[infowarrior1]

(04-28-2019 04:21 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

(04-28-2019 02:01 PM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

Actually, the exact opposite. You are inflaming the Catholic/Protestant division and splitting Christian brothers ("Protestants have been tearing apart Christendom for 400 years"). Why? All Christians must band together to salvage what is left of Western Civilization.

*Sigh* Come back to me in a year after you try finding an honourable Protestant.

There are a few of them out there - I certainly don't reject a man based on his upbringing - but "Once saved always saved" and "Faith not Works" are recipes for demonic behaviour. Few of them know the Father, and they'll hate you for your faith.

We only know the indwelling of the holy spirit by a person's works. And God's chastening of his sons. For no true Christian wouldn't be unchastened by God for sin. David had to suffer 14 years of scourging by God even though he was saved by his faith.

They would be unable to be content in sin. Some sinners get away with it but no Christian ever truly can.

Unfortunately "Faith not works" is the truth as far as Paul's writings goes. No man truly earns salvation. But by his genuine belief he receives the baptism of the holy spirit. But he earns further reward by his works. And chastening by God who loves his children (Proverbs 3:11-12) (Hebrews 12:5-11).

And as far as bible translations go. To get away from the corrupt Schofield reference bible.

The King James Version is more reliable by far by comparison as it was done prior to the Schofield distortion.

[Tail Gunner]

(04-29-2019 12:24 AM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  

And as far as bible translations go. To get away from the corrupt Schofield reference bible.

The King James Version is more reliable by far by comparison as it was done prior to the Schofield distortion.

I am not sure that I have ever even met anyone who used a Schofield reference bible. It must be a mainline liberal Protestant Bible. I have primarily used the King James Version and NKJV, although I also have a Geneva Bible and a few of the other more literal translations as cross-references.

[infowarrior1]

(04-29-2019 12:46 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-29-2019 12:24 AM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  

And as far as bible translations go. To get away from the corrupt Schofield reference bible.

The King James Version is more reliable by far by comparison as it was done prior to the Schofield distortion.

I am not sure that I have ever even met anyone who used a Schofield reference bible. It must be a mainline liberal Protestant Bible. I have primarily used the King James Version and NKJV, although I also have a Geneva Bible and a few of the other more literal translations as cross-references.

Given the "Zionist Neocon Conservative Christians" I think that either their seminaries used the Schofield Reference Bible and it became a tradition or the newer bible translations are also influenced at the very least by that bible.

So its better I think to stick with the KJV. And avoid the NKJV there is I think a lot of feminist influenced translation like the NIV 2011:
http://www.bible-researcher.com/cbmw.niv2011.2.pdf

and other modern deceptions.

[ThriceLazarus]

With regards to Faith and Works, doesn’t one beget the other?

If one works truly for the LORD the fruit of their labor will engender faith. Similary, those with true faith will be called to work for the LORD. If one works for themselves and claims to work for Him, well an evil tree begets evil fruit. Further, if one has faith yet resists the call to work is that truly faith?

It is certainly a process. Personally, I have found one fills while the other empties - at first I found faith, which dimmed when the fruit of my labor was found to be rotten, which led to darkening of the soul, which led to seeking, which has begotten faith, and led to further works. I am only a man, so certainly I will falter once again, and rise, and fall till tire.

What led to a rekindling of faith was the realization of the works I had done. Some part, some petty portion, truly was undertaken in Love of Him. The rest was selfish. It is no surprise that what was done for Him has brought a modest harvest years later. The rest is dust.

Another thought on works - we are fallible creatures. We can never truly know if the fruits of our labor will be Good or poison. Take advances in medicine for example. Certainly, those men developing insulin for the genetically diabetic believed they were doing righteous work. And yet, that advancement has aided and abetted the obesity epidemic by acting as a panacea for induced diabetes. Rather than face the root cause of their ‘beetus - their gluttony and sloth - someone can just jab a needle into their belly and wallow still in wicked habits.

