For Catholics, Coptics, Anglicans, Orthodox, and Protestants alike, we are all brothers and sisters in Christ. :3
Except Mormons, screw them. they think that Jesus was an ayy lmao.
And JW, they are JEWs without "e"
previous thread:
Bible:
>KJV
biblegateway.com
>Septuagint
ecmarsh.com
>Vulgata
drbo.org
>Georgian
orthodoxy.ge
>Savonic
pomog.org
Other urls found in this thread:
catholicherald.co.uk
orthodoxinfo.com
youtu.be
therealpresence.org
youtube.com
twitter.com
>Be Catholic
>Become Atheist after a few years
>Visit Pol
> Quickly realise that Atheism is a cancer, start to believe in God again
> Have devout Atheist girlfriend
What do I do, Sup Forums?
She's so cute. CUTE!
Watch the Passion of Jesus Christ with her
Take control of your relationship and come back to the Church, fellow bong
pic related chicks love beautiful things. Just take her here for mass
>> Have devout Atheist girlfriend
blackpill her on the Truth of Christ.
What keeps her from coming to the faith? Was she ever a Christian?
History channel had a good one too.
Congrats user. You've been called.
Yes, she was until she became a teenager I think
Fo you know why she stopped believing?
If you're a teenager and you still believe everything you were told as a child, you're a dupe.
I doubt the why of it matters all that much.
*do
>no mention of independent baptists
I disagree. In order to conbert anyone, you have to know why they currently don't believe.
Everyone comes to the Faith in different ways, and is convinced by different things.
Knowing why they don't believe makes it easier to point them towards the things that will help them be converted.
Can Catholic Universities be fixed?
catholicherald.co.uk
A Catholic University fired a guy... for opposing abortion.
That is, opposing abortion is not acceptable in a Catholic University.
Hello, Christians. Agnostic Atheist here. I have a question for you.
If God created the Universe, wouldn't that mean that he planned bad things to happen? You could say that people have free will, but if he did the first action and is omniscent (thus knowing the consequences of every subsequent thing), he technically created the conditions for material evil to thrive and does nothing to fix it. How can this be a sign of omnibenevolence?
Not untill Francis is in charge.
Think of the universe as God's playground. Do you think he wants to be bored or that he has the best sense of humor ever?
I think probably he has the best sense of humor ever.
Especially when filled with despair. Any pics like that?
>If God created the Universe, wouldn't that mean that he planned bad things to happen?
No, not at all. Evil is the very lack of God, saying God planned Evil is like saying life planned death, light planned darkness or heat planned cold. You can't plan or do something that is against your very nature.
Evil is the result of mankinds choice to disobey God. God allowed man to choose evil, yes, but He didn't make them choose it.
Moreover, He does do things to fix it. The entire point of Christ's life, death and resurrection was to fix evil, to give man a different path besides that of sin, the path to salvation.
Daily reminder that Orthodox Christians do not believe that anyone outside of their Church can experience the Holy Spirit or receive divine Grace.
Sorry, I have nothing else like that
Damn it! Guess I better learn to draw better.
Catholics aren't Christian
...
Not bad, but could use more despair and sadness. Such as being on the verge of tears or being bullied like their's no tomorrow. Thanks, though.
>Be Catholic
>Become Atheist
Nothing ever kills me more than hearing this
Its such a fucking common thing in America too
Makes me wish I was born centuries ago, when I could execute you people for being paynim scum
>Schism
Stay atheist and make it less cancer, fag.
So he's just there for the memes, gotcha.
Well, let's set the premises.
-In the beginning, there was nothing but God.
-God created everything.
-Thus God is essential and his creation contingent.
Second line:
-Evil exists.
-God created everything.
-God is Omniscent, so he he knows if evil could come to be in his creation.
From this logic, I see the following conclusions:
-God cannot control evil; therefore, he's not Omniscent nor Omnipotent.
-God created an Universe where evil exists and given that he's Omniscent, he set the conditions for evil, if not directly act upon it. Given that he doesn't stop it when he has the means to do it ethically, it could be argued that he's not Omnibenevolent.
Where's the flaw?
Yes. Because conflict and suffering force us to adapt and become better people.
Without that, we'd be just like Southwest Africa, perfect conditions for humans, with no development.
>Where's the flaw?
Right here:
>it could be argued that he's not Omnibenevolent.
