/lit/ - Literature

First for atheism

>>19771510

>>19771519
Into hellfire? Yes

Go back to >>>/his/ already.

>>19771522
Good thing the term ‘nations’ has nothing to do with race in the Bible and the Bible predicts that the nations will come to follow God

>>19771519
Oh my science, this post is so wholesome 100!

>>19771529
You know it has everything thing to do with race. Why are you in denial?

>Genesis 15:13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; Genesis 15:18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:

https://youtu.be/cGUQSg5MwYU
What do anons think of this as it relates to the story of Judas and the perfume

https://www.crisismagazine.com/2022/fighting-the-demon-of-pornography

>>19771590
god gave the goyim to the jews so that salvation can come from the jews, as jesus said.

>>19771990
Lol he gets it

>>19771528
die, kike.

>>19772040
>/biblegen/ hates jews even more than /pol/
very based, would Crusade with, against the real enemy this time.

Just read the first part for St John Chrysostom's Homilies on Matthew, very well written, he truly was the golden mouthed Saint.

>>19771510
>calling Elisha a "bald head"
Those little shits had it coming tbdesu.

>>19771519
Same desu

>>19772120
Praying for you

>>19771524
Why would bother threaten people who don't believe in hell with hell lol

>>19772257
they do believe deep down. atheism is simply gigacope.

>>19772309
When you believe an assortment of, let's be honest, rather baseless claims I imagine it can be comforting to pretend they're all actually self-evident and that your enemies are simply pretending otherwise. It's not hard to see why your phony faith has created so many useless atheists.

>>19772353
not my problem

>>19772240
Larping idolater

bruh, why don't ortholarpers ever write shit down? oh what's that, because if they had written anything down everyone would only mock and laugh at what would have been written? orthos are a funny larp, nothing more.

Is the Everyman's library edition of the bible any good?
I want the KJV translation to read as literature and I hate leather/thin bible paper

>>19771522
and turns out the Bible was right about the goyim
time to convert to Judaism or be a rightous noahide

>>19772605
>Is the Everyman's library edition of the bible any good?
no
learn biblical gebrew and greek

>>19772600
blessed webm

>>19772811
>trampling the vicar of christ
>not heresy
orthos are blocked from salvation, simple as. sorry that heaven's gates are closed to you bro, but maybe you should repent while there's still time.

>>19773553
>seething retarded papist

also, does anyone have that webm of the ortho bishop dipping an old chicken's leg in a bath and serving it to people?

>>19773560
heretic

>>19773567
>doesn't follow the original teaching of the church but later made-up bullshit
>calling anyone a heretic
hahahaha

>>19773592
no, i'm afraid you know nothing of church history or its teachings, you arrogant heretic. we'll see you burning for all eternity, and who will be laughing then.

>>19773619
Universalism is the authentic Catholic teaching so it doesn't matter who obeys the Pope and who doesn't.

>>19773619
>you know nothing of church history or its teachings
lol seems like neither do you

>>19772600
What the frig am I looking at?

>>19774182
Average Orthodox event.

>>19772353
Lmfao did any presents evolve under your tree on sciencemas eve? Did Neil Degrasse Tyson hide science eggs around your house after doing the computus? No.

>>19773592
>original teaching of the church but later made-up bullshit
*ahem*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christian
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Perspective_on_Paul
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-orthodox_Christianity

>>19773553
>>19773619
>>19773688
>Universal is true and everyone is saved
>Except Orthodogs and protties fuck em stupid uneducated retarded pieces of shit I hate them so much fuck fuck fuck
>Based Francis and Vatican II, peace love, ecumenism ;)

>>19774470
>We finally figured out Paul in the 1970s, we did it bros...

>>19774408
>It took until the 1970s but we finally figured out Paul... we did it bros....

>>19773553
>orthos are blocked from salvation,
St. Mark is in heaven right now according to the Vatican... Also RC thought allows essentially anyone to be saved by the invented heretical notion of "invincible ignorance".

>>19774408
>New Perspective on Paul

>The "new perspective" was started with E. P. Sanders' 1977 work Paul and Palestinian Judaism.
>Sanders identifies himself as a "liberal, modern, secularized Protestant" in his book Jesus and Judaism

>N.T. Wright has written a large number of works aimed at popularising the “new perspective” outside of academia.
>N. T. Wright is an English New Testament scholar, Pauline theologian and Anglican bishop. He was the bishop of Durham from 2003 to 2010.
>The Church of England has allowed priests to enter into same-sex civil partnerships since 2005.

>>19774408
>E. P. Sanders has conceded that Ephesians 2:9 teaches the traditional [Protestant] perspective.
haha

>>19774276

Orthodox Priests are all KGB agents lmao. There's a space going on on twitter right now and some eastern european guy was just like 'yeah, in the russian orthodox church most priests were informants for the KGB."
XD, bros, how fucking pozzed is ortholarpy?!

>>19774773
>some guy on twitter said a thing
Stop the press!

Is the Catholic anon an elaborate anti-Catholic troll? My assumption is he is attempting to drive people away from Catholicism by presenting it in the most negative possible light. He has the hatefulness and exclusivity of the trad stereotype combined with a full support of modernism and theological liberalism. It doesn't make any sense otherwise.

>>19774800
Also if that is what he is doing I support it and think he is doing a good job.

The afterlife confuses me. Are we supposed to go to Heaven, Sheol, or just sleep until the New Earth and New Heaven?

>>19772120
This. I wouldn't presume to know what God "should do", but my little mortal mind thinks bringing back bear attacks could do a lot of good.

>>19774800
>>19774821
I'm not interested in being 'persuasive', faggot. I'm interested only in stomping on ortholarpers. take it as you will, but I'm not the over-socialized goodie-good boy that you ortholarpers try so hard to be online.
>noooo, stop being a meanie people won't like you!
get wrecked faggot

>>19774193
Very much like the dead foot water. They are constantly doing retarded things.

>>19774843
See I would take this seriously if you were not in support of Francis and the VII paradigm, which entails a brotherly and ecumenical attitude toward both Orthodox and Protestants. So you're either retarded or a troll.

>>19772353
I recommend you actually take a serious look at Christianity, you'll be surprised. not protestantism, btw
>>19772605
maybe look into the Cambridge Paragraph Bible, it's easier to read if youre look for just literature
>>19772811
>>19773560
>>19773592
ortholarpies came back around for another beating eh?
>>19773716
it's called primacy of Rome. read acts
>>19774470
who are you quoting?
>>19774408
NPP is based af. nt wright's bio of Paul is worth a look.
>>19774571
wright himself is actually against gay "marriage" if I recall
>>19774531
anyone disputing invincible ignorance is a troll, full stop.
>>19774800
>>19774821
you realize there's more than one catholic poster right? i haven't even posted in the thread before this post. I live in your head rent-free. keep seeing me everywhere you look.
>>19774824
There is heaven, hell, and purgatory. Who goes where and when? we don't know. how does it happen? we don't know. traditionally, upon death, the soul exists the body and arrives for particular judgement. what happens after that is unclear. there's a lot of elaborate protestant theories but take eschatological certainty with a grain of salt.
>>19774843
for example, this guy who posts the christians/orthodox meme picture is not me.
>>19774852
again, that dude is not me. ecumenism means welcoming people but not false ideas. big difference. btw there's a happy medium between trad larping and the "spirit of vatican ii" which doesn't exist btw. if you actually read the conciliar documents you'll see they were surprisingly conservative. reform movements in the USA especially in the 70s went waaaaay out of hand, largely due to a lot of homosexual bishops and nuns (not kidding).

>>19771520
redpill me on this? where does one find this gospel

for my fellow catholic posters. here are some of my favorite catholic and christian magazines and sites I read often

Catholic World Report
Commonweal
Crisis Magazine
The Masculinist w/ Aaron Renn
U.S. Catholic
America Magazine

YT channels I like:
Word on Fire
Reason and Theology
Ascension Press
Pints with Aquinas

Other blogs worth checking out:
Deep Strength
Red Pill Christians (has a very prot. leaning approach though)
The Gospel Coalition (they're VERY Reformed and often post awful takes but they have some interesting content sometimes, plus I like to keep up with Protestant news as well)

Sites I don't like
National Catholic Register (basically a Vatican puppet organization)
National Catholic Reporter (radically liberal)
Aleteia and CNA and Crux and Our Sunday Visitor (Vatican puppets with no critical commentary)
OrthoChristian (puppet of Russian Orthodoxy, direct ties to Russian government)
Christianity Today (big media puppet)
Church Militant and the Pillar (Taylor Marshall Q-style radtrad larpers)
BustedHalo (meme-tier commentary)

Any other reading recs?

>>19775142
it's a gnostic gospel in the NH texts. really not worth the time. it's a sayings gospel with 90% of the other material found in the 4 gospels. it's gnostic because there's a few sayings where Jesus talks about "secret knowledge" but the gospel of thomas was written 200ish years after mark so it's not original.

>>19775120
Redpill me on the New Perspective on Paul? How is it based?

>>19775184
It's not, it's fake and gay.

>>19775184
>New Perspective on Paul
it's only really "new" to Protestants. NPP is close to the traditional understanding for Catholics and Orthodox on Pauline works.
N.T. Wright
>Paul, in company with mainstream second-Temple Judaism, affirms that God’s final judgment will be in accordance with the entirety of a life led – in accordance, in other words, with works.

Traditional, prots think that "works of the law" means like legalistic things taken to save oneself (i.e., doing works). NPP says Paul is critical of the works of the LAW - ie, the rules of the old Mosaic covenant law. Basically, the "new law" in Paul is not critical of good works, but critical instead of trying to be saved under the old covenant law of the Torah.

This has always been the traditional catholic/ortho view. From what I understand though, a lot of prots have a very uneasy relationship with the old covenant. There's a very huge strand of prot theology called "dispensationalism" which sees different covenants and laws and rules taking place at different points in history, including history after the resurrection. it's all quite complex but that's the basics of it from what I understand. most modern evangelicals are dispensationalist so the NPP was controversial even though it's not "new".

>>19775241
>Basically, the "new law" in Paul is not critical of good works, but critical instead of trying to be saved under the old covenant law of the Torah
Claimed by people who hope you don't actually read Paul for yourself.

>>19775120
>maybe look into the Cambridge Paragraph Bible, it's easier to read if youre look for just literature
What's good about it?
It seems to have bible paper so I'd want to avoid it

>>19775142
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/infancythomas.html
>>19775177
Close, but incorrect. What you're describing is the Gospel of Thomas, not the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. The Infancy Gospel version of Jesus portrays him as a dick, a bully, a violent, petulant child, showing off his powers and inflicting harm on others. We know from the Gospel of John that the miracle at Cana was Jesus's first miracle, so it naturally follows that this Infancy Gospel is gnostic bullshit.

Origen
>Anyway, will any man of sense suppose that there was a first day, and a second, and a third, evening and morning, without sun and moon and stars? and the first, as it were, even without a heaven? And who is so silly as to imagine that God, like a husbandman, planted a garden in Eden eastward, and put in it a tree of life, which could be seen and felt, so that whoever tasted of the fruit with his bodily teeth received the gift of life, and further that any one as he masticated the fruit of this tree partook of good and evil? And if God is also said to walk in the garden in the evening, and Adam to hide himself under the tree, I do not suppose that any one will doubt that these passages by means of seeming history, though the incidents never occurred, figuratively reveal certain mysteries. Moreover, Cain's coming out from the presence of God, if we give heed, is a distinct inducement to inquire what is meant by "the presence of God," and by a man's "coming out from" it. Why say more? They who are not quite blind can collect countless similar instances of things recorded as actual occurrences, though not literally true. Why, even the Gospels abound in incidents of the same kind. We read of the Devil taking Jesus into a lofty mountain, that from thence he might shew Him the kingdoms of the whole world and their glory. Who but a careless reader of these things would not condemn the supposition that with the bodily eye, which required a lofty height if the parts down below at the foot were to be seen, Jesus beheld the kingdoms of Persia, Scythia, India, and Parthia, and the glory of their rulers among men? And, similarly, the careful student may observe countless other instances in the Gospels, and may thus be convinced that with the historical events, literally true, different ones are interwoven which obviously never occurred.
On the Inspiration of Divine Scripture

>>19775334
I've read, it's obviously he is reacting against the Phariseeism of the day and mistaken Jewish Christians. Paul himself is never critical of "good works", he's critical of the Old Law of the Mosaic Covenant. Romans is basically about why the Torah is no longer needed, it's not really about "sola fide".

>>19775341
Paragraphs make the KJV easier to read

>>19775507
I overlooked the infancy part in the meme
>written in the 6th or 7th century
Yes, it can be avoided.

>Bible thread is first post in catalog
Feels great.

Threadgoers, how do you all put effort and will into starting something?
I want to read the Bible and also start on some other hobbies.
Any tips on getting a kickstart and mantaining effort?

Anyone here have the NRSV Life with God study bible? looks decent

>>19775570
Give yourself a second reason to read the Bible. Aside from "because you should" and besides "to understand your faith." For me, it was in order to understand all the literary allusions to the Bible in famous texts; by the end of reading the Bible, I had that, but more importantly, I built my faith.

>>19775621
What about other pursuits?

>>19775534
i find it easier to read when every verse is on a new line personally. paragraph symbol is good enough for me.

