/lit/ - Literature

>>5250011
Biblical narratives are for people without access to Q (Sayings) or Thomas. Man the fuck up, like a lion, eaten by a man. p.s.: Jesus on Lions in Thomas indicates that the apostles and John were wrong about the conversion of the righteous gentiles and the law. Hope you're cut and don't wear blended cloth.

Mark is my favorite Gospel also. I really love the idea of the 'secret' Messiah, the one nobody gets to know about until EVERYBODY gets to know about him. It's also great because Jesus is a real hardass about hypocrisy and excess in it.

Also, where the Beautitudes are concerned, Luke's version > Matthew's version.

just a general Christian question to le fellow Christians

pauls a great guy , hes says things that can makes so much sense. Yet sometimes i feel he strays from the words of Jesus and get too caught up in cultural/theological stuff - i am talking of course about the whole "Aint no women talking in ma church" thing

Am i being foolish or may this be the case

>>5251002
Paul's epistles are sort of a mixed bag of things that speak to all of Christendom and things that speak to the specific Christian communities he was writing to. You need to be able to discern what's what, which is where historical analysis and critical study can help.

However, he is essential to Christianity. Without him there would be no Church, so I'll forgive him for a few of his eccentricities.

>>5251002
Most of his comments in 1 Corinthians make sense. Essentially they had the problem of people, especially women, getting drunk before the Eucharistic meal and then gossiping and talking out of turn during it.

>>5250928
Q doesn't exist. Farrer hypothesis ftw. Also, it's pretty obvious even from Mark that Jesus's ministry extended to the Gentiles.

>>5251911
>Also, it's pretty obvious even from Mark that Jesus's ministry extended to the Gentiles.
Are you retarded? Jesus relates with the righteous Gentiles and Samaritans, people with some commitment to the law beyond no idols, no blood sacrifices.

Face it: Pauline christianity is a monstrosity against Jesus' completion of the law.

>>5251911
what about that "woman is the glory of man" crap.

>>5251937
How is Paul a monstrosity *against* Jesus's completion of the law? Isn't his whole point that Jesus has completed the law, therefore circumcision, etc., is dead?

>>5250011
>enigmatic "γαρ" ending at 15:8
So you read it in Greek? Who has the best Greek of the NT?

>>5252280
Hebrews and John.

Does anyone know where I can get a free King James Bible? I know that mormon.org will give me a nice leather bound one, but I don't want those fuckers coming to my house.

>>5252293
I got my KJV and Book of Mormon without coming to my house.

what are the most literary books of the bible?

>>5252304
I'd say Daniel, Job, Isaiah, Ecclesiastes, Wisdom, Psalms, Mark, John, Romans, Hebrews, Revelation.

>>5252312
cheers m8

>>5252304
The wisdom books, the prophetic books, and the Gospels (esp. John) are probably the ones most studied for their poetic or narrative qualities. The Pentateuch gets a lot of attention from scholars of myth, but obviously there's a lot of overlap with literary criticism in this case.

Christians of /lit/: what denomination are you?

>>5252404
I want to call myself a Catholic because of le ebin culture, but I just can't bring myself to.
So I'm sort of a pseudo-protestant Calvinist.

>>5252404
(SSPX) Catholic.

>>5252404
Roman Catholic Church

>>5252404
Catholic as fuck

protestant here, i have a question for you catholics. say i want to convert. do i have to believe that the pope speaks for god?

>>5250011
religion is stupid and all believers should be ashamed of yourselves youre all mentally 5 years old

>>5252450
You have to believe that priests in general and the Pope in particular have a privileged connection to God, yes.

>>5252450
The Pope is infallible when speaking ex cathedra, or in matters pertaining to salvation or Catholic dogma. This has only been explicitly invoked a few times, such as when Pope Pius XII declared the Assumption of Mary.

Catholics don't believe that the Pope cannot be inerrant. For example, as a more traditionally minded Catholic I have serious problems with the documents of Vatican II, but am not forced to act in a way contrary to my faith because of it.

>>5252471
Wow. Really poor sentence structure there. I meant to say: Catholics don't believe that the Pope cannot err.

Quick question to the believers of /lit/, what is your attitude on Christian pacifism?
Do you believe in total pacifism? Would a good Christian fight back when struck?
Do you believe Christians should resist were, hypothetically, Christendom itself under threat?
>Heathens aimsama

>>5252484
>Would a good Christian fight back when struck?
No.
>Do you believe Christians should resist were, hypothetically, Christendom itself under threat?
Yes.

>>5252413
What's SSPX?

>>5252484
I think you can build a certain Christian militarism out of the actions of Jesus himself. What was the one time Jesus broke from his pacifism and was a militant fellow?

The time he drove the money lenders out of the Temple.

So one can follow from that and argue that Christians should take up arms whenever someone threatens to use God as a prop through which they can enrich themselves and build up treasure in this world.

Which means that Christians should be bombing and attacking all investment bankers, really.

>>5251021
>>5251002
>>5251911
Nobody's mentioned that 1 Corinthians is a confirmed fabrication and wasn't written by Paul?

>>5252598
1 Corinthians is indisputably authentic.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles..

Has anyone read Reza Aslan's "Zealot"? I heard it was good, but I haven't gotten around to it yet.

>>5252462
Doesn't change the fact that the Bible has literary value. People still study Homer, even though the ancient Greek and Roman religions are regarded as mythology, correct!

>>5252404
Catholic

Where would I start reading if I wanted to learn more about Orthodox Christianity?

>>5252605
Oops, sorry. I just knew Paul's line about women was fake, and anon said it was from 1 Corinthians and *blush*

>>5252625
Kallistos Ware is the usual go-to.

>>5252630
No problem. I've made the same mistake. The one you're thinking of is probably 1 Timothy.

>>5252404
I'm ignostic, but >>5252617 summed it up

>>5252625
Vladimir Lossky's 'Orthodox Theology' is a concise introduction, or there's the Cambridge Companion to Orthodox Theology for more detail and guidance for further reading.

So Catholic up in here. Making me proud, /lit/. :'-)

Hey isn't Catholicism supposed to be like evil or some shit cause the Jesuits?

>>5252558
A weird and somewhat culty group of quasi-schismatic traditionalist Catholics.

>>5252683
>jesuit
>more like just legit ammirite

>>5252689
Yeah, man. Just finished St. Ignatius's autobiography today, actually.

god tier:
Gospels according to Mark, Luke, Matthew and John
Gnostic Christianity (early Christian writings)

shit tier:
the rest

What is some good literature on the history and formation of the church and bible? Stumbling around I came across the following (well mostly Metzger's stuff), does /lit/ have anything they would add?

History of the Catholic Church: From the Apostolic Age to the Third Millennium – James Hitchcock
The New Testament: Its Background Growth and Content – Bruce M. Metzger
The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration – Bruce M. Metzger, Bart D. Ehrman
The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance – Bruce M. Metzger
The Canon of Scripture – F. F. Bruce
The Bible in Translation: Ancient and English Versions – Bruce M. Metzger

>2014
>still no retort against the problem of evil

Incompetent little shits, hehehe.

I sort of want to convert to Catholicism but I have crippling social anxiety and don't think I could handle going up to a priest and asking about it.

For the same reason confessions sound really scary to me.

Wat do?

>>5252764
I'd start with Eusebius's Church History. His historical accuracy has been called into account in several places, but it's helpful to know how the Church understands its own history without (immediate) recourse to secular intellectuals like Ehrman.

>>5252777
>Why doesn't god make me a sandwich?
>If he can't, then he isn't all powerful
>If he won't, then he's evil and I hate him
>Therefore he doesn't exist

Atheist "logic"

>>5252783
I'll pray for you.

And confession really isn't that scary.

>>5252783
Priests for the most part are taught, grown, and groomed to be open individuals for all.

This isn't like trying to shoot the shit with a bartender, much less the cute girl two stools down.

This is coming from someone who was Roman Catholic. It's their entire purpose to bring comfort in the face of a difficult burden.

>>5250011
Protestant voluntary egoist here

I love you guys, but all you need is faith.

Evening /lit/,
What's the best translation of the divine comedy?
>inb4 learn Italian

>>5252790
friendly reminder that your god designed baby rape

>>5250011
I like Christianity but once you place the actual Biblical texts and the Church traditions in a historical trajectory doesn't the whole thing just kind of whittle away? We know there is very little historicity to the OT, we know the NT was written by unreliable narrators, and we know the pre-orthodox Christianities were everywhere on the ideological board. Based only on what is presented to us there's very little to trust.

>captcha: synods framem

>>5252815
Faith is a good and powerful thing. It is perhaps the most important thing. As Paul says, "If Christ was not raised from the dead, your faith is in vain and you are still in your sins." That is our creed, and if we stand by it, one can argue that we need nothing else.

But humans are frail and weak by nature. This is the failure of Nietzsche and Stirner, in their assumption that we can move beyond our constructs and achieve life on our own. Humans totally on their own are prone to failing and falling, and everyone is susceptible to this, no matter how mighty, no matter how grand. Humans need structure. Humans need spooks, to use Stirner's term. Humans need constructs which they can cling to, rocks upon which they can plant their anchor and wait out the storms of life.

