/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>767307

Who is that a pic of? I'm confused.

Anyways… Which Bible? :) The Bible we have now was formed by canons set forth by the only church with leaders who had a direct line from the Apostles onward (i.e. now the Catholic and Orthodox churches). The Lord's own words ring true when he said the Holy Spirit would guide us into all truth - and it was these men that the Holy Spirit guided to form what we now have as the Bible. Protestants somehow conveniently forget this fact.. and either think the Bible plopped down from the skies.. or think that early church was ONLY inspired in this one matter. But the burden is on them to explain such reasoning. Why would the Holy Spirit guide them into the canon, but somehow completely abandon them in every other single matter?

And even then Protestants only follow them on the NT. They'd rather follow Jews on the OT… as if race gives you authority over the Holy Spirit. They give power to the very people who reject and killed Christ. How exactly do they have ANY grace?

The Message onlyism is God's gift to man.

>>767317

Gigachad, eh. I need to keep up on memes. Just a lowly /christian/ here.

>>767317

>and “A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense.” They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.

1 Peter 2:8

Peter was a Calvinist. I've already submitted to him, have you?

>>767332

That's just retarded. Even by Calvinist standards. Even if someone were to entertain your theological angle, it'd be more proper to say Calvin was Petrine (although he wasn't.. he was a Catholic-lite Augustinian fanboy. The whole Western hemisphere is trapped in this dialectic).

>>767312

>and it was these men that the Holy Spirit guided to form what we now have as the Bible. Protestants somehow conveniently forget this fact.. and either think the Bible plopped down from the skies.. or think that early church was ONLY inspired in this one matter.

Actually they added to scripture and called it the deuterocanon.

>Why would the Holy Spirit guide them into the canon, but somehow completely abandon them in every other single matter?

Nope they were wrong here as well. And this is because they were unable to determine scripture accurately but add random stuff to it. The presence of that random stuff is the proof they aren't inspired.

>>767374

>but add random stuff to it.

Meant "but added random stuff to it."

>>767322

>I need to keep up on memes.

No, you really don't. These days literally everything is a meme to someone, somewhere. It's best to just shrug and move on.

>>767307

>be literal npc

weak

>>767402

Are you deadnaming that church?

>>767402

What about Orthos and modernist Catholics?

>>767607

:D

>>767605

>>767605

:–D

>>767312

>Protestants somehow conveniently forget this fact.. and either think the Bible plopped down from the skies.. or think that early church was ONLY inspired in this one matter.

The early Christians already had as their canon the Old Testament that we have today, and at the time of the apostles their writings were already considered as inspired, so that the NT canon was already technically in circulation.

>>768670

The Pharisee canon Protestants use isn't the same OT Canon you have in mind.

>>767307

based and redpilled

>>769063

Go home Pierre

>>769100 (checked)

This

Based and redpilled

>“This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life. God didn’t go to all the trouble of sending his Son merely to point an accusing finger, telling the world how bad it was. He came to help, to put the world right again. Anyone who trusts in him is acquitted; anyone who refuses to trust him has long since been under the death sentence without knowing it. And why? Because of that person’s failure to believe in the one-of-a-kind Son of God when introduced to him. (John 3:16-18 MSG)

>>769223

Same anon here that you're quoting. Why is that retarded? Why not just answer those questions in good faith? Even I didn't insult Protestants with something so terse. About the only harsh thing I said is they follow Jews, who don't even have the Holy Spirit. Which is true.

>>769237

YES YES YES

>>769145

H-how?

>>769325

https://albertmohler.com/2019/02/08/briefing-2-8-19/

>Back in August of 2015, the CBC, that's the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, ran a story that said, "An ordained United Church of Canada minister who believes in neither God nor Bible, said she is prepared to fight an unprecedented attempt to boot her from the pulpit for her beliefs." Actually, you might say, technically, it's not for her belief so much as her absence of beliefs: the absence of historic Christian beliefs. Even the creedal affirmations, that were a part of the vows she took in ordination, and even the liberal denomination known as the United Church of Canada. Pastor of the West Hill Church, Gretta Vosper had said, "I don't believe in the God called God. Using the word, gets in the way of sharing what I want to share." 

>>769334

<"I don't believe in the God called God. "

Ya, because your god is satan, you daft cunt. Good gravy Canada, get your shit together.

>>769334

>minister

>she

there's your problem right there

>>769348

>minister

>not priest

found the other, older problem

>>769334

That's not the worst of it though: The United Church of Canada is an unholy conglomeration of Methodism, Presbyterianism, Anglicanism and all the things in between. It's one thing to merge diocese and congregations, but the United Church of Canada goes beyond that. There is no one, decided doctrine. It is literally a house divided, a Tower of Babel where the sick and twisted congregate with the unknowing and naive.

>>769352

👆

>>769368

Why do Churches of different faiths try to combine together like a bad voltron? Is it so they have a better voting block?

>>769511

Money, I guess.. better way to maintain churches and have more funds…especially as each one individually has dwindled in extreme numbers over the 20th century (mainline Protestants dropped like flies pretty much).

Just to add, it's also to fund more national or global efforts (shared publishing or learning materials, etc) that they struggled with on their own.

>>769511

Ecumenism

They think unity permits compromising doctrine, when in reality unity is only an objective for the LOCAL church

>>769551

All of those mainliners are pretty much the same on doctrine though (individualistic, and only care about the Bible in the broadest of terms), so it's easy for them to unite. About the only difference is the government and liturgy (no small thing actually, but it is to them).