How can Sup Forums have such a Christian slant yet hate this guy? He does literally as Jesus instructs: Turn the other cheek and be unconditionally kind to others, including muslims and tolerating others. You know? The meek shall inherit the earth and forgiveness. Or did you all just want to conveniently forget that stuff?
Just admit it that you would rather have the Crusaders of the middle ages that have nothing to do with Christianity proper nor what Jesus actually said.
duh, a big point of Christianity is "choose your own adventure". you ignore large swaths of it to fit whatever agenda you have, or quote parts of it that actually fit it. that's why you can have extremely peaceful christians and extremely violent christians and they both work because they both can interpret the bible however they damn well please
I'm pretty sure that most of Sup Forums isn't really very religious and is just Right-Wing but LARPs as extremely Christian because it's so contrarian.
Catholics aren't Christian
Well he killed his own fuckin jesuits while in Argentina, for starters.
Sup Forums is traditionalist/orthodox at heart, Francis is a modernist.
"Old Testament Christians" are literally just stupid Jews who don't cash in on any Jew benefits
when christianity was invented muslims didn't exist. therefore christian rules does not apply to muslims. deus vult
Protestants are heretics.
He's a heretic. The catholic church has been blasphemous for a long time.
>unconditionally kind to others,
>wants a crusade
>money laundering for mafia
>lives behind wall, accepts no refugees
>covers up for paedophiles
>lives in gold plated palace while millions starve
>a total greaseball
taking money from fools like (OP)
Romans 4:8
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin
If you commit a venial sin will it be imputed to you? If you commit a mortal sin will it be imputed to you?
Catholic here, wants Crusades.
The Christians have been too fucking soft. That's why we were made, so they can turn the other cheek and look down their noses at us doing the dirty work.
good thing Sup Forums isn't Christian
Then why is the Jewishly legally separate arm of the Church known as the 501(c)(3) Catholic Charities Corporation deliberately funding the importation of the caliphate into my country?
He does a lot more than that though. Bashing the desire for a wall, while living in a great walled city is completely backwards. There is love for your neighbor, but letting someone's culture completely take over your own is not that. You obviously just have no clue what he's actually said.
>Just admit it that you would rather have the Crusaders of the middle ages that have nothing to do with Christianity proper nor what Jesus actually said.
Since when was defending your lands and people against a foreign invader a bad thing? Are you one of those retards that think the Crusades were an unjustified attack against innocent muslims doing nothing? 1/10 for getting me to make this reply. Pic related is your entire point.
...
They're not evangelicals, they're communists.
Don't forget the encyclical declaring global warming was real.
Sup Forums is post-Christian. This board is an all-thresher that separates the wheat from the chaff.
Also other pic related. Catholics can resist their pope when he goes outside what the faith teaches.
That's all great head canon, but where is the source besides your youtube baptist conspiracy videos?
We have been infiltrated since the 1900 mark. The Popes have all been slime since.
The Jews despise Catholicism, we fight back. They filled the Vatican with sodomites and depravity to destroy the beautiful white nuclear family.
Because he is the most libtard Pope of all times
Evangelicals are the shit of Christianity
All Protestants contradict the Church Fathers
NONE CAN PROVE ME WRONG
Who is the blessed man of Romans 4:8?
Are your sins imputed to you Malaysiafriend?
>Supporting a degenerate pedo institution
My country is filled with them
God impute sin in me and make me sin according to Sola Fide logic
If there's such a thing as a false prophet, this motherfucker is it.
It can be you. It's not alluding to a single person. If you fight for preservation, you will know what your doing is right.
You will know what you are doing when you are wrong.
>Pius IX and X
>bad
>2017
>following an anti-pope
Just be a sedevacantist, don't fall for the "Orthodox" meme.
>tfw using your IBM EGA card to play Ultima 6: The False Profit and listening to the FM-modulated soundtrack on your Sound Balster so you wouldn't wake up your parents
>unconditionally kind
15 "If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that `every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.' 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
Learn your Bible if you're going to talk shit, retard.
How does one acquire non-imputation of sin?
you have to go back martinez
I'm pretty sure Jesus said a lot of bad stuff about rich people in power and how they go to hell.
Romans 5:1
Therefore, having been justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ
Have you been justified by faith? Do you have peace with God?
>How can Sup Forums have such a Christian slant
>a few shitposters makes a majority
No,
I thought this was more pol edited shitposting. It's fucking real.
>This past Sunday, my gorgeous wife – a white evangelical,
>like me — gave birth to our beautiful African-American
>triplet daughters whom we adopted as embryos.
>These sweet girls will hopefully soon be coming home to meet
> their 3-year-old African-American brother and 2-year-old
>biracial sister, both of whom we adopted as infants.
