Protestant / Catholic / Orthodox mega thread

Keep all your Christian denominational debates here.

Theology and Biblical scholarship is also welcome. If atheists have any questions, feel free to ask.

Please keep shitposting to a minimum.

Other urls found in this thread:

cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/03/17/pope-francis-dont-hesitate-use-exorcist-necessary/
youtube.com/watch?v=3r9L8lPCY_M
youtube.com/watch?v=MTvcrAmj_lY
youtube.com/watch?v=Xx9T1WaOv8k
youtube.com/watch?v=qG_ZUWiM_50
youtube.com/watch?v=cRmWSB1c6L8
youtube.com/watch?v=aXcLCPtWu08
youtube.com/watch?v=VZic4LngKis
youtube.com/watch?v=ZUkiBz9rYEs
youtube.com/watch?v=wjmFm8PIz8M
youtube.com/watch?v=JFI6m6Icav4
youtube.com/watch?v=S80z3kC31uw
youtube.com/watch?v=5bVEXZ38Vs8
youtube.com/watch?v=LClaSilFlA8
youtube.com/watch?v=oTo2wbfvT9E
youtube.com/watch?v=KHcf3E8qOqA
youtube.com/watch?v=ll0otULYzms
youtube.com/watch?v=qk_VwZxN9bA
youtube.com/watch?v=efRRknDAuHc
youtube.com/watch?v=FywOhaY-GEA
youtube.com/watch?v=ZhaLDYo0Kl8
youtube.com/watch?v=qTi1FZkoEsM
youtube.com/watch?v=86PL9wueH-s
youtube.com/watch?v=TLoUq8vybzY
youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y
youtube.com/watch?v=BpVJzLFQ9ro
youtube.com/watch?v=rnajIzZGE5o
youtube.com/watch?v=3pweOIaaTVk
youtube.com/watch?v=m8T2lUPpfgs
youtube.com/watch?v=S-SzIJngWqE
youtube.com/watch?v=oETivbBtlAE
youtube.com/watch?v=kKKIvmcO5LQ
youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4FRgas
youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM
youtube.com/watch?v=4C5pq7W5yRM
youtube.com/watch?v=4l1lQMCOguw
youtube.com/watch?v=3Yt7hvgFuNg
youtube.com/watch?v=XbLJtxn_OCo
youtube.com/watch?v=bj0lekx-NiQ
youtube.com/watch?v=_Ii-bsrHB0o
youtube.com/watch?v=xnBTJDje5xk
youtube.com/watch?v=qDX6F_O5XB0
crisismagazine.com/2015/atheists-dont-exist
letusreason.org/apolo7.htm
ichthys.com/
strangenotions.com/gods-philosophers/
reasons.org/articles/articles/fulfilled-prophecy-evidence-for-the-reliability-of-the-bible
youtube.com/watch?v=YCr3YEGGgr8
youtube.com/watch?v=o__D464kGyY
youtube.com/watch?v=PuTPylRXKd8
protestanterrors.com
youtube.com/watch?v=5baWgvEqbeg
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Southern Baptist here. I understand how based Catholics have been in the past, but can you guys explain to me why a guy who supports gay marriage should be considered the mouth of God?

I mean, I'm not saying I'm against gay marriage. I have gay friends, I'd just prefer civil unions honestly. I'm just wondering why we're suddenly acting like these are consistent with God's word. It's fine to be a Christian and not want to stone gays, just disagree with their lifestyle, y'know?

Oh boy, it's yet another thread where we have to explain the specific circumstances where the pope is infallible.

I didn't mean it like that. I just meant how does Catholic doctrine justify this. I'm not trying to be offensive or anything, believe me, Catholics are seriously fucking based. Just look at the degeneracy that has seeped into our own movements- Episcopalians, Lutherans, it's all fucking retarded. We need unity among Christians if anything.

I just want to know how a traditionalist, anti-gay marriage, anti-abortion Catholic would view the Pope today. Like how would you get me to convert to Catholicism, essentially.