>>19775570
just spend 10 minutes every morning reading the bible you retarded coomer

>>19775570
get a physical bible so you don't have the distractions that come with reading on computers

>>19774848
I've seen that webm, same question, what the frig are they purportedly doing in these two videos?

>>19776094
The foot one is of schismatic Old Believers. Not sure about the other one.

>>19775534
>Paragraphs make the KJV easier to read
>t. homosexual
Verse by verse is what God intended. Reading any other way fails to create the proper psychological interaction.

>>19775570
>also start on some other hobbies
Enjoy Hell.

>>19776136
>you cant do anything but read the Bible
That's a new one

>>19776124
>that's not us us that's other us
All moot when you still pray to demons in disguise and outright disregard direct teachings and commands of Christ. Not only do you call your "leaders" by the title of "Father", but you kiss their man hands.

>>19775120
>reform movements in the USA especially in the 70s went waaaaay out of hand,
There's been no real move to correct this stuff for over 50 years now. It's seems absurd that it is not intentional. There is a Pope is there not? Is it not his job to deal with this?

>>19775532
Eph. 2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

How is that contorted to only mean works of Jewish law? That does not make sense. If you have done anything to merit salvation then you have done something in which you can boast.

>On this rock shall I found my church
does not mean
>Your Church is infallible and all they say are absolute truths, therefore you should abandon your conscience and blindly follow your 'fathers'

Fellas... how am I supposed to reconcile Hosea 11:9 with the trinity?

>I will not execute my fierce anger;
I will not again destroy Ephraim;
for I am God and not a man,
the Holy One in your midst,
and I will not come in wrath.

I had to check a Hebrew interlinear Bible just to make sure I was reading this correctly

>ki 'el anoki welo ish
>literally "For God I am and not man"

(This was what I get for deciding to listen to a Jew).

>>19774501
>>19774571
>>19774594
you retards didn't notice but my point was that catholicism is the heresy since christianity started out as Judaism with Jesus being the Jewish messiah, proto-orthodoxy was just one of the many competing sects that appeared later like the gnostics, but Paul and the gospels only make sense in the context of Judaism (for example the expression of the evil eye)

>>19775570
follow a lectionary daily reading plan with some commentary. morning evenings prayers take 10 minutes at most. maybe do it the last thing at night and first thing when you wake up.
>>19776124
I've forgot about the old believers schism, kek.
>>19776130
0/10
>>19776136
0/10
>>19776513
James 2:24

>>19776566
>James 2:24
The context of James is the evidence of faith. This also does not explain what Paul means, it just creates a contradiction if you believe James is speaking of justification in the same sense. Paul says it is not of works lest a person boast. So anything you do in which you can boast is something that is not part of justification. There's no logic in which good works are not part of that.

>>19775241
>a lot of prots have a very uneasy relationship with the old covenant
so do catholics apparently since they violate noahide laws with no issue (even when the apostles gave the direction to obey them in Acts), like eating bloody meat

>>19775510
>And, similarly, the careful student may observe countless other instances in the Gospels, and may thus be convinced that with the historical events, literally true, different ones are interwoven which obviously never occurred.
and just like that Origen's rejected the Scriptures

>>19776513
>Eph. 2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
>How is that contorted to only mean works of Jewish law?
It doesn't even mean works of Jewish law, Israel was also saved from Egypt by grace only and not their works, this isn't a new concept in Judaism or the Old Testament in general

>>19776590
Right, that's what I'm saying. That text cannot be squared with the New Perspective on Paul. Good works are something you can boast in if they merit salvation in any way.

>>19776548
>Fellas... how am I supposed to reconcile Hosea 11:9 with the trinity?
You aren't, Jesus too said the shema

>The first of all the commandments is,
>Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

Did he say God is one but actually three?

>>19776548
The essence of God is not a man. Christ taking to himself a human nature does not mix or impair the divine nature.
>>19776612
God being three in a different sense than he is one does not mean that he is not one.

>>19776496
This is not true. In the 1970s places like Georgetown were doing "clown masses" with tightropes, I wish I was kidding. Additionally that was time that, in the US especially, a lot of african american gospel music was forced into the mass by liberal bishops.

in 2001 Liturgiam authenticam was issued and it revised the translations to be more accurate, cracked down on "freewheeling" and generally was a big improvement. additionally Musicam sacram and Sacrosanctum concilium actually "require" the preservation of Gregorian chant, use of Latin at times, and gives options for ad orientem. Basically after 2001 the original dictums have started to be taken very seriously. The new generation of seminarians are very traditional - this was also when the crackdown on sex abusers and open homosexuals in the clergy kicked into gear. the use of certain hymns has been limited now too. there's a robust traditional post-V2 university movement in the USA too (CUA, Franciscan, St. Thomas, University of Dallas, etc).

radtrad ism was a reaction to the crazy stuff that went on in the 60s and 70s. Traditionis custodes crackdowns on that, since it's not longer needed really. Honestly, if you go to an urban catholic parish today, you will probably encounter chant and use of latin and sacred hymns at some point in the mass now. hell, even my suburban parish uses latin now.

basically the situation is a lot better. yes, there's exceptions. some dioceses are known to be hyper liberal (chicago, washington). but, on the whole, it's improved.

>>19776531
>"That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." actually means "That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it except for 1400 years from now when the gates of hell shall prevail against it and my true church will be one of fourty-thousand splinter groups, though which one, I shall not say."
>"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." actually means the Spirit of truth will guide you into all truth until I decide to stop guiding you into all truth 1400 years from now and pick some other church to guide into the truth
k cool story bro

>>19776513
>Protestants claim that we are “justified by faith alone”—saying good works are unnecessary for Christians in the process of justification. This misconception is rooted in the misinterpretation of a few key texts, usually Romans 3:28: Romans 4:5 is another. On the surface, St. Paul seems to be saying works are not necessary for our justification or salvation in any sense, but that is not the case when we examine the context of these passages. Not only would this interpretation contradict the words of James 2, but it would also contradict Paul himself.

>Paul made very clear in Romans 2:6-8 that good works are necessary for attaining eternal life, at least for those capable of performing them: “For he will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury.”

>So what about the fact that Paul also said we are “justified by faith apart from works of law?” He was writing to a church in Rome struggling with a very prominent first-century heretical sect known today as the “Judaizers.” These heretics taught that belief in Christ and obedience to the New Covenant was not enough to be saved. A man also had to keep the Mosaic Law (which, according to Hebrews 7:11-12, has been superseded in Christ) and be circumcised in order to be saved (cf. Acts 15:1-2). Paul gave us one clue—among many—that he had this sect in mind when he wrote in Romans 2:28-29, “For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true circumcision something external and physical. He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal . . . ” Paul told us in Colossians 2:11-12 that this true “circumcision of Christ” is baptism. It is in this context that Paul says we are “justified by faith apart from works of law.” He did not in any sense say that works are unnecessary. He specified works of law because these were the works without which the Judaizers were claiming one “cannot be saved.”

>The Catholic Church has never taught we “earn” our salvation. It is an inheritance (Galatians 5:21), freely given to anyone who becomes a child of God (1 John 3:1), so long as they remain that way (John 15:1-11). You can’t earn it but you can lose the free gift given from the Father (James 1:17). The choice is to believe the Church and its teaching about this going back to the time of the apostles or to accept the teaching of a man who wanted to “protest” the Church’s teaching with a different interpretation of scripture and going so far as to add the word “alone” to the bible. We all have to decide. With a bit of study and logic, the choice is clear.

>>19776570
>This also does not explain what Paul means
To understand what Paul means you need to consider the new testament was not the Scripture they were talking about and that he was the equivalent of a rabbi by all accounts
https://youtube.com/watch?v=WDkUc5Kq1RY

Further, there is always the problem of the composition of the New Testament, but even in the New Testament it says everything should be put to the test against the Scripture (Old Testament) and if something contradicts it, it should be discarded
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannine_Comma

>11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
>12 As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.

>>19775570
>Threadgoers, how do you all put effort and will into starting something?
fear of heaven
would you be lazy under constant surveillance of men? so why not under God's?

>>19776572
>he is unironically a "jewish christian"

oh nononononono!
imagine being BTFO by a dude writing 2000 years ago.
read Romans.

>>19776584
>it was literally real bro!
>what do you mean here is evidence it wasn't literally real!
>that means it also cannot be figuratively real!

I guess you are not a "man of sense", as Origen puts it.

>>19776570
>>19776590
>>19776597

see >>19776668

>>19776659
>That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church
meaning congregation, peter was the chief rabbi

>Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth
meaning the ruach hakodesh

>>19776682
>read Romans
no, I'm not a paulinist, Torah has precedence over anything that may have been attributed to Paul

>>19776688
oh yes, the science men are the "men of sense"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Parsons_(rocket_engineer)

I can't wait for the day earth is revealed to be flat and young so all those heresies are destroyed one by one

>>19776693
Stop cutting verses in half to serve your aims. Quote the whole text, Shlomo.

>>19776699
>The modern Judaizing Cults, that seek to bring the law of Moses "jot and tittle" into the Faith, misinterpret Matthew 5:17-20 by missing out the meaning of what might be referred to as "the two great untils" and say the correct interpretation is that the archaic and anachronistic old law of Moses is here today, until "all be fulfilled" that is every single prophecy about the kingdom and Messiah and his people, ignoring that Jesus specifically interpreted what he meant in Luke 24 using the exact same expression "These are the words which I spoke to you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me". This Hebrew Roots or Judaizing cult, that is essentially a modern form of the Galatians heresy, is described as "the doctrines of devils" cult in 1 Tim 4:1-4. The interpretation is exceptionally heretical, as the old law was violent and draconian.

>radical "Jewish Christian" protestant enters the thead

that's a new one! we have the resident KJV-only pentecostal, the "non-denominational" Calvinist evangelical, the Calvinist Orthodox Old Believer, what other interesting characters will appear?

>>19776624
>God being three in a different sense than he is one does not mean that he is not one.
it does mean that unless you're speaking in the sense of kabbalist thought where there is a kind of primordial God who passes through the 10 sephirot and then manifests itself as YHWH

>>19776709
>I can't wait for the day earth is revealed to be flat
1/10, you were doing a bit good there

>>19776612
Seeing as how you are very likely a Jew... I have a simple question:

Why do Jews have such a problem with the concept of the Eucharist? One Jew told me that the idea of the Messiah dying (before triumphing) is totally foreign to Jews. Also ritual cannibalism is apparently "against the Torah."

Now here's my response to that: It ISN'T cannibalism because Jesus ISN'T dead. He's very much alive. So all we are asking is for Jews to consume the flesh and blood of a living creature. Where's the issue, Jews?

>>19776624
I'm with you, and here is where I get confused. Christ took on a human nature... and in that human nature he repeatedly called Himself "the Son of Man" (nearly 90 times in the gospels, more than any other phrase). How am I supposed to reconcile this with the trinity?

>Jesus is God
>Jesus is also the Son of Man
>therefore God is the Son of Man
>this implies that God is a creation of man

This uncomfortable paradox is an unavoidable conclusion... and one that many Christians ignore. Most people assume that "the Son of Man" is a reference to Daniel 7. Well if that's the case then I'm *even more confused* about the whole thing:

"I was watching in the night visions,
And behold, One like a Son of Man,
Coming with the clouds of heaven!
He came to the Ancient of Days,
And they brought Him near before Him." (Daniel 7:13)

Tradition has long said that the Ancient of Days is God (YHWH). So if the Ancient of Days is God (YHWH), then how can "one like a Son of Man" also be God? Are there any Jews (outside of Christianity) who interpret BOTH figures to be God?

>>19771510
That was Yaldaboath's doing. Most people misunderstand the nature of the material world.

>>19776724
me

>>19776724
The one who doesn't worship Yaldaboath and his Archons but seeks the Pleroma.

>>19776668
>So what about the fact that Paul also said we are “justified by faith apart from works of law?” He was writing to a church in Rome struggling with a very prominent first-century heretical sect known today as the “Judaizers.”
ah yes hereticals like James the just along with others apostles who actually walked with Christ, those were the judaizers
https://en.l.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christian

>These heretics taught that belief in Christ and obedience to the New Covenant was not enough to be saved.
More or less correct depending on what is meant by "new covenant", according to Christ himself

>“Abraham is our father,” they answered. “If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do what Abraham did.

>Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

>21Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
>22Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’
>23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’

>Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Continuing

>A man also had to keep the Mosaic Law (which, according to Hebrews 7:11-12, has been superseded in Christ)
Hebrews 7:11-12 in no way affirms that, it just illustrates the well know concepts of emunah and bitachon of Judaism. Notice all the examples Paul gives are not merely belief, but an action, meaning, they obeyed the word of God. He is saying faith is gasoline, your body is a car and the law is the map.

>and be circumcised in order to be saved (cf. Acts 15:1-2).
This was never required for non jews to be saved, this was only required for jews to be jews and such be able to keep all the law, Paul wasn't wrong in correcting them

>Paul gave us one clue—among many—that he had this sect in mind when he wrote in Romans 2:28-29, “For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true circumcision something external and physical. He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal . . . ”
Correct, this is the judaic understanding, so much so that if you are violating Shabbat you are not considered a jew anymore until you repent, other jews can lend you money with interest like you are a goy

>Paul told us in Colossians 2:11-12 that this true “circumcision of Christ” is baptism.
Doubtful, likely a later interpolation like the woman taken in adultery in John. The baptism is just the mikveh, which is a form of ritual cleaning from the old testament.

