Sexually liberal

>Perhaps he disagrees about what God "wants," friend.
Even if you disagree, it is obvious God knows better than you and therefore you must submit to his will, friend.
To be a Christian means to follow the commandments, whether you like it or not.

>I really don't think contraceptive pre-marital sex, sodomy, or masturbation, when done behind closed doors and without public comment, are inconsistent with a modest and well ordered society.
yeah sex just happens without social consequences am I right
just dicks and vaginas floating around in a void

You're the reason why all those fucking retarded Churches exist in the United States. How about instead of hunting down that one church that believes in your unique bullshit you actually sacrifice something and make a change.

God does not make his condemnation of any of what I listed clear, except arguably sodomy. Even that, however, never comes straight from God, it comes indirectly through the form of an ancient Jewish code of laws and through Paul's letters. Not one page in the bible has God in any form saying "don't put on a condom."

This isn't about what God wants, its about what Churches think God wants.

Mark Chapter 7:

20 And he went on, 'It is what comes out of someone that makes that person unclean.
21 For it is from within, from the heart, that evil intentions emerge: fornication, theft, murder,
22 adultery, avarice, malice, deceit, indecency, envy, slander, pride, folly.
23 All these evil things come from within and make a person unclean.'

catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=48&bible_chapter=7

And that is relevant... how? I mean, besides "fornication," which is far too broad (even in Greek) to be read as an indictment of a specific act.

Pre-marital sex counts as fornication.

This.

I'm atheist myself but it seems absolutely ridiculous and dishonest to first find what you believe to be right and true, and then find a matching religion/church. Religion is about believing or accepting certain teachings as absolute truth and living your life accordingly, even if that means self-sacrifice.

What OP is doing is just looking for a social club for like-minded people. Not religion.

And what passage in the Bible makes that clear?

>Pre-marital sex counts as fornication

According to modern Catholics, sure. But I think you'll find the Greek word it is translated from is not so simple, and just means "sexuality with ill intent" (still not a perfect translation).

>Religion is about believing or accepting certain teachings as absolute truth and living your life accordingly, even if that means self-sacrifice.

I think you're confusing Church and Religion. You can accept and believe the absolute truth of the Bible and the divinity of Christ, and thus have religion; and then seek a Church where you don't have a bunch of extra traditions stapled on.

American Protestantism has this, but the conservative sects have swapped catholic traditions (esp sexual morality) for puritain ones, and the liberal sects have swapped catholic traditions for the Democratic party.

I've always taken biblical marriage to be like common law marriage. If a man and a woman are living together in a committed relationship, they don't need a piece of paper from the government saying they are married.

Church and religion are one and the same. Only one church has a true divine mandate. If you go shopping for one based on your own personal preferences, you are not listening to God but playing God.

What does being "sexually liberal" mean? Do you think that trannies are whatever they say they are? Or do you just enjoy sucking dick and eating pussy at the same time and want a church that won't shame you for your degenerate behavior and lead you down the path to salvation?

>all these sinners thinking they know God's Will

Have fun in hell.

>Only one church has a true divine mandate.

Mormons?

Arians?

>implying there is anything wrong with either of those things

How is the Chruch's claim to a divine mandate any less presumptive?

The Bible is vauge, Catholic dogma is more tradition than anything else, and the line of apostolic succession is spotty. To claim absolute knowledge of God's will on every minor topic to the exclusion of competing opinions is absurd.

I listed exactly what I meant earlier. I don't have a problem with premarital, contraceptive, or homosexual sex.

Its entirely 100% presumptive. That's why they call it 'faith' or 'believing'.

If you are not willing to take that leap of faith, you aren't a true believer. Just somebody who wants to see their own values confirmed by a group of likeminded individuals.

>I'm for adultery and sodomy
>but I'm a social conservative

Does not compute

>I listed exactly what I meant earlier. I don't have a problem with premarital, contraceptive, or homosexual sex.

God does. Does that matter to you?