And concerning translations of the Book:

Tail Gunner has it right. The KVJ is passable, yet it too is rife with many flaws that set snares. Interlinear translations exist, and while they may not be perfect, they are as close as one can get if you’re unable to learn Koine Greek.

[Aurini]

Lazarus nailed it; faith begets works. That simple. Faith alone, and ugly works, is false faith.

As for Bibles - recognize, first of all, that you don't need one. Second, that you're supposed to think for yourself - it is divinely inspired, and ought to inspire you. Third - if you want a good Bible, look for the St Reims Latin Vulgate. It's the oldest Bible in English that you'll find.

If Protestants were honestly seeking God, they wouldn't spend hours pouring through old tomes of Catholic prayers (ignoring the prayers, but seeking...) until they found that one prayer that seemed slightly at odds with theology - and then write a novel about how this obscure thing "proves" that Catholics "yadda yadda". The Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox, despite being separated by centuries, politics, and internecine strife, agree on all significant matters of theology - while Protestants invent new heresies by the day. That right there should be your answer.

Seek God; stop arguing. My critique of Protestants is that almost none of them are seeking God.

[CynicalContrarian]

As a non-denominational Christian. I see it as Faith being key.
Yet there is still a Christian duty to conduct good works.

Not that works can 'tip the scales' though.
As works only done for selfish purposes are not viable when compared to more altruistic / selfless works.

[ilostabet]

(04-29-2019 03:15 AM)Aurini Wrote:  

As for Bibles - recognize, first of all, that you don't need one.

Can you clarify what you mean by this?

I am not Protestant, but one of the things I appreciate and admire in Prots in general is that the lay people actually read the Bible, study it, make it part of everyday life. One of the weirdest experiences of my life was meeting a devout Catholic (who goes to mass, confession, etc, regularly and is not a dummy or a simpleton) who didn't know I was quoting Proverbs when I stated 'The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom' - this was because he did not have the habit of opening up his Bible and reading it and obviously the Catechism had not stayed in his mind (which is why you should refresh that by yourself, in my opinion). Obviously you can love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself without ever opening a Bible and I understand the need for clarifying your readings with authority (your priest, the Church Fathers, etc), but I don't think it should be tossed away as meaningless to sit down and read it for yourself. Isn't it throwing away your ability to think for yourself - which you mentioned afterward - when we have the word of God available to us, compiled by very wise men, and not read it ourselves?

[CynicalContrarian]

(04-29-2019 05:15 AM)ilostabet Wrote:  

(04-29-2019 03:15 AM)Aurini Wrote:  

As for Bibles - recognize, first of all, that you don't need one.

Can you clarify what you mean by this?

I am not Protestant, but one of the things I appreciate and admire in Prots in general is that the lay people actually read the Bible, study it, make it part of everyday life. One of the weirdest experiences of my life was meeting a devout Catholic (who goes to mass, confession, etc, regularly and is not a dummy or a simpleton) who didn't know I was quoting Proverbs when I stated 'The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom' - this was because he did not have the habit of opening up his Bible and reading it and obviously the Catechism had not stayed in his mind (which is why you should refresh that by yourself, in my opinion). Obviously you can love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself without ever opening a Bible and I understand the need for clarifying your readings with authority (your priest, the Church Fathers, etc), but I don't think it should be tossed away as meaningless to sit down and read it for yourself. Isn't it throwing away your ability to think for yourself - which you mentioned afterward - when we have the word of God available to us, compiled by very wise men, and not read it ourselves?

Same thing with the sunday sabbath.
If more folk actually read their Bibles, of any sort, they'd struggle to find a distinct reference to a sunday sabbath.

[AnonymousBosch]

Food for thought:

Before there was ready access to Bibles, how did the Faith survive and flourish?

Does the experienced oral tradition of those apostles who walked with Jesus but whose teachings weren't contained in the bible count for anything?

Is expecting a book to contain the entire transmitted reality of a growing church a reasonable assumption, or does it border on Autism, ignoring the reality of an oral tradition of Faith spread through a Community?

