How do Pope-cucks defend indulgences?
>>1267419
How do heretic-cucks defend taking their ball and running home when they couldn't handle the banter?
>>1267420
By listening to the Word of God and not the antichrist in Rome?
>>1267424
>i don't like my religion
>i'm going to start a new one!
t. cultist
>>1267419
What the hell is a Pope-cuck?
Indulgences are Free Market anyway, if buy them if you want, why do you hate Capitalism? Are you a dirty commie?
>>1267428
Says the Christian to the Jew.
>>1267433
If the Jews weren't so fixated on their Messiah showing up and killing every non-Jew they'd be no such thing as Christianity
>>1267419
Is this bait. Smells like bait.
>>1267420
M8, it's the Catholics who to this very day still cannot handle Lutheran banter
>>1267432
Yes. I am.
>>1267457
>>1267419
Indulgence were just F2P premium currency before their time, you either farm good action point or you paid to have the indulgence.
>>1267424
>I know christianity better than Peter
Filthy heretic
>>1267549
I always love it when Catholics bring this up
There is literally no connection between Peter and the Roman Catholic Church. Literally none. Never in his lifetime did the Catholic Church look or function like it does now. Everything that makes the Catholic Church the way it is happened after the Constantinian shift.
>>1267557
>1 continued chain of christianity governance
>that means nothing
Fuck off you literal heretic
>>1267419
The Church never sold indulgences.
Why would I defend them?
>>1267594
No, it means absolutely nothing
Peter would never in his life defend post Constantinian Catholicism
>>1267419
Do you know how many indulgences there are?
Walking through a special door can be an indulgence.
>>1267419
Pope is God on earth.
God can do what he wants.
Next.
>>1267818
More papist than pope.
How can Protestants explain this
>>1267903
They can't
>>1267419
Given that the Church realized they made a mistake and stopped selling them, I don't have to. It was centuries ago, after all.
How do heretics defend mega churches?
>>1267818
Catholics are the worst thing about this board.
>>1268004
They don't cause they love shit like that.
>>1268005
Nah. All religiousfags are.
>>1267549
And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.
- Matthew 23:9
>>1267419
>charity is a virtue
>virtues can be used to atone for sins
>giving money to the church so it can feed the poor or whatever is charity
tah dah
>>1268014
Nah. All anti-religious fags are.
>>1267641
>I know the thoughts of Peter guys, I swear. Proofs? None, but who cares about proof anyway, my feelings are what matters
>Direct line of succesion from Peter to Francis? Nah, that's total bullshit m8
>>1268041
HE WAS A PONTIFF OF ROME
>>1267903
>>1268029
The canon was formed through the influence of the Holy Spirit; what that author describes as "kerygmatic, liturgical, paraenetic, and exegitical tradions" are all products of the Spirit, the same Spirit which remains directly accessible to this day. The early church was tasked with conforming doctrine to what the Spirit taught them, i.e. the Spirit shapes "tradition" and not the other way around. God knew what the canon would look like before the church did and He deliberately included all "traditions" necessary for salvation within that canon.
It is clear to anyone without scales in their eyes that the traditions of the Roman church are largely a continuation of pre-Christian Roman idolatry. And I'm not just referring to the Dagon hats and Mary worship, but the fact that the Roman ecclesiastical hierarchy mirrors the structure of a Roman legion (I don't recall any "cardinals" among Christ's apostles. . .).
Listen, if you believe in the resurrection and love Jesus and your neighbor that is enough to be saved. If you want to be a Latinboo LARPer God understands, but don't pretend that people are going to Hell because they don't play that game.
>>1267419
Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance.
>>1268041
Don't have to. He wrote his feelings about Rome.
1 Peter 5:13 She who is in Babylon, elect together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son.
>>1268044
Prove it. Bible verse? Anything?
Wasn't everything run by councils?
Didn't the bishop of Rome serve as one of many for a thousand years without being primary?
>>1268112
It all started in Babylon and was continued to Roman Catholicism, aka Mystery Babylon.
For instance, Ash Wednesday, the start of a 40 day fast, has nothing to do with Jesus, but with the 40 day fast and mourning of Babylon's queen for her lost son. At the end of the 40 day fast, the son is "resurrected".
There was no mourning prior to Jesus' 40 day fast in the wilderness, and He did not raise from the dead at the end of it.
>>1268135
>For instance, Ash Wednesday, the start of a 40 day fast, has nothing to do with Jesus
Luke 4:1-13
Even the protestant observance this tradition.
>>1268112
The fact is that totally destroys every single notion of Sola Scriptura in the NT authors and the infancy of Christianity, making this notion something else added into much later and contradictory to that of what we get in the NT and the Early Christians.
Once it is agreed that the Holy Spirit influences the Tradition of the Church and such are its products which also remains accessible to this day, it entails consistency throughout the ages the content of this Tradition. Core elements cannot contradict or oppose each other. BUT, in Protestantism we see the opposite of this, a break with the Tradition from this infancy. From their refusal to accept Apostolic Succession which is used as a criterion to measure this consistency and universal belief.
So too bad, your argument fails to match history. If any it makes it worse for your side.
Also, a sort of ecclesiastical authority already existed as shown with the authority of Paul, the concept of the "Pillars of the Church" and James as the leader of the Jerusalem church. Not long after, Clement of Rome goes so far as to compare the Church's clergy with Old Testament priesthood, showing once again how this Tradition contradicts yours.
>>1268112
And what wonder is it if those in Christ who were entrusted with such a duty by God, appointed those [ministers] before mentioned, when the blessed Moses also, "a faithful servant in all his house," noted down in the sacred books all the injunctions which were given him, and when the other prophets also followed him, bearing witness with one consent to the ordinances which he had appointed? For, when rivalry arose concerning the priesthood, and the tribes were contending among themselves as to which of them should be adorned with that glorious title, he commanded the twelve princes of the tribes to bring him their rods, each one being inscribed with the name of the tribe. And he took them and bound them [together], and sealed them with the rings of the princes of the tribes, and laid them up in the tabernacle of witness on the table of God. And having shut the doors of the tabernacle, he sealed the keys, as he had done the rods, and said to them, Men and brethren, the tribe whose rod shall blossom has God chosen to fulfil the office of the priesthood, and to minister unto Him. And when the morning had come, he assembled all Israel, six hundred thousand men, and showed the seals to the princes of the tribes, and opened the tabernacle of witness, and brought forth the rods. And the rod of Aaron was found not only to have blossomed, but to bear fruit upon it. What think ye, beloved? Did not Moses know beforehand that this would happen? Undoubtedly he knew; but he acted thus, that there might be no sedition in Israel, and that the name of the true and only God might be glorified; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1010.htm
>>1268041
Peters church is in no way the same church as the Roman Catholic Church. That's just a fact.