Allowed myself to be overcome with anger and pride and spent an hour arguing on 4chan. I feel sick now. This is horrible.

>>19776718
>and say the correct interpretation is that the archaic and anachronistic old law of Moses is here today
yes, unfortunately it's not followed, seeing by the number of trannies and faggots being protected and elevated to the high places of governemtn and media

>until "all be fulfilled" that is every single prophecy about the kingdom and Messiah and his people
in case you haven't noticed revelations did not happen yet so yes, not all were fulfilled

>ignoring that Jesus specifically interpreted what he meant in Luke 24 using the exact same expression
Yet in Zechariah it's said the people who don't celebrate Sukkot, one of the festivities of the old testament, will not get rain.

It's even more curious when you consider christians celebrate christmas (with christima trees and all that, dressing in red on parades) but they don't even dare celebrating the festivities Christ celebrated (e.g. John 7 where Christ celebrates Sukkot)

I think I said plenty already

>>19776745
>Why do Jews have such a problem with the concept of the Eucharist
prohibition of consuming blood, specifically eating blood, this goes since Noah

>One Jew told me that the idea of the Messiah dying (before triumphing) is totally foreign to Jews.
It was a surprise to me to learn the Jewish messiah as orthodox rabbis describe is supposed to somewhat die before returning, I don't remember the details but I thought it was very similar to Christ's history. Yaron Reuven has some videos about the messiah if you want more details on it.

So no, the idea isn't that foreign.

>Also ritual cannibalism is apparently "against the Torah."
Any type of cannibalism

>It ISN'T cannibalism because Jesus ISN'T dead. He's very much alive. So all we are asking is for Jews to consume the flesh and blood of a living creature. Where's the issue, Jews?
Congratulations for playing yourself, because one of the laws for both jews and noahides prohibits eating the part of any animal that is still alive, let Aline of humans.

>>19776745
>Tradition has long said that the Ancient of Days is God (YHWH). So if the Ancient of Days is God (YHWH), then how can "one like a Son of Man" also be God? Are there any Jews (outside of Christianity) who interpret BOTH figures to be God?
You should look for sefaria.org commentary on Daniel 7, specially Rashi's and Rambam's

>>19776826
go kill yourself gnostic, be consistent with your hate for creation and acheive gnosis (ignore every time wisdom is presented as a character in the old testament though, you light have turned to Judaism)

>>19776885
you shouldn't regret doing a mitzvah (least you lose all your credits in heaven), fighting for God is an obligation, even if you're misguided about the true religion

try reading this letter every week
https://www.sefaria.org/Iggeret_HaRamban?lang=en

>>19776992
It wasnt done in religious duty. It was done because I wanted to make an anon feel like an idiot. Truly horrible.

I'm trying to become more humble, but it feels like pride is deeply rooted in my personality and way of thinking. I've been praying the Jesus Prayer throughout the day and reciting Mark 9:24 at times in order to combat my pride. Anyone have any good scriptural readings or other works by church fathers that would help me?

>>19776955
Are Christians Noahides, though? Doesn't Genesis 9 only apply to literal descendants of Noah (i.e. Jews)?

>"1 So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. 3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs. 4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood." (Gen 9:1-4)

>>19776958
I'll take a look at their commentaries. But looking at this translation (on Sefaria.org) has me wondering: am I looking at a translation of the Masoretic text? By native Hebrew speakers? Because I'm only interested in the Masoretic text (I hear that it's the most authoritative version of the original Hebrew).

I'm only asking this because Sefaria's version of Daniel 7 reads so differently to the Christian translations I am most familiar with (NRSV, NKJV, ESV, NIV). This is despite the fact that they are all (presumably) translating from the Masoretic text. So... why all the differences?

>In the first year of King Belshazzar of Babylon, Daniel saw a dream and a vision of his mind in bed; afterward he wrote down the dream...
>As I looked on,
>Thrones were set in place,
>And the Ancient of Days took His seat.
>His garment was like white snow,
>And the hair of His head was like lamb’s wool.
>His throne was tongues of flame;
>Its wheels were blazing fire.
>A river of fire streamed forth before Him;
>Thousands upon thousands served Him;
>Myriads upon myriads attended Him;
>The court sat and the books were opened.
>As I looked on, in the night vision,
>One like a human being
>Came with the clouds of heaven;
>He reached the Ancient of Days
>And was presented to Him.
>Dominion, glory, and kingship were given to him;
>All peoples and nations of every language must serve him.
>His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away,
>And his kingship, one that shall not be destroyed.

Okay so without reading ANY commentary... it seems quite clear to me that the Ancient of Days is God. I mean, who else would be sitting on a throne, and attended to by myriads of angels

>>19776849
>>19776915
>>19776955
>>19776958
>>19776992
just so you know, you may consider yourself jewish but you're taking protestant sola scriptura positions which are not tenable. you're not wrong per se in some of the things you say but others are a bit off point.

> Old Testament law, as such, is not binding on Christians. It never has been. In fact, it was only ever binding on those to whom it was delivered—the Jews (Israelites). That said, some of that law contains elements of a law that is binding on all people of every place and time. Jesus and Paul provide evidence of this in the New Testament.
[A Pharisee lawyer] asked him a question, to test him. “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?” And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets.” (Matt. 22:34-40)
>The solemnity of our Lord’s opening pronouncements and his clear intention of inaugurating a new religious movement make it necessary for him to explain his position with regard to the Old Testament law. He has not come to abrogate but to bring it to perfection, i.e. to reveal the full intention of the divine legislator. The sense of this “fulfilling" is the total expression of God’s will in the old order. Far from dying the old moral order is to rise to a new life, infused with a new spirit. Jesus perfects the law, so important in Jewish daily life, by revealing its pedagogical meaning through a divine interpretation: What comes out of a man is what defiles a man.
Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath; his disciples were hungry, and they began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. But when the Pharisees saw it, they said to him, “Look, your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath.” He said to them, “Have you not read what David did, when he was hungry, and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God and ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? Or have you not read in the law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are guiltless? I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. For the Son of man is lord of the Sabbath.” (Matt. 12:1-8)
>Clearly, Jesus indicated that he—not the Old Testament—had authority over the Law, and its regulation was not as rigid as the Pharisees and Jews thought. In fact, once Jesus would endow the hierarchy of his Church with his own authority (Matt. 16:19; 18:18), regulation of worship would become the domain of the Church alone.

>>19776849
>>19776915
>>19776955
>>19776958
>>19776992
>In the Torah, God gave Israel certain practices that pertained to the whole nation. These included the tabernacle—which would eventually give way to the temple—as well as the animal sacrifices performed there. If people today want say to that the Church has not replaced Israel, what would it mean to claim that these laws have not been superseded?Surely we can’t say that Jewish people still need to perform animal sacrifices. The New Testament makes it clear that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross has made those obsolete, and the Eucharist has taken their place as an ongoing rite. From a Christian point of view, the temple and its sacrifices must have been superseded in some sense.

>Today it is clear that, on the one hand, these ordinances served the protection of Israel’s identity in the great scattering among the peoples. On the other hand, the abolition of their binding character was the condition for the emergence of worldwide Christianity from the Gentiles. As they are presented in the Torah, the ritual practices were ever binding only on the Jewish people, and the New Testament makes clear that circumcision, kosher laws, and other such norms are not binding on Gentile Christians. But what about Jewish Christians?

>The New Testament indicates that Paul did not see himself as being under the Jewish law, but he sometimes con-formed to the Jewish law to evangelize Jews, nor does Jesus uphold the traditional Pharisaic interpretation of the old law. Evidently, Jews are permitted to observe Torah as a cultural practice—as a way of retaining their identity as a people—but they are not religiously required to do so.

>The Old Covenant has never been revoked. (CCC 121). Such expressions emphasize the continuity of God’s special relationship with the Jewish people, but the phrase is rather imprecise, for God doesn’t make a single covenant in the Old Testament. He makes several.

>Which one, then, is being spoken of? The most likely two would be the covenant God made with Abraham and the one he made with Moses. (The covenants with Noah and David are less likely candidates, as they weren’t with the whole of God’s chosen people at the time.) The Mosaic covenant is the one that most naturally would come to mind, but, from a Christian point of view, elements of it have clearly and obviously been superseded.

>>19777183
the LXX is older than the MT and holds authority over it.

>>19777183
>>19776745
The Trinity is highly complex and it's hard to justify the doctrine in short posts here. It's probably the most difficult Christian doctrine to defend, just so you know.

Here are some reading links if you're interested.

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/explaining-the-trinity
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/defending-the-trinity
https://www.catholic.com/qa/why-the-trinity-is-three-persons
https://www.catholic.com/qa/isnt-holy-trinity-christian-polytheism
https://www.catholic.com/qa/can-you-explain-the-trinity-in-plain-language
https://www.catholic.com/qa/was-the-trinity-ever-contemplated-expected-imagined-prophesied-or-talked-about-before-the-time
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/its-ok-not-to-understand-the-trinity

>>19777251
>https://www.catholic.com
Based.

>>19777183
>Are Christians Noahides, though?
every single human is a noahide bro

>Doesn't Genesis 9 only apply to literal descendants of Noah (i.e. Jews)?
unless your ancestors somehow survived the flood you are a descendant of noah

>>19776955
Noahide "laws" are a Haredi Jewish Talmudic invention in the 1990s.

>>19777187
>Old Testament law, as such, is not binding on Christians
It is but only the parts given to Noah, Adam, and the ethical laws like honoring your parents which can be derived logically. The mount Sinai law per se isn't an obligation to non jews according to Judaism.

In a Christian perspective it seems the entire law does apply to gentiles since that is how the sacrifice of Christ works, blood for blood, like described in the Torah, thus cleaning both jews and gentiles sins.

>That said, some of that law contains elements of a law that is binding on all people of every place and time
Yes, the noahide law code.

Noahides can keep 99% of the jewish law if they want, one of the reasons to eat kosher, for example, is to keep yourself pure, which means you will be able to learn Torah easier, as there isn't a barrier of sin (violation of the law) hindering your comprehension.

>“Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?”
Interestingly one of the Jewish sages, Hillel, who died 10 years after Jesus was born, gave a similar answer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillel_the_Elder
>a prospective convert who asked that the Torah be explained to him while he stood on one foot, illustrates the character differences between Shammai and Hillel.
>Shammai dismissed the man. Hillel gently chastised the man, saying: "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn."

>On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets
Which means these 2 statements are the basis of all the law and prophets, yet they don't give you the details, James points this out
>In fact, this is love for God: to keep his commands. And his commands are not burdensome

So the first command is obeying the Torah, which protestants (from my experience with evangelicals) do not care to do and catholics do not seem to focus much on (just some like regarding sex, and even then I've seen catholic teens say anal doesn't count), that is the advantage of judaism, they focus more than the other groups on Torah and any adept of orthodox judaism will become versed in the law and follow it, thus fulfilling the 2 fundamental commands. The issue with Judaism is the fact there is no temple anymore, so you could make the point of Jesus Christ being the messiah and being the only way to pay your sins with blood, as it happened in temple times. The problem is that you can also make a point of God forgiving your sins if you confess them to Him and repent, without any bloodshed. I've heard personal histories of people who repented the way Orthodox Judaism prescribes and it worked for them, one example
https://youtube.com/watch?v=0Ocomaajh90

Going back to James, it's interesting to note he is quoting the Torah
>Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach.

>>19777047
>>19777159
mussar helps
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLfeqUDL5aojZrpQEahwf0Jhxsc5mYJ3U0

I recommend watching this lecture series taking notes and listening to it as much as you can to remember how one should act

>>19777159
Read the Sayings of the Desert Fathers
they are big on humility

>>19776724
>"""V"""

>>19777461
nta, but is there a difference between the Alphabetical Collection and the Penguin version?

>>19776885
Don't whack off and make it even worse.

>>19777187
>Jesus perfects the law, so important in Jewish daily life, by revealing its pedagogical meaning through a divine interpretation:
not necessarily, the concept of "going beyond the letter of the law" already exists in Judaism, it likely already existed before Jesus too

>What comes out of a man is what defiles a man
Ah, but you see, he said "listen, and understand", which means he was not talking literally, but in parable, how could he not? Was he not criticizing the pharisees just moments before for violating the Torah? How could he then tell people to violate it just moments after? Of course he wasn't, and this is clear in Matthew 15
https://emmaus-group.org/2015/10/thus-jesus-declared-all-foods-clean-or-did-he/
https://www.jerusalemperspective.com/4572/

Though gentiles are under no obligation to eat kosher, I recommend though if you want to understand the Bible, because the food you eat becomes your blood, the blood being pure or not is important for spiritual matters

>Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath; his disciples were hungry, and they began to pluck heads of grain and to eat
Jesus explained it, I don't have much to add besides that Jewish law has leniencies and he wasn't working, he wasn't baking bread and neither were David, for example.

>And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless
This relates to the concept of measure for measure, mist likely the pharisees were guilty of violating the law (like Jesus says in Matthew 23), so accusing people, specially innocents, would do nothing to themselves besides bring their own condemnation, measure for measure.

>For the Son of man is lord of the Sabbath
On another ntoe gentiles are not allowed to keep the Sabbath according to most opinions in Orthodox Judaism, but they can celebrate Shabbat because of Genesis.

