Catholicucks

>Catholicucks
>giving divine religious authority to a south american beaner that licks nigger feet
>literally having to follow his word, even if it is to tear down your nation's border, otherwise you're defying your religion
>Orthocux
>literally special snowflake schism bullshit, that might as well just be an extension of the Russian state, and that will sell out its practitioners in a moment's notice to whoever is in charge of Russia

> P R O T E S T A NT
>defies and knows the Jew well
>does not accept nigger feet kissers as an authority on God and rather places emphasis on the book itself
>closer in line with original Christianity by smashing idols and decadent wasteful churches commissioned by Pope Nigger

the fuck aren't you a protestant yet, Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/playlist?list=PLF170B126002E7CB0
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Elvira#The_canons
youtube.com/watch?v=zT9xRMwXaZI&feature=youtu.be
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

catholicism is essentially paganism (religion of our ancestors) with a jew facade. protestantism is the jew facade without the pagan roots

I am.

That's bullshit.
This whole thing is bullshit.
That's a scam.
Fuck the Church.
Here's 95 reasons why.

God is a meme

>Beaner
>Argentinian
>Murica geography

>even if it is to tear down your nation's border
I don't know of any Christians that don't support importing tons of immigrants and refugees and generally supporting foreign scum.

protestantism

>feeling like a jew when u had to pay gold to the church for various bullshit
>tell the pope to fuck off and disobey him
>believe in jew christianity but without the pope.

Weren't the Protestants the first to setup banks and charge usury like the Jews?

Long Live The Reformation.
Fuck all Cathocucks

me

> P R O T E S T A NT
>defies and knows the Jew well
>so well that the dominant strains of Protestantism denounce Catholicism for not being jewish enough
Won't cry for you apostates.
>Weren't the Protestants the first to setup banks and charge usury like the Jews?
This bong gets it.

Yes.

Modern Protestantism worships Jews and Israel and dildoes.

In my village even the Catholic priest said that we're fighting another holy war against Islam after 500 years.

The only thing that is imoortant is that jesus was a the most humvle kindest man ever to exist.. to hate on the pope for trying to be a fraction of that makes you a fucming retard.

>you need to need to lie down kike.

>decadent wasteful churches

What is wasteful about beautiful buildings you cultureless no-foreskin? The Vatican has some of the most important works of art in history.

HI LEDDIT

Cuz groups like the Unitarian church, Lutherans, other liberal denominations, fuck, even MOST fundamentalist christians are totally redpilled right? Oh wait. You're just a sad little fuckwit that is the odd combination of protestant and nazfag, so you want to try and justify one ideology with the other. Here's a hint boyo: protestantism has nothing to do with white supremacy. How bout you do the world a favor and KYS.

Its all the same shit, don't believe any of these middle eastern religions, they all work like this:
- Take some truths only older people discover cause life experience is needed to see them
- Add some feel-good stuff for women
- Mix it with bullshit to further your groups cause
- Claim it to be "holy/special"

It's all BS, stay away from it.

- Badly written with unfounded claims
- No coherent logic
- Need to do mental gymnastics to make it work

No-one in the church/mosques knows how this stuff works, is supposed to be or what its common ground is- simply cause there is no "standardization" of God and everyone has a different opinion on how to interpret.

Biggest pile of shit ever if you put all single pieces together.

Pro Tip: Divide the world into faggots and winners, that works, religion does not.

>following the teachings of a German autist fascinated with feces
>elaborated his "salvation by faith" heresy on the shitter
>forced a nun out of the convent to marry her like the good degenerate he was

preachers need wives and children
1 timothy 3
1This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

...

still not justified to force a nun out of her convent, the holy wovs she made before God.

but it's not surprising, you protestants respect nothing, except money.

God never told anyone to live celibate life
he wants his followers to have lots of kids
Genesis 1
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

That's not a mandated requirement dipshit its saying that he is a pious man that's got his shit together.
Also the reason why Catholic priests are required to be unmarried with few exceptions is the Tradition of the Catholic church.

it says he needs to be able to rule his house to rule the church
if he doesn't have a wife or kids there's no one to rule
celibacy is from a doctrine that arose in 300 AD
the catholic church literally makes up rules

at least the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus himself, not by some butthurt dude

It's literally saying that if he can't handle a family he wouldn't be able to handle a parish. The reason why it mentions the parts of the family is because married priests were prevalent at that time. The idea of celibacy became codified in the 16th Century, not the 4th...

