Why do there still exist non-Reformed Christians? It's been proven they're heretics, this has been settled for hundreds of years.
Arminians, Papists and Crypto-Arians, explain yourselves.
i as a catholic believe that on occasion the pope can invoke the Holy Spirit, and when he does so he is infallible, never had a pope invoked the Holy Spirit and decreed Catholicism is a false faith
>>1404307
So you only care what the Pope says, not what scripture says?
Well, you're Pope has also "infallibly" declared Islam to be true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Dort
Hello?
>>1404270
Blah blah blah
Behold!
Bait!
>It's been proven they're heretics, this has been settled for hundreds of years.
[citation needed]
>>1404270
All Christians are heretical to each other. You can believe you are "right" when another says you are "wrong"
True Christianity is in the Heart, not in a building, not in a commonly accepted idea of Christianity.
Some people love the Pope, others hate the Pope. Some people eat bread at church, others see the lack of devotion in church.
We are all different.
I just found out Deism is the masterrace religion, but Lutheran and Reformed teachings will always be a huge influence to me.
For example when people say they have free will. You don't have free will, you're a slave to you baser instincts. When you say you such and such decisions, or you adhere to such and such ideology, out of your own free choice, you're fooling yourself. All you're really doing is acting on your driven by your desires like an ox.
>>1404860
>Deism
>religion
>>1404860
deism is fucking weak
its just aquinas without the 'extra' religious flair
diests work under the exact same theological framework as christians but just wont admit that they are, in fact, christian
>>1404869
>its just aquinas without the 'extra' religious flair
There's literally nothing wrong with that. I also take much from Plato, Schopenhauer, and everything that seems true by anyone irrespective of their backgrounds. But here's the difference. I don't have to pretend that the mythological aspects of their religion and philosophy (Plato had myths too; the bible can be interpreted as Platonic myths, and have been so by, for example, Philo of Alexandria) are literally true, only images of metaphysical concepts.
Why do there still exist non-Orthodox Christians? It's been proven they're heretics, this has been settled for thousands of years.
>>1404270
I kinda agree
I admire catholicism for its philosophy, mysticism, and theology
But the pope can eat a million dicks, I disagree with papal infallibility
This argentinian nigger is a traitor
Please do tell if their is a reform movement for me right this moment
I want to be catholic, but I hate the pope
>>1404901
>only images of metaphysical concepts.
this is the fundamental position of the early iconoclastic christians and also almost the entirety of islamic thought. it's fine to be a deist, but just be aware that for the most part, its just the decaffeinated form of abrahamic tradition. wanting to do away with the 'images' is an idea christians have already had (and some implemented) centuries ago
>>1404901 (me)
For example sin is to act in a manner not conformable with reason. And the rule of sin is signified mythologically by "Satan". But when we act with reason or "logos" than indeed we are following Christ, as it were.
>>1404968
>just be aware that for the most part, its just the decaffeinated form of abrahamic tradition
I'm okay with this, but as I said I'm open for different influences.
>>1404916
SSPX, Sedevacantism?
>>1404822
Bless this post
>>1404270
Excellent thread my friend, I'm sure it will invoke wonderful discussion
>>1404996
Sspx isnt catholic enough, sedavacantism doesnt deny papal infallibility, it just says the seat is vacant of a just and real ruler.
I need something that denies papal infallibility in general
Get those instruments and images out of God's Kirk. He gave us the means and words with which to offer Him praise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3MzZgPBL3Q
Simple fact that makes protestants eternally BTFO is the fact that priests have the ability to make wine and bread into the divine escence of god, not only that but most prostestants sects do not have priest which is one pf the main things Iesus created.
Im writing in my phone so sorry for mistakes.
>>1405179
>Devouring my savoir
>Passing my savoir through your bowels
I owe my salvation to God and His son Jesus Christ alone, He (God) gave me the intelligence to search for and find the truth by opening my mind to His word and receiving in my soul His grace which then revealed to me the truth of the written word of God.
>>1404916
Orthodox?
>>1405273
So you read the Bible without any background information, in most catholic Bibles we have small colums of information to give us cobtext and language clues to understand the bible, most Priest have to study 9 years to really understand the circumstances of what is written in the Bible.
Also it is necessary to have one of the 7 sacraments (eating the wine and bread) because it represents the last supper and males us remember the sacrifice of God
>>1405273
No Holy Spirit?
>>1405179
We do not have priests because there is no resacrifice in the sacrament. No priest can reach up into heaven and pull Christ down to earth, and there is no other mediator between God and man but Christ our High Priest. Therefore, Christ Himself is both the author and the substance of the sacrament. When the lawfully ordained minister takes the elements, ordinary bread and wine, and unites them with the Word as instituted by Christ, there He has promised to be, and when we partake in faith we eat the true body and blood of Christ, not by any power in the priest but by the power of the Word and of the Holy Spirit who exhibits and confers the grace visually represented by the elements. He instituted the sacrament to feed us, not so that we may impiously sacrifice Him again and again, and worship the elements, and pass Him through our bowels.
