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

[Preacher ✝]

I would disagree that it is slander and yes

Its false and defamatory, which is the definition of slander. You may not agree that its false but if it were false you should agree that it would be slander.

contest with you all to be more Christian

The irony is that you can't be more Christian than being Catholic. Ours is the only Church that was founded by Christ himself. (Matthew 16:18-19)

I want to understand fully what God wants of me, so that I can do right by him personally

So why then would you seek out a religion that has simplified and reduced Christianity down?

Honestly it sounds like you've been given a very poor understanding of Catholicism, wrought with bias.

Guys like this:


I would strongly encourage you to at least listen to some Catholic scholars (which I am not) on the matter so you can form an opinion based on both sides.

Heres a short video and a longer one depending on how much time you have.

 

[YouDoNotHaveTheRight]

Its false and defamatory, which is the definition of slander. You may not agree that its false but if it were false you should agree that it would be slander.

The irony is that you can't be more Christian than being Catholic. Ours is the only Church that was founded by Christ himself. (Matthew 16:18-19)

So why then would you seek out a religion that has simplified and reduced Christianity down?

Honestly it sounds like you've been given a very poor understanding of Catholicism, wrought with bias.

Guys like this:
View attachment 6372780

I would strongly encourage you to at least listen to some Catholic scholars (which I am not) on the matter so you can form an opinion based on both sides.

Heres a short video and a longer one depending on how much time you have.

Sadly while I don't expect you to change your belief for me I am forever changed already even if self damning. I do appreciate your desire though. I have had bad luck with youtube for religious discussions because they all seem to have a handler of a different persuasion which is very disheartening and discouraging I did find good things on some of the alt tubes, but watching anyone with ill intentions they will always reveal it one way or another they cannot help themselves these are general statements not about the videos you linked.

 

[Str8Bustah]

Sadly while I don't expect you to change your belief for me I am forever changed already even if self damning.

This is quite literally a trap set by the devil to try and make both your current life miserable as well as your next life. Don't pay it any heed and, if you're really, really stuck, ask the Theotokos for intercession. She helps literally everyone who asks for it, even if they think they've done something unforgiveable.

 

[Preacher ✝]

Sadly while I don't expect you to change your belief for me I am forever changed already even if self damning. I do appreciate your desire though. I have had bad luck with youtube for religious discussions because they all seem to have a handler of a different persuasion which is very disheartening and discouraging I did find good things on some of the alt tubes, but watching anyone with ill intentions they will always reveal it one way or another they cannot help themselves these are general statements not about the videos you linked.

Well if you ever want a source that definitely doesnt have a kike handler I've attached some documents including St. Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologiae and a fascinating article on contemporary Eucharistic Miracles.

 

[YouDoNotHaveTheRight]

I feel peace in my path regardless I'm willing to do it if I feel it is what is wanted from me. In a way it makes me feel how David, Adolf, many others must have felt though my battles now are small and spiritual compared to what they faced overall. Str8bustah I am not stuck just wanted to share a bit. Preacher I am good my brother, but if you keep giving me Catholic resources I am going to start asking you about gray and black popes and Jesuits lol. I read many angles of things I even compare what different religions entirely have to say regarding mine I ended up where I ended up by no coincidence.

 

[VeePeeN]

That said the Catholic Church has appropriated things that were once Pagan and devoted them to Christ instead. My favorite example is the Christmas Tree

What's your view on Jeremiah 10?

The veneration of an evergreen tree is a pagan symbol of a dead false-god's penis (Tammuz, as the Hebrews called him; Adonis, to the Greeks and Romans).

The story is that his consort (Ishtar, to the Hebrews; Aphrodite/Venus to Greeks and Romans, respectively) was the one who decreed the tradition of placing presents under an evergreen tree that's been decked out in silver and gold around the time of the winter solstice.

This consort is also, of course, the one who's tradition of veneration is analogous to what Catholics celebrate as Easter, with the act of children hunting for eggs that house treats for them (as she was said to descend to earth in an egg as the "Queen of Heaven").

 

[Preacher ✝]

I am going to start asking you about gray and black popes and Jesuits

This does not scare me in the slightest.