Well, I would start by saying that Francis says a lot of shit that is not authoritative. His off the cuff remarks in interviews do not have the weight of Church teaching. I think he is trying to subtly shift Church teaching THROUGH his interviews. He won't, though.

I would also say that His Holiness is misinterpreted a lot by the atheistic media. They WANT him to support gay marriage, abortion, and gender theory. So the minute that he says something that isn't fire-breathing hatred of any of those groups, they try to run with it, in the hopes of shaping a narrative. Meanwhile, what he says is often not so much like what they report.

And they just ignore certain other things. Like, for example, they like to ignore how much he talks about exorcisms.

cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/03/17/pope-francis-dont-hesitate-use-exorcist-necessary/

Oh yeah dude, no doubt that he is misinterpreted. He mentions a lot of conservative points, but notice how the liberal media chooses to focus on when he says remotely liberal things are pro-refugee or something, in spite of the fact that like many conservative Evangelical groups, even my own, support refugee programs or something.

It's fucking bullshit man. Thanks for this info about exorcism btw. Idk if I'm a schizophrenic or something, but I seriously believe we're in some kind of spiritual warfare in our daily lives. We constantly have to fight our demons to stay true to the teachings of Jesus Christ. I've always found like the Book of Revelations to be super fascinating to me and those kinds of climatic faith-based conflicts.

Thanks for the clarifications. I'm not sure if i'll convert, but you anons definitely are based.

Dumping some sermons and lectures (mostly by Calvinists).

>Postmodernism and Society
youtube.com/watch?v=3r9L8lPCY_M
This message will explain the pervasive influence of postmodern thinking on every aspect of contemporary culture: politics, business, education, entertainment, etc.

>The Disappearance of God
youtube.com/watch?v=MTvcrAmj_lY
G.K. Chesterton once said that when people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing, they believe in anything. The rejection of Christianity by our culture has resulted in a spiritual vacuum that is being filled by all manner of aberrant teachings. In this session, Dr. Albert Mohler will provide guidance to Christians who are confused by all the falsehoods swirling around them every day.

>Welcome to the Machine
youtube.com/watch?v=Xx9T1WaOv8k
When a culture rejects God, it always replaces Him with something else. For many in our post-Christian culture, the new “god” is science, the new priests (those whom we must not question) are the scientists, and the new religion is a materialistic scientism. In this session, Dr. Albert Mohler will explore the changing place of science in our culture and explain how Christians should respond to the claims of science.

>Post-Christian Christianity
youtube.com/watch?v=qG_ZUWiM_50
When the surrounding culture changes, one approach that has been taken by many churches over the centuries is to capitulate to the new thought-forms and change the message of Christ to suit the world. This was true of nineteenth-century liberalism, and it is true in many churches today. In this session, Dr. R.C. Sproul explains the dangers of following the ever-shifting tides of contemporary culture and calls the church to walk in the ancient paths.

>How to Study the Bible
youtube.com/watch?v=cRmWSB1c6L8
Have you ever a read passage in the Bible and discovered something you never noticed before? How many interpretations can one Scripture passage have? Are all interpretations valid? While the basic message of Scripture is clear, those who do not understand and apply the basic principles of biblical interpretation can easily misinterpret it. In this message, Dr. R.C. Sproul, Sr. will introduce some of the more important tools and concepts that are necessary in order to properly study and understand the Bible.

>Back to Basics
youtube.com/watch?v=aXcLCPtWu08
In every age and in every nation, the church is tempted to capitulate to the values and ideals of the surrounding culture. In every age and in every nation, the solution is the same: repentance and faith. To be faithful, the church must recover the Gospel of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. In this message, Dr. R.C. Sproul looks at the essentials of the Gospel and explains why it is necessary in every generation to re-emphasize the centrality of these basic truths.

Understanding our enemy (Satan).