>Protestantism
>"Were Christians but without the annoying Morality"

>Unitarians
They are barely even a Christian church. They're the wayward cousin of the family.
The OT has been superseded, fake Jew.
Whereas Protestants simply pull theirs out of their ass based loosely upon OT verses that agree with what their feels at any given moment. Protties are faker than Islam.

What gives Luther authority?

It is known
youtube.com/playlist?list=PLF170B126002E7CB0

Does protestantism have these cool outfits? I don't think so. BTFO.

A heresy of a heresy is 2x times the shit...

Orthodox is the only true way as Catholicucks split from us. Also fuck Russia. Shows how much you know about us.

...

stfu monkey

you don't have any claim to any european strand of christianity at all

buddy maybe you don't know that your leaders already recognised the pope as protos a few years ago

I'd rather have the Pope kiss a nigger foot than have this.

>stfu monkey

remember that this is the average american on Sup Forums

t. Khalil

Thanks Protties.

>the most catholic country in the world

Burger, please. Go talk about flat Earth in your 121483295257 denomination of "christianism".

Thanks Protties

Yeah bullshit.
Your pope is just a pedophile who covers for the rest of the pedophiles in your little heretical cult.

Implying I'm not

this

I don't even want to know how you got a 71% match with them.
>okay, maybe a little curious

whereas, in Protestantism, pedophilia begins at home

>retard uses physical appearance to justify gender roles.
No different than Muhammad

it says "must be"
that means required
also, please learn about your own denomination's history
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Elvira#The_canons
The Old Testament has not been superseded. God is eternal and His character is unwavering. Jesus did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill. I posted the verse from Genesis to show that it has ALWAYS been God's plan for us to have children.
Even so, I don't think you've actually read the bible, seeing how the first verse I posted was actually from the New Testament. I think you're the one denying the Lord because of your feelings, friend.
It doesn't surprise me. Those in charge of the catholic church have never liked it when their patrons read the Bible.

XDDDD

Do you understand that you are directly supporting a pedophile satanic cult to molest more children?
Wake up, your last 3-4 popes have apologized profusely to the Orthodox but we'll never have your celibate pedophile priests or their "infallible" pope back.
Once a heretic always a heretic.

Well, I guess I should be getting to bed! Good night! And please don't swear if you can help it, It's not becoming of a Christian!
Ephesians 4:29
Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.

Malachi Martin: Christ's Design for His Church / The Antichrist / The new world order
youtube.com/watch?v=zT9xRMwXaZI&feature=youtu.be

catholicism having pagan roots is not a good thing u dumb atheists

Revelation 21:8
8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

>and idolaters

>tfw too smart to believe in a god

The_canons
A synod is not an ecumenical council and therefore has no authority over the whole church. In fact, a lot of these "canons" seem outright absurd and not in line with Catholicism to begin with. This could be one of the origins of the practice of celibacy, but it is not an official endorsement by the Catholic church as a whole.

you dont know alot of Christians do you?

Lutheran myself.

>giving divine religious authority to a south american beaner that licks nigger feet

t.ahmed

no one wants you back, you turk rape baby gyro eating retard.

...

>Jew facade

Over the years maybe, there was a time when the Catholic church and antisemitism were the same.

Tell me when Protestantism doesn't contradict the early christians

>synod of elvira
>no context to understand prohibition of images
>still contradict Protestantism

Why I am not Protestant?

The fathers of the church spoke as they did because they regarded themselves as interpreters of the Scriptures. Therefore they are not to be made a substitute for the Scriptures; nor can the Scriptures be understood apart from the authoritative interpretation which tradition places upon them...if tradition is primitive, Protestant theology must admit that ‘Scripture alone’ requires redefinition. (Jaroslav Pelikan, Obedient Rebels, Harper & Row: New York, N. Y., 1964, p. 180 – bold emphasis mine.)

Because protestantism hates christianity

Because protestantism is a contradiction

The divine Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, as opposed to human writings; and the oral tradition or living faith of the catholic church from the apostles down, as opposed tothe varying opinions of heretical sects—together form one infallible source and rule of faith. Both are vehicles of the same substance: the saving revelation of God in Christ; with this difference in form and office, that the church tradition determines the canon, furnishes the key and true interpretation of the Scriptures, and guards them against heretical abuse. (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, MI, 1981 ed., vol. 3, p. 606 – bold emphasis mine.)

