If you get martyred before confessing a mortal sin do you still go to hell?

Fair enough, but the implication was the islamic interpretation of that god.

>do you need to be aware of every sin you've committed to be forgiven?
Yes

>what if I stole something but thought I had good reasons for doing so?
You cant justify sin, your reasons are irrelevant

What about aborted babies.

Are you literally retarded?

so a one time petty thief for formula to feed a baby goes to hell?

>What about aborted babies
What about them?

>so a one time petty thief for formula to feed a baby goes to hell?
If he doesnt repent of it yes

>Fair enough, but the implication was the islamic interpretation of that god.
dumbass whiteboi

How are they meant to get baptized?

What do you mean what about them? so yeah, you are literally retarded.

>not knowing Christians created a whole sub-sect of ideology to say aborted babies don't go to hell
>cause reasons

The word "allah" is almost universally used in the west to refer to the islamic god

>>so a one time petty thief for formula to feed a baby goes to hell?
>If he doesnt repent of it yes
kek

The unborn have committed no sin of their own and jesus died to forgive them of original sin. They go to heaven

Is there something you'd like to tell me son?

>The unborn have committed no sin of their own and jesus died to forgive them of original sin. They go to heaven
Kek, literally wrong. Like, you may see this as me simply saying 'no'. But you are factually wrong.

Demonstrate

what if there are twins and one lusts after the other?

What if I believe in god, will Allah judge me?
What if I believe in Allah, will god judge me?
What if I was born before the word of christ reached man, do I go to hell?
What if I was mentally retarded and unable to comprehrend the idea of a god or of sin, and kill a stranger because my retarded mind thought he was threatening me?

Are you literally asking me to explain the most basic fundamentals of your religion?

>what if there are twins and one lusts after the other
Unborn children have no awareness so they cant

Yup

at what point do they become aware? if a newborn is aware of its surroundings enough to suck on a teat why is a 9 month old fetus not aware enough to notice how hot his sister is?

'no'.

here.

Google -

"Original Sin"
"Limbo"
"Limbo of Infants"

You are a literal retard.

>What if i believe in X, will X judge me?

No one knows who goes to hell. That is God's domain, presuming these matters of course. Just try to be a good goy and not a shit.

>Infants can be legitimately baptised
>Aborted Infants go to hell

Yeah..Ok..

Sometime between birth and 2 years of age, its hard to tell.

Dont care, i'm not a catholic. Justify your point yourself or go away

>aborted infants are baptized and free of original sin
Really?

Kek.

>I don't believe that part
>xD

Catholics are frankly irrational, the concept of original sin literally discredits Jesus whom died for our sins. To say jesus didn't die for our sins is blasphemy

>Jesus died for our sins
>Blasphemy

Pick one cathocuck

>what is translation
>Catholics and Christians are different
>really
>because reasons

Pick one.

You posted desperate attempts by catholics to keep their dogma lined up. I dont care about catholic dogma

Number two pls.. The catholics make up their own dogma just as the scribes and pharisees imposed man made traditions on the word of god.

>I dont care about catholic dogma
And I do not care what you think. I am on the outside. You are retarded, it's all the same thing but different interpretations of the same thing.
Again, you are a literal retard.

What happens if you abort a baby which is not technically human yet? That soul goes to hell, right?

>Baby
>Not Human Yet
Bruv you have to be kidding me, with that logic abortion wouldn't be a sin

>And I do not care what you think
So why are you posting catholic theological conundrums that have no impact whatsoever on anyone who doesnt share their assumptions?

>What happens if you abort a baby which is not technically human yet?
Once there is blood flow theres a soul, and it goes to heaven if it dies early. Before blood flow there is no soul and nothing to go to heaven or hell

So yes, you are actually ignorant in human development. It's okay to abort babies until they reach a point where they are considered human.

Technically, we are not aborting babies, what we are aborting isn't even human yet.

When does this baby receive a soul? Is it before or after this point?

>I don't care for the opinion of people who read the exact same thing I did but came to a different conclusion

Truly ignorant.

So a 3 year old who does not believe in Christianity goes to hell?

Foetus's are human at all points. whether they are people or not is a different question

>When does this baby receive a soul?
When it receives blood flow

A three year old who rejects god on his own volation (probably) will go to hell. However, the conditions of hell are not up to us to decide.

