[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / ausneets / b2 / choroy / dempart / feet / komica / pol3 / vichan ]

/christianity/ - Christian Theology

Free speech discussion


Winner of the 77nd Attention-Hungry Games
/x/ - Paranormal Phenomena and The RCP Authority

April 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Subject *
Comment *
Verification *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
(replaces files and can be used instead)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.

| Rules | Log | The Gospel |

File: b0828ab01df34c4⋯.jpg (158.8 KB, 600x400, 3:2, multi-ethnic-hands.jpg)

93dcc3  No.2594[Reply]

I grew up in a liberal household in a liberal part of America; I was raised a christian by my parents whom I love.

I don't hate anyone and I certainly don't hate anyone for their race but one thing that angers me deep down is race-mixing. I don't necessarily see miscegenation as a bad thing but ever single multi-racial couple at my school is pretty much a black dude with a white girl almost without fail. This wouldn't be bad if the couples were a bit more "diverse" but no, deep down I probably hate these people but I want to love them just as God loves me.

Anyone have any advise on how I can deal with this?

54 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

1ee359  No.3784

File: b4d7630ee0b59da⋯.png (552.62 KB, 684x823, 684:823, Context is important.png)



Even in the bible race mixing was always from the context of the Israelites/ancient Judaism not mixing, so it's not the same as the white race mixing that the OP talks about.

0b4610  No.3787


You want to know a secret. caucasians are actually red skinned we just have the outward appearance of looking "white" which in its self is destructive terminology. It really should be germanics, italics and other groups in that sense. You don't see jews running around calling themselves semites. Unless it's for "anti semitism"

0b4610  No.3812


>Nehemiah 13:22-27

>And I commanded the Levites that they should cleanse themselves, and that they should come and keep the gates, to sanctify the sabbath day. Remember me, O my God, concerning this also, and spare me according to the greatness of thy mercy. 23In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab: 24And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews' language, but according to the language of each people. 25And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves. 26Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel: nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin. 27Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives?

4ba31e  No.3814


it's always chucked and pathetic white ingels like you that complain

098d18  No.3815


>But we are all children of God. Do you think that after we're all saved, we're meant to be isolated from other believers from different nations?

>Acts 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation

The bible is pretty anti-globalism.

>The Tower of Babel separated languages, not really "races". "Nations", sure.

This is another example of anti-globalism, God has been trying to stop the externalization of Global governments.

>If two Christians of different races want to begin a family and serve Christ, I see no issue.

The bible leaves this up to the individual, It's a political standard, and i don't see any issue with Christians wanting to avoid race mixing.

File: 938be0daa20f0d6⋯.jpg (141.48 KB, 700x489, 700:489, 279097.p (1).jpg)

fe543a  No.3736[Reply]

It's good that we have a board where Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants can have open discussions without getting banned by the mods because they belong to a different denomination or church. But we got to have some limits here, right? We cannot be like /christian/ where one denomination controls everything, but we cannot be like /christ/ where Gnositcs, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Messianic Jews, Unitarians, and whole host of other heresies that are just too far out there. Are these groups being regulated? Should we have a rule that only Trinitarian Christians (Christians who subscribe the the Nicene definition whether they acknowledge it or not) are the only ones allowed on here? We should at least have some common confession of faith on here that should involve the Trinity, which is the central doctrine of Christianity.

3 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

3b18d9  No.3741


>The spirit of this board is for Trinitarians, because one cannot be a Christian without believing the Trinity.

Absolutely, but that doesn't mean we need to ban those that aren't Trinitarian if they just happen to be having productive discussion. When /christian/ ramped up rule 2, they began to ban at slightest bit of heresy, which in the process destroyed some productive threads. Any censorship should only apply to those things which derail discussion, such as porn and blatant spamming.

fe543a  No.3742


OP here. I'm not saying ban them if they come here asking a question or something, only if they attempt to promote their doctrines in any way, implicitly or explicitly. Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox promoting their doctrines is fine. Mormons promoting theirs should be automatic ban. We need to have at least some rules regarding this.