Remember, Schaff IS A PROTESTANT

Perhaps the most important aspect of the rule of faith is that it gives us what the Church conceived to be ‘the main body of truth’ (to use Irenaeus’ phrase). The Scriptures are, after all, a body of documents testifying to God’s activity towards men in Christ. They are not a rule of faith, nor a list of doctrines, nor a manual of the articles of a Christian man’s belief. In the rule of faith we have a key to what the Church thought the Scriptures came to, where it was, so to speak, that their weight fell, what was their drift. This interpretation of their drift was itself tradition, a way of handling the Scriptures, a way of living in them and being exposed to their effect, which, while not an original part of the Christian Gospel, not itself the paradosis par excellence, had been developed from the Gospel itself, from its heart, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit as an essential part of the existence of the Christian faith in history…

We cannot recognize the rule of faith as original tradition, going back by oral continuity independently of Scripture to Christ and his apostles. But we can recognize it as the tradition in which the Church was interpreting Scripture under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and as such claim it as an essential ingredient of historical Christianity. (R.P.C. Hanson, Tradition In The Early Church, pp. 128, 129

No matter how cucked the catholic church becomes, no matter how low it falls protestants will always be bellow it.
You're the retards that had "lesbian bishops demands removal of crosses from her churches to not offend muslims"

If you really cared about Christianity you'd convert to the Eastern Orthodox Church

The first clear attitude to emerge on the relation between Scripture, tradition and the church was the coincidence view: that the teaching of the church, Scripture and tradition coincide. Apostolic tradition is authoritative but does not differ in content from the Scriptures. The teaching of the church is likewise authoritative but is only the proclamation of the apostolic message found in Scripture and tradition. The classical embodiment of the coincidence view is found in the writings of Irenaeus and Tertullian.

These both reject the Gnostic claims to a secret tradition supplementing Scripture. Apostolic tradition does not add to Scripture but is evidence of how it is correctly to be interpreted. This tradition is found in those churches which were founded by the apostles, who taught men whose successors teach today. These apostolic churches agree as to the content of the Christian message, in marked contrast to the variations among the heretics. It is important to note that it is the church which is the custodian of Scripture and tradition and which has the authentic apostolic message. There was no question of appealing to Scripture or tradition against the church. This is partly because the apostolic tradition was found in the church but not just for this reason: the Holy Spirit preserves the church from error and leads her into the truth. The real concern of Irenaeus and Tertullian was not with the relation between Scripture and tradition but with the identity of ecclesiastical with apostolic teaching. Any exposition of their teaching on Scripture and tradition which fails to show this is to that extent defective. (A.N.S. Lane, “Scripture, Tradition and Church: An Historical Survey”, Vox Evangelica, Volume IX – 1975, pp. 39, 40 – bold emphasis mine.)

>literally worse than Jews
>ruined Europe
>ruined the US
Gee, I sure wonder why I'm not a protestant.

Regardless of the teachings or foundation of Catholicism giving it legitimacy, can Catholics agree that their Church is irreparably corrupted today?

the infallible unbreakable word of the mediator of god


pic related

>P R O T E S T A NT
>defies and knows the Jew well
Do Americucks actually believe this? Most protestant parties in the west re the biggest Israeli shills in existence. They understand that a church with no leadership or voice is easy to corrupt and nearly every notable protestant is their slave. Catholics got infiltrated pretty hard but at least we have plenty of people in the upper echelon of the church who will undo cuck Popes mess once he dies. You guys have nothing that can save you.

Well an argentinian is about as white as a beaner. Or you, for that matter.

Actually the pope forbide ursury, thats why jews were taking off spain with the muslims too

you're just mad a Protestant raped your catholicuck dad.

>>After all, in their exegesis the early Church theologians neither received the Bible as a 'Bible without notes' nor interpreted it in a vacuum. They received along with the Bible a tradition of interpreting it for a worshipping community and they proceeded to interpret it for a worshipping community. The study of the Bible as a scientific discipline to be carried on for its own sake was very far from their thought, and at all times has been, one suspects, a mere will-o'-the-wisp. This does not mean that the Fathers sacrificed everything for the sake of the edification of the faithful or for the consistent articulation of a doctrinal system. They sacrificed too much for these ends, but they were not unconscious of limits and controls on this process imposed by the Bible itself. Their purpose in exegesis was nevertheless purely practical, and we do not understand their exegesis until we understand this. They began the story of the Church's relations with the Bible, in which the Bible and the life of the Church were to interact for all the centuries to come, each correcting, deepening, fertilising the other. They inaugurated the Church's dance with the Bible, fancifully perhaps, but not irresponsibly, perhaps erratically, but at least gaily.-Cambridge History of the Bible, pg 453

is that spain or you do too in brail?