Faith is one such rock. But it is not enough, or at least, not enough for many. So the Church acts as as a rock- as THE Rock, upon which the Church is built, and "the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it." Humans NEED a Church. Humans need a light in dark places, a strength in weak times. Humans need the Touch of something that is not of this world.

>>5252617
>Has anyone read Reza Aslan's "Zealot"?
It's bretty good intro material.

>>5252465
"But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren."

>>5252404

Methodist. I'm ashamed at the current state of our church, but I think Wesley was on the right track.

>>5253100

I achieve life and happiness on my own. So that theory is wrong.

>>5253202
>J.C. Leyendecker
Noice

Like Mademoiselle's hair <3

>>5253202
>J.C. Leyendecker
Noice

Like Mademoiselle's hair. <3

>>5253258

she's a real class act

>being punished for the transgressions of adam
>going to hell
>obeying the law of moses
>drinking poision
>smoking

i hope none of you guys do this
captcha:mormonism is the master race :^)

>>5253202
>>5253258
Ha, I am familiar with Arrow shirts and collars. I am a follower of men's fashion, especially in its more classical aspects.

Also, I do not believe any person achieves anything 'on their own.' We all climb to the top of the mountains formed by those that come after us. We all stand upon the shoulders of giants, whether those giants be human or divine. I am not ashamed to admit that other people were crucial in my becoming who I am. Likewise, those that come after me will be who they are because of me.

>>5253295
>implying Joseph Smith wasn't a false prophet

>>5253305
if he was a false prophet then how come mormons are the chosen people? proof: there are 15 million mormons and 6/10 get a college education, 38% of mormons make between 50 and 100 thousand a year. only 26% are below 30 thousand or less as opposed to the general population which is 31%.

>>5253331
Don't see how the proves anything, mate.

>>5253301

there's a difference between getting tips and guidance from your fellow man, and getting divine or alien existential assistance because you are fundamentally flawed beyond repair.

>>5253301
I believe that too, but "happiness"?
I didn't read the post he was responding to, but he feelings are mostly his own

>tfw the best gospel is the gospel according to John for the historical knowledge

>>5252708
Lolololol

This person has never read Ecclesiastes or Daniel, two of the most creative, philosophical books written yet.

On that note, I always wondered why Freud always referenced Exodus in The Interpretation of Dreams when Daniel is a much better book for dream interpretation.

>>5253295
The silly thing is that original sin is a NT concept. In the OT, it is clearly stated that the son will not pay for the sins of the father.

>>5253398
I believe that happiness is a relational thing. We are happy insofar as that happiness is shared with others. Even in loneliness, we share our happiness with an 'other,' whether this is God, our imagined ideal self, or something else entirely. I do not believe that happiness can exist wholly in a human vacuum.

>>5253088
>pre-orthodox Christianities were everywhere on the ideological board.
Well you can't really depart from Jesus' teachings. His rules were fairly explicit, then expounded by Paul's letter to the Romans as the denouncement of the Torahite laws because they brought sin, or led to sin. In other words, forming their own religion on the basis of worshiping certain virtues, as opposed to certain laws.This isn't to say the old testament didn't have virtues, of course it did, however a lot of the faith in the old testament was fear driven.

>>5253413
Which is also funny, because in the old testament it also says that the sons down to the third and fourth generations are punished for the transgressions of their ancestors.

from t.s. eliot's introduction to the pensees

Pascal is a man of the world among ascetics, and an ascetic among men of the world; he had the knowledge of worldliness and the passion of asceticism, and in him the two are fused into an individual whole. The majority of mankind is lazy-minded, incurious, absorbed in vanities, and tepid in emotion, and is therefore incapable of either much doubt or much faith; and when the ordinary man calls himself a sceptic or an unbeliever, that is ordinarily a simple pose, cloaking a disinclination to think anything out to a conclusion. Pascal's disillusioned analysis of human bondage is sometimes interpreted to mean that Pascal was really and finally an unbeliever, who, in his despair, was incapable of enduring reality and enjoying the heroic satisfaction of the free man's worship of nothing. His despair, his disillusion, are, however, no illustration of personal weakness; they are perfectly objective, because they are essential moments in the progress of the intellectual soul; and for the type of Pascal they are the analogue of the drought, the dark night, which is an essential stage in the progress of the Christian mystic. A similar despair, when it is arrived at by a diseased character or an impure soul, may issue in the most disastrous consequences though with the most superb manifestations; and[Pg xvi] thus we get Gulliver's Travels; but in Pascal we find no such distortion; his despair is in itself more terrible than Swift's, because our heart tells us that it corresponds exactly to the facts and cannot be dismissed as mental disease; but it was also a despair which was a necessary prelude to, and element in, the joy of faith.

what the fuck is he on about when he says swift is representative of a "distortion." someone explain this to me please.

>>5253434
And the fear was driven on the basis of preventing transgressions from these laws, providing examples for whenever these laws were broken.

You are all idiots

>>5253411
>Ecclesiastes

it's like reading an angsty teens diary, or Eliot Rodgers manifesto.

>>5252404
raised mostly pentecostal (assemblies of god), some apostolic

>>5253480
The knowledge of Ecclesiastes strikes me as something innate and very, very old. Whereas the proverbs have no doubt been passed down since millenia past, Ecclesiastes strikes me as this sort of epic, ancient wisdom passed down to Solomon from ages past since time immemorial. 'All that has is all that will be', not only is this concept scientifically accurate, letting the philosophy of Ecclesiastes resonate through your soul is one of the most heart-shattering things you can possibly do. It's almost nihilistic, if it weren't for God's judgment, and as a piece of philosophy it is profound and even aphoristic at times. Truly, Ecclesiastes is the one book you should read drom the Old Testament. Well Genesis too, but we all know Genesis is the best book of the bible.

so boyos should the sermon on the mount be interpreted figuratively (a la augustine, aquinas) or literally (tolstoy, yoder)?

>>5253496
>'All that has is all that will be', not only is this concept scientifically accurate

it's not scientifically accurate, there may well be all sorts of phenomena and artifacts that last forever, or the passage of time itself may be a misunderstanding.

>muh wisdom

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1siWHmKV5c&t=0m19s

>>5253496
the knowledge of ecclesiastes sounded pretty basic, and at times baseless, to me.

>>5253522
How is time, as a function of the fourth dimension, constantly not recurring on itself?

Thinking about the ramifications of the immutable wisdom of Ecclesiastes is what prevents me from sleeping at night.

>>5253497
Both.

When there are questions on the interpretations of Scripture, you should always accept multiple meanings. Dante really expounds upon this in the Divine Comedy. A thing can exist for its own sake while simultaneously being a symbol for something else. The Sermon on the Mount, with all its components, invites both a literal and a figurative interpretation, and both contain great wisdom.

>>5253331
Because all Mormons are white and live in a first world country

>>5253522
>thinking bible quotes need to pass a checklist of our current knowledge to be viable values or a way of thinking and living
ayy lmao

>>5252404
Restorationist

I don't uderstand sola fide and protestant defenders of it. It seems to me like the last remains of people who can't take religion seriously. If only I believe in Jeebus everything is good!
I mean damn, if only Jesus left clear instructions on how to achieve salvation when asked multiple times, right?

Oh wait...

" Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?"17"Why do you ask me about what is good?"Jesus replied."There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments."18"Which ones?" the man inquired. Jesus replied," 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery,do not steal, do not give false testimony,19honor your father and mother,'and 'love your neighbor as yourself."

Wow, thanks Jesus!

>>5254096
Depends on the protestant, but I could defend sola fide sola scriptorum. The sola fide derived will be identical with your Jesus' commandments.

>>5252404
Coptic.

>>5253496
This.

"“For of all I have ever seen or learned, Ecclesiastes seems to me the noblest, the wisest, and the most powerful expression of man’s life upon this earth – and also the highest flower of poetry, eloquence, and truth. I am not given to dogmatic judgments in the matter of literary creation, but if I had to make one I could say that Ecclesiastes is the greatest single piece of writing I have ever known, and the wisdom expressed in it the most lasting and profound.” - Tom Wolfe, Bonfire of the Vanities.

In all seriousness, how does someone "become" a Christian?

>>5254096
Rewarding works is good for keeping plebs in line. Sola fide causes the highest sort of moral person. Because the religion does teach how God wants you to live, but also tells you you won't get rewarded for doing so, being a good person is inspired solely by your love of God and others, not buy a special treat at the end of the line.

>>5254784
Protestants will trump out the big line from Romans about believing and confessing with the mouth, but I'd say the bottom line is baptism.

>>5254792
I don't accept that many Christians believe or are strengthened in their faith through the idea of heavenly rewards. It seems to me an incredibly base explanation, almost certainly from people from outside of the faith who have denied the presence of God.

>>5254784
>>5254802
The two main verses you'll probably hear are:

Acts 2:38
“Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

and

Romans 10:9-10
If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.