>I don't care for the opinion of people who read the exact same thing I did but came to a different conclusion
I literally dont

Its hard to judge whether children are capable of committing sins or repenting them, so I cant really say. I'll assume not though because it seems very harsh for a loving god

>When it receives blood flow
So when a fetus is just a clump of cells it does not have a soul? then how are early abortions murder?

When the sperm fertalises the egg there is life, which is therefore a sin to end.

>When it receives blood flow
Care to point me to the part in the bible where it says the soul is in the blood?

You understand this directly does not line up with what humans are saying, and comes directly back to my point of interpretations?

>when a baby develops the required organs to create and cycle blood, god gives him a soul
>even though his mothers blood and therefore soul is moving through him
xD

This is actually THE most retarded thing I've ever heard.

What about people who receive complete blood transfusions? Are their souls mixing?
>inb4 it's not IN your blood
xD

>>I don't care for the opinion of people who read the exact same thing I did but came to a different conclusion
If someone reads The Lord of The Rings and concludes that Frodo is main villain I will ignore their opinion

>I'll assume not though because it seems very harsh for a loving god
the whole idea of eternal punishment is very harsh for a loving god.

Kek. If he can explain his reasoning without fail then again, you are a literal retard. And you ARE being willingly ignorant.

I could actually tell you how Frodo is the bad guy, it's literally possible. Morgoth did nothing wrong, neither did Sauron.

Limbo was never dogma and is now not accepted as a legitimate theory in Catholicism.

>Care to point me to the part in the bible where it says the soul is in the blood?
You know I cant actually find it. Might be I misremembered. Ah well ill go back to first breath then

The reasoning all rests on original sin being present in everyone even following the crucifiction. I disagree with this

>So when a fetus is just a clump of cells it does not have a soul?
Nah I was wrong ,you dont get a soul until first breath.

>then how are early abortions murder?
They arent

>I disagree with this
For the fiftieth fucking time. That's not the god dam point.

>I don't believe that part
>xD

The people who say this read the exact same thing you did, but came to a different conclusion. You cannot deny it, without using ignorance.

>For the fiftieth fucking time. That's not the god dam point.
Demonstrate why its correct then

>You cannot deny it, without using ignorance
I dont deny it, I just dont care. Why should I defend somebody elses wrong argument?

>Demonstrate why its correct then
Kek. You are now asking me to prove Catholicism correct, prove it wrong, or prove yourself correct as well.

>I dont deny it
>I disagree with this
In an ideological sense this i literally the same thing.
>imb4
'no'.

>I'll change my answer when proven to be retarded
As wishy washy as your own logic.

>Kek. You are now asking me to prove Catholicism correct, prove it wrong, or prove yourself correct as well.
I'm not the one making the claim. You keep trying to force me to accept the catholic interpretation of original sin without any justification

>>I'll change my answer when proven to be retarded
Yes of course, when a point is shown to be wrong you change it. What kind of moron are you?

Kek. You are literally retarded.

When something in your belief system doesn't ft with want you want it to say you ask me to prove your own religion.

Kek.. Seriously, look at what you are doing. It literally cannot be done, by anyone. Not by you, not by anyone.

The point is precisely the fact that it CANNOT be proven it HAS to be believed, if you could prove it there would be no belief.

Again, how can you so fundamentally misunderstand your own faith?

Kek, look how bumbling you are, you cannot argue your own faith so you went the
>prove it
Route. If anyone could do it faith and belief would not exist, it would be simply objective.

Retard.

You understand your book tells you to do exactly not this? I don't have my image on this computer but yeah. It's there.

>When something in your belief system doesn't ft with want you want it to say you ask me to prove your own religion.
Catholicism is not my belief system. Why are you struggling with this concept?

I have no interest or requirement to justify someone elses faith

Are you seriously so mentally challenged that you think every interpretation of christianity is obliged to justify the others?

If you have some objection to MY OWN argument state it, you cant attack me by pointing out holes in someone else's argument

No, martyrdom means you're good to go. Even if you're not baptized, martyrdom means you're good to go. Martyrdom is the Golden Ticket, so to speak.

It doesnt say to stick dogmatically to a single interpretation or remembered passage and never change it, especially when its shown that what you remember is not correct

>Catholicism is not my belief system. Why are you struggling with this concept?

AGAIN.

Something which is based on your own cannot be denied, it can only be ignored. You can only be ignorant.

Keep in mind, nowhere have i said there is anything wrong with that, it is required by your faith.

You are the one denying to be doing anything but. You are saying -

>I don't believe in therefore it's wrong
Even though it's based on the same thing your belief is. It's a simple interpretation, neither are 'correct'. They both have value, all you can say is 'no'.

