/christianity/ - Christianity

 >>/365/
He's literallly jewish

 >>/366/
I think you have to delete posts after they show. It would be nice if you could have a review system but I guess if someone is causing trouble, they're not going to be using the same IP.

 >>/298/

 >>/352/
> islam
What I'm curious about are how Muslim scholars like Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi able to be scholars.

Shit hole Israel is faggot central.
Kikes.

Yes. They will never fix their own problems when they constantly use Christ as a red herring, yet the christian just endures as their gomorrah falls. Just don't send your kids out to be an actress/whore.

 >>/323/

So.... in other words, exactly what I said... just using a more vivid and hyper-specific example (which could ironically be a form of pilpul in itself.)

 >>/323/

Even more detailed and official explanations exhibit pilpul as going beyond merely being a synonym for doublespeak:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilpul

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/pilpul?s=t

Here's some other oldies but goodies:

biblegateway.com
gotquestions.org
http://www.ccel.org
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com

DVi71DEU8AAK7QR jpg
(73.66 KB, 960x496)

As a orthodox christian i recommend Jay Dyers channel and website:

https://jaysanalysis.com/
https://www.youtube.com/user/jaydyer

He is former protestant and catholic who turned orthodox 10 years ago(?). 

Also protestant and catholics will find his content interesting because he quite often debates catholics and protestants about theology. I personally enjoy his debates against pagans, as i use to be one.

Jay Dyer vs. Erick Ybarra (catholic) debate about Papacy: https://youtube.com/watch?v=pkIfo15jV-8

Jay Dyer vs. Nick Fuentes (catholic): https://youtube.com/watch?v=y5TrGzQ8woQ

Jay Dyer vs. Boglord Dave Martel about paganism: https://youtube.com/watch?v=GLlGNihWIJ4

Also this is good too "Genesis vs. Atheism & paganism": https://youtube.com/watch?v=_0RN4CHxUzc

vaticancatholic https://youtube.com/watch?v=ztqdmCIGSDY

 >>/155/
Based Doggo

Brothers please pray for me, I am in desperate need of your prayers. Let’s just say that lately I’ve found myself at Vanity Fair, and the temptation of cheese pizza has been very strong.

90a6031d782a87f5588... png
(435.59 KB, 826x896)

318c3360b3f3099200c3... jpg
(102.03 KB, 694x734)

 >>/167/
> I believe in the Aryan God
You forgot the 's' at the end

 >>/292/

Will be praying for you bro.

Please pray for the Lord to remove my pedo desires and fantasies from me. Also please pray that I not be left alone with any children till He does, since I’m fairly confident that if I were alone with an attractive child for a prolonged period I would probably end up touching them

 >>/316/
> Where you're wrong is that we're heirs of the new world, and thus we shouldn't follow the Law anymore.
We should always follow the law, even into eternity. That’s because the law represents God’s character. It is not an arbitrary thing, the laws of God are innately good and reflect not only the divine character but also the created order. This is why men died even when there was no law, because creation itself testifies to the law, and so men even in ignorance sin against God willingly. 
> we're still under the Law
Then we are still in our sin and there is no life in us. Have you sinned? Does the law not promise death for sin? Then by your own admission you deserve not to live with Christ, from whom all life is derived, but to die like a criminal.
> we're not living under the laws of a new world, spiritually.
You are contradicting the entire New Testament. Do you dismiss the New Testament? If so, what revelation do you bring forward? Or is this a religion of your own design?

 >>/321/
> We should always follow the law, even into eternity. (...) the laws of God are innately good and reflect not only the divine character but also the created order. 

Jesus corrected and added to the Law multiple times. Paul spoke how you are bound by the Law only until you die and how it is not for a righteous man. Moses broke the initial 10 commandments thrashing them against the ground when he saw Hebrews worship golden calf and only then this entire legalistic insanity was added because of transgression as "statutes not good, And judgments by which they do not live" (Ezekiel 20:25). 
Spirit of the Law is wildly different than the letter and we follow the spirit.