>>1268224
It's also not the Protestant either
>>1268224
>>1268264
>Nothing that makes the Catholic Church what it is was present before Constantine
Eucharist, Patristics
>>1268041
Except for that time the Pope was in Avignon. Or there were three of them. Unbroken in Rome, yeah.
>>1268289
I mean the authority structure, the role of priests, the religiosity of Saint veneration, etc. All of the extra biblical bullshit
>>1268264
This is the view of the Eucharist in the Early church
>>1268331
>the authority structure,
>the role of priests
See Ignatius of Antioch
> the religiosity of Saint veneration
See St.Cyprian
>>1268180
As I stated above, nobody died prior to Jesus' 40 day fast, and nobody rose from the dead after Jesus' 40 day fast.
As opposed to Catholicism, mourning the death prior to a 40 day fast, and celebrating a resurrection at the end of a 40 day fast, which is what Semiramis of Babylon did.
Rome = Babylon
>>1268199
It actually totally destroys every single claim of the Roman Catholic church to elevate their traditions up to the level of inspired scriptures.
>>1268224
It is, actually, having nothing to do with Jesus, and lying about having Peter's bones.
>>1267818
No man anointed by men can claim to represent G-d.
>>1268376
The early pagan Roman Catholic church, yes.
The real church, no.
>>1268421
Represent? He claims to be Jesus on earth.
There have been popes quoted as saying "I am the way, the truth and the life."
Bunch of lost goats.
give to charity to prove you are a good person so you have less sins to pay penance for in the afterlife, what's not to get
>>1268432
>pay your way into heaven what's not to get
Salvation, Simon Magus, salvation.
>>1268426
Goy, this popery is blaspheming against G-d.
>God on Earth is not God but is actually Jesus
>>1268412
d nobody rose from the dead after Jesus' 40 day fast.
(From Wiki)
Its institutional purpose is heightened in the annual commemoration of Holy Week, marking the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus,
>As opposed to Catholicism, mourning the death prior to a 40 day fast
Yes, the carnival are pretty "mourning days".
>>1268005
t. heretic
>>1268426
Strawman argument.
The pope claims to be Vicar of Christ.
>>1268482
HE WAS THE VICAR OF CHRIST
>>1268422
Show me evidence of your heresy in the Church Fathers
>>1267420 >>1267419 while heretics might frequently have wives that are adulteresses, I would surmise that very few Popes had this problem. The real problem is that the children who post here have lost the ability to understand and properly communicate in English.
>>1267419
They defend it by claiming that they needed mo money fo dem gold basilicas so it's ok if they scammed thousands of people and tell them the Pope is shortening their time in limbo.
>>1268558
Could you post examples of them defending it the way you said?
>>1268558
/r/ing a "heaven ain't free" spurdo
>>1267549
I like heresy. But am I a heretic? Are agnostics heretics, infidels or some other term?
>>1268558 Who are "they"?
>>1268521 /thread
>mo money fo dem
Why should anyone ever take you seriously as a human being? You are illeterate and are a major contributor to the downfall of civilization.
How do Catholics defend the complete extermination of the Cathars and the Bogomils?
Both were movements that were embraced at a grassroots level due to the well-known and well-documented corruption of the Church. Neither the Bogomils or the Cathars attempted to rebel or even to act aggressively towards the Church, and both show just how ungodly the Church was by explicitly acting due to temporal and very worldly concerns.
>>1268421
>annointed
What if YHWH said so? Who says that YHWH, through Jesus and a succession of 'vicars' didn't say so? King Hazael of Damascus was annointed. Did YHWH direct that or was that just some Old Testament prophet spewing forth feces?
>>1268521
Prostitution is permitted according to some Catholic theologians since it prevents worse sin like rape(at least so go the argument)
>>1267419
How do Religo-cuck defend their primal disgust for purity?
>>1268521
then you'd surmise wrong, bucko
Sixtus III raped a girl but was acquitted by the Emperor because "The judge of all ought to be judged by none"
Leo III was accused of adultery and perjury and had to have Charlemagne come bail him out (in exchange for an imperial coronation)
John X had affairs with some prostitute and her daughter and had a son by them
Benedict IX was a bisexual rapist
John XII had a concubine
Innocent VIII had 16 bastards
Alexander VI had at least 7 bastard kids and had a fondness for prostitutes
Paul III acknowledged 2 bastard kids of his
Plenty more popes had bastard children and affairs with prostitutes before they came into power. More still had people cruelly tortured, executed, and assassinated while in office and sanctioned wars against fellow non-heretical Christians.
>>1268949
>You are illeterate
lol
Luther is such a smug toad-like troll of a person, but I can't help but love him.
>>1267594
It means something to the Roman Empire.
It means nothing to God.
>>1267818
I try to convince people that Catholics really believe this.
It's good to see them this up front about it.
Absolute blasphemy.
>>1267903
By "tradition of the church" regarding the canon, they mean "these books have always been considered scripture".
Scripture = scripture; tradition did not make them scripture.
>>1268005
Literally the worst people on earth. Literally.
>>1268438
The pope claims to be God.
The pope's claim is blasphemous.
>>1268462
Again, that's all about Semiramis, the Queen of Heaven, mourning her lost son, fasting for 40 days, and having her son "rise from the dead" at the end of that 40 day mourning and fasting period.
Has nothing to do with Jesus at all.
When you see a papist with ashes on his head on Ash Wednesday, know that he is a pagan.
>>1268482
Vicar.
Vicarious in Latin.
In place of, in stead of.
Anti- in the Greek
Antichrist.
Yes, the pope is antichrist.
>>1268517
You showed me the heresy of your early church fathers.
Mine did not commit such heresies.
>>1269146
Rome. The City of Whores and Orphans.
I always love the shitfests of different sides trying to claim their superior similarity to the early church. If the gateway to salvation was emulating the early church there isn't a sect that comes remotely close.
