/christ/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>4580

LGBT is the majority now?

Let's hope not.

In fact I have made the experience that young people are very open to any kind of argument made to them reasonably. The problem is that they are susceptible to peer pressure.

>LGBT

>majority

Pls no

Just get all the LGBT Christians to come here. Not everyone, by far, will agree with them but we'll at least talk with them. I have no problem doing so.

>>4586

Just tell them to go to /christ/ when you ban them. We'll take them. We're not scared to converse with anyone.

That way, you get rid of them, and by increasing the amount of homos here, it will decrease the likelihood of your presence amongst us. Win-win.

Also, to me, you are the modernist, the progressive. Don't forget.

I mean the majority of young Christians are for the inclusion of LGBT people, not that they are majority themselves.

I don't get why that board is so fucking popular. I just feel sorry for all those who click that board who know nothing about Christianity and just get the message "Catholicism is all that matters, everything else is shit" thrown at them from every poster. Now they're outright banning everyone who's not Catholic or Orthodox. I would have been more active on this board instead if it had been more popular, this board should be on the top list instead of /christian/. They should just rename themselves /catholic/ at least.

>>4685

Let /christian/ be however they like and stop worrying about it.

Make a legitimate thread and let's talk about this homosexual issue.

Half a year ago someone claiming to be a Christian posted on /atheism/ that they had been banned for a post with a single sentence that said Verbatim, "Jesus didn't say anything about hating gays." You could probably still find it in the ban log.

>>4663

>Thou shalt not give false testimony against your neighbour.

Says the guy who keeps lying about me…

Look here:

>to me

See that sweet ass pair of words right here? It means "Here follows my opinion." An opinion is not a lie. Do you know what you're a Modernist and a Progressive to me? If you don't, then keep your peace.

Also, we're not buddies, you can't use "thou" to me, not that you know the difference.

>>4685

>I don't get why that board is so fucking popular.

My guess is that most are poltards with a spiritual side. They found a higher fuel for their political crusade. Now they can hate other humans while feeling validated by the Most High.

It's /pol/ 2.0, Deus Vult Edition.

>I just feel sorry for all those who click that board who know nothing about Christianity and just get the message "Catholicism is all that matters, everything else is shit"

That's my main concern with that board. That's why I'll break the rules and dump the name of /christ/ in there every now and then just so the poor souls get a chance at being exposed to something else, like Christianity.

>>4717

not even that.

its just catholics playing to be orthodoxs that supports the church because muh eropean heritage while denying vatican ii

>>4719

>denying vatican ii

That's my favourite bit about these Catholics.

>The Church is always right because led by the Holy Spirit, the Pope cannot fail

>I personally decide which Pope is a real Pope and which doctrine is real Church doctrine

Brilliant.

>>4724

>That's my favourite bit about these Catholics.

Sedevacantism is a non catholic heresy

>>4685

>not Catholic or Orthodox gets banned

No.

>They should just rename themselves /catholic/

Or /christ/ should be called /religion/, besides, catholic and christian is the same.

>>4702

>Also, we're not buddies, you can't use "thou"

You are a baptised catholic, peace be upon thou.

Very uncharitable and blasphemous

>That's why I'll break the rules

Yeah, you have no sensus fidei if you don’t find that dodgy.

>>4784

>Yeah, you have no sensus fidei if you don’t find that dodgy.

I find you dodgy.

>>4685

It's you who knows nothing of Christianity.

To be honest, even if they didn't ban LGBT discussion, it's still a toxic place for that discussion to take place because of their board culture.

I mean calling someone a fag when they come to you in good faith will probably drive them off.

>LGBT

>Christian

Yeah, no. Enjoy hell.

>>6274

This isn't appropriate behavior for a Christian. If we hold ourselves to all the standards that straight couples do, what's do inherently corrupt about it?

>>6384

>This isn't appropriate behavior for a Christian.

Why? Jesus told the wicked that they are going to hell all the time.

> If we hold ourselves to all the standards that straight couples do, what's do inherently corrupt about it?

It is inherently evil. It is disordered and a rebellion against the god willed order. It is unnatural. It is unhealthy and spreads disease. It makes you mentally sick. It is condemned by the law and the Church. Nothing good is coming of it. There is no reason for promoting it.

Pick one.

