Christianity General

It is a middle eastern religion weather you like it or not, it was spread by the people in the levant on to the romans.

It is hard to explain, I just think of it as the light.

I would love for a protestant to explain why they're not Catholic after reading this:

What is the biblical justification for the papacy? Tradition relies on several texts, but one most especially. In Matthew's gospel, Jesus asked his apostles what sorts of things people were saying about him. They gave hum a summary of the current rumors. Then Jesus asked them, collectively, who they thought he was. And Simon answered for the group:

Simon Peter replied, "you are the Christ, the son of the living God." And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but for My Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Note first that Simon served as a spokesman for the group, and he uttered a profound doctrine: the dogma of the incarnation (see Jn 6:68-69). Jesus explained to Simon that such truth could not be gained by natural means; Simon had received a special revelation from god. And Simon, with god's help, had spoken infallibly. Jesus then gave Simon a new name, Peter--literally, "Rock"-- a name that appears nowhere in the historical record before that moment. Jesus promised to build a divine edifice upon that rock foundation. He called the edifice "My Church"; for it would be not merely a human institution. It would be, in some sense, incorrupt, too: "the powers of death [or 'gates of hell'] shall not prevail against it." So we see that god himself gave a guarantee to preserve Peter's authority.

1/3

Now, some critics argue that Jesus referred to himself when he spoke of the "rock" on which he would build his church. They point out that the word used for "rock" is the Greek 'petra'--meaning a large rock--whereas the name he gave to Simon was the Greek 'petros', meaning a small rock. The critics say that Jesus meant, essentially, that Peter was a little pebble, and Jesus was the boulder from which the church would rise up.

There are several problems with that interpretation. First of all, Jesus probably did not speak Greek in this exchange. It is very likely that he spoke Aramaic, and his words were later translated into Greek when the gospels were written. In Aramaic there is only one word that could be used for "rock": 'kephas'. In Aramaic, there would have been no distinction between Peter's name and the church's foundation.

Still, critics might press the point, noting that the holy spirit inspired Matthew to employ two different Greek words in his written gospel. But Matthew did not have much choice. Jesus was speaking of a foundation stone, so 'petra' would certainly be the right choice; but 'petra' is a feminine noun, and so it could not have served as Simon's new name. A male could not adopt a feminine name; the name would have to be adapted, be given a masculine form. Thus Matthew, guided by the holy spirit, did something that was obvious and practically necessary: he used the masculine form, 'petros', to render Peter's name, 'Kephas.'

Was Jesus giving Peter a unique role in the church? The answer seems obvious from the remaining pages of the New Testament. Peter is everywhere, shown to be the chief spokesman, preacher, teacher, healer, judge, and administrator in the newborn church.

2/3

Did Peter exhibit any signs of infallibility when he taught doctrine? Critics might point out that, almost immediately after Jesus commissioned him, Peter fell; he contradicted Jesus, telling him he must not suffer. Jesus then reproved Peter in the strongest terms, calling him "Satan"! Critics note too, that much later in Peter's life, he found himself in conflict with Paul over the treatment of gentiles in the church. And Paul publicly corrected Peter! Now, how could a man graced with the charism of infallibility endure public correction by both Jesus and Paul?

We should note right away that both Jesus and Paul were reproving Peter not for his doctrine, but for his failure of will. Indeed, there were faulting him for not living up to his own doctrine. In Matthew's passage, Peter had moved from confessing the lord's divinity to rejecting the lord's will. In the conflict with Paul, Peter had moved from eating with gentiles himself to forbidding other Jewish-Christians to practice such fellowship. Both Jesus and Paul were exhorting Peter merely to practice what he infallibly preached.

Is there biblical justification for our calling Peter the "vicar of Christ"? Doesn't that put Peter in a place occupied by god alone? No, because Jesus himself had said to the apostles: "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me" (Lk 10:16). Jesus is clearly assigning the twelve as his vicars. He is telling them that he will act vicariously through them. And what Jesus said of all apostles is pre-eminently true of the prince of apostles,

3/3 This is excerpt from one of Scott Hahn's books.

