Are you a christian? Why or why not?

Are you a christian? Why or why not?

Bonus question, what do you think of catholics

Other urls found in this thread:

triablogue.blogspot.com/2012/08/augustine-goofs-on-justification-whole.html
youtu.be/ttxumEkHnKE
youtube.com/watch?v=-rhGMCYWqKI
youtu.be/zIioOvwaT3A
google.co.uk/amp/s/www.gotquestions.org/amp/penal-substitution.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

...

yes.
among other reasons, the historical evidence for the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ is compelling.
i wanted to be catholic, but their soteriology is based on a translation error made by augustine, which was infallibly ratified as dogma post reformation.

Israeli lovin red blooded American baptist here. Cathocucks are just that cuckolds who bow down to popecuck whore of babylon who worship statues like cucks and r going to hell for being cucks and not reading the bible literally lol, fuckin cucks

checked. Praise Jesus!

I am. While I was raised into a Christian family, being Christian just feels right. I know that's a terribad justification from an outsider point but, it works for me. No problems with Catholics, most of them tend to dislike me, however.
>translation error made by augustine
Interesting, I've not heard of this. Care to share?

this article explains it pretty well:
triablogue.blogspot.com/2012/08/augustine-goofs-on-justification-whole.html

post moar, can't find full thing

Thanks user, will make for an interesting read.

How literally do you all take the bible? what is this compelling evidence he was resurrected?

OP, I am:
>Reformed Presbyterian
>Christian Reconstructionist
>Theonomist
Bonus:
>Catholicism is completely incoherent in light of the Scriptures
>the Pope is an antichrist

Not quite sure, I like to think possible meanings or ways things had happened through. I have a yearmate who's a Jehovah's witness, and we occasionally debate about it too.

Mark 9:1
Where Jesus says hell be back with the kingdom before all his disciples die.
He doesn't

I am personally agnostic. I do not care either way and I do not force my beliefs on people, unlike most Muslims. But other than that I actually like Christians, they are the only religion I find believable and Christians and Catholic Christians are usually very nice.

The ironic thing is the same Mcgarth also admits that there is no trace of Sola Fide in the Church Fathers at all

Either way early christianity will contradict protestantism a lot

What do you think of this?

>How literally do you all take the Bible?
The Bible is not a historical textbook or a science textbook. Its first purpose is theological. However, where it touches on science and history, it is entirely accurate in its representation of those subjects, as well as fully accurate in its representation of God and theological doctrine. I affirm that the Scriptures in their original languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, Koine Greek) are infallible and inerrant.

>What is the compelling evidence He was resurrected?
The unanimous testimony of the eyewitnesses in the thousands upon thousands of manuscripts we have from the early church period, and the willingness of the Apostles and thousands of early Christians to be torn to shreds, beheaded, burned alive for the testimony that Jesus rose from the dead.

Kike religion. Fuck Abraham.

I like catholics, most I met are great people.
I'm not religious myself, wasn't raised that way.

I'm not sure what I'm reading, but oh well
Tradition can be helpful and can be a marker for early church practices, but it cannot overrule the infallible Word of God.

Christcucks are universalist retards. They value superstition over their own blood.

i try to understand the author's intention, i don't take everything literal or everything metaphorical
>I am the door [...] (John 10:9)
no one reads this passage and thinks Jesus is saying he's made out of wood and has hinges

>compelling evidence he was resurrected?
to know Jesus rose from the dead, we need to know 2 things:
1: That he died
2: That he was alive again

even among secular historical scholarship, there is virtually a total consensus that Christ lived and was crucified.
>Atheist New-Testament Scholar Gerd Ludermann declared "Jesus' death as a consequence of crucifixion is indisputable."
>John Dominic Crossan, of the infamous Jesus-Seminar says: There is not even the "slightest doubt about the fact of Jesus' crucifixion under Pontius Pilate."
>Marcus Borg, another member of the Jesus-Seminar states: Jesus' execution is the "most certain fact about the historical Jesus"
>Jewish Scholar Pinchas Lapide: Jesus' death by crucifixion is "historically certain."
>Paula Fredriksen: "The single most solid fact about Jesus' life is his death: he was executed by the Roman prefect Pilate, on or around Passover, in the manner Rome reserved particularly for political insurrectionists, namely, crucifixion."
>Bart Ehrman: "one of the most certain facts of history is that Jesus was crucified on orders of the roman prefect of Judea, Pontius Pilate."

no one survives a roman crucifixion. in the final part of the process, they smash their head in or stab them through the heart with a sword or spear, or set them on fire, or let wild animals rip them apart.