>>1269396
Gee, almost as though salvation were a private matter between a man and his Creator.
>>1269370
Apparently, the authors of the NT don't subscribe to Sola Scriptura >>1267903
>>1269347
On what basis? The basis is Tradition since we do not find in any of the accepted Scriptures themselves a definition of the boundaries of Scripture itself.
And as Gamble also shows, Scripture itself in the form of the NT arises and contains indebtness to Tradition itself which becomes more prevalent the further back one goes.
So no, you failed to explain anything. Your point only works if,
a)The canon is known from the beginning and is closed
b)There is no disputes regarding books of Scripture
We don't have a and we have b from history.
Gamble is also a Protestant
>>1269146
I am pleased by your well researched and well articulated post, HOWEVER in order for a Pope to be a "cuck", said Pope must be married and it is his wife who must commit the adultery. I am not defending the Papacy and once again I applaud your post BUT what I do take exception to is the constant misapplication of the word "cuck" is cyberspace.
Thank you once again for your Papal degeneracy list.
>>1269467
2 Timothy 3:16-17.
Apparently they did.
Roman Tradition: Let's totally deify Mary!
>>1269484
The whole context also includes the importance of Tradition so spitting that verse isn't gonna do anything to prove my point wrong.
If any, it proves mine right where there is no Sola Scriptura in Early Christianity.
NO Protestant can beat my arguments
>>1269467
You're insane.
On the basis that the OT was developed and in place 400 years before Christ, meticulously maintained by the Hebrews.
On the basis that every single book in the NT was written by an eyewitness to the life, ministry, death or resurrection of Jesus Christ, was inspired by the Holy Spirit of God, and contained absolutely nothing that contradicted any other book in the bible.
The Holy Spirit inspired 66 books.
Those 66 books are in the bible.
The Holy Spirit maintains those 66 books.
The Holy Spirit teaches those 66 books.
You've no idea what I mean, or Who, when I say "Holy Spirit".
You literally think it's a spook.
>>1269477
When a man rails the pope's boyfriend in front of him, is the pope a cuck?
Or did you not know the tradition of orgies and homosexuality that pervaded the Vatican, and which lingers today?
>>1269498
Where in those 66 books we find the list of that 66books.
The whole canon of the OT wasn't even settled during Jesus' time. It was fluid. No such Council of Jamnia ever happened. It's considered bullshit by most scholars today.
If Scripture itself cannot give us the boundaries of itself then it entails that its boundaries are set not by Scripture itself but by something else which would be Tradition.
But this decimates Sola Scriptura as here, Tradition becomes the authority and not Scripture.
And here you are failing to answer my question.
The realization of God's plan on Earth and its enforcement aren't free. Those who help the church carry out God's will should be rewarded in heaven..
Its really that simple. I have no idea why Jesus deniers (Yes, if you deny that Jesus told Peter to build his church then you are a denier) cant get this around their heads
>>1269498
>>1269531
I just told you what they were.
OT
NT
>>1269548
Where in the OT and NT is the definition of the boundaries of Scripture itself.
You did not answer this question.
>>1268199
The early Christians was not subject to the popish extravagances which later became the hallmark of the Roman church. Luther was a REFORMER because he rooted out the superfluous dogmas which men allowed to pollute Christ's Gospel over the centuries following His ascension. Luther understood the only way to prevent this idolatrous creep that inevitably infects human institutions due to our sinful nature is to take authority away from man and give it back to God's word. It is essential to remember that the doctrine of Sola Scriptura was a response to abuses of ecclesiastical authority and was designed to prevent them in the future.
Everything a person needs to know to have a redemptive relationship with Jesus Christ can be found in Holy Scripture. God knew this when He inspired the evangelists to write the Gospels and He knew this when He directed to church fathers in composing the canon.
>>1269539
And again, because the bible was organically realized to be inspired by God, all things inspired by God are in, and all things not are out.
That's not a tradition.
That's scripture being scripture.
The reason you can't tell the bible is inspired by God is because you are dead and lack spiritual discernment.
>>1269552
The argument here is that the Early Christians never hold to a notion of Sola Scriptura and such notion opposes it. The ironic thing is that the closer one looks at Scripture itself, the more the influence of Tradition becomes prevalent. This is also why the Coincidence view of Scripture that ANS Lane talks about came to be since under such a framework, a distinction between the two contents is meaningless when Scripture itself contains the Tradition and arises from it.
Sola Scriptura teaches us that Scripture Alone is the highest authority in ALL matters of faith.
So when asking the question: "Where in Scripture the definition and boundaries of Scripture are?", it must be answered by at least one of the 66 book of Scripture Protestants use. If not, it entails Scripture not being the highest authority and decimates this principle, which is NEVER found in Early Christianity
>>1269554
The composition of Scripture is Tradition since in NONE of those Scriptures do we find any definition or layout of its boundaries.
The "inspired by God" claim is pointless when it is Tradition that enables the recognition of at least, the core books throughout Early Christianity which some here and there being disputed or taken out.
Either way of course, you are not answering my question proving yet again how the problem of the Canon is one that crushes down the legitimacy of Sola Scriptura
>>1269552
Come to think about it, no answer is even given to the points I had raised in that post.
Daily reminder the Avignon Papacy excommunicated everyone following the Roman and Pisan Papacy.
Daily reminder the Roman Papacy excommunicated everyone following the Avignon and Pisan Papacy.
Daily reminder the Pisan Papacy excommunicated everyone following the Roman and Avignon Papacy.
But then the Council of Constance made everything fine again.
If I was a good Catholic who died between 1376 and 1416, would I go to Hell or Purgatory?
>>1269504
No. The Pope isn't married to his boyfriend so no, he isn't being "cucked".
>>1269477
I wasn't the guy calling them cucks, I just decided to reply to that guy because the pre-modern papacy is really fun to criticize because they had such an aura of holiness backing their authority even though plenty of them did horrific things.
Here's one of my favorite pope stories about a fairly decent one.
After the death of Pope Nicholas IV in 1292 the papal throne remained vacant for two years due to deadlock between the Colonna and the Caetanis families. One day a hermit named Peter stormed into the Vatican to berate the cardinals for being huge assholes driven by dynastic politics, and everyone was so moved by his speech that they made him Pope instead. He assumed the name Celestine V but was a weak pope because nobody respected him since he didn't blackmail people or resort to violence. After 5 months of being pope he was so jaded with the church that he passed an act that said "popes are allowed to abdicate" and then abdicated. After trying to retire to a monastery the next pope, Boniface VIII, had him arrested and imprisoned in a dungeon until he died so that nobody would proclaim him antipope.