>>6385

>Jesus told the wicked that they are going to hell all the time.

Jesus warned the wicked against hell. He never relished the idea of people being tossed into the inferno.

>It… spreads disease.

All sex has potential to spread disease.

>Makes you mentally sick.

I've never seen any evidence of that.

>Condemned by the law and the Church.

Here in the U.S. it's legal. Maybe in the Islamic fundamentalist Middle East or Uganda. But are those really places that represent ideals to strive for?

All that's left is an arbitrary declaration of it being "unnatural". The Bible was written by humans, and is therefore subject to a measure of human error, no? Those passages could very well be the remnants of the bigotry of ancient days.

I already spent half a decade trying to suppress my feelings. I never want anyone to have to go through that misery. That is my reason for "promoting" it - which, by the way, does not mean 'trying to convert straight people' as much as 'get people who are gay and always have been and will be' to accept who they are.

>>6388

>Jesus warned the wicked against hell. He never relished the idea of people being tossed into the inferno.

Something to add to that:

Jesus is God, and people go to hell. If this was wrong Jesus could prevent this. But no, he as our judge actually sends people to hell that deserve it and that have condemned themselve to it.

Of course he would prefer no one going there, that's why he incarnated in the first place. But he sure is ready to enact justice where it is needed. Otherwise there'd be no hell in the first place.

So if someone is going to hell Jesus sees this as a valid sentence.

>>6390

And you should give an carry the sentence right?

>>6389

I don't understand the "crossing the street" comparison.

This article says that homosexual youth are far, far more likely to commit suicide in a negative climate.

>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3081186/

This one does also.

>http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/gender-society/school-climate-suicide-gay-lesbian-lgbtq-youth

Mind you, these are objective studies, not just unsubstantiated graphs.

>>6393

if catholic reads he wouldnt be a catholic no more

>>6388

>The Bible was written by humans, and is therefore subject to a measure of human error, no?

stop pretending to be a christian then

go and put your fedora on your head, and watch some Richard Dawkins videos. if you don't like the clear anti-homo stance of God, then be on your way

>>6392

What are you even talking about,?

I was talking about Christian morals, and when you realised that you had nothing to counter it you Made it personal. Correct?

>>6393

the point was that homos kill themselve by far higher numbers either way.

>>6394

Yeah. Let's disregard that the Church is the biggest scientific institution in history of mankind and stuff. Let's disregard her universities and degrees and everyone learned.

>>6407

>t you Made it personal. Correct?

no

just because the wage of sin is death doesnt mean we should kill people, let God judge and punish

>>6406

I don't understand how it's unchristian to acknowledge the possibility of human error in the Bible. Even though it's divinely inspired, it's been influenced by the prejudices of those writing, collecting, editing, and translating it. I mean, could the word of God be fully and flawlessly rendered in something as banal and mundane as human speech?

Also, why do the anti-homosexual verses of Levitical law count if you can ignore the other parts? "Sexual immorality" is a broad term - gay stuff is only specifically stated in those passages and you probably mix fabrics and eat shellfish.

>>6407

The point of those studies are to show that in a world free of the millennia of homophobia, the disproportionate suicide rates may not exist.

>>6411

it's a slippery slope when you take out the parts of the Bible that happen to go against your personal earthly feelings, and then pretend it's because you think it could be an error, as opposed to just wanting to ignore the parts you don't like

you need evidence to say why you think this verse or that verse is in error. if it's just because you don't like the message, then you should be honest with yourself about your motives

>>6408

you are the only one here that is talking about killing homos m8. This persecution is only real in your mind.

>>6415

Evidence? Alright. The passages from Leviticus are part of a group of regulations that the average Christian is not expected to follow today. The passage from Romans had the historical context of Paul being surrounded by the Romans' disgusting practice of pederasty. Given that homosexuality is an inborn trait that - unlike many other actual sins condemned by the Bible - is not harmful, I don't understand the prohibition.

Though in addition to that, for honesty's sake, I am sometimes frustrated by this. It's so easy for you to make these sweeping, benevolent declarations that we should "stop for our own good" and "consider a life of chastity." You'll never be tempted by this. But for me, it's as much a part of me as blonde hair or having five fingers on each hand. If all the supposed negative effects are caused by an unenlightened environment, all that I have left is a sweeping declaration by some ancient man from one of the most historically anti-gay places in the world that I'm a sickness on his say-so. If Jesus spoke out against the gays, fine. I'd concede that I couldn't be a Christian. But the fact that you're above laws against shaving and women covering their heads -choices, mind you- and I'm still thrown under the bus for this? It's infuriating.