0fe14d  No.3743


>Mormons promoting theirs should be automatic ban.

i strongly disagree, mormons promoting their garbage here should be met with arguments against their cult, rather than silencing them.


>the mormon could become an ex-mormon

>you will inadvertently learn more about your faith by dismantling theirs, as will other people reading the thread

>you'll be more practiced for evangelizing the next mormon you come across, as will other people reading the thread


>people will learn what actually mormons believe (not even really a con)


i read on /christian/ someone calling this board "/b/ with crosses" while trashing it, and i liked that notion.

089a4c  No.3744


great answer

This board is for Christian discussion. Sage and hide non-christian problem starters (read: anti trinitarians). Exercising such power from the moderator is exactly against the point of this board. This isn't a church, it's an imageboard.


Totally arbitrary.

We have a deliberately short rules page: https://8ch.net/christianity/rules.html

There is existing meta discussion on the rationale: >>581

9f874d  No.3803


The rules are good as they are, no need to become /christian/ clone

File: 1715a7f3c0eab57⋯.jpg (40.22 KB, 1024x576, 16:9, earnest.jpg)

bba05d  No.3466[Reply]


Shooting suspect John Earnest

1 Jew dead

Alleged manifesto: https://pastebin.com/VXXFQMTW

Here's what he had to say to us:

<“How can you call yourself a Christian and do this? Surely the Bible calls for you to love your enemies?” Firstly, just because someone calls themselves a Christian does not make them one. Plenty of people wrongfully identify with being Christian. Beyond the scope of time the Father and the Son made a covenant in eternity—that the Son would bring a people to Him that He may be glorified through them. I did not choose to be a Christian. The Father chose me. The Son saved me. And the Spirit keeps me. Why me? I do not know. And my answer to loving my enemies? Trust yids and their puppet braindead lemming normalfags to take one quote from the Bible and grossly twist its meaning to serve their own evil purposes—meanwhile ignoring the encompassing history and context of the entire Bible and the wisdom it takes to apply God’s law in a broken world. Is it lawful to let a thief murder my friend instead of killing the thief to prevent the death of my friend? To ask such a question is to answer it. It is not loving towards your friend to let him be murdered. It is not loving towards your enemy—the thief—to let him murder. A child can understand the concept of self-defense. It is unlawful and cowardly to stand on the sidelines as the European people are genocided around you. I did not want to have to kill Jews. But they have given us no other option. I’m just a normal dude who wanted to have a family, help and heal people, and play piano. But the Jew—with his genocidal instincts—is insistent on poking the bear until it tears his head off. The Jew has forced our hand, and our response is completely justified. My God does not take kindly to the destruction of His creation. Especially one of the most beautiful, intelligent, and innovative races that He has created. Least of all at the hands of one of the most ugly, sinful, deceitful, cursed, and corrupt. My God understands why I did what I did.

Is he right or wrong? Why?

26 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

6475ae  No.3670


It broke off from the PCUSA not the PCA

55e029  No.3727


The OPC is the greatest calvinist denomination ever. You're not lukewarm if you're in the OPC and they clearly, deeply teach systematic theology from the pulpit; from a calvinist perspective.

c9f974  No.3729

File: 88d8506b470f42c⋯.png (644.44 KB, 1023x924, 31:28, earnest jail.png)

WAPO made an article investigating his theology:


<The manifesto, which circulated online after the attack and before numerous mainstream social media websites attempted to remove it, reeled off grievances against Jewish people, many of which had little to do with religion. But the writer also spoke of biblical justification and of Christian belief throughout the document. The two main themes were: Jews’ guilt in the biblical narrative, and his own salvation.

<Several pastors said they found the manifesto’s parts about salvation significantly more troubling. Because when it came to what it said about salvation, they agreed with it. “I did not choose to be a Christian. The Father chose me. The Son saved me. And the Spirit keeps me,” the writer said, espousing a Reformed, or Calvinist, theology. He also wrote that his salvation was based not on his actions or lack of sin but on God’s will.