>context about Abraham justified by faith
>Abraham was obedient to God hence showing his faith in action
>literally contradicting Sola Fide
>implying he's not a sionist puppet
Not how it works, there's a limited amount of interpretations based on various items ranging from linguistics, to interpretation, historical events that occured, etc. An interpretation that has no evidence is usually discarded.
I said "Around the 1900 mark". So I was 14 years off, it's a 2016 year history of this tale.
Francis is a very controversial Pope. Haven't you heard about the cardinals and Amoris Laetitia?
Galatians 6:7-9: 7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. 8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. 9And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
Sola Fide btfo by Paul
But how do I get non-imputation of sin? That's all I want to know
Do you have peace with God user?
>he cannot even comprehend the Bible
So much for Sola Scriptura
You don't. That's part of the deal is that we come to understand nobody's perfect.
Yes. But not with Proddies who are liars and demons
So who is the blessed man of Romans 4:8?
Jesus died for yours. You are good to go when you understand that he did. Jesus was the ultimate good bloke, you would him with the kids. You can aspire to him as a good role model, but you aren't going to score those marks. As long as you are shooting in the right direction, you are good to go.
fuck this homo/immigrant loving commie
#notmypope
It refers to the one who is like Abraham you stupid moron
This pope has too many self destructive tendencies. He wants open borders no matter what. Christians are supposed to help people but not to the point of suicide.
>what is context?
Do you read the bible or pick out random verses and only read them literally?
"Contrarian" is going to become a buzzword on Sup Forums, it's pretty much "everyone on here is edgy and is trying to be 'cool' by doing the opposite of society, hurr durr I'm so smart!"
There has been plenty of polls done on the religious affiliation of Sup Forums and it always ends up being mostly Christian. You should also note the Christian threads that are always made in addition to the anti-theistic ones that involve people wanting to partake in a religious community whilst ignoring what is responsible for such a community with a right-wing mindset existing in the first place.
>For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect
I would have to think that's an outcry against the jews.
It is not even literally but how he wants to see it
Romans 2:5-13 5 "But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God 6 Who will RENDER TO EVERY MAN ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS: 7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: 8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, 9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; 10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: 11 For there is no respect of persons with God. 12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; 13 For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified."
#NotMyPope
The next guy that's being handed the Mitre is game on. He has a sword.
Protestant here, totally willing to team up with Catholics and Orthodox to make new Crusade. Can we put aside our differences to remove Islam and save civilization?
(((Crusaders)))
en.wikipedia.org
>The Crusades were a series of religious wars sanctioned by the Latin Church in the medieval period, especially the campaigns in the Eastern Mediterranean with the aim of capturing Jerusalem
en.wikipedia.org
>Deus lo vult is the motto of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem
en.wikipedia.org
>Judaism, Christianity and Islam
en.wikipedia.org
>Abraham (Avraham) (/ˈeJbrəˌhæm, -həm/ ABE-raham; Hebrew: אַבְרָהָם, About this sound listen (help·info)), originally Abram, is the first of the three patriarchs of Judaism
(((Christianity)))
(((Saudi Arabia)))
(((Islam)))
It's who controls the religions, that's what it always was about, what Zion fights for, what Islam fights for, what Israel is all about. Does pope or Jews really believe all that bible stories? They try to convince you that their teachings will help you so you help them with your money.
So who do I get non-imputation of sin user? How is it that the Lord remembers not my iniquities?
Are you the blessed man?
Are your sins imputed to you?
That is the core theme of Paul's critique of works. But Proddies somehow magically think Paul says you cannot do good works and shit
t. Nigger who has a female pastor
I'm also of Italian descent
>Are you the blessed man?
I wish. I'm just the worm son of a maggot.
As a result of the renewed attention to Evangelical, Roman Catholic, and Greek Orthodox relations, there is increased interest among Evangelicals in the early sources of Christian doctrine and exegetical practices. This too is certainly to be welcomed, though with cautious enthusiasm, since the current reconsideration of the patristic era is not a “return the sources” (ad fontes), but governed by a very specific agenda: to read the ancient fathers through the lens of post-Reformation Protestantism in the search for criteria, such as sola scriptura, embedded within the religious consciousness of the early church. Ancient vindication of such religious ideas would presumably further the claim that Protestants, not Roman Catholics, are the upholders of true faith. Witness the recent attempts to find a “patristic principle of sola scriptura” in Irenaeus(11) or Athanasius, from which the conclusion is reached, “Sola scriptura has long been the rule of believing Christian people, even before it became necessary to use the specific terminology against later innovators who would usurp the Scriptures’ supremacy in the church.”(12) Is the principle sola scriptura historically tenable in the form which is usually defined so that the Bible is the only normative source for the Christian faith and practice? Do the writings of the early church affirm this principle? As will become apparent, the very search for such a principle in the writings of the fathers is misguided in the light of the early church’s understanding of apostolic authority. Even if one argues that a biblicism that approximates sola scriptura can be detected within the patristic age, it in no way guarantees a Christian doctrine of God or salvation. On the contrary, a scripture-only principle was found to create greater problems which have plagued Christianity ever since. (D. H. Williams, “The Search for Sola Scriptura in the Early Church”, Interpretation vol. 52.4 (October 1998) pp. 355, 356.)