>>1404810
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Dort
>>1405299
>in most catholic Bibles we have small colums of information to give us cobtext and language clues to understand the bible
This is a practice that pretty much began with the Geneva Bible. Catholics didn't start doing this until much later.
This is why you can't treat all so-called Protestants the same. In the Presbyterian church I grew up in, ministers are generally required to have a bachelor's degree and to earn a divinity degree at seminary. They are required to demonstrate fluency in systematic, historical, and practical theology, as well as the ability to competently preach the Bible from the original languages. They are required to subscribe the church's confession of faith and catechisms as well as to be able to defend the same in oral examination before they can be ordained.
Lay members are encouraged to study the Bible for themselves, but there is no right of individual interpretation. Ministers have been disciplined for teaching their own interpretations contrary to church teaching, although that doesn't happen enough (much more than it does in the Catholic church though).
>>1404916
Reformed Protestantism is Biblical, Catholic and Orthodox.
>>1405299
That's a rather Zwinglian interpretation of the Eucharist, m8.
>>1404310
>So you only care what the Pope says, not what scripture says?
why not both?
>>1404310
>islam to be true
<citation needed>
>>1404270
Because they were destined by God to damnation.
>>1408770
Supralapsarians pls go.
>>1406707
They conflict
Why do you care about your little sectarian divides? You're all 2,000 year old Jewish heresy anyway.
>not worshiping the sun
>>1406466
this, I'm Presbyterian too, our ministers are very well educated and have to be able to read least Greek and Hebrew. Most Catholic priests are not even that well educated in Latin
>>1408793
t. pelagian
>>1404270
Explain this
>>1404270
Wow look at the Calvinist God
>>1409101
Too bad Sola Scriptura isn't in Early Christianity or the Bible.
Guess you Calvinshits are heretics
>>1404307
>never had a pope invoked the Holy Spirit and decreed Catholicism is a false faith
That's like summoning Apollo who declares Zeus to be a false god.
Of course the fucking Holy Spirit is going to be pandering, it's part of the goddamn theology.
Also it would take a strangely noble and open minded human as Pope to willingly rid himself of his power and nice robes.
Irenaeus destroying Sola Fide
>>1410369
m8 haven't you been BTFO enough times to stop shitposting?
>>1410352
Kek, papist pretending he cares what scripture says
>>1410344
My explanation is terminal autism
I recommend suicide
>>1405094
OCC
>Catholics say its fanciful that the scripture is divine, but believe wine and bread become Jesus for cannibalism every Sunday
>>1410433
Explain this
>>1404310
How the fuck did the Pope declare Islam to be true?
>>1410451
M E T A P H O R you dense shit. Try thinking for yourself for once; your beloved church tradition isn't going to save you pal.
>>1410460
Not according to Early Church Father Ignatius and Paul you dumbshit
>>1410460
>M E T A P H O R you dense shit.
Not him or a Christian, but you're just assuming it's a metaphor because it doesn't fit your belief system. There is no way that "they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ" is a metaphor. Are you telling me that this guy believes that people who refuse to use a certain metaphor should be socially ostracized?
>>1410445
>my ceaseless shitposting counts as an argument
>>1410482
>posting academic sources and church fathers is shitpost
Get a load of this shit
>>1404270
Catholics are the original christians. You're all heretics that will burn in hell for eternity.
TRAITORS!
Some of you even live in sin by not being baptized as babies. How can you live with yourselves?
>>1410451
>I always spam the same images while constantly moving the goalposts to avoid the facts that disagree with my preconceived notions
>>1410489
There isn't even any notion of papal infallibility in early christianity
>>1410492
No Protestants ever prove me wrong.
And not once do I ever receive any adequate explanation or anything about how I avoid facts which disagree with me.
Show can only shitpost but you can't prove anything for shit
>>1410489
You Papists make me sick
Take your false doctrines back to hell, filthy heretic
>>1404310
Scripture was invented by the Catholic Church. They chose what books would make it into the Bible, and excluded a whole bunch of others that could have made it in.
>>1410499
Kill yourself?
>>1410478
The Eucharist is metaphorical, which is a commonly held Protestant view, sir. When Jesus told his disciples to be nourished on his flesh and blood when giving them bread and wine, it's pretty obvious he was speaking metaphorically about how he will nourish the spiritual wants of humanity with his sacrifice. He did not mean that the bread and wine was literally his flesh and blood, yet Catholics and Orthodox genuinely believe that every Sunday their foodstuffs are magically transformed into bread-tasting flesh and wine-tasting blood.
