Christian theology thread for Christians - Deus homo factus est naturam erante, mundus renovatus est a Christo regnante

[Sissyagamben]

It's all been written.

A lot of catholics are just hoping this pope will just 'pass'.

It's difficult to asses how much actual damage he is doing since questioning the pope is a big no-no in catholicism and many people who doesn't approve just go along reluctantly.

But fucker's doing the classic leftist strategy of colonizing every institution at every level with fervorous stooges so that his faggot 'revolution' survives him. Any future based pope will likely find a lot of resistance from individuals appointed by this fucker in key positions.

In any case, just to answer, John Paul II told you what to do back in 1980: "Take a rosary and pray! Pray hard!"

I was upset at first with his “contextualize the church” postmodern language and the lunch with tranny, but I think I get it more now. Maybe it’s cope, but whatever

When he talked to trannies he told them they should love their natural God given body, it’s not like how it is for the anglicans where they are all hecking valid. The trannies were also among a bunch of other people, afaik he didn’t just talk to the trannies.
It makes sense because those are the ppl who really, really need God. If they get the message that church community can be a place of solace, and through keep going they do away with their current associations, that wouldn’t be too bad at all. Maybe they are sinners, and more egregious ones than most in their transpassings, but perfection is not required at all for one to become a Catholic. It’s through being a Christian one becomes closer to perfection in the journey.
I’ll allow myself this level of copium.

 

[Otoya Yamaguchi]

The Saints aren't dead. Categorically, Saints are promised eternal life. So, it is not uncommon to ask the richteous to pray to God on your behalf. The prayers of the richteous availeth much.

The saints have eternal life in heaven, they are not on this earth

You talk about saints praying for you. What no one has answered is WHY ARE YOU ASKING SAINTS TO PRAY FOR YOU?

 

[A Real Munson]

The saints have eternal life in heaven, they are not on this earth

You talk about saints praying for you. What no one has answered is WHY ARE YOU ASKING SAINTS TO PRAY FOR YOU?

I did answer that. "The prayers of the richteous availeth much." I'm asking them to pray for me, because they are closer to God and are more in his favor than I am. Their prayers, should they offer them on my behalf, can be expected to have more pull with the Lord than do my own. So, while I pray to God on my own behalf, I also ask for prayers from my loved ones, my neighbors, and from the Saints.

Edit: Spelling of one word.

 

[Otoya Yamaguchi]

Have you read the Book of Revelation? Are you aware that the souls of the saints are alive, right now, with God? The souls of the saints reside with God:



The souls of the saints are able to cry with a loud voice. They speak to the Lord. This would not be possible if they were dead because we serve the God of the Living, not the dead. It is only possible that these saints are in eternal communion with God because they are alive. They were killed, but they are not dead. The saints live! They reside within the eternal altar of sacrifice, and they are beseeching Holy God.

I understand. But if god can hear and see all, there is no point in asking a mortal to pray on my behalf. The saints are a pointless middleman in this case. God will hear my prayers himself, and will certainly not be swayed or convinced by someone else doing it for me

In that same Rev passage, it says the saints, while there in heaven, are still servants of god. Not his equal, not his consultants

I did answer that. "The prayers of the richteous availeth much." I'm asking them to pray for me, because they are closer to God and are more in his favor than I am.

Says who? God tells isaiah that God can always hear and touch us, no matter how far we fall away from him

 

[A Real Munson]

Says who? God tells isaiah that God can always hear and touch us, no matter how far we fall away from him

The Word of God says as much.

James 5:16 “Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much”

I try not to take my own richteousness for granted.

 

[Dr. Kinder]

I’ll allow myself this level of copium.

Lies don't come from the Spirit, including lies we tell ourselves for coping purposes. Lies come from the Father of Lies, who is Satan. Father James Martin is winning very strongly. It isn't good. It isn't good!

 

[Blobby's Murder Knife]

They sure act like it

Literally where? He gives direction, but he is just another fallible and fallen man.

I was upset at first with his “contextualize the church” postmodern language and the lunch with tranny, but I think I get it more now. Maybe it’s cope, but whatever

When he talked to trannies he told them they should love their natural God given body, it’s not like how it is for the anglicans where they are all hecking valid. The trannies were also among a bunch of other people, afaik he didn’t just talk to the trannies.
It makes sense because those are the ppl who really, really need God. If they get the message that church community can be a place of solace, and through keep going they do away with their current associations, that wouldn’t be too bad at all. Maybe they are sinners, and more egregious ones than most in their transpassings, but perfection is not required at all for one to become a Catholic. It’s through being a Christian one becomes closer to perfection in the journey.
I’ll allow myself this level of copium.