>Build up their strength inside the Roman Empire until they reached the point where they became so politically powerful they could outlaw and destroy all other religious competition
>Survive 1000 years of consistent asskickings from Islam
>Sail with European empires on their conquests of the Americas, Africa, Australia, and Asia; completing the ultimate vengeance on Islam
>Die off once people have access to the internet
The greatest story ever told.

>Die off once people have access to the internet
More like being replaced by Islam

23 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The teachers of religious law and the Pharisees are the official interpreters of the law of Moses. 3 So practice and obey whatever they tell you, but don’t follow their example. For they don’t practice what they teach. 4 They crush people with unbearable religious demands and never lift a finger to ease the burden.

5 “Everything they do is for show. On their arms they wear extra wide prayer boxes with Scripture verses inside, and they wear robes with extra long tassels. 6 And they love to sit at the head table at banquets and in the seats of honor in the synagogues. 7 They love to receive respectful greetings as they walk in the marketplaces, and to be called ‘Rabbi.’

8 “Don’t let anyone call you ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one teacher, and all of you are equal as brothers and sisters. 9 And don’t address anyone here on earth as ‘Father,’ for only God in heaven is your Father. 10 And don’t let anyone call you ‘Teacher,’ for you have only one teacher, the Messiah. 11 The greatest among you must be a servant. 12 But those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.

Try responding to the arguments presented or give alternative interpretations to the relevant scripture and provide reasoning for those interpretations. All you're doing is proof-texting and that's not productive or useful.

It seems pretty self explanitory to me, but I'm no expert.

this

Well it's not self explanatory to me. For example what does "call no man father" mean to you? That literally nobody should ever call anyone father? What do you call your dad?

John 15:15 I no longer call you slaves, because a master doesn't confide in his slaves. Now you are my friends, since I have told you everything the Father told me.

You're just quoting random verses. This stupid and I should have known better than to bother responding to you.

I don't think that message is confusing.

Jesus did not start a new religion.

Jesus is not a random Jewish rabbi.

This world is here because Jesus made it.

How come of all the time periods God could've sent his son he sent him to a patch of desert swarming with apocalyptic jewish prophets at a time when there was no photography or video or really any method to preserve his teachings properly other than having some random dudes transcribe some hearsay about things that happened 50 years ago.

For context this would be like me going around asking random people what Hitler was like and constructing a biography from that alone. No peer reviewed sources, no books, just random people who may or may not have been alive at the same time as him.

And this is the best way God could possibly conceive of spreading his message throughout the world? Did God get a lobotomy after the Big Bang or what

Christianity is the worst thing to ever happened to Europe.

I take it you don't like the way God runs his universe.

I'm sure you'll run your universe much better than God runs his.

Let me know if you want actual answers.

If Jesus came today instead of thousands of years ago you still wouldn't believe so there's no point in pretending any photography, video, or "peer reviewed biographies" would have changed anything.

Of course I would, seeing a person walk on water, or multiply loaves of bread would make it easy to believe. The bigger point is the God decided to send Jesus at a VERY superstitious time, at a period of history when there were prophets on every corner of Jerusalem shouting that the end is near. Isn't it far easier to believe that he was just one of many who actually managed to get some people to write about him and his myth grew from that, than actually being the Son of God?

I mean I'd like to believe, but logically it makes zero sense.

>Of course I would, seeing a person walk on water, or multiply loaves of bread would make it easy to believe.

If I showed you a video of somebody walking on water would you believe it was god?

Sure

So you believe Chris Angel is God? Is David Copperfield God too? What about that street magician, David Blaine. Is he God too?

Here's what the bible says about you, if you're curious:

Matthew 12:39 But He answered and said to them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.

By the way, all of the books of the New Testament were written by men not only filled with the Holy Spirit, and inspired by the Holy Spirit to bring all things to their remembrance, but actual eyewitnesses to the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Christ Jesus. Yes, even Paul.