<In the manifesto, “you actually hear a frighteningly clear articulation of Christian theology in certain sentences and paragraphs. He has, in some ways, been well taught in the church,” said the Rev. Duke Kwon, a Washington pastor in the Presbyterian Church in America, another evangelical denomination which shares many of its beliefs with the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.

7a2e06  No.3751

First off, a c*lvinist, just want to say, this is among the logical conclusions of broken theology. Muh "I'm saved already" nonsense which obviates moral responsibility. The Father does not predestine souls as the shooter suggests, this should be obvious from Pauline theology; oddly the same verses which indicate the rejection of the Jews "Now if some branches have been broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others to share in the nourishment of the olive root, do not boast over those branches. If you do, remember this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you…" Romans (11:17-18) then later "do not be arrogant, but be afraid" Romans (11:20). The bitter fruits of heresy gentlemen.

Second off, and on another level entirely this wouldn't be the first time that Jews and Christians have been at one another's throats. The moral cancer known as blood libel has a long history, the fact that it resurfaced indicates social instability. Blood libel is a known quantity that comes about when people haven't kept their house in order morally, politically and socially. Just another sign that something is rotten in the state of Denmark.


>Is violence in self-defence Biblical?

Yes, but this is not an instance of self-defence. Moses slew the Egyptian for beating a fellow Hebrew, Judith slew Holofernes, and David ordered the deaths of those who threatened Susanna all these were instances of justice.

>Is preemptive action in self-defence Biblical?

Preemptive action in self-defence is contradictory.

>Can killing enemies be Biblically justified as loving them?

Warfare, if we are speaking of just war theory, is an unfortunate necessity, but we do not speak of loving the enemy, rather loving the neighbour who is threatened by that enemy. (See Judith and Holofernes, David and Goliath, etc.)

>Is it against God's will for a racial group to be eliminated?

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

ec7f93  No.3758

File: e025dd3ee977fd7⋯.jpg (109.34 KB, 866x1390, 433:695, disguided-bank-robber-dres….jpg)


>Preemptive action in self-defence is contradictory

Do you wait for a robber to shoot before you're allowed to shoot him?

What if he pointed it at your daughter?

File: 6a7318433fa5cce⋯.png (230.37 KB, 1772x540, 443:135, papacy argument.png)

165903  No.1492[Reply]

This is a response to pic related that gets posted often.

Simon really did have a name change to "Cephas", which translated is "Peter" between Aramaic and Greek. It means rock, and this was intentional symbolism related to the event of Matthew 16. There truly is a pun involved with "you are Peter (Petros, a rock) , and upon this rock (petra, large rock, bedrock) I will build my church" Matt 16:18.

The Catholic uses this passage to claim that Peter had exclusive authority over all church leadership matters, and that they're the only inheritors of such authority.

The "keys to the kingdom" allegedly give

>authority to govern the house of God, which is the Church

The power to "bind and loose" gives

>authority to absolve sins

>to pronounce doctrinal judgements

>to make disciplinary decisions in the Church

Catholic catechism, 553

Couple this with a series of strawmen about protestantism, and you have quite a narrative:

>protestants are subjectivist

>protestants reject church governance

>protestants reject that Christ established visible churches

All of which are explicitly rejected by every reformer, and in every generation for the last 502 years.

In reality, Christ's charge to Peter, as with every spiritual teaching, is broadly applicable to all Christians. Peter was told that the church will be built (upon his confession), and Peter was told "feed my sheep" thrice (John 21), but this responsibility didn't end with Peter. If it did, how could it be related to his role as bishop of Rome since he had not been there yet (if ever)? Peter was not a bishop at the time of John 21. Peter's immediate role was as a missionary to the circumcised after Christ's ascension. "Sheep" in the NT always refers to the disciples or believers in the church, and the shepherd is either Christ or a pastor. How then can we call Peter the chief of earthlPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

32 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

650796  No.3685

File: d93f0252d0fe7a9⋯.png (6.4 KB, 220x230, 22:23, 08437b0d1c44bdb9dfe26a2e84….png)



Hmm yes indeed a classic debate

f74122  No.3708

In my understanding, there is no faith in God needed to get the Catholic sacraments.