Here is my take on it. I have no problem with him talking to troons in outreach. Our Blessed Lord did the same. What is seriously missing the asking them to repent, give up their lifestyle, to follow Christ, and here is how we will help you leave that old life behind. It just seems like he met with them, asked them not to do much of anything, photo-oped and moved on.

 

[A Real Munson]

Here is my take on it. I have no problem with him talking to troons in outreach. Our Blessed Lord did the same. What is seriously missing the asking them to repent, give up their lifestyle, to follow Christ, and here is how we will help you leave that old life behind. It just seems like he met with them, asked them not to do much of anything, photo-oped and moved on.

I tend to agree with the criticism of him that we're called to be a light to the nations, and that one doesn't put a basket over a lamp. Essentially, criticizing him for allowing his words to be taken out of context so carelessly and allowing confusion and obfuscation of the truth. He allows liars to use his name and station to further their lying. Jesus did not equivocate nor allow his words to be twisted.

The bloodlust of "Holy Mother Church" is duly noted. Catholic church authorities had the desire in their hearts to murder Servetus. That they were too incompetent to pull it off does not obviate their guilt.

The Magisterium is not the whole of the Church. It is however an important institution instantiated by the apostles, and their inheritors, the Bishops through which the teaching of Christ is used to illuminate the world. You throw away apostolic succession, and Christ's deposit of faith, at your own risk. The apostles are the ones to whom it was given to teach as Christ taught. It was not so given to every disciple who followed Christ.

Their are arguments to be made against the Magisterium and the cousrse it's chosen over the years. I don't think accusations of bloodlust make for the strongest among them though

Says who? God tells isaiah that God can always hear and touch us, no matter how far we fall away

That doesn't mean that we are all of equal richteousness or that God will give our petitions as much weight as each other.

 

[Otoya Yamaguchi]

The Word of God says as much.

You quoted james...no offense to James, but God > James

I try not to take my own richteousness for granted.

The messiah says you are not righteous

Literally where? He gives direction, but he is just another fallible and fallen man.

Whi calls himself father, claims infallibility, claims to speak for God, makes up things about the bible, tells followers to worship false gods, and lives in a literal palace on a throne of gold.

And no catholics seem to have an issue with this

True, the pope is a mortal man with sin, just like me. The difference is, I do not claim any authority

 

[A Real Munson]

You quoted james...no offense to James, but God > James

The messiah says you are not righteous

This is what happens when you become completely umoored from sacred tradition. Careful prots, it's more likely than you think!

Whi calls himself father, claims infallibility, claims to speak for God, makes up things about the bible, tells followers to worship false gods, and lives in a literal palace on a throne of gold.

First of all, don't double post, it makes you a double nigger. Don't be a double nigger.

There are multiple reasons we refer to priests as Father. I won't go into too much detail, but one reason, is that in the execution of their duties, they are a limited stand in, acting in persona Christi. They are an appointed stand in for Christ, the High Priest. They are ordained by the Bishops, who are the inheritors of the apostolate.

You don't seem to understand the doctrine of Papal infallibility. It does not mean the Pope is infallible. It means that at times, within the scope of his office, he can make declarations which are recognized as being infallible. If Papal infallibility is not explicitly invoked, then it isn't at play.

Nigger, you're claiming to speak for God, here in this thread, at least as much as the Pope ever does.

I'm going to need a citation showing when any of the Popes, all the way back to Peter, or any of the Bishops since Pentecost, have called Christians to worship false gods. If you're claiming that Saints are worshipped as false gods, then you're retarded.

I'll pray for you, but I know you don't think much of prayer.

True, the pope is a mortal man with sin, just like me. The difference is, I do not claim any authority

Yes you do. You claim to be your own teaching authority. The teaching authority Christ bestowed the apostles is the same authority you're here claiming for yourself.

Remember the story of the Ethiopian scholar, in the Acts of the Apostles. How can you read, if you have no one to teach you?

Edit: grammar.

 

[Otoya Yamaguchi]

This is what happens when you become completely umoored from sacred tradition.

Tradition is just cult speak for "something catholics made up".

They are an appointed stand in for Christ, the High Priest.

Appointed by who? Christ appointed a task to "building thr church" to Peter and Peter alone. The church is built. Mission accomplished. Peter is dead. Popes are claiming a lineage that doesn't exist scrupturally

he can make declarations

Who says?