>>1410502
>be Protestant
>get bombarded by academic sources that opposes his bullshit
>only sperg out without any proper argument or refutation
>>1404869
Deists believe in a creating God who never touches the world after the creation, Christians believe in a God who is constantly sustaining the world.
>>1410501
What we now know as the Roman Catholic Church didn't exist until the schism.
>>1410501
That's a shitty argument, unless the Catholic Church is God (blasphemy) you're saying canon was not determined by God but men
>>1410503
Don't forget Paul(who sees the whole Eucharist as a re-presentation of Christ's death) and Ignatius who follows suit in the magical route
>>1410350
>Wow look at the Calvinist God
You mean the Biblical God.
I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.
Isaiah 45:7
>>1410505
>Barely relevant pages of Catholic textbooks are academic sources
Yeah, okay buddy.
>>1410507
That's fair, but it still does'nt justify basing one's faith on scripture rather than the original institution that created the scripture in the first place. All this means is that Orthodox and Catholic believers are the only ones who have it right.
>>1410505
>be Papist
>go to Hell
>>1410517
God created scripture, blasphemer
>>1410515
>Church Fathers, Catholic
>secular academic sources, Catholic
Wow
>>1410514
Good by that logic, your God is immoral for ascribing responsibility upon things with no power or capability to even move itself!
>>1410529
kill yourself
>>1410518
yes, stay mad
>>1410532
Don't you have some little boys to rape?
>>1410526
Apparently God made it such that this Scripture have to be binded together with Tradition
>>1410543
I don't because by your logic, God is the one who made it such!
>>1410547
prove it with scripture
>>1404270
I don't get this whole shit about papist going to hell. We all believe in Jesus, we all believe in scripture, and from what I can tell, you guys say that all you need to do to go to heaven, is believe that Jesus Christ is the lord and savior. News flash, Catholics also believe that. Why is this shit flinging going on. I'd get these debates if it was still the 30 years war or some something, but that time is long past. We must now come together as christians in our entirety, and hold ourselves up the Christ. I am Roman Catholic, but that doesn't mean I condemn or hate baptist, or Lutherans, or Calvinist, or that whole bunch. Can't we just get along???
>>1410553
Who else but God? He flat out states it. Are you saying he doesn't have sovereign power and control over everything that ever happens?
>>1410557
Did Scripture magically fell from the sky?
How do I read Scripture?
Which books constitutes Scripture and following Sola Scriptura which Scripture can I consult to know?
>>1410553
Are you a fucking gnostic?
>>1410532
>your God is immoral
God is almighty and beyond morality, and he isn't impeded by subjective moral principles.
>>1410567
I'll take that to mean no.
>>1410568
I think Catholics are similar to gnostics in that they both scream NO! NOT FAIR! upon reading about the Biblical God and then invent their own God who only lives in their heads and caters to their personal set of values.
>>1410562
Your evil church teaches there is no salvation outside of itself
To be saved by God's grace you must have faith in it
Catholics teach the false doctrine of salvation by works, you don't have faith God will save you.
>>1410507
Same goes for Orthodox.
>>1410350
>neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.
Westminster Confession of Faith
>Moreover, we condemn Florinus and Blastus, against whom Irenaeus wrote, and all who make God the author of sin.
Second Helvetic Confession
>The cause or guilt of this unbelief as well as of all other sins is no way in God, but in man himself
Canons of Dordt
>Yet God is not the author of, nor can he be charged with, the sin that occurs.
Belgic Confession
The Calvinist churches have already established and confessed what sort of God they believe in, and they explicitly condemned the view you say they held (while quoting a chapter on Luther).
>>1404270
Calvin and all those other people are nothing but false prophets. Pope was chosen by God himself.
You will all burn in hell.
>>1410627
Your religious group relies on man made tradition that nullifies Gods Word and is Pharisaical.
>>1410601
>Your evil church teaches there is no salvation outside of itself
As do you. Or do "true Bible-believing Christians" believe the Dalai Lama is going to heaven despite him being outside the "true Bible-believing Christian Church?"
>To be saved by God's grace you must have faith in it
And who are you, O Arbiter of What Others Believe? Can one profess faith in God's Grace and be honest in it whilst not being your particular flavor of American Evangelical Christianity? What makes you qualified to know another's heart with such pompous self-assurance?
>Catholics teach the false doctrine of salvation by works, you don't have faith God will save you.
>You teach the false doctrine of salary by works, you don't have faith your employer will pay you.