>>1269572
Christians follow Jesus Christ, not other Christians regardless of how early or late they might be. All the necessary traditions for salvation, such as baptism, were preserved in the canon and God knew this when He directed its composition.
It is nothing short of ridiculous to claim that a doctrine like "papal infallibility" should be given equal authority as the beatitudes or other scriptural doctrines just because a bunch of Romans in dresses thought it would be cool. Do you honestly believe God fearing Christians are going to be condemned to the lake of fire because they don't believe Mary stayed a virgin her whole life? Where do YOU think James came from?
>>1269593
What if it's the pope's favorite 10 year old boy getting plowed by three cardinals? Is the pope getting cucked then?
>>1269578
2 Timothy 3:16-17.
Inspired by God? In.
Not inspired by God? Not in.
>>1269586
Hard to say. I don't know if back then 99% of Catholics go to hell, as the case is today.
>>1269584
>hey man you need to prove that your view is valid to me based on my own criteria and working within an arbitrary frame that I set up that a priori rules out your viewpoint shah can't do it huh well looks like i win again
>>1269599
No one is talking about Papal Infallibility or Catholicism here.
I'm just showing how Protestantism is contradictory to that of the Early Christians and history, on a HISTORY BOARD
I agree that "All the necessary traditions for salvation, such as baptism, were preserved in the canon and God knew this when He directed its composition." and I expect them to be consistent throughout the ages.
In the Church Fathers throughout the ages we find regarding Baptism, Baptismal Regeneration.
Regarding the Eucharist, where the mode of presence is mentioned, elements consumed are referred to as the Body and Blood of Christ. Consistent amongst them.
On the Protestant side, we get a view agreeing with the Church Fathers and another in opposition with them. And here, a Protestant who tries to ignore this problem amongst his elk when it have serious implications and consists of matters of faith which are important.
Stupid how a discussion of Catholic doctrine pops out when my argument doesn't mention them at all. Fucking fallacy.
>>1269609
I'm following the criteria of Sola Scriptura to show me the definitions of the boundaries of Scripture. This is a matter of faith and according to Sola Scriptura, Scripture is the highest authority in all matters of faith. But we see here no ability of Protestants to show by Scripture the definition and boundaries of Scripture, meaning of course it must be by Tradition that such definition arises, proving my point.
>>1269603
So how is one gonna recognize that its inspired? We can't even find in Scripture itself the definition of these inspired texts in terms of their composition which entails Tradition as the means of such recognition.
>>1269611
1. You're an idiot, because "Protestants" is a catholic term that refers to people in the 16th century.
Using "protestants" to mean "1st century Christians" is absurd.
2. Your idiot church does not date back to the 1st century; it dates back 4000 years to Babylon. You act as though that's a good thing. It is not.
3. If you're using scripture to prove tradition, then scripture is still the authority.
4. If you do not understand how complete 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is, read it until you do.
5. If you do not see how evil most of the "traditions" of the Roman Catholic church are, you'll never meet Mary.
ever.
>>1269621
2 Timothy 3:16-17.
Here's another favorite of mine to take down Sola Scriptura.
If Scripture is the highest authority in all matters of faith, this entails that the use of theodicy to solve theological problems(such as Problem of Evil) or reason to argue for god's existence is kinda pointless and makes the use of reason, the highest authority, not Scripture. Scripture doesn't tell us about solutions to the Problem of Evil and for it to be used as an argument for God's existence would be circular reasoning.
So reason is to be abandoned and fallacy to be embraced to truly practice Sola Scriptura
>>1269645
Random passer-by here, that doesn't really damage the Sola. In fact attempting to address those problems is probably more damaging to Christianity since it puts the whole notion of your religion into the realm of a true or false question, by attempting to prove it true you open it to the possibility of being false.
t.Atheist
>>1269645
The bible....does not talk about the problem of evil....
Holy fuck.
>>1269632
1)Protestants means those who follows the five shitty solaes stupid. My arguments shows in this case the 1st century Christians not using Sola Scriptura and it being in opposition to their take on the matter
2)This is a red herring. We are talking about whether Sola Scriptura is found in the Early Church or in Scripture
3)My argument uses Scripture as a demonstration of how it arises from Tradition and in itself shows its use as authoritative to the point the two are one. Proving Traditions with Scripture also doesn't even entail Sola Scriptura since the Coincidence view of Scripture and Tradition dictates this yet assigns Tradition as the means to read Scripture and as evidence for the correct way to read it. Tradition also includes the method of Scriptural reading
4)The context of 2 Timothy 3 includes Tradition so it's stupid for you to use it.
5)Show me an Early Church Father that deny the change of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. I'm waiting
>>1269611
The fact that you think Christians are compelled to follow other Christians and not Jesus Himself shows that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the faith.
We don't have to agree with the church fathers about everything because guess what, they were fallible human beings just like you and me! What were effective methods for the church in antiquity are not necessarily effective in the 21st century. The only thing that is unchanging is God Himself and we anchor ourselves to His word so that we are not tossed about by the fickle winds of culture. However, simply because we are anchored in the Word does not mean we do not adjust our sails. The church doesn't need to wear robes and process with candles or any other man made traditions... sure those things can be nice and if they bring you closer to Jesus then go for it, but don't act like they are essential to our faith.
>>1269671
I said SOLUTIONS to the Problem of Evil. Is the free will defense found there?
>>1269594
Thank you again. The degenerac (sexual or otherwise) and intrigue surrounding the Papacy is always a lively topic.
>>1269674
Actually you have to at the very least on key matters of faith such as free will, soteriology, Scripture and Tradition, Eucharist, Baptism...etc
On these areas, the Church Fathers despite their differences and span throughout centuries are all consistent with each other. The point here is simple, if Truth does not change, then one expects it to be the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
So if your doctrines is not in line with that of Early Christianity or fails to match up to history, too bad, we have a huge problem as it entails that if you are right, truth can change and God can actually contradict himself, or that you are wrong since earlier, the truth is "X" and the truth is unchanging.
>>1269678
Holy fuck.