Yes, and by believing in, and having faith in, a man-made church, you assure your own damnation.

He makes money and wants lower taxes. That's all that means.

This thread is fucking stupid. Every Christian church outside of loopy Unitarians who worship Krishna next to Jesus has conservative sexual ethics. Deal with it.

Honestly dude? Most churches would be "right" for you because very few if any of them actually care if anyone follows their rules regarding sex anymore. The xtians on Veeky Forums are a clear minority of contrarians who still cling to a past that is long dead and not coming back.

No, I'm not a believer in the Catholic Church. That was the point. I'm not a believer in sexually *and* socially conservative Churches. The question was, are there any that aren't the first but are the second.

I see no compelling evidence that he does. Except for homosexuality, arguably, but that doesn't change the other two.

Adultery =/= sodomy

As far as social conservatism goes, put it this way: I don't think its a mortal sin if gays have sex, but I don't think they should be allowed marriage or a platform in the media.

No, I'm pretty center-left on economics. I'm not a libertarian.

I refuse to be a part of the watering down of religion. I will join a Church I can believe in 100% or not at all.

>I see no compelling evidence that he does. Except for homosexuality, arguably, but that doesn't change the other two.

He made His opinion quite clear through both His prophets and His Son.

Does that matter to you?

>I refuse to be a part of the watering down of religion. I will join a Church I can believe in 100% or not at all.

That's the only way to be saved. 100% commitment to the risen Jesus Christ.

Which has nothing to do with any man-made church whatsoever, but for the Body of Christ, the collection of all true believers from Pentecost to the Rapture.

I guess church is just not for you friend.

No, he really hasn't. No where in the Bible - categorically, *no where* - does he or anyone else condemn pre marital sex or contraceptives. Sodomy is condemned in an ancient Jewish law code, and in the letters of Paul, both of which are debatable as statements of God's opinion.

*Thank you!* YOU seem to get what I'm saying. A Church I agree with would be nice, but I made it clear in my OP that if *organized* Christianity was beyond my reach then so be it.

None?

Damn.

He does, actually.

Matthew 15:19
For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.

1 Corinthians 6
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 homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

Mark 7:20-22
And He said, “What comes out of a man, that defiles a man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lewdness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness.

2 Corinthians 12
For I fear lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I wish, and that I shall be found by you such as you do not wish; lest there be contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, backbitings, whisperings, conceits, tumults; lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and I shall mourn for many who have sinned before and have not repented of the uncleanness, fornication, and lewdness which they have practiced.

The bible is silent on contraception.

Does any of this matter to you?

>*organized* Christianity

To me, organized Christianity is a few families, a few people, meeting in their homes and talking about how awesome Jesus is.

Can you imagine actually being a Christ-cuck?

It's pretty awesome to be adopted by the richest being in the universe, yes it is.

All of those rely on a Catholic interpretation of the word "fornication". Like said, the word is actually far less clear. It could mean basically anything.

The 1 Corinthians verse is the only one that uses clear language to condemn homosexuality, but Paul's condemnation of them is not equivalent to God's condemnation. Paul is an important figure in the early Church, but he was not Jesus.

Guys, you are wasting your time.
OP does not love Jesus. He does not give a fuck about God. All he wants is to find a circlejerk that has his same political ideas and that does not judge him for his individual wickedness. If he can find a chick with big boobs to fuck and cum on her face right before mass even better.
He made this whole thread with the sole purpose of finding somone who enables and confirms his delusions, while refusing to acknowledge he is wallowing in mortal sin.

>21Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven.

>>For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables

As the Holy Spirit inspired all of the writings of all of the books of the bible, that would include all of the writings of Paul, the greatest apostle to walk the earth.

I feel you do not have an intellectual problem with saying that the ideal life would not include fornication, but that your own fornication causes you to feel too dirty to approach a holy God.

But what if you realized that God knew everything about you before you were born, knew all of your sins before you committed them, and paid the price for all of them on the cross two thousand years ago?