Do you even know what "works" entails to us? Do you even realize that many of the things you assaninely bash Catholics for not doing based solely on what Parson Mitch told you, are "works" as far as Catholics are concerned and you treat them the way we do? "True Christians read the bible and God damns those who don't read the Bible" your pastor at "First Bible Fellowship in the Lord" bleats out, that's "saved by works" talk if I ever heard it.
>>1410627
You worship idols.
>>1410634
Enjoy Hell.
>>1410636
I guess the Lincoln Memorial is pagan temple then.
>>1404270
The Bible was compiled by the Catholic Church, but the Catholic Church itself is non-Biblical.
The conclusion is obvious: Christianity doesn't work as an idea. It would only work if each person had personal revelations.
>>1410643
No one prays to the Lincoln memorial
>>1404916
become high church anglican
>>1410642
>no rebuttal
>just a prepackaged "witty retort"
Oh silly me, I forgot I was dealing with someone who honestly believes Pic Related as truth even though it fails at its own logic.
>how are elephants and giraffes still alive?
>why AREN'T Protoceratops and Microraptors still alive?
>>1410653
Nobody deserves a fag church
>christianity is the religion of peace
>christ teaches forgiveness
>christians ITT hate one another, tell each other to an hero, say they're going to burn in hell
>>1410654
Alright m8, go back to worshipping allah and mohamet
>>1410601
>>1410634
>As do you.
This is actually correct. The Reformed churches that there is ordinarily no salvation outside the Church.
>We believe that since this holy assembly and congregation is the gathering of those who are saved and there is no salvation apart from it, no one ought to withdraw from it, content to be by himself, regardless of his status or condition.
Belgic Confession
>OUTSIDE THE CHURCH OF GOD THERE IS NO SALVATION. But we esteem fellowship with the true Church of Christ so highly that we deny that those can live before God who do not stand in fellowship with the true Church of God, but separate themselves from it. For as there was no salvation outside Noah's ark when the world perished in flood; so we believe that there is no certain salvation outside Christ, who offers himself to be enjoyed by the elect in the Church; and hence we teach that those who wish to live ought not to be separated from the true Church of Christ.
Second Helvetic Confession
>The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; and of their children: and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.
Westminster Confession
>>1410651
>prayer to saints is worship
Yeah about that...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oSaayx70zT0
>>1410657
It seems paradoxical, but it makes perfect sense. Saying someone is going to burn in hell isn't hate. It's a warning.
The true paradox is why everyone thinks Christianity is supposed to be a "nice" religion when Jesus preached Hell.
>>1410664
Christ doesn't preach eternal suffering, He preaches the way out.
Hell is mental slavery and the perceived inability to escape negative karma.
Love thy neighbor like you love thy self
>>1410661
Listen to Stephen Anderson
>>1410657
Because Christians are so bent over backwards hurting their back on who is right and who is wrong.
They are all wrong if they don't follow the original teachings of Christ.
When it comes to all the labels of denominations, it is all vain nonsense, useless and endless babbling back and forth.
That is not Christianity
>>1410668
>don't worry, there's no eternal suffering in fire
>just eternal separation from God
>btw this is the worst thing that could ever happen to you
t-thanks
>>1410661
Salvation is in the Heart, not in the "Church" because the world has separated all the churches against eachother to war over who is right and who is wrong.
None hold the teachings of the Christ exclusive, even Christ told us these teachings are not His own
>>1410668
Buddha pls go
>>1410678
Satan pls go
>>1410672
The TRUE teachings of CHRIST are THE WORDS of GOD and NOT teaching of the catholic cult.
CHRIST commanded to be wary of pharisees and teachers of THE LAW, since those are hypocrites, living by pagan human traditions RATHER, than GOD'S WORD and Apostolic tradition.
>>1410675
Nothing is separate from God. There is no eternal separation from God.
The worst thing that can happen to you is you being your own enemy against yourself.
It is one thing, to see how the extent of our sins are below us and the throne of God, that suffering makes sense because it is a step to get over those habitual patterns.
However, if we are told we cannot reach God ever because we don't "belong to this church" that is just a bias of someone elses accepted doctrine or creed. It is about our relationship to God, not our false sense of identity of what type of "Christian" we are.
If someone condemns you, they will also be condemned. If someone says you are not Christian because x y and z, who cares, the opinions of man are nothing to the Eternal Truth
>>1410688
This. Orthodoxy.
>>1410691
>the opinions of man are nothing to the Eternal Truth
Thanks, God. I sure am glad you sorted out what you meant.
>>1410656
there are traditional/conservative movements in anglicanism
>>1410688
Even the "Catholic cult" you are so willing to be above teaches the same Apostolic tradition you believe is exclusive to your "cult"
All it takes to be Christian today is to read a gospel and understand what Christ is telling you
>>1410699
>teaches the same Apostolic tradition
If all their teachings and practices are detestable to GOD?