'Repent' means something like changing your mind about not obeying God. The exact meaning of 'be baptised' is subject to a bit more theological debate. Is baptism necessary and/or sufficient for salvation? Does infant baptism count? What about partial immersion? Do we even need liquid water at all? We could be here all night.

>>5252404

Reformed for most part, but I tend to not get along with people in the same denomination for some reason.

>>5254830
I'd say some kind of baptism is necessary, and that everyone living in a first-world or nominally Christian country has an obligation to be baptized. Yet I do think there are such things as baptism by desire and baptism by blood.

>>5250960
yea no one likes a cock tease

4 thingies and man woman and confussle

>>5250928
>Biblical narratives are for people without access to Q

Q doesn't even exist it's just the parts common to the synoptic gospels, seriously that's as retarded as saying "learning ancient Greek is for people without access to proto-indo-european"

>>5254896
I would say wind and earth on the right and fire and water on the left if we dig

>>5252404

Catholic

>>5254896
Those are the four evangelists stylized as cherubim. Clockwise: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Evangelists#Evangelists.27_symbols

>>5255008
Did you even read that? It's Matthew, John, Luke, Mark if you're going clockwise.

>>5255068
Speak of which: has anyone else read Meditations on the Tarot? It's not divinatory crap, it's a great book on the Christian symbolism of the Marseilles Tarot.

>>5255088
Tell us more, please
No haven't read that

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

>>5255122
It was a book written by an anonymous German occultist. It goes through every card of the Major Arcana and talks about its Christian symbolism, as well as what it means for a life of prayer and hermeticism. Quotes all kinds of saints and occult literature throughout -- and about 800 pages.

>>5255149
wow blamo
Might look into that one, since he is anonymous he can go that extra distance in theory that is

>>5253427
Disagree. Others do effect us and our mood, they're there to love and all, sure, but
>we share our happiness with an 'other,' whether this is God, our imagined ideal self,
This is insular stuff. god is a imagined other. I believe in nature and nurture, but I don't want to put a child in a room of robots to see how it feels later. If it can smile and laugh the same way we do.

>>5253434
Except that the Jerusalem Church headed by James, the closest you can get to an "orthodoxy" at the time, made Paul,recant his teachings and promise to walk the official line in subservience. Paul only lives on as a thinker because the Jerusalem Christians were wiped out by the Romans, giving credence to the idea that Paul was right about everything and chosen to spread the truth when, really, he just got lucky. Otherwise Christianity would have placed his writings in an apocrypha at best.

So what about the east?

This is the best thread I've read here in a long time. Has anyone read The Genius of Christianity or the Rerum Novarum? I'd like to read them both, starting with the Rerum Novarum this weekend.

>ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων

>>5250011
fiction general?

>>5255714
Don't insult my God or I'll fucking forgive you

>>5255679
I've read Rerum Novarum. It's a great encyclical; a lot of it still holds up to scrutiny today. You can't go wrong with any of Leo XIII's writings. He's my favorite pope.

>>5255706
One of the best statements of Christ's divinity right here, boys.

>>5252312
Song of Songs is one of the great poems

>>5252404
Catholic, but crypto-protestant due to growing up in Lutheran culture.

>>5252683
I immensely enjoy the "jesuit are archenemies of freemasons" narrative.

>>5254825
Why all the threats of hell then?

Sola fide is cancer because it reduces the whole religion to something as hard to grasp and impossible to control as "faith". When pressed Protestants will bullshit about God giving grace to men and our works are meaningless, but why even evangelize then? Why tell people to accept Christ? After all, it's all God, so how can you start believing in something out of the blue on your own?
This is why - they don't want to put any effort. The Protestant goal is to delegate Christianity to some kind of intellectual assent because the demands are too high, so screw it, huh? There isn't even a difference between a sola fideist and an atheist, the former doesn't have to change his behavvior oe bit because HURR DURR MY FAITH YOU DONT HAVE FAITH
I hope this shit stops spreading, all it does is make a joke out of the religion. Don't even make me started on sola scriptura. Yup, the Bible is all you need to , here join one of our thirty thousand denominations that interpret it differently. I guess it was God's plan too.

"The truest of all men was the Man of Sorrows, and the truest of all books is Solomon’s, and Ecclesiastes is the fine hammered steel of woe. “All is vanity.” ALL."

Based Melville champion the most based book of the Bible.

Ecclesiastes is timeless. I'm also particularly fond of Lamentations. It's a fantastic exploration of the failure of humanity to come into communion with the divine. It's heart-breaking in parts.

Also, Catholic here. Convert from Diet Christianity (I.E.-Non-denominational bullshit) three years ago.

>>5256332
How did your conversion follow?
I'm always interested in people's edperiences as I find I rarely relate

>>5252404
I'm heavy on ritualism so I'd consider myself Orthodox, I'm extremely liberal when it comes to sexual morals though, but keep pretty hard on the "eye of a needle".

That said, a lot of my actual beliefs are an bad mixture of Vishishtadvaita and Neoplatonism (really only a poor attempt to fit Yajna and Amesha Spenta-like polytheism into Christianity, generally basing themselves on the need of a divine sacrifice to end reincarnation) that comes of as pretty New Agey at the moment, but it's a thought in progress.

>>5256357

In brief, when I started to actually read about the early church and church history in general it became readily apparent that Catholicism was right and always has been right. In addition, I always found it troubling that so many protestant preachers interpret scripture however the fuck they want to with no regards to authority, theology, or tradition. The cherry-picking of verses and passages to justify heretical views pissed me off to no end.

Once I actually started to really read scripture in context and with a complete picture, it wasn't too difficult to see how much most preachers leave out to fit their own theological agenda.

It also helped that almost all of my spiritual heroes are Catholic (Augustine, St. John of the Cross, Chesterton, O'Connor, John Henry Newman, Etc.).

Much of protestantism is simply wish-fullfillment. It's akin to psycho-therapy, allowing people to feel emotionally secure with no emphasis on obligation or dedication to the cost of discipleship. Many protestants, at least in my experience, use Christianity as an emotional and psychological crutch and/or another social club.

>>5256623
I agree with you on Protestants and have a huge respect for the Church but I just have no compelling reason to believe andabstain from stuff like sexual sin, I'm pretty much a lazy platonist.
What would you recommend someone like me to read?

I just finished reading through A Cross of Centuries, this collection of short stories written in the tradition of the Christ.

Some of them deal with alternate tellings of the events in the gospel, others with characters who mirror Christ's life or godhood. It was a pretty good book.

Does anyone know of any novels that deal with messianic origin stories?

Like a man who becomes known as a god through his actions?

Sort of like Dune, but not necessarily so Sci-Fi or heroic. I'd really like to read some more stuff like this.

>>5256768
Silver Surfer comics, start with the original

>>5255747
Thank you, I can't wait to start.

The student organization I work for has recently elected a chaplain for its members, and especially for us full-time employees, to have as counsel. We full-timers met with her the other day for dinner, and it was something really extraordinary - she was a sincere person. In my country a sincere person is the most difficult thing to find, as social life is always about partying and talking bullshit. My closest friends are often sincere, but since I started working full-time I've had less and less opportunity to meet with them, and my colleagues completely lack the capacity to discuss topics of intellectual matter. Meeting this chaplain, who is probably in her late fourties/early fifties - that is, meeting someone not only from another generation, but also from a different mindset (in my country, you're weird if you're religious) - has presented the perfect opportunity for me to study the Christian heritage, and to have sincere, adult conversations with someone about topics I have noone else to talk to about (my friends are atheistic as fuck).

I know this has very little to do with /lit/, but all the more to do with Christianity - I have now, at 23 years old, finally someone to talk to about Jesus. There were priests before this one, but I didn't realise my own need for sincerity. I want to read the Bible and all other texts relevant for understanding the Christian heritage of Europe - a heritage that might well prove to be a way back to a common identity, now that we don't kill eachother for being Protestant/Catholic. I want to explore the possibilities of using the Christian history, and not neccessarily Christianity itself, as a foundation for modern society

Replace "sincere" with "solemn" or "serious" if it makes the text make more sense.

I am considering asking the pastor of my church certain personal theological questions.

However, I wonder if what I am really looking for is simply an excuse to not think through things myself. Have any of you ever been in such a situation?

What subjects should one have a basic knowledge of before reading God and Other Minds?

>>5256877
I think it is ok to ask the opinions of others, but the best thing to do is pray about it.

Y'all need Jesus.
Perhaps the Holy Spirit too ....

>>5256877
>However, I wonder if what I am really looking for is simply an excuse to not think through things myself.
That's what Catholicism is all about.

>>5252404
Catholic (in Ireland) turned mostly Orthodox.

fuckin love Jesus

I've heard people say that the KJV is full of inaccuracies and mistranslations, but that its aesthetically brilliant. I'm about to begin studying scripture for the first time in my life and I was wondering if it'd be acceptable for forming a solid understanding and relationship with God.

I love Jesus much more--I'm willing to give my body and virginity to him as well.

A question for Roman Catholics. I'm not religious, but generally curious.
Are your priests actually taught about the freemasons? Do they speak about it? Does it have anything to do with the average Roman Catholic?