That's literally what the bible deals with en toto.
>>1269660
I think it does as any theological problems now pointed out have to be instead of properly argumented in defense, lays in the use of fallacy.
>>1269673
1. 2 Timothy 3:16
2. See 1.
3. Using scripture to prove tradition means that scripture is being used as an authority over tradition.
4. 2 Timothy 3:16-17, in context.
5. It's not in the bible at all. It's completely pagan. NO Christian believes taking communion to remember what Jesus went through for us means that we're cannibals and vampires.
It's a disgusting pagan practice, and includes satanic practices as well. They eat human beings too.
>>1269706
Want to take another run at that sport?
>>1269703
It doesn't. Deal with it. All it tells us is that God is doing something to save humanity from some problem in a nutshell. It doesn't tell us why God allowed the problem to be there in the first place. It doesn't tell us about the free will defense or why God allows the suffering to go on instead of taking immediate action to stop it.
So reason have to come in and do the work for us to fill in these gaps, not Scripture itself which is silent.
>>1269723
Wow.
Let me just say that your complete and utter ignorance over the bible doesn't reflect on the bible in any way.
Just on you.
Creation.
Fall.
Redemption.
Judgment.
Eternity.
Go get yourself a bible and start reading it.
>>1269723
>Scripture itself which is silent.
Scripture, silent on "evil".
Wow.
491 Bible results for “evil.” Showing results 1-25.
>>1269697
The truth is that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who suffered death upon the cross for humanity's redemption and was resurrected on the third day. That is the non-negotiable truth of the Christian religion.
Other questions we may have are open for discussion and anyone who claims to have reached a definitive answer regarding the nature of free will or the problem of evil is deluding themselves. These questions have always been and will remain mysteries that our puny human brains cannot completely grasp. We can attempt to discuss them and we can form hypotheses but it is only the tyrannical instinct in a person that would demand the whole world adopt his pet interpretation of this or that philosophical mystery.
>>1269713
The context of 2 Timothy 3 already shows us Tradition so any appeal to any verses in that area must take this into account.
Scripture is not above Tradition when all it is is simply a written form of it. Scripture can prove Tradition but it is not Sola Scriptura when Tradition is used as the lens to read and understand Scripture, as evidence for how it is to be read or includes the notation that it must be consistent or even utilize the Apostolic Succession method.
Let's see what 2nd Century Christian, Justin Martyr who tries to defend Christianity to the Roman Emperor has to say about the Eucharist,
And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.(Chapter 66)
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm
>>1269737
That shows God doing something about it. It doesn't justify why suffering exists or God allows it to happen.
>>1269740
Good job showing how you are an illiterate buffoon who can't even read. I did not say Scripture is silent on evil but on giving answers to what philosophers call the Problem of Evil
>>1269744
Inspired Word of God.
Something some Italian said.
Learn to tell the difference.
>>1269744
Eat God, Be God did not start with your church. It started thousands of years earlier, with other pagan churches.
>>1269754
Step 1. Get bible.
Step 2. Read bible.
>>1269754
You need extra help. I'll help you.
The bible: Evil is a temporary problem created by men and angels and annihilated by God.
Fini
>>1269742
Christian Tradition from the Church Fathers tell us that Jesus' Atonement is for all of humanity. But amongst the Protestants, some say it's only for the Elect. So which is it? For all or for a chosen group?
Important matter of faith. Both CANNOT be simultaneously true. The use of "mystery bullshit" is simply avoiding the problem right away when Protestants themselves take their respective positions as theological truth and God would be stupid if somehow magically, both become true.
Such an argument also entails that matters of faith cannot be even known or answered which makes the act of reading Scripture pointless! This isn't science where the act is meaningful and provides insight despite the possibilities of other shit.
But on this matter, such makes the whole notion of Sola Scriptura, pointless which ironically tells us that Scripture is clear to believers enlightened by the Holy Spirit. We don't get that shit with your approach here, given by the fact that on important matters of faith like free will and the sacraments, we get no answers at all. The difference in Sacramental views is what drives the wedge between Luther's Sola Fide and Calvin's. Given such a view important to Sola Scriptura as well, it means that your whole argument here is pretty much bullshit and creates theological solipsism where Scripture cannot be known despite ironically it being clear to enlightened believers!
>>1269673
>five solaes
Anglicanism and Methodism use prima scriptura instead of sola scriptura
>>1269786
Correct but Methodism rise out of Anglicanism. Anglicanism is sometimes seen as something else all together.
But on their prima scriptura, they get the credit of being closer to the Early Church.
>>1269789
I realized something, why is the so called Pagan Christians who are Catholic persecuted by the Roman state?
That makes no sense if Babilon is Rome!!
>>1268435
God understands logic and would understand that you are simply utilizing the economic system to more effectively deliver charity, you are not paying someone to pray for you.
>>1269760
The Bible doesn't even call itself the Word of God. Only Jesus!
Disgusting book worshiper.
>>1269820
The bible calls Jesus the Word of God.
And the phrase word of God is used dozens, if not hundreds, of times to describe the scriptures.
Step 1: Get bible.
Step 2: Read bible.
>>1269807
Rome is Babylon.
Roman Catholicism is Mystery Babylon.
The Catholics persecuted the Christians.
The Catholics persecuted the pagans.
The Catholics persecuted the natives.
The Catholics persecuted the entire fucking world.
That clear it up for ya, sport?
>>1269813
Simon Magus tried to buy the power of the Holy Spirit.
So are you.
>>1269823
Look again at my statement. I said "Word of God" with a capital.
Scripture isn't that.
It is the word of God but not The Word of God. Learn the difference dufoos
>>1269832
Look at my post again.
Read it this time.
Then get a bible, and read that.
>>1269832
56 Bible results for “"word of god".” Showing results 1-25.
1. Get bible.
2. Read bible.
>>1269827
Puritans persecuted the natives too. They saw it as God's will since Predestination.
But either way, where are evidence of your unicorn christians that believe your bullshit in the time of Justin Martyr.
I'm waiting
>>1269832
Oh, you're that filthy pervert Soursoul Moochy or whatever.
You're a reprobate.
But at least you dropped your trip.
