Be Catholic

>Be Christian.
>Claim there is only one god.
>Have three gods.

Oh fuck off m8
Veneration isn't wrong and your "currynigger" brothers in Christ are just as Catholic as you. There's been Catholics in India since St. Thomas

Then how you going to point out Catholic's beliefs come from Protevangelium of James? and it credit itself as James the Just as the author, despite being dead for nearly 80 years?
youtube.com/watch?v=vhxRPUngS4I

>Be Christian
>Worship assbaby.

>to others it'll sound like an old family squabble.
You people are more self-aware than I thought.

>Be Christian.
>Claim to turn the other cheek
>Kill more people than anyone else on earth

>be autist
>shitpost relentlessly

>Be Protestant
>Ignore all the commandments

That's objectively false in light of 20th century atheistic dictatorships

...

hitler was christian

>be catholic
>believe marriage to be a holy sacrament between two people who love each other so dearly they choose to live a life of full commitment to each other without separation
>do not allow said people to get to know and understand each other in the most intimate way before engaging in this holy sacrament

He kept up the facade to maintain power. He despised Christianity and catholics in particular. He even said that he wish Charles martel had lost the battle of tours so that Europe would be Islamic

>be protestant
>go to hell

...

>be catholic
>claim your faith is the only true faith
>is based upon a canaanite war god who commanded his chosen people to exterminate many tribes

The very existence of the Protoevangelium destroys James White's own argument as it already shows devotion to Mary in Early Christianity.

The fact that Irenaeus can call Mary a cause of Salvation and the New Eve, which Justin Martyr also did for the latter blows up in James White's own face. Same with the existence of the Odes of Solomon itself!

SOLA

The first clear attitude to emerge on the relation between Scripture, tradition and the church was the coincidence view: that the teaching of the church, Scripture and tradition coincide. Apostolic tradition is authoritative but does not differ in content from the Scriptures. The teaching of the church is likewise authoritative but is only the proclamation of the apostolic message found in Scripture and tradition. The classical embodiment of the coincidence view is found in the writings of Irenaeus and Tertullian.

These both reject the Gnostic claims to a secret tradition supplementing Scripture. Apostolic tradition does not add to Scripture but is evidence of how it is correctly to be interpreted. This tradition is found in those churches which were founded by the apostles, who taught men whose successors teach today. These apostolic churches agree as to the content of the Christian message, in marked contrast to the variations among the heretics. It is important to note that it is the church which is the custodian of Scripture and tradition and which has the authentic apostolic message. There was no question of appealing to Scripture or tradition against the church. This is partly because the apostolic tradition was found in the church but not just for this reason: the Holy Spirit preserves the church from error and leads her into the truth. The real concern of Irenaeus and Tertullian was not with the relation between Scripture and tradition but with the identity of ecclesiastical with apostolic teaching. Any exposition of their teaching on Scripture and tradition which fails to show this is to that extent defective. (A.N.S. Lane, “Scripture, Tradition and Church: An Historical Survey”, Vox Evangelica, Volume IX – 1975, pp. 39, 40 – )

They use the same arguments pagans use

>W-We're ASKING them to PRAY for us

Protestants being the enemy of Christianity
But when the adversary of the race of the righteous, the envious, malicious, and wicked one, perceived the impressive nature of his martyrdom, and [considered] the blameless life he had led from the beginning, and how he was now crowned with the wreath of immortality, having beyond dispute received his reward, he did his utmost that not the least memorial of him should be taken away by us, although many desired to do this, and to become possessors of his holy flesh. For this end he suggested it to Nicetes, the father of Herod and brother of Alce, to go and entreat the governor not to give up his body to be buried, "lest," said he, "forsaking Him that was crucified, they begin to worship this one." This he said at the suggestion and urgent persuasion of the Jews, who also watched us, as we sought to take him out of the fire, being ignorant of this, that it is neither possible for us ever to forsake Christ, who suffered for the salvation of such as shall be saved throughout the whole world (the blameless one for sinners ), nor to worship any other.

newadvent.org/fathers/0102.htm

Catholic here.

Commandments don't count.

Of course the veneration of saints was influenced by the surrounding pagan culture, but it was so from the churches earliest days, so if they were wrong then they were wrong from almost the beginning, as far back as we can reliably trace with history and archeology.

So both sides chew on that for awhile

>Muhammad
>Martin Luther
Probably the worst two people in the history of mankind.

The phrasing of "other gods before me" implies there are other gods at all.

bible a shit

That's never said by pagans, and you're going to hell

No, it only prove that Catholic depend on unreliable and pagan sources, like Gnosticism, to centralize your dogma.
Again the author claims to be James, but he dead at 62AD the Protoevangelium was created in 140AD.

>Irenaeus
>More trustworthy than John 14:6
Wew, pagan.

The point opposes James White's view that the Early Christians are a bunch of proto-calvinists.

The mere existence and the popularity of the Protoevangelium shows this.

Nobody considers the Protoevangelium itself to be a Pagan source to begin with.