, you're claiming to speak for God, here in this thread, at least as much as the Pope ever does.

Sure. That's what a good relationship with the Lord looks like. But I do not claim any worship or demand any validation or worship like the pope does

have called Christians to worship false gods

They call it intercession. They call Mary the queen, they worship angels, Saints and popes

I'll pray for you, but I know you don't think much of prayer.

I know plenty of prayer. My knowledge of prayer and the word is validated by the Lord. Your opinion is irrelevant to me, I don't care about your validation or opinion on this topic. Christ is the King. Christ is the only opinion and validation I seek

You claim to be your own teaching authority.

I never claimed any such thing. Where did I claim any kind of authority on anything? Quite the opposite, I know nothing. All I have to go on is the messiah and god. Like jesus said "the only way to the father is through me." Not through a pope, a priests, Joe Biden, or a stranger in kiwifarms

Remember the story of the Ethiopian scholar, in the Acts of the Apostles

My teacher is christ and his words

 

[Fareal]

I wonder what sort of households the Protestants are brought up in, that they react with such violent confusion to the concept of asking your Mother to intercede on your wayward behalf with your Father, and ask Him to show your wayward self mercy and grace. What is it that offends them so about our Mother in heaven‘s love for us?

 

[Blobby's Murder Knife]

I wonder what sort of households the Protestants are brought up in, that they react with such violent confusion to the concept of asking your Mother to intercede on your wayward behalf with your Father, and ask Him to show your wayward self mercy and grace. What is it that offends them so about our Mother in heaven‘s love for us?

Martin Luther never threw our Blessed Mother under the bus.

 

[Dr. Kinder]

You throw away apostolic succession, and Christ's deposit of faith, at your own risk.

Those who teach what the Apostles taught are the successors of the Apostles.

Any person who accurately teaches what the Apostles taught is in the line of Apostolic succession.

I reject your Catholic construct, which is no different from the Pharisees claiming, "Abraham is our father," which naturally sets them up as the successors to Abraham. But in reality, of course, this wasn't true. No, they weren't Abraham's successors. It doesn't matter whether they were genetically descended from Abraham or not. It doesn't matter if they had followed all the laws of priestly succession. They didn't do as Abraham did, so they were not Abraham's sons: they were not the successors of Abraham because their conduct disqualified them.

In order to take your position seriously, it's necessary for you to allege that sodomy apologist Father James Martin is in the "Apostolic line of succession" while a non-Catholic who accurately preaches and teaches the gospel of grace is not.

That's why Catholicism is fake. It sees people like Pope Francis and Father James Martin as successors of the apostles, not on the basis of what they teach or do, but based on a claimed lineage. That is no different from how the Pharisees protested to Jesus in John 8.

I understand. But if god can hear and see all, there is no point in asking a mortal to pray on my behalf. The saints are a pointless middleman in this case. God will hear my prayers himself, and will certainly not be swayed or convinced by someone else doing it for me

In that same Rev passage, it says the saints, while there in heaven, are still servants of god. Not his equal, not his consultants

Where are you getting the misconception that the saints are mortal? They are enjoying eternal life with God right now. They are not mortal. They are saints. They have been given immortality as a free gift of God. I think you really need to examine the man-made categories you are using and replace them with biblical categories.

 

[A Real Munson]

I reject your Catholic construct, which is no different from the Pharisees claiming, "Abraham is our father," which naturally sets them up as the successors to Abraham. But in reality, of course, this wasn't true.

It's not my construct, it's Christ's. It is substantially different though. In point of fact, all of the Apostles were appointed. The original twelve were appointed by Christ in his time on Earth. Then in order to replace Judas, another Apostle was appointed (Acts 1:26). It's not for you to appoint yourself, even if you think you teach as the original 12 did.

God can raise up sons of Abraham from the stones. You and I, can not.

In order to take your position seriously, it's necessary for you to allege that sodomy apologist Father James Martin is in the "Apostolic line of succession" while a non-Catholic who accurately preaches and teaches the gospel of grace is not.

No. James Martin is a properly ordained priest. He is not, God forbid, a Bishop. A lay person is a disciple of Christ. That doesn't make him or her, even though they may be a theologian or evangelist, an Apostle or Presbyrter.

I am confident that Cardinal Bergoglio is a properly ordained Bishop, but I am less confident that he was properly appointed as Pope.