[to be continued]

It is basically saying that practices that are not rooted in Scripture have roots in tradition. The same author also makes clear the need to abide by the rule of faith and that the true church is one with unity and succession, one not to be found in protestants and rejected by sola Scriptura outright

Yes, and I'm a non-denominational Christian.

My opinion on Catholics varies a lot. Most of the time these individuals seem to be cultural Christians, and lack religious fluency (Note these are younger people that I talk to). When I start asking specific questions about Catholicism, these individuals usually say that they only go to church once or twice every year, etc. so they cannot answer most of my questions.

I have yet to meet a single Catholic that doesn't fit the above, and I've talked to tons of Catholics.

Also, since people from European countries have this notion that Catholics are usually more right-wing than Protestants, I'd like to point out that Protestants in the U.S. are more right-wing than Catholics.

Out of personal experience, the only group of people that seem to maintain some consistency with religious fluency, and can actually have a basic conversation about their religion are Southern Baptists. Even some Evangelicals that I talk to seem to know a lot about the bible, because they usually attend bible studies.

I am. I have been taught Christianity since my youth but never had a rebellious stage...not to say that I haven't done my share of bad things....I've just never thought there wasn't a God or blamed Him for all life's crap. That said, I still had very clear moments of revelation. It's not like I have just been believing blindly. I have felt the love of God and been baptized in the Holy Spirit.

I'm so blessed to have known young...sometimes when I see the way professing Christians treat people, I wonder if I would allow myself to honestly consider Christianity as an adult if I didn't know it already. Not just the selfish, rude, hypocritical way Christians are.... but the typical arguments that atheists give, ie. The religions are all similar. Why choose one middle eastern religion and not another, etc.

I feel Catholicism is the Decil's corruption of the faith. It takes the free gift of Jesus' salvation and turns it into works. And it attempts to put angels, saints and even Jesus' mother on the same level as Jesus and there is no comparison. Yeshua is the name above every name. At His name every knee shall bow and confess that He is Lord. If you want to defeat a demon, you Dont say the name of Gabriel, or Peter or Mary. You command it leave in JESUS name, and it immediately flees.

Catholicism is dead, overrun by jews and subversive liberals.

I believe freedom of religion should be freedom of choosing your christian sect. (No JW, liberal protestant sects or Mormons)

Christianity is needed in the west.

>Kike religion
>The primary persecutors of early Christians were Jews
top kek

>Universalists
>Jesus talked about hell more than heaven
kek

I am, because I judge it to be true. I'm also a Catholic.

Judaiser

>jesus
>just a scapegoat punching bag for God the father because he got mad at puppets disobeying him who did so because God moved them to do that to begin with
Just calvinist logic

It is not intended to be taken literally in every aspect. The Bible has every form of writing possible and to just take it all literally is missing the point. Now I will say maybe Jonah did end up in the belly of a fish. I believe the things spoken of Jesus are literal and true. But the prophets, revelation, song of solomon, and others are not entirely literal books. There's allegory, prose, poetry, simile, duality...it's a rich, amazing book. And I believe the King James Version is the inspired, infallible Word of God spoken through men. Be careful about other versions that try to deny the Godship of Jesus.

in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7, there is a credal statement:
>3 For I passed on to you as of first importance what I also received—that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures,
>4 and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures,
>5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.
>6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.
>7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.

scholarship says this statement is from much earlier than the epistle it's seen in
>James D. G. Dunn writes: "This tradition, we can be entirely confident, was formulated as tradition within months of Jesus' death."
>Michael Goulder: "Paul 'received' the tradition -- that is, he was taught it at his conversion -- perhaps two years after Jesus' death."
>Ulrich Wilckens: "indubitably goes back to the oldest phase of all in the history of primitive Christianity"
>Gerd Ludermann: "the elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion of Jesus."
>Paul Barnett: "within two or three years of the First easter."
>Richard Burridge and Graham Gould: "from only a few years after Jesus' death."
>Robert Funk and the Jesus Seminar: within "two or three years at most."
>Richard Hays: "within about three years after Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem."
>Alexander Wedderburn: "first half of the 30s."

it shows that this is what the first Christians actually believed, this is their eyewitness testimony
the fact that it's so early destroys the legend hypothesis
the fact that he's purported to have been seen by multiple people at the same time destroys the hallucination hypothesis (because hallucinations are subjective to the individual)

so either they were lying about having witnessed this, or Christ really rose from the dead.