Is any part of the tradition not found in the bible to be dismissed outright?

How could many Saints and the early Desert Fathers know the Truth with no access to Scripture, even by the 19th Century? How could Saint Catherine of Sienna or Brother Lawrence know the Truth whilst both being illiterate? Why are all their teachings across hundreds of years internally-consistent?

Why did the King James have to be heavily-modified from the Latin Vulgate and the Greek, other than the books that were removed directly-contradicted Luther's agenda, when they'd been established as Canon for 1200 years before Luther?

What is the final warning of the Bible about? How would this affect any denomination founded upon a modified bible?

If the Bible is the Infallible Word Of God, why did it need to be modified at all?

Why does Protestants constantly accuse Catholics of following Satan?

What behaviour always evidences when one is serving the Demonic?

What can you predict about them based on their accusations?

Why do they always get so emotional whenever criticized, given how ready they are to accuse?

What Demon reliably leads one to believe they know more than their Superiors in the Natural Order?

Is the main goal of this Demon to lead one into Schism?

Why was it important for the Demonic that Mary become removed?

Why was it important for the Demonic that images of Jesus no longer be depicted?

Why was it important for the Demonic that transubstantiation be blocked?

Why was it important for the Demonic that reconciliation be negated?

Why the stressing of a subjective personal interpretation (emotion) over infused knowledge and experiential clarification of it (reason)?

Why does this pattern conform to the Talmud more than the New Covenant?

Why is it assumed God can't protect the Church he founded, but a corruptible man can make it better?

How does the process of Institutional Convergence occur?

Who is always behind it?

Who funded, then betrayed, Luther?

What happens to the people in the Institution once it's converged?

Do they point and shriek at others?

Do they swarm?

Do they seek to destroy the Other?

Did they murder Catholics for possessing a Bible that explained how the King James had been modified into Heresy?

Did they arrest priests who used that bible for holding masses in private homes, then pull out their guts as they threw them into a fire before their eyes?

How many of those who compiled the Douay-Rheims bible ended up murdered by Schismatics?

Do these tortures sound Godly?

What does Jesus always promise will happen to his True Followers?

Are they really just the first Social Justice Warriors and was the Catholic Church just Marvel Comics to them, where they came in, threw out the Canon, changed the backstories and told you your heroes were now demons?

Do they claim to read the Bible, yet conform to Old Covenant teachings, missing the obvious teachings of the New Covenant?

Do they worship God, or Israel?

Do they worship Israel, despite Luther writing 'On The Jews and Their Lies'?

Do the political leaders they reliably-vote for in any way attempt to block the Satanic Subversion of their country, or do they seemingly-cooperate with them?

After 70+ years of murdering Catholics in the Middle East in the name of Protecting Israel, what religion now dominates in those countries?

What's the connection between Judaism and Islam?

Why did the spiritual founder of Reform Judaism convert to Islam?

Has 70+ years of murdering Catholics in the Middle East in the name of Protecting Israel turned America into a nation favoured by God, or is the nation on the verge of a dysfunctional, Satanic collapse, where its citizens are ruled by Subjective Truth?

How could these people ever ethically vote for Donald Trump, if they really knew The Father and followed the teachings of the Bible?

How long does this pattern of killing Catholics go back?

What was interesting about the religions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, specifically?

What's the dominant religion in Venezuela?

Did Venezuela collapse due to Communism, or due to US Sanctions, and (((international banking))) refusing to return its Gold Reserves?

Why has Q called out the Catholic Church, and is now calling out the Orthodox Church, as both being evil, but has never mentioned any Protestant or Southern Baptist Leaders, despite recent revelations of sexual abuse happening in the latter?

How did Israel recently treat Catholic Palestinians attempting to go to Jerusalem for Easter?

Why has no American Religious Leader called them out on this?

Why the lack of internal-consistency in stated beliefs? Why the contradiction? Why the constant erosion into further denominations?