>>5257030
I both read from, and recommend the KJV.

If you should choose another version. Be advised some of them have left out important verses.

http://biblehub.com/acts/8-37.htm

The NIV, NLT, ESV, ISV, and many others have omitted this important verse.

When read in context this verse is the important part of the message.
It answers the question from the previous verse.
Q: See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
A: If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest

It also has the confession of faith.
And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

I can't believe so many people are Catholic.
The Catholic Church is many times in blatant contradiction to the Bible.
http://www.end-times-prophecy.org/catholic-church-false-doctrine.html

It is also quite obviously the "Whore of Babylon" spoken of in Revelation.
http://www.end-times-prophecy.org/the-whore-of-babylon.html

PS
http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=16251

I'm really interested in several specific aspects of Christianity.

First, I'd like to know what you guys think the most beautiful passage is.
Second, could you push me in the direction of books/accounts of how Christian guilt functions, as I myself while not being religious find your faith one of the most interesting?
Third, simply any literature that deals deeply with Christian feels in general.

Could you help me out?

A non literary aspect of Christianity I adore are European churches and hymns. Hymns are !!GREAT!!

>>5257321
For the second, just read Augustine, man. Or read about him. Nigga had PROBLEMS.

>>5257338
Thanks. I've been told that the Scarlet Letter is excellent but I didn't really enjoy it that much. Perhaps because I couldn't get myself into a mindset that said that "adultery is a evil and deadly sin, and you must die for it." I did like the comet scene, though.

Were you raised Christian or did you find Christ in some other way?

>>5257449
Actually both.
I was raised Christian, but turned away, and became an atheist.
Only just recently I started looking into Christianity.
The more I looked into it, the more I became convinced it was true.

Thank you Jesus for not turning your back on me, even when I turned my back on you.

>>5257502
I think it's true but have no ambition to change my life as a result
wat do


waT dowa

>>5257502
>The more I looked into it, the more I became convinced it was true.
Why? I was raised Christian as well and I'm an atheist now. I want to understand.

>>5257556
Not that guy, but try reading apologetics. There's another thread with some good advice.

>>5257545
Pray.

I honestly don't know what else to say.
I don't personally believe you are required to do anything other than believe in Jesus.
That being said.
How can you say you believe, and not want to live your life for Him?

If it is any consolation. I will pray for you.

>>5257556
>Why?
I honestly don't know.
It all started when a friend and I were discussing why people have faith.
I made the statement "How can anyone believe something without any evidence? They have no evidence that Christianity is true."
He agreed, and we went on making fun of the "stupid Christians".
So later on I'm sitting at my computer, and the question "Why do you think they have no evidence?" pops in my head.
I decided to investigate considering I had the whole internet at my fingertips.

Over the course of a month or so I became convinced Christianity was true. At least mentally.
After Praying for forgiveness, and confessing Jesus was Lord, I found myself overwhelmed.
It is one thing to know in your mind, it is quite another to know it in your heart.
Anyways some of the "evidence" I find to be the most convincing:

The book "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist" by Norman Geisler, and Frank Turek.
For an idea of what the book entails there is a video on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyHWtQN4yLM
(watched the vid, currently reading the book.)

Also the book "Without Excuse" by Werenr Gitt
You can find an article outlining his argument here.
http://creation.com/laws-of-information-1
He also has a video on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v47eG3fWUs0
(read the article, and the book, I have also watched the vid)

Another book is "Evidence for Christianity" by Josh Mcdowell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sj2d2cW_2fc
(I have watched the vid, I have not read the book, but I own it)

Lastly the book "Cold Case Christianity" by J. Warner Wallace
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQmodO2quW0
(I have only watched the video)

Much more out there, but this is a good start.

>>5257642
I will look into it, thanks, but to be honest it doesn't seem very convincing right now

>>5250011
*tips fedora*
captcha: Adthei for

>>5257039
From the inception of Freemasonry to the institution of the new Code of Canon Law after Vatican II, Catholics were forbidden from joining any Masonic Orders/Lodges. The new Code makes no mention of Freemasonry, but my understanding is that Catholics are still discouraged from joining. I have no source for this assertion but it may be mentioned in the Catechism.

The reasons for the Church's antipathy toward Freemasonry are the Masons ecumenical Deist stance, their quasi-religious garb, and their traditional association with anti-Catholic persons and institutions.

>>5257733
Me again. About priests mentioning Masonry, since I was a child to the present I have attended hundreds of Masses (possibly 1000-2000) and I have never heard mention of Masonry in the Mass.

If anything, Masonry was influenced by Catholicism, not the other way around. I'm saying this on the basis of my minimal knowledge of Masonic rituals.

>>5257654
It took me a good month or so.

Also that is just a few of the better sources.
I can't tell you how many articles I have read, or videos I have watched.

Seek and ye shall find.

If you have something in particular that is causing you to doubt, you should look into that topic first.

Do you have any such topics, or problems?
Perhaps I could point you towards the best answer.

>>5257213
>http://www.end-times-prophecy.org/catholic-church-false-doctrine.html

Nice troll. If you actually believe any of those things, you're pretty fucking ignorant. The Bible, the most binding document on all Christians, is a product of the Catholic Church. Without the Church, there is no Bible. You can try and use scripture to justify Catholicphobia but you'll always end up looking like a fool.

>all these cunts roleplaying at living in pre-enlightenment times

You'll break character soon enough, contemporary society won't let this shit last.

>>5257757
>The Bible, the most binding document on all Christians, is a product of the Catholic Church. Without the Church, there is no Bible.

Alright.
How does that fact refute the claims made in the article?

I made the rules, so I can't break them.
Is that your argument?

>>5257777
>still bekieving in enlightenment optimism

Modern science won't make it last, don't worry

>>5257785

Partly, yes. But to play along, I'll just pick apart one of the claims made in that garbage article.

False Doctrine 1 is misleading. Nowhere does it say that the Pope can change scripture. The Pope is given apostolic authority over Church doctrine. he is not free to change scripture at will.

In terms of the Church's authority to dictate Christian doctrine, this was Christ's command alone.

Matt. 18:18 "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." This passage gives direct authority to the church regarding matters of faith. These are the words of Christ to his disciples.

You'll also notice that whenever the Church is mentioned in the Bible it is wholly singular. Nowhere in scripture will you ever find any passage condoning the splitting of the Church. From the beginning of the Church, when Christ handed St. Peter the keys to heaven, it is clear that there is only to be one Church, the bride of Christ. Notice that Christ refers to the singular Church as his bride. A marriage implies commitment with one exclusive partner. If Christ intended his Church to consist of 40,000+ denominations, he would have referred to the Church as his whore.

Furthermore, it is clear throughout the NT that the early Church priests and bishops were to be obeyed regarding Church teaching.

See Hebrews 13:7 "Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation."

And again in Hebrews 13:17 "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you."

It was readily apparent to Paul that the Church certainly did have binding authority over Christians in the early Church. It's priests and bishops were given the authority through apostolic succession.

You also run into the problem that the website says this:

>"The doctrines of the Catholic Church are entirely independent of Holy Scripture." (Familiar Explanation of Catholic Doctrine. Rev. M Muller, page 151)

Who the fuck is Rev. Muller and what the fuck would you listen to him in regards to Church doctrine?

>>5257777
Proven fact, amirite? heh..

Can anyone shed some light on the word "Deed" as it is used in Moral Theology?

A book I was reading made a specific reference to the etymological meaning of deed "in the world of moral theology" but in this regard I am woefully ignorant.

>>5252404
Non-denominational

>>5257850
>Nowhere does it say that the Pope can change scripture. The Pope is given apostolic authority over Church doctrine. he is not free to change scripture at will.

Alright.
Well the scripture says
Ephesians 2:8,9
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Not of works, lest any man should boast.
i.e. Salvation is the gift of God, and you don't earn it with works.

And that the way to be saved is by believing in Jesus
Acts 16:30,31
And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Considering that scripture how could Pope Francis say non-believers are saved?
http://www.catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=51077
On Wednesday he declared that all people, not just Catholics, are redeemed through Jesus, even atheists.
However, he did emphasize there was a catch. Those people must still do good. In fact, it is in doing good that they are led to the One who is the Source of all that is good.
>Those people must still do good

Perhaps he forgot what it says in Ephesians.


If someone with authority goes against what the ultimate authority says, why would you believe the person over the scripture?

Did not the Pharisees have the same problem?
They considered themselves to have ultimate authority, and ended up being dead wrong.

>>5257948

Well this one has been debunked to death. Another example of classic protestants cherry-picking the passages they want to apply.

You convienently left out Eph. Verse 9, which states "For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do."

So right Paul talks about grace, he makes it readily apparent that good works are necessary and will flow from the true Christian.

You are also forgetting about all of these passages, which make it clear that faith without works is dead, and thus grace can be nullified by a passive Christian.

John 14:12 "Truly, truly, I say to you , he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the father."

1 Corin. 15:58 "Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain."

Phillipians 2: 12-13 "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." Christ clearly commands his disciples to WORK out their salvation.