>Clearly, Jesus indicated that he—not the Old Testament—had authority over the Law
Or it could be some scribe added the last sentence, the new testament has many other examples or dubious passages, though obviously it makes sense for God Himself to do whatever He wants in Shabbat, though in that passage Jesus didn't violate Shabbat

>and its regulation was not as rigid as the Pharisees and Jews thought
It's not that it isn't rigid, but that it has many situations and contexts where one law may supersede another (like saving a life being more important than SOME laws), hence why an Oral Torah is essential, as well as carefull evaluation of the law as a whole (like some pharisees did, as opposed to others who not only didn't follow the Torah, but also just used it simply to accuse others of crimes)

>>19777221
>what would it mean to claim that these laws have not been superseded
the sages explain what it means, though entiles are not allowed to read the Talmud you can ask a good rabbi about it, he can give a much better explanation than me

>>19777221
>nor does Jesus uphold the traditional Pharisaic interpretation of the old law
pharisees were not the only jewish sect at the time, still the Oral Torah still existed and was the basis of many interpretations and decisions

>>19777226
not necessarily, there is the majoritarian approach to textual reconstruction for example

>>19777364
>Noahide "laws" are a Haredi Jewish Talmudic invention in the 1990s
not really, the apostles who walked with Christ were clearly jews and they knew about the noahide laws, like in Acts 15:20 is said
>Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.

Do you know what are the 7 basic noahide laws? There are more than 50 but these are the starting ones

>Do establish laws.
>Don’t curse God.
>Do not practice idolatry.
>Do not engage in illicit sexuality.
>Do not participate in bloodshed.
>Do not rob.
>Do not eat flesh from a living animal

Bible coming next Wednesday.

>>19777226
>the LXX is older than the MT and holds authority over it.
Does the RCC take this position? The above statement implies that the Jews changed their own scriptures in order to remove any potential references to Christ (as in Isaiah 7). That is a tough pill for me to swallow, honestly.

>>19777251
I will look into these, thanks. Really struggling right now desu.

>>19777401
Honestly, even though I was raised Christian... I am a hairs-breadth away from considering converting to Judaism... after having read most of the Bible. I love God first and foremost -- as Jesus Himself teaches -- and I cannot reconcile the NT with the OT.

There are so many reasons why I feel that way. For instance, when I read the gospels... I get the impression that Jesus would not agree with Paul on many points. Like... Jesus' last public teaching, as recorded in Matthew 25, plainly states that the Son of Man (Jesus) and His angels will judge ALL nations by a simple moral code: Treat the least among you as you would treat Jesus Himself (or one of His angels). If one read's Matthew from beginning to end... it's apparent that the Sheep in the Goats is the culmination of all of Jesus' prior teachings. So how can I ignore it in favor of Paul? Especially when this teaching is totally consistent with the OT?

What turns me off from Judaism that I don't want to get circumcised. When I read the Old Testament, I see getting circumcised as equivalent to taking on a Nazarite vow (i.e. optional and only applying to ethnic Jews). Even though I love God... I don't see why that procedure is necessary. This is one area in which I agree with Paul.

On the other hand, I can't be a proper Noahide because I was born gay... and that violates one of the Noahide laws. The RCC would reject me as well. What options are even left? I still love God, and I want to live according to Matthew 25 (as well as all other Noahide laws). But that's not good enough, apparently...

>>19777571
>Bible
Only it's KJB, anything else is a "bible".

>>19777587
>Does the RCC take this position? The above statement implies that the Jews changed their own scriptures in order to remove any potential references to Christ (as in Isaiah 7). That is a tough pill for me to swallow, honestly.
That's the exact position of Church historian Eusebius of Caesarea in his Chronicon in the 4th century:
http://www.attalus.org/armenian/euseb7.htm
>Our [Septuagint] text and this Samaritan Hebrew text are in harmony regarding the number of years each man lived prior to fathering a son. They [both] diverge from the Jewish Hebrew version by 650 years, because, according to the latter, 292 years transpired from the flood until the first year of Abraham. The most ancient Hebrew text, which has been preserved in the Samaritan version, agrees with the Septuagint translation that these men from [the time of the] flood until [the time of] Abraham fathered sons when they were at least a hundred years of age. Then who would suggest that their descendants, who lived longer, had fathered children any sooner than the period provided in the Septuagint? Consequently, the rational conclusion is that the [figures provided in the] Jewish version from Adam to Abraham are in error, except for the three generations beginning with Jared, and that the Samaritan version is also in error, but only from Adam to the flood, because from the flood to Abraham [the Samaritan version] is in agreement with the Septuagint translation.
>Moreover it is obvious that the Hebrew Jewish version is incorrect from the fact that by its calculations Adam and Noah were alive at the same time--something which no other account proposes. If, according to the Jewish scriptures, there were 292 years from the flood until Abraham, and Noah lived an additional 350 years after the flood, it is clear that Noah was alive until the 58th year of Abraham. Furthermore it is possible to show that the Jewish version is unreliable in another way, because it says that the generations before Abraham were about 30 years old when they fathered sons, while it makes the generations after Abraham considerably older when they fathered sons.
>Thus it is patently clear that the Septuagint was translated from old and accurate Hebrew copies, and is the most appropriate text for us to use in our present Chronicle, especially since the church of Christ, which has spread throughout the world, supports only this version and since the apostles and disciples of Christ used and transmitted this version. In the Septuagint [version], 2,242 years transpired from Adam until the flood, and 942 years transpired from the flood until the first year of Abraham, making a total of 3,184 years.

>>19777587
>On the other hand, I can't be a proper Noahide because I was born gay... and that violates one of the Noahide laws
having the feeling of homo doesn't make you sin, acting on it does fren

a rabbi I learn from suggests, for homos, that they seek counseling from a rabbi who knows the field, and to use that desire (he says homosexuality is just a desire, you can use it for good or for bad) for a good way, try to find a really masculine woman and see if that works for you

>>19777587
>Jesus' last public teaching, as recorded in Matthew 25, plainly states that the Son of Man (Jesus) and His angels will judge ALL nations by a simple moral code: Treat the least among you as you would treat Jesus Himself (or one of His angels).
this one is hard for me since the least among me are usually niggers asking for money
I still don't know what should I do with them, I know they just use that money to buy drugs, the local government tells people to not give money to them, and the more I give the more of them show up in the area

>>19777630
>Noah lived an additional 350 years after the flood
At some point the discussion on "reliable" dates surely becomes a joke.

>>19777669
I'm with you on that being a tough one. But... Jesus was actually quite *radical* on the issue of "giving niggers money" (much to my chagrin). In fact, that instruction is hiding in plain sight... nestled within the Sermon on the Mount:

>38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ 39 But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile.
>42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you." (Matthew 5: 38-42)

NO ONE follows verse 42. Most Christians (rightly so) pretend like it doesn't exist. I would quickly go broke if I gave to all the beggars in my city. Same goes for loaning money to everyone. I would be just like the apostles in Acts:

>44 All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds[j] to all, as any had need. (Acts 2:44-45)

In the end we'd all be a community of beggars. And for those of us who wanted to still work... we would work simply to provide money to beggars, not for ourselves. Why work anymore at that point, you know?

>>19777587
>What turns me off from Judaism that I don't want to get circumcised
Neither do I, unless they return with the circumcision before the Greek period, which was much less damaging than the current one.

>I don't see why that procedure is necessary
There are many lectures of rabbis giving reasons for it using dialogues between pagans and jews, one of them is supposedly from Onkelos, a roman convert who supposedly was the nephew of Hadrian, essentially Hadrian asks him why not learn Torah without circumcision, Onkelos answers that

>even the wisest in the empire is incapable of learning their Torah without undergoing circumcision.
>Why it is impossible to acquire Torah wisdom and insight without first fulfilling the mitzvah of milah?
>The reason for that is because the Torah states clearly: “Zos Hatorah Odom Ki Yomus Buhoel” – “This is the Torah of a man who dies in a tent.” Reish Lakish derives from this verse: “Torah cannot exist except in a person who kills himself on her behalf.”
>By giving us the mitzvah of milah, Hkb”h wanted to teach us a vital lesson: if we wish to enter into a covenant with the Holy One, Blessed is He, we must be willing to serve Him even if it means enduring suffering and self-sacrifice.
>Therefore, only someone who has fulfilled the mitzvah of milah is able to acquire the Torah. For milah is the covenant between HKB”H and Yisroel, by which a Jewish man demonstrates that he accepts upon himself to serve Hashem through pain and the direst of circumstances.

Though since Torah is used interchangeably for the Oral and the written Torah, this doesn't mean you won't understand the Tanakh without being circumcised, but you need to put in the effort.

As for converting, you should learn all the Tanakh, Mussar and Halakah you can before thinking of that. Also Hebrew.

This could take a life time so don't worry about converting, even if you were to convert to become a jew, you would need to be keeping 99% of the things jews need to do anyway before circumcision, you need to consider carefully if you're prepared for the task.

And since you said you have homo desires, I believe it is a law for jews to have at least one girl and one boy, so I don't know how you would keep that as a gay, I could be wrong though

>>19777630
the problem continues when the dead sea scrolls disagree with both masoretic and septuagint

>>19771519
Sorry kiddo, but atheism is peak cringe. God is real, Bible is truth, and I love Jesus.

>>19777777
Checked!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>19777777
Checked and based

>>19777777
Christchads, i-...i-...I KNEEEEEEEEEEL!!!!!!!!!

>>19777777
Atheistbros... what the FUCK is this????

>>19777777
Absolutely based

>>19777777
WITNESSED!

>>19777777
it's over.

>>19777707
>Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you." (Matthew 5: 38-42)
>NO ONE follows verse 42. Most Christians (rightly so) pretend like it doesn't exist. I would quickly go broke if I gave to all the beggars in my city. Same goes for loaning money to everyone.

In Judaism you're only obligated to give 10% of your earnings after expenses, 20% if you want to be extra righteous (this is the limit, above that is considered a sin if you don't provide for your family and yourself first). This is tzedakah.

According to some articles I read this is one of the jewish "secrets" to get rich. Many passages confirm this like in Proverbs 19 and 22, some I can't remember also attribute home protection for that act alone.

Personally I haven't been asked the past months to give money, but I will now if asked, but only 10% at most of what I earn if I haven't donated it to righteous causes already.

For beggars I try to give only food, food I would give to Christ, and also some addresses for churches and government social help.

I don't know if it's related to it, but the last time I did help a couple of beggars (one was white-ish so it was easier), my crypto portfolio increased by 5 times, I didn't invest much though unfortunately.

So verse 42 is very consistent with the old testament if you want to always have your requests listened by God.

>44 All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds[j] to all, as any had need
I read from an anon that this was because they knew what would happen in Rome those times (invasion of Rome, destruction of Judea, etc.), so technically acquiring liquidity (getting cash) was the best long term strategy for that moment, this is the Joseph investment strategy investment
https://youtube.com/watch?v=CJafuvqfzFo

So I think it does work to get richer, but you could do better than just give money directly

>>19777657
>>19777740
Luckily I am not full-blown homo. I am bi with a VERY strong leaning towards the same sex. Always been like that. Can't change it.

My extended family (Baptist) used to give me so much shit for this. It made me feel utterly worthless, like God Himself was rejecting me (and anyone like me). And I ultimately blamed the Jews for this (anti-gay) state of things. Yes, Paul says some anti-gay stuff... but Paul ultimately got his anti-gay stance from Leviticus.

This is the reason that I hated Jews when I was younger. I didn't buy into the Jew-hate I saw in the Gospels -- like in John 8:44 (which is quite frankly a dangerous passage, as is the rest of John 8). But I blamed Jews for making the world hostile to gays.

Over time, though, a number of things dawned on me:
1) Jews never asked for Christianity (or Islam) to take off
2) Jews have been royally fucked by Christianity (and Islam) more than anyone
3) Jews living today are NOT responsible for the actions of their ancestors -- contrary to what Jesus says in Matthew 23:35 (Matthew 23 is another dangerous chapter; like... how many innocent Jews have been murdered on account of "Woe to the Pharisees"?)

And yet I still can't let the Jews of this world completely off the hook for Leviticus 18:22. For one thing... it all hangs on the interpretation of a *euphemism* ("mishkevei issah"). Can anyone tell me what "mishkevei issah" means? No, they can't... because no one really knows... and it literally only occurs in 2 places (Lev 18:22 and Lev 20:13).

Furthermore, the rest of Lev 18 relies on interpreting a euphemism: "uncover nakedness." This euphemism makes absolutely no sense in Genesis, when we are told that Ham "uncovers Noah's nakedness." And so Noah looks like a total monster for cursing his son (what's the harm in seeing your parent naked; it's bound to happen)?

Well, at least in the case of "uncover nakedness" we get some clues from Leviticus 18, that this is probably a euphemism for "having sex." Suddenly, then, Noah's reaction doesn't seem so utterly unreasonable.

However, there's still the issue of "mishkevei issah." What does it mean? Like... Lev 18:22 sounds like total, ungrammatical nonsense when interpreted literally:

>we'et zachar lo tishkav mishkevei issah toevah hi
>and with male no lying down bed woman taboo it is

Yes, I am furthermore claiming that "taboo" is the more honest translation of "toevah" (another word that no one honestly knows the precise meaning of)... and I am far from alone in thinking this way. And to see why "taboo" fits, we only have to look at Leviticus 11... which is entirely about clean (kosher) and unclean foods. Like... eating pork isn't objectively an "abomination." It's quite simply a "taboo" to the Jewish people.

