[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / ausneets / doomer / egy / klpmm / pinoy / vg / vichan ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?

File: 468034362823774⋯.jpg (56.51 KB, 636x430, 318:215, sg.jpg)

fd8fcc  No.804643

God is real.

Jesus was right.

The bible has been mistranslated

and most denominations are using

God's name in vain.

>Liars, Hippocrates, False Teachers and atheistic "Life Coaches" are leading their congregations to proverbial hell.

There are currently signs and wonders happening every single day.

There are great profits in these modern times.

The end really is near.

What the actual winnie the pooh

are all of you doing

about the division of

the Christian denominations?

>The bible does not restrict the use of common colloquialisms you legalistic shit-lords…

REPENT AND BE SAVED!

>Choose the cold path or choose the hot; the Kingdom of heaven will spit you out if you are luke-warm.

fd8fcc  No.804645

File: fcc90c732448a9e⋯.jpg (19.52 KB, 480x360, 4:3, 0 (15).jpg)

*What the actual (((f u c k))).

You allow adultery… but you disobey Christ himself by (((judging people))) for using profane language?

The bible never said that you can't use a swear word you oversensitive, legalistic, hypocrites!

>God will judge you!


7ff46d  No.804648

It's not good practice to swear.


350294  No.804649

File: 5398a2aa5aacdb6⋯.jpg (23.55 KB, 250x272, 125:136, 5763428843_ce57f1f3a9.jpg)

>>804643

>The bible has been mistranslated


640176  No.804650

What is this word salad lol


68fbc8  No.804651

File: 3e6eb5bc8c4a3ae⋯.jpg (24.52 KB, 699x583, 699:583, 1557182472495.jpg)

If god didn't want me to call black people nïggers, then why did he make them responsible for 50% of homicides despite being 13% of the population???


8c3e5c  No.804661

>>804643

which part is mistranslated


716215  No.804669

File: 7f4bb6e4290bab2⋯.jpeg (109.51 KB, 630x630, 1:1, CAEBA895-ED52-4A99-858D-5….jpeg)

>>804643

>legalistic $hit-lords

Pic related


995380  No.804676

>>804669

based natsuki poster


9373cd  No.804680

File: d1ecfd5c89a5789⋯.jpg (8.08 KB, 246x205, 6:5, download (7).jpg)


370ae4  No.804692

>>804661

"Jew" when it actually means "Judean" for example. Making Rev 2:9 and 3:9 extremely enlightening regarding a certain (((group)))


c95648  No.804693

>>804692

Regardless of your personal contention, Revelation is understood to be referring to Jews who reject Christ as Messiah anyway, so what's the point?

And which translation is a mistranslation? All of them?


370ae4  No.804694

>>804693

It makes a pretty big difference since it indicates Talmudists are foreign to Judea. Jesus was not a "Jew" as it's now interpreted.


370ae4  No.804697


c95648  No.804698

>>804694

>It makes a pretty big difference since it indicates Talmudists are foreign to Judea

And again, what is the importance? The Talmudists already fall under the distinction of "Jews who rejected their messiah", and actually covers "Orthodox Jews" as well as the other misc. Jewish sects.

> Jesus was not a "Jew" as it's now interpreted.

So, "Salvation comes from the Jews" is a mistranslation? Do you argue that Salvation comes from Judeans?


370ae4  No.804699

File: e12ccb7bc4d5eac⋯.png (1.29 MB, 876x7073, 876:7073, further_explanation_of_jew….png)


c95648  No.804700

>>804699

That entire picture is question-begging, why isn't Judaism, even if it could simply be called Pharisaism alone, Abrahamic? What is an Abrahamic religion, then? What about the Sadducees?

Jesus did not rebuke the Pharisees alone, He rebuked both of the two major sects of the Jews - Pharisees AND Sadducees. The distinction is pointless, and I suspect there is some other agenda lurking around, probably racial idolatry.

This isn't even getting into the ridiculous semantic argument, either the Hebrew and Greek referred to Jews as a whole - the sects of the Pharisees and the Sadducees included - or didn't. This is a new, and completely nonsensical semantic argument. Whom did the Church Fathers criticize? Whom did the Church that Christ established treat as Jews, if the word "Jew" didn't exist until the 18th century?

And AGAIN, what difference does it all make? Jews as we understand it today pertains to ALL Jews who claim to follow the Torah but reject Jesus Christ as the Messiah. What is the agenda here?


370ae4  No.804704

>>804700

Thinking Jesus could have in any shape or form either spiritually and/or physically resembled the abomination that are the Jews as today percieved is absolutely absurd.

Jews as today understood goes even beyond accepting Jesus, they are a racial group whose hands are wet with the blood of the lamb. And if you take the time to watch the video you'd see that even before then they were already radically distinct in culture and race to the original tribes.


c95648  No.804707

>>804704

>Thinking Jesus could have in any shape or form either spiritually and/or physically resembled the abomination that are the Jews as today percieved is absolutely absurd.

Who said this? The Ashkenazi are already known to be a mostly Turkish sub-race that converted en masse centuries ago, why do we need to re-define Scripture to support what genetics does?

>they are a racial group whose hands are wet with the blood of the lamb.

Which they can absolve by repenting and turning to Jesus Christ with a whole heart. Your phrasing hints at your intention, are you a racial idolatrist? What if Jesus Christ could be traced to the Ashkenazi, what difference would this make?

If God wanted pure Jews, He would have created them out of stone, just as St. John the Baptist said.


4a500f  No.804711

>>804707

>The Ashkenazi are already known to be a mostly Turkish sub-race that converted en masse centuries ago

That's a theory ironically made by a jew.

Ashkenazim are levantines that screwed around with euros.

If they were steppefags, they should have looked like tatars, anyhow.


4a500f  No.804712

Speaking of, the NT says the jews will convert en-masse to Christianity during the End Times.

If DA REAL jews are gone, and the modern(sidenote: there are a ton of non-ashkenazim jews, btw) jews are a bunch of phonies and posers, who is supposed to miraculously convert, shocking the entire world?


b9b63e  No.804719

>>804643

>The bible has been mistranslated

begome greek ordodox then?


758338  No.804739

>>804712

Another point for partial preterism.


4a686d  No.806885

>>804651

Satan did that to them anon. Don't blaspheme the Lord like that.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / ausneets / doomer / egy / klpmm / pinoy / vg / vichan ]