But Probably the most damning of all passages comes from St. James. James 2:19-26:

"You believe God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe--and shudder. Do you want to be shown, you foolish fellow, that faith apart from works is barren? Was not Abraham our father justified by works , when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, and Scripture was fulfilled which says "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness"; and he was called the friend of God. You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone. And in the same way was not also Rahab the Harlot justified by works by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? For as the body apart form the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead."

Grace is what saves Christians. Not faith. Christians are saved by grace through faith. But faith without works is dead. Protestants are right when they say faith is needed, but they are wrong to assume that it is all that is needed. Once again, it's the protestants that don't follow scripture and want to interpret it in their own way, not the Catholics.

This again goes back to my point about the Bible being the product of the Catholic Church. Scripture informs all aspects of Catholic Dogma. There is no doctrine in Catholicism that is not scripturally based.

>>5257998
You have done more to condemn the statements made by the pope than to confirm them.
>Christians are saved by grace through faith
How then are atheists saved by works?
"all people, not just Catholics, are redeemed through Jesus, even atheists.
However, he did emphasize there was a catch. Those people must still do good." - Pope Francis

Also since you brought it up.
>There is no doctrine in Catholicism that is not scripturally based.

Care to point me to the scripture that says to pray using vain repetitions?
It seems to me that is in direct contradiction to the scripture.
Matthew 6:7
But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

Why do Catholics do the rosary?
Make the Sign of the Cross and say the "Apostles' Creed."
Say the "Our Father."
Say three "Hail Marys."
Say the "Glory be to the Father."
Announce the First Mystery; then say the "Our Father."
Say ten "Hail Marys," while meditating on the Mystery.
Say the "Glory be to the Father."
Announce the Second Mystery; then say the "Our Father." Repeat 6 and 7 and continue with Third, Fourth and Fifth Mysteries in the same manner.


Seems like vain repetitions if you ask me.

>>5256835
>chaplain
>woman

This is where you irreversibly fucked up.

Also as for the "Our Father"
Jesus meant for it to be an example.
He did not say "Say this prayer"
He said "After this manner therefore pray ye"
i.e. Pray like this.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manner
manner: the way that something is done or happens

Furthermore in His example He was praying to the Father, not to marry, or Saint [insert name here], or to anyone else.

>>5257998
none of these verses say anything like "your salvation will be forfeit if you don't do good works". on the other hand,

>For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
>Not of works, lest any man should boast.

clearly states that works have no effect on salvation

>>5258040
>How then are atheists saved by works?

You're misunderstanding what the Pope was saying. A lot of it has to do with the understanding of the Resurrection of the body and soul. It is quite possible for fervent atheists to hold Christ as the model for a good and just life. Is it not possible for an Atheist who is inspired by Christ to do good works to be offered salvation? Hasn't he technically 'believed' in Christ possibly more so than many self-proclaimed Christians?

But even if you don't like this explanation, the Pope was merely expanding and reflecting on the mystery of faith and salvation. Theologically, this is rooted in the understanding of the final judgement, where all souls will be given a final opportunity to receive the gift of faith.

After all, how do you explain the righteous pagans and the Old Testament prophets? They surely did not know or understand Jesus, yet you probably never even questioned their salvation. Why?

>Why do Catholics do the rosary?
These are the words of Christ, the Angel Gabriel, and Mary's cousin Elizabeth. The rosary is a prayer method meant to instill Christians into a deeper meditation on the mysteries of the faith. The same can be said for the other Mysteries. Each decade is meant to be a meditation of the life of Christ and other major events in Scripture. The intent behind the Rosary is to bring the Christian into closer communion with Christ and God. The Rosary is a meditation on the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. The Rosary is not a passive prayer method. Rather it is incredibly active and engaging, forcing Christians to focus on the mysteries of the life of Christ rather than simply reflecting on their own suffering.

When Matthew refers to "vain repetitions" he is referring to the repetitions of pagans. A repetitive prayer to God and Christ would not be "vain" because the holy spirit is real and the intent behind the prayer would be to glorify and meditate upon the Almighty. How could such a prayer be "vain"? Thus the repetitions are all directed towards the true living God.

>Make the Sign of the Cross and say the "Apostles' Creed."
The Sign of the Cross is a submission of your faith. A gesture of commitment and reminder of the sacrifice of Christ. The Apostles' Creed is the profession of the faith, just as the Apostles set it up. It is submission to Christ and his Church. It is a declaration and reminder of what we, the community of Christ, believe and stand for as a whole universal community.

>Say the "Our Father."
After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. 11 Give us this day our daily bread. 12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen

>>5258119

Actually that's exactly what it says. Again, follow the theological argument

Christans are saved BY grace THROUGH faith. But faith WITHOUT works is DEAD. In this case, so to is grace.

>>5258158
>deeper meditation on the mysteries of the faith.

Mysteries, delusion. Whatever.

>>5258165
that depends on your definition of faith. yours implies an arbitrary set of activities based on historical precedent, which is quite a bit like the jews.

>>5258040
>Care to point me to the scripture that says to pray using vain repetitions?

I'll do you one better and show you that Christ himself practiced repetitive prayer. From Matthew 26: 39-44 And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, "My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt."
And he came to the disciples and found them sleeping; and he said to Peter, "So, could you not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak."
Again, for the second time, he went away and prayed, "My Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink it, thy will be done." And again he came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were heavy. So, leaving them again, he went away and prayed for the third time, saying the same words."

Notice that final verse? The part about how he said the same words? This happened three separate times.

Furthermore, you may as well discard the Book of Psalms and Proverbs, which are both essentially books of formed (i.e.-Repetitive) prayers.

>>5258172

Considering Catholicism is revealed Judaism, this makes partial sense.

>>5258158
>Theologically, this is rooted in the understanding of the final judgement, where all souls will be given a final opportunity to receive the gift of faith.
You are dead wrong on that brother.

Once you leave this life it is too late to repent.
Hebrews 12:17
For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.

Also
I noticed you did not back up your statements with scripture.
Why is that?

>>5258189
So Jesus facing death on the cross, prayed 3 separate times with the same words is somehow the same as Catholics praying the rosary?

I would point out that the when doing the rosary prayer someone would end up saying 53 "Hail Marys"
It hardly seems comparable.

For more on "too late to repent"
See
Luke 16:19-31
Matthew 25:1-13

also
Matthew 7:22,23
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

>>5258226
>So Jesus facing death on the cross, prayed 3 separate times with the same words is somehow the same as Catholics praying the rosary?

Actually, yes it is. He's utilizing formed prayer to come to a deeper meditative and contemplative state. Regardless of it seems comparable or not is not the point. It's clear that you don't understand the difference between "vain repetitions" and simple repetitions. I gave you a scriptural example of Christ himself utilizing formed prayer and now you're saying they aren't comparable. It's unclear how many times Christ said the same prayer though it's probably safe to assume that he prayed the same prayer many many times considering he was in the garden for a while.

>>5258277
That last verse there hurts.

How did the idea of Christ dying for our sins develop?

Looking at the Bible, it seems more vague than Christianity would like it to. There are these relevant verses:

John 2:2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

John 3:16-18
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

John 5:24-25
I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life. 25 I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live.

All from John. The eternal life promised can be interpreted as Christ's *message* delivering the world towards salvation, but the very act of his crucifixion becoming some sort of covenant?What is intuitive about Christ being the "atoning sacrifice?"

>>5258407
Read Paul's letters, that's where the idea really starts.

>>5258437
Yeah I think that's right, but I'm still confused about John 2:2. How exactly does his death atone for the sins of the world? And why would it still be possible for sin to exist if that were the case?

>>5258507
>Trying this hard to understand nonsensical, impossible bullshit that never happened

Topkeke

>>5258365
>>5258040
"Vain repetitions" is from the King James Bible, which was probably written with the intention of slandering Catholics / the Rosary. The actual phrase is more like, "don't speak too much", or, "don't babble".

>>5258407
Old Testament foretold it. There is the priest tribe of Levi that would sacrifice lambs for the sin offering. There's Isaiah 53 describing such a one. There are probably other similar OT verses, typically in the other prophets, psalms+proverbs, and in some descriptions of the covenants, but I can't remember them specifically at the moment. OT prophets are usually quoted in the gospels to describe fulfilled prophecy as well.

>>5258507
His death gives justification for the sins of those who will believe. Christ is both God and man. Because He is God, He never sins and His death can atone for an infinite amount of people. Because He is also man, he can represent man and atone for the sins, just like how the OT priests were the representatives for Israel when making the sin offering before God.

Sin still exists because God is still letting the world exist so that all who will believe will be able to hear the Gospel and repent. Also, sin still exists in Christians because they still have their fallen flesh (their physical bodies). This sin is being removed through sanctification.

Christians have the immediate blessing of justification before God for all of their sins, past and future. And they have the progressive blessing of sanctification while on this earth.

>>5258407
>What is intuitive about Christ being the "atoning sacrifice?"

Might not be intuitive to us, but you have to put it back in its original context. The Jews of the day knew all about sacrifice, atonement, etc.