a. 1 Cor 11:17–34.
From a literary standpoint the oldest account of the institution of the Lord‘s
Supper is found in 1 Cor 11:23–26. Paul reports the account essentially in the form in which he had
learned to know it in Antioch in the 40‘s and as he had passed it on to the Corinthians when he established
the church there. The traditional words ―receive‖ and ―deliver‖ (paralambanein and paradidonai) in v 23a
are well known in the scholarly language of Rabbinism (cf. Midr. Qoh. 12:11) and of Hellenism (Diod.
5.2,3). They clearly indicate that the vv 23b–25 are a fragment of tradition (possibly with some Pauline
touches). ―From the kyrios‖ points to the earthly Jesus as the source of this catena of traditional elements.
At the same time he is seen as the present exalted Lord who gives the sacrament its permanent validity.
The rather scanty reference to the historic event of the passion in v 23b (―on the night when he was
betrayed‖) sets the words of Institution off from the timeless, cyclic myths and formulae of the Mysteries.

The traditional text lays out another aspect of the meal in which the breaking of the bread at the
beginning of the meal and the blessing of the cup at the end (cf. 11:25a ―in the same way also the cup,
after supper‖) surround the main meal. The words ―for you,‖ spoken at the breaking of the bread, are
addressed to the participants of the Lord‘s Supper; they draw them into participation of the salvatory self sacrifice
of Jesus. The contents of the cup in v 25b are not directly identified as the blood. Rather, in the
foreground stands the sealing of the eschatological new covenant in the death on the cross. Besides its
vertical dimension (the God of the covenant creating a new people), this covenant has a horizontal aspect:
the celebrants are brought together into covenant community.

Anchor Bible Dictionary-Lord's Supper, pg 5363

>a bunch of heretics wanted to change the bible to be whatever they wanted

o wow this is news to me

>early christians are heretics

“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.)

Sorry apostates

Proud protestant here, Catholics are a abomination.
They worship a nigger pope before God.

Why did Protestants hate the early christians?

protestant beliefs are a set of doctrinal beliefs you ascribe to its not a institutional "church" system

Protestantism is a set of mad contradictions

Luther changed the bible when he translated it to German

you only have to be right on salvation to be saved

faith alone

check m8.

a lot of prottys arent even saved they believe in faith and works like the cath cucks

I too believe in Sola Fide as described by Osborn in "Clement of Alexandria"

Faith grants divinity to the believer. On the believer rests the head of the universe (we have the mind of Christ, 1 Cor. 2:16), the kind and gentle word who subverts the craftiness and empty thoughts of the wise (1.3.23; 1 Cor. 3:19f ). The faith which, by love, ascends to knowledge is desirable for its own sake. If we had to choose between the knowledge of God and eternal salvation, we should choose knowledge. The soul never sleeps, and the constant exertion of the intelligence is the essence of an intelligent being (4.22.136); this is the divine perfection to which we are called. Faith is always on the move, from faith to faith, moving up the ladder of dialectic. It is the grain of mustard seed which stimulates the soul to grow. Faith is fixed on God and in some way divine, a source of power and stability. From the shifting sands of error, it moves to the firm ground of truth, and there it remains. (pg 172)

EBIN FUNNIEZ
>*SING SONG VOICE*
WOWTALKINGREALLYFASTNOWSOFUNNIEZXDDD
>*NERD CULTURE REFERENCE IN SONG SONG VOICE*
TALKINGREALLYFASTAGAINHEYNORMIESYOUCANPRETENDTOBEANERDBYWATCHINGTHISYOUWON'TACTUALLYBECLEVERTHOUGHYOUSTUPIDCUNTS
>*AMATEURISH ANIMATION AND MORE SING SONG VOICE*
GIBSLEDDITGOLDPLOXXXDDDD

Off you go newfag. Fuck off.

Catholicism is pagan tradition + Christian influence tying it together.

Protestanism is Judaism with Jesus.

Wrong James 2:14

From the next page

The rise of a Christian rule of faith or truth in the second century has been criticised either as a restriction on reason or as part of a decline into intellectualism.9 Yet Tertullian uses it to govern all inquiry: argument from scripture is useless and leads to a pain in the head or belly. Only the rule is decisive, because it comes from an apostolic source, which cannot be denied. Whoever has the rule does not need to go further, for after Christ there is no place for disputation and inquiry (praescr. 7f ). Clement claims that argument needs the rule as starting-point but also insists on the need of scripture for logical inquiry; Irenaeus regards the apostolic preaching which includes the rule as capable of proof from scripture.

Says the one who was more than likely genitally mutilated as a child to honour jewish tradition. Pedophilia in the church was grossly over-exaggerated.