Authoritarian hierarchical priestly system
Vain repetitions("hail marys")
Priestly robes (match pharisee garb almost identitically)
Idolatry
Necromancy/consulting spirits.
Heathen pagan shits, I pray for your souls but we all know pagans go straight to hell
>>1410688
That pic gave me AIDS
>>1410709
Even people who say "we are God's chosen people" will have detestable practices, considered detestable by people who say "No, we are God's chosen people"
>>1410671
Stephen Anderson is a Baptist, and very much not Reformed.
>>1410678
The heart which contemns the church Christ called to Himself has not been renewed by the Spirit unto salvation. Nowhere in Scripture has there ever been an encouragement to go it alone, but to be found amongst the people of God.
>But as it is now our purpose to discourse of the visible Church, let us learn, from her single title of Mother, how useful, nay, how necessary the knowledge of her is, since there is no other means of entering into life unless she conceive us in the womb and give us birth, unless she nourish us at her breasts, and, in short, keep us under her charge and government, until, divested of mortal flesh, we become like the angels, (Matth. 22: 30.) For our weakness does not permit us to leave the school until we have spent our whole lives as scholars. Moreover, beyond the pale of the Church no forgiveness of sins, no salvation, can be hoped for, as Isaiah and Joel testify, (Isa. 37: 32; Joel 2: 32.) To their testimony Ezekiel subscribes, when he declares, "They shall not be in the assembly of my people, neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of Israel," (Ezek. 13: 9;) as, on the other hand, those who turn to the cultivation of true piety are said to inscribe their names among the citizens of Jerusalem. For which reason it is said in the psalm, "Remember me, O Lord, with the favour that thou bearest unto thy people: O visit me with thy salvation; that I may see the good of thy chosen, that I may rejoice in the gladness of thy nation, that I may glory with thine inheritance," (Ps. 106: 4, 6.) By these words the paternal favour of God and the special evidence of spiritual life are confined to his peculiar people, and hence the abandonment of the Church is always fatal.
Institutes of the Christian Religion
>>1410688
>CHRIST commanded to be wary of pharisees and teachers of THE LAW, since those are hypocrites, living by pagan human traditions RATHER, than GOD'S WORD and Apostolic tradition
No, the Pharisees issue only becomes apparent when you know who they are and why they existed.
They formed after the Babylonian Exile, where the idea was "that shit with Babylon was because we weren't obeying Mosaic Law hard enough as God commanded us to do generations ago, so to prevent any more of that shit, we shall be as rigid to Mosaic Law as possible as to not slip up so God won't need to chastise us again."
It was all well and good, but by the time the Incarnation happened, it became to a point where they cared less about the reasons for the Laws or why they were needed and should be followed, and more "we were told to do X, do X! We don't care why, just do X!" For example, them getting so buthurt about Jesus healing on the sabbath or the 12 picking some wheat berries on the sabbath. They had started following the Law for the Law's sake. Being as bare bones in understanding that "no work on the sabbath" to them meant "any productive action is immoral on the sabbath and God will punish you for doing anything productive on the sabbath. Your chair broke? Wait until tomorrow to repair it, NO WORK ON THE SABBATH!!!!"
They were like the Sola Scriptura fanatics of their time by that point.
Also.
>apostolic tradition
What Apostolic Tradition could you possibly have? The only ones who claim anything like that are Catholics and Orthodox.
>>1410720
The bible says to preach the truth
>>1410601
Don't you have a tent revival to go to or something you fucking bumpkin?
>>1410659
Nice response, I'm so convinced you are the intellectual who is in the right here.
Do you have an actual argument or no?
>>1410724
So what's the right church?
>>1410738
u r fgt
>>1410609
Guess the Westminster Confession of Faith contradicted itself
>>1410724
Why trust the opinion and consensus of the "Institutes of the Christian Religion" over the Self. If they see that abandoning the church is fatal, who cares. It is only their generally accepted opinion.
We are all God's people. Who cares what building we enter, because we are a building ourself. The temple of our Heart is more sacred to God than a temple that tries to exclude people and separate God's people
>>1410728
Teach the word of God, don't preach the word of God.
I can go on and on and on "You need to accept my idea of Christianity because I was taught x y and z" and never end up leaving anything valuable for someone else to ponder on.
>>1410744
You are
>>1410744
>We believe that we ought to discern diligently and very carefully, by the Word of God, what is the true church-- for all sects in the world today claim for themselves the name of "the church."
>We are not speaking here of the company of hypocrites who are mixed among the good in the church and who nonetheless are not part of it, even though they are physically there. But we are speaking of distinguishing the body and fellowship of the true church from all sects that call themselves "the church."