I'm probably going to catch some well deserved flak for this: but when Cardinal Ratzinger stepped down, it is possible that this move was anticipated and that some (even well meaning) Cardinals had inappropriate, advance conversations about a posssible successor. That would be a grave departure of form which arguably, would invalidate his appointment.

I also agree with many Orthodox Christians that overmuch is made about the role of the Pope. He is the Bishop of Rome, and the foremost of the Bishops, but I think more is made of it today and in recent centuries than was even in Peter's lifetime.

That's why Catholicism is fake. It sees people like Pope Francis and Father James Martin as successors of the apostles, not on the basis of what they teach or do, but based on a claimed lineage.

That is such a gross mischaracterization of the role of and manner of appointment of Priests and Bishops, that I have to believe it's intentional, even if only subconsciously. I trust you actually believe this, but you need to be looking right past anything that doesn't conform immediately to your existing view of the Church Magisterium.

Edit: spelling.

 

[Dr. Kinder]

You quoted james...no offense to James, but God > James

Are you claiming that James did not speak for God and did not have the Holy Spirit? Otherwise your comment is nonsense. Do you trust that God spoke through the texts that were eventually compiled into our Bible? Or do you think they are just the words of man and you can overrule them as you please? In which case, where are you getting your information about God from?

That is such a gross mischaracterization of the role of and manner of appointment of Priests and Bishops, that I have to believe it's intentional, even if only subconsciously. I trust you actually believe this, but you need to be looking right past anything that doesn't conform immediately to your existing view of the Church Magisterium.

You have completely ignored the substance of my point, which is that anyone who faithfully teaches as the Apostles taught is a successor of the Apostles, and anyone who does not faithfully teach as the Apostles taught is not a successor of the Apostles.

Your statement "It's not for you to appoint yourself" is accurate, though a non sequitur. When did I appoint myself to anything? Obviously only the Holy Spirit can appoint preachers, teachers, elders, overseers, or any other position in the Body of Christ.

God can raise up sons of Abraham from the stones. You and I, can not.

Yes, and that is exactly what God does, independent of human concepts of apostolic lineage. The Pharisees had the exact same arguments in their possession that the Catholic Church uses today. They were the Appointed Ones, the Anointed Ones! They had the secret knowledge, the sacred magisterium. No, they didn't use those precise terms, but the allegations are substantively the same as how the Catholic Church characterizes itself today. Try all you'd like to hand-wave away the plain meaning of the verse. There's about as much Scriptural evidence for the Catholic conception of Apostolic Succession as there is for the bodily assumption of Mary: ZERO.

Supposedly the gates of Hell will never prevail against the Catholic Church. Then why does the smell of sulfur fill the sanctuary?

 

[A Real Munson]

You have completely ignored the substance of my point, which is that anyone who faithfully teaches as the Apostles taught is a successor of the Apostles, and anyone who does not faithfully teach as the Apostles taught is not a successor of the Apostles.

Your statement "It's not for you to appoint yourself" is accurate, though a non sequitur. When did I appoint myself to anything? Obviously only the Holy Spirit can appoint preachers, teachers, elders, overseers, or any other position in the Body of Christ.

No, I didn't ignore your point. How do you arrive at the conclusion that "anyone who teaches as the Apostles taught is a successor of the Apostles..."? Also, who on Earth was charged with maintaining Christ's teachings and instructing the faithful in them? It was charged to the apostles, and that teaching was handed down through them. It is not for you to decide what is or is not in keeping with them. It's not for layety to fracture the Church or Christ's teaching that way. That's one of the many reasons why the Church holds ecumenical councils, to maintain the consistency of Christ's teaching, continuously in every age.

When did you appoint yourself? When you presented your own conclusions as sacred tradition; truer, and more fullsome than that instructed by the Church for millenia.

Only [God] (I would make a small quibble about the role of the Father and the Son in these appointments) can appoint the faithful to positions within the Body of Christ? I won't disagree with you here, but how is it determined whether someone is so appointed? How do you even arrive at that conclusion without sacred tradition, secured by Christ through his ordained? Who is to say which texts are Divinely inspired and which are not?

Do you just seek out the strongest arguments and decide for yourself?

If you would do so with scripture, why not revisit, and entertain the old heresies? I'm not suggesting you do, I'm really asking why you don't.

Yes, and that is exactly what God does,

Says you.

Try all you'd like to hand-wave away the plain meaning of the verse.

I'm not. I'm aware that God can do whatever he chooses with his Church. This is still his Church. Your church, however, is your own. It is not the Church established by Christ, at Pentecost.