The Black Pope: There is a person sometimes called “the black pope,” but his existence is not a secret and he does not have anywhere near as much power as the real pope. “The black pope” is a nickname given to the Father General of the Society of Jesus. When the Jesuits were the most prestigious, influential missionary order in the world, the people of Rome began to speak jokingly of their head as a second pope. They called him “the black pope” because he wore the Jesuits’ black clerical garb, in contrast to the real pope, who wore white and became known as “the white pope.”
“The black pope” does not have authority over anyone but Jesuits. Sometimes people point to him as evidence of a conspiracy in the Vatican, but what they really have is a garbled understanding of a Catholic in-joke.

The Jesuits: A missionary order founded by St. Ignatius of Loyola. At one point in history they were the top dogs in terms of going on mission and spreading Catholicism to new parts of the world. Since many cultures first experience with Catholicism came from Jesuits, they also took the brunt of the push back in places where Catholic Faith threatened the existing power structure. Over the centuries they have accumulated so many conspiracy theories about them that, like the Black Pope, its basically become an inside joke for us.

The Gray Pope: A false-title given to the head of the presitigious and influential Orsini family. This very devout and old Noble bloodline has seen a significant number of its members devote their lives to Catholicism, including 3 Popes and 20 Cardinals spanning from 1144AD to 1743AD. Like with all such old Nobility families there are conspiracy theories about them, and the notion of the Grey Pope is no different, but the fact remains that no such office was ever recognized either formally or informally. Most of the conspiracies around the Orsini family and the concept of a Grey Pope can be traced back to Pope Nicholas III, the middle Pope of the three Orsini Popes. Specifically because he did engage in a bit of nepotism, elevating 3 of his relatives to the office of Cardinal. While those acts of nepotism have been condemned by the Church since he was otherwise a decent Pope for that era. Certainly not as bad as any of the 8 "Bad Popes" we've suffered through in the past. Today the Orsini family is almost completely died out, they barely have any influence at all let alone over the Church.

 

[Preacher ✝]

What's your view on Jeremiah 10?

Its Old Testament and meant to be understood in the context of its time when Hebrews were encountering other cultures that worshipped false gods in horrific rituals.

The veneration of an evergreen tree is a pagan symbol of a dead false-god's penis (Tammuz, as the Hebrews called him; Adonis, to the Greeks and Romans).

No, it was a big tree in Norse Germany that was devoted to Thor. Saint Boniface cut it down and used the wood to build a Church. Because of this evergreens became associated with Christianity in Germany and the Christmas Tree was born.

The story is that his consort (Ishtar, to the Hebrews; Aphrodite/Venus to Greeks and Romans, respectively) was the one who decreed the tradition of placing presents under an evergreen tree that's been decked out in silver and gold around the time of the winter solstice.

Wrong again, the tradition of giving out presents originates with Saint Nicholas (yes, the real Santa) who famously gave money to poor families so their daughters were not sold into prostitution. He also punched a heretic in the face at the Council of Nicaea, very based.

This consort is also, of course, the one who's tradition of veneration is analogous to what Catholics celebrate as Easter, with the act of children hunting for eggs that house treats for them (as she was said to descend to earth in an egg as the "Queen of Heaven").

Yea thats just completely fabricated. It has no basis in history whatsoever.

 

[Irish Turtle]

Its Old Testament and meant to be understood in the context of its time when Hebrews were encountering other cultures that worshipped false gods in horrific rituals.

No, it was a big tree in Norse Germany that was devoted to Thor. Saint Boniface cut it down and used the wood to build a Church. Because of this evergreens became associated with Christianity in Germany and the Christmas Tree was born.


Wrong again, the tradition of giving out presents originates with Saint Nicholas (yes, the real Santa) who famously gave money to poor families so their daughters were not sold into prostitution. He also punched a heretic in the face at the Council of Nicaea, very based.