>The true church can be recognized if it has the following marks: The church engages in the pure preaching of the gospel; it makes use of the pure administration of the sacraments as Christ instituted them; it practices church discipline for correcting faults. In short, it governs itself according to the pure Word of God, rejecting all things contrary to it and holding Jesus Christ as the only Head. By these marks one can be assured of recognizing the true church-- and no one ought to be separated from it.
>As for those who can belong to the church, we can recognize them by the distinguishing marks of Christians: namely by faith, and by their fleeing from sin and pursuing righteousness, once they have received the one and only Savior, Jesus Christ. They love the true God and their neighbors, without turning to the right or left, and they crucify the flesh and its works.
>>1410709
>Authoritarian hierarchical priestly system
"You are priest forever in the line of Melchizedek."
>Vain repetitions("hail marys")
Define vain.
Also, Define "Devotive Prayer"
>Priestly robes (match pharisee garb almost identitically)
So fucking what?
>Idolatry
>Necromancy/consulting spirits.
>citation needed
And before you say it:
A statue of a saint isn't Idolatry anymore than your senior class photo is.
How the hell is a one-way request for intercessory prayer "necromancy/communing with the dead?" Last I checked, Necromancy involves making zombies and the Church condemns mediums.
>>1410756
You are truly retarded
You'll be tipping a fedora before the years out
>>1410757
>Why trust the opinion and consensus of the "Institutes of the Christian Religion" over the Self.
Because self-righteousness is exactly what Scripture condemns.
>>1410767
a true Christian following God in truth and Spirit would never bow down before any statue, and do anything that the Bible expressly says not to.
No matter how many Reformed confessions deny God as responsible for evil, the fact remains that he still is and it only makes their whole system contradictory! Why? Because Calvinism teaches Predestination which entails God as the author of evil for the act of presestination is NOT on the basis of foreknowlege but of God's own intent. This entails all evil acts to be means to whatever end such a deity wants and makes any disclaim that God isn't responsible for sin and bad shit, contradictory. Even the Calvinist pastor Timmie Keller agrees that evil situations are out there by God as MEANS
>>1410767
I don't pray to my photo
You pray to your statues
>>1410756
You don't know how to read, do you? Nothing in that image, especially the highlighted portion, indicates divine authorship of sin.
>>1410728
>anything circular is inherently solar
>>1410781
Run out of pictures and actually had to post something yourself?
>>1410774
It isn't self righteousness in the sense that it is vain exalting of the self.
In order to be saved the Self HAS TO BE MADE Righteous by the hand of God, rather than the hands of men
>>1410778
And what makes you think we even WANT you to bow before them?
>>1410767
Why do you need an intermediary for your prayers? To petition God on your behalf? Doesn't God already know whether or not you are worthy? Isn't he omniscient?
>>1410785
No we don't. Or is "showing reverence before a Crucifix because it reminds you of the Passion of the Lord and the reverence you show is given to the Passion itself rather than the physical reminder of it" pagan? Because pic related isn't the actual Jesus but it does serve as a Memento Calvariae.
>>1410799
So you have NEVER asked for someone else to pray for you and you have NEVER prayed for someone else?
>>1410781
>the fact remains that he still is
That is your confession, not theirs.
>Because Calvinism teaches Predestination which entails God as the author of evil
No, it entails God having determined whom He will save, and whom He will not. It does not entail His causing men to sin, or writing sin in their hearts, but rather to pass some by and leave them in their fallen state.
>>1410788
It does. We know that Predestination is done BEFORE the foundation of the world in the case of the Elect.
This isn't on any basis of the rlect themselves as explicitly stated.
And on those that aren't this elect, God ignores them and have some special plan for them.
We also know that God is omniscient and that Predestination both ways are in fact God's decree.
Because someone cannot read, I have to explain that which is clearly stated.
And due to all the stuff mentioned here, any statement that God isn't the author of sin and evil is in fact...contradictory
>>1410781
>This entails all evil acts to be means to whatever end such a deity wants and makes any disclaim that God isn't responsible for sin and bad shit, contradictory. Even the Calvinist pastor Timmie Keller agrees that evil situations are out there by God as MEANS
Second Helvetic Confession:
>GOD IS NOT THE AUTHOR OF SIN, AND HOW FAR HE IS SAID TO HARDEN. It is expressly written: "Thou art not a God who delights in wickedness. Thou hatest all evildoers. Thou destroyest those who speak lies" (Ps. 5:4 ff.). And again: "When the devil lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies" (John 8:44). Moreover, there is enough sinfulness and corruption in us that it is not necessary for God to infuse into us a new or still greater perversity. When, therefore, it is said in Scripture that God hardens, blinds and delivers up to a reprobate mind, it is to be understood that God does it by a just judgment as a just Judge and Avenger. Finally, as often as God in Scripture is said or seems to do something evil, it is not thereby said that man does not do evil, but that God permits it and does not prevent it, according to his just judgment, who could prevent it if he wished, or because he turns man's evil into good, as he did in the case of the sin of Joseph's brethren, or because he governs sins lest they break out and rage more than is appropriate. St. Augustine writes in his Enchiridion: "What happens contrary to his will occurs, in a wonderful and ineffable way, not apart from his will. For it would not happen if he did not allow it. And yet he does not allow it unwillingly but willingly. But he who is good would not permit evil to be done, unless, being omnipotent, he could bring good out of evil." Thus wrote Augustine.
