Should I be Catholic or Protestant Sup Forums?

Should I be Catholic or Protestant Sup Forums?

I was christened a Protestant at the behest of my father, but he was never really a practicing Christian (never went to church etc). As I was never really encouraged to be Christian I abandoned faith very early in in life, causing me to have a fairly edgy atheist phase that over time became agnosticism. After some time I feel as if I am ready to accept the Christian faith back into my life.

Personally I see Catholism as less degenerate in its current state, however I have no love for the current Pope and the Vatican. I also feel a slight emotional connection to Protestantism as I was born I to that faith.

What do Sup Forums?

Pic semi related

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=5bVEXZ38Vs8
youtube.com/watch?v=8zghMbjv3b8
youtube.com/watch?v=DpeVeXJe_3o
youtube.com/watch?v=zjn9dzATPIs
youtube.com/watch?v=lpIXFCiJ1Jc
youtube.com/watch?v=8SoOK8N5ZV0
w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_14091998_fides-et-ratio.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Be Protestant
youtube.com/watch?v=5bVEXZ38Vs8
There is no gospel in Romanism.

just meet your local communities, hang out, help a bit both of them and pick the one you preferred

best of luck

...

8 hour documentary.

Thanks dude, 8 hours is a lot though... Any recommended parts to watch or is it easier to watch the entire thing?

If you're English, you should be an Angilcan. It's the central pillar of our nation's culture and heritage.

As long as your are Christian and fear god then its fine my crusader brother

*tips eternally*

Catholicism is the objectively superior and the only true religion.

Don't waste your time. First year grad students are taught to be concise, if thus fagot can't get his points out in under 4 hours, he needs some serious practice.

Be a Roman-Catholic. Protestants are too uptight ie Evangelicalism.

Avenge Jesus and dedicate your life to exposing the Illuminati aka The Synagogue of Satan.

>one holy catholic and apostolic

Catholicism is for niggers, spics and brown/poor Europeans.

Each part is a documentary in and of itself, here you go
youtube.com/watch?v=8zghMbjv3b8
youtube.com/watch?v=DpeVeXJe_3o
youtube.com/watch?v=zjn9dzATPIs
youtube.com/watch?v=zjn9dzATPIs (this one is both parts 4 and 5 becuase theyre shorter)
youtube.com/watch?v=lpIXFCiJ1Jc

Can I still be Anglican if I'm Scottish?

It is concise, it's so long because it is so thorough

>Should I be Catholic or Protestant Sup Forums?
Neither. Worshiping Josephs wifes son is incredibly cucked.

For some reason 4-5 didn't paste
youtube.com/watch?v=8SoOK8N5ZV0

You will be given biased opinions on this with both religions saying one is superior than the other.
If you really are serious and not baiting, I would look into both religions and organise a meeting with a priest of each religion.
Me being Catholic I'm not sure how the prods do their religion but I know that in my parish they go into depth on the history of Catholicism and God etc.
Nobody can make this personal decision but you lad, I wish you the best

Anglican or Lutheran are best in my opinion. Ideally, be whatever your grandparents were. Pass on your history.

You can't be WASP if you aren't P.

Thanks dude

>Personally I see Catholism as less degenerate in its current state, however I have no love for the current Pope and the Vatican

Orthodox my dude.

The image speaks for itself

If you want something more intelligent, go for Catholicism. If you want more of an Evangelical-style fideism, go for Protestantism.

When people talk about church leaders affecting how they view Catholicism I find St. Augustine very helpful. He was in a debate with a man who thought only the morally excellent could be priests. Augustine's response, quickly paraphrase it is that the grace administered during the sacraments and the authority of the doctrinal teaching does not come from the moral excellence of man, but from God.


Seek truth, not simply social or ancestral communion. All good will come of this.

Catholic, there's no other way with maybe a slight exception of Orthodocy. Pretty much all of Luthers demands are now accepted norm in Catholic church, and after all it is the rock that Paul and Peter built. As a manner of speech and literal. St. Peters in Rome is built on Peters tomb, and St. Pauls in Rome houses the remains of Paul.

>A
>FUCKING
>LEAF

>It's the central pillar of our nation's culture and heritage.
It's literally your former king throwing a hissyfit because he didn't want to quit beheading his wives.

