/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>832018

>All those mega-church Jesuit false preachers

Wait, what? I'm not the greatest fan of either, but what makes you think they're the same? That's just weird. I don't see how you came across this type of worldview at all. I'm missing some crucial steps.

As for Nathaniel, come to think of it, you're right, he is heavily political. But I haven't seen him for years. I didn't know he censored scripture verses. Why? That's definitely fishy.

>>832018

>trying to distract from Jesuits and the beast in Rome and the image of the beast in the USA

Wat

>>832021

Maybe every other person here is abusing drugs and I'm just not in on the joke.

>>832020

OP is a Baptist nut that's been sinposting on here for the past few weeks. The kind that projects the faults of their own denomination (e.g. money-hungry megachurches) onto Catholics and the Orthodox with no basis whatsoever, and believes that Catholic globalist agents are subverting the U.S. and that the Pope controls the world. It's a joke, really.

>>832022

OP could be on drugs, but in all reality I think he's just getting his theology from psychopaths like Steve Anderson and Bryan Denlinger. The kind that get joy from screaming at strangers, burning non-KJV Bibles, promoting heresies within their cult, and otherwise driving people away from the one true faith.

>>832018

I know very little of nathanial other than he have say controversial things, but dedicating a thread complaining about one e-beggar christian somehow threatening to distract the world of giant well-known scandals of major denominations sounds like an overreaction on your end.

Just stop following e-beggars and promote to your friends and everyone else here to more redpilled people.The sad reality of this world is more christian online personalities than not would rather live a comfortable sweet spot of mild controversy to bring in cash rather than push for hardcore traditionalist christian values.

>>832023

>catholic/orthodox

>accusing others of being money-hungry

>>832032

I ought to know: I used to be a Prot. One of the many things that drove me away from Protestantism was money-hungry pastors.

>go to baptist church growing up

>every other sermon is about money

>go to another prot church

>pastor spends the last 20 minutes of his sermon complaining that we aren't giving enough money (this was my first visit and it was a congregation of 15 people

>visit other prot churches, same money-hungry nonsense

>go to a baptist megachurch

>spend a good six months trying to like this one

>pastor did a 3-month long series on how you can give more money, often talked about how he wants to buy a corvette, had sports players talk about their careers for an entire sunday service, etc.

>the pastor even said we have an obligation to tithe

>left that church feeling dead inside

>went to a catholic church

>several months in, no mentions of money other than what the donations go towards (always smoke and mirrors with the prot churches)

>the mass is focused solely around Lord Jesus Christ

>happily donate to the Church each week

>entered full communion with Rome and never looked back

How exactly are the Catholics and Orthodox money-hungry, in your eyes? Or are you just projecting again?

>>832035

You know, I've heard of these people called Jesuits, they argued that it is acceptable to use intellectually dishonest tactics such as pretending to be something you are not or spreading untrue anecdotes if they think that means someone might be fooled into Catholicism.

I'm not defending the Jesuits, I'm just wondering if you have evidence that what you say about their deception is true.

>>832035

>be me

>raised Catholic

>everyone obsessed with money

>priests stealing altar boys' lunch money

>constant homilies on tithing and offerings

>soup kitchen used for money laundering

>mom would starve me on Saturdays so we would look needier on Sunday mornings so others wouldn't expect us to give more

>underground gambling ring led by archbishop

As you can see these anecdotes prove my team is good and yours is bad

>>832035

I agree. Protestantism is just a scam. I tried a Lutheran Church but is was politically biased. Many such cases. Funny thing is. i remember seeing that Protestantism is shrinking , percentage wise in the u.s.. While The catholic Church is still steady despite what has been happening. There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. It is the most consistent and the theology is vastly superior to anything Protestants have. The more I learn about it, the more that Protestantism seems like a bad fart in the wind. Protestantism is false. I will stand by it.

>>832074

>That pic

The baptist church was founded by a man by john smyth who was kicked out of HIS OWN CHURCH.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Baptist/History

>>832081

And this is why I do not take Protestantism seriously anymore: They are Hypocrites. They are little different from the pharisees who Jesus condemned.