That is false. All that has transpired is to a good end. All evil is to a good end. Evil was necessary, that good be increased.
As images of God, we have free will and father doesnt interfere in it, by his will. This means that we can disobey Him and refuse His grace. Absence of God is evil, it's not independent idea or substance.
I wouldn't say just for the memes.
I mean, if you suppose God's a psychopath then I guess he's just getting a chuckle out out of our suffering. But if you think he's a lad then probably he knows that our suffering is just strutting and fretting across the stage and he'll tend his flock in the long run.
The schisms in the Catholic church from the late 80s to the late 2000s got a lot of people off. New Pope is alright, lot of people like him. Last two were greedy undercover jews, especially Pope Sidious. People are slowly coming back to religion and Christianity because theyre aftaid of Islam. Eventually we'll all have to choose a side, and the Athiests can say what they want, but Islam is a lot worse the way they deal with them than the church is. They should follow Hitchens' example.
Is it impossible for God, then, to create an Universe where suffering isn't required?
If it is not and he abstains from making it, he's not Omnibenevolent since he's making people suffer.
If it is, he's not Omnipotent.
Then what's the point of the death of newborn babies? There must certainly be actions that amount to more bad than they do good. In another note, there most certainly are stories of bad things that amount to nothing in the end.
Why is absence of God evil?
I'm trying to understand you people. I love Christ-chan pics lol
>Then what's the point of the death of newborn babies?
I guess that's just the mechanics of the universe. The other day as I was driving, a little scrawny squirrel limped across the road, so I stomped on my brakes in order to not kill it. Was that merciful or did it prolong the suffering of a stupid starving squirrel?
Later, I blew past a vulture eating a dead something by the side of a road. Was the vulture in the wrong? Or was it doing great service recycling some kind of unfortunate accident? If that dead something hadn't been run over and mushed, would it have hurt the vulture's ability to eat and live?
I just don't think the universe is so simple that we should expect it to be like whatever we think of as heaven.
>Then what's the point of the death of newborn babies?
The glory of God, the same good end as all ill works.
>There must certainly be actions that amount to more bad than they do good
Absolutely none. In all evils lies a blessed hope.
Think of it like this: God is capable of the best possible world. So, for Him to create any world but the best would be wrong, no?
But the best possible world is the one with the most good, yes? And the best possible good is the total glorification of God. But for God to receive this glory, He must demonstrate His attributes. But, some of His attributes, such as mercy and justice (which are a part of omnibenevolence), require evil to exist, for how could He forgive or punish if there were no evil things to punish and forgive?
>His Omnipotence means power to do all that is intrinsically possible, not to do the intrinsically impossible. You may attribute miracles to Him, but not nonsense.
>If you choose to say, 'God can give a creature free will and at the same time withhold free will from it,' you have not succeeded in saying anything about God: meaningless combinations of words do not suddenly acquire meaning simply because we prifex to them the two other words, 'God can.'
He could either create a world where suffering is possible, but where there is also the ability for humans to make the choice to attempt to alleviate the suffering of others, or he could create a world where humans are incapable of causing suffering, & where they are incapable of choosing to help others.
He could not create a world where there was no suffering & where free will existed. However, you imply 'suffering' is always bad. It would indeed be evil if suffering existed and there was no heaven in which we were to be rewarded for enduring suffering. There are countless stories of people who've lost loved ones, cried, & those tears have washed away the error of atheism.
Today I found out that Calvinist conception of sacrament is practically different from that of the early Christians. What gives?
If there is no water in glass, it's empty. If there is, it's full. Full and empty are good and evil.
However absence of God's grace is possible only when free will exist. God willingly doesnt interfere in our free will, as he wants us to be His children and be like him, not slaves and servants. This evil is possible because we have free will, because God wants us to be free, as he is.
Im bad at explanations, but I hope it helps :3
*The evil
Autocorrector
Think you'll find all protestant sects differ from early Christians fellow bong.
Case in point: early Christians believed in the primacy of Peter's successor
>-Evil exists.
Evil does not "exist." Evil is the lack of something, the lack of good. But, just as we don't say "the current environment is currently lacking in heat" but instead we say "it's cold" so too with evil.
>-God created everything.
Yes, but evil is NOT a created thing.
>-God is Omniscent, so he he knows if evil could come to be in his creation.