 >>/324/
> Jesus corrected and added to the Law
Marcionism.
> Paul spoke how you are bound by the Law only until you die and how it is not for a righteous man
Yes, we are not bound to the law, because we have died in Christ, and that has nothing to do with what I said.
> Moses broke the initial 10 commandments thrashing them against the ground when he saw Hebrews worship golden calf
So you think this somehow means there was something wrong with those commandments? Even though what angered him was a violation of those very commandments, and the tablets were replaced?
> Spirit of the Law is wildly different than the letter and we follow the spirit.
I don’t know why you think this is contradictory to me, it seems less consistent with what you said

 >>/317/
> It's almost like you've lost the track of the conversation. Neighbour in the Law is a fellow Hebrew since 'thy people'.
Probably because it's the Old Covenant. Thy people were immediately Law-observant Hebrews.
> Neighbour in Jesus' teaching is your fellow human being, not just your fellow Christian. 
Nonsense. Jesus clearly states who your "neighbour" is in Luke 10:25-37.
> It is a summary of the message of the Law, not a direct citation. 
A message of the tribalistic interpretation the Pharisees were engaged in. Following the Law to the word, but not to its Spirit. 
> "'And concerning those of the nations who have believed, we have written, having given judgment, that they observe no such thing, except to keep themselves both from idol-sacrifices, and blood, and a strangled thing, and whoredom.' " 
They weren't allowed to enter the Second Temple, and as such they were practicing Christianity themselves among their own people, thus they didn't practice such rituals.
> And while it might seem like mental acrobatics what Paul did there does fit 1 Corinthians 9:20 
Perhaps, though Paul as a Benjaminite and former Pharisee willingly observed the Law as he did before instead of just practice it to gain the jews as followers. 
> When Paul wrote about it he made separation between body and internal man. Your body will die (or will be transformed if you live through to see Jesus' return) your internal man is saved already
What then is the internal man? Is it not your bodily heart? 
 >>/318/
This is where things get sloppy. Just because we're saved by Christ's atonement, this doesn't mean that we shouldn't follow the Law. Until all is fulfilled, we should follow the model to live a good life, we are not to follow iniquity as saved people.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=QWwAArWY_jY

 >>/334/
So i'll begin with the fact that lucifer was never actually referred to as the morning star in the original KJV. Lucifer in the original hebrew is simply translated as the shining one. Different from the morning star. Lucifer in latin actually means light bearer. Basically nothing in the original hebrew indicates that Lucifer was ever even mentioned as the morning star. Also catholicism literally means universalism. Worshipping and praying towards saints, Mary or popes or any other figure aside from God/Jesus is against them. After all the only way to the father is through christ and his sacrifice for us John 14:6. Secondly Jesus was considered perfect even as a man. He never commited any sin and was sacrificed so people could be salvaged for their sins. This is actually 100% in God's character because he loved the world and spared people many times over example David commited adultery but was forgiven. This means that God would make a sacrifice so people can go to heaven. That doesn't mean the mosaic law was abolished far from it however the sacrifices are abolished because Jesus sacrificed himself. Also when saul says that love of money is the root of evil he isn't meaning that it is bad and you should never use it. He is saying that you should hold the love of the spirit over the love of money. I.e Isaiah 52:3. Further strengthened by Matthew 21:12. Money is a very useful tool but when making money becomes ones primary motion then we lose the sense of ourselves. Then again I'm anti paul but I think this is a suitable argument for pauline christianity followers. 