>>5258539
>The actual phrase is more like, "don't speak too much", or, "don't babble".

Don't speak too much / don't babble "as the heathens do", it's probably in reference to how heathens would speak to their "gods" as though they were magicians.

>>5253625
/thread
/existance

>>5251002
The historical context back then was probably an uprising of women trying to usurp power and authority. Women in both Judaic and Hellenistic cultures were treated like dogs. So when Christianity gave women value and some freedom in comparison, some women started abusing the freedom. Paul was reacting against their actions.

>>5252404
Reformed and Calvinistic. In the process of becoming a member of an OPC church.

>>5252484
I'm still not certain on this. I also remember when Jesus tells the disciples to buy a sword for their travels in Luke 23 I believe. Though of course he said His kingdom is not of this world I think after the "live by the sword, die by the sword" part.

As of now, I would defend myself, but do my best to simply incapacitate. Now if I was married and my wife/daughter were in danger, I would probably end up killing the aggressor alot quicker than if I was not married with children.

>>5252625
Depends on what you mean by Orthodox. Could either be one of two denominations, or just the historic Christian faith in general, ala from the early church to the reformers to puritans and other groups.

>>5252764
http://www.amazon.com/History-Christian-Church-Complete-Volumes-ebook/dp/B00HUCSUCG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1407472573&sr=8-1&keywords=complete+church+history

>>5256877
i have had to and i would say it is a good thing to do when you cannot discern something...if you have given it thought and cannot find it out then seek wise counsel...

>>5253497
What part of it needs to be figurative to understand?

What is it like having an inferior brain? This is the best place to ask since the religious can be proved with 100% certainty to have a brain defective in the areas that their faith covers.

>>5254096
You get the wrong meaning if you don't include the ending for that passage. Jesus was testing the man because He knew he worshiped money and was trying to earn his way into the kingdom via works.

>>5254096
>>5254792
>>5254825
>>5255828
Youngster here who isn't well-read in the bible

I thought simply taking Jesus into your heart and believing was enough to get you into heaven?

Keeping all of the commandments all of the time is an impossibility because our inherent imperfections.

I'm legitimately curious as to the explicit rules of getting into heaven.

Feel free to call me an idiot

>>5258697
>Believes the story of jesus
You're most assuredly a total fucking idiot.

>>5258702
I don't know about that. I generally bet on God and he gives me talents when I need them. Thanks to him I've been able to learn numerous things and approach a higher-end level of each in a matter of one to two months.

That's enough for me to believe it bro

>>5254784
Becoming a true Christian occurs when God the Holy Spirit regenerates the heart of the sinner, so that the sinner loves God and his commandments. This happens as a result of hearing/having heard the Gospel, and it produces an actual change in the sinner's mind to follow God.

There are evidences of Christian character, such as loving God's Word, having sorrow for sin, wanting to follow His commandments/Word, praying, etc. 2 Peter 1 has a list of qualities that are evidence of one's having been saved and redeemed and regenerated by God. Romans 6-8 also details more about how justification and regeneration give the sinner a new nature.

>>5258712
Astonishing.

>>5258729
At least if I were in a garbage can, someone would help me out.

>>5258734
>A christian attempts to speak

>>5258738

>>5258697
>taking Jesus into your heart and believing
But what does that mean? If you literally mean only that statement, it sounds very spiritual to an absurd degree. Believing in Christ means to believe in His words and His work, that His death paid for our sins, and now we are to repent of our ways and take up our Cross by denying ourselves and following his commandments (Luke 9). If you are truly Christian, you will read your Bible and try to follow it because you love God and love His Word (John 14). Of course you will fail as you say, as we are still in this flesh, but the fact that you battle against it is a sign of your Christianity (Romans 7:14-25). Read Romans 1-9 for this theology. Ephesians 1-3 is pretty compact as well but Romans has more length to explain more.

>>5256623
>>5256127
But the reformers were nothing like that. They were pious and reverent of God and His Word. They and Protestantism are not inherently anti-nomian. That occurred/occurs from people twisting the Scriptures to their own lust and destruction. Your hatred is not towards Protestantism, but modern evangelical Christianity, which does not remember the reformers and does not care for the Bible and God's holiness at all.

>>5257084
KJV is based on a different set of manuscripts than the more modern translations. The more modern ones I believe are more accurate, but I haven't studied the topic well. But in general, KJV is still a very faithful translation, and the only good modern translation you listed is the ESV. NET (for NT) and NASB are good as well.

>>5257321
Most beautiful passage? Romans 8:29-30.
For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

For three and two, read The Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan.

>>5258848
>For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

That's absolutely lovely. Thanks, Anon!!

>>5252404
Red Letter/Non-denominational

>>5258158
Check out Romans 4 for OT salvation being by faith. God's people were under a different covenant during the OT. So they didn't have to explicitly hear the Gospel as explained in the NT, but they still believed in God and His promises and this justified them (justification = salvation). And the prophets were already given information about Christ which is how they were able to prophesy about Him in their books.

>>5257998
Protestants BLOWN THE FUCK OUT

Sola fide makes no sense, I haven't seen a defense of it that doesn't just cherrypick Paul. Why should anyone listen to Paul about salvation when Christ left clear words on how salvation is achieved? Christ talks all the time about the need to do good works and reform your life, trying to ignore this with some Paul's horseshit is the height of arrogance. Go with your Paul then, Catholics aren't Paulists, they're Christians.

"If you want to receive eternal life, follow the Commandments"

>>5258848
Wow what a horrible quote. I actually don't mind Romans, it is a lot better than Paul's letters to the Corinthians, but pick a better quote please.

>>5253100
Faith is smoke and mirrors compared to flame of knowledge. You see too little in humanity.

True, Human need something higher but it must come from within. Humans need their personal church, their own light, their own spark

jesus was a pretty cool guy, I'll probably raise my children catholic with a wink and a nod

>>5259575
Having an active relationship with God is very demanding. It requires constant, vigorous introspection supplemented by years of study. It revealed an insight and willpower that I didn't even know I had.

Christ has made me stronger, so I don't understand the importance of setting up a new moral framework just for the sake of calling it my own.

>>5259509
How many good works did the thief on the cross perform?
Did he ever follow the commandments?
Was he saved?

You claim we are cherry picking, but all he did was go an get the verses that seem to support his view.
What is the difference?
Also see >>5258119

>Paul's horseshit
If what Paul says is "horseshit" why is nearly half of the New Testament written by him?
Are you calling the New Testament "horseshit", or only the 13 books written by Paul?
Do you think I should tear those books out of my Bible?

PS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMc38L44avA

>>5252404
Swedenborgian here.

Ask me anything.

>>5259575


>humanism

disgusting

man is not the full measure

>>5259842
THANK YOU LEFTIST SKELETON

>>5257998
Thank you based apologist anon
Hey /lit/, know any books on apologetics? (are there such a thing?)

>>5259878
>Hey /lit/, know any books on apologetics?
There are a few listed >>5257642

Also there are some books by C.S.Lewis
Mere Christianity
The Screwtape Letters
The Great Divorce
The Problem of Pain
Miracles
A Grief Observed
The Abolition of Man


There are a few recommendations located here as well.
http://www.apologetics.org/resources/suggested-reading-list/

I really recommend "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist"
You can read the introduction here.
http://davidlimbaugh.com/1581345615.1.pdf

Hopefully some other anons will have some recommendations as well.
I am trying to learn all that I can.

>>5259825
How were righteous people before Christ saved?
It is possible you MIGHT be saved in the way you describe, but it's very unclear and doubgful. How do you know you have faith in Christ? What if your church is heretical?
Righteous behavior pleases agod even if you reject him.
Through receiving the word we are cleansed and motivated to follow Christ, but not receiving it doesn't make everyone else satanist demons, this is classic Christian elitism.

How do you know Christianity is right and not another religion?

>>5259783
Christ didn't make you stronger. You did. Also by personal church, I meant forming their own relationship to divinity, with no middleman. Books and sages can only guide you, but your pathway and relationship with God can only be made by you and for you. No one else can unleash your divine spark. You are your own Christ.

>>5259842
>He thinks I am a humanist

Top kek. Try again zealot

>>5260168
>How were righteous people before Christ saved?
The same way people are saved today.
By having faith in God.

Genesis 15:6
And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

Galatians 3:6
Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.

Romans 4:3
For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

PS
Acts 16:30,31
And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
>Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved

>>5260176
because you're white

>>5260168
Also our righteousness is like filthy rags to the Holy God.

Isaiah 64:6
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.


That is why we must put our faith in Jesus.
Because none of us are righteous.

Ecclesiastes 7:20
For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.

Romans 3:10
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

The good news of the Gospel is you are not required to live a perfect life.
Jesus has lived the perfect life for you.
You do not have to die with your sins.
Jesus has already died for your sins.

It's a good thing too, considering:
Romans 3:23
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

tl/dr
Salvation is not the same as edification.

>>5260234
Good thing Christ left the Church to bring peopl to righteousness then.

>>5260176
How do you know your science is right and not another science?