What are Demons reliably unable to do when they attempt to build something?

What is the point of obsessing over the Bible if the result is never conforming with God's Will?

What does the Father say about prayers and sacrifices without a humble and contrite heart?

Do they think He is like them?

Who was his accusation made against?

Were they Holy, or did they just believe they were Holy?

Who are the Elect who are deceived? If it's the Catholics, then why would Absolute Truth have founded a Corruptible Church?

What does Jesus say about knowing them by their Fruits?

Why would one seem veiled and not see the obvious contradictions?

Why is it important to know who is and isn't truly of the Father in the coming collapse?

Can you see the Truth when you're not in a State of Grace?

What's required first?

Why would people who aren't evidencing any supernatural reordering of their behaviour believe they have any reliable knowledge of the father?

These are the kind of questions I ask myself, and which might save your life as we head into the collapse, because not everyone who says 'Lord, Lord' knows the Father.

Hey, if Protestants want to throw stupid accusations around whenever they feel like it, why can't I?

[nomadbrah]

According to Wiki, Easter is named after the saxon godess Eostre. The easter bunny is pagan in origin. A bunny laying eggs is an absurd image, which goes together with the traditions of pagan europeans, that spring is a time of rapid change, from winter to summer, in a month. This is celebrated in various different manners. The Romans celebrated with a carnival and turning everything upside down, slave became master, master became slave, for a short time. Scandinavians have similar traditions, where for one day, children can spank their parents or in feudal times, the serfs could command their masters.

I don't like when some christians attack pagan germanic holidays. If you're not germanic, fine, don't celebrate Easter or Yule, but don't attack those who do. It was after all christians who jumped on Yule and Easter, not the other way around.

If you want to stick closer to christian easter, you celebrate Pascha, which is what its called in Orthodox christianity and comes from jewish Pesach.

[Deusleveult]

(04-29-2019 03:15 AM)Aurini Wrote:  

Lazarus nailed it; faith begets works. That simple. Faith alone, and ugly works, is false faith.

As for Bibles - recognize, first of all, that you don't need one. Second, that you're supposed to think for yourself - it is divinely inspired, and ought to inspire you. Third - if you want a good Bible, look for the St Reims Latin Vulgate. It's the oldest Bible in English that you'll find.

If Protestants were honestly seeking God, they wouldn't spend hours pouring through old tomes of Catholic prayers (ignoring the prayers, but seeking...) until they found that one prayer that seemed slightly at odds with theology - and then write a novel about how this obscure thing "proves" that Catholics "yadda yadda". The Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox, despite being separated by centuries, politics, and internecine strife, agree on all significant matters of theology - while Protestants invent new heresies by the day. That right there should be your answer.

Seek God; stop arguing. My critique of Protestants is that almost none of them are seeking God.

You actually need to read the Bible if you are truly Christian.

Long story short, I was baptized in France because of tradition but then nothing, no first communion, no confirmation, no christian knowledge.
I grew up like the majority of people my generation, god less.

But despite that and despite the majority of people claiming they don't believe in God, I always believed there was something above us. It didn't make sense to me that there was nothing, that nothing created us and that when we die, that's the end.

So as a young man I did what we are supposed to do in our current culture, living an individual, material and hedonistic lifestyle. But even if I didn't go the extreme of it, I was just not content with it. There was no sense, no meaning.

After meeting a christian lady my age in Malaysia in one of my travels, feeling something different in her, I started going to the Catholic Church seeking meaning and truth.

I started as a total newbie without any knowledge of Mass, Scriptures and Catholic doctrines, etc...
I slowly learned along the way but most of my spiritual journey was by pure instinct without ever reading the Bible (just some Scriptures here and there).

This went on for a few years and just last year I've read the Bible, twice actually, on a pilgrimage by foot to Jerusalem.
And by reading it, it put into words a lot of things that I've felt inside but couldn't quite understand.
It was a confirmation that I was on the right track all along, even if God didn't "talk" to me directly or didn't show clear "signs" of his presence.
I was happy to realize that he worked my spirit and my heart slowly but surely, without me even realizing it.