And yeah, it honestly pisses me off that 1/10 people on this planet are LGBT (at birth)... and we're deciding to ruin their lives based on some ambiguous passages in Leviticus. The Jesus of Matthew 25 would be horrified.

>>19777777
>In the Hebrew, the word ‘seven’ is translated as sheva. It is from the root savah, which means to be full or complete or satisfied, to have enough of, to be perfect.

>On the 7th day God rested from His work of Creation
>The 7th month was specially hallowed by its number of feats
>The 7th year was the Sabbath year of rest for the land; while 7 x 7 years marked the following year as the Jubilee
>The Bible has 7 major divisions
>There are 7 men in the Old Testament who are specifically mentioned as a man of God
>God gave Abraham a 7-fold blessing
>During the Feast of the Atonement, blood was sprinkled 7 times before the mercy-seat by the High Priest
>There are 7 names mentioned in the titles as the authors of the Psalms
>In the book of Hebrews, written by the apostle Paul, he uses 7 titles to refer to Christ
>In Matthew 13, Jesus is quoted as giving 7 parables
>7 Psalms are ascribed to David in the New Testament
>There are 7 annual Holy Days in the Old Testament
>Jesus performed 7 miracles on the Sabbath
>Jesus made 7 statements from the cross
>There are 7 colors of the spectrum and in the rainbow
>In music, there are 7 notes of the scale
>In nature and science, there are 7 divisions of classification for the animal and vegetable kingdoms
>In time, there are 7 days in the week
>There are 7 ages of man according to Jewish tradition
>In Revelation, 14 words that have the number 7 preceding them: 7 churches, 7 candlesticks, 7 stars, 7 Spirits of God, 7 seals, 7 horns, 7 eyes, 7 angels, 7 trumpets, 7 thunders, 7 heads, 7 crowns, 7 plagues, and 7 golden vials full of the wrath of God.
>The first resurrection of the dead takes place at the 7th trumpet, completing salvation for the world

>Seven times a day do I praise you because of your righteous judgments (Psalm 119:164)
>The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times (Psalm 12:6)
>Seven priests shall bear before the ark seven trumpets of rams’ horns: and the seventh day you shall compass the city seven times, and the priests shall blow with the trumpets. And it shall come to pass, that when they make a long blast with the ram’s horn, and when you hear the sound of the trumpet, all the people shall shout with a great shout; and the wall of the city shall fall down flat, and the people shall ascend up every man straight before him (Joshua 6:2-5)
>Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times? Jesus answered, I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times (Matthew 18:21-22)

Do you guys have lists showing the best bible translations that we can buy at the moment?
I was thinking of getting pic related, no idea if it's a good edition.

>>19777777
hot damn I haven't seen quality digits like those in YEARS

>>19777498
Get Merton's collection
>>19777520
That quote clearly explains why it's superseded. You have no response besides pilpul "well you need to see a rabbi!". The cultic laws are clearly abolished, Jesus himself claims authority over the sabbath and its provisions. The Talmud has zero authority, and is a post-Roman cope to deal with the fact the temple was annhiliated.
>>19777524
Talmudic judiasism has nothing to do with Christianity. Have you ever actually read the Talmud? there are active curses on Jesus and his followers in the Talmud, esp. the Babylonian one. You cannot be a Talmud-follower and Christian, period. Jesus himself is the New Temple.
>>19777529
The Talmudic Masoretes did in fact modify the 1100 AD MT to obscure Messianic references; there's quite a few sites online to compare LXX and MT readings. The LXX is older by about 1300 years and is the original canon of the Christian church.
>>19777549
>Acts 15:20
Again, the Cultic laws are abolished and not in effect for Christians. If you reject the whole of the NT, you are not a Christian. period. you are something else but you are not Christian. Orthodoxy is inseparable from orthopraxy.
>>19777587
>The above statement implies that the Jews changed their own scriptures in order to remove any potential references to Christ.
Yes, not only did this happen, but the LXX is the older text, as I said. Jesus and the NT quotes from the LXX. The LXX was in widespread use in Palestine at the time. Greek was the lingua franca
>>19777587
Your mistake is to take a sola scriptura approach. Understood - nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Bible is the sole source of authority. Nowhere. Jesus established a Church, he established apostles and a priesthood, and he established sacraments. You really need to read a catechism. Reading scriptures from a single translation, without commentary from Church Fathers, is a recipe for historical illcontext and modern bias tainting of the text. All of this is extensively covered in previous Bible threads so I recommend you read those (chain of links in the OP post)

>The RCC would reject me if I was gay.
Incorrect. Again, read the Catechism and Paul. All Christians are called to chastity, including those with homosexual desires. Gay thoughts are not wrong. Lust, dwelling on it though actively, is. And so it active gay actions. But temptation in itself is not a sin.

>>19777404
>open one of these lectures
>it begins with a bunch of cinematic logos like a fucking capeshit movie
lol i like it

>>19777603
cope.
>>19777630
Eusebius is based but take his word with a grain of salt
>>19777669
you are obviously a seeker, I recommend you watch some intro videos here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVdGX3N-WIJ5nUvklBTNhAw
>>19777707
>Matthew 5: 42
The Sermon on the Mount is not only literal, it is also allegorical and aspirational (cut off your hand, etc). read about the senses of scripture.
>>19777740
>>19777587
are you guys Christians or larping as Jews? you have protestant theology but you're coming off as if you want to be jewish. you do know "jewish christianity" is a modern, ahistorical, abiblical, aecclesial protestant invention from about the 1960s in the USA from fundamentalist evangelicals right? i'm not kidding, you can look it up. it's a massive aesthetic larp with little theological depth, and it's self-contracting. I seriously recommend you read Paul. do not buy into the >le Paulineism is not le christianity! liberal modern cope. Paul was and is THE apostle. he has incredibly deep theology. hell, jesus himself appeared to him. do not dismiss paul. every position you're taking rn was extensively litigated in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD by theologians, you can read the early fathers yourself. the old law is NOT in force.
>>19777755
DSS agrees with LXX more than MT. scribal errors bt manuscripts are common anyway

>>19777833
>>19777834
again, the jewish cultic law (and subsequent talmudism) is NOT in force. see >>19777903
and >>19777889

You're coming from radical baptist protestant evangelical fundamentalist. that strain of thought is unfortunately by far the most numerous in the USA. it is also NOT the mainstream catholic/orthodox thought or practice or theology, not even close. gay thoughts passively =/= active gay actions. homosexuality is no different than masturbation - they are both disordered temptations as a result of the fallen nature. that's it. it's not a "hierarchy" of sins.

>it honestly pisses me off that 1/10 people on this planet are LGBT
false gay lobby stat btw.

the old covenant is violent and inhuman in many ways. its is provisional and meant to be abolished. in short, the entire jewish religion is abolished.

https://www.catholic.com/video/why-dont-christians-observe-jewish-dietary-laws
https://www.catholic.com/qa/if-jesus-was-a-jew-why-are-we-catholic
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/salvation-is-from-the-jews
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/why-we-are-not-bound-by-everything-in-the-old-law
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/ebionism
https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/judaizers
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/benedict-on-judaism-and-christianity
https://www.catholic.com/qa/does-the-jewish-religion-still-have-a-priesthood-today

Just got this. Should be here by Tuesday at the latest. Already have their GNT.

>>19777846
read the previous threads thru the op link - basically, for the LXX, the only good option is NETS rn. there's a few orthodox guys who post here sometimes who use the LES but im not a fan. NETS is based of the NRSV but it's the best we have rn. get a commentary to go along with it.

we really need to make a sticky pastebin with the best translations and commentaries by denomination. a lot of questions here could be helped by that

>>19771510
>cursed them in the name of the Lord
as in he said, "God damn them"?

>>19777925
>the only good option is NETS rn
I disagree based on the NETS mistranslation at Psalm 39 (40), translating from the MT instead of the Greek.

>>19777512
>Was he not criticizing the pharisees just moments before for violating the Torah? How could he then tell people to violate it just moments after?
He could because Jesus claims total authority over the sabbath. this is why he repeatedly violates prohibitions in the Torah on sabbath behavior.
>Though gentiles are under no obligation to eat kosher
no one is under obligation to eat kosher. the old covenant's cultic aspects have been abolished.
>because the food you eat becomes your blood, the blood being pure or not is important for spiritual matters
you're hasidim, aren't you? just curious
>Jesus explained it, I don't have much to add besides that Jewish law has leniencies and he wasn't working, he wasn't baking bread and neither were David, for example.
Jesus violated the sabbath. why do you think he was executed by the jews' order? anyway around this is cope.
>‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,
you are doing some serious pilpul to try and reconcile jesus' words and actions and your desire to keep the old cultic laws. they cannot coexist, period.

see the links here >>19777919
they are very indepth and address a lot of the errors you're making

>Or it could be some scribe added the last sentence
massive fucking cope. you did the same in the last post
>the sentences I agree with are true, but the ones I don't agree with are scribal errors!!
this is the logical endpoint of sola scriptura, lmao.
>the new testament has many other examples or dubious passages
yes, and it is clearly established what is pericope and what isn't. nice gymnastics though
>hence why an Oral Torah is essential
i am in disbelief you think the talmud is even remotely reconcilable with christianity.

>>19777925
Catholics already have picrel and KJB poster's infographic would be one Bible, so I guess others can step up to correct me. Off the top of my head, though, the Orthodox will probably bring up the OSB and the EOB, and the KJV NT, plus the LES and NETS; and other Protestants will bring up the NASB77/95, ESV, CSB, and maybe some others. Discussing denominational commentaries could be fun.

>>19777931
again, NETS is based off the NRSV which uses the MT based as all KJV lineage versions do

it's not optimal, but it's the best we have rn since it lists anytime the usual MT textual reading departs from the LXX in the notes and provides extensively historical and textual commentary.

it's a good current stopgap, I agree it's not optimal and I don't personally like using it.

>>19777945
Just so you know, I am a catholic and that infographic is quite questionable in places.

The DR and Knox recs. are fine (it should say to use the 1635 DR but that's not in print), but there are some serious problems with both the JB and the RSV2CE

JB: ultra dynamic. is a translation from French. that infographic doesn't note it uses "Yahwah" for adonai which is currently prohibited for catholic translations by the vatican. NJB is not "meh" - it has exceptional notes and is essentially a new translation as its not from the French, in fact its far better than the JB. the guy who wrote this infographic is obv a radtrad because he disagrees with the historiocritical notes.

no mention of the NABRE which is execellent and *the official bible of the catholic church in the USA*!

RSV2CE: many problems. no transparency with changes, is continually quietly revised, ignatius has been avoidant abt explaining translation philosophy, and it chooses some traditional renderings which are textually inaccurate (lead us not into temptation)

Haydock: completely outdated for the modern reader. no currently scholarship, never received bishop conference approval. New Jerome and New Catholic are better modern commentaries.

Didache and ICSB: again, RSV2CE. Highly polemical, both. very intro-level and they both remove textual notes to make the bible less "messy" (wrongly)

cathechism: recommends the 1997 edition and not the current 2020 update (probably due to anti-francis bias)

Again, that chart is seriously "rad trad" leaning and makes some awful recommendations under the guise of "fact".

>>19777947
>again, NETS is based off the NRSV which uses the MT based as all KJV lineage versions do
>it's not optimal, but it's the best we have rn since it lists anytime the usual MT textual reading departs from the LXX in the notes and provides extensively historical and textual commentary.
Why would you want an LXX translation based on the MT instead of...the LXX? That Psalm verse isn't a matter of the MT reading being in a note; it's a matter of the MT being in the text in place of the LXX reading, in a supposed LXX translation.

>>19777975
>NJB is not "meh" - it has exceptional notes and is essentially a new translation as its not from the French, in fact its far better than the JB.
And it was rejected by the Catholic Church, hence why it was never allowed to become the lectionary translation anywhere where the JB was used; the JB was succeeded in lectionary by the RNJB in the last 3 years, which uses horribly gimped notes and the print Bibles have been shown to be defective, with incomprehensible footnotes referring to text that's not there anymore or just attached to the wrong version.
>no mention of the NABRE which is execellent and *the official bible of the catholic church in the USA*!
No, it's not "excellent" [sic], but either way, there's no point in getting the NABRE now when the next revision is just 3 years away.
>New Jerome and New Catholic are better modern commentaries.
No, they aren't, and neither was the "Jerome" commentary. The CCSS and the Orchard CCHS are the best Catholic commentaries, though the latter is OOP. The ESVSB is mostly fine, too, as a non-Catholic.
>Again, that chart is seriously "rad trad" leaning and makes some awful recommendations under the guise of "fact".
til the Bible in a Year podcast priest is "rad trad" because he used the Ignatius.

>>19777975
>Didache and ICSB: again, RSV2CE. Highly polemical, both.
(And that's a good thing!)

>>19777777
Checked

>>19777975
>because he disagrees with the historiocritical notes
Just jumping into this thread to remind you that Q isn't real, 2 Peter is authentic, and Paul wrote Hebrews. With that, I'm out.

>>19777975
Ah, another Bergoglio worshipper praising modern scholastics and avoiding the Jew like always.

