What are some comfy movies approved for a Christian board like Sup Forums?

What are some comfy movies approved for a Christian board like Sup Forums?

Could be direct Bible stories like "The Ten Commandments" with Charlton Heston or even loosely Christian history based movies like "Kingdom of Heaven".

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=v1Qu3dZlRGE
youtube.com/watch?v=27qUO8_9uT0
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican's_list_of_films
youtube.com/watch?v=HSsjaKqdM30
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 15&version=NABRE
youtube.com/watch?v=D7Q69QJkYLM
youtube.com/watch?v=WrMUFP8Fx1w
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_naturalism
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

I really liked the original Ben Hur

This >is a christian board shit is the cringiest shit ever.

This is a Muslim board infidel.

Imsallah.

Fireproof

>OMG IM SO FUCKING TRIGGERED, THIS IS CRINGE! THATS WHAT IT IS

Its okay, Jesus forgives you for he knows that you know not what you do.

hey reddit

But Sup Forums has been once since the tree of life changed this board forever

Ken Russell's The Devils.

Robocop

The Apostle get grisly & dark, but it deals with redemption. For me it's Bobby D's best work.

youtube.com/watch?v=v1Qu3dZlRGE

Signs had a lot of good scenes pertaining to hope.

youtube.com/watch?v=27qUO8_9uT0

>Sup Forums has been since disliking atheism became contrarian

fixed

Atheism is the dumbest fucking religion on the planet and if they were true to their own tenants they would shut up anyway as everything is subjective man and you can't judge people for believing in God man

A Thief in the Night

Truly scary movie for any brim and tombstone fearing christian

>everything is subjective man and you can't judge people for believing in God man
>American philosophy

Nope that's just textbook Richard Dawkinism, who's a Britbong. Atheists are all determinists and subjectivists. Anyone who says they aren't are either dumb, confused, or liars.

> Atheists are all determinists and subjectivists. Anyone who says they aren't are either dumb, confused, or liars.

right after you say

>you can't judge people for believing in God man

The ironing is too much. Put more thought into your bait before you go off and contradict yourself.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican's_list_of_films

>In 1995, on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of cinema, the Vatican compiled a list of 45 "great films". The 45 movies are divided into three categories: religion, values, and art.

>Religion

Andrei Rublev (1966)
Babette's Feast (1987)
Ben-Hur (1959)
The Flowers of St. Francis (1950)
Francesco (1989)
The Gospel According to St. Matthew (1966)
La Passion de Notre Seigneur Jesus-Christ (1905)
A Man for All Seasons (1966)
The Mission (1986)
Monsieur Vincent (1947)
Nazarin (1958)
Ordet (1955)
The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928)
The Sacrifice (1986)
Therese (1986)

>Values

Au Revoir les Enfants (1988)
Bicycle Thieves (1949)
The Burmese Harp (1956)
Chariots of Fire (1981)
Dekalog (1988)
Dersu Uzala (1975)
Gandhi (1982)
Intolerance (1916)
It's a Wonderful Life (1946)
On the Waterfront (1954)
Rome, Open City (1945)
Schindler's List (1993)
The Seventh Seal (1956)
The Tree of Wooden Clogs (1978)
Wild Strawberries (1957)

>Art

Citizen Kane (1941)
8½ (1963)
Fantasia (1940)
Grand Illusion (1937)
La Strada (1954)
The Lavender Hill Mob (1951)
The Leopard (1963)
Little Women (1933)
Metropolis (1927)
Modern Times (1936)
Napoleon (1927)
Nosferatu (1922)
Stagecoach (1939)
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
The Wizard of Oz (1939)

Tree of Life and 2001 are atheistic odes. Both make use of the grand epic of evolution.

God's Not Dead

>Schindler's List
>Gandhi

Dropped.

captcha: steggle of christ

God's Not Dead 2

...

The Holocaust is the most probable myth the Vatican believes in

I'm a Baptist, we are the true relaters of Jesus's message.

This much is unavoidable.

>Belief in science and belief in God are mutually exclusive
Try harder next time.

That was for laughs folks.

The the true question being.. do you believe bleed his blood for you on that cross?

Plain & simple..

>>Belief in science and belief in God are mutually exclusive

Depends
If you throw out or twist the scriptures however you feel like, then sure you can believe in both.

science=/=evolution

They are though when scientific claims your God makes are false. There is just no way to reconcile christianity with where we are in science now honest to yourself.

Not at all the case. You shouldn't think Evangelicals are representative to "devout Christians" and not just a specific modern denomination.

I wouldn't think that is at all the case.

Genesis was not meant to be taken literal. It was to be the hook.

God sending his son to die for you,,, well that's a question you have to answer for yourself.