So they aren't some random guys asking questions from third parties and trying to make their stories coincide.

They are messengers to you from God, to tell you about the collaboration between God and Man that is occurring in your lifetime, and that is available to you to participate.

Well let me present to evidence for God. It turns out he looks like an Indian.

youtube.com/watch?v=ydk0EnUbnjk

What is 'spirit'?

You've made a believer out of me lemme tell ya

What is a "field"?

Ive always found verses like that hilarious. Such a human thing to say.

"Oh shit, they're not gonna believe this in a couple years. Let's make it heretical to ask for signs because that's unreasonable!"

Lmao. So stupid

Chrisitianity and a general. Two cancers in one.

>The word spirit is often used metaphysically to refer to the consciousness or personality. The notions of a person's spirit and soul often also overlap, as both contrast with body and both are believed to survive bodily death in some religions,[2] and "spirit" can also have the sense of "ghost", i.e. a manifestation of the spirit of a deceased person.
wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Ways_to_Give

It's a little wiser when you realize that God is not the only being who can perform supernatural acts.

And not being one of God's, you are defenseless and lack discretion to know which is which.

Jesus performed every miracle necessary right in the faces of the people who were supposed to recognize them as miracles the Messiah would perform, even one they had secretly that Jesus could not have known about, and yet performed, but they said "he has a devil" instead of "My Lord and my God!".

Even the pharaohs of Egypt could perform magic. What you see in your lifetime will blow your mind. And again, since you are not prepared for it, expect to be deceived.

Jesus didn't do anything besides petty magic tricks

The Jewish messiah was supposed to cause the whole world to worship the God of Israel, bring world peace, return all the Jews to their homeland, etc.

The Holy Spirit indwells in the hearts of believers and helps guide them away from sin and toward God. Think of the newborn soul as an empty temple. It fills up with trash over the years. On conversion, the Holy Spirit moves in and starts cleaning out and using the place. The Holy Spirit ensures the ultimate unity and infallibility of the Church.

Well 2 of those things are true so

Which 2 things?

When it arrives, it finds the house swept clean and put in order.

2/3rds of the world worship the God of Israel (Jews, Christians, Muslims) and Jews obviously currently occupy their homeland

That's not the whole world, and there are still more Jews living outside Israel.

And Jesus accomplished none of these personally.

>most religions are 100% ethnic, or in some way exclusive
Fucking wrong. Besides the Jews (who make up 1% of the population) most religions aren't ethnic.

New Living Translation
For you, a thousand years are as a passing day, as brief as a few night hours.

He fed 10,000 people with a few loaves and fish, and had 12 baskets of food left over.

The only thing you can say is "no he didn't", and of course that's based on nothing but your normalcy bias.

He cast demons out of a deaf, dumb and blind man; gave sight to the blind; hearing to the deaf; healed the palsied; cured lepers; stopped a woman's 12 year long issue of blood; walked on water, raised the dead after 4 days; he did enough.

And even then, not everyone who witnessed all of those miracles became believers.

Humanity is depraved.

The things you mention Jesus did not do at that time because he came to his own, and his own received him not.

He will do all of those things in due time, as He is alive, and He is the Messiah, and He is the King of Kings, and the Lord of Lords.

If you cannot see all of the Jews being returned to Israel even now, I don't know if you should cross the street by yourself.

If you do not know that the rebirth of Israel in one day is the direct fulfillment of the dry bones prophecy, then you do not, as Jesus said, believe Moses and the prophets.

So by what right do you call yourself a Jew?

it rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again

Sentences are meant to go together. When you leave a space after each sentence it looks retarded.

Way

to

deal

with

the

substance

m8

.

It truly is

I'm new to this but think of it as faith being the entire point, the force that is good. Knowing does not achieve spiritual fulfilment. Having faith and believing does. Does that offer a new perspective?

I'm not the one you're talking too. I haven't even read your posts because you write like a mental patient.

kek

#rekt

>I mean I'd like to believe, but logically it makes zero sense.