Would that change your mind?

What if instead of an old judge waiting to convict you of your sins you saw God as a man slightly older than you are with His arms out waiting for you to run over and jump into them?

What if you saw yourself as a small child, and God as your father treading water in the deep end of the pool, encouraging you to jump into His arms? Sure, the pool looks scary, and you could drown, but He is God. Maybe it's safe to jump into His arms, and let Him catch you, and clean you, the way only He can.

I'm not going to lie to you. If you approach the holy God, you will be broken. But you will be in the hands of the great healer, and He will transform you into something you cannot be on your own.

>As the Holy Spirit inspired all of the writings of all of the books of the bible, that would include all of the writings of Paul, the greatest apostle to walk the earth.

Debatable, I think. Historical circumstances need to be taken into account, but *for the sake of argument* I will cede this point. Let us agree that homosexuality is a grave sin.

In that case, I still do not see any problem with the fact that I got a blowjob from my first girlfriend two years ago. It doesn't make me feel dirty or complex in my relationship with God. It just means I don't feel welcome in the Catholic or Orthodox Church.

>I don't feel welcome in the Catholic or Orthodox Church.

I would encourage you to believe that is a good thing, not a bad thing.

Both churches are comprised of people who place their faith in their respective church.

Their faith is thus misplaced, and they are as lost as you are. They just have a mob telling them that they're not.

>I refuse to be a part of the watering down of religion. I will join a Church I can believe in 100% or not at all.

But you are watering down religion by desiring this!

You have taken your own personal opinions about truth and right, and desire a church to match them. You are basicly saying that the absolute word of God, has to be YOUR word. You want to see a group of people believe and worship YOUR truths. You desire to have your personal worldview elevated to be the word of God. And if you aren't given this, you refuse to submit to the Lord.

This isn't faith at all. Faith is taking the word of the Lord and acting accordingly, for he is God and knows right and truth better than you do.

I'm an atheist and yet I have a thousand times more respect for true Christians than I have for the likes of you.

I never claimed to see it as a bad thing. I just recognized that it was, and intended to ask around in case anyone knew of an alternative Church (that wasn't the liberal prayer circle the CoE has become).

Christianity is the Bible. That is the Word of God, and that *alone*. So long as the bible does not directly, clearly state that pre-marital and contraceptive sex are bad, then it is not I who am substituting my beliefs for the word of God, but the Church which condemns those acts.

Basically, I'm a sola scriptura protestant that neither condemns the pill nor wants to see it sold on every street corner. I am not adding to the word of God, or equating my views to his. I'm merely not equating the word of Rome to the word of God.

>Catholic and Orthodox faith is misplaced
I want heretics to leave

you are proof that protestants think of themselves as their own Pope, coming up with whatever interpretation suits their wickedness and thinking they are righteous nonetheless.

The orthodoxy is fine but you'd be an idiot if you said the Catholic faith isn't corrupted beyond saving.

whatever makes you sleep at night, heretic.
Remember that your time for repentance is limited. You have a lot of years in this life to leave your heretical ways; you won't have any excuse when you find yourself in front of the Son of Man.

youtube.com/watch?v=XyFuaXlYo8Q

You are choosing your own beliefs based on your own personal opinions, and are now looking for a Church to tell you that's the word of God.

The Orthodoxy here is just as lost as the papists. They substitute their patriarchy for the pope, their church for Rome, but suffer from the same works based mentality, blasphemies and abominations.

They truly are two legs on the same statue, each ruling the world for a thousand years.

t.not saved person

I think I'll do fine, man.

Versus the actual pope, who comes up with whatever interpretation suits him and claims its the literal word of god?

Well yeah. The Word of God is limited to 1,000 pages, it cannot conceivably cover every topic. So a bunch are left up to social convention or personal opinion.

I'm not looking for a Church to tell me my opinions are the word of god, just a Church that doesn't add stuff to the Bible that isn't clearly there.

