[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 24 KB, 172x211, John-Smyth.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16825138 No.16825138 [Reply] [Original]

What do my fellow /lit/izens think of baptism?
Is it the ultimate redpill?
Baptists nowadays still keep traditions and the family unit strong and dont allow TVs in their homes for example and their women only wear skirts - no jeans or other manly clothing.

>> No.16825160

>>16825138
i think you're dumb and this is not /lit/ related
you should go back to where you came from faggot

>> No.16825170

>>16825160
How is it not /lit/ related? Where do you propose i should post instead? And where do you think i come from?

>> No.16825181

>>16825170
>How is it not /lit/ related?
/lit/ is for the discussion of literature, specifically books (fiction & non-fiction), short stories, poetry, creative writing, etc. If you want to discuss history, religion, or the humanities, go to /his/. If you want to discuss politics, go to /pol/. Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.
>Where do you propose i should post instead?
I don't know and I don't care
>And where do you think i come from?
I don't know and I don't care

>> No.16825213
File: 617 KB, 690x750, 1589315599534.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16825213

>>16825181
Well, sir, in this case i shall ask my question at /his/ also. I shall not be deleting this thread however since I'm asking you specifically - the /lit/izens (MY FELLOW /lit/izens) for your opinion on this subject. Because I value your opinion more highly than the opinion of /his/torians. This is because i consider myself rather one of you than one of them.
Now that you know this, perhaps i can persuade you to be more amicable and respond to my question in OP? Well?

>> No.16825261
File: 608 KB, 1088x1600, LA SANTÍSIMA TRINIDAD • I.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16825261

«BAPTISM» IS A SUBSECT OF «PROTESTANTISM»; «PROTESTANTISM» IS ANTICHRISTIAN.

>> No.16825271
File: 1.13 MB, 1512x2016, CC512B3B-372C-4276-B277-80CB19550BE9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16825271

>>16825261

>> No.16825277
File: 360 KB, 660x431, 8851FC30-183F-4D9D-913F-6826DA666478.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16825277

>>16825261
>>16825271

>> No.16825283

>>16825261
>«PROTESTANTISM» IS ANTICHRISTIAN
How so? I am interested and might even agree if you say that catholicism is also antichristian.

>> No.16825296

>>16825138
baptist churches are gossip circles for old women and places for boomer men to go off on nonsensical rants; growing up as one turned me into an atheist until I became Catholic

>> No.16825329
File: 495 KB, 580x800, SALVATOR MVNDI • ANÓNIMO.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16825329

>>16825283


«PROTESTANTISTIC» THEOLOGY IS FATALISTIC, AND, ULTIMATELY, NIHILISTIC; «PROTESTANTISTIC» THEOLOGY IS AN INVERSIVE ABERRATION OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY, THE MORE FLAGRANT, CRITICAL ERRORS OF WHICH INCLUDE: (I) THE PRESUMPTION OF INHERENT EVIL IN ALL HUMANS, (II) THE POSITING OF ANTITHESIS BETWEEN FAITH, AND REASON, (III) THE SUBORDINATION OF REASON TO WILL.

ON THESE THREE ABERRANT DOGMAS STANDS THE HYDRA OF «PROTESTANTISM».

>> No.16825342

>>16825329
Okay but what about catholicism?

>> No.16825377

>>16825342


WHAT ABOUT IT?

>> No.16825390

>>16825377
Is it antichristian too or not?

>> No.16825428

>>16825271
wtf is this true??

>> No.16825496

>>16825428
yes, there is something very fishy in western religion. it is indeed true.

>> No.16825522
File: 3.31 MB, 731x1183, LA SANTISOFIÁNICA TRIUNIDAD.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16825522

>>16825390


THE CATHOLIC CREED IS THE TRUE CREED.

>> No.16825547

>>16825522
Then I will not agree with you

>> No.16825555

>>16825547


YOU SHOULD AGREE WITH THE TRUTH, NOT WITH ME.