And most scholars believe that the Odes of Solomon isn't Gnostic.

You want Gnosticism? That's basically what James White believed in. The Gnostics have the belief that there's no free will and individuals are predestined.

WAIT!! That's exactly what James White believes in!

Neither did the pagans, they just thought their statues were "representations" of the divinity they prayed to, like every other sane human being.

Didn't stop the church fathers and doctors from turning them into straw-men

Even if there is a clear difference between veneration and adoration, why doesn't the Catholic Church do anything to protect the people who can't tell the difference? Shouldn't Santeria have alerted the Church to the fact that promoting things superficially similar to idolatry and paganism can lead to it?

Even if there is a clear difference between veneration and adoration, why don't the protestants do anything to protect the people who can't tell the difference? Shouldn't Jim Jones/Moonies/Taiping/Mormons have alerted to the fact that promoting things superficially similar to idolatry and paganism can lead to it?

That makes no sense. There is no centralized Protestant church.

The thing is, why do Protestants accept memorials for the dead, the act of putting wreaths by the graves of soldiers, the act of soldiers standing in attention by their graves in commemoration of their deeds.

Such acts are close to Catholic veneration which Protestants all argue about. Yet when it comes to this, they just keep their petty mouths shut, showing how they can't be consistent

Yes, but you'd think by now Protestants would see the errors of their ways, and at least personally reject the practices that lead to those things.

>Be christfag
>Worship a jew

but user we're not under law we're under graethss

Atheist here:
Everybody already knows Catholics are pagans.

is there some reason people have grown so ill informed in the future?

>Who is Stalin?
>Who is Mao Zedong?
>Who is Adolf Hitler?

aren't you leaving out the mongols?

If you're Christian and not Catholic or Orthodox, you're basically Muslim/Mormon tier in your disrespect for Christ. You must believe, like the Muslims, that Jesus came to earth then his teachings resulted in immediate apostasy. About a millennium went by until Jesus, who had lead people into false beliefs.could be corrected by a prophet or theologian.

you contradict yourself.

Also, it wasn't Jesus who lead people into false beliefs. it was everyone after Jesus that corrupted his teachings, by melding them too much with pagan teachings and using them as political tools to solidify power.

It's like, imagine if the enlightenment of all of humanity is a cake. Jesus was the flour, the base of the cake and what most of the cake is composed of, while Muhammad wass the heat of the oven.

No he didn't. Your view entails God doing nothing for a millenia and adbandoning his flock!

...

>be protestant
>shit myself
>muh whore

too much information, and nobody questions whether any of what they are deliberately shown is true or not.

false gods

user's argument a shit

>believes the creator of the universe inspired the bible
>bible's embarrassingly wrong about the nature of human behavior, age of the world, ancestry of humanity, authorship of torah, etc etc etc etc
>thinks catholics are idiots because they interpret a verse differently

you're a special kind of stupid

inb4 but its symbolic except for when I don't want it to be herdehur

>St. Augustine affirmed he did not believe in a literal six day creation in the 4th century AD
>Hellenistic Jewish thinkers affirmed this in the BC era
>The age of the earth was confirmed to be in the millions of years in the 17th century and the Church did not throw a hissyfity
>The Church did not throw a hissyfit over Lamarckian evolution
>Wilburforce actually used reasonable arguments in his debate against Darwin despite being only remembered for his ancestry quip
>Retarded Americans in flyover states affirm a 6000 year old earth
>They somehow represent the Christian mainstream across the centuries

>I don't know how literary genres work

what kind of headassery is this

I went to Catholic school and they emphasized that the Virgin is to be respected and you can pray to her, but she is not to be worshipped like Jesus/God. I don't remember the details but there is a distinction

Of course you can't expect Indians to understand that

Do you have thoughts of your own?

Both the Bible and history out Catholicism for the fraud it has been and continues to be. And where did the term "Catholicism" come from? The best case I can make is that it came from Emperor Theodosius of Rome. He stated the religion of Rome will be "the Catholic religion".
And at that point, all people in the empire from all rites were forced at sword point into Catholicism - including the Christians. All the pagan beliefs were renamed. This is how they came up with a Saint for curing dogbites. It used to be a pagan god you prayed to; but, now it's a 'christian saint'. This also explains why so many of the pagan idols ended up going along for the ride with new names. The pagans still offered cakes to their idols; but, now they called them 'Peter' instead of Apollo, and Mary/Jesus instead of The goddess of the mother/son worship of the pagans.

If you need sex to love someone, you have a skewed view of what love is.

God IS great.

It's more likely the guy he's replying too is a fedora tipper and thus it's more impacting to mention all the atheists who killed theists in the millions to push a godless society.

>If you need sex to love someone
Because that's clearly what I said.

Fuck off, retard.

What specific cults did the Virgin Mary take over?

>Neither did the pagans
Actually they did
Now fuck off

>James White
>Jame Whi
>Jme Wh
>Je W
>Jew

>Be Christian

They did literally nothing wrong though.

How can you know?
I demand proof!