That is true, yes.
>From this logic, I see the following conclusions:
>-God cannot control evil; therefore, he's not Omniscent nor Omnipotent.
That is incorrect. God could stop all evil right now. He doesn't because that would rid us of freewill.
>-God created an Universe where evil exists and given that he's Omniscent, he set the conditions for evil, if not directly act upon it. Given that he doesn't stop it when he has the means to do it ethically, it could be argued that he's not Omnibenevolent.
He set the conditions for evil to exist in that He gave us freewill, but we, not God, choose to use it for evil. He even warned us not to use it for evil, but we did anyways. It's like if I gave you some metal and the tools to work it with. You can choose to use this to make something good, like a plow to be used in growing crops. Or you can choose to make a dagger, and stab someone. Either way, I'm not to blame for your acts. If you choose to stab someone, it's not my fault.
And once again, He does give us the tools to rid the world of evil: He sent His only Son Jesus Christ to die for us, and in doing so offer us a way to escape from sin.
He gave us a way to rid the world of evil while still preserving our freewill.
...
Malaysia
Protestants don't follow the early churches ways, we've been saying this for centuries.
Come home to the Catholic Church user.
I do know they differ a lot from the Calvinists and Evangelicals
>New Pope is alright
What's preventing me from getting back to the Church is precisely the current pope, which is falling into the indifferentism countless popes before him warned all of us about. Priests are following him blindly.
oh pls, mormons are the only based Christians left in the west. (except Amish)
>High Birthrate - Only ones saving the White race in America
>considered black people to be literally cursed by God
>get own planet after death
>have infinite amount of sex in heaven to populate new planet.
>they're all going to be white
yeah that sounds real fuckin good to me.
Wtf is this?
How do I come home?
Define omniscience, omnipotence and omnibenevolence.
Define good, evil and suffering.
if you guys ever wonder why so many christian threads are popping up its because a bunch of christians saw how easy it was for white supramacists to rally people to their point of view and so they are now are using the board as an honest to god recruiting station
Another example: many protestant sects deny transubstantiation. The Church fathers believed in it
St. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 A.D.)
>I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the Bread of God, WHICH IS THE FLESH OF JESUS CHRIST, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I DESIRE HIS BLOOD, which is love incorruptible. (Letter to the Romans 7:3)
listening to some
>youtube.com
shit's smooth af
still tippin ma fadora tho
Evil is the lack of God, of Good. God cannot create that which is anathema to His very nature. Evil stems from a lack of Good, it is the cancer that forms when people succumb to dark desires. It is Sitra Ahra, the very opposite of all that is holy and pure. God did not create Evil no, Evil came into existence specifically to oppose God.
>Why is absence of God evil?
Simple.
God is a perfect being. In fact, He is not just perfect, He is the most perfect being that can be.
Therefore, it follows that in order to be perfect, one must be like God, for God is perfection itself.
We term anything that reflects this perfection "Good."
We define Evil as being the opposite of Good.
As Good refers to reflecting the perfection of God, that is to say being more like God, Evil therefore refers to the exact opposite: the lack of this Perfection.
>How do I come home?
Start by going to mass, talking to a priest and eventually going through RCIA and becoming a full fledged member of the Church.
>demiurge worship
>deceiver on a stick
I seem to recall technically Christians are supposed to spread the "good news." You don't get to be a world-dominant religion through the lack of capacity to self-reproduce (like life as we know it.)
On the other hand, it's pretty neat that the idea is to simply offer a possibility rather than subjugate goyim or tax you and chop your head off if you don't convert or other such barbarism.
From my perspective as a channer of about a decade, I see it as more of a bounce back from the day when you had to hide you were Christian in order to fit in. Sup Forums in this sense represents a more honest sense of tolerance.
>God cannot
He can, but he won't
Don't forget that we are talking about entity that can defy any law and logic known to us
Lad please tell me you're joking
I will actually move to infinitychan if you're not joking
>oh pls, mormons are the only based Christians left in the west.
They aren't even Christians. You can't call yourself Christian and also not believe in the creed.
Can you be gay in Christianity?
There's a devout Catholic lesbian with a gf. She goes to church everyday to clean it and plays violin with the choir. Also goes to mass every Sunday. But she has a gf.
I see your point: such is the cycle of life.