So reading the Bible is important, but it depends on where you are on your personal journey with God.

[ilostabet]

@AB,

I agree with everything you wrote (or the implications of your questions, rather). I wasn't trying to rehash old controversies between Caths and Prots - I find them to be almost wholly counterproductive.

I was simply asking if it would be profitable for people in the XXI Century, who are literate and have access to the text (including faithful translations from the Greek), to regularly read the Bible. If done with the appropriate humbleness, I don't see any downside to it, only upside.

[trickster]

This thread clearly illustrates that the proper humbleness is a rare thing. People love to use the bible to bludgeon their debate partner with “facts” and show how their interpretation is “right”. Unfortunately, the Bible, as we can see from the last couple pages, is too often used as an intellectual tool to rebut another intellectual interpretation of God and his teachings. It’s all rubbish and unholy and, frankly, undignified.

[infowarrior1]

(04-29-2019 07:37 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

Food for thought:

Snip

Is any part of the tradition not found in the bible to be dismissed outright

[b]Why did the King James have to be heavily-modified from the Latin Vulgate and the Greek, other than the books that were removed directly-contradicted Luther's agenda, when they'd been established as Canon for 1200 years before Luther?

What is the final warning of the Bible about? How would this affect any denomination founded upon a modified bible?[/b]

I am interested in the claims that are made here. Where can I find evidence for this? All I know is that Luther wanted to remove book of James but was prevented from doing so.

What I do know is that the manuscripts that are brought over from constantinople as a result of its fall played a significant role in the KJV. In the form of the Textus Receptus.

As for the rest of the books I don't see any reason for their inclusion as far as the Tanakh is concerned. For those reasons:
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/otcanon.php

[infowarrior1]

(04-29-2019 08:32 AM)trickster Wrote:  

This thread clearly illustrates that the proper humbleness is a rare thing. People love to use the bible to bludgeon their debate partner with “facts” and show how their interpretation is “right”. Unfortunately, the Bible, as we can see from the last couple pages, is too often used as an intellectual tool to rebut another intellectual interpretation of God and his teachings. It’s all rubbish and unholy and, frankly, undignified.

It occurs from the very beginning of Christianity. I see no reason where any of that will stop.

[Aurini]

@infowarrior

You can find the information on Wikipedia, but as usual you have to read between the lines. Here's an explanation that details the why and whom behind the books being removed, and to this day most of the arguments Protestants start are inspired by these particular exemptions.

Faith vs Works: this is a completely autistic debate. I've quoted the Catholic Church's stance to Protestant pastors, and they said they agreed with it; then I told them it was the Catholic Church's stance, and they said they disagreed with it (is that of God? Or is that early Social Justice?)

Prayers to Saints: one of the books removed discussed praying to the dead. The Protestants argue that praying for the intercession of a living Saint is idolatry - even though all of their ancestors did it for over a thousand years.

Have you ever seen one of those videos where somebody tries to argue against Anita Sarkeesian's mischaracterization of video games? And it takes them 30 minutes to explain why her 5 minute video is incorrect? That's what arguing with a Protestant is like. They make up their facts, and cherry-pick their evidence, and no matter how many times you trap them with logic, they'll say "Well, you're clever, but I still think you worship idols."

This is also the problem with vulgate Bibles; your average idiot can use them to argue whatever he wants, and then claim that God sanctioned it.

Unlike a scientific debate, a debate with a Protestant does nothing to advance one's faith or understanding. They just want to drag you down into the mud, and facts won't sway their opinion. Consider that I was an atheist for most of my adult life - and I was argued (following revelation, it always needs to start there) into joining the most difficult Church with the least social status. I could have become a Unitarian, and kept doing whatever I want to do - but I put on an outfit that didn't quite fit, because I knew it would straighten my spine.

Protestants lack logos.