Yea thats just completely fabricated. It has no basis in history whatsoever.

thoughts on this schizo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdsJs0UIm7s
he is a black hebrew israelite who is supposedly traditional christian
his name is truthunedited

 

[VeePeeN]

Also side note that I want to post, but do not want to double post. There is not a temple in existance I can fit into bros I don't want to be a preacher, but as someone who wants to study bible you would think you could find a place where you can discuss bible study with others, but here in the bible belt it is hyper down bad and hyper israeli shills. Even on non jq related topics barely any know of the book of enoch or have an open mind to other context at all and I feel like labelling religion as theology is counterproductive to believers because it makes what is supposed to be true almost like a fiction that guides you its truly strange and worries me greatly.

I'm in the Bible belt myself, and have yet to encounter a church that represents an authentic Christianity. That said, I haven't really been searching for one either, tho the few times I've attended one, they were very disappointing.

In my assessment, alongside prayer and scripture, all one needs to be a true Christian is fellowship, and that doesn't entail a ritual sunday visit to a physical structure. This very thread can count as fellowship (Matt 18:20 "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them").

The greatest thing about Christianity is how simple it is. Matthew 22:37-40 tells you everything you need to know:

37 Jesus said unto him, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."
​

Love thy God, and love thy neighbor. That covers all ten commandments in just two statements. I personally find the second one extremely difficult at times. We all get angry with others, often without a legitimate cause. Christianity is just a rejection of self, and embracing of God.

Any added doctrine or dogma takes away from the perfect simplicity that Jesus prescribed. You don't need a church to share in the Word, you just need another mind. YOU are the temple of Christ (1 Corinth 3:16), His spirit is in you, the breath of life.

Added note, I also enjoy extra-canonical scripture, including the books of Enoch. He's mentioned in Genesis as walking with God and being taken away. His story is absolutely worth reading for added context if one is desiring that, but I don't think it's necessary for one's salvation.

 

[Preacher ✝]

black hebrew israelite

THAS RIIIIIIIITE


But seriously they're just a strange amalgamation of Afrocentrism, Judaism, and Pseudo-Christianity stuffed into a clown suit. Their heresy is designed to appeal to low IQ black people and the black pride movement. Literally "We Wuz Jews n shieeeet"

. You don't need a church to share in the Word

Then why did Jesus Christ form a Church 6 chapters earlier? (Matthew 16:18-19)

 

[VeePeeN]

Its Old Testament and meant to be understood in the context of its time when Hebrews were encountering other cultures that worshipped false gods in horrific rituals.

No, it was a big tree in Norse Germany that was devoted to Thor. Saint Boniface cut it down and used the wood to build a Church. Because of this evergreens became associated with Christianity in Germany and the Christmas Tree was born.


Wrong again, the tradition of giving out presents originates with Saint Nicholas (yes, the real Santa) who famously gave money to poor families so their daughters were not sold into prostitution. He also punched a heretic in the face at the Council of Nicaea, very based.


Yea thats just completely fabricated. It has no basis in history whatsoever.

Brother, I pray you let go of the false dogma of the Catholic Church.

Sumerian mythology is much older than the German fables. Tammuz is antedeluvian, The Germans are sons of Japheth.

I really shouldn't have to say this, but my God, Santa is not real. He's an amalgamation of Germanic fables (Sinnterklass, Jolnir, etc) to a Christian analog ("Saint Nick"). It's what the RCC always did, take the same 'gods' worshipped by past pagan civilizations and give them new names (Sumerian/Mesopotamian, Greeks, Romans, Germans/Northern Europeans), but they are not Christian in any way.

How is the context of:

Hebrews were encountering other cultures that worshipped false gods in horrific rituals.

any different than what the Romans did?

Christ laid the foundation for his church, and Paul's letters are the doctrine. However, you can't just discard the entire OT. Yes, much of it is meant for the ancient hebrews, but God's commandments are still in effect. The new covenant does not have us honor the many rules of Levitivus and Deuteronomy, but anything that falls within those two greatest commandments of 'love thy God and love thy neighbor' is relevant to a Christian, which includes idolatry and veneration of images or objects.

I mean you no ill will; I take you at your word that you are a believer in the divinity of Christ and I pray that you reconcile within you His Word with man's doctrine. You are the temple, the Holy Spirit is within you, the RCC is not sacrosanct.

EDIT:

Then why did Jesus Christ form a Church 6 chapters earlier? (Matthew 16:18-19)

Matthew 18:20 "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them"

I don't need the pope to worship Christ in fellowship. The church is in the mind of the believers. YOU are the church if you believe.