My sins will be judged when I die.
It's not a difficult game to understand. Sinners go in both directions, and I don't get to make the decision which direction I go. I can only suggest advice that I think would be good if you want to go in the right direction after this is over.
Notes:
(11) T. Nettles, “One Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church,” Roman Catholicism: Evangelical Protestants Analyze What Divides and Unites Us, ed. J. Armstrong (Chicago: Moody, 1995) 40. Nettles seems oblivious to the crucial distinction between written and oral authority in Irenaeus when he says, “The Scripture is that which is ‘handed down,’ that is, tradition.”
(12) J. White, “Sola scriptura and the Early Church,” in Kistler, Sola Scriptura! The Protestant Position on the Bible, 53. White's essay exhibits very limited familiarity with patristic doctrinal history such that it claims Athanasius stood against Liberius’, bishop of Rome (p. 42), whereas in fact, Athanasius sought the protection of Liberius’ successor, Julius, during his exile, and he, of all the Greek fathers, remained the most intimate with Rome after Julius’ death in 352. There is hardly a case for a proto-opposition between “Protestants” and “Roman Catholics.” Moreover, it is striking White argues that Athanasius makes no appeal to unwritten tradition, and yet in the very citation offered as proof of this point (Oration Against the Arians 3:29) Athanasius refers to Mary as Theotokos, bearer of God; an Alexandrian tradition which few Protestants would espouse! [D. H. Williams, “The Search for Sola Scriptura in the Early Church”, Interpretation vol. 52.4 (October 1998) p. 365.]
this board is a fucking cesspool of hatred, bigotry, and lies, probably infested with Russian agents as well.
HURRRRR DURRR DEM DAR PROTESTANTS TRIGGERIING ME AGAIN HURRR
HURRRR
HURRRR
The original antisemite?
>Proddie so assmad about the truth
James 2:14-26 - 14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?15If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, 16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? 17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. 19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? 23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. 24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and NOT BY FAITH ONLY. 25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? 26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
Tolerance isn't a positive. Christians now tolerate their own misgivings and filthy behavior so they latch on to that as to mean something it doesn't.
The whole point is not to tolerate your lowest nature, but to transcend yourself by commitment to virtue. Self denial and sacrifice are meant to be the building blocks of harmony within your community and your people. People tolerate their own slovenly and lazy behavior so they can't understand actually taking a firm stance for what you know to be right. Watching the world slide into the abyss and tolerating it isn't heroic or following Christ.
It's like when I hear an obese slug of a man with no spine or original thoughts talk about how faithful he has been to his wife while patting himself on the back. No buddy, you have no choice but to be. Or "I'm a law abiding citizen and I pay my taxes." Yea because you are a pussy and fear the slightest discomfort or social disapproval.
Christ's example was that he bowed to no earthy impulse or authority. He took it all the way, and didn't back down or submit. He followed God's path. Francis is a supplicating weakling.
HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Muh Catholeek priest
Muh Boipuccy
Muh Special statues
HURRRR DURRRRRRR
>1 post by this ID
Found the jew.
>Proddie so assmad he cannot even refute
“Moreover, aside from these scriptural utterances, let us also consider the tradition and teaching and faith of the Catholic Church from the beginning, that which the Lord has given, the apostles preached, and the fathers [596A] guarded. This is the foundation on which the Church is established, and the one who strays form it is not a Christian and should no longer be called so…”(Athanasius, Epistola I Ad Serapion – English trans. by Khaled Anatolis, Athanasius, Routledge: London, 2004, p. 227.)
>He still doesn't know what turn the other cheek means
“What was new here? Not the idea that the Bible, being God-given, speaks with God’s authority—that was common ground to both the Reformers and their opponents, and was indeed at that time an unquestioned Christian commonplace, like the doctrine of the Trinity. Nor was there anything new in the Reformer’s insistence that Bible reading is a sweet nourishing activity for Christian people. What was new was the belief, borne upon the Reformer’s by their own experience of Bible study, that Scripture can and does interpret itself to the faithful from within...From the second century on, Christians had assumed that the traditions and teachers of the church, guided by the Holy Spirit, were faithful to the biblical message, and that it was safe to equate Church doctrine with Bible truth.” (J. I. Packer, “‘Sola Scriptura’ In History and Today”, God’s Inerrant Word, ed. James Montgomery, pp. 44-45.)
sola scriptura btfo
...