Well Jesus was born in the line of David. Not by Joseph but by mary. How do we know this. Simple contrast matthew 1 genealogy to the luke 3 genealogy. Thus we can assume that mary actually came from nathan's line making it true that Jesus was of the line of David. Furthermore we can also remember that if Jesus was born of Joseph he would have never gotten onto the throne. Why? because male heirs of that line were never able to get on the throne. When Jesus got DNA tested he had 23 chromosomes from Mary but only 1 Man chromosome. Thus we know that Jesus will rule the people because he isn't an ordinary man. He is God in the flesh. Also quick note. God isn't some sky wizard at the top of the clouds waiting to throw lightning bolts at you. He is a spirit as stated in John 4:24.

Ok I don't believe in that garbage once saved always saved garbage. Jesus saves you if you believe in him yes. However you also have to keep that salvation. Here is how I view it. In James 2:20 when one becomes a believer they must do works in conjunction with faith to keep their salvation. Salvation through christ is just the beginning. Look at the parable of the sower Matthew 13:3-9. Basically anyone who thinks that believing in Jesus gives you a free pass to do whatever you want is sorely mistaken. In my opinion Jesus followed the mosaic law thus as christians we should also follow the mosaic law. Finally look at the modern world around you. Have you found any "good" or "innocent" people. prideful people, sexually repugnant souls and liars are everywhere. Thus yes I believe for a fact that you must come to Jesus to be potentially saved. Even then you must work vigourously in the name of christ. What the church wants isn't what Jesus wants. If you are still going to church in the modern era you're doing it wrong unless you have an extremely traditional church in the area. Jesus never said any of that in the bible.

Christianity is nothing other than a fear based religion? Fear is the call to action. Without fear nothing is ever accomplished. This is why we live in a hodgepot of trash and disgusting people because they are unrepentant and unfearful. Many people associate fear with negativity. I do not, I view it as a call to raise arms and fight back. For fear is nothing more than a natural emotion used to justify retaliation and/or devotion to a specific goal. Fear being negative is a myth. Great men are those who over come them.

I'll continue with the next part.

 >>/335/
Also when you say that it is not through love but through fear. Do you know why christians are trying to get you to repent? Think of it this way fear also drives other emotions. Example a christian is fearful you will go into the lake of fire. Thus they will try everything in their power to convert you because they fear for your sake when you are not afraid. Christians love because they fear for others. Other peoples emotions are merely empty. For without fear those emotions can't be truly satisfying. Be fearful strengthen your heart and increase your love. Nothing is more loving than fearing for the worst and trying your best to prevent such an outcome.

> Christian walks up to me in public
> Believe in Jesus
> Why?
> Because if you don't you will burn in hell forever so give our church all of your money because Jesus needs your money, but he loves you
> walk away and make sure to remember what this person looks like so I can avoid them in the future.
This is a strawman. The person who made this is basically applying this to every christian in existence and saying that every single one acts like this. That is not the case. Some like Joel Olstein would. However others would never do something like that. I for example am a christian and never go to church I pray alone in the house because that is what Jesus said Matthew 6:6. Thrusting a view of christians and applying it to every christian is ridiculous. That's like me saying all atheists are fat, ugly, have no morality, fist eachother and have no standards except for hating christians and posting pictures of thunderfoot or the amazing atheist to prove it. You see how ridiculous it is to make carictures of people to make them look bad? That is less making an argument and attempting to attack the persons character just because this is how they view christians. In other words they don't view christians as people but mere nuisances. Something most christians would never do.

Stupid people believe the threats. You say that but what if it turned out to be true. Would you be calling them stupid if you were burning in a lake of fire because you refuse to believe in God when they were trying to convert you? would you blame them for your inability to take them seriously? Basically you are calling them stupid because they fear for the worst. Albeit misguided. If you really want to spread the truth tell them to read the bible because that is how you strengthen ones faith. Not some pastor wanting to make a quick buck. 

Basically the entire thing turns into a whining about christians being fearful and wanting to save people calling them stupid and not wanting to properly bring up any other argument. Pure bollocks.

 >>/335/
 >>/336/
Wait so you posted these over here, should I copy-paste my same replies from the other thread here too, or should we just cross link the two threads? I'm okay with the easier option.