>>1410830
That's the logical consequence of predestination which isn't based in part on the individual actions themselves. We also know from the Westminster Confession of faith that even predestination to damnation is in fact, GOD'S DECREE. All these prior to creation.
So, logically speaking it means that the Fall was ordained by God, alongside Satan's rebellion.
>>1410833
I wonder why this is left out.
If any this means any "free will" is in fact...Compatibilistic. But that entails God as deliberately setting things up such that his goals occur, making him the grand mastermind of all events which not caused by human folly but by God who made it such using human beings as means for that
>>1410833
And let's not forget that any "faith" is in fact Divine mind control as the same Confession makes it very clear that it's from God
>>1410836
> it means that the Fall was ordained by God
You just figured that out? When you have a concept that is literally the creator and ruler of everything, everything ultimately is his responsibility.
>>1410864
You mean God who also presestines his elect puppet before the creation of the world?
>>1410847
Actually, it is you who have left something out.
Had you read Chapter IX, you would see that they teach that man does evil by his own free will. And indeed, that their only restriction on the freedom of the will is the freedom to do genuinely good works before God, and to procure final salvation. In all other external things, they attribute freedom to man.
Moreover, predestination and providence are not the same thing, and ALL orthodox Christians at the very least teach the latter.
Every single Reformed confession states that sin is caused by human folly.
>>1410858
>>1410869
>"faith" is in fact Divine mind control
No Reformed confession teaches this, either. You're injecting your own conclusion into works which you have neither read nor are aware of the context of. In fact, the Reformed systematizers were very much working under a Thomistic concept of concurrence. They denied the ability of man to will true good, not to decide their own actions. In fact this is one of the things that the later determinists would find fault with in Calvinism. They knew the distinction between predestination and determinism, and found fault with the Reformed for affirming the former and denying the latter.
>>1410874
I didn't which is why I explained what type of free will goes with such a contradictory statement.
The problem of course is that the actual St. Augustine sees Grace as freeing the will to choose. That God cannot justify the person without consent. Consent is ignored here and the Elect themselves are not chosen based on foreknowledge Of their own actions.
This logically entails no libertarian free will but Compatabilist free will. But desires and choices are ultimately prior caused according to such model and due to this, God would be setting things up such that his elect will be saved and the Reprobate...damned. All preaching in Calvinist thought is after all just God using humans as means.
>>1410889
False.
We seen "faith" as something God places in the person, not of all men.
According to Calvinism and that same confession, men cannot even choose God.
>>1410889
Also,here's what Thomism have to say on the issue...proving my point http://www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/papers/freedom%20and%20God.pdf
>>1410891
>>1410897
You are again confusing categories. The early Reformed (as well as Thomas Aquinas) would have rejected compatibilism. Compatibilism is a 20th-century phenomenon and not a 16th or 17th century one.
The doctrine of the Reformers and their heirs is predicated on an indifference with regard to particular action, freedom of contradiction and freedom of contrariety. You are confusing predestination, determinism, and the various states of the will as they understood them, and slapping your own understanding over their writings.
You in fact consistently do this with everything you quote. Even your earlier screenshots from non-Reformed secondary sources are used incorrectly. You don't know what you're talking about, and you don't know how to find out the difference. I've seen papers in introductory philosophy courses which cite sources the way you do, and they always flunk.
>>1410938
Thomists will but not the Reformed.
Only Arminians and Lutherans both can be said to side with the Thomists.
Thomas Aquinas DOES NOT use the language of the Reformers. He does not say that God predestines from the beginning of time but only says that which is described in the paper I cited which contradicts Calvinism.
You shown no evidence demonstrating that the Reformed hold onto the same notion as you described. You only say without any citation whatsoever.
None of the language of the Reformed confessions in fact matches Aquinas.
Now eat shit Reformed scum
>>1411027
It's already been cited in the Westminster Confession: >>1410609
Here's Charles Hodge on the doctrine of concurrence:
>Concursus, therefore, assumes, (1) That God gives to second causes the power of acting. (2) That He preserves them in being and vigour. (3) That He excites and determines second causes to act. (4) That He directs and governs them to the predetermined end. ...