>>6419

The quote is cool and all but the lighting and microphone makes it look like some stand up comedy act. Can't take it seriously.

>>6419

>Implying I would be venting about it to you all if I could just have chosen not to.

>Implying I could have made the loveless relationship between me and my girlfriend work.

>Implying I haven't tried to curry interest in the female figure that I just can't arouse myself to.

>>6420

Ah, but I don't need to understand. I only need obey. That's all fine and dandy. But what about Matthew 15:11. Yes, that was a joke. The truth is, I'm still allowed to be angry about it. So many of my predecessors beaten, scorned, stoned. An epidemic wracking the community to the point where my father - a doctor - still remembers the meetings full of physicians, confused and outraged at the senseless loss of life. Then, the acceptance - the diseases having their causes discovered. The hatred being criminalized instead of condoned. The countries that lag behind being lambasted. And all of that sacrifice, that pain to buy me a brighter tomorrow where I wouldn't have to feel ashamed, is for nothing? That what I've been lead to call progress is just moral decline? How? It's… unutterably awful. Horrifying and tragic are the only words for it.

When I was a child, I felt so close to god. This continued unto Middle School, in the form of an active interest in my faith. Suddenly, here I am - I'm not just the sinner. I'm not just making a mistake. This pervades my very being. And I'm losing touch. God feels further and further away. My prayers became less gestures of devotion and more pleas to someone increasingly incomprehensible to me. So maybe, it's only natural that I wan't to know why. My friends accept this part of me. I don't have to come here if I don't want to. You all are far more devout than I am. I want to be back to when everything was alright. So I do want to know why. Why? Why, damn it, WHY?

>>6445

Joke aside:

Leviticus 20,13

If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death.

Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.

Roman 1,27

In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Leviticus 18,22

Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.

Judges 19,22

While they were celebrating, behold, the men of the city, certain worthless fellows, surrounded the house, pounding the door; and they spoke to the owner of the house, the old man, saying, "Bring out the man who came into your house that we may have relations with him." Then the man, the owner of the house, went out to them and said to them, "No, my fellows, please do not act so wickedly

1Corinthians 6,9

On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren. Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

1Timothy 1,10

immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,

>>6436

temptation will be always be there

>>6446

Ah, alright, so there are several passages that do speak of this. Thank you for clarifying for me

I think I was just discussing one of these passages, with someone. Judges 19,22, is this not in reference to the Jews? The men outside the house that is.

no, I did not hear any such from /pol/, I would not trust their interpretation of the Bible anyways

However, my other question does still stand, why all the fuss over this one, when many other sins are passed over, or downright ignored, why does being gay become a sin worth not even interacting with people over. If every sin were treated as harshly, well, parents would be disowning children left and right for fornicating outside of wedlock.

Especially to those outside the Christian faith, where are them not being Christian in my opinion, would be the bigger issues

Also I do not see anywhere that says to persecute these people, only that they shall receive due penalty, but I see none that says to not serve them as you would any other sinner, nor anywhere that says it is a Christian mans responsibility to judge them.

Correct me if I am wrong, or please inform me on what passages I am potentially thinking of, but are there not other passages that speak of leaving judgement and punishment to God, said by Jesus himself?

If I am wrong, what does the Bible say about how you should interact with those who sin, willingly or unwillingly?

>>6470

james 4

There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you–who are you to judge your neighbor?

Luke 6:37

“Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven;

Matthew 7:1-5

“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

romans 12 maybe?

Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord.

1 Corinthians 4:1-21

This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. Moreover, it is required of stewards that they be found trustworthy. But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.

James 4:11-12

Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?

>>6473

Ah, thank you very much, I had thought there were such verses. So wouldn't that make groups such as the Westboro Baptist church for example, and other extremists who wish to eradicate and judge the gays and homosexuals, going against their own beliefs?

>>6479

>Not serving homosexuals is the least a Christian can do nowadays

you mean like not letting the enter the church and stuff?