>>1269778
Scripture teaches us that if we confess with our mouths that Jesus is Lord and believe in our hearts that God raised Him from the dead, we will be saved (Romans 10:9). Full stop. Any "church father" who teaches a doctrine of salvation that contradicts our canonical writings is wrong. It's that simple. Holy Scripture is our rule for measuring our beliefs and the more our beliefs are in line with scripture, the closer to the truth they will be.
However, not every issue that can be conceived of is relevant to one's personal salvation. Reasonable Christians can have disagreements about the nature of free will without compromising their eternal reward. Yes you are right that there is only one correct answer to questions like this but what I'm saying is that we will not be given that answer in this life and simply because someone adopts a mistaken view about free will does not mean they are condemned to Hell. There will be those who have a near flawless understanding of philosophy who will nonetheless suffer the second death because they never actually knew Jesus and there will be those who are utterly ignorant of philosophy who will still be seated at Christ's right hand in glory. What makes someone a Christian is not their knowledge, knowledge is what makes someone a scribe, a Christian is identified by their capacity to love.
One time a woman at my (Catholic) church puked after taking the Eucharist and everyone freaked out and they had to collect it on a cloth and put it in a special bowl. I don't remember there being any blood in it.
>>1269845
[Citation needed]
>>1269778
>Christian Tradition from the Church Fathers tell us that Jesus' Atonement is for all of humanity.
This is actually false and non-biblical, and comes from a profound misunderstanding of the word "atonement".
>>1269838
>>1269834
>word of God
Not "Word" of God with a capital "W". Good job strawmanning
NO PROTTIE CAN BEAT ME
>>1269847
Let's see what Paul really meant by that,
By contrast, many recent studies of the Greek word pistis have concluded that its primary and most common meaning was faithfulness, meaning firm commitment in an interpersonal relationship.[14][15][16][17] As such, the word could be almost synonymous with "obedience" when the people in the relationship held different status levels (e.g. a slave being faithful to his master). Far from being equivalent to "lack of human effort", the word seems to imply and require human effort. The interpretation of Paul's writings that we need to "faithfully" obey God's commands is quite different from one which sees him saying that we need to have "faith" that he will do everything for us. This is also argued to explain why James was adamant that "faith without works is dead" and that "a man is saved by works, and not by faith alone", while also saying that to merely believe places one on the same level as the demons (see James 2). The "new" perspective argues that James was concerned with those who were trying to reduce faith to an intellectual subscription without any intent to follow God or Jesus, and that Paul always intended "faith" to mean a full submission to God.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Perspective_on_Paul
My point isn't that EVERY issue is relevant to Salvation but there must be agreements where it matters. Free will and the Sacraments for example shows this where differing interpretations lead to two opposing views. Logically we know both cannot be true, only one or none.
Amongst Protestants, the Bible used as justification for their positions regardless of where they stand. And because of this, it actually opposes Sola Scriptura which tells us that Scripture is clear to believers who have the Holy Spirit. Guess we now know this is bullshit as this Holy Spirit can actually give two contradictory things or somehow intends to mislead and deceive or be sick and evil by hiding the true meaning of the texts.
>>1269856
Read the post again, reprobate.
Eyes open this time.
>>1269878
Paul meant what he wrote.
And what he wrote is impossible to achieve without the assistance of the Holy Spirit, as Jesus told Peter when Peter uttered the same thing, and as Jesus told the thief on the cross when he uttered the same thing.
Let's not rely on wiki.
>>1269888
If any you are the illiterate one here.
Scripture doesn't use a capital "W" when referring itself as word of God. Such is only used for Jesus.
How stupid are you
>>1269892
No, I mean Jesus' work did not include atonement.
The Spanish had other ideas. In 1565, they established a forward operating base at St. Augustine and proceeded to wipe out the Fort Caroline colony. The Spanish commander, Pedro Menéndez de Avilés, wrote to the Spanish King Philip II that he had “hanged all those we had found in [Fort Caroline] because...they were scattering the odious Lutheran doctrine in these Provinces.” When hundreds of survivors of a shipwrecked French fleet washed up on the beaches of Florida, they were put to the sword, beside a river the Spanish called Matanzas (“slaughters”). In other words, the first encounter between European Christians in America ended in a blood bath.
Did you read your own cite?
>>1269896
The thief on the Cross also did something. He rebuked the other for ridiculing Jesus. So that isn't mere belief alone. It isn't as you are saying.
If such is true, Paul's use of "pistis" is telling that his version of "faith" is one that implies effort and obedience to God. Even if there is assistance from the Holy Spirit, it's one where the individual is also active and not a passive tool that cannot do anything.
>>1269897
Read it again. Eyes open, looking at the letters, noticing when the W is capitalized, and when it is not.
>>1269905
Such a fool. The truth right before you, the example of the thief right there to instruct you, and yet you remain completely idiotically and most foolishly damned.
"Remember me, Lord, when you come into your Kingdom."
1. Confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord; and
2. Believe in your heart God raised Him from the dead. (when you come into your Kingdom, man hanging on a cross next to me).
>>1269903
>From the earliest arrival of Europeans on America’s shores, religion has often been a cudgel, used to discriminate, suppress and even kill the foreign, the “heretic” and the “unbeliever”—including the “heathen” natives already here. Moreover, while it is true that the vast majority of early-generation Americans were Christian, the pitched battles between various Protestant sects and, more explosively, between Protestants and Catholics, present an unavoidable contradiction to the widely held notion that America is a “Christian nation.”
Learn to grow a brain if you can.
Also, the fact that you don't even know what "atonement" is shows how shallow your knowledge of theology is. The term "atonement" refers to the Salvic work of Jesus. That's it moron
>>1269878
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Perspective_on_Paul
>This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
>The neutrality of this article is disputed. (September 2011)
>This article may need to be rewritten entirely to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. (August 2012)
This is what you're hanging your argument on...
Furthermore, God is ultimately our judge who decides who lived by the Spirit and who didn't. This is why things like "excommunication" are offensive to the Gospel because they are examples of humanity usurping God's authority. Scripture IS clear to believers who have the Holy Spirit and God ultimately decides who those people. There will be those who were beloved on Earth as pillars of the church who God knows are charlatans in reality and there will be those who were "excommunicated" by the church who God will save nonetheless. The Holy Spirit does not give contradictory things but there have been and will continue to be many men who mistake Satan masquerading as an angel of light for God Himself.
>>1269923
*God ultimately decides who those people are.