Catholics aren't Christian

>I believe freedom of religion should be freedom of choosing your christian sect. (No JW, liberal protestant sects or Mormons)

You either have all denominations or none of them, you can't ask for freedom of religion but deny certain denominations the freedom to practice their faith.

Only churches which teach justification by faith alone and the trinity ought be permitted existence

Dude, I like catholicism but the anti-pope is killing it. He needs to get out of the church. He is a Judiaser he shakes hands with communists and kikes.

>leaf

>Calling Protestants Judaizers
>Teaching justification by faith + works
bye papist

>"Calvinist"
>Confusing PSA with Satisfaction Theory of Atonement

Great answers. And I would add the KJV to that list and any other correct translation. God's Word MUST be able to translate into every language without fail, by definition of God. But I believe there are nefarious forces at work that have been corrupting the Word and giving us false translations and I believe many are duped into believing they are correct

and no one would willingly go through the pain persecution torture and death the early christians went through for a lie

the immediate response to this is always
>well what about suicide bombers? does that make the quran true?
the difference is they're dying for what they actually believe to be true, not dying for what they know is a lie

Maybe so but that's not freedom of religious expression.

No one truely 100% believes in freedom of religion, even the founding fathers changed theirind when they saw what Muslims were.

>Reformed Presbyterian
>Christian Reconstructionist
>Theonomist

Can you explain to us what each of these is, and why you believe that?

Yes

My mum gets cancer test results back tomorrow

I pray to Jesus and my lord to keep her healthy, safe and true to the light

Amem

Yes, on the verge of committing.

Background in theoretical physics and engineering. Working in theoretical biophsyics. I tried much shit like edglord satanism, buddhism, atheism and nothing of it all and nothing seemed right at all.

Then, from my studies I've concluded that there's a higher principle - or truth.
And since my family is Christian (part catholics and part russian-orthodox), I decided to give that a try.

Up to now I still see some contradictions but nothing that would push me away at all.
It just feels right. Also I want a real wife, not some used up ... and so on.

Once may say Christianity and being a scientist is a contradiction but I can assure you it's not. It only is if you take some of the more artificial things 100% by face value and literal - like Genesis. But I don't see the point in doing that.

No. I'm not a fucking retard.

Sounds like you'd rather believe the loser than trust the Creator....I've never understood Lucifarians

>literally removing books from the Bible that you don't like and altering passages to better suit your church's views

The early Christians of course contradicted the five solaes. Just ask Irenaeus for example

That is PSA deal with it. In fact all the Satisfaction theory does is make the whole atonement a legalistic exchange. PSA takes this further to the point of ridiculousness

>the primary early Christians were also Jews
Hm, it's so weird traditionalists would oppose a splinter cult.

Contradictions to my own way of thinking, I should add.

Like turning the other cheek. I really ... don't see that being a thing ...

>assmad when entire theology refuted
Calvinist logic 101

Look at this shit and tell me how humans are responsible for their acts

The early Christians deny the five solaes

I hope it goes well user

Turning the other cheek doesn't mean that you should let people hurt you or steal from you without defending yourself or that you should ignore sin when you see it, it means that you shouldn't let the wrongdoings of others personally affect you, so you don't go down the route of endless selfish vindication.

No because a book isn't proof of a skywizard.

That's fine. If there's parts you don't like(the pacifism, the promotion of weakness and poverty) just pretend they don't exist. It's what everybody used to do.

No, I am not. Christianity was invented by the Flavian Dynasty of Rome. Read "Caesar's Messiah" by Joseph At will.

is it weird to do this?

>Turning the other cheek doesn't mean that you should let people hurt you or steal from you without defending yourself
Ah, Jesus liked opposite speak, huh? And when his followers did exactly what he said to do and not the opposite they were doing it wrong?
Interesting.

I'm exactly the same as you. Went through a whole edgy teen stage but after a few years reading philosophy and Christian shows I'm on the verge. Pretty much just waiting to "find God".

It's not black and white. That's the mystery of "free will." God may know the outcome, but I don't believe for a second that He "ordained" certain men to result in eternal damnation.

"For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who wills to have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." 1 Tim. 2:3-4

Sure.