How long till true christians will be graded as a hate group and the persecution starts?

ill say 40 years

>>6470

> when many other sins are passed over, or downright ignored

They shouldn't be. And they are not btw. Adultery ie excludes you from communion the same as pederasty.

>Also I do not see anywhere that says to persecute these people

> nor anywhere that says it is a Christian mans responsibility to judge them.

>of leaving judgement and punishment to God

>If I am wrong, what does the Bible say about how you should interact with those who sin, willingly or unwillingly?

That's why I dislike the scripture game.

See, the bible is just a book. It is not the answer to all of your problems nor will it magically solve them or even adress them.

Christianity is not the religion which worships the Bible. Christianity is older than the Bible by a couple of hundred years. You can be a Christian without a bible. There have been sure many great illiterate Christians.

>>6445

>>6473

>>6476

You can claim anything with random bible verses you know? That's why protestantism is such a failure.

Read the whole chapter:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+6

>>6481

No. If they come to a church it means they want help and the proper kind. You really should serve them in the biblical sense at that point.

I mean trying to not support their endeavors. Not purchasing their products, not hiring them when you're able, not spending time with them other than to preach. Not giving in. This applied to active, unrepentant homosexuals though, not people who want to do the right thing. And it will depend a lot on the individual's circumstances, but the basic idea is to remove yourself from their influence as much as you can.

On the treatment of sinners:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Corinthians+6&version=NABRE

For what partnership do righteousness and lawlessness have? Or what fellowship does light have with darkness? What accord has Christ with Beliar?

>>6521

>"Thou" is like the "Du" and "You" the "Sie" in German.

Oolf is a Romagne Frenchie I believe. So "Tu" and "Vous" it is :^)

>>6521

People are banned for not checking the catalogue and chances are if someone opens a thread with a redundant topic, they just came to shitpost anyway.

We can also not have a thread advertising for sin. /christian/ is a board meant for evangelisation—not for deconcersion.

>"Catholicism is all that matters, everything else is shit"

>Agreed … that this is the majority opinion on /christian/

Funnily enough this has been a development and a good sign.

>>6561

>mental gymnastic of the mods

>>6562

this

>>6388

Just checking back here to let you know my "game plan" after thinking about what you said. I'm going to consider your words, but I'm also going to confer with some of the more local spiritual leaders and my loved ones to get a variety of viewpoints and interpretations of scripture. I haven't given up on God yet. Studies and my theatre stuff have kept me too busy to reflect on, act on, or indulge my proclivities. Wish me luck, I guess.

I may have come across as whiny or fatalistic, but I guess I tried rejecting this part of me a long time. Five years of shutting it out. I Know you don't want to promote homosexuality, but the stigma against it in my old home combined with a couple loathsome flamboyant specimens from my new one made me fear it, refuse to try and understand it, bury it 'til it boiled over. It shouldn't have to be hidden that you have these feelings, or you'll never seek emotional or spiritual advice from those around you. I don't know what I'll do now. But I'm not afraid to find an answer.

>>6682

> It shouldn't have to be hidden that you have these feelings, or you'll never seek emotional or spiritual advice from those around you.

This. Its not the way of the Gospel to have to deal with these things on your own, and my Church actively discourages this (I imagine Catholicism does as well, don't know about each and every branch of Protestantism).

Its good to talk about it and get help, you can't beat something like this on your own, I know that for a fact. Best of luck, don't forget to keep coming back to see if there's anything anyone here can aid you with.

>>6682

Unrelated question: why are gays historically attracted to theatre? Are they attracted to the fantasy of being someone else, or of playing the role of a woman?

>>6685

I think historically, at least in western society, artists and actors have always been degenerates in one way or another. Even in our day and age when these people get millions of dollars for their work, a lot of them are just morons or very steeped in ridiculous behavior.

The way I see it, like is drawn to like. At the very least one can't deny that the usual roustabouts, ruffians and riff-raff of the theater don't have any moral high ground to chide gays, and frankly would be less susceptible to the sins of spiritual pride than someone more moral.

>>6686

I disagree.

I think since its part of the arts, artists always want to be on the last wave so it gets very progressive. It also works as a way to put thoughts push movements

>>6687

That's a very recent phenomenon though, its acceptance as a "progressive" value. Meanwhile, the drugs, sexual promiscuity, flimsy relationships, strange beliefs and occasional violence are still very much a part of that culture, and for the vast majority of history homosexuality was lumped up with them. Still is by some of us.