>just a Church that doesn't add stuff to the Bible that isn't clearly there.

That right is only reserved for you, right?

What have I added? As far as I can tell, I've added nothing at all.

>I think I'll do fine, man.
I have no doubts you sleep like a baby. Watch the video.

>12Wherefore, my dearly beloved, (as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but much more now in my absence,) with fear and trembling work out your salvation.

>Versus the actual pope, who comes up with whatever interpretation suits him and claims its the literal word of god?
ahahahahahahahahahahaahahahah
Man, you guys always crack me up. Aren't you coming with whatever interpretation you want yourself anyway? Do you think God is a matter of opinion? Do you think God accepts flawed interpretations for the sole reason that you reject the authority of the Church he founded? You people are some of the most delusional individuals ever.
The Magisteriu is stopped from teaching heresy by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not talking to you, because all you prottie heretics interpet things differently. The Holy Spirit would never support a "house divided that cannot stand". The only thing you protties can agree on is that you hate the Catholic Church, because the only thing you can agree on is that you hate the truth.

The only logical conclusion you can draw from my post is that I belong neither to Rome nor Istanbul.

I'm very happy to have been saved by my confession of faith in Christ Jesus, knowing that God raised Him from the dead. And then developing a living and working relationship with my Creator.

Very happy indeed.

Whence do you believe these insights of morality you have originate?

A) They have been revealed to you by God.
B) You have divined the true meaning of Scripture through study (and possibly some divine guidance).
C) Anything else.

A: Anabaptism, or various other minor cults. You're a prophet!
B: You're a protestant. There may be a church for you, hell if I know.
C: See you in hell, fellow unbeliever.

>The Magisteriu is stopped from teaching heresy by the Holy Spirit.

Absolute bald faced lie that you believe is true.

>The Magisteriu is stopped from teaching heresy by the Holy Spirit

Can't make this up, people.

>The Holy Spirit is not talking to you

Well of course not. If the Holy Spirit guided people like that, we wouldn't need a Bible. That goes for the Magesterium, the Pope, Martin Luther, and Me.

>Absolute bald faced lie that you believe is true.
Tell me a lie it has taught then. Go on, I will be waiting

>Well of course not. If the Holy Spirit guided people like that, we wouldn't need a Bible. That goes for the Magesterium, the Pope, Martin Luther, and Me.
But you all come up with a different view of what the Bible is teaching. So you are saying that the Bible is useless and that God is incapable of giving us the fullness of truth?

Mary did not die.
Mary went alive into heaven.
Mary was born sinless.
Mary is Co-Mediatrix with Jesus.

There are thousands more.

As to your ridiculous image, there has been a bible for 3500 years:

Acts 17:11
These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.

>who comes up with whatever interpretation suits him and claims its the literal word of god?
once again protestants revealing how retarded they are

Better than Catholics refusing to think for themselves, I'd say.

>So you are saying that the Bible is useless and that God is incapable of giving us the fullness of truth?

God understands that the Truth is not always clear and obvious, and his word reflects that. It is human fallability that turns a necessarily complex, multi-layered, and opaque truth into a thousand clear cut and absolute statements of contradictory truth.

Jesuit mind control is a real thing.

>Mary went alive into heaven
>Mary was born sinless
Only these two have been declared by the Magisterium. They didn't come from nothing. It's always been believed by the Church throughout the centuries. In fact, even though they don't have it as dogma, The Eastern Orthodox and all other Churches with apostolic succession believe it too, although they have not defined it as a dogma.
>Mary did not die
This has not been declared because we don't know for sure. Catholic mystics have given a very coherent idea about how the whole thing played out. Their private revelation though is not dogma and therefore was not used as evidence. The Magisterium does not define whether she died before being assumed into heaven.
Watch this if you want to learn more about private revelation regarding this topic:
youtube.com/watch?v=V9H-ZVRZhww

>Mary is Co-Mediatrix with Jesus.
Co- simply means "with". It has none of the implications you strawman into it. Either way the Magisterium has not declared it.