>> No.16825602

>>16825377
>>16825522
>>16825555
youre a retard but i gotta say; these digits are amazing

>> No.16825849

>>16825181
You're conspicuously absent in the ten trillion threads about
>tfw no gf
>tradcaths
>nu-atheists
>"philosophy is bullshit" threads
Why don't you fuck off back to /a/ with your board purism nonsense.
And John Smyth, pictured in the OP, was a religious writer.

>> No.16825864

>>16825522
Based digits

>> No.16825896

>>16825849
>>You're conspicuously absent in the ten trillion threads about...
>Whataboutism
ISHYDDT.
>>And John Smyth, pictured in the OP, was a religious writer
>Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around SPECIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS to which posters can refer
Are you brain damaged?

>> No.16825906

>>16825138
based

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUO5o4YmTbA

>> No.16826876

>>16825261
In order to protest the Roman Catholic Church, one must first recognize it as a legitimate entity. Baptists believe that the Roman Catholic Church was illegitimate from its foundation, so they have no more reason to protest against it than to protest against Buddhism. Baptists are not Protestants.

>> No.16826904

>>16825329
>PRESUMPTION OF INHERENT EVIL IN ALL HUMANS
The Roman Catholics are the ones who practice pedobaptism because they believe in original sin. How can you accuse Baptists of believing that all people have a sin nature when you believe that infants will go to hell/purgatory/limbo if they haven't been baptized?

>> No.16826921

Historical baptists were based. They wouldn't want anything to do with modern IFBs though.

>> No.16826942

Baptism?

Getting my third child baptized.

t. Infant baptizing Presbyterian

>> No.16826956

>>16825138
You have to be more specific. You're referring to Independent Fundamentalist Baptists; not all Baptists are like this.
>t. my oneitis goes to a "contemporary" Baptist church, and many things there are liberal, if not un-biblical.

>> No.16826964
File: 49 KB, 897x944, Samuel_Rutherford_St._Andrews.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16826964

>>16826942
Based.

>> No.16826969

>>16826956
spoiler text annuls the green text, huh
>t. my (spoiler) goes to a "contemporary" Baptist church, and many things there are liberal, if not un-biblical.

>> No.16827006

>>16826956
>>16826969
>testtest>test

>> No.16827018

>>16825138
Grew up in a southern town where a Baptist church exists every 5 miles. They watched TV, women wore jeans and worked.

I think you may be referring to Holyness or Pentecostals.

And no, it's not exactly a redpill. Redpills and objective truth may exist but aren't as binary and monolithic as your average /pol/ user would have you believe.

For instance. How does women wearing skirts improve society?

>> No.16827022

>>16827006
What the heck, adding a second > after the spoiler cancelled the spoiler tags

>> No.16827032

>>16827018
Society would be far more tolerable if I didn't have to see yoga pants every time I walk outside

>> No.16827061

>>16827032
Noted.

>> No.16827067

>>16827032
>Looking at the bottom halves of women
Uncouth, positively barbaric

>> No.16827070

>>16827067
He's a filthy degenerate

>> No.16827087

>>16825138
That Spurgeon fellow was pretty good. I have his seven volume commentary on the Psalms.

>> No.16828800

>>16825160
About the 8th time today. You're wrong and and severely mentally ill.

>> No.16828814

>>16825271
>>16825277
is this value brand Campbell?

>> No.16828828

>>16827067
Even if you dont look, it will trigger an autonomic and sexual response for most men at some level. Women provocatively dressed clothing are an occasion of sin. The Pslamist warns to not even to go near the house of a strange woman, let alone speak or be in her direct presence. Jeans, yoga pants, cleavage and so on are scandalous clothes that induce one to sin.

>> No.16829946

>>16825138
Baptism is great. I mean, it has to be, it's the only way to join Holy Catholic Church.