>you cant attack me by pointing out holes in someone else's argument
This has literally nothing to do with Christian v Catholic dogma anymore, but of course, you would have nothing without it.

Catholic and Christian are mutually exclusive terms

>It doesnt say to stick dogmatically to a single interpretation or remembered passage and never change it, especially when its shown that what you remember is not correct
It literally does.

1/2

...

How do you define "Christian"?

What in the holy fuck are you talking about? Any idiot can have any interpretation they like of the same material, unless you agree with that interpretation you are not obliged to justify it .

There are ten thousand different variations of the belief that the christian god is not real. You are not obliged to defend any part of them that you dont agree with

I am not obliged to defend the guy arguing that Frodo is the primary villain

Martyrdom is irelevant to salvation. Faith is all that matters.

Bible believer.

I dont see a single passage saying "If you remember part of this book and your memory turns out to be wrong, stick with your memory rather than what this book actually says"

Holy shit, once again. It's got literally nothing to do with justification, or defending your own faith holy fuck. It revolves around your own fucking ignorance, which you are holding up WILLINGLY.

It's the fact that you simply say they are wrong. Give nothing, and then base your own religion on the same thing they did.

It's utter retardation. It's literally as valid as your own beliefs, they can justify their beliefs (to an outsider) as much as you can. It's as valid as your own belief, you cannot simply say 'no' like you are.

If you cannot understand this most basic point, let's just call it a day and fuck off from each other. I am sick of this circle jerk.

Nope, but it does tell you to do what is in the book.

I.e. you have to have read and actually remember the whole book. Why are you arguing from literal ignorance.

>I don't remember
YOu base your faith on a book you cannot remember, nice. I bet I have a better understand of TOlkien's universe than you do your entire faith.

>It's got literally nothing to do with justification, or defending your own faith holy fuck
It is not my faith. Attack my own argument if you can

People make mistakes nigger, when you do you correct them, not that difficult a concept

Kek, I said I am done with this circle-jerk. I have told you many times just how irrelevant your argument is. I am not arguing some which is irrelevant with someone who is also ignorant.
>Catholics and Christians believe same thing
>interpretation is what differs
>I am right they are wrong
>no reason as to why
>I AM NOT CATHOLIC
>REFUTE MY ARGUMENT
>Well, your faith are both based in the same thing
>I AM NOT CATHOLIC
>REFUTE MY ARGUMENT
>It's basic errors with interpretations, you both believe the same thing
>I AM NOT CATHOLIC
>REFUTE THE ARGUMENT

That's what you've said.

I am simply done.

Ahhh welll, maybe you should read your bible and actually remember it. What you did is literal heresy.

"God", "g-d" and "Allah" are the same god you fucko

I have refused to engage with your baffling attempts to bring up catholic theology to a non-catholic

A sin maybe, but i'm sorry for it

>I refuse to see the point because if I actually acknowledged it I would see I am just a baffled retard who consumes anything fed to him

At least you finally admitted you are ignorant.

Nigga, you're not gonna be a martyr for the faith if you don't have faith.

I don't even know what Protestants mean by "faith" anymore, since Protestant like to sort faith in various kinds, only one of which is valid for salvation.

I see your point, its just stupid

No. They are all local words for God, but are not the same. What Muslims call "Allah", is Satan or at least a demon. An interaction with God, or the Holy Spirit, would not make a human feel like committing suicide.

humanities was a mistake

Jesus fuck are you theologically ignorant. It is the same god. It's a politically motovated issue that we nowadays see them as 2 separate gods; but it is the same. God and allah are two terms for the same entity. In islam, jesus is a prophet of god. Our god, their god. Also the jews'. We're all people of the book.

"Allah" is cognate with "El", the Hebrew word for God.

While what Muslims refer to as "Allah" might not be YHWH, that doesn't mean the word itself is objectionable. It's literally just Arabic for God.

>sola fide
>ever

>Allah is Satan

t. Amerifat

Hardly, read the Gospels and then read the Koran. Clearly a different God, with the later not being God at all, but simply a demon at the least.

1.- only one god and its not allah
2.- see above
3.- yeah your were sons of the OS (original sinners) therefore stained. To hell you go.
4.-god doesnt need retarda on heaven they can burn on hell or wherever they dont bother anyone
5.-if you kill you go to hell

Now you know.

Deus vult

you're a colossal idiot. for the love of christ don't reproduce

And you're an Æutist