However, God could have made an Universe were all of those events didn't happen by protecting the squirrel before it got hurt in the first place.
What I'm saying is that, if God is Omniscent, he's partially responsible for all the evil that exists because he created an Universe where he knew that bad things would happen. If he, on the other hand, has no control over it, he can't be Omnipotent.
Well... I differ. Excuse me, but I fail to see how the isolated death by starvation of children in African villages amount to a greater good. Again, God could have made the Universe so it didn't have evil to be a problem in the first place.
(Check'd)
Wouldn't having a purposed trajectory of suffering contradict free will? I mean, choice does matter, but by assuming that evil MUST play a role in life when an Omnipotent being could change things for the better and choses not to for some reason, it could be understood that he's abstaining from good.
It's predetermination. Almost like being born in a bad gamble. It is true that free will and universal good are not compatible, but it seems like a choice is severely encouraged (eternal bliss) while the other is severely punished (eternal hell). Freedom, then, would consist of choosing between hell and heaven instead of acting upon the system itself. That's a single choice, and not free will as I'd understand it.
Okay then.
Well, I believe there are some flaws in God's conceptualization and I've pointed a few, so I wouldn't define him as 'perfect' or 'good'. I don't agree with those premises and I'd need some more support to take them in.
Merriam Webster.
>Doesn't know anything about Christianity and just wants to spout of bullshit that he ingested from Reddit
>Not being a kike puppet
Please elaborate on how Islam, and Kabbalah are "so much better", than Christianity Spain.
>Sup Forums wants to preserve western civilization
>but trying to strengthen the basis of western civilization is a bad thing
I know full well about christianity.
Yahwe is the demiurge and jesus is the deceiver.
Gnosis is the way, worship Abraxas.
God is Good, he is literally love and compassion in it's purest form. Evil is the diametric opposite of everything Gd embodies. Sure, He could probably make a person be jealous or angry, or do things they wouldn't normally, but it wouldn't be out of malice. Evil on the other hand, is fully capable of turning a person into a monster with casual ease. Making even the holiest and most righteous of men into monsters that would skullfuck their own families. This is specifically because it is everything God isn't.
>basis of western civilization
Mate just kill yourself fuckin hell
The only reason western civilization works is because of secular standards put into place to prevent christfags from ruining shit. The founding fathers were deists for a reason.
>Western civilization
>Middle Eastern God
>Post-Rome church
Then you're using unchristian notions, I'm sorry. Christian theology is based off Aristotle's and Plato's works. The ideas of omnipotence, omniscience and omnibenevolence are coming from there.
Pretty sure they believe in the Bible as well.
Besides it's all bullshit anyways.
At least theirs promotes strong family values, follow the law, and has lots of white children.
Protestants are either black or faggot lovers and Catholics are peasant beaners.
>love and compassion in the purest form
Then why is there even a punishment for heresy in the first place? Besides that, why ignore that Yahweh ordered mass genocide on more people than Columbus.
K m8.
I think if you want to take this kind of logical approach to it then you need to ask yourself what set of axioms you are working off of, just as in 101-level university course on analysis. One of the Christian axioms, as stated above, is that God is more perfect than man; in other words, man is fundamentally not capable of fully understanding God, and therefore not capable of explaining why things are the way they are.
Another axiom: we have free will. We can choose to do things in accordance with what we think God wants, or we can chose to defy what we think God wants, or we can just sort of bumble along without thinking at all.
The consequence of these two axioms is that the outcome of the system, even if we assume God to be perfect, is going to contain things that we perceive as "good", things that we perceive as "evil", and things that are paradoxes -- things we can prove that we can't answer.
You might think that's dodging the question. You might be correct. But I propose that Christianity is one of our best tried and tested ways to explain the universe. Just from a strictly agnostic rational line of thinking.
>Pretty sure they believe in the Bible as well.
So do muslims, yet nobody considers them Christians
We try to explain these concepts with our slight sight. Only you torture yourself, hell and heaven is condition of soul. We don't know what exactly we shall feel there and how it will be torture or rewarding. Personally, i think that sa images of God (therefore creators) we shall create our own plains of Existance nd, it will be based on condition of our soul. The point is, that we are talking about entity, that is yet beyond our absolute understanding.
They are demiurge worshippers, they worship darkness, look at the image, please.