>A Gnostic Gospel
youtube.com/watch?v=VZic4LngKis
Americans are incurably "spiritual," but this spirituality expresses itself in ways that are incompatible with biblical Christianity. It expresses itself in ways that are essentially Gnostic. The American church has not been immune to the influence of this American Gnosticism. In this message, Dr. Peter Jones compares this private, mystical, and inward religious mentality with the corporate, doctrinal, and visible faith of orthodox Christianity.

>Dualism: The Illuminati Religion
youtube.com/watch?v=ZUkiBz9rYEs
In this 'Conspiracy Theory of Everything' type exposé on the Illuminati, Gnosticism and Luciferian beliefs I reveal for the first time the hidden and zealously guarded religous beliefs of the Elites. I begin by outlining their basic beliefs about Dualism and the Great Work and what all these doctrines entail. I then attempt to prove my outlandish assertions by reviewing four of the most Gnostic entrenched pieces of content available (The Matrix, Tron Legacy, Lego Movie & ES4: Shivering Isles). I also offer a large list of other similar content. After this I examine occult symbolism and cultural trends showing that the same doctrines appear where ever the Illuminati have any influence. Some examples of topics covered are: Freemasonic Symbolism, Baphomet, 9/11, The Emerald Tablet, LGBT, Evolution, Chimeras, Transhumanism, Race Wars, Prince ect. ect. In the final section of the video I go about refuting the many beliefs revealed in the first two sections, as well as offering a superior alternative to those beliefs which is found in the Gospel of Christ contained in the Word of God, the Bible.

>AGE OF DECEIT
youtube.com/watch?v=wjmFm8PIz8M

>Zeitgeist Debunked
youtube.com/watch?v=JFI6m6Icav4

>Birth of All Occult, Tower of Babel and Nimrod
youtube.com/watch?v=S80z3kC31uw

On Catholicism, Islam and WE WUZ.

>Detailed Documentary Exposing Catholic Church (8 hours)
youtube.com/watch?v=5bVEXZ38Vs8

>The Real History of the evil Roman Catholic Church
youtube.com/watch?v=LClaSilFlA8

>The Jesuit Agenda Exposed
youtube.com/watch?v=oTo2wbfvT9E

>The Real Bible Version Issue
youtube.com/watch?v=KHcf3E8qOqA

>The Catholic and Islamic Connection
youtube.com/watch?v=ll0otULYzms

>Detailed Documentary Exposing Islam (3 hours)
youtube.com/watch?v=qk_VwZxN9bA

>Muhammad the World's Most Evil Man?
youtube.com/watch?v=efRRknDAuHc

>Evidence Muhammad was Demon Possessed
youtube.com/watch?v=FywOhaY-GEA

>Original Sources Koran Stole its Stories From
youtube.com/watch?v=ZhaLDYo0Kl8

>Allah = Satan
youtube.com/watch?v=qTi1FZkoEsM
youtube.com/watch?v=86PL9wueH-s
youtube.com/watch?v=TLoUq8vybzY

>Why We Are Afraid, A 1400 Year Secret
youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y

>Black Hebrew Israelites Debunked
youtube.com/watch?v=BpVJzLFQ9ro

>Does The Bible Condemn Masturbation?
youtube.com/watch?v=rnajIzZGE5o
In this video I discuss whether the Bible condemns the act of self masturbation or not. I first look at the opinions of some more popular YouTube videos that have addressed the topic, pointing out that they all agree on one thing. That is, they all agree that the Bible never speaks to the issue. Is that true? No, in my humble opinion. To prove this point I go to a text in Matthew 5 and show decisively that even Jesus Himself directly attacks this type of practice, essentially undermining any argument that would seek to allow for this type of behavior in the Christian's life. Don't be deceived Saints of the Lord! Be faithful Bride of Christ, to your Husband to-be!

>Should A Christian Keep The Sabbath? | The 10 Commandments
youtube.com/watch?v=3pweOIaaTVk
In this video I discuss whether or not Christians should observe the Old Testament Sabbath. Very relevant to this discussion are the Ten Commandments and whether they should be kept by us today. I start by commentating Matthew chapter 5 and contrasting it with other Scriptures found in the New Testament. I then move onto Matthew 19 and clarify it's intent and how it affects this important topic. After this I move into presenting Sabbatarian trouble verses, discussing possible interpretations of the passages and giving answers to commonly held misconceptions about these verses. Lastly, I restate my position, trying to draw out my intent in making this video, discussing my own experiences of seventh day Sabbath observance and warning of particular dangers involved with this topic.