 

[Preacher ✝]

Brother, I pray you let go of the false dogma of the Catholic Church.

And I pray you abandon your heresy and embrace the true Church founded by Christ himself.

Santa is not real

Saint Nicholas is very real.

Matthew 18:20 "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them"

You're responding to scripture with scripture so I'll respond to your scripture with more scripture. Matthew 12:25. Scripture cannot contradict Scripture.

EDIT: you need to lurk more. In this thread we've done a good job avoiding the spiral of calling each other heretics by not starting it because once someone starts it no one backs down since we're talking about religious convictions here. Don't shit up the thread.

 

[VeePeeN]

Saint Nicholas is very real.

I said Santa, not Saint Nicholas.

You're responding to scripture with scripture so I'll respond to your scripture with more scripture. Matthew 12:25. Scripture cannot contradict Scripture.

The text doesn't reference scripture ("every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand").

Cross-referencing scripture is an important part of studying the Word.

2Tim 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth

It's not contradicting scripture when one side is bearing false witness (your statements that the dogma of the Vatican is the only way to salvation).

So in the spirit of rightly dividing the Word in a battle of scripture vs scripture, I must point you towards Matthew 4:5-7:

5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,

6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

7 Jesus said unto him, "It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God."
​

I'm just following the example of my Lord and Saviour. If someone is misrepresenting the Word, I'm to 'rightly divide' the scriptures. Your representation of Matthew 12:25 is a not in line with meaning of the text, and at worst, an example of self-serving (trying to win an argument at the expense of the truth; ie, a false witness)

And again, I bear no malice. I abhor the RCC, but I don't hate the adherents of it. They've been misled and I pray they return to the true flock. Jesus values highly the ones that went astray (Matthew 18:10-14, Luke 15:1-7).

EDIT:

the true Church founded by Christ himself.

The RCC was founded by Emperor Theodosius, not Christ. Jesus proclaimed Peter the foundation, and he was martyred by the same government that would eventually found the RCC.

 

[Preacher ✝]

is a not in line with meaning of the text

As you are not part of the magisterium you have no say in what the meaning of the text is. Your interpretation has no more value than the ramblings of a mad man.

Now settle down and stop shitting up the thread before you end up threadbanned.

EDIT: And as for Matthew 12:25 what I am telling you is that A House Divided Cannot Stand, and if you're trying to say that Matthew 18:20 contradicts Matthew 16:18-19 then thats a house divided and it cannot stand, you fucking moron.

EDIT AGAIN: fuck it I'll take the hat emote. I'm fucking MATI. Im sick of your brand of punk ass faggot coming in here with a shallow reductionist view of Christianity, rejecting its rich history for whatever interpretation suits your self centered and prideful needs. The arrogant notion that your retarded ass understands scripture better than 2000+ years of scholars disgusts me. People like you make me wish we still burned heretics at the fucking stake. Most of the Protestants in here at least have the common fucking sense not to start the heretic spiral because it even a sola scriptura nimrod knows it will completely derail the thread.

 

[VeePeeN]

As you are not part of the magisterium you have no say in what the meaning of the text is. Your interpretation has no more value than the ramblings of a mad man.

Now settle down and stop shitting up the thread before you end up threadbanned.

EDIT: And as for Matthew 12:25 what I am telling you is that A House Divided Cannot Stand, and if you're trying to say that Matthew 18:20 contradicts Matthew 16:18-19 then thats a house divided and it cannot stand, you fucking moron.

EDIT AGAIN: fuck it I'll take the hat emote. I'm fucking MATI. Im sick of your brand of punk ass faggot coming in here with a shallow reductionist view of Christianity, rejecting its rich history for whatever interpretation suits your self centered and prideful needs. The arrogant notion that your retarded ass understands scripture better than 2000+ years of scholars disgusts me. People like you make me wish we still burned heretics at the fucking stake. Most of the Protestants in here at least have the common fucking sense not to start the heretic spiral because it even a sola scriptura nimrod knows it will completely derail the thread.

Talk about a mask off moment. I still pray for you, brother. This thread is for discussion of Christian theology, and nothing I've said is detracting from that purpose.