[Dr. Howard]

(04-29-2019 10:52 AM)Aurini Wrote:  

@infowarrior

You can find the information on Wikipedia, but as usual you have to read between the lines. Here's an explanation that details the why and whom behind the books being removed, and to this day most of the arguments Protestants start are inspired by these particular exemptions.

Faith vs Works: this is a completely autistic debate. I've quoted the Catholic Church's stance to Protestant pastors, and they said they agreed with it; then I told them it was the Catholic Church's stance, and they said they disagreed with it (is that of God? Or is that early Social Justice?)

Prayers to Saints: one of the books removed discussed praying to the dead. The Protestants argue that praying for the intercession of a living Saint is idolatry - even though all of their ancestors did it for over a thousand years.

Have you ever seen one of those videos where somebody tries to argue against Anita Sarkeesian's mischaracterization of video games? And it takes them 30 minutes to explain why her 5 minute video is incorrect? That's what arguing with a Protestant is like. They make up their facts, and cherry-pick their evidence, and no matter how many times you trap them with logic, they'll say "Well, you're clever, but I still think you worship idols."

This is also the problem with vulgate Bibles; your average idiot can use them to argue whatever he wants, and then claim that God sanctioned it.

Unlike a scientific debate, a debate with a Protestant does nothing to advance one's faith or understanding. They just want to drag you down into the mud, and facts won't sway their opinion. Consider that I was an atheist for most of my adult life - and I was argued (following revelation, it always needs to start there) into joining the most difficult Church with the least social status. I could have become a Unitarian, and kept doing whatever I want to do - but I put on an outfit that didn't quite fit, because I knew it would straighten my spine.

Protestants lack logos.

I'm a Protestant, and I think Catholics are wrong. However, I think they are only 10% wrong. Agnostics are 75% wrong, Atheists are 100% wrong and Satanists and reprobates are 200% wrong.

This day and age is not the one to be worried about if your neighbor is going to the right church. It should be if they go to a Church at all, or even know Christ.

When I get mormons that come to my door do I try to convert them to southern baptists? No. I offer them some cold water and a snack and then we talk about the elderly or homebound or troubled people on my street that don't know Jesus at all and could use some charity or the gospel. We'll pray something out of the New Testament and they are on their way encouraged to win souls.

Satan probably loves it when Christians just argue among themselves like Pharisees instead of engaging the lost or serving their Church.

[Wutang]

(04-28-2019 01:55 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

Your post leads nowhere. Yes, God is allowing Islam to invade our lands because we've become unrighteous. Yes, God allowed Communism to take over Russia because we ignored Fatima. Yes, God allowed Martin Luther his heresies because the Catholic Church had become corrupt. What's your point? Shrug our shoulders, and accommodate the evil in our midst?

Something I've had in my mind for a while is if the current situation with Islam in Europe is a repeat of when God allowed Israel to be overrun by it's neighbors even though those neighbors were heathens. I'm generally wary of over-spiritualizing politics and social-cultural changes as a sign that God is doing something but for the past few years I can't but help but think of the parallels. Just like the Israelites abandoned the old covenant, the Europeans have been abandoning the new covenant and this seems to be the result.

[nomadbrah]

I find it extremely difficult to understand how anyone can look at Yawhe and think he is the same god as Christ.

Isn't that the reason for the whole traiterous megachurch evangelicals in the US?

Christ is easy to recognize as divine. His teachings transcend humanity. Yawhe? Do you think you could convert the Maya or the Korean by tales of child mutilation, genocide and a jealous petty god?

I also don't see how any christian can believe in god's punishment for stuff like islam invading Europe, when it is clearly spelled out that Christ is the last sacrifice, no longer does god intervene in the world. With Christ, the divine, through the holy spirit, is born into all humans. Thus, if we are getting punished, it is because we turned away from our own divinity and became corrupted. When Europeans had the holy spirit, THEY, not Yawhe, were victorious. Deus Vult, was not sitting around, God wills it, not Inshallah, IF God wills it.