Your post has zero evidence to back up any of its assertions. Seeing miracles does not make it easier to believe that Jesus is God; there are many miracles (usually involving blood and Mary idols) that have nothing to do with Jesus, and that do not lead to the conclusion "therefore Jesus is God".

Jesus did not come at a "superstitious time", he came the very day he was prophesied to come, the very way he was prophesied to come, and was the very person he was prophesied to be.

There were no prophets in Jerusalem but for Jesus; the last prophet that heard from God was Malachi, and that was 400 years before Jesus.

The people shouting in the street were not saying the end was near; they were shouting to raise an army to cast off the yoke of Rome. And they had no religious basis for it; they were occupied people and chafed under the occupation.

Jesus is not one of many anything; he is absolutely unique. He is both the Son of God and the Son of Man. Capable of redeeming mankind, and positioned to redeem mankind. Nobody else ever was, is, or ever will be.

You can believe anything you choose to believe, and the only things you must believe to be saved are that Jesus is the christ, the Son of the Living God, raised from the dead.

This is supernatural knowledge that God will assist you with, if you ask.

GOD WILL NOT OVERWHELM YOUR SOVEREIGNTY. He already forgave you of all of your sins; the 1 and only thing you must do is believe Jesus is who he says he is.

And no, nothing makes that "easier", not even seeing miracles.

>There were no prophets in Jerusalem but for Jesus
This is factually not true. Crucifixion was the standard punishment for all those apocalyptic prophets who tried to disturb the peace and there were a lot of them

I pushed my cock into Kasim Muhammad's asshole, and the big Black man squealed. I smacked his hairy Black ass and told him to shut the fuck up. Looking at us while fingering her pussy, Kasim's sexy wife, a chocolate-skinned Somali beauty named Khadija, winked at us. Clearly the Black woman was turned on by the sight of a well-endowed white male fucking her husband in the ass. I gripped Kasim's hips tightly and rammed my cock up his shit hole. I always wanted to try this, reverse the whole cuckold fantasy thing, you know? In most cuckold stories, a big Black guy dominates a white woman while her limp-dick white husband watches. I like to flip the script and dominate Blacks instead, you know?

I like to meet tall, good-looking and well-endowed Black men for sexual fun. I'm always a top and I have a good time with these Black studs. I like to bend them over and stuff their sexy Black asses with my thick white cock. To a lesser extent I am sexually attracted to Black women. I've been with five Black women and perhaps eleven Black men in my lifetime, and I'm forty one years old. I haven't had the privilege of hooking up with a Black couple before, though. That's why I am savoring this wonderful sexual encounter with this sexy Black couple. They're from a conservative Muslim nation in the Horn of Africa, believe it or not. I know, that's the last place you would expect swingers to come from, right? I guess people can definitely surprise you with the shit they do and what they're really into, if you know what I mean.

I flipped Kasim on his back and raised his hairy legs in the air while pumping my cock into his asshole. He just lay there and took it like the bitch he was. I always knew that underneath all their religious craziness and macho swagger, Muslim guys were punks and Kasim Muhammad was definitely living proof. Khadija joined us after donning a shiny alabaster strap-on dildo. Kasim had been screaming non-stop as I pounded his well-lubricated but nevertheless tight ass with powerful thrusts of my thick Irish cock. Khadija silenced him by stuffing his mouth with her strap-on dildo. Obediently he began sucking her dildo with the same passion he sucked my cock earlier. Khadija and I high-fived each other as we filled Kasim's holes with our respective pricks. Khadija seemed to really enjoy helping me dominate her husband, and I was most thankful for her help. Not that I needed it, of course, but having it did help make things extra special.

Most religions today are not ethnic for the very same reason as Christianity (they're popular memes), so if you're thinking the most common religions today such as Islam and Buddhism obviously that's correct but also irrelevant to my discussion. Judaism and European pagan religions are they only ones involved in the situation I'm discussing and are all ethnic.