The Catholic Church is the only Church founded by Jesus Christ. No amount of cope will ever change that. Also, faith is not just a belief in what you can't prove. It is fidelity, it is loyalty through uncertain times.

There's about as much Scriptural evidence for the Catholic conception of Apostolic Succession as there is for the bodily assumption of Mary: ZERO.

Apostolic succession, and the structure of the Church is described plainly throughout Acts of The Apostles.

It was successors of the apostles who delineated which texts were Divinely inspired, which were hoaxes and which were useful, but not scripture. That is sacred tradition, protected by those appointed by God.

Supposedly the gates of Hell will never prevail against the Catholic Church. Then why does the smell of sulfur fill the sanctuary?

God's Church has stood for over 2000 years. Whatever that smell is must be coming from your lips.

 

[SwanSwanson]

I still think about this one Christian girl who friendzoned me due to religious differences. she spent more time trying to convince me of race and IQ rather than her actual religion.

 

[Dr. Kinder]

That's one of the many reasons why the Church holds ecumenical councils, to maintain the consistency of Christ's teaching, continuously in every age.

Ah yes, the much-vaunted Synod on Synodality, the inward-turning masturbatory nonsense that does no good for any believer, anywhere, in any way, at any time. Please note a single benefit produced by the Synod on Synodality or indeed any other ecumenical council since Vatican II, including Vatican II itself.

I won't argue with the remainder of your post. I'm not the type of Protestant to allege that Catholics are not Christian. I think many Catholics are Christian and that there's nothing wrong with praying to the saints. The saints are alive and can intercede in prayer just as living people do.

Beyond that, institutional Catholicism and Protestantism are equally wicked because both arms of the faith failed the Servetus Test. The proper response to Servetus' theological errors was to reason with him, perhaps to ban his heretical writings, even to exile him, but to burn him alive? All because he said "Jesus is the Son of the Eternal God" instead of "Jesus is the Eternal Son of God." Anyone who would kill a person over that is someone given over entirely to Satan.

The Catholic authorities wanted to murder him. They would have burned him alive themselves if he hadn't escaped in a daring heist. The bloodlust of those authorities makes it clear that the Spirit was not in them. The Spirit is not a spirit of murder and self-seeking political gain.

Micheal Servetus is obviously a saint of Holy God, on par with Thomas Beckett despite Servetus' theological errors, and I'm unconcerned with the teachings of any church whose leaders and members are too myopic and hateful to see that. I don't care how messed up a man's doctrine may be. If he dies screaming, "Jesus, Son of the Eternal God, have mercy on me!" then the nature of his death has verified and validated that he was a testator of Holy God (Hebrews 9:16-2. Bear in mind that Servetus died especially slowly because they used green, damp wood. It took a very long time for him to die. Spectators, taking pity, tried throwing additional kindling onto the fire. Anything to make it end.

I will continue to testify of Servetus and all other martyrs of Christ into the dead ears, the blank eyes, and the stone hearts of the murderous wretches who, to this day, think Servetus deserved to die.

 

[A Real Munson]

Ah yes, the much-vaunted Synod on Synodality, the inward-turning masturbatory nonsense that does no good for any believer, anywhere, in any way, at any time. Please note a single benefit produced by the Synod on Synodality or indeed any other ecumenical council since Vatican II, including Vatican II itself.

Since Vatican II? That's the blink of an eye in terms of Church history. Why don't you just ask me to name the best three Popes since the turn of the century?

The first Council of Nicaea in 325 to combat Arianism, the heresy it appears your example was preaching. Heresy is serious business. Immortal souls are on the line. Those are stakes much more grave than one man's time on Earth. May God have mercy on his soul. I'm not going to argue about what should have been done. Justifying an abandonment of the Church seems to be quite a bold response to what you view as being a grave mistake. I would argue that shattering Christ's Church is a graver consequence than killing one of His servants.

I won't argue with the remainder of your post.

You haven't argued with any of my post. You made heretofor unsubstantiated claims about Apostolic succession and the worthlessness of any historical claim to it. Then, I made my rebuttal (take it or leave it) which you ignored, to then air your (much more substantiated, thank you) grievance with the Church.

Bear in mind that Servetus died especially slowly because they used green, damp wood.

Green damp wood is used as a mercy so that smoke inhalation renders the condemned unconscious before killing them by asphyxiation. I thought everyone knew this.

Until next time. Go with God.