OP,

Orthodox = Tradition
Catholic = Philosophy
Protestant = Community

t. Catholic

>Pretty much all of Luthers demands are now accepted norm in Catholic church
Not the only one that matters: The gospel

I take it you're a Protestant then?

Aw. Forever alone, user?

t. Jew

Luther was properly responded to by Trent. His comment on the abuse of indulgences was legitimate. His heresies further were rejected.

>atheist doesn't say anything helpful or substantial at all
>just posts smug condescensions and leaves

At least you bumped the thread.

You should be a new creation in Christ Jesus.

This guy gets it.

The orthodox church is the most uncucked, the Catholics have the most nerd thinkers, and the protestants are all about the Sunday afternoon social.

Justification is by faith alone

Which is heresy as God is the one, who, for his good purpose, works in you both to desire and to work.

So then why did Jesus tell the rich to help the poor, for example, since it makes no difference either way according to you?

This is not what saves people, this is what saved people do.

...

What if saved people do not do this, since they're saved so long as they believe?

Which is incorrect and God works in you to both desire and to work and not simply to desire and your work comes from that. You're mistaken.

>this is God's representative on Earth.

Catholics are a joke. It's a bunch of pedos managed by a cuck.

If you like logic, tradition, art, natural law and being based: Roman Catholic.

If you're a faggot who is into, "Well I just FEEEEEEEL that: blah blah blah." be a protscum.

I skipped to the mariology part, this guy is endlessly rambling on without explanation claiming that things are wrong.

A good tree bears good fruit
Who is the blessed man of Romans 4:8?

Look at that, you shook the anti-theist enough to respond! He was waiting for 10+ minutes waiting for responses too. I'm surprised. Well done, user.

That's because you skipped ahead

>Should I be Catholic or Protestant Sup Forums?
Neither, superstition is for children and old women.
But, anyway, I don't believe any this bullshjt you've written. I think you're one of the normal Christian shitposters changing it up a bit.

It sounds like a circular argument. Saved people do good things because they're saved, and they're saved because they do good things. If they didn't do good things they wouldn't be saved, and if they're not saved they wouldn't do good things.

>muh faith alone
>but it's only real faith if it produces works
>muh faith alone tho

What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but hath not works? Shall faith be able to save him?


No wonder LUTHER wanted to REMOVE the book of JAMES.

>and they're saved because they do good things
'no'
You're justified by faith alone, in the same moment you are sanctified and will do good things. This is because the faith itself is the work of the Spirit of God, and He will finish His work. Who shall bring a charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies.

I can tell the whole thing is just rambling for 8 hours, using scripture out of context based around sola scriptura which Catholics don't even believe in the first place. Yes catholicism is wrong according to protestants, but protestantism is built around fundamentally wrong assertions

I don't know. My understanding is that your country is traditionally Presbyterian/Calvinist. The Church of Scotland is not linked to the Church of England, but is probably similar religiously.

More importantly, it was our King stating that no foreign body would have any power over England. Henry VIII was the first Brexiter.

Here's how that is properly translated
"Can that faith save him?"
As verse 18 says "Show me your faith apart from works, and I will show you my faith by my works", the focus never leaves visible outward fruits of internal invisible faith. In this sense a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone, for a lone faith is a false faith.
Not an argument

So if you sin, you're unjustified? Does this mean that if you sin, God rejects you? Or is it impossible to sin once the witch doctor (your pastor) has waved the justification stick at you?

Protestantism is so silly

...

Dude fuck off, people like you have pushed me forward to accepting faith again.

Read chapter 3, it gives the context of chapter 4. Paul is rebuking those who want Pagan converts to Christianity to be circumcised and initiated to the Jewish faith, by fulfilling the works of the Law ('Law' and 'Works' meaning Mosaic Law in this context) and therefore do not acknowledge the ultimate sacrifice of Christ on the Cross.

w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_14091998_fides-et-ratio.html

see
Glad to see you bumping the thread again.

Catholic for sure. Jesus himself created the Catholic church. Not to mention that there's a crusade coming soon.

Atheism.