You essentially get saved by getting pedo-baptized, confirmed later, by going confession and paying your tithe and indulgence.

All you need for that is to believe in the authority of the Catholic Church.

Am I correct, or did I miss something?

4709f8  No.3709


no faith is needed if you're severely mentally handicapped or in 'invincible ignorance', otherwise it is necessary.

f74122  No.3710


Why do I see so many Catholics without a connection to the living God?

c3d16b  No.3747


This is called a strawman. Every sacramentalist believe faith is required for sacramental efficiacy.

542dd9  No.2679[Reply]

God is not real. Religion is superstition. Science is the only truth and science knows it can be wrong and will change with new information. Religion resists any change or contradiction. Imagine if barbers still did blood letting to drain the sickness out. That is religion. Old outdated information. Let it go.

4 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

668020  No.2761

File: 5ce990077eec24b⋯.jpeg (43.76 KB, 625x626, 625:626, 699848CD-7EF1-4508-8D86-F….jpeg)

00bbf3  No.2814


>Religion resists any change or contradiction.

The doctrine of the Bible being the word of God and unchanging is probably my primary disagreement with the average Christian.

>Kant asks whether a religious synod or presbytery should be entitled to “commit itself by oath to a certain unalterable set of doctrines.” He answers that a contract like this prevents “all further enlightenment of mankind forever.” It is impossible and immoral that the people of one generation could restrict the thoughts of the next generation, to prevent the extension and correction of previous knowledge, and stop all future progress. Based on this, later generations are not bound by the oaths of preceding generations. With freedom, each citizen, especially the clergy, could provide public comment until public insight and public opinion changes the religious institution. But Kant says that it is impossible to agree, “even for a single lifetime,” to a permanent religious constitution that doesn't allow public comment and criticism. If one were to renounce enlightenment for later generations, one would be trampling on the “sacred rights of mankind.” Neither an individual citizen nor a monarch has the right to constrict historical development.

>Kant further explains why he has been emphasizing the religious aspect, religious immaturity, "is the most pernicious and dishonourable variety of all.” If Enlightenment is man's emergence from his ‘self-incurred immaturity' and the guiding forces of society, then simply put: the church is a political force which constrains public behaviour through the use of doctrine. By defining doctrines and making them politically binding, the Church can control the growth of reason, therefore, publicly it is in your own self-interest not to assent to a set of beliefs that hinder the development of your reason. It is in man's interest to surpass those that prevent him from using his own reason.

1d4d84  No.3164

Religion is the mere vessel that carries a theist from reality into a world of delusion.

6b16a5  No.3658

File: 665e071986901b7⋯.jpg (23.43 KB, 333x499, 333:499, 41i2jc430bL._SX331_BO1,204….jpg)


Science is measurement. Compartmentalized measurement. If you zoomed out a little bit, expanded your view, you might realize scientists spend their whole lives measuring God's Creation. Am I the only one who finds God hilarious?

If you don't believe in absolute truth, how can you trust the scientific method? Aren't 50% of studies BS?

This book dismantles your worldview in the 1st 20 pages. Far more eloquently than I can.

>“Everything in this life passes away — only God remains, only He is worth struggling towards. We have a choice: to follow the way of this world, of the society that surrounds us, and thereby find ourselves outside of God; or to choose the way of life, to choose God Who calls us and for Whom our heart is searching.”

>“What, more realistically, is this “mutation,” the “new man”? He is the rootless man, discontinuous with a past that Nihilism has destroyed, the raw material of every demagogue’s dream; the “free-thinker” and skeptic, closed only to the truth but “open” to each new intellectual fashion because he himself has no intellectual foundation; the “seeker” after some “new revelation,” ready to believe anything new because true faith has been annihilated in him; the planner and experimenter, worshipping “fact” because he has abandoned truth, seeing the world as a vast laboratory in which he is free to determine what is “possible”; the autonomous man, pretending to the humility of only asking his “rights,” yet full of the pride that expects everything to be given him in a world where nothing is authoritatively forbidden; the man of the moment, without conscience or values and thus at the mercy of the strongest “stimulus”; the “rebel,” hating all restraint and authority because he himself is his own and only god; the “mass man,” this new barbarian, thoroughly “reduced” and “simplified” and capable of only the most elementary ideas, yet scornful of anyone who presumes to point out the higher things or the real complexity of life.”