>>19778034
That's a piss poor reading of Aristotle considering that Aristotle expressly refutes the notion of God/Truth as Being when considering the idea of the universal against the real (substantial).

>>19777889
>Again, the Cultic laws are abolished and not in effect for Christians. If you reject the whole of the NT, you are not a Christian. period. you are something else but you are not Christian. Orthodoxy is inseparable from orthopraxy.
did you know the orthodox christians do follow those "cultic laws" in acts?

>>19777777
nicely done

>>19777846
>Do you guys have lists showing the best bible translations that we can buy at the moment?
https://freehebrew.hismagnificence.com/
https://www.sefaria.org/texts/Tanakh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblia_Hebraica_Quinta
https://www.die-bibel.de/en/shop/biblia-hebraica-stuttgartensia-5225

https://freegreek.hismagnificence.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novum_Testamentum_Graece
https://www.amazon.com/Holy-Bible-Testament-Greek-english-Dictionary/dp/3438051605/

>>19778097
>Nestle-Aland
cringe. get the THGNT

>>19778101
>THGNT
>A text of the Greek New Testament that is based on the most recent scholarship and is rooted in the earliest manuscript witnesses.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R28AALDJ90C8LX/

>>19777889
>nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Bible is the sole source of authority. Nowhere
>The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue. Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.

>>19777890
you have to see the kino he publishes sometimes

>>19777942
>Jesus violated the sabbath
https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/438/how-does-jesus-argument-from-david-and-the-showbread-work

Jesus and His disciples were not breaking Biblical law by plucking grains to eat and satisfy their hunger in the moment. The Sabbath law required some interpretation since it was general, and Jesus interpreted it as allowing the actions of Him and His disciples.

David's action was unlawful to eat the showbread, but he did claim to keep himself and men holy beforehand. God had mercy on David in this situation.

God permitted some types of work, priestly work, on the Sabbath, and even Rabbinical law accepted saving someone's life as permitted on the Sabbath, thus medical work for saving a life would be allowed by their strict interpretation.

Jesus states that He is greater than the Temple and Lord of the Sabbath, which only God can be. He is more capable of interpreting Sabbath law than the Pharisees.

>why do you think he was executed by the jews' order?
He said he was God, which he could be, likely, possibly, not denying it or anything.
https://jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/issues-v22-n08/the-messiah-would-be-god

>>19777549
This isn't the Noahide commandments, but the Code of Holiness from Leviticus.
Gentile converts to Christianity were not treated as "Noahides", but as Israelites. In fact many of them were already "Noahides", such as Cornelius.

>>19777942
The Church Fathers emphasized that Jesus did -not- break the Law. It is the unbelieving Jews who did not understand the Law of the new covenant. For instance, see St Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, Book IV, chapter VIII, where he argues against the Gnostic claim that Jesus and His disciples broke the Sabbath.

>>19777777
Holy

>>19776668
This does not answer my question. I want you to tell me specifically what this means:

>Eph. 2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

How does only refer to works of the Mosaic law? He says that the reason it is not of works is so that no one may boast. Are works of the Mosaic law the only works one could boast of? That does not make sense. This verse has to be squared away with everything else Paul writes or the interpretation you are putting forward is not consistent.

>>19776669
People do not reject the Johannine comma because it contradicts something, they reject it because it has poor textual evidence. Is it your contention that Ephesians is not scripture? If so I do not have any care to discuss this matter with you.

>>19776659
>the gates of hell shall not prevail against it
Tell me specifically what this means in a way that makes sense that the metaphor is a "gate".

>>19778204
>This isn't the Noahide commandments, but the Code of Holiness from Leviticus
it resembles a lot more what God ordered to Noah if you ask me
but if Leviticus was being ordered to gentiles, why would they limit themselves to just a few? go with the entire thing too

since timothy i think mentions the fact the law was read a the synagogue in every city and every week, it leads me to think they were progressively introducing the new members to jewish law

>>19778402
>People do not reject the Johannine comma because it contradicts something, they reject it because it has poor textual evidence. Is it your contention that Ephesians is not scripture?
why wouldn't it be?

What is the Catholic/Orthodox reason for why Jesus just calls Mary "woman" whenever he talks to her?

Why are there so many christians on /lit/? Basically every other board laughs at them.

>>19778591
Oh no, the guy that spends all day arguing about cartoon characters laughs at me, how mortifying.

>>19777777
Hail the holy digits!

Oh look, another day, another raft of news stories of murder, rape, greed, and hated. More disease, drought, volcanoes, childhood cancer.

>>19778595
says the guy arguing over imaginary beings in the sky

>>19778653

>>19777777
Based.

>>19777777
Excellent.

>>19778766
For Gnostics, the Pleroma is unfathomable. It lacks nothing and so wants nothing. It's only its emanations through Forethought, the Barbelo, that act (Sophia, Christ, etc.).

I'll grant, this is still a problem for them, but God as eternal and unmoving is also a problem for Plato-inspired orthodox Christianity holding Patristic doctrines, which most do.

Who are writers who explore the wrath of God without punting on it by calling it justice, or a form of love? I know of Boehme, and then Jung gets into it in his autobiography, which is interesting, but also not particularly fleshed out. I suppose Hegel's image of God, the Absolute, also has wrath and negatively, since it must have these to sublate them.

>>19777975
>no mention of the NABRE which is execellent and *the official bible of the catholic church in the USA*!
I do like that this version translates certain things honestly

Gen. 3:15
I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; They will strike at your head, while you strike at their heel.

Luke 1:28
And coming to her, he said, “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.”

>>19778653
>another raft of news stories of murder, rape, greed, and hated. More disease, drought, volcanoes, childhood cancer.
and all this because you couldn't control yourself, coomer

Deut 28
>However, if you do not obey the Lord your God and do not carefully follow all his commands and decrees I am giving you today, all these curses will come on you and overtake you: ...

>>19778829
>For Gnostics, the Pleroma is unfathomable. It lacks nothing and so wants nothing. It's only its emanations through Forethought, the Barbelo, that act (Sophia, Christ, etc.).
and i assume all this was discovered by gnostics through the scientific method and empiricism, using rigorous replication to verify results before furthering the exploration into other dimensions and planes of being?

or let me guess, it was all just drugs and fanfictions by hobos too lazy to live in reality?

>>19778870
They were around in late antiquity, so no, they didn't use the scientific method since it didn't exist. The scientific method isn't the only way to know things. Induction and empiricism alone is actually not a particularly good way to learn about the world. Do you think mathematics is advanced by people solving problems over and over and putting together theories about observations? Deduction drives advances in plenty of spheres. Empiricism helps vet new theories in physics, sure, but a lot of those theories are based on mathematics developed not using those methods.

Gnosticism is a super broad term that can mean "any group focused on a demiurge" or "Christians focused on Christ bringing enlightenment/deification, changing their essence and freeing them from material constraints/determinism." Not all "Gnostic" texts have a demiurge, Thomas for example does not. John is also considered a Gnostic gospel by some Gnostic scholars, has no demiurge, and is Canon. Certainly the Eastern Patristics deification teachings also flow with this, and exegesis on both letters to the Corinthians were used by Gnostics to support their claims. There were Jewish Gnostics too. Most people focus on the most radical departures from orthodoxy, the alternative Genesis stories in The Apocryphon of John and the Hypostasis of the Archons, but plenty of Gnostic texts are less challenging to orthodoxy. Gnostics existed within orthodox churches for a long time, a sort of extra study group for people interested in ontology and mysticism. It helped form later traditions such as Kabbalah and medieval forms of Hermeticism.

The cosmology is supposed to be symbolic. While most people point to Plato and Plotinus as the key influences for Gnostics, their ontology, the balance of emanations in the Pleroma, draws a lot more from Heraclitus and the idea of an ontological semiotics of opposites. Given their predilection for allegory, no, they wouldn't think people actually went to these places, observer them, and come back. Zostrionos, a book that tells that sort of story, is allegorical and symbolic.

People deeply misunderstand and simplify Gnosticism. They focus on the most extreme stuff, like Yaldaboath (Yahweh, the creator of the physical world) and his Archons (Angles who are essentially demons) gang raping Eve, which results in the birth of Cain and hylics, or Jesus bringing the fruit to Adam so that he can eat from the Tree of Knowledge to save, not condemn him. Yeah, that's wild. Yaldaboath also tries to gang rape Noah's daughter too. That's also not what most Gnostics believed. Gnosticism was actually deeply intertwined in the early church, a Gnostic was almost elected Pope. So, a deeper study actually sheds a lot of light on orthodox thought, and helped me understand its more esoteric doctrines.

>>19778870
Also, they didn't have access to good drugs, but documents we have suggest they rejected intoxicants. Gnostics trended ascetic. No sex, no drunkenness, lots of fasting and meditation. "The way out is in," sort of stuff. Sort of like the Anabaptists, or the Cathars (who they either influenced or who came to similar conclusions), they appear to have acted out Christian piety with more zeal than the mainstream church vis-a-vis giving up wealth, ignoring social distinctions, rejecting violence (Anabaptists mostly did this, but there is the travesty of Munster), etc. In return for this, the Church genocided them, or in the case of Anabaptists, Luther reversed on religious freedom and Protestants genocided them as soon as they called for an end to serfdom and sharing of agriculture.

>>19779106
>Do you think mathematics is advanced by people solving problems over and over and putting together theories about observations?
yes

>Gnosticism is a super broad term that can mean "any group focused on a demiurge" or "Christians focused on Christ bringing enlightenment/deification, changing their essence and freeing them from material constraints/determinism
I just have a problem understanding how these people found out about how to become a god through imagination alone

>>19779124
so they found out about the existence of other gods and other planes of existence by altering their mental state through fasting and meditation? is that roughly it?

>>19777777
Amen

>>19777777
Amen

The primary thing, on a practical level, keeping me from converting to Catholicism or Orthodoxy is the fact that I would have to confess all of my post-baptism sins to a priest. I was seriously considering converting at one point but once I learned this it made me despair and regret having been baptized. I think I could accept the doctrine of confession if I had a clean slate to start with, that is, if I were to enter and be baptized, but that is impossible since both churches would accept my baptism.

Catholic bros - I have so many Audible credits and want to use them up so I can cancel the account - can you recommend any good Catholic audio books I should get? I have read St. Augustine's Confessions, Mere Christianity. Maybe something that explains the various bible version controversies, or just some other philosophical stuff. Please provide any suggestions you may have, god bless.

>>19771510

take the Nahum pill
his books is short, but he is the best poet in the bible


11 Where now is the lions’ den,
the place where they fed their young,
where the lion and lioness went,
and the cubs, with nothing to fear?
12 The lion killed enough for his cubs
and strangled the prey for his mate,
filling his lairs with the kill
and his dens with the prey.

13 “I am against you,”
declares the Lord Almighty.
“I will burn up your chariots in smoke,
and the sword will devour your young lions.
I will leave you no prey on the earth.
The voices of your messengers
will no longer be heard.”

3 Woe to the city of blood,
full of lies,
full of plunder,
never without victims!
2 The crack of whips,
the clatter of wheels,
galloping horses
and jolting chariots!
3 Charging cavalry,
flashing swords
and glittering spears!
Many casualties,
piles of dead,
bodies without number,
people stumbling over the corpses—
4 all because of the wanton lust of a prostitute,
alluring, the mistress of sorceries,
who enslaved nations by her prostitution
and peoples by her witchcraft.

5 “I am against you,” declares the Lord Almighty.
“I will lift your skirts over your face.
I will show the nations your nakedness
and the kingdoms your shame.
6 I will pelt you with filth,
I will treat you with contempt
and make you a spectacle.
7 All who see you will flee from you and say,
‘Nineveh is in ruins—who will mourn for her?’
Where can I find anyone to comfort you?”

.
.
.
18 King of Assyria, your shepherds[b] slumber;
your nobles lie down to rest.
Your people are scattered on the mountains
with no one to gather them.
19 Nothing can heal you;
your wound is fatal.
All who hear the news about you
clap their hands at your fall,
for who has not felt
your endless cruelty?

>>19778540
They don't know that, they don't read the Bible.

>>19779190
Well, that isn't how mathematics works. Go study math and mathematicians if you want confirmation of this.

A lot of physics also starts with deduction, then uses empircism for vetting. Though to be sure, some shit like the more recent statistical "solution" to multiple body problems works by just pulling in a fuck ton of observation.

>>19779206
Pretty much. Which would be observation based, empiricism. However, a lot of that stuff is symbolic, while some is almost certainly made up LARP.

>>19777846
I wanted to get that but lots of the Amazon reviews mention it not being the full Apocrypha.

I am repulsed by liberal humanist "scholars" who talk about how much they like the Bible because it is so "powerful" and a "deep psychological truth about the human condition".
Reducing the Holy Scriptures to a cheap self-help book.
Even an edgy atheist is more tolerable because at least he doesn't try to sugarcoat his hatred for God.

>>19779812
Are you ashamed of confessing your sins?
What is your issue with confession?

>>19780202
I didn't take being baptized seriously (on a symbol) and did not make much attempt to avoid sin afterwards, then I fell away for a good while. I think I could accept the concept it self if I were operating off of a clean slate, I would think about these things before sin and take it more seriously, but having to try to go back and enumerate everything to some degree, especially sexual matters, makes me feel hopeless.