>The Riddle of Living Water
youtube.com/watch?v=m8T2lUPpfgs
This video is an in-depth Bible study focused upon living water. I start by systematically discussing the Gospel of John's many mentions of water and drawing out much of the meaning that God inspired in the text, by showing the selections in their proper context. I then show the connections between John's living water theme and various Old Testament passages that shed light on what is meant by John. After this, I move on to connect John's writings about living water in Revelation back to his Gospel as well as other various Old Testament passages. After finishing with John I discuss a handful of other places where living water shows up in the Bible, both in the Old & New Testaments. Finally, I close with a thorough discussion of the creation event found in Genesis 1 and my take on how living water is essential to it.

>The Choice (motivational video)
youtube.com/watch?v=S-SzIJngWqE

>Why Leftists Believe Weird and Immoral Things
youtube.com/watch?v=oETivbBtlAE

On atheism and theism.

>Worst Objection to Theism: Who Created God?
youtube.com/watch?v=kKKIvmcO5LQ

>Digital Physics Argument for God's Existence
youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4FRgas

>The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument
youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM

>Quantum Physics Debunks Materialism
youtube.com/watch?v=4C5pq7W5yRM

>The Introspective Argument
youtube.com/watch?v=4l1lQMCOguw

>The Teleological Argument
youtube.com/watch?v=3Yt7hvgFuNg

>What Atheists Confuse
Part 1 youtube.com/watch?v=XbLJtxn_OCo
Part 2 youtube.com/watch?v=bj0lekx-NiQ

>Is Atheism a Delusion?
Part 1 youtube.com/watch?v=_Ii-bsrHB0o
Part 2 youtube.com/watch?v=xnBTJDje5xk

>Atheists Don't Exist
youtube.com/watch?v=qDX6F_O5XB0
In this film it's recognized there's no point in endlessly giving "atheists" classical or evidentialist arguments since their fallen nature and faulty unbelieving presuppositions prevent them from accepting them. Plus it is dishonoring to God to let them autonomously weigh evidence for God as if He was on trial and they were the judges. Rather, we reduce the unbeliever's worldview to absurdity noting it can't account for valid human experience (and that Christianity does), and show the God they know deep down is needed to rescue them from such absurdity.

crisismagazine.com/2015/atheists-dont-exist
letusreason.org/apolo7.htm

>Theology & Eschatology
ichthys.com/

>On the "Dark Age" myth
strangenotions.com/gods-philosophers/

>The Reliability of the Bible
reasons.org/articles/articles/fulfilled-prophecy-evidence-for-the-reliability-of-the-bible

>Persia in Bible Prophecy
youtube.com/watch?v=YCr3YEGGgr8

>Mystery Babylon (Bill Cooper podcast series)
youtube.com/watch?v=o__D464kGyY

>Struggling with Sin
youtube.com/watch?v=PuTPylRXKd8

>this thread
protestanterrors.com

>angry christcucks upset that protestants exist
oy vey it's like the 30 year war all over again! We need to stop this, fransiscus
*diddles children*

there's a reason why the rothschilds and the like settled and alilied with britain [and its succesor, the US] over france and other european powers.

the entire role of protestantism in history has been to undermine and destroy Christianity, hence why it has rapidly disappeared entirely in a post-Nietzsche Europe. It's very existence is redundant. The only real protestant population now is in the United States, and those same specific populations are the ones happily signing up to die for Israel.

>Muh j00s

>Das Holy Bible
The correct German would be "Die Heilige Bibel".

The article "Die" would add another layer of irony, because it sounds like an imperative: "Die, Holy Bible!"

who was crying "oy vey" first?