A guy who forgives and loves everybody and takes sins on himself from everybody is a guy who is anti-semite, i don't think so.
“Along with total commitment to the Scriptures as the norm of all doctrine, a new and clear conviction concerning the authority of oral tradition began to develop. This oral tradition, handed down from generation to generation and going back through the apostles directly to Christ, in no way conflicted with the Scriptures. But it did aid the church in interpreting the Scriptures and particularly in summarizing the Christian faith and thus protecting Christians against the aberrations of Gnostics and heretics. To Tertullian and Irenaeus, who developed this position, such apostolic tradition, which faithfully transmitted Christ’s teaching, was, like Scripture, infallible.” (Robert D. Preus, “The View of the Bible Held by the Church: The Early Church Through Luther”, in Inerrancy, edited by Norman Geisler, Zondervan: Grand Rapids, MI, 1980, p. 359)
And yet, they hate him more than anyone else
HURRRR TRY REFUTE MEEE
MUH COPYPASTA IS SUPREME HURRRR DURRRR
Done gone Off anD been triggering mee HURRRR
“In the ante-Nicene Church, the notion of sola Scriptura does not exist. But then there is also no notion of a tradition which is superior to Scripture, or which alters the essential content of the apostolic message as it is deposited in Scripture. There is simply no way of imagining possible conflict between the Christian Scripture and the Christian tradition—and, therefore, no necessity to choose between them.” (Albert Outler, “The Sense of Tradition in the Ante-Nicene Church”, in The Heritage of Christian Thought: Essays in Honor of Robert Lowery Calhoun, edited by Cushman and Grislis: New York, N. Y., 1965, p.29)
>I wish
What good news is this then?
Are your sins counted against you or does God forget your tresspasses?
>Proddie cannot refute any of my points
stay mad loser
…Valtentinians and Basilidians and Saturnillians; each introduced/brought in privately and seperately its own/private opinion (ekastos idiōs kai etepoiōs idian doxan pareisēgagosan), and from them came false Christs and false prophets and false apostles who destroyed the unity of the Church by their poisonous doctrine against God and against his Christ. (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, IV.22 – Greek from the Loeb Classical Library, Eusebius Ecclesiastical History, 1.376 – English trans. mine.)
Proddies btfo
I think Paul, previously Saul, was on to something. Think about his path to Damascus, which the Jewish neocon communist trotskites are are now pushing.
He got the idea that maybe that wasn't a good idea afterall. Those weren't very good works. Maybe his subsequent works were somewhat faulty. But that flash of light allegedly got his mind turned around to try to do something better.
I think that's a pretty key message to any Christian, Catholic or not.
In the same way, anyone who keeps unchangeable in himself the Rule of the Truth[23] received through baptism will recognize the names and sayings and parables from the Scriptures, but this blasphemous theme of theirs he will not recognize. For even if he recognizes the jewels, he will not accept the fox for the image of the king. He will restore each one of the passages to its proper order and, having fit it into the body of the Truth, he will lay bare their fabrication and show it is without support.
[23] In A.H. Irenaeus speaks of Tradition as “the Rule of the Truth,” but in Proof 3 he calls it “the Rule of the Faith.” So these terms are used as synonyms for Christian Tradition. In the concrete, Irenaeus applies “Rule of the Truth” to the Sacred Scriptures (2.25.1; 2.28.1; 4.35.4) and to the preaching of the Church (Proof 3), which is also known as the body of the Truth (2.27.1; Proof 1). This Rule of the Truth forms a harmonious picture (1.8.1). It also serves as a criterion of Truth (1.9.4; 1.10.1). N. Brox…also holds that the Rule of the Truth is in Irenaeus not a Creed, but is the entire faith believed and preached by the Church. It is ipsa veritas. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies – Book 1, trans. by John J.Dillon, Newman Press, p. 48 – endnote p. 182.)
dont post that cuck hes more of a faggot that you.
fucking washed up old garbage celeb that shits on the god lord Trump.
THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD
AND HE IS WHITE
FOLLOW THE DON
OR DIE
POPE SUCK-A-TOE IS THE FALSE PROPHET.
FUCK CATHOLICS AND KILL NIGGERS
Because he's the equivalent of a papal SJW - a traitor, weakling and coward.
JP2 made overtures to other sects, this guy sucks their dick and then lets them have a go at his anus.
Not even all Christians have Jesus in center of religion. Jews use Jesus on Americans for centuries. Wouldn't you think they would remove him if that wasn't the case if Jews control money. Why would anti-religious Jews have "in god we trust on money"?
He was talking about doing the Mosaic law
You got any more of that copypasta?
He's just a fucking argentinian communist.
It seems that Jesuits have a penchant for cancerous marxism