9a8686  No.3703


Science is the lowest rung of truth, rational philosophy is above it, then theology, then God himself.

File: d1b0bccb97dc9e3⋯.jpg (54.75 KB, 320x466, 160:233, 320px-Hans_von_Tübingen_00….jpg)

3c8b11  No.3699[Reply]

Hello, I am (not) Gnosis and I will need cessation from the collar bone to the top of my head, which is like drainage.

Drainage of a malformation. The child of chaos, or the demiurge. It's much like tar.

Who else Gnosis here? Meaning who else here hears voices in their head which are demonic?

What the difference between the spheres and tar?


af3c8d  No.3700

>Meaning who else here hears voices in their head which are demonic?

Get thee to a exorcist and psychiatrist.

154b63  No.3701

You need Jesus

3c5e77  No.3791

File: c5412468091ebe1⋯.webm (11.68 MB, 540x360, 3:2, alternetive gospels.webm)

File: 66f1e9dbd27a8b8⋯.jpg (27.37 KB, 350x500, 7:10, 84874636.jpg)

a2fe45  No.3674[Reply]

>this triggers the Prot

2 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

1cee4f  No.3682

File: ab76503901fd463⋯.jpeg (240.01 KB, 1300x1065, 260:213, BBFC32FB-ED82-470C-9BD0-1….jpeg)


Default position in Medieval Land.

fe32a0  No.3683

File: 41301321246e9c4⋯.jpg (150.46 KB, 512x512, 1:1, 20190425_172513.jpg)

>if you don't accept my doctrine on Mary you hate her

Ok kid

c679bd  No.3687


Goddess worship? Doesn't sound Bibilical.

97922d  No.3694

I don't hate her I just don't worship her.

84e019  No.3731

File: 565e8be2affc0ed⋯.png (89.65 KB, 370x370, 1:1, 565e8be2affc0ed32d9d574f70….png)



<Im not triggered, just dissappointed by your heresy.

<I will pray for you.

File: 7c97cf53212aa68⋯.png (351.72 KB, 1000x1000, 1:1, Christian go getter.png)

70a173  No.1944[Reply]

Any hesitation in going to church is spiritual warfare from the devil himself. If you are apprehensive about going, introverted, lonely, you need to NUT UP.

Church is exactly the place you need to be if you have problems. There is a congregation of people meeting every Sunday who want nothing more of you than to love you unconditionally.

Here is everything you need to know:

>Worship service

Looks something like this: Singing, prayer, reading, offering, sermon, benediction.

Pick a seat anywhere. People will want to say hi and shake your hand.

Stand up and sit down when everyone else does.

Nobody is listening to your singing voice, don't worry about it. Sit out a verse if you don't know the song, try to learn the melody for the next one.

They don't want your money in the offering if you're new.

>Sunday school

Just a bible study in smaller groups, maybe organized by age group. This is the best way to meet people.

Show up during the sunday school hour and say "I'm looking for sunday school".

If there's no greeter, just Chad walk up to the room where you hear voices and ask "Is this sunday school?"

>Lord's supper (eucharist)

Don't take it if you're not already Christian.

Nobody will judge you for sitting out, they won't even notice anyway. It's not about you, it's about God.

<But I don't have good enough clothes

<But I'll embarrass myself

<But I have a sinful past

<But I can't kick the sin I'm stuck in

<But I know some of the people at that church, it will be awkward

Shut the hell up, stop being a faggot

Look at yourself in the mirror and say "gPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

18 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

b8c0a7  No.3591


It would still be a lie

fc8201  No.3595


pedophiles are rebrobates and cant be saved so do the world a favor and blow your brains out

bddd17  No.3614

File: 1deedfd47d22107⋯.png (71.46 KB, 343x400, 343:400, 32038F18-763E-4950-A9DA-40….png)


>Any hesitation in going to church is spiritual warfare from the devil himself.