Were what you say the case, many artists would have made big deal out of their homosexuality in ages past when it could lead in loss of life and limb, or at the very least of career, but they didn't. They tried really hard to conceal it just like celebrities today try to conceal their degeneracy, except for the occasional purposeful public indiscretion because, as some kind of self-fulfilling prophecy, people expect actors to be degenerate (because they often are) and in a sense enjoy that.

>>6688

I disagree again.

The arts have always been on the cutting edge. Even the manerists like El Greco were criticized because of their degeneracy, and now those who call on degeneracy find Grecos work as classics.

That today's famous people are degenerate have more to do with the showmanship than with the arts

>>6695

>That today's famous people are degenerate have more to do with the showmanship than with the arts

>That today's famous people are degenerate have more to do with the showmanship than with the arts

>The arts have always been on the cutting e

These statements contradict eachother.

Anyways, the fact that artists are almost always attention seekers, grand-standers, pretender and reject tradition is not in question. They are, and usually degenerate too; this is a moral category that cannot change. Gauguin will always be an adulterer and a degenerate, despite his talent and popularity.

The question was though, is there something about the arts that attracts gays, and you seem to think that, at the very least, they use their sin as a tool to garner the attention and achieve the edge that art inherently rewards and grooms.

>>6697

They would if art= show

Which many people don't think it is. But I hold an extreme position in art theory so my views on it its quite rare.

Well I think what attracts gays to art is just the medium. You cannot have pro gay science, so they use art as to vent.

What do you think of Francis Bacon? I made a couple of webms with some of his christian related work.

>>6698

>You cannot have pro gay science, so they use

art as to vent.

That's pretty reasonable.

>Francis Bacon

His contributions to science are pretty sound. Made up the whole scientific method on his own if my High school teachers are correct (don't think it was quiet as simple as that).

As far as his religious views or writings go, I'm not familiar. Share the webms.

>>6699

I'm talking about Francis bacon the painter kek

His webms are in the art thread on the catalog.

>>6700

Oh lel. I'm not an artsy character in the least, never had much appreciation for it truth be told. I'll check them out regardless, though I might have seen them already when I checked out your art thread.

>>4586

>Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?

- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014

- http://elitedaily.com/news/world/homophobic-men-aroused-gay-male-porn-surprised/

>Homophobia is more pronounced in individuals with an unacknowledged attraction to the same sex and who grew up with authoritarian parents who forbade such desires, a series of psychology studies demonstrates. The study is the first to document the role that both parenting and sexual orientation play in the formation of intense fear of homosexuals.

- http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120406234458.htm

Is there anything you'd like to tell us?

>>6773

Again? Topkek.

Invite people to come here with us.

Before the hotpocket mod comes here again to bitch out :^)

>>6775

And you will be banned for it.

>>6776

Was there any reason for this particular thread? Did you mess with someone's feelings again ;^)?

>>6775

do what i do when i post on other board, use /christ/ as your name.

>>6776

hi mod.

>>6777

too much incense maybe ? :^)?

>>6780

Dank oc

This place only need more users, those at the other board needs to realise the shitty moderation is killing the place.

If you want to discuss something here just do it. Dont wait till some one does it for you.

>>6781

The largest problem with 8chan is that exit is damn difficult, especially since board owners ban all mention of alternative boards. I do hope more people move to /christ/ - it's not impossible, /ggrevolt/ has been gaining steam.

>>6781 >>6782

Indeed shitty moderation is killing the board. Proven with this one.

Daily reminder that if you want to revolt, you are a shitty christian.

>>6777

Fuck, what do I know. Literally the same cancer as on /christian/ is the reason why /christ/ is shit.

>>6783

its your fault m8

>>6784

Non sequitur.

>>6785

Like God just because you dont see Him doesn't mean He isn't there.

>>6786

He doesn't tho

>>6787

My fedora friend. Why do you blind yourself on purpose?

>ITT /christian/ visitors

>(a) to bitch about hotpockets on /christian/,

>(b) be mods on /christian/ justifying their bans and repeating that tired maymays about schismatics

>>6831

Disgruntled shitposters and gamergate mentality founded this board, what do you expect?

>>6841

You're a disgrace to Holy Mother Church, CUCKVOL.