>Reformed Presbyterian
I affirm the historic creeds of the Christian faith (the ecumenical creeds/councils like the Apostles', Nicene, Chalcedonian, etc). Beyond that, I affirm the Westminster Confession of 1646 putting me in the company of John Knox (a successor to John Calvin), the Scottish Covenanters, et cetera.
I emphasize Reformed because "Presbyterian" means next to nothing in America because of the PCUSA, one of the three most liberal denominations in this country next to the Episcopal Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church. The two main and largest conservative Presbyterian denominatons in America are the PCA and the OPC (Orthodox Presbyterian Church).
To bullet point Presbyterian beliefs:
>Calvinism (Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited/Definite Atonement, Irresistible Grace/Effectual Calling, Perseverance of the Saints)
>Paedobaptism (Children of believers are a part of the covenant community and are to be raised as Christians and not pagans)
>Presbyterian government (Local churches aren't autonomous, they should be led by elders and overseen by a board of elders called a presbytery composed of local elders from churches in the region)
>Regulative Principle of Worship (We worship God His way, not our way)

>Christian Reconstructionist
>Theonomist
I believe God's Law is the authoritative standard for government. This can be summarized in two beliefs:
>Lex Talionis
>Christian Establishmentarianism

>Lex Talionis
"An eye for an eye." God's Law is equity of the highest order, and perfectly just. What God commands the civil magistrate to punish, he must punish, and what He does not, he cannot. This provides a safeguard against the abuse of power, and following the Civil Law of the Torah in this way looks a lot like Libertarian Minarchism, but no pagans.

(cont.)

I was a nihilist in my childhood and teens (parents didn't go to church and I was homeschooled, Xbox live)
My father really started going to church again after I moved out, and harassed me constantly about going with him.
I went with him like once every few months to make him happy,
and one Sunday, just for fun I unironically tried praying for myself and my family.
Felt like I had a fucking seizure, and I started sobbing hard. I don't know what it is, but I believe and read the Bible now (just in time to be trendy on Sup Forums, too!)

Good news, you just contradicted calvinism.

So who is right? Protestants can't even agree

>not knowing church history
>not realizing the apocryphal books were never considered canonical by the early church
>not realizing the Catholic Church only dogmatized the apocrypha in the 17th century after the reformation
keeeek

You literally have no idea what Penal Substitution is. It's laughable.

Of course, the fathers of all those councils contradict Calvinism in the age of the ecumenical councils

All five solaes rejected by all the fathers

The early church was composed mainly of Greek/Gentile converts with a Jewish minority by the close of the 1st century.
But that hurts your narrative.

>Israeli lovin red blooded American baptist here.

Let me guess...you love Steven Anderson you fuckin autistic kike lover?

youtu.be/ttxumEkHnKE

all 5?
even "glory to God alone" ?

Also

Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

Romans 3:23-26

Yes I am a Christian. I cannot deny what's happening around the globe any longer. The world is turning against Christianity like never seen before.
Flooding of Islam around the world to destroy the remaining Christians and Jews, the raise of things that are suddenly considered 'normal' these days. I mean what the fuck. Everything that is aligned with Jesus is opposed.

Catholicism is created to deceive Christians with the idolatry of the 'holy Mary'.

Except of course the Deuterocanon WAS considered scripture to the church fathers

Here for example from Athanasius

"[T]he sacred writers to whom the Son has revealed Him, have given us a certain image from things visible, saying, 'Who is the brightness of His glory, and the Expression of His Person;' [Heb 1:3] and again, 'For with Thee is the well of life, and in Thy light shall we see lights;' [Ps 36:9] and when the Word chides Israel, He says, 'Thou hast forsaken the Fountain of wisdom;' [Baruch 3:12] and this Fountain it is which says, 'They have forsaken Me the Fountain of living waters' [Jer 2:13]" [3] Athanasius the Great: Defense of the Nicene Faith,2 (A.D. 351), in NPNF2, IV:158.

As usual, protestants misrepresent history

LOL NO
>Council of Orange

>israeli lovin'
>steven anderson
are you retarded?

youtube.com/watch?v=-rhGMCYWqKI

Now look, I'm Christian but I have some comments on this and why I think you could at least take a second look at your beliefs.

Have you been keeping up with FBI user, Anon5, or Sourceanon? One thing that sticks out is that there is so much history left undiscovered and manipulated. There is so much technology not publicly available and deemed "impossible."

Here's my argument. Look at your iphone, or android if you're a pleb, and think for a second how complicated this device is. How in less than one generation these devices have reduced the attention spans of millions of people to mere seconds.

We humans are capable of great extraordinary things. If we can make an iphone, what's stopping us from framing some dirty paper some guy made and saying it is history and proof of Jesus' ____ (fill in the blank).