Can you believe that God loves you that much?

If you arent going to take the infallible word of god literally, why even be a christian?

I dont understand

What specifically are you referring to?

The Bible is a book that is in line with science. And yes, if you just throw out teachings of the Bible because Richard Dawkins said so then you probably aren't a Christian.

youtube.com/watch?v=HSsjaKqdM30

God new man was too infallible to understand. He made it simple & still you did not understand.

So he sent his son to die for you & still, you do not understand.

That's why they carefully established Jesus' line back to Adam
That's why Paul said through one man sin came into the world

What about all the other errors and contradictions in the bible? What about the fact that we don't even know what the original text said because God is too stupid to protect his holy book? What about evolution explaining behaviour better than the fall?
What about mind brain connection disproving the soul?

Sure you can always claim something is compatible and ignore everything that goes against it but that's not being honest. You just like christianity so you attempt to reconcile it with what you actually believe

Western culture and the western tradition has been heavily influenced by hristian theology, but just because someone is using western elements that also include Christian elements in an artistic work that doesn't mean that the work itself is Christian. The Tree of Life alludes to the western tradition, including the western traditions' affirmation of evolution.

That's like saying Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra is Christian because he's working in a western philosophical tradition influenced by Christianity.

This is what I came here to post

>infallible
*flawed

>no true scotsman
>ignoring glaring scientific claims in the bible such as the great flood, or even something as mundane as the impossibly tall tower of babel

The only way to reconcile science and the bible is to do what Ken Ham did. Say that the laws of physics today are different than they were 2000 years ago.

>the once saved always saved dumblet

Paul was just a man, and the Bible is just a book. However, it's fairly well supported as historical documents of its time go, and I believe that the gospels are a genuine recording of the life of Christ.

You mostly just sound like you're uninterested in the idea that anyone would interpret the Bible differently from the very literal way you do.

It was of an age where less than 95% of the population knew how to actually read.

It's like explaining the suicide squeeze to a cat.

That shit better have some cat nip in it.

The bible is very easy to understand. Its messages are clear.

The only reason why people act likes its "hard" is because they spend a whole bunch of time trying to claim that things should be interpreted differently or used as a metaphor to fit in with modern times. Its really hard when you try to do that.

If you read the bible, its pretty on the nose what it says and what it was meant to mean.

>Paul was just a man, and the Bible is just a book
There you go. You don't even know that christianity claims the bible to be God breathed. You don't care about it you don't believe in it. You're just memeing

>You mostly just sound like you're uninterested in the idea that anyone would interpret the Bible differently from the very literal way you do.
No you're just being dishonest

>ignoring what I wrote for your prelearned response

>god sent his son to earth and made him get murdered whos actually him too or something so it doesnt really matter to atone to himself for humans sins who he created and made naturally sinful himself and damned to hell for thousands of years before this and still does if you dont at random guess the right sub-sub-sub set of christianity to follow

this is why monotheism is retarded, at least pantheism can explain way plotholes by just saying different gods have different agendas

Figuratively/Literally is a shitty dichotomy that no actual scholar uses for any textual criticism. There are multiple "literal" ways to read it and multiple figurative ways. Just thinking that how you understand it at face value precisely what it means for it to be "literally". Even the patristic era scholar St. Augustine had a book called The Literal Meaning of Genesis that would fly in the face of Evangelicals generally. Anti-theists and Evangelicals have a habit of assuming genre of texts they speak about, along with structure, and that fucks with their understanding dramatically.
By the Catholic and Orthodox church, which have their origins in the early church and actually give a damn about having intellectual consistency through in doctrine through history understand the creation story and Adam and Eve (those two specifically as Genesis isn't exactly a whole book but a collection of various texts) as "myth" in the academic sense. By that I mean that they are cultural stories. However, they do uphold that these stories have a basis in truth. For instance, they uphold the reality of a fall and of two individuals that are the common ancestor to all men whom are called Adam and Eve.


>Steven Anderson

lolno

How is that at all related to what I said?

>Paul was just a man, and the Bible is just a book. However, it's fairly well supported as historical documents of its time go, and I believe that the gospels are a genuine recording of the life of Christ.

Yep and Jesus was just the bastard son of the Roman soldier Pantera, and you don't actually go anywhere when you die, and it all means nothing, etc.

But yeah no you're totally Christian.

Bro, there are some really basic apologetics out there coming from all over the place, including the Catholic church, that deal with all of this. If the Catholic Church doesn't take Genesis to be a literal representation of creation, maybe you don't actually know what you're talking about.

>Jesus was just the bastard son of the Roman soldier Pantera
This is my favorite atheist conspiracy theory

>If you read the bible, its pretty on the nose what it says and what it was meant to mean.