Francis, for his faults, does not support gay marriage:
"It is my wish that throughout my visit the family should be a recurrent theme. How essential the family has been to the building of this country! And how worthy it remains of our support and encouragement! Yet I cannot hide my concern for the family, which is threatened, perhaps as never before, from within and without. Fundamental relationships are being called into question, as is the very basis of marriage and the family. I can only reiterate the importance and, above all, the richness and the beauty of family life.
In particular, I would like to call attention to those family members who are the most vulnerable, the young. For many of them, a future filled with countless possibilities beckons, yet so many others seem disoriented and aimless, trapped in a hopeless maze of violence, abuse and despair. Their problems are our problems. We cannot avoid them. We need to face them together, to talk about them and to seek effective solutions rather than getting bogged down in discussions. At the risk of oversimplifying, we might say that we live in a culture which pressures young people not to start a family, because they lack possibilities for the future. Yet this same culture presents others with so many options that they too are dissuaded from starting a family"
"The family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life"
While I'm not too pleased with Francis (he's a very pious and holy man, he's just not fit for pope in my opinion, and certainly not the pope we need in this period where islam is so intent on harming the Church) he's not gone against Church teaching.
Which is one of my biggest issues with him, he inadvertently leads his flock astray by not calling out the media on misquoting him and twisting his words, like the servants of the enemy they are.

Did Jesus always exist, or was he created to go to Earth?

1. The Pope doesn't support gay marriage
2. Don't pretend you're "ok" with gay people after a post like that

Catholics, Orthodox, and most Protestants think he always existed as God.

Unitarians don't, and I don't think Mormons do either.

The Gospel of John was explicitly written to support the first group's argument.

Did the /pol/ Catholic generals get banned or did the creator get lazy?

>I'm not saying I'm against gay marriage
You think the profaning of marriage is fine? Do you think sodomy is ok?

Is the "Young, Restless and Reformed" movement a Neo-Puritan movement?

Actually the reason John was written was as an anti-Gnostic polemic, which only strengthens its authenticity.

>The article "Die" would add another layer of irony, because it sounds like an imperative: "Die, Holy Bible!"
Not if you pronounce it like a German

Why would that stregthen its authenticity when it has a clear objective to dispute a theological rival, for political expedience in John's present?

Because it means its purpose is not to teach the deity of Christ, but the humanity of Christ

From a catholic perspective the Satan has been in the Vatican and will be for 100 years.

I think it was intended for non-Germans, the comic that is. Most everyone would've understood "Die Heilige Bibel" after thinking for two seconds, but by then the impact would've been lessened.

Reminder that this man was right on the Eucharist

Why do Protestants ignore the first 1500 years of Christianity?

Why do they ignore apostolic succession? How do they explain Matthias replacing Judas as an apostle in the book of Acts?

Why do they ignore the fact that Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of Heaven? The Pope is the successor of Saint Peter.

>Protestants
No thanks. Orthodox I can handle, protestants are scum.

Because he was trying to refute a theological rival. That's an evasion, not an answer.

I'll ask again, how do these circumstances make John's testimony more authentic, and not less?

Catholic Jesus vs. Protestant Jesus.

>Why do Protestants ignore the first 1500 years of Christianity?
We don't
>Why do they ignore apostolic succession? How do they explain Matthias replacing Judas as an apostle in the book of Acts?
There is no Christian sacerdotal priesthood, so there is no apostolic succession (at least not the way you mean it)
>Why do they ignore the fact that Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of Heaven?
Jesus did not give Peter the Keys, He gave the apostles the Keys.
>The Pope is the successor of Saint Peter.
Considering Rome was not monoepiscopal until the 140s, that is impossible.

Because John's purpose isn't the deity of Christ, which means that the clear testimony of Christ's deity isn't some forgery but the orthodox Christian belief

I want to believe but it's really hard. I don't know how you do it.

You will know them by their fruits.

There's several holes in you reasoning.

1. Apparently since John's objective isn't to portray the divinity of Jesus, but rather the humanity of Jesus; what he says about Jesus's divinity in his testimony is apparently authentic and true.