>As to your ridiculous image, there has been a bible for 3500 years:
You mean the Old Testament that you butchered because of Luther? Nice hipocrisy ;)
Pic related btw

>God understands that the Truth is not always clear and obvious, and his word reflects that
Top heresy m8
> It is human fallability that turns a necessarily complex, multi-layered, and opaque truth into a thousand clear cut and absolute statements of contradictory truth.
That's the problem. God founded his Church and gave the keys to Peter exactly so that we could have an authority that through the Holy Spirit reveals us the fullness of truth without errors. By refuting this authority you are condemning yourself to lies and deceit. Remember, Jesus didn't say I am the Way, the "partial" Truth and the Life.

>Better than Catholics refusing to think for themselves, I'd say.
Better than religious people refusing to think for themsevles, I'd say. See? You speak like an atheist that rejects authority based on his personal feelings.
Heaven is not a democracy, it is a kingdom. Just like the Kingdom of Israel, the Church is a mirror, an imitation of the Kingdom in Heaven. God does not create anything based on the principles of equality of the French revolution, or on the "don't serve in heaven, rule in hell" principles of the devil. Open your eyes, user

They are two blasphemies and abominations.

Go ahead and try to defend them, and then try to defend why nobody "knew" this until 1854.

Degenerate, the only true Church is the Catholic Church.

Jesus hates self-righteous religious people.

I'm sure glad I'm not you.

>said the protestant that ruined Europe

making the claim that the pope just say whatever he wants and says the Holy Spirit told him its legit is classic protestant bullshit. It's never happened. Why do you have this idea that everything the pope says falls into the infallibility? It's never been the case.

I would serve heaven. Not in the Church. I follow the words of Christ, and use my God given intellect to do so. I do not rely on others to tell me what to think. Good day, my friend.

>They are two blasphemies and abominations.
are you referring to Mary's sinlessness and assumption to heaven?

>Go ahead and try to defend them, and then try to defend why nobody "knew" this until 1854.
I already explained you that all Churches with apostolic succession KNEW already, since the beginning of the Church. The Magisterium simply defined it as dogma because it is the truth. EO and other Churches with apostolic succession believe it too, although it isn't dogma.

Jesus hates people who reject his Truth in favour of their own lies.
What is more self-righteous of thinking you and only you have final authority on what the Bibles says? What is more self-righteous than rejecting the oldest institution on the planet, founded by Jesus Christ, because you don't like to follow authority and prefer to be your own authority?
>I'm sure glad I'm not you.
There is nothing inherently good in being me as a person. I am just sorry you are not Catholic and you cannot go over the lies and deceit of your false teachers.

I'm absolutely thrilled that I'm not Catholic. Hell is a horrific place to spend eternity.

>God founded his Church and gave the keys to Peter exactly so that we could have an authority that through the Holy Spirit reveals us the fullness of truth without errors.

Once again, you take a passage from the Bible and add a load of mashed potatoes and gravy on top. The interpretation that Peter was chosen to give stability and unity to the early Church is just as reasonable, if not more so.

>Remember, Jesus didn't say I am the Way, the "partial" Truth and the Life.

Just because a truth is complex, multi layered, and opaque, does not make it partial.

>Hell is a horrific place to spend eternity.
Then be a Catholic you self-righteous twat that shitposts about whores in the land formerly known as babylon.

my nigga

Peter opened heaven to the Jews at Pentecost and to the Gentiles after seeing saved Gentiles at Cornelius' house. The keys were used; heaven is open; the notion that the keys were passed to anyone else is pure evil and started things like excommunications and enforced papal bulls.

>anyone else is pure evil and started things like excommunications and enforced papal bulls.
Proofs?