<let us pray this mass for the jews who God came to first n sheit and accept those wonderful baby dick suckers into our healthy White Christian community

Sounds like there’s plenty of devil himself in church.

7d1c93  No.3616


If that's what's preached at your church I agree that you shouldn't go

af6be4  No.3645

When in doubt pray

File: 15812fcad26b187⋯.jpg (74.49 KB, 960x680, 24:17, big-christ-family3.jpg)

File: 79ad2440f82b4df⋯.png (7.7 KB, 731x312, 731:312, romans116-dra.PNG)

File: 6a78b763c39f3f0⋯.jpg (2.35 MB, 2631x1689, 877:563, big-christ-family2.jpg)

File: 3053b6b36ec952e⋯.jpg (52.77 KB, 575x320, 115:64, big-christ-family1.jpg)

8fb2cd  No.3619[Reply]

In spite of the terribly high costs of raising a family (at least in my country), I have noted many happy (specifically Catholic) families with ≥7 children. This thread is dedicated to discussing (and perhaps merely appreciating) this phenomenon and is not meant as a relationships thread extra.

8fb2cd  No.3620

oops, i forgot this is /christianity/ not the other board

9ab89c  No.3621

I'm 37 and have zero children.

0bdb38  No.3622


You are failing your obligation to reproduce


Catholics are welcome to post here

19976b  No.3629


>Be fruitful and multiply

This sounds like an attempt at derailing the board.

2af5fa  No.3634


Christians are reproducing more to compensate.

File: 5a80aa34cd29a83⋯.jpeg (49.2 KB, 700x909, 700:909, FcvJNk3.jpeg)

04907e  No.3498[Reply]

Is there any documentation about this I can use to back up my claims? They always say stuff like :"why do Christians thank God when something good happens, but say it cant be helped when something bad happens"

f9a7bf  No.3518

File: 5fc4947aa57cb44⋯.png (130.15 KB, 529x602, 529:602, problem of evil.png)

look up:

>problem of evil


>alvin plantinga

>free will defense

59d7e2  No.3523

Luke 13:4,

<from the very mouth of God

>"because thats life, shit happens."

c200f0  No.3600


31e8b5  No.3608

File: 9117ab6697fbde6⋯.png (199.71 KB, 493x500, 493:500, thinking christchan.png)

>God can't be real!

<Why not Fedora-kun?

>Cuz bad things happen! God must

<But if God doesn't exist and only physical things exist, why call evil things evil? What standard are you using and how can you absolutely ensure this standard is absolute?

>Because muh society/muh feel feels/muh logical positivism/muh "brute facts"/muh ethical evolutionism/ muh game theory

<But your brain will rot, society changes and will disappear after the heat death of the universe, and pain happens all the time and not one iota is given for it by the physical cosmos


<So a subjective, non-real ethical standard that can't be uniformally and absolutely enforced forever and everywhere no matter what forces God to not exist?

<And He can't exist because we pathetic creatures demand He makes it hunky-dory for us filthy sinners, and supposedly this makes Him obligated to do that or He can't exist. Why?

>GRRRR stop making sense Christanon-chan!

<By the way Fedora-kun, He did solve the problem of evil, it's called the Cross

>but say it cant be helped when something bad happens

That's not right and the good ones don't say that. They should either say "But by the grace of God go I." or "Thank you Lord for not giving me what I, a filthy sinner, rightfully deserve."

243cb7  No.3632

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

Because he allows free will.

>inb4 free will doesn't exist.