2. If John's primary goal is to portray the humanity of Jesus, why does it disagree so wildly with the synoptic gospels in recounting Jesus' earthly mission; what order his earthly works took place in.

3. Why wouldn't John's testimony aim to primarily focus on Jesus' divinity, if so much of Jesus' portrayed divinity is closely in line with Orthodox Christology and Theology?

4. Again, why wouldn't the author's desire to refute Gnosticism weaken his testimony, when he has a supposed desire to do so and may show it in his writing?

>Apparently since John's objective isn't to portray the divinity of Jesus, but rather the humanity of Jesus; what he says about Jesus's divinity in his testimony is apparently authentic and true.
I never said that, I said it proves it was the oldest Christian view and not some made-up conspiracy like muslims think
>why does it disagree so wildly with the synoptic gospels in recounting Jesus' earthly mission; what order his earthly works took place in
It doesn't
>Why wouldn't John's testimony aim to primarily focus on Jesus' divinity
Because it is about His humanity. Do you have short-term memory loss?
>Again, why wouldn't the author's desire to refute Gnosticism weaken his testimony
Because it means his desire isn't to refute Arianism, Socinianism or Islam, his desire is to refute Docetism. This should be obvious

>I never said that, I said it proves it was the oldest Christian view and not some made-up conspiracy like muslims think
The Synoptics have the oldest Christian view, primarily Mark.
>It doesn't
So when Jesus smashes up the Court of Gentiles as one of the first acts of his ministry, this is in line with the Synoptics who claim he did it in his final week; one of the things that lead to his eventual death. Or when Jesus tries to keep his miracles and messiah-status secret in the Synoptics, but openly proclaims and demonstrates his power in John? Literally, every Biblical scholar would disagree with you, even the ones inside the Church.
>Because it is about His humanity. Do you have short-term memory loss?
In what way. You still haven't remotely answered this question.
>Because it means his desire isn't to refute Arianism, Socinianism or Islam, his desire is to refute Docetism. This should be obvious
Then his Gospel was probably the worst to do it in. Since it does focus on Jesus' divine status.

There's a reason why scholars see John's Gospel as the least reliable; since it's so inaccurate in retelling the smallest details of Jesus' life that are testified in the other three; and so eager to focus on Jesus' divine nature, which is coincidentally so much in line with later Orthodox belief. You've provided no proof that John meant to focus on Jesus' humanity, and then jumped to secure his theology as being sound because he allegedly had less interest in talking about it.

Also since you let the insults fly first, a sign that you really want out of your losing argument, I'll give you a tip. Grow the fuck up, you're terrible at this.

You're a fucking fraud.

...

>Your duty is to believe and to preach what the Bible says, not what you want it to say

That's almost painfully ironic in Protestant context.

>Raping kids and selling tickets to Heaven is what God would want, goy!

...

expand on this

This thread is pretty comfy desu. There's even frogposters lol. I like it.

the creator got lazy, I still see some christians threads here and there so discussion is obviously not banned.

Seems like Catholicism is the most sure way to get to heaven.

I have a similar problem user. It's hard to deal with the materialistic/naturalistic poison the western society drops into our mind for years since we're born.

What's your problem with believing? Do you think it's not logical?

post the unedited one c'mon

Yes, that's the lie that keeps the papists coming back for more.

Protestants claim that an authoritative church is not needed to determine which writings are inspired. Some protestants even say it's obvious which ancient writings belong in the bible and which do not. But is it really so obvious?

After all, some books of the bible don't seem very "biblical." Ecclesiastes contains what seems to be a cynical rejection of the afterlife, the third letter of John doesn't mention the name of Jesus Christ, and the letter of Philemon doesn't teach any specific doctrine. The part of the book of Esther that protestants consider to be inspired scripture never even mentions God. Yet, all these writings are found in the bible, although writings that were popular in the early church, like the Didache or the letter of Clement (which was even read in church services) are not.