So, with using only the texts to assist, what are the genres of:

>Psalms
>Job
>Luke

Matthew 15:9
>But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

What did He mean by this?

I never claimed they do. There are flaws with literally every claim of christianity.
You just don't care about what the issues are. Because you're not a real christian.

THE KEY POINTS BEING

GOD LOVES YOU

DO YOU ACCEPT HIS LOVE?

It definitely helps in the battle of living.

>implying you can be a determinist and a subjectivist at the same time

I said belief in God, not belief in organized religion, much less a literal interpretation of scriptures written thousands of years ago. Science is a means of understanding God's creation, or whatever you want to call the larger order that we fit into. The people who wrote the Bible simply didn't know a lot of things that we know now.

And there are a hell of a lot of things we don't know today that will be understood 2000 years in the future. We're just barely starting to figure it all out. The most obnoxious thing about a certain strain of Atheists is that they believe they know everything, but the scientists that they worship would be the first to disagree.

There are flaws with our understanding of everything. When we found that Newtonian physics and Quantum physics didn't mesh, did we throw them out entirely for their flaws? Of course not, we saw that there was still truth in them and worked to refine what we knew. I am a follower of Christ, the Son of God. I believe he died for our sins and rose again three days later. Nothing else is a dealbreaker.

Context first. Part 1/2.

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 15&version=NABRE

1 Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, 2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders?[b] They do not wash [their] hands when they eat a meal.” 3 He said to them in reply, “And why do you break the commandment of God[c] for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and ‘Whoever curses father or mother shall die.’ 5 [d]But you say, ‘Whoever says to father or mother, “Any support you might have had from me is dedicated to God,” 6 need not honor his father.’ You have nullified the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7 Hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy about you when he said:

8 ‘This people honors me with their lips,[e]
but their hearts are far from me;
9 in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines human precepts.’”
10 He summoned the crowd and said to them, “Hear and understand. 11 It is not what enters one’s mouth that defiles that person; but what comes out of the mouth is what defiles one.” 12 Then his disciples approached and said to him, “Do you know that the Pharisees took offense when they heard what you said?” 13 He said in reply,[f] “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. 14 Let them alone; they are blind guides (of the blind). If a blind person leads a blind person, both will fall into a pit.” 15 Then Peter[g] said to him in reply, “Explain [this] parable to us.” 16 He said to them, “Are even you still without understanding? 17 Do you not realize that everything that enters the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled into the latrine? 18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile. 19 [h]For from the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, unchastity, theft, false witness, blasphemy. 20 These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile.”

Jesus's word though.

The sermon on mount is the greatest thing ever.

Not some science & I love science.

You can. Most atheists are philosophical and moral subjectivists, as well as determinists.

Moral objectivism is cuckoo for cocoa puffs with determinism anyway because if it were true than EVERYTHING (including all human action) is just a series of dominoes playing out and everything is determined to happened from previous inputs. Holding humans to objective standards while saying that it's all dominoes all the way back is like screaming at a rock tumbling down a hill "wrongly", chastising a cloud for raining "unvirtuously", or criticizing your computer for not telling you something "truthfully".

Free will only makes sense if God exists, and Christianity teaches that we are not just meat robots, but that God breathed into our nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul.

Part 2/2

That line is a part of Isaiah's prophecy that is being referenced. The line specifically says that "they" are not truly upholding the will of God as they think their own innovations are doctrine.

>Evangelicals in this thread

>People who sprinkle babies, commit rampant idolatry, and put the edicts of man before the word of God in this thread

No you're not.

>Nothing else is a dealbreaker
Let's turn this around. Why do christians have to go there? Because on all testable claims they got their shit pushed in. And by now we know Jesus wasn't even Bethlehemian as the messiah was prophecised to be. You would give this much rope to literally no claim youd evr elsewise encounter. You are not christian you want to be.
Thats why christians have to open 10 threads about this on every board. To hide their own doubt under empty phrases about how christianity still holds up despite being disprven by vague appeals to philosophy and how "someone can explain it all"

Ah, and here we are again. If it doesn't fit your definition, it's not Christianity. Horseshoe theory always wins. It's unfortunate that you leave no room for progress in these discussions.

Not him but I don't have to appeal to shit. I'm a fundamentalist Baptist who converted from hardcore atheism.

Atheism can't answer itself and modern theoretical science is identical to the circles within circles of people using geocentric models of the universe, with having to keep making up increasingly more complicated shit in an endless spiral that didn't actually explain anything.

Meanwhile
>In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth

Wow, so hard.

Reminder that if you're a Protestant you aren't actually Christian.

youtube.com/watch?v=D7Q69QJkYLM

>If it doesn't fit your definition, it's not Christianity
I claimed nothing that could even be mistaken for it.