And I pray you abandon your heresy

In this thread we've done a good job avoiding the spiral of calling each other heretics

And in the same post, no less . . . I never called you a heretic.

I also never said that verse in Matthew contradict each other. Quite the opposite, I said they prove each other.

 

[Preacher ✝]

nothing I've said is detracting from that purpose

starting the doom spiral of us all calling eachother heretics is detracting from discussion, idiot.

I never called you a heretic.

here's where you did that

Brother, I pray you let go of the false dogma of the Catholic Church.

If we all started doing this shit we'd never be able to discuss anything. Now fuck off.

In DMs @VeePeeN and I have reached an understanding and ended hostilities.

Normal thread discussion can resume unimpeded. Apologies for the interruption.

EDIT: I decided to share this excerpt from one of my posts in our DM conversation because I'm pleased with how it came out and I think everyone might find it interesting.

Spoiler: Excerpt from DM

I think its better if I explain the Catholic view of Matthew 16:18-19 first as it is the root of my faith.

18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

First of all the naming of Peter as the Rock. Peter was born Simon. Christ gave him the name Peter when they first met. Peter is the English translation of Petros, which is the masculine of Petras, which means rock. So when Christ reiterates that Simon is Peter, as he did when they met, and then says upon this rock, he's referring to Peter. Its a pun. Now Peter would go on to become the first Bishop of Rome, and since the Pope is the Bishop of Rome that makes Peter the first Pope (even though the title of Pope had not yet been coined, the office is the same and the Pope today is also Bishop of Rome). Since Christ is God, and God is all knowing, Chirst knew that Peter would go on to become the first Pope when he named him, and because he knew that it means he was intentionally founding the Catholic Church in that moment. He also declared that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it, and since what Christ says is truth itself, that means the Gates of Hell shall not Triumph against the Catholic Church.

Line 19 about the keys to the kingdom of heaven and the powers to bind and loose clears up any doubt about what happened in line 18. It alludes to the end of Isiah Chapter 22 when Eliakim son of Helcias is called to be the new Steward of the Kingdom of David replacing the corrupt Shebna.

Spoiler: Isaiah 22:20-25

In other words, Christ is naming Peter as the Steward of his Kingdom on Earth, and granting him the necessary authority and power to minister the kingdom while Christ is in Heaven. Since Peter is a mere mortal, those powers become tied to his office and inherited by his successor as the Kingdom needs a Steward.

Because I believe Jesus Christ is the son of God, because I believe he is neither a liar nor a fool, I will hold true to the Church he founded because he said the Gates of Hell shall not Triumph against it.

Does that make sense?

 

[Key the Metal Shitposter]

Talk about a mask off moment. I still pray for you, brother. This thread is for discussion of Christian theology, and nothing I've said is detracting from that

Do you have a response to this post?

Question for Prots in here. How do you justify Bible alone when the canon of scripture cannot be divorced from Church tradition? And by that I mean, the Orthodox Church decided what books actually went into the Bible via councils. How then can Scripture alone divorced from an organized Church authority make sense in your worldview without appealing to tradition that you reject? And if you dont reject justifying the canon of scripture by tradition, why can the church decide the canon of scripture in a council but cant decide authoritative theological exegesis in the same way?

 

[Giant Kozaky]

i am drumk and smoeone linked me here from general chat, why do people believe a deitythat only revealed himself to a backwater tribe (of jews)?
like i get taking the bible as fables and as a guide mto being a moral person, but i find genuine belief of the abrihamic dety to be delusional on the same level as trannies beliving that castration is a sex change

(sorry 4 drunk spelling)

 

[Key the Metal Shitposter]

i am drumk and smoeone linked me here from general chat, why do people believe a deitythat only revealed himself to a backwater tribe (of jews)?
like i get taking the bible as fables and as a guide mto being a moral person, but i find genuine belief of the abrihamic dety to be delusional on the same level as trannies beliving that castration is a sex change

Christ came to save all of humanity and through his disciples has been revealed all over the world. So actually God did not just reveal himself to one tribe, but rather said tribe was chosen to prefigure Christ and establish a tradition of worship through which would play out messianic prophecy.