>>832081

The Edinburgh Encyclopedia, Vol 3, p. 251. (1830)

It must have already occurred to our readers, that the baptists are the same sect of Christians which we formerly described under the appellation of ANABAPTISTS. Indeed, this seems to have been their great leading principle from the time of Tertullian to the present day.

https://www.invidio.us/watch?v=N6-OPtuKSms

>>832083

There we have a much more well-researched as well as impartial source that directly contradicts your claims. What you've done is identified the early confessional baptists, but there had already been congregational independent baptists long before this. Zwingli also wrote against them in 1527.

https://www.invidio.us/watch?v=N6-OPtuKSms

I tried to play the link but it pooped out on me

Impartial how? Painting Protestantism in a good light

>>832087

Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

— John 6:29

>>832088

Philippians 2:12

>>832090

https://www.invidio.us/watch?v=6AG0uYd9a6I

>>832091

St James 2

St James 1:27

>>832095

I am only more convinced of the fallacy of Protestantism. It is more and more apparent, that the Catholic Church is the ONLY true Church. There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church

>>832093

>>832090

>>832095

Actually post the quote instead of just this referral.

Protestants HATE Mary. But she said all generations will call me blessed. Mary was hailed at the annunciation. That is a BIG deal. For an angel to hail a HUMAN. Is UNTHINKABLE. In the OT, it was men that hailed angels. BECAUSE they were SUPERIOR to them, for they had known no sin. (the angels that sinned became Fallen ones). NOT SO with Mary. For an angel to do that means that the human is ABOVE

them. As in WITHOUT SIN. EXPLAIN

>>832099

whole chapter of St James 2

St James 1:26-27

26. And if any man think himself to be religious, not bridling his tongue, but deceiving his heart, this man faith is vain.

27. Religion clean and UNDEFILED before God and the Father, is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their tribulation: and to keep one's self UNSPOTTED from the world.

IOW STOP SINNING. ANYONE can be a saint, the thing that separates the Saint from the unrepentant is this: The former WANTS to be a saint, to be holy. The latter does not want to or does not care or is even hostile to it. How about you anon. Do you want to stop sinning. Or do you wish to sin boldly?

>>832100

>Protestants HATE Mary. But she said all generations will call me blessed. Mary was hailed at the annunciation. That is a BIG deal. For an angel to hail a HUMAN. Is UNTHINKABLE.

Protestants don't hate Mary. And you're not winning any of them over with reasoning like this. "Hail" is just "Χαῖρε /Chaire" in Greek. It's a positive greeting. It's used in the Septuagint as well, and often means "Rejoice!" Which is fitting - the Angel was the first to preach the Gospel. He was giving her Good News and telling her greetings and to rejoice. Yet you've turned it on it's head into bizarro territory and made it about her instead of the Gospel or the Holy Child himself.

>>832100

Do ANY PROTS here defy our MOTHER? Hot diggity, you just attacked the Kings mother! you think you can get ANYWHERE near heaven in insulting His mother? She is the Holy Queen. A powerful queen and a MOST MERCIFUL and LOVING MOTHER. Ave Maria!

She who has NEVER been tempted, let alone sin. Vivo Christo ray

All I see is heresy in the world. No zeal for God. Religious indifference. Churches empty. Disregard for holiness. Acceptance of sin All religions are equal. And no she was hailed like royalty, like in hail caeser. Angels DO NOT bow bow to humans. EVER. That title is reserved for those who are above them.

>>832102

Actually, this also reminds me of the Vulgate's insistence at translating the "seed" promised to Eve (the very first message of the Good News) is actually Mary. Not Jesus. When even the ancient church condemns you all. Saints as old as Irenaeus knew that the Seed was Christ, but you insist that it was Mary. It's symbolic of this thinking that also goes behind this "Hail" interpretation. You also wish to block the path to Christ with more mediators. Then when people give the plain Gospel, you accuse them of hating the mediators you propped up. When they didn't hate them at all. They just wanted the plain truth of the Gospel to be known. The Seed is Christ. Not Mary. Hail is just a greeting. Not the angel bowing down.

Angels do not bow to humans. They are above them. They are perfect, Superhuman in virtue and intelligence. Mary was troubled by this. BECAUSE NOT how it works.in the OT, people bend the knee to angels. To say otherwise is rubbish.

I am not saying she is the Good news. Christ is. But she is the the Holy queen. To Jesus through Mary. She is the New Covenant. She acts for lack of a better term, as a pipeline through whom grace passes through from God to us. She was conceived without original sin. She was chosen to be His mother. She has never known temptation.

Mary was troubled by the angel's greeting. Why would she be troubled by it if it were a mere greeting

Luke 1:29

>Who having heard was troubled at his saying, and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be.

If it were a simple greeting why would she be troubled?

And what is your denomination?

>>832109

are you Catholic?

>>832074

I don't see Saint Peter in your graphic; is Matthew 16:18 false?

>>832142

Question makes no sense. Try again anytime.

>>832146

>I don't understand.

Of course you don't.

>>832160

I'm pretty sure he said the question doesn't make sense, not that he doesn't understand.

>>832039

except you invented a story to make a point and the other posted didnt.