>>19780265
>only* a symbol
That is to say I was baptized by Baptists

>>19777777
Holy shit I kneel

>>19778519
Because those commandments are given not only to "the children of Israel" or "the house of Israel" but also to "the strangers who dwell among you".

Catholics believe this

>>19780745
Yes, they are Babylonians.

>>19780745

>>19780799
Source is "The Glories of Mary". All of these are from the first 20 pages and the book is over 600 pages long.

>the anti-Christian poster starts spamming again
Many such cases.

>>19780819
>christcuck forgot his meds again

>>19780807
>He *owes* to Mary
Well, there goes my robes, torn.

>>19780523
>also to "the strangers who dwell among you".
that means converts, not just gentiles living around

>>19780819
None of this nonsense about Mary is Christian.

>>19777777
We're reaching levels of BASEDness that should not be possible

>>19777777
Atheists BTFO for all eternity.
>So is it written in the dubs of our ancestors

https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/the-river-of-fire-kalomiros/

I don't trust this Robert Barron or any of these liberal theologians who modify their theology to appease the scientism crowd. I don't know if he is well meaning but ignorant, or if he is intentionally teaching false doctrine, but in any case, that is enough for me.
https://youtu.be/UVsbVAVSssc

>>19781037
What an obvious closet faggot. The Bible is correct regardless of anything and everything. Science can be "true", but the Bible is Truth above all else. This assumes one is reading the KJB, of course. If one is reading a "bible" then science might be more true.

>>19777777
Amen

>>19781194
Can you just fuck off, you pagan idol worshipper?

>>19781037
He is not bad entirely. He makes good points in certain dogmatic questions and is a good entrance for normalfags getting into the Catholic Faith.

>>19777777
>>19777777
>>19777777
>>19777777

>>19780849
Right - Gentiles who did not have to become Jews through circumcision but who still belonged to God's people and had to abide by the Law if they wanted to dwell in Canaan. This is very much the situation the Gentile converts to Christianity found themselves in: they were not merely adjacent to and supportive of God's people (as the Noahides like Cornelius were), but they were integrated into God's people (the Church) yet were not Jews.
The Judaizing party argued that they had to become Jews first before they could become full-fledged Christians. As for Paul's stance, we see it in his epistles - the new covenant means a new Law, which is a remarkably new application of the commandments, because what Jesus did changed the situation entirely; no more Jews or Gentiles, but a new race, the Christians, members of the body of Jesus through baptism (see Romans); a new application of uncleanness laws as well as capital punishment/banishment and the liturgical offering of sacrifices (see 1&2 Corinthians); no more subservience to angels and new moons and Sabbaths (see Galatians)...

The Council of Jerusalem ruled between the two - as far as a literal application of the Law is concerned, it is indeed needed, but based on a close reading of the Law, only the Holiness Code is binding for Gentiles. As for the spiritual, new application of the Law as Paul understood it, well, that was always in vigor as we see in Acts (baptism as the new circumcision through which one becomes a Christian; Christians being the new temple, which is dangerous as those two I forgot the names of died instantly, killed by God's presence in them as the priests were killed if they did not minister properly; Sunday as a higher liturgical day than Saturday...)

>>19781758
To clarify, the "strangers who dwell among you" have to be Gentiles and not Jews, or else they would not be called "strangers" at all, nor would they be specifically called out in those commandments.

Does any Christian tradition have chanting like those of the Rig Veda, but with Psalms and Christian hymns?

https://youtu.be/1JFeA0hBORo?t=269

>>19781928
Orthodox have chants but that is not to say that it is the same thing as your gay Hindu meditation or whatever. Many Orthodox such as Father Seraphim Rose have written very strong words against those who claim that Orthodoxy and Hinduism, Buddhism, new age, etc., are compatible.

>>19771510
I think you are all a test of my faith from Christ. You all come across as unbelievably smug and impious, so self satisfied with your “faith” but never willing to live by the rules of a godly life. I’m looking forward to meeting actual believers when I go to Canterbury for uni next year.

>>19777919
>You're coming from radical baptist protestant evangelical fundamentalist. that strain of thought is unfortunately by far the most numerous in the USA.

You're right. I view my Baptist relatives as functionally braindead. They believe in sola scriptura... and yet they have no clue what the scriptures *actually* say. A Baptist minister could convince them of pretty much *anything* because they are so damn clueless.

As for Catholicism... I tend to respect the views or my Catholic friends a lot more than my Protestant friends. At least with my Catholic friends, I know that they have actually spent some serious time studying theology.

But there are times when their answers seem like cop-outs to me. Like, "Our answers to that question come from *tradition* not *scripture.*" Before I actually read the scriptures myself, this argument made no sense to me. Now it kind of does. However, this means that Catholics have their own equivalent of the Talmud...

>are you guys Christians or larping as Jews?
I was raised Christian but now I'm not sure what I am. Not Jewish. Just... realizing that some of their critiques are valid.

>false gay lobby stat
Nah. If anything, 1 in 10 is an underestimate. Until *very recently* the only people who would identify as LGBT in public polls were 1) those who were the gayest of the gays, and 2) those who felt safe enough to admit it. But there were always closeted gays (like myself) who had repressed their same-sex attractions so much that they were deluded into calling themselves "straight." There were also gays who *know* that they weren't straight, but are too afraid to tell a pollster. But now that LGBT people don't have to live in a constant state of fear (at least in some places), we are starting to get a truer sense of how many LGBT people are actually out there.

(It's more than 1 in 10).

The world is also realizing that being gay is just a natural, human variation -- like having red hair or green eyes. As such... the Abrahamic religions are going to face a massive reckoning (of their own making) in the 21st century. Everyone can see this reckoning coming. That's why so many churches are freaking out. But they are making the mistake of doubling-down, whilst blaming this societal backlash on their *victims.* This will just make people leave all the faster.

To make matters even worse for themselves, Christians have (unnecessarily) made LGBT people a marginalized group... and they are treating that marginalized group like crap... in direct violation of Matthew 25. This places most Christians firmly in the "Goats" camp. So... there is that to reckon with as well.

And yet if the Church were to try to atone for this history... I would actually feel safe stepping inside one again. I would also be ready to forgive. Sadly... I don't see many churches doing that.

>>19780999
I agree with this view of Hell more than the common "place of fire, brimstone, and rejection" view, but I'm not sure if seeing it like this would necessitate changing views on other points of doctrine or not.

>>19782190
Can’t tell if this is bait or not, why don’t you think people on lit are genuine believers?

>>19782190
>I’m looking forward to meeting actual believers when...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

>>19782002
>Orthodox have chants
To be avoided. They are mostly in foreign languages that "sound good" but 9/10 of them are prayers to "Mary" and "saints" rather than God and you'd never know that what you are hearing is demonic but sound "based".

>>19782268
This is a Satanic post.

>>19782329
Explain

>>19782344
Homosexualism and other perversions like that are attacks on Truth. God created the world with distinct categories and types of things that are different from each other (but that difference does not necessitate conflict - conflict is a result of sin).
Now what homosexualists, "transgenders" and so on do is assume that these distintions and categories either don't matter or don't even exist. "Who cares bro, we're all the same, we aren't hurting anyone, my body my choice" blah blah blah.
It is an abuse of the body which God has made. It is gnostic and demonic.
It is no coincidence that occultists like Aleister Crowley are all sodomites too.

>>19782299
Have you read any of this thread? It’s literally all just purity testing, I’m holier than thou from faggots who probably have anime porn open in another tab
Just reading these threads is all the evidence you need to show there is no genuine faith on this website just constant grandstanding.

>>19777777
Atheistbros, did we just lose?

>>19782190
Isn't this post sort of ironic and the exact thing that it is criticizing?

>>19782427
And that would be fine if it was criticising any of the straw men (Reddit atheism mostly) that everyone else has spent the entirety of the thread arguing against and that are of no real concern to anybody but easy to argue against when you’ve got a thread full of people who agree with you automatically.
But none of these faggots will hear criticism of their own paper thin faith, any protest of this sort will be ignored so people can feel better about themselves while they continue to live in sin.

>>19782427
And that would be fine if it was criticising any of the strawmen (Reddit atheism mostly) that everyone else has spent the entirety of the thread bashing and that are of no real concern to anybody but easy to argue against when you’ve got a thread full of people who agree with you automatically.
But none of these faggots will hear criticism of their own paper thin faith, any protest of this sort will be ignored so people can feel better about themselves while they continue to live in sin.

>>19782427
And that would be fine if it was criticising any of the strawmen (Reddit atheism mostly) that everyone else has spent the entirety of the thread bashing and that are of no real concern to anybody but are an easy way to get a few (you)s.
But none of these faggots will hear criticism of their own paper thin faith, any protest of this sort will be ignored so people can feel better about themselves while they continue to live in sin.

>>19782504
>>19782523
>...he types twice, for emphasis

There can be no doubt that the covid vaccine is a forerunner of the mark of the beast. That much is very clear.

>>19782553
Why, exactly?

>>19782532
Spelling error in the first one and I didn’t want faggots like you pointing that out instead of responding to what I’m saying.

>>19782563
>you're all impostors who don't follow Christ
>proceeds to repeatedly call people faggots

>>19782557
You can now see how this can be done, I assume. Excluding people from economic activity will become even easier in the future.

Rev. 13:16-17 Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name.

>>19782557
Well when you look at the overarching agenda that the covid narrative is a part of, the New World Order, the so-called "great reset", and so on, we can see the the demonic agenda at work and a preparation for the populace to receive a mark or be persecuted if they do not submit.
Also, Saint Paisios of the Orthodox Church prophesied in the 1980s that there will come a "vaccine" which will be mandatory and if you refuse (which you should) you will face punishment from the satanic state. Also in Greece an Orthodox Christian monk receieved the first dose and was overcome with a sense of terrible shame and he said that he literally saw the devil's face right in front of him, saying to him "Now you are mine." He has refused the second dose and warns everyone not to recieve the shot.

>>19782581
And that is what invalidates everything I’ve said? Why should I care how I address these people, to me they’re no better than sinners and infidels.

Goatskin, Calfskin, or any number of synthetic options.

Do you have a favorite?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcSIXXLuTE8

>>19782709
consooooooooooooooooooooooom

>>19782709
Is this something sort of commercialised hobby to you?
Go and lost this in the stack thread I'm sure you'll get alot of (you)s there.

>>19782607
Also another thing on this topic is the sheer level of lying and gaslighting, as they say. This mind boggling level of dishonesty and psychological abuse is demonic.
Do you know that the covid "vaccine" literally not even a vaccine by the normal definition? They changed the definition so that this gene editing shot can be called a vaccine. I think that they are trying to erase the likeness of God from man.
And of course there is the global depopulation agenda which they don't even try to hide anymore, and so on.

>>19782709
>>19782709 #
Is this some sort of commercialised hobby to you?
Go and post this in the stack thread I'm sure you'll get alot of (you)s there.

>>19782709
Is this some sort of commercialised hobby to you?
Go and post this in the stack thread I'm sure you'll get alot of (you)s there

>>19782720
This, collect them all, never fully read any of them.

I'm so, so sick of pornography, anons.
The longer I use it, the more I realize how poisonous it is. I've tried quitting the habit many times and gone up to a couple months without using it, but I've always relapsed again.
I saw a screencap of a post recently that resonated deeply with me. An anon asked why porn as free and another anon responded that you pay with your soul. I've never read truer words on this site.
I've read Augustine's Confessions. Are there any good passages from scripture or other works about people who recovered from this kind of thing?

>>19782846
Father Seraphim Rose said that pornography is the devil's version of iconography.

>>19782858
where did he say this

>>19782863
I don't remember.

>>19782846
Psalm 101:3 I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes

>>19782863
>>19782870
Isn't it true regardless of who said it?

>>19782875
what does this matter someone may want to read more of what he was saying in the context faggot

>>19782268
I will pray for you, brother.

>>19782884
Not a true Christian in the whole thread

>>19782709
>stacked vertically instead of aligned horizontally
Always a red flag.

what does it mean to take up your cross

>>19783122
Be willing to bear actual suffering instead of larping.

>>19782889
This

>>19777777
Based

all of you are awful.

>>19778016
>>19778019
>>19778043
>>19778050
rsv2ce sucks, hebrews isn't authentic, francis is the pope, protestantism is heresy.
>you are le left! you are le right! you are le modernist or le traditional!
no im on the side of facts. truth doesn't have a "side".
keep being a "sede" who is trad except when you have to accept the traditions of the magisterium and the pope and modern scholarship.
>>19778076
keep reading to the end of the book.
>>19778097
>>19778129
>>19778139
>>19778151
>jewsforjesus.org
>he said he was God, which he *could be*
why do people come here and larp as knowledgeable about Christianity when they aren't even christian, aren't baptized, and have never formally received theological training? refuting all you bullshit means starting from square one to establish terms since half the people here can barely define the difference between the NT and OT or they have barely heard abt the establishment of the canon, church tradition, philosophy, etc.
>>19778402
it means God gives you faith. you are saved BY the faith god gives you. that doesnt mean that boom, you think jesus is real, you're "saved". it means that through the process god establishes bringing you closer to him, through *that* process, you're saved. faith v. works is a false dichotomy thought up in the protestant era
>>19778439
it means the catholic church is still existing and there is still a pope - aka, the original church and leader is still in existence.