I've been learning some people are truly reptiles in disguise, that there were 20" beings on the planet, that joe rogan wasn't totally wrong searching for bigfoot, and that atlantis was a ship and you can kind of see it in the northern hemisphere in the atlantic ocean.

How can you easily place trust in old dirty framed papers?

Oh yeah he fuckin hate Isarael, my bad...most Murican Protestant preachers are always sucking on Israel huge slimy Jewish cock...

Do we actually have russian-(or other) orthodox Christians among us ?

If so, how serious do you take things like daily prayer (morning and evening prayers) and fasting ?

Like the things you're supposed to do at/in your "home church" so to speak.

And also do you regularly attend liturgy ? (like: also in between Sundays ?)

Thanks in advance

Council of Orange affirms Augustine which of course isn't Calvinist. Augustine is very clear on the fact that there is free will in the libertarian sense and that Grace aids it in it's weakened state

Key difference from the monergism of Calvinism

>Christian Establishmentarianism

Christianity should be recognized as the official national religion, but no state church (see: Church of England) should be established because God has ordained that they be separate spheres. There should be liberty among Christian religions, but not between Christianity and Mohammedism, etc.

Yes. I've seen miracles happen. I've seen too much supernatural. There's too much evidence for Christianity. The shadow government that wages war against whites wages an equally desperate war against Christianity. Only a blind man could not see it. And it just so happens that the shadow government worships the antis of Christianity such as moloch. We are all disciples of Christ that believe him, and we will not be destroyed before he comes. I believe the Catholic Church has been infiltrated by satanism and pedophilia. Again. Much evidence. Ironic given that they were at one time the biggest persecuters of christians

Ayy did you read those chick tracts too? Before I read them I still thought Catholicism was wrong, but now I'm fully convinced the (((Church))) is the whore of babylon.

By its own logic yes. Look at thisI challenge protestants to show me where martyrs or core figures are treated in that sense

Augustine was in no way a synergist. He did not believe in libertarian free will as we define it in theological discussions. He beleived that the human will outside the state of grace was free only to sin.

No. I'm Zoroastrian like my father before me and like his father before him. Why? Because even though I am not super religious I think it's important to honor my family and my culture.

0:55...le average Murican Prot preacher...yelling crazy stuff while being fat.

youtu.be/zIioOvwaT3A

Except of course you can't even show me where I misrepresented it

I'll let Got Questions speak

google.co.uk/amp/s/www.gotquestions.org/amp/penal-substitution.html

I speak of its logical conclusion unlike it

Catholic here. I follow the religion out of respect for Hitler.

What chick tracts my boy?

No There is not enough evidence to believe in god

Except that he did. This is examplified by his statements in On Grace and Free Will or even his statement on how God can act through legal authorities to make the Donatists scared, they choose to repent

Augustine's view of the will is libertarian as shown in On Grace and Free Will especially in his explicit argument that The Bible teaches it through commands of action.

Augustine however envisions a weak will which is why it is incapable of doing the good to begin with and hence needs grace

Huge difference

You literally described Satisfaction Theory and claimed it was a Calvinistic doctrine then claimed it was PSA. You don't have a n y c l u e what you're talking about. Provide an actual argument and not a strawman of Reformed orthodoxy and then we'll talk.

Christianity is the only hope for the west

Christian Orthodox

> Why
I like having faith. Makes me feel better

> what do you think of catholics
Dislike them for the schism in 1054 and I don't think they act very christian-y lately but whatever it's fine.

What evidence are you expecting ?

Neither.....and both....

It took us the entirety of our existence just to see planets outside of our solar system or to see cells that comprise the body. We admit we know very little about creation and yet we think we can judge the Creator......foolishness

I think catholics are gnostic faggots

No. I had read the Bible, and i don't understand why are 2 Gods. The 1st one, angry and vengeful. And the 2nd, a cuck: forgive, put the other cheek.

Virgin Mary was a translation mistake, they wanted to say very young.

Ah, and the Bible was writen ar 3rd century, in the First Council of Nicaea, by people under rule of Constantin I, roman empereor. If you are an empereor, you want the people you rule cucked.

I believe that Jesús was a warlord, someone who kicked the jews from the temple and then talks about peace? bullshit!

Bar-Abbas = Son of the father, "Barrabas" was the other prisioner, the one the jews saved, he was arrested bc riots. In my humble opinion, he was Jesus.

Again making no attempt to even locate the supposed strawman and even worse, I had linked to an actual Calvinist site on the matter which basically says the same thing as I did

Deal with it

You are just a coward who is afraid to admit defeat