>>832220

He understands that his graphic is a falsehood, that there is no Saint Peter in his line to the Baptist Church so it is against scripture, that the Baptist Church was founded by an Anglican Priest named John Smith in 1609, and that the religious beliefs of Baptist started in the 17th century and not with Christ.

When faced with the truth of the matter, best to bear false witness against me. Sin begets sin.

If I was you guys, rather than committing another sin, I'd go with the "divine inspiration" argument that King Henry was divinely inspired (by his need for divorce, I'd say rather than murdering his wives via lies) to change the errors in the Catholic Church, and that John Smith was then divinely inspired to correct the errors in the Anglican Church… That's a bit harder to debate against.

I forgive you, wanna try the better argument? That the Man King Henry VIII, who was in a state of unrepentant mortal sin, was divinely inspired?

>>832243

It's a sarcastic pic

>>832243

I'm pretty sure no one thinks St. Peter was the only apostle to start churches. Another apparent issue on top of this discussion however is your apparent misinterpretation of Matthew 16:18 but we can deal with that another time.

See >>832083

>>832085

>>832247

>I'm pretty sure no one thinks St. Peter was the only apostle to start churches.

What others were established by the Lord are stated in the Bible?

And it doesn't even say Peter started the Church, it says The Lord started His Church on Peter the Rock.

>>832255

>What other (churches) were established by the Lord are stated in the Bible?

Local ones like in Galatia, Corinth, Thessalonica, etc

>>832258

And they all answered to Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

No one said that The Lord only established his Church in Rome, that's a straw man.

>>832268

Where is that stated in the Bible? No, "on this rock" is a different argument

The primacy of Rome is a post biblical development

>>832271

Me: Matthew 16:18

protestant bros: Where? I don't see it.

Me: Right there, Matthew 16:18. "And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Protestant Bros: No, that's not what that means! The Lord was talking to himself!

Me: No, right there, the Lord establishes his church.

Protestant bros: You winnie the poohin' demon! You're going to hell. Read the scripture!!

Me: Isn't the Gospel of Matthew Scripture!!

Protestant Bros: You're an idiot.

me: okay.

>>832275

Me: asking a specific question and deliberately clarifying that this is unrelated to the "on this rock" event

You: instead going into the "on this rock" event and depicting an angry dum dum Protestant strawman

Me: ok

Ok

>>832276

Forgive me for not chasing after the red herrings; they spawn to quickly.

>>832276

I'm praying for them at this point, that Jesus our Lord can please give them peace and understanding.

>>832294

Amen

>>832507

>The crescent pic

I love how evangelical conspiratards swapped a perfectly good and better-known name under which Selene was originally known(Diana) which they could actually tie to Scripture, just to try and force the roman paganism meme.

>>832513

>conspiratards, memes, nooooooo you can't just call an apple an apple waaaah

"It is interesting to note how often our Church has availed herself of practices which were in common use among pagans…Thus it is true, in a certain sense, that some Catholic rites and ceremonies are a reproduction of those of pagan creeds…." (The Externals of the Catholic Church, Her Government, Ceremonies, Festivals, Sacramentals and Devotions, by John F. Sullivan, p 156, published by P.J. Kennedy, NY, 1942)

The retention of the old pagan name of Dies Solis, for Sunday is, in a great measure, owing to the union of pagan and Christian sentiment with which the first day of the week was recommended by Constantine to his subjects - pagan and Christian alike - as the 'venerable' day of the sun." -Arthur P. Stanley, History of the Eastern Church, p. 184

"It has often been charged… that Catholicism is overlaid with many pagan incrustations. Catholicism is ready to accept that accusation - and even to make it her boast… the great god Pan is not really dead, he is baptized" -The Story of Catholicism p 37

Cardinal Newman admits in his book that; the "The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison [Note 17], are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church. {374}" -An Essay on The Development of the Christian Doctrine John Henry "Cardinal Newman" p.359

The penetration of the religion of Babylon became so general and well known that Rome was called the "New Babylon." -Faith of our fathers 1917 ed. Cardinal Gibbons, p. 106

"In order to attach to Christianity great attraction in the eyes of the nobility, the priests adopted the outer garments and adornments which were used in pagan cults." -Life of Constantine, Eusabius, cited in Altai-Nimalaya, p. 94

"The Church did everything it could to stamp out such 'pagan' rites, but had to capitualet and allow the rites to continue with only the name of the local diety changed to some Christian saint's name." -Religious Tradition and Myth. Dr. Edwin Goodenough, Professor of Religion, Harvard University. p. 56, 57

In Stanley's History, page 40: "The popes filled the place of the vacant emperors at Rome, inheriting their power, their prestige, and their titles from PAGANISM."