The doctrine of concursus does not deny the efficiency of second causes. They are real causes, having a principium agendi in themselves. (1:600)
>The above statement of the doctrine of concursus is designed merely to give the views generally entertained by Augustinians, as to the nature of God's providential government. Whether those views are correct or not, it is important that they should be understood. It is very evident that there is a broad distinction between this theory of concursus and the theory which resolves all events, whether necessary or free, into the immediate agency of God. The points of difference between the two theories are, (1.) That the one admits and the other denies the reality and efficiency of second causes. (2.) The one makes no distinction between free and necessary events, attributing them equally to the almighty and creative energy of God; the other admits the validity and unspeakable importance of this distinction. (3.) The one asserts and the other denies that the agency of God is the same in sinful acts that it is in good acts. (4.) The one admits that God is the author of sin, the other repudiates that doctrine with abhorrence. (1: 603)
>>1411060
Damn. Give me some sources and I'll see them for myself b-baka
>>1411076
It's chapter 9 of Hodge's Systematic Theology.
N-not that I l-like you or anything. Baka baka!
>>1411104
Chapter 9 of volume 1, of course.
>>1411104
O////O
I-I only wanted your attention
Come to think about it...wouldn't it mean Catholicism and Protestantism a-are kinda close 0__0
>>1411116
Yes and no. The thing is, the Reformers didn't really initially want to start new churches and create ecclesiastical chaos. That just sort of happened as their disagreements solidified, as well as due to the political realities of medieval and post-medieval Europe.
As happens with all human events, people who agree on a lot but have a stake in separating or opposing each other focus on and amplify those differences.
Catholicism and Protestantism aren't that close in each other's eyes. But if you ask an Orthodox theologian they'll say they're pretty similar in more ways than they want to admit.
The differences are real, but not always exactly in conformity to what propaganda and stereotype would admit.
>>1411125
I-I don't think I know anything anymore
Please enlighten me master
>>1411138
>>1411116
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther%27s_Marian_theology#Veneration
>>1411161
B-Baka >___<
>>1411175
D-Don't tell me there's more similarities between Luther's and Calvin's Eucharistic theology next
>>1411200
Eh. More so than there is between Luther and Zwingli, but no cigar.
Lutherans consider Calvinists "crafty sacramentarians," because they confess a real presence but deny the ubiquity of Christ's body and deny that he is "in, with, under" the elements (yes, some Lutherans will take exception to that turn of phrase but it's a reasonable approximation of their eucharistic theology). Luther would deny that Calvin believed in the Real Presence. Both would claim a sacramental union between the sign and the thing signified, but they mean somewhat different things.
Luther:
>Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.
Calvin:
>We must confess, then, that if the representation which God gives us in the Supper is true, the internal substance of the sacrament is conjoined with the visible signs; and as the bread is distributed to us by the hand, so the body of Christ is communicated to us in order that we may be made partakers of it. Though there should be nothing more, we have good cause to be satisfied, when we understand that Jesus Christ gives us in the Supper the proper substance of his body and blood, in order that we may possess it fully, and possessing it have part in all his blessings.
>>1411290
It sounds similar to the while substance and accidents thing of Transubstantiation.
I think I get why ecumenism is actually possible now.
Hello Christians, thought it would be a good idea to ask this here.
Why does the modern church pander to gays so much?
Is there any decent argument to rejecting the Pauline epistles which condemn homosexuality, or is it just that some modern denominations are desperate for congregation members?
Surely it can't be as cynical as the latter, or at least as simple as that.
>>1410517
The orthodox churches and reformed churches both use texus respetus bibles the catholic church uses something different
>>1410831
Go away Pelagius
>>1411371
Great falling away
>>1412356
Pelagius is preferable than what you are spewing now
>>1412911
t. heretic
>>1412911
Lol, enjoy the hellfire
>>1404310
Are you a Christian or a Biblical?
>>1413096
What?
>>1411371
If you are gay and Christian, that is your business between you and God.
If you aren't gay and Christian, it is not your buisness.
>>1413386
In no one sought advice about Christianity apart from God, Christianity wouldn't even be a cohesive belief.
>>1413409
My advice is this:
All Sodomites are pedophiles, they should be locked up forever with nothing but a Bible
>>1404310
>Thinking the Bible is a magic book like Muzzies think the Koran is
>Not simply the best account of Jesus' ministry and the early church that's to be read in light of tradition
>>1405094
The only "Catholics" who deny papal infallibility and Vatican I are the "Old Catholics". They have women priests now and are basically liberal Anglicans
>>1414081
>denying biblical inerrancy
>being a blasphemer