>and use my God given intellect to do so.
Your intellect is corrupted and the result of a fallen nature. God gave intellect so that you would seek truth, not so you would reject it in the name of individualism.
>I do not rely on others to tell me what to think.
Do you rely on geography books to tell you where Berlin is located? Yes
Do you use geography books to tell you how many times you should brush your teeth? No
It is the same thing. All you have to do is trust the Magisterium on matters of faith and morals, respect the Sacraments, interpret the Bible through the Sacred Taditions of the Church.
The rest is up to you and is between you and Jesus.
>Good day, my friend
At least I prompted your good manners, a good day to you to and may God take away the thin veil upon your eyes and bless you

>I'm absolutely thrilled that I'm not Catholic. Hell is a horrific place to spend eternity.
I am asolutely mortified that you are so close-minded and reject to open your heart to the Truth.

> The interpretation that Peter was chosen to give stability and unity to the early Church is just as reasonable, if not more so.
The interpetation that it was a temporary mandate does not stand, because Jesus clearly says the gates of hell would not prevail. It is a clear reference that his mandate lasts until the end of times.
You might want to read on the papacy:
catholic-pages.com/pope/hahn.asp
>Just because a truth is complex, multi layered, and opaque, does not make it partial.
It is not the truth in the Bible that is partial, it is your interpretation. You don't have the fullness of Truth that is in the Catholic Church, and this leads to errors and lies. God is not an opinion.

this

how can more than one church have a true divine mandate? to say multiple churches all have a true divine mandate is to acknowledge the mandates are at odds but are still all true anyway.

Mormons aren't Christians, they're heretics of the highest order.

>The keys were used; heaven is open; the notion that the keys were passed to anyone else is pure evil

Nonsense. Read again:
>19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

It is not only about opening heaven, it is about loosing on earth too. It is about exercising the authority given by the keys. In a temporaty mandate that does not give out authority that would not be possible.

*about binding on earth

All of the apostles received that power.

Matthew 18
“Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

“Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.”

Peter used the keys; heaven is open. To say that your vile antichrist has the power to let people into heaven or keep them out is just another charge against the Whore of Babylon, in whom you are balls deep.

>To say that your vile antichrist has the power to let people into heaven or keep them out is just another charge against the Whore of Babylon, in whom you are balls deep
>still trying to shoehorn his fetishist Babylon shit into this discussion about the Church
What church do you go to? If you say none then you aren't a Christian, reading the bible doesn't automatically make you Christian.

>All of the apostles received that power.
Let's assume that was true. Protestants don't have apostolic succession. Therefore they don't have that power either way.

>“Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.”
Nice try linking two verses that are not close to each other but are used in different contexts. As usual you twist Scripture. Why don't you post the whole thing?
The verse is about correcting a brother who "trespassed". The idea of two or three witnesses is clearly based upon jewish Law. "But if he neglect the Church", not a whatever community of people, but those who are part of the Church. It is a verse about the power of prayer and about the power of those in the Church to stray their brothers away from wickedness and heresy.

>if two on you agree on earth
Protestants don't agree on anything anyway.

I suggest you read this for more scriptural evidence:
catholic.com/blog/tim-staples/the-papacy-in-scripture-no-rocks-required

>To say that your vile antichrist has the power to let people into heaven or keep them out is just another charge against the Whore of Babylon, in whom you are balls deep.
So much hate from the devil in your words. The papacy is simply a figure of authority that has the purpose of preserving doctrine and dogma so that nobody tries to divert it from the fullness of truth. People excommunicate themselves when they fall into heresies, without the need of Popes telling them they did.

I will also add that those verses come at a later time than when "binding on earth" etc. is used in relation to Peter. It is used for the first time in Matthew 16:18. So by repeating that part, it is clearly making a reference to the authority bestowed upon the Church of Peter by Jesus. It is not therefore a reference to "anyone who believes", but to those who are part of the Church with the authority to bind and loose

Fornication is more strict than "having sex with someone that is not your wife/husband".
"Sexuality with good intent" means having sex with your wife/husband with the purpose of having kids.

Having sex with your wife for the only sake of pleasure counts as fornication.