This is all very related to my initial point actually. Every single community has had it's own ethnic religion for all of human history. Yet today a small number of popular religions dominate humanity. This is again because they are the religions that encourage proselytizing, despite the number of religious movements like that being less than the number of ethnic religions that have existed.

Dispute Over Who Jesus Is
21 Once more Jesus said to them, “I am going away, and you will look for me, and you will die in your sin. Where I go, you cannot come.”

22 This made the Jews ask, “Will he kill himself? Is that why he says, ‘Where I go, you cannot come’?”

23 But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24 I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”

25 “Who are you?” they asked.

“Just what I have been telling you from the beginning,” Jesus replied. 26 “I have much to say in judgment of you. But he who sent me is trustworthy, and what I have heard from him I tell the world.”

27 They did not understand that he was telling them about his Father. 28 So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up[a] the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. 29 The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him.” 30 Even as he spoke, many believed in him.

>The people shouting in the street were not saying the end was near; they were shouting to raise an army to cast off the yoke of Rome. And they had no religious basis for it; they were occupied people and chafed under the occupation.

No, apocalypticism was quite popular among Jews in Jesus' time. Jesus himself was baptized by an apocalyptic prophet, and this seems to have been his and early Christianity's biggest message.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_background_of_the_New_Testament#Factions.2C_groups_and_cults_in_the_Roman_period

Dispute Over Whose Children Jesus’ Opponents Are
31 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples.
>32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

33 They answered him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?”

34 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. 35 Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. 37 I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word. 38 I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.[b]”

literally because rome

39 “Abraham is our father,” they answered.

“If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would[c] do what Abraham did. 40 As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. 41 You are doing the works of your own father.”

“We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.”

42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47 Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”

I would say it was the culmination of the medeteranean people becoming more aware of the entirety of the roman empire as an entity.
Christianity essentially spiritually unified the people under roman rule.

What im saying is probably complete nonesense but it owuld be interesting to read writings of early christian zealots and how they described the role of their religion as they understood it.

Your definition of prophet is "someone who shouts something".

A prophet of God hears from God and then tells the people what God said.

Aside from Jesus, there were no prophets in Jerusalem during his lifetime. John the Baptist could be considered something of an Elijah, had the Jews accepted Jesus, but again, tied to Jesus as his cousin.

Being crucified was easy. Jesus' companions at Calvary were thieves.

You forget all the philosophy schools (stoicism, epicureanism, Platonism) and mystery religions(Cult of Isis, Cult of Cybele) None of which were ethnic.

Jesus was baptized by his cousin, John, who did not speak to God and relay the message to the people. His job was to point out the Messiah, and he did so at Jesus' baptism.

Nor was John crucified.

Nor was John in Jerusalem.

Nor was Judaism an apocalyptic religion.

Barabbas, the man freed instead of Jesus on Passover, killed a man in a revolt against Rome. Him they freed. And the Maccabbean revolt was only 150 years or so before Jesus; the memory of throwing off an empire was fairly fresh.

I thought Jesus and Barabbas were the same person though.

>The account of Jacob wrestling with the angel is found in Genesis 32:22-32 and referenced elsewhere in Hosea 12:4. The account includes the renaming of Jacob as "Israel", literally "He who struggles with God." The account is also regularly described as Jacob wrestling with God.[1]

U wot

Yes Cucktianity is European because white people are altruistic lunatics that will modify any belief system to follow their madness. The original middle eastern Christianity was basically Islam lite.

>carried on the torch of civilization
Cucktianity had no part in civilizing the rest of Europe.

Don't know why you thought that. Bible's pretty clear on the matter.

Matthew 27
And at that time they had a notorious prisoner called Barabbas. Therefore, when they had gathered together, Pilate said to them, “Whom do you want me to release to you? Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ?”

That's because Jacob was wrestling Jesus.

"Before Abraham was, I Am."

--Jesus of Nazareth

I read it in a history book.

You'll find if you poke around the "let's discredit the bible" societies enough that they have an endless list of complaints against the bible for the past 1900 years, all of which have been answered in the bible's favor.