File: e883d0ff858342f⋯.png (17.51 KB, 509x411, 509:411, depressed pepe.png)

File: dcb5c3aa3a8999f⋯.png (64.92 KB, 1008x546, 24:13, continuationists.png)

253b34  No.1615[Reply]

Everywhere I go, people are claiming to have particular messages from God regarding their lives beyond scriptures. I just let a church that over-spiritualized everything. Nigh every church I'm investigating in my area has a section like this:

>In 2008 God made it clear that _(pastor) was no longer in control of his life and that his life was to be fully available to Him. God’s word that was spoken to _ was that “You did it your way, now it’s time to do it my Way.” That night while crying in his garage, ____ fully surrendered his will to God’s will and now strives to only do as He sees what His father is doing. His life testimony is one of many miracles that many, including God can testify to.

I really want to affirm the sentiment. It would be greatly encouraging, but I can't intellectually get on board. I believe in a closed canon. Continuous revelation is charismatic and against the doctrine of the sufficiency of scripture.

My systematic professor told our class that a claim of revelation amounts to claim of being a prophet, and everyone claiming should be held to the tests of a prophet in the OT, which nobody would pass.

Another way I could assent to such language is to read it as metaphorical, and sometimes it is, but they almost always mean in a very literal way "God told me x,y,z".

Anyone else witness this?

Am I wrong?

18 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

0a6321  No.3581


Revelation that is divine and direct - such as communication from angels, prophecy, visions, hearing God's voice in a literal direct way, scripture itself. As I said here >>3566 most communication with God that everyday people experience is on a more subtle and down-to-earth level, which I suppose would be either technically categorized as either falling under general revelation, or possibly something that is in between general and special revelation, since God can communicate via such things as borderline supernatural "coincidences" and such.

As far as the issue of whether special revelation has ceased, I'm honestly on the fence about it at this moment. But I feel a instinctual skepticism and distrust when a modern person claims to have special revelation from God, due to so many kooky cults and heresies starting this way.

c399a3  No.3582


Any revelation that is not general is special

0a6321  No.3585


So if I pray for guidance on choosing the right church, and I get a restrained answer that is void of angels, visions, God speaking directly as a voice in my head, etc. It's still considered special?

2ed6b6  No.3588


>So if I pray for guidance on choosing the right church

I did and used the walk and see where I end up approach, because the few parishes in question were within a few miles.

I ended up in front of the right church with a big cross on the side of the building multiple times, despite starting my walk from different places every time.

bb6874  No.3594


Yes, special revelation

File: 1a88670629a4432⋯.jpg (22.21 KB, 350x520, 35:52, douay-rheims.jpg)

1e8027  No.3542[Reply]

Catholics should at least acknowledge that the Reformation forced them to clean house. I'd like to hear /christianity/'s thoughts on how the Catholic church improved (or worsened) as a result of the Reformation. I found this list online and added a few:

1. Greater clarity with regards to doctrine – an unequivocal set of rules.

2. The superstitions of the Medieval Church were under control.

3. New orders were established and went into the community to do “good work” and to help the sick and poor. A spiritual commitment applied to all tasks, which was a good example to lay people.

4. Greater importance put on communion, which enabled the faith to be cultivated and spread.

5. Popes were more open to constructive change and recognized the corruption of the old church. More churches were built.

6. The power of the popes was unquestioned after Trent – this was good if they were pro-reform.

7. The Counter-Reformation proved to the outside world that the Catholic Church had recognized its past failings and was willing to reform itself rather than blind itself to its faults.

8. Ideas of the new Catholic Church spread by groups like the Jesuits.

9. Good support (in general) by Catholic lay rulers after 1555. The Council of Trent was accepted everywhere and though Philip II controlled the Catholic Church in Spain he was an ardent Catholic.

10. The power of Spain in the C16 meant that the Catholic Church had very strong backing.

11. Translation of the Bible into English.

2 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

44ce76  No.3549

File: 2f9dd256d5f814b⋯.png (371.02 KB, 680x497, 680:497, Geneva_Feels.png)

The counter-reformation was a net positive event in Christian history because it proved once and for all time that romanism is a pagan cult devoid of the gospel

17c6c7  No.3556


>1. Greater clarity with regards to doctrine – an unequivocal set of rules.

They created doctrine where there was none before. Mary's assumption into heaven, for example.

>2. The superstitions of the Medieval Church were under control.