>>6841

>Disgruntled shitposters

You keepsaying this, but point me to where they are please? They most likely could even post here, but all I've seen so far is a high quality board.

>>6859

Cuckvol deleted a thread I made Monday night which was literally just posting the first four chapters of Romans and explaining that salvation is by faith, not works. He deleted the Bible because it triggered his Catholicism. The next day I posted in another thread that, according to Catholic works theology, many Catholics are burning in hell for failing to meet their own standards. He banned me for that. Then I went on Tor and told everyone he banned me for being sola fide. And he shut off Tor for the whole board. Then I just got around that and kept posting sola fide and sola scriptura, and made an anti-cuckvol demanding that he either stop deleting the evidence when he bans people or change the rules that Protestantism isn't allowed. Then he started freaking out and banning other people too. Guess he thought they were all me. To a liar the truth is frightening.

>>6884

just tell people to come here

>>6884

>And he shut off Tor for the whole board

Nah, I said I would if you don’t stop shitposting with it.

>then he started freaking out and banning other people too. Guess he thought they were all me. To a liar the truth is frightening.

a) this is not true b) how’d you know if I bandelete?

Good though that you admit that you were banevading. If I banned others, they shilled /christ/

>He deleted the Bible because it triggered his Catholicism

Stop giving false testimony.

>>6891

At this point you're such an outlandish caricature of a terrible hotpocket that I have to assume you're some kind of leftist edgelord trying to make the Church look bad.

>>6917

>why don't Roman Catholics believe in it

That’s a misrepresentation and you will go to hell for such lies.

>>6950

Says who, says where?

Isn't making a false claim over a false claim a false claim?

>>6973

False testimony = sin

If he does not repent it = hell

>>6982

>False testimony = sin

>If he does not repent it = hell

>b-but we're totally not works salvation deus vult

Papist

>>7065

>confession=works

Idiot.

>>7071

Yes its a work.

>>7073

Let me phrase it otherwise: conversion is a fruit of grace, so man cannot repent out of his own force. That’s why we should ask Christ to give us insight for repentence.

Likewise, if we cannot forgive someone, we should ask God to help us to find forgiveness.

>>7076

If I have a gift to give you, but I tell you you have to go and do A, and then go do B in a specific building, and then you have to go and do C someplace else, and with some other people you have to do D, and you must change your habits to reflect E; is it really a free gift I'm giving you?

Was not the theif on the cross saved by faith alone?

>>7086

The thief on the cross accepted the real presence and probably heard about Jesus for the first time though. He confessed his sins before that AND realised that Christ is unblemished.

“And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong”

However Christ came to call the sinners to repentence. And doing the will of the Father (= works) is the other aspect of Christianity. Likewise you have no safety and Jesus did not personally tell you that you will be in paradise. The only promise Christ gave is that he will judge where judgment is due.

Your pretence is wrong that heaven is something we earn by saying a sentence as if Christianity required some sort of Shahada. Christ earned us a way to heaven, the way and door to which is Christ himself. You are not alone though because he has ministers who in His name “cast out demons and [absolve of] sins”.

Heaven isn’t free, life is free.

>>7092

>Heaven isn’t free, life is free.

Actually life you have to work for; if a man doesn't work he won't eat. Heaven is a free gift from my Father. Amen, praise God for his glorious mercy.

>And doing the will of the Father (= works) is the other aspect of Christianity.

Yet again you will claim that you don't believe in a works salvation.

Are all papists such liars?

>>7150

Cooperation with Christ is necessary.

Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name?

And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.

That confirms that a) the faithful are subject to the decalogue and b) that priests who are sinners can still do things in Christs name but will not go to heaven, c) it is not just 'random good works' that is important but actually doing the will of the Father.

Believing and trusting in God also means not

>Amen, praise God for his glorious mercy.

Words said in vain and unrepentence and you—as always— cherrypick a sentence instead of addresing everything.

>Actually life you have to work for

“Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes?

Behold the birds of the air, for they neither sow, nor do they reap, nor gather into barns: and your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not you of much more value than they?”

That shows how much sense for the faith you have.

>>4597

>once again, proving that the Bible obviously opposes homosexual behavior.

Why do you need to do this?

The Bible is so obvious on the issue that there shouldnt even be people suggesting otherwise.