For instance, the existence of Pilate was doubted as they had no extra-biblical evidence for him. Until they found some.

Then his character could not have been as portrayed in the bible, as there was no evidence he was as written. Until they found some.

Jericho was a myth, a story children heard. Until they found it.

The war cisterns of Jerusalem were faked by King David, again, until they found them.

The bible is the anvil upon which thousands of hammers have been broken.

Not saying non ethnic religions didn't exist, but that they were a minority. Mystery religions were still exclusive like ethnic religions, just not ethnically exclusive, and not many cults or ideologies before Christianity were designed in such a way that they caused mass conversions in a comparable way. Those philosophy schools didn't incite their followers to crusade for them like Christianity did, my point was just that regardless of intent by the founders, proponents, or followers, the details of Christianity simply play human relations well to its advantage in ways other religions didn't, including non ethnic ones. In Europe and the Mediterranean at that time the majority of groups had some ethnic religion that Christianity competed with so that was my focus, but it would be logical to assume those other non-ethnic religious movements either did non manipulate people as effectively or were part of a cultural context that was ore resistant to them.

Some early cults could have had some of the same strengths as Christianity as far as I know, and I can't say there isn't some degree of chance in what succeeds, but Christianity still undeniably has details that make it more likely to succeed which makes it unsurprising that it has.

>Nor was John crucified.
>Nor was John in Jerusalem.
And?
>Nor was Judaism an apocalyptic religion.
Judaism wasn't a monolith, there were apocalyptic sects, like the Essenes, and Christians.

The Old Testament was Jewish Mythology. Christ made his common sense adaptable to that, and due to it's nature Christianity was adaptable to all pre-christian wordly psychedelic religions by creating and using the correct mod for every one of them. Trully a evolutionary jump for it's age.

Who are you trying to convince, me, or yourself?

Our proddie poster is severely autistic and can barely read. But I do think he's honestly trying to convince you. He's just not very good at it or at understanding any viewpoint other than his own.

Christianity was exclusive to those who wanted to undergo the sacraments needed, just as the mystery religions.

Ethnic exclusive religions weren't exactly the norm. Greeks prayed to gods from all over the near east, Romans added foreign gods to their state pagan cult.

>a random Jewish rabbi
Jesus of Nazareth claimed to be the Jewish Messiah, the one destined to defeat the enemies and powers enslaving Israel, He also claimed that He was not just a man, but the Word of God incarnate in the flesh. That hardly makes him an obscure little rabbi. His message was that in order to defeat the enemy (which was believed to be Rome) you must not go to war and use violence, but you must be filled with love and mercy and maintain a strong faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel. When Jesus rose from the dead, it showed that He had defeated the real enemy: death itself. And it was His resurrection that made his followers believe, it was His resurrection that made Saul of Tarsus, who persecuted Christ's followers, come to be a follower himself and as Paul the Apostle, he spread the Gospel throughout Asia Minor and the Greco-Roman world. Eventually the Roman Empire itself became Christian and thus Christianity spread to all of the regions within the Empire, as God had planned. And from those regions, missionaries spread the Gospel to the other parts of the globe.

God the Father is the pure being of God. God the Word is God's wisdom, love and activity within his created order (all of God's actions happen through Him speaking) and Jesus is the incarnation of this Word. God the Spirit is harder to explain, but it could be described as being God's DNA in a sense. DNA contains the characteristics of a person, so when you inherit your parents' DNA, you inherit their characteristics like hair and eye colour and certain emotional and mental qualities, when you get chosen to be part of God's family, He gives you His DNA (His Spirit) which He has given to all other members of His family, and so you inherit God's characteristics such as love, wisdom and kindness.

...

...

...

...

...

Which is better? Pravoslavlje (Orthodox), Catholicism or Protestantism.
I live in a Pravoslav country, so...

I think Orthodox is probably the best. The current Pope is horrid and Protestantism is retarded.

Luck basically.

Christianity became so widespread because the Roman state started persecuting polytheist faiths.