>>5260168
>How were righteous people before Christ saved?

They weren't. They remained in the Bosom of Abraham, a circle of hell, until Christ descended into hell to free them.

>>5260298
I never said anything about science

>>5260176
>>5260307
Not the guy you were replying to, but for some evidence that God is real, and that Christianity is true see>>5257642

Also
I would be happy to answer(to the best of my ability) questions, or objections you might have.

Question to converts: How do you deal with the idea that your loved ones will go to hell?

>>5260375
You pray for them often in the hope that the mercy of God may release them from their suffering, but you must acknowledge that it was a choice on their part, and that if a soul that rejected Christ had risen to heaven, the sight of God would have been a torture worse than anything imaginable in hell.

>go to Heaven
>be under watchful eyes of tyrannical God who can do whatever he pleases with you (Lucifer was once his highest angel, but that didn't stop him from casting him down to the bowels of Hell. What makes you think he'd spare you that fate?)
>be surrounded by believers of only 1 of the vast array of religions in human history
>pleasure ultimately loses all meaning when you can have whatever you want, whenever you want

>go to Hell
>be watched over by one of the few people who stood up to God and lived to tell the tale
>surrounded by Native Americans, Greek philosophers, pagans, the list goes on
>daily exposure to torture and pain motivates growth and development of the human soul
>can have all the casual sex you want without being married

Can somebody explain how going to Hell is worse than going to Heaven? I just don't seem to get it.

>>5260397
So you essentially deal with the eternal torture (or some sort of spiritual equivalent of it) of your loved ones every day?

This alone would be enough for me to refrain from even seriously considering a religion.

>>5252404
Catholic

>>5260298
Yes I believe Chemistry is the one true sconce. Praise Carbon!

>>5260513
*science

>>5260375
I hold to universal salvation. A loving God doesn't abandon us eternally, it is an absurd concept. However we will pay the wages
of our sin in some manner. I believe Hell is a result of God's ultimate love for human freedom, that he will allow those who choose to deny him even when faced with his full reality in the afterlife, a place.

>>5260555
I thought it was explicitly said that Hell is punishment for all non believers

>>5260555

>I believe Hell is a result of God's ultimate love for human freedom

He loves freedom so much he punishes you for eternity for exercising it...huh?

>>5260601

When I see comments like this it makes me think of a symphonic orchestra being drowned out by a foghorn and the person with the horn laughing and shouting "I guess your fiddles just can't hack it, eh?"

>>5260619

Your analogy was entertaining, but I fail to grasp any argument it may contain. Care to elaborate?

>>5260620
He's really mad because years of brainwashing make you blind to the blatant retardation that is Genesis, Hell and the story of christ.

>>5260620

There was no argument, it was a comment on how I feel often when someone tries to explain something and is undercut by a cheap comment.

What does that anon really want? He wants nothing but to ridicule and mock, and takes any low angle he can take. People could be here all day untwisting his words to show him the things that he could easily discern if he actually wanted to know (by y'know, reading), but it would do him no good because of his insincerity in asking.

>>5260645
>>5260625

Yes, make no mistake, a pearl is nothing to a pig.

>>5260645

>There was no argument

So then you concede that you're in the wrong? That's how debates like these between humans work: somebody raises a point, and you either argue against it or concede it.

>He wants nothing but to ridicule and mock

Perhaps it would be best to ask why you're being mocked? Sarcastic quips may seem offensive to you, but you write them off and sweep whatever point they're trying to make under the rug it just engenders an even worse reaction.

>>5260555
So God loves our freedom more than us?

>>5260666

I concede I am not the person you think I am. I have made three posts in this thread. I am sure you can tell which they are.

And now this, my fourth, my last. I don't debate in these threads. I merely stopped by to voice my distaste at certain types of comments.

>>5260645
Not that anon but last i checked this was a Christianity general thread, where people discuss. He was trying to clarify something you said. It is much easier to obtain clarity then y'know reading. Swinging that snobbish attitude is rather rude, unless you want this thread to be full of circlejerking

>>5260651
>Le xD
Shut up retard. If you really believe an overdaddy designed everything and "knew you before you were born" and imbued you with free will, then told on specific desert group a narrow band of rules and the understanding they are to force others to accept his love, then disappeared for a few hundred years, wakes up, rapes a women to give birth to himself and torture himself to death to save you from the sin he knowingly planted there in advance, you are a complete fucking moron and most assuredly a cultist.

>>5260672
Look at it this way. A person who is rightlz ordered towards God can comprehend him and reap the rewards of this in the afterlife. A person who continually rejects him will not understand God, and any proof he might receive will nly bring him Iin error. It's not that God chooses to condemn you, it's that you are simply unable by your nature to be close to God, you have to overcome your sinful state.

the central idea of Christianity is that God seeks us, just as we seek him. He wants us to love him, unconditionally.

>>5260504
I would also point out that someone you love going to hell, is no reason for you to join them.
If anyone who cares about you is currently in hell, it is safe to assume they do not want you to join them.
see Luke 16:19-31

Also there is a good chance we will not remember them.
Revelation 21:4
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

>>5260555
>A loving God doesn't abandon us eternally
It is possible that people do not survive forever in hell, they are eventually destroyed.
Matthew 10:28
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

>>5258158
This is a great defense of the rosary. I've been praying it a lot lately and it's been one of the most beneficial things I've done in a long time. I urge all Christians, Catholic or no, to try praying it sometime while thinking of Christ's life and death.

OP here. This thread has turned out much better than I had hoped. It's given me a lot to read and reflect on. Thanks very much, everyone.

>>5258666
[tips fedora]

>>5260739
>He wants us to love him, unconditionally.

Why does he want us to love him? I mean, I believe that everything was made by conscious creator, but I can't bring myself to love him. If anything, the overwhelming pain and misery that everyone suffers just leads me to hate him. Yes, we may have been kicked out of eden and eternally punished for it, but I can't love someone who punishes the world eternally. And the fact that he demands my love makes it even worse. I just can't muster the Stockholm syndrome that others seem to have.

>>5261012
>tips fedora

Annnnnnnnnnnnd you ruin it. Like some greek tragdery

>>5260619
Kekked. Great analogy.

>>5253639
high five bro

You guys might like this film it has some insight into the book of Revelation.
It also has a lot about the history of Christianity.
http://filenuke.com/i1j6d3e73fjd

>>5260472
I can explain why you are a retard if you like.

>>5260601
No, He respects your sovereignty, and if you choose to be separated from Him forever, you will be separated from Him forever, and all that He is, and all that He does.

>>5260472
Sure.

Heaven is nothing like you pictured it, and hell is a pitch black lake of fire where you see nothing, you are on fire, the fire never goes out, you never die, and all you hear are the screams of billions of other damned men and angels howling in agony.

Did I mention it goes on for an eternity?

>>5260505
He clearly said "christians, what denomination are you?", not "what religion are you?".

>>5261018
If you met Him, before you die, you would love Him.

If you meet Him after you die, you will not.

There is no question you will meet Him. The only question is whether or not that is while you yet live, and can choose to be with Him, or after you die an unbelieving and unrepentant sinner, and are cast off.

Make no mistake. You get to choose. And your choice matters to you.

>>5257998
Paul heavily disagrees with James, stating that if it is works that save, it is not grace. Works of the Law and grace do not go together; you are either saved by the Grace of God, or you are saved by the works you do.

James was right in only one sense. The "works" of God is to believe in the One Whom He has sent. In that "work" lies the grace that saves through faith, and not of works, lest any man should boast.

I see catholics boasting all the time about their works. And I have yet to meet a catholic who was also a christian.

>>5262105
>If you meet Him after you die, you will not.

I think even the damned love God. In fact, I think that's the true eternal fire: the fire of their own self-loathing for betraying God and as a result separating themselves from His light.

Check out this part of Dream of Gerontius by Newman. This poem is about a soul going to their judgement. This soul in particular is saved, yet, listen to the description the angel gives of a soul meeting God.

WHEN then—if such thy lot—thou seest thy Judge,
The sight of Him will kindle in thy heart,
All tender, gracious, reverential thoughts.
Thou wilt be sick with love, and yearn for Him,
And feel as though thou couldst but pity Him,
That one so sweet should e’er have placed Himself
At disadvantage such, as to be used
So vilely by a being so vile as thee.
There is a pleading in His pensive eyes
Will pierce thee to the quick, and trouble thee.
And thou wilt hate and loathe thyself; for, though
Now sinless, thou wilt feel that thou hast sinned,
As never thou didst feel; and wilt desire
To slink away, and hide thee from His sight;
And yet wilt have a longing aye to dwell
Within the beauty of His countenance.
And these two pains, so counter and so keen,—
The longing for Him, when thou seest Him not;
The shame of self at thought of seeing Him,—
Will be thy veriest, sharpest purgatory.

http://www.ccel.org/n/newman/gerontius/gerontius.htm

>>5259509
Following the Commandments perfectly, as God the Father is perfect, is impossible. So if that is the only way to eternal life, you may as well do what thou wilt.