You want to pigeonhole Christianity into the easy, ready-made strawman of your youth. It was so much easier when Christians took demonstrably wrong positions, wasn't it?

I used to be Atheist but switched to Christian when it became too edgy and mainstream, but i feel like Christianity is becoming too mainstream on here now what can we switch to next? i've always wanted to try Buddhism.

>into the easy, ready-made strawman of your youth.
I feel like there's some projection here. I still never claimed any such thing. I'm pointing out that giving more and more ground and always saying "it's jsut a metaphor bro" makes christianity less likely not more.
Don't be so hard on yourself Sup Forumsddit

A reminder.
youtube.com/watch?v=WrMUFP8Fx1w

You could try following something you believe as true rather than treating what you believe as novelty.

Do you believe in anything, really?

So atheism it is

Max Stirner. Despook yourself

Atheism isn't a belief, and very vague at that.
You need to apply yourself.

dis nigga gets it

You've consistently made territorial claims about who is or is not a Christian. Claiming, now, that it was just about the likelihood of Christianity's veracity is pure backpedalling.

And I've consistently stood by the Gospels as truth, not metaphor. They are the core of which I, and all Christians, base their faith around.

what do i call myself i don't know if there's a god and don't really care either

apatheist

>Atheism isn't a belief
When your whole life and values revolve around God being non-existent, it kind of is

Most anti-theists are just metaphysical naturalists.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_naturalism

Go for it. We still think you're wrong but at least you know what you are.

No I'm saying everybody on here is not a christian but a larper for cultural reasons.

>And I've consistently stood by the Gospels as truth, not metaphor. They are the core of which I, and all Christians, base their faith around.
Well no. 1. Of all there are certain implications of the gospels being true that necessary follow. Jesus didn't came out of nowhere he claimed to fullfill judaism. 2. The gospels are demonstrably not true. Easiest example being the census that didn't happen. The only explanation for that is christians trying to tie Jesus to messianic prophecies and you know that. 3. We don't even know what the gospels originally said. Ignore everything else and tell me how a religion can be true if the God is literally so stupid in revealing his scripture that one thousand and nine hundred years after their writting we discover that certain parts weren't part of the original and that we don't know what the original said. And since I assume that you'll hide behind the catholic church without knowing the stance of the catholic church on the issue I inform you that they revised their infallible canon to cut out these passages

>And I've consistently stood by the Gospels as truth, not metaphor. They are the core of which I, and all Christians, base their faith around.

From the earliest synods of the organised Church, Christians understood the need to interpret the Bible on multiple levels - namely, the literal, metaphorical, moral, and mystical. Do not fall for the evangelical Protestant meme: they have set the nuance of the Christian faith back 1800 years with their retarded young earth theories and other awkward nonsense.

Agnostic

That's anti-theist, not atheist.

>everyone is a larper
That is closing your eyes and going "lalalalala" tier.

>That is closing your eyes and going "lalalalala" tier.
No it's true

>mfw that's actually a word

sounds stupid, i don't like how everyone has a label for everything.

i just tell people i don't know because i honestly don't. i'd like there to be one and know i'll meet my family in the afterlife again but i cannot believe it if i cannot see it with my own eyes. i would just be lying to myself.

Atheism isn't a religion

Keep telling yourself that, bud.

Agnostic and Apatheist are terms used to describe your belief to the question of belief in God. He needs to be looking at is an understanding of what he actually believes the world is like. That's what "Christian" and "Buddhist" is but not at all what Atheist, Agnostic, and Apatheist is. Those are shallow labels.

I will, since it's objectively true

God didn't write it, men did. Yes, I do consistently find myself aligning with the Catholic Church's stance on canon, and I don't have an issue with changes made for accuracy.

The census did occur, by the way, it's just doubtful, for a couple of reasons, that Mary and Joseph would have had to go to Bethlehem because of it. Plus, there are two Bethlehems that could have been the referenced city. There are a lot of things we don't know, but that's why we have archeologists and historians who specialize in this. I'll continue to adjust based on the facts we find, and I have no issue with that. I'm fairly confident that the Apostle's Creed will stand just fine.

Nice strawman.

All fundamentalists recognize that there are obvious allegories, metaphors, parables, etc. throughout the Bibles. Most of these are pretty apparent and not hard to pic up on. Furthermore, there are a lot of things that are plainly stated as literal and it's only people who are closet atheists and secretly believe it's all fundamentally fairytales (but that they "like" all of the Jesus parts so they kind of roll with it) and then have to jump through a thousand hoops and twist everything around so that they can still look cool with all of their postmodern degenerate friends without having to have awckward conversations with Grama or give up on the church potlucks.