>>19778540
woman is not the correct translation
"gunai" is a common form of polite address in greek. see aristophanes or sophocles. it means "dear lady" or "dearest madam". read nyland.
>>19778653
>>19778766
>>19778829
god chose to become human, therefore the material world cannot be evil. checkmate.
>>19778832
nabre is good because of its fantastic book introductions and good textual notes. before people shit on it here i recommend they actually use it for a while. I particularly like the psalms translations.
>>19778858
evil does not exist. evil is merely a deprivation of the good.
>>19779812
this is completely incorrect, in the CC, and im not sure where you heard this take. if you never been baptised, you do not need to confess after baptism - it completely wipes away all sins. however if you sin after that, of course penance is the ordinary means of forgiveness.
https://www.catholic.com/tract/confession
>>19779887
introduction to the devout life
maybe some scott hahn books
>>19780015
nice
>>19780133
incorrect, it has the full deutero
>>19780158
it's not either/or, avatarfag
>>19780345
if you've already been baptized w/ the trinitarian formula, it's licit. you don't need to be nor can you be "re-baptised".
>>19780745
>>19780797
>>19780799
>>19780819
>>19780833
>>19780862
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/is-there-a-queen-in-the-kingdom-of-heaven
https://www.catholic.com/tract/mary-mother-of-god
https://www.catholic.com/qa/isnt-calling-mary-the-mediatrix-of-all-graces-contrary-to-the-doctrine-that-jesus-is-the-sole
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/is-marys-queenship-biblical

>>19780999
>>19782273
orthodoxy allows for a number of broad views of hell. the "doctrine" on it is quite limited.
>>19781037
>robert barron
>liberal theologian
lmao. wait kill you hear about kung, schillebeeckx, and rahner.
why are protties so obsessed with BB? he's actually very squarely in the catholic tradition. if you wanna pick on "liberal" catholic theologians there's quite a few you could choose from.
>>19781194
science and religion can't contract because God created both and both point towards truth, which is him.
the KJV is dogshit btw. get an accurate version.
>>19781897
why do protties love to rail against source and redaction criticism? the anti-intellectual strain is distinctly american and southern.
>>19781928
it's called Gregorian chant and it's been around for 1000 years in the west.
>>19782190
there's one or two RADICAL fundamentalist baptist evangelical reformed protestants here who unfortunately shit up every thread.
>>19782268
fundamentalist baptist evangelical reformed protestants are awful.
read up more on sacred tradition. who do you think assembled the bible? the church and the bishops existed before the bible as a whole did.
>it's more than 1 in 10.
it's not gays are, at max, 2% of the US population. and the US is a very homosexual country. transsexuals are far far less. same with other meme tier gender ideologies.
homosexuality may be natural but is also a disorder. schizophrenia is natural - it is also disordered, however.
>And yet if the Church were to try to atone for this history... I would actually feel safe stepping inside one again. I would also be ready to forgive. Sadly... I don't see many churches doing that.
there is a difference between accepting people with homosexual desires and sanctioning homosexual behavior.
>>19782553
>>19782557
>>19782607
>>19782762
ignore fundamentalist baptist evangelical reformed protestants. the mark of the beast isnt even close. if anything its like a biometric wallet/id that's somehow linked to anti-christianity. millenarinism is false btw.
>>19782581
lol
>>19782613
>christ will not save or help some people in this life
heretical blasphemous book
>>19782776
>>19782720
>>19782803
>>19783048
this is the bible thead. it's allowed. go back to /pol/
>>19782709
can't go wrong with paperback.
>>19782846
go to confession and receive the sacraments. read the book "spiritual warfare". there's a modern edition published by the oratory.
>>19782858
>>19782870
>>19782884
>Fr. Rose (my prophet) said
>but i dont remember if he actually said it
>you're a faggot!
lmao. idols of pixels. fundamentalist baptist evangelical reformed protestants, everyone!

>>19783122
it means prayer "thy will be done" over and over and meaning it.

>>19783543
>rsv2ce sucks
Shame the Vatican quotes it in the CCC then, specifically choosing the RSV over the NAB when the USCCB lobbied for the latter to be used in the CCC.
>hebrews isn't authentic
Yes, it is, pagan.
>francis is the pope
First true thing you've said.
>protestantism is heresy
Second true thing you've said.

>>19782846
I've posted 1st Corinthians 10:13 on this same topic before, I think.
>No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear.
>But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it.

This is something I have struggled with as well, anon. Realizing exactly how far I had strayed (relegating Christ for years to an hour on Sunday, if that; yet spending likely dozens of hours on pornography a week) made me ashamed, quite frankly, to ask Him for forgiveness and reconciliation. I wish it didn't take what it did, but I have a much keener appreciation for the parable of the debtors, and the depth of His mercy, than I ever had before.
I've also personally found that the more I pray throughout the day and keep the Lord on my mind, the more difficult it is for me to even place myself in a position to be tempted by pornography. Sorry for the blogpost. I'll be praying for you, anon.

>mass reply spam
So tiresome.

>>19783651
>nononono you can't respond individually to multiple people! nonononono!

please get king jimbo to wipe you crocodile tears.

>>19783643
>Shame the Vatican quotes it in the CCC then, specifically choosing the RSV over the NAB when the USCCB lobbied for the latter to be used in the CCC.
you drank the ignatius press kool aid. go ahead, find a list of changes, times it was revised, and publicly declared translation philosophy and metrics. you cant. im a catholic but you gotta call you bullshit when you see it.
>authentic
I meant its not authentically written by paul. youre strawmanning me hard in your head.

Pornography is not the greatest error because it fundamentally points towards a good (mutual desire, companionship, love, bonding). It's just misplaced and misdirected. Sin, after all, simply means to "miss the mark".

>>19777777

>>19783674
>I meant its not authentically written by paul.
Yes, it is. Hence why it's called "The Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews."

>>19782846
Truth is time heals all wounds even self-inflicted psychological brain damage dependency. As long as you keep reinforcing the side of you that hates porn you will never get worse and only get better, watch yourself gain control from sheer force of inertia. After a year it will be a cakewalk where you very rarely stumble. The pit is real but so is the way out.

>>19783633
>heretical blasphemous book
Catholics be like
>Uh, yeah, if you're Orthodox you are Catholic in everything except you only lack licit communion. You should come to Mass :)
>Also your saints are evil blasphemers.

>>19784026
It’s mostly just people on here who haven’t actually read any scripture and use zealousness to get easy (you)s.
Faith is mostly a game to these people, not something to be taken seriously.

>>19776659
And then peter went to found the church of Antioch

>>19781758
>Gentiles who did not have to become Jews through circumcision
no it means the circumcised gentiles, meaning converts

>>19781758
>The Council of Jerusalem ruled between the two - as far as a literal application of the Law is concerned, it is indeed needed, but based on a close reading of the Law, only the Holiness Code is binding for Gentiles.
and with that, trannyism, masturbation, faggotry, false testimonies, dishonoring of parents, pride, stealing, cheating, gambling and all violations of the Torah (oral or written) are rampant in christian societies due to their lack of focus on "legalism"

congratulations christians, you played yourself

I bet Peter would utterly abhor the Catholic "Church™" of at least the last 1650 years.

>>19781758
>Sunday as a higher liturgical day than Saturday
This one is extremely blasphemous and the one thing that led me away from catholicism (10 commandments, festivities being celebrated even after Christ 's death and ressurection, respect for Shabbat in all the new testament, Jesus and apostles going to the synagogue on Shabbat, etc.)

>>19783633
>read up more on sacred tradition.
Jews also claim to have a sacred tradition called Talmud

>who do you think assembled the bible?
who do you think wrote it?

>the church and the bishops existed before the bible as a whole did
The Scriptures referred by Jesus and apostles weren't exactly the books cherry picked by the church fathers

>>19782268
>Nah. If anything, 1 in 10 is an underestimate
these stats come from Alfred Kinsey, who was proved to be a scientific fraud
https://www.amazon.com/Kinsey-Crimes-Consequences-Scheme-Reisman/dp/B01JXQ5218

>>19782268
>The world is also realizing that being gay is just a natural, human variation
I really doubt that
https://vcresearch.berkeley.edu/news/pesticide-atrazine-can-turn-male-frogs-females

there is probably a chemical reason for why faggotry and autism are increasing, until all variables are eliminated it is not intellectually honest to go for "it's just a natural variation"

I can list a few options
>microplastics during pregnancy
>pesticides during childhood
>additives in food
>lack of bioavailable vitamins and minerals
>non ionizing radiation during babyhood
etc

>>19782268
>But now that LGBT people don't have to live in a constant state of fear
mate these "people" are warned as abominations for a reason, they just passed this law in Canada prohibiting "conversion therapy" (meaning any attempt to influence) but only for straight "orientation", applying mkultra to turn your child into a tranny is totally legal to those freaks, but correcting your child so that you don't lose your chance of grandchildren because of brainwashing is illegal

https://www.worldstockmarket.net/canada-conversion-therapy-is-now-prohibited-by-law/

>>19782709
what is the point of having more than one bible in your native language? buy commentary books and an old and new testament in the original languages

>>19782606
that's why Christians should develop bitcoin through radio waves so that we transact among ourselves without government intervention

>>19784395
To compare translations

>>19782846
>I'm so, so sick of pornography, anons.
>The longer I use it, the more I realize how poisonous it is. I've tried quitting the habit many times and gone up to a couple months without using it, but I've always relapsed again.
>I saw a screencap of a post recently that resonated deeply with me. An anon asked why porn as free and another anon responded that you pay with your soul. I've never read truer words on this site.
>I've read Augustine's Confessions. Are there any good passages from scripture or other works about people who recovered from this kind of thing?
Judaism could help you, this is the video that led me to it, recommended by some anon pol for nofap
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Ot9qSqkphgs

Judaism has a very practical process to repent for sin and avoid it
>stop doing it
>build a fence by learning about it every day
>say you're sorry to God
>breakdown in tears with regret begging for forgiveness

the last step could take years because you won't be able to see the filth while you're in it
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ClIQ3FNZeQs

the explanations of each step and why they're ordered that way are throughout the videos on his channel

I can tell you some things I learned watching hours of lectures from this rabbi and confirmed with experience over time

masurbation is caused by an empty mind, meaning a mind empty of Torah, you have to keep Torah in your thoughts every day, iggeres ha rambam is great for that (a latter with teachings on how to live a life without sin, very short)

if you avoid looking at women at all costs, even in your mind (specially there) you won half the battle. Do not ever look at women in real life if they are dressing iimmodestly (which means anything other than a dress covering everything from clavicles to legs).

Before sleeping, always remember to not look or touch any woman, otherwise you will spill seed for lilith (satan's wife), sleep on your side for extra help.

keep your mind busy with work and family during the week, learn about the problems fornication has brought to society (e.g. birth control pills in the water)

>>19782873
which is interesting because everything a man sees is recorded in his soul

"protect your eyes during the day so evil doesn't come to you at night"

>>19782897
Orthodox jews are closer to imitating Christ than Christians

>>19783543
>church tradition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-orthodox_Christianity

>>19783580
>evil does not exist. evil is merely a deprivation of the good.
>I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things

>>19783643
>francis is the pope
>First true thing you've said
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/canon-lawyer-priest-on-amazon-synods-pagan-tree-planting-this-is-horrendous/

>>19783677
the absolute state of christians

>>19784434
The rest of your post is fine and agreeable, but I am not and never will be a Jew. I appreciate that you took the time to write all this, unlike the lazy mass replyer above.

>>19784463
Catholic anon has ruled that Pachamama is official Catholic teaching, so it's okay.

>>19784471
Judaism is the only religion that doesn't require you to convert to be saved, I'm not asking you to become a Jew, just learn what is useful

>>19784474
not like the Bible didn't have warnings about it
>The children gather wood, the fathers light the fire, and the women knead the dough and make cakes to offer to the Queen of Heaven. They pour out drink offerings to other gods to arouse my anger.

a catholic would probably have a stroke while reading the genesis 6 conspiracy

>>19783127
Anon you've just excluded everyone on this website.

>>19784444
i cant believe no one will mention those quads before the thread is archived

Reminder that universalism is the official Catholic teaching, so it doesn't matter if you belong to a different denomination or not.

>>19784449
I wouldn't sling that around so easily, as this idea is bad for everyone. It doesn't just undermine Catholicism and Orthodoxy but also Protestantism. Pic related is a Protestant book written to refute it, for example.

>>19784749
except orthodogs and prots because they are stupid
muslims and atheists will be saved though

>>19784892
what about Jews?

>>19784939
The only exception are stinky prot and ortho filth.

>>19784778
>I wouldn't sling that around so easily, as this idea is bad for everyone. It doesn't just undermine Catholicism and Orthodoxy but also Protestantism.
I am neither so I'm not affected (Jewish Christian)

>>19784993
No, it applies to you too. You're just one sect of many, none of whom have any legitimate truth claim.

>>19785036
how so?

Sometimes I witness the dismal state of injustice my nation is marred in and I spew the most hateful things against minorities while foaming at the mouth. I completely forget about Christ. How do I fix this? The political injustice and indolence of the masses make my blood boil with rage.

>>19785146
I suggest two things,
1. Stop placing your hope in worldly things such as politics and political situations that will pass away.
2. Make the next thread since this one is about to be pruned.

>>19771510
Dubs and my faith is restored