If you sin willfuly (That is, desire sin live for sin and love sin) there is no more sacrifice for you. However, the new man cannot be completely free from the old man in this life, for it is written "If we say we have no sin we are a liar and the truth is not in us.". The believers sins are always covered by the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ. You do not make yourself un-saved, but you only reveal you never knew Christ.

I am aware of the context, but you did not answer my question: Who is the blessed man?

Ok, in all seriousness, St. Peters is a bit doubtful, but plausible when you get to the bone of it. Mind that major shrines were placed on these peoples burial places soon after their death, even as the persecution was still ongoing, and that the time from them to construction of first churches is not longer than from where we are today and 18th to 19th century, and we even now still have people that can tell us first hand what happened in WW1.

With that in mind, St. Pauls is a certainty. He worked later and was a very known figure in a movement that was past it's innitial stages, so his burial place in ad 67 was a well known place, and after that the persecutions was over a monument was place there. Constantin built a church over it somewhere in ad 250. It was rebuilt over the time, turned into basilica, but the grave remained the focal point. Benedict 16th even allowed a probe into it that found a male skeleton. Fragments were carbon dated to a person living in ether first or second century ad. I'd say it was not a coincidence that Francis went there for his prayer after being elected the new pope.

>'Law' and 'Works' meaning Mosaic Law in this context
That is false, and it is telling Catholics must borrow from the modern heresy of New Perspectivism
It makes a mess of Paul's argument, how could the works Abraham was not justified by be the works of the Mosaic Law, when Abraham never lived to see the law come?

So if you're saved you can't sin, and if you are saved and you do sin, you were never saved to begin with? Circular argument again.

Didn't Jesus himself acknowledge that everyone sins when he told the crowd that he who is without sin can cast the first stone at the adulteress? Does this mean nobody is saved?

>So if you're saved you can't sin
Again, you will sin, but you will hate sin
>Circular argument again
I don't think you know what those words mean

...

Let me put it this way, the saved believer is at the same time both righteous and sinful.

This guy gets it.

t. Catholic

I'm an Atheist but think guys like you're a fagets.

Orthodox is the only way. If you're gonna be a Protestant you may as well abandon Christianity and be a secular goy.

So you're saved but not saved at the same time? Or you're not saved and you resent not being saved?

Who is the blessed man of Romans 4:8?

Anglican

...

Protestant by far. Catholicism is steeped in corruption.

Daily reminder that atheists are worse for society than race mixers.

Oh, such a simplistic child-like vision of reality. I remember those days.

Catholic.
>however I have no love for the current Pope
Popes die.
Ripperoni in Pepperoni John Paul II.

If someone is saved, they will do good and fight their sin. If someone is not saved, they will adore sin and fight good
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it may be demonstrated they were not truly of us.
1 John 2:19

This OP if you want to be a nerd be Catholic.

Want to be the least cucked form of Christianity be Orthodox.

If you like heresy and being part of a heretical community go for the protest-peasant meme.

Read the Bible. Decide for yourself what belief in it should look like.

So if someone has a deep faith in God but occasionally makes mistakes (as all humans do) they're an agent of Satan?

>my IQ is lower than 80: the picture

...

Be a Kekist instead. It's fun and full of redpills.

We are all sinners. For the dozenth time, the saved believer will sin, but they will fight against their sin

yes, being atheist makes you dumber and worse than others.

Catholics built this great country.

Although I hate the new pope my personal bias says go with the catholic faith

What if someone fights against their sin but they don't believe in God? Are they secretly saved?

Well you can be a Christian or join the cult of Mary. Your choice user.

There is no such thing.

Yah you right, this actually makes a lot of sense now that I think about it.
t. Protestant

...

I'm not a protestant

Well Abraham of course.

>New Perspectivism

You'll have to define the term. Please.

>It makes a mess of Paul's argument, how could the works Abraham was not justified by be the works of the Mosaic Law, when Abraham never lived to see the law come?

You typo'd here so it's a bit hard to grasp what you mean. Regardless, Paul uses "works" synonymous with "works of the law" constantly. It's used just a few verses before chapter 4 begins too. You're confused.

>better than you
No, that was a insult to your intelligence first and foremost user.