>>1269923
Look at the sources from the part I had cited
Douglas A. Campbell, "The Quest For Paul’s Gospel: A Suggested Strategy", 2005, pp. 178–207
Hay, D. M. (1989). "Pistis as "Ground for Faith" in Hellenized Judaism and Paul". Journal of Biblical Literature 108 (3): 461–476. doi:10.2307/3267114. JSTOR 3267114.
Howard, G. (1974). "The 'Faith of Christ'". The Expository Times 85 (7): 212–5. doi:10.1177/001452467408500710.
Pilch and Malina, "Handbook of Biblical Social Values", 1998, pg 72–75
These are academic sources which backed the cited part up and what my argument rest upon.
Also thank you for agreeing with my point that Scripture is clear to the believers who have the Holy Spirit according to Sola Scriptura.
The fact that amongst your kind we find contradictions in belief and doctrine makes the question of who has the holy spirit impossible to answer when both side can use Scripture to justify their positions. If this is also so, we expect interpretation to be consistent throughout the ages reflecting the one truth obtained by enlightened believers. But amongst the Protestants and those of ages prior, we find differences in doctrine and Biblical interpretation! None of the Early Christians and Church Fathers have Protestant doctrines like the five solaes
>>1269970
You can cite all the scribes in the world and it won't change the truth one iota.
Also, JUDGING who has the Holy Spirit is not something Christians need to concern themselves with because we are here to serve not judge. God alone is our judge and we ought to be more preoccupied with beam in our own eyes before we get upset over a splinter in our neighbor's.
Yes Protestant scholars have had innumerable disagreements with each other but do you know what they all agree on? That Jesus Christ is the Son of God who suffered death upon the cross for the remission of sins and was resurrected from the dead on the third day. Like I've said, this is the fundamental truth of Christianity. Believing this truth is what separates the sheep from the goats.
>>1269990
I agree which is why I had used authoritative academic sources here to show that there is no bias and what I'm arguing is what the truth is in contrast to your lies and deceit.
The Bible is simple to those who have the Holy Spirit. Scripture cannot contradict itself. So it is reasonable to expect that those who are enlightened by the Holy Spirit to have in fact the same and consistent interpretation of Scripture. If not, then we literally reach a state of theological solipsism where the truth of Scripture cannot be known. So we can conclude that there must be a strain of interpretation that we would find throughout the centuries which are the same and consistent reflecting this.
We find that the Church Fathers all disagree with the positions of your camp and oppose them from their interpretation of Scripture. We have Biblical scholarship by Christians themselves which points out how your camp got Paul wrong. It then must be proposed that you and your camp are wrong and did not have enlightenment of the Holy Spirit as shown by the disconnect with history.
If we accept your position, it is akin to scientists not accepting certain presuppositions and using the scientific method to uncover reality since we don't know anyways. But no progress is to be made from this and makes one worse than shit, just like you are
>>1269916
Not one single Puritan on Indian atrocity in your own liberal garbage article that you cited to back up your idiotic point.
Just the usual catholics slaughtering everyone in their way.
>>1269990
An agreement on one thing, does not entail that their overall views are valid since their opposing views make it such that the Jesus who came and rose from the dead are two differing Jesuses!
That is ridiculous
>>1269921
I literally harmonized the thief on the cross with Romans 10:9-10, but you're too determined to follow the Whore of Babylon into hellfire to notice.
>>1270032
>"heathen natives"
Illiterate moron. Can't even read.
>>1270024
>authoritative academic sources
There's your logical fallacy.
>>1270038
The thief on the Cross follows Paul for he is obedient. This is why he rebuked the other thief. He didn't dindu nuffin idiot.
>>1270040
Go ahead. Show from the article that the Puritans wreaked some sort of genocide on the natives.
>>1270047
Citing academic sources is not fallacy. Journals do that shit all the time idiot
>>1270049
And again, rebuking his buddy meant nothing for his salvation.
Me rebuking you for all of your abominations and blasphemies does not save me. I'm already saved.
>>1270053
It's a logical fallacy: appeal to authority.
And when you're talking about God, there is no authority above God to appeal to. Your "experts" are idiotic lost sinners in need of a savior.
>>1270051
>religion has often been a cudgel, used to discriminate, suppress and even kill the foreign, the “heretic” and the “unbeliever”—including the “heathen” natives already here
Shows how stupid and delusional you are.
Fuck the Puritans. I would kill them all for their authoritarianism and dehumanizing of others!
>>1268990
The Cathar view was that their theology was older than that of the Roman Church and that the Roman Church had corrupted its own scripture, invented new doctrine and abandoned the beliefs and practices of the Early Church.
Cathars: 1
Whore of Babylon: 0
Let us keep a sense of proportion. The record of Christianity from the days when it first obtained the power to persecute is one of the most ghastly in history. The total number of Manichaeans, Arians, Priscillianists, Paulicians, Bogomiles, Cathari, Waldensians, Albigensians, witches, Lollards, Hussites, Jews and Protestants killed because of their rebellion against Rome clearly runs to many millions; and beyond these actual executions or massacres is the enormously larger number of those who were tortured, imprisoned, or beggared. I am concerned rather with the positive historical aspect of this. In almost every century a large part of the race has endeavored to reject the Christian religion, and, if in those centuries there had been the same freedom as we enjoy, Roman Catholicism would, in spite of the universal ignorance, have shrunk long ago into a sect. The religious history of Europe has never yet been written.
-- The Story Of Religious Controversy Chapter XXIII by Joseph McCabe
>>1270024
CHRISTIANS ARE CALLED TO IMITATE JESUS CHRIST NOT THE CHURCH FATHERS.
CHRISTIANS ARE CALLED TO IMITATE JESUS CHRIST NOT BIBLICAL SCHOLARS.
WHETHER THE CHURCH FATHERS AND BIBLICAL SCHOLARS AGREE OR DISAGREE IS IRRELEVANT TO ONE'S SALVATION BECAUSE THEY WERE/ARE MERE HUMAN BEINGS.
GOD HIMSELF KNOWS THE TRUTH OF SCRIPTURE AND HE WILL JUDGE ACCORDINGLY.
CHRISTIANITY IS A RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD NOT A SCIENCE.
>>1269550
Wow.
This is tough for you, huh.
The OT was given by God through His prophets to the Hebrews, who maintained it rigorously.
The NT are all the writings inspired by God written by men who witnessed the Son of God here on earth.