[Aurini]

(04-29-2019 01:31 PM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

I'm a Protestant, and I think Catholics are wrong. However, I think they are only 10% wrong. Agnostics are 75% wrong, Atheists are 100% wrong and Satanists and reprobates are 200% wrong.

This day and age is not the one to be worried about if your neighbor is going to the right church. It should be if they go to a Church at all, or even know Christ.

When I get mormons that come to my door do I try to convert them to southern baptists? No. I offer them some cold water and a snack and then we talk about the elderly or homebound or troubled people on my street that don't know Jesus at all and could use some charity or the gospel. We'll pray something out of the New Testament and they are on their way encouraged to win souls.

Satan probably loves it when Christians just argue among themselves like Pharisees instead of engaging the lost or serving their Church.

I believe St Paul specifically commanded different groups of Christians not to bicker about minor doctrinal issues; you're welcome under my roof any time.

I remain leery of your brethren, however. Hard experience has taught me it's a rare Protestant who follows that statement.

@Wutang

If we were a spiritual people, our society wouldn't be in the mess it's in today. And if it weren't in that mess, it wouldn't be vulnerable to invasion. As Common Filth likes to say, if you're surrounded by mosquitos, you might be living in a swamp.

[Sherman]

This conflict is as predictable as the sun rising in the morning. Sorry guys, but your Christian utopia is never going to happen, because the question immediately becomes, who rules, and then you end up killing each other. Same with the Muslims. That's why Thomas Jefferson came up with the idea of freedom of religion, to make the state secular. He knew the alternative was that the Christian sects would tear each other apart trying to get the upper hand and destroy the country - which is what happened with Islam and why it became so pathetically weak.

[NoMoreTO]

(03-29-2019 08:29 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

This is not a thread for pedantic debate about the existence of God or which sect is best. This is for people who already believe in God and want to get closer to Him. (Atheists are free to create their own thread).

Friendly reminder.

[DeadlyReed]

To be fair, Islam (and Judaism) have it right - you win the spoils first and THEN you fight over it.

[Aurini]

(04-29-2019 05:19 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

This conflict is as predictable as the sun rising in the morning. Sorry guys, but your Christian utopia is never going to happen, because the question immediately becomes, who rules, and then you end up killing each other. Same with the Muslims. That's why Thomas Jefferson came up with the idea of freedom of religion, to make the state secular. He knew the alternative was that the Christian sects would tear each other apart trying to get the upper hand and destroy the country - which is what happened with Islam and why it became so pathetically weak.

You're mistaking absolute truth for a subjective opinion.

As I noted above, the Orthodox and Catholic churches have been separate for centuries, and yet they agree on all major theological issues. This is because they both used Reason to follow Faith - so they arrived at the same place. Similarly, you'll find that the Catholic Church is in agreement with about 90% of, say, Buddhism - except for the fact that Buddhism is missing the critical piece, the instantiation of the Word.

The issue with Protestant sects is that they've replaced reason with emotion; they go to church to feel good. This creates a free-market effect where pastors are celebrated for telling people what they want to hear, not what they need to hear. They're in rejection of Logos, and out of communion with Christ. They've replaced faith with belief. They need to stop pretending they're all popes, and learn to serve - when they do, they'll come back. If they don't, they'll fade away as all heresies do - but not without causing a lot of damage along the way.

PS I'm going to take a break from posting in this thread. On the one hand, I can't speak the truth with one arm tied behind my back; on the other hand, when you speak the truth, others often misconstrue it as a personal attack. It's a razor's edge trying to balance the two, and I'm still figuring out how to walk it. As I said: any God fearing Protestant is welcome under my roof, despite our ostensible disagreements.

[MichaelWitcoff]

Saint Augustine’s story is incredibly powerful for red-pill guys who decide to give their lives to Christ. At certain points, reading “Confessions” felt like someone else had already written my autobiography. It resonated so strongly with me that I ended up taking Augustine as my patron Saint / Baptismal name when I was received into Orthodoxy.