They failed many prophecies already, but tell lies to backup their shortcomings, they are sons of darkness and tell lies, and murder, and rape children.
The true God is Abraxas.
Well, under those axioms, the dicussion has no point 3:
But I do agree that Christianity has provided the basis for a lot of natural comprehension. If not directly, rhetorically.
>the discussion has no point
I think the opposite. If we have free will an we want to make use of it, then we have no choice but to wonder and debate how best to use it.
Baptists are a type of Protestant though.
free will is an issue of semantics
it really doesn't mean anything
Crashing this religion...
You're simple straw manning in your criticisms. If you were talking with a priest or something, he would immediately dismiss you as someone ignorant and tell you the same things I'm telling you.
...
I like him and I like you
The only way to save them is to totally purge them and society of leftists. The rot is too deed for anything less.
Maybe "the discussion has no point" was a very bad way to put it lol. Let me try again:
"The questions have no answers that humans can know."
If no answer can ever be reached, at least under those premises, then that line of analysis is condemned to be cyclical and never set foot on anything. Perspectives can be built and strong ideas can be constructed, but no final answer is achieveable.
You dismissed me first for using 'unchristian notions'. That's like a muslim telling me I can't hold a discussion of Islam because my terminology is unquranic.
If we're going to discuss this around using words as described by an ideology rather than their universal meaning, may I first ask for your pronouns?
>be me
>pagan LARPing nordic faggot
>running around in a loincloth, murdering and raping other people
>all in the name of Odin
>be me
>Roman soldier
>living the dream until the Empire's fate is fading
>the Empire collapses
>be me
>citizen of Byzantine
>living the dream
>faith is strong, so is our empire, and our people
>literally needed 2 empires to destroy us
>"The questions have no answers that humans can know."
Well, thats the point of the faith.
Entire Geometry is based on an axyome that point exists (although it has no measurements and it doesnt, technically)and an entire axyome is based on faith, solely.
Well, I can't really get behind that 3:
Geometry can be tangibilized and reproduced in the tangible world by anyone with a stick, but many affirmations of Christianity (multiplication of bread, water into wine, etc.) are exclusive to divinity and unexplainable to mankind.
I still enjoy some aspects of Christianity and think Christ-chan is cute tho.
You don't get it. For instance, you throw around evil, suffering and good in a sense that is unchristian. Christian theology holds that what's good is to follow one's nature and what's evil is to purposefully go against it. God would be then infinitely good because his nature is one of true actuality or that of being a necessary being, which he follows by definition of being a necessary being. An example of a person not following her nature would be a woman actively trying not to become a mother; or a person actively trying to hamper his own reason.
See why the notions matter?
I'm addicted to lust
just admit that you're using the mongolian shitposting board as a recruiting station.. ive seen plenty of christians waste their time trying to recruit people at more retarded areas (like beaches during spring break) so it wouldn't surprise me that they're trying to corral the board into accepting the notion that its a christian board and it "always has been"
It's pretty rough going but every person functions on a set of unfounded assumptions or ideas that they hold to be true axiomatically which they cannot actually prove.
Everything makes sense within the system set up by those axioms (at least in theory, people are always full of contradictions which they just haven't fully considered), and they'll judge everything by its closeness to their own system, due to a lack of an objective standard.
So yeah, if you have a different set of axioms these discussions may not make much sense to you. Same way that a discussion of what is moral or good would be hard to hold between a Wahhabist and a Quaker - they have different definitions and there's no real way to easily reconcile them.
There are some thing that you need to see to have faith in, but there are some things, that you need to have faith in, to see
The fact, that you ask these questions and try to understand it is a good start.
Oh yess, those secular standards that are currently leading to the absolutely degenerate state of the west?
And even then, you're completely ignoring that fact that the founding fathers were most definitely inspired by Christian thought, even if they didn't agree with the religion itself.
And hell, let's look at the arts: almost all the great works, the truly great ones, are Christian works.
Many of the greatest western composers were extremely devout, with Mozart being the best example.
Classical thought and knowledge was preserved by Christians.
Universities are a Christian invention.
Modern Musical notation was a Christian invention.
The west isn't a Muslim hellhole like the middle east because of Christian Crusaders
Christianity is most definitely the basis of western civilization. Only a fool would say otherwise.
Me too. And I genuinely want to end it. My lust is for real women though, not hentai.