Imagine if every American had the authority to decide what the US constitution means. Each person could do as he wished, saying that his actions fell under his own interpretation of "freedom of religion" or "freedom of association." What would come of this approach? Anarchy. Fortunately, the founding fathers created an institution called the Supreme Court that was entrusted with interpreting the Constitution. That way, through the court's decisions, a uniform legal code would be created that would treat all citizens equally. Just as a personal interpretation of the constitution would lead to chaos for the rule of law, relying solely on one's personal interpretation of the bible as a guide to Christian doctrine leads to chaos for the rule of faith.

If Americas founding fathers were wise enough to foresee the dangers of individuals engaging in private constitutional interpretation, then wouldn't the church's "founding fathers," or Christ and the apostles, see the danger in relegating Christian authority to private biblical interpretation? We read in Peter 1:20 that "no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation," and the author later warns his readers that some passages in the bible are "hard to understand, which the ignorant and the unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures" (2 Pet. 3:16)

Believing Jesus is God, died for the sins of the world, and raised from the dead on the third day, requires supernatural assistance.

Since you both have come to the ends of yourself and cannot "force" yourselves to believe, you now need to know that you always required supernatural assistance.

That the things to do to become saved are supernatural.

For if we confess with our mouths that Jesus is Lord, and believe in our hearts God raised him from the dead, we will be saved.

The word is in your mouth, and in your heart, that you should be saved.

You merely need to ask for divine assistance, which will be forthcoming.

Your pasta is really stale. Ecclesiastes deals with things "under the sun". It repeats that dozens of times. "Under the sun". It does not purport to discuss anything other than the animal life you presumably believe you are living through, where if you poke a dead body it does not speak to you.

The third letter of John was not written to mention Jesus; James doesn't mention Jesus either. All of the scripture is there for teaching, for exhortation, for instruction in biblical knowledge.

Philemon tells you that you can be a slave and be pleasing to the Lord, and you can be a slave owner and be pleasing to the Lord. That the Lord does not play favorites; every man is lost and in need of salvation.

If you cannot see God's hand in keeping the king awake at night and then suddenly wondering what ever happened to that nice old Jew who saved his life, I don't know what to tell you. His hand is obviously moving in Esther to prevent a genocide of his people.

The constitution is not divinely inspired.

if you pay attention to the passages, Ecclesiastes has many added lines. Also Ecclesiastes is in line with the jewish view of the afterlife at that moment, called Shelom. All people live in an almost perpetual darkness but some find solace in the presence of God. It was until the coming of the Messiah that all the chosen people would return to God's Kindgom. But you can see how judaism went through some rough patches and now most of them are basically atheists.

Just my two cents on this.

Why is this board so consistently filled with retards? I'm not questioning the legitimacy of the books I'm merely saying that it's not completely obvious that they should belong in the bible and you haven't tried to argue that point.

I'm not saying the constitution is divinely inspired, it's a fucking analogy.

Yeah I'm not arguing that Ecclesiastes shouldn't be in the bible. You so missed the point.

the point is that Ecclesiastes should be in the Bible because it reflects the pact that Jesus came to fullfill and how he changed everything. You could say the same about Leviticus and Deutoronomy and their stoning laws. Jesus renovated everything.

I should mention that I'm not a protestant so it's not obvious which books are added or which not, there are linguistic studies about them and their original manuscripts. Sorry, english is not my first language. It's an argument from Tradition.

Where's the pasta from, CatholicAnswers

It is completely obvious to people who know what they are talking about, i.e. me.

It is not completely obvious to people incredibly ignorant about all things God, i.e. you.

Just because something is unclear and confusing to YOU does not mean that the thing is unclear and confusing.

It just basically means you're an idiot.

www.papistlies.org

Anglican Church was established in the 7th century and didn't become Protestant until the reign of Queen Elizabeth I.

...

Bumpo

youtube.com/watch?v=5baWgvEqbeg

The Most Anointed Preaching.

This always sends chills down my spine, you can just feel the Holy Spirit within this man.

catholics BTFO

>praying to dead humans and saints with pagan origins

Catholicism, not even once.