Go ask your church what you believe, because you have no beliefs of your own.
>>1270059
1. Confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord; and
2. Believe in your heart God raised Him from the dead.
>>1270033
And God will judge who among them actually knew the real Jesus.
>>1270066
Thank you for proving my point. For me to imitate something requires me to be active to "imitate" it!
>>1270070
You are not addressing the question. Where in Scripture is the boundaries of Scripture itself?
I do not in Scripture see any definition of these boundaries. It did not tell me which books are those
>>1270066
Therefore Christians are called upon to reject the teachings of Paul, correct? Paul was an opportunist who usurped the legacy of Jesus, correct?
>>1270079
So tough for you to get this.
Inspired by God: In
Not inspired by God: not in
>>1270081
That's like Marxists rejecting the teachings of Marx.
>>1270079
IF YOU WANT TO IMITATE JESUS CHRIST THEN YOU WILL NEED TO DISPENSE WITH HUMAN TRADITIONS.
THE SABBATH WAS MADE FOR MAN NOT MAN FOR THE SABBATH.
>>1270085
That brings us to the issue, how do we know which books are inspired and which are not?
We are not given this answer in Scripture itself
>>1270093
Dispose human traditions for Divine traditions
>>1270087
>This is why he also demands that one works out his own salvation with fear and trembling.
So stupid. So sure you're not stupid.
Paul says that the Holy Spirit of God is literally living inside of you.
So remember that. Remember God is with you, literally living inside you. And remembering that, work out your salvation (not earn your salvation; do the works God places before you AFTER you are saved) with fear and trembling.
Your position that Christians are anti-good works is anathema.
Your position that you can work for God, put God in your debt, and force him to let you into heaven is also anathema.
>gangraped by Protties on all holes
>Managed to take all their dicks in all my holes
>>1270096
It brings you to the issue, because you do not have the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit of God.
So you have no mechanism by which to do so.
Which is why you are so confused.
>>1270097
Which are all contained in Holy Scripture.
>>1270106
Or lost to the winds of time.
Or made out of whole cloth in 1854 when the papacy went full blown Mother Earth cult goddess tier pagans.
>>1270100
From your own retarded statement, it entails I have to make effort in my salvation. Nobody's saying you earn your way to heaven or any system of merit. My obedience is simply a response to that which is given to me. I'm not a mind controlled zombie just because I'm empowered by the Holy Spirit in me. I'm still a person with will who must hold on to the gift until the end in submission and obedience.
Your shit position is heretical. No Church Father believed in that shit
>>1270102
Your god hides the truth from everyone, he makes the truth unknowable as if wanting as many as possible to go to hell
>>1270120
Define "effort"
>>1270120
He makes things known to his children, not to the children of satan. You can only learn things from satan.
Open adoption, of course, is ongoing but for a limited time only.
>>1270102
Who says? Paul himself? Mohammed claimed to be inspired. Joseph Smith claimed to be inspired. Why do you reject their teachings but venerate Paul?
>>1270130
You talk about competing canons as though it is something that matters.
Maybe you've heard of Paul, the Apostle?
He wrote 2 Timothy 3:16-17.
>>1270124
I use it in the normal sense fuckturd
>>1270125
Which Protestant got it right then?
Amongst your group which you call "children of god", they all have differing and contradictory views! Looks like you are lying about your god.
No one can even know whether it's "open" or not based on your stupid logic
>>1270142
I will keep telling it to everyone.
>>1270138
Effort.
Let's see.
1. Confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord; (this requires some effort on your part, yes.) and
2. Believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead. (not sure how this requires effort, but let's say it involves at least supernatural effort.
Are you saying that unless your salvation is effortless, you don't want it? You're not willing to expend the effort to receive a free gift?
>>1270138
All Christians got it right.
All non-Christians got it wrong.
>>1270142
Christians don't have to tell other Christians what Jesus is like. We all know the same Jesus.
Read Jeremiah 31.
Hell, read anything in the bible for yourself.
>>1270142
All Scriptures are inspired by God.
Scripture: inspired by God.
Non-scripture: not inspired by God.
>>1270158
Is it your disgusting sexual immorality that's sending you to hell?
>>1270158
>the guy who presumes to judge God is also judging my arguments
Well at least I'm being judged in good company!
>>1270161
How about "working it in fear and trembling" or actually having some fruit or that faith is dead?
Oh right I forgot!! That's just God mind controlling me since I don't actually do any of that!
>>1270165
Nope. Protestants know of differing Jesuses and we don't know which version is the true one! Oh the irony of it all!
>>1270162
Protestants are not Christians
>>1270167
You are not even answering the statement I made
ALL PROTS CONFIRMED FOR STUPID MORONS
>>1270181
You mean and "those" delivered because the word "arguments" is plural.
>>1270200
>got pwned
>can only point out grammar error like a retard
>>1270209
Someone who struggles with basic grammar is hardly in a position to be critiquing other people's arguments.
>>1270225
>cannot answer arguments
>attack grammar which isn't part of argument instead
The retardation of Proturdism
>>1270238
I was helping you with your grammar and you'll live a much happier life once you learn to distinguish a helping hand from an attacking fist.
>>1270267
Fuck off. For you to even comment on such a topic demonstrates how badly you have been owned by my arguments.
Eat shit loser
>>1270238
What is Proturdism? Is that professional defication? Or are you simply an illeterate neckbeard who can't form a coherent argument using the English language?
>all these limp-wristed nu-males ITT getting triggered by the fact that the Church that alone holds the only Truth that is to be found in this life, and is despised by all the world, sometimes in its incredibly long history had to use violence to crush the insanity and power thirst of entitled cunts who were after trying to institute their own hipster cult rather than care about the souls of men
all Protestants ITT confirmed kill
>>1269912
the thief was justified from being baptised and doing works because he was about to die, you idiot. His impossibility to carry out those things is what allowed him to avoid it. Protties will never understand what the Bible actually says, unlike Catholics.
>>1270072
>2. Believe in your heart God raised Him from the dead.
The thief didn't know Jesus was going to be rased from the dead. lmao protties can't into logic
What I gather from this thread is, is that they can't
P*pists, I swear
"Why did you do this thing?"
"YAH WELL YOU AS WELL HERETIC"
>>1273144
Unfortunately Romans struggle with humility.
