor as yourself and love God with all your power.

Christ is Lord and you better respect the apostles and Mary too.

Cultivate generosity and transcend selfishness, greed, lust and wrath.

No one withheld this from plebs. Be suspicious of Jews and false prophets.

Don't cut your penis anymore, and what defiles you is your actions and speech not what goes in your mouth, etc. Don't fornicate with your neighbors waifu…etc

Everyone who grew up in a Christian nation knew the fundamentals of the faith just by word of mouth. God doesn't test you on metaphysical knowledge of the hierarchy of the angels or the correct order of the tribulation. So prots need to chill with their silly accusations against catholics, and catholics need to chill with their idea that protestants perverted their tradition (you guys did that yourself).

>>736874

I'm not intending for these images to show anything besides what they statistically prove: how self-identified members of faith groups respond to various questions

>Evangelicals who cease being Evangelical in practice are not very likely to still identify as Evangelical compared to Catholics

prove it

>>736629

Is it really a good idea to hold up Judaizers, Polytheists, and Arians as shining torchbearers of American (since this is clearly a USA-only survey) piety?

To be honest, even if I've done it myself, I've started to grow sick of muh graphposting. Vapid grandstanding about how glorious and upright you are while everything the fathers and patriarchs built burns down around us.

As an aside

>Returning to the correct doctrine of the Bible and church fathers was explicitly the objective of the reformation

Since I presume you aren't (feel free to correct me) a high-Church Lutheran, how do you reconcile that stance with the Apostolic Fathers e.g. Ignatius of Antioch? His letter to the Smyrnaeans describes a system completely absent from much of Protestantism, especially in the Americas. Honest question.

>>737102

>Is it really a good idea to hold up (x, y, z) as torchbearers of American piety?

not what I'm doing

>>Returning to the correct doctrine of the Bible and church fathers was explicitly the objective of the reformation

>how do you reconcile that stance with the Apostolic Fathers e.g. Ignatius of Antioch?

That's a basic historical fact of the intent of the reformers. I'm not arguing proper ecclesiology.

Read the post I responded to

>>737113

They didn't like how Church governance was being portrayed. The Bible tells us to obey those in power, but not to follow their actions.

If they really wanted to follow the church Fathers they wouldn't of reformed in the manner they did. Heck, Luther didn't even expect to fall out of Catholicism.

>>737124

Cool narrative man

That's just not related to what I'm talking about

>>737157

Sure