Can you elaborate further on what you mean by this?

>4. Greater importance put on communion, which enabled the faith to be cultivated and spread.

Do you mean communion as in "the gathering of people" or communion as in the Eucharist?

>5. Popes were more open to constructive change and recognized the corruption of the old church. More churches were built.

Isn't the whole purpose of apostolic succession that the church doesn't change, and the big claim that apostolic churches have to back their authority is that they follow the traditions of old?

>6. The power of the popes was unquestioned after Trent – this was good if they were pro-reform.

I'm honestly confused by this one. You're saying it's good for the popes, who are now more powerful, to be pro-reform? Or are you saying it's good that they want to reform the church? Either way, do you see the issue here? The protestant reformation brought about a reformation of the church regardless, but this one is okay because it's approved by the RCC. And it also makes it seem a lot like the doctrine surrounding papal authority is just a power grab, though that may be with how you've worded it here.

>7. The Counter-Reformation proved to the outside world that the Catholic Church had recognized its past failings and was willing to reform itself rather than blind itself to its faults.

That's a good point, but it'd be better if they recognized their doctrine as unbiblical rather than being blinded by their traditions.

>8. Ideas of the new Catholic Church spread by groups like the Jesuits.

Ask any trad catholic what they think of the jesuits, I'll wait. And again, why are there ideas of the "new catholic Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

1e8027  No.3559


Good questions! I just copy/pasted that list from a page about the Counter-Reformation, and it didn't go into additional details so I'm not sure what the answers are. But thanks for asking good questions.

af4262  No.3584


Examination of the Council of Trent is supposedly good too. I wish it was available online or at least not absurdly expensive.

881e1e  No.3589


this. just like other councils it's just doubling down on the establishment

File: 95a99087d3973cd⋯.png (24.56 KB, 570x1024, 285:512, 570px-Logo_of_the_United_M….png)

0b5cb5  No.3561[Reply]


>A ruling by the United Methodist Church's highest court has upheld the denomination's support of traditional marriage and its opposition to LGBT ordination. The ruling, some evangelical commentators say, could portend a split in the UMC.

>"The United Methodist Church is not going to be able to hold together" as its liberal and conservative elements espouse conflicting views of human sexuality among other matters, R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said today (April 29) in his podcast "The Briefing." "It is not going to be a united Methodist Church. The polarities within the denomination are simply too great."

>In an April 26 ruling, the UMC's Judicial Council upheld 10 of 17 petitions in the Traditional Plan narrowly adopted by delegates to the UMC General Conference in February. The Traditional Plan affirmed the UMC's longstanding declarations that "the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching" and that "self-avowed practicing homosexuals" cannot be ordained to the ministry or married in the UMC.

b0add7  No.3562

Too little too late

c38096  No.3571


Good! Separate the chaff from the wheat.

File: 1d46e6305f5aeb0⋯.jpg (8.02 KB, 600x400, 3:2, protestant-flag.jpg)

83b6f0  No.2301[Reply]

Bible translations.

Study Bibles.





Internet streaming and traditional radio stations.

Misc. resources.


19 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

83b6f0  No.3013

Some Protestant Literature (Anglican, Lutheran, Reformed, Evangelical):



667493  No.3194


Issuesetc is a good lutheran podcast.

83b6f0  No.3557



Thanks for these recommendations!

83b6f0  No.3558


Also thank you for this as well!

7e48e2  No.3563

Reminder that "reformed" doesn't exclusively refer to calvinists

File: 4ae1788be32a1cf⋯.jpg (76.66 KB, 674x388, 337:194, holy-bible.jpg)

2aa9e9  No.3509[Reply]

Can Christianity talk about Free Speech 1st amendment ?! etc!



Protect your rights and 1st amendment !

https://8ch.net/thetruthh2019/res/1.html ->proof videos links on this thread

a6c221  No.3513

Give us the summary. Feds exposed as what?

Delete Post [ ]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23]
| Catalog | Nerve Center | Cancer
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / ausneets / b2 / choroy / dempart / feet / komica / pol3 / vichan ]