The only way a man can be righteous is is God declares that man is righteous for whatever reason God wants to use. He declared Abraham righteous for believing His Word; He declared Job righteous for living upright and making sacrifices before there was a Law, He declared Lot righteous for believing Abraham's God is the one true God, and He declared all christians righteous because He took all of our sins away from us, and remembers them no more.

>>5262164
I think some may feel that way, and of course, I don't believe in purgatory, being a bible believing christian. I have met enough people in my lifetime to know that they hate God, and always will. They hate God to their own destruction, and continue to hate. They are truly the children of satan.

>>5260168
All of the righteous before Jesus rose from the dead were confined to Paradise deep in the bowels of the earth, in the third heaven. Paradise, or the Bosom of Abraham, is one of a two-compartmental afterlife chamber, the other side being Hades, a darker and hotter and more awful place to be than Paradise. Nobody can cross from one to the other on their own.

Jesus told this story to us as the story of a certain rich man and Lazarus the beggar (not the one He raised from the dead), the rich man ending up in Hades, and the beggar in the Bosom of Abraham.

Still being an obnoxious rich man, he orders Abraham to send Lazarus over to him with a drop of water for his tongue, as he is on fire hot. Abraham explains that is impossible. The rich man then tells Abraham to send someone to tell his brothers that this place is real and to be avoided at all costs.

Abraham told the rich man that they had Moses and the Prophets, and that if they did not believe in Moses and the Prophets, they would not believe even though one came back from the dead and told them.

Those righteous people in the Bosom of Abraham were visited by Jesus on the day He died, and He stayed with them for three days until He rose, and took them into heaven with Him.

The people in Hades are still there, and their numbers grow daily. The Bosom of Abraham is empty, and will never again house anyone, as anyone now who dies goes to be with the Lord directly.

In the end of everything, this two-compartmental holding chamber will be cast into the Lake of Fire, the dead in it judged and cast into the Lake of Fire, and then all of it will be remembered no more.

>>5252404
>all these replies with religious folks

it's the year of our lord 2014 and still people buy into this crap.

before you idiots spew this lame meme, i'll do it for you: *tips fidora*

>>5262251
Ironic.

>>5258697
If you confess with your mouth, that is to say out loud, that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart (not your head) that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. Romans 10:9

If you ask Jesus into your heart, you are demonstrating that you know He was killed but is now alive and can hear you, and that He can come into your heart via His Holy Spirit. So if you add saying that Jesus is Lord to that, you have done what God asked you to do; bend the knee to Jesus, declare Him Lord, believe He rose from the dead, and consent to be saved.

Good question.

Too bad Emperor Julian died prematurly, he couldnt stop you galileans, fucking ruined everything.

Any orthodox people here?

Some guys said OPC what is that?

>>5252404
"Macedonian Orthodox" but that's really to define the language in which the service takes place, so basically Eastern Orthodox.

Is there a famous philosopher who is Eastern Orthodox?

>>5262385
Outside of the context of the church?

>>5256685
Mere Christianity, and then Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy is one of my favorite books of all time. I've read it about 7 times. It's the book that gave me that "at last I truly see " moment

Not that guy btw

Does God feel pain over those who are not close to him? Is he alone?

>>5262385
richard swinburne is a philosopher of religion

>>5262723
>Does God feel pain over those who are not close to him?
I think that He does.
God loves everyone.
Not everyone loves God.

Have you ever loved someone that did not love you back?
If you haven't I can tell you it is very emotionally painful.

>Is he alone?
Nope.
God can never be "alone" as He exists as a Trinity.
The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
He also has angels.
Furthermore there are people currently in Heaven.

>>5264519
>Furthermore there are people currently in Heaven.
I doubt this. I don't think there has ever been a mortal worthy of heaven. Despite the feel-goody 'all you need to do is repent' of Christianity, after Eve there has been nobody whose soul is pure enough. If the church told you that heaven was closed to you (as the Watchtower currently teaches) there would be a mass outcry.

>>5264523
The good news of the Gospel is that we are not required to be worthy.
Hence salvation is the gift of God.

It is not based on our works, but the work of Jesus.

I agree that none of us are worthy.
The only one who was worthy was Jesus.
I choose to believe in Him.

Do you believe the old testament?
2 Kings 2
Verse 2: And it came to pass, when the Lord would take up Elijah into heaven by a whirlwind, that Elijah went with Elisha from Gilgal.
>the Lord would take up Elijah into heaven

Verse 11: And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.
>Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

If Elijah did not actually go into heaven, as the bible says, where then did he go?

>>5264549
>Do you believe the old testament?
Yes, and despite my reservations about the worthiness of mortals, I have to believe that nobody is worthy of heaven, yet God redeemed 144,000 people to allow into heaven:

Revelation 14:1-4
1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.
2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:
3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.
4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men.

>>5264549

This is a good post.

>>5264578
>God redeemed 144,000 people to allow into heaven:
Then why do you doubt that there are people in heaven?


>These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men.

It never states that only these are redeemed.

Do you think that only virgins can be saved?
Why then has God said "be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth"?
Genesis 1:28
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

How can someone obeying God's command be condemned because he has obeyed it?

>>5264597
That's prelapsarian though.

>>5264597
Those 144,000 are the anointed, the only redeemed lambs and therefore worthy of heaven. Everyone else is the other sheep. There are countless references to this small chosen group" "Israel of God" (Galatians 6:16), "little flock" (Luke 12:32), "New Jerusalem," and "the bride, the Lamb's wife" (Revelation 21:2,9) in the New Testament also refer to the same group of "anointed" Christians."

Jesus' use of the term "other sheep" at John 10:16 was intended to indicate that the majority of his followers were not part of the 144,000 and can only have an earthly, rather than heavenly, hope. In the resurrection, those who died faithful to God are included in the 'other sheep' and will receive a "resurrection of the righteous" ("just" KJV) mentioned in Acts 24:15. Those who died without faithfully serving God will receive the "resurrection of the unrighteous" ("unjust" KJV). They will be given an opportunity to gain God's favor and join Jesus' 'other sheep'. Individuals unfavorably judged by are not resurrected, and are in Gehenna - eternal damnation. Those of the 'other sheep' who are alive now, some of who survive through armageddon without needing a resurrection, are referred to as the 'great crowd

I am atheist, but I am afraid of going to Hell in case it turns out that Christianity is one true religion after all. I want to be saved from the lake of fire that awaits my kind of people. (Revelation 21:8)

However, considering that the Scriptures seem to be a collection of old, inconsistent fairytales and lies to a non-believer, I am deeply struggling to become a Christian.

So here is my question: What's the best way for me to lose my ability to think critically, and thus, become able to love God and embrace Christianity unconditionally? Should I hit myself in the head with a hammer?

May God bless you all.

>>5264679

Faith.

If you couldn't figure that one out, perhaps you've already lost your ability to think critically.

>>5264679
>What's the best way for me to lose my ability to think critically

Humility. The spirit of perpetual criticism is for wretched pedants and the spiteful ignorant.

>>5264631
Does them committing sin somehow negate God's previous command?

>>5264633
You have an interesting way of looking at things.

Matthew 22:1-14
Verse 2:The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
Verse 10: So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.
>both bad and good

Luke 14:15-24
Verse 15: And when one of them that sat at meat with him heard these things, he said unto him, Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God.
Verse 21: So that servant came, and shewed his lord these things. Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant, Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind.
>bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind.


It seems to me Jesus is using these parables in reference to Heaven.
It also seems to me that imperfect people were allowed in.

What is your interpretation of these parables?

>>5264679
You can be both logical, and religious.
Examine the evidence for yourself.
Here are a few places you could start.

The book "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist" by Norman Geisler, and Frank Turek.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyHWtQN4yLM

The book "Without Excuse" by Werenr Gitt
http://creation.com/laws-of-information-1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v47eG3fWUs0

"Evidence for Christianity" by Josh Mcdowell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sj2d2cW_2fc

"Cold Case Christianity" by J. Warner Wallace
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQmodO2quW0

>>5264679
You need Shinran Buddhism, friend.

http://vocaroo.com/i/s1QASpF3dKYs

>>5264701
Sounds interesting. I think I'll try it.

>>5264679

Think critically, never lose that, what's what the Bible actually says to do. Read this, it should help.

>>5264728
>what the Bible actually says to do
Kill homosexuals and adulterers?

>>5264731
John 8:7
So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

PS
http://carm.org/why-do-christians-not-obey-old-testaments-commands-to-kill-homosexuals

>>5264679
Hahaha, pure gold!
You cant reverse it, just by constantly surpressing your true thoughts (essence of faith in the 21 century OH SNAP) and live in self denial *fullpleb* and hope for a reward which has never been proven *megatronpleb* and to understand the condition of your future schizophrenie, follow hegels description of madness :
>“Both the mad and tragic selves recenter their desires and designs around an inner reality which is essentially dislocated from the outer world.” Ideology sustains its power through the “inwardly divided doubled form of consciousness”

Substitute your god and jesus with mithras/ahura mazda or other deities and then read what you guys are posting, it sounds so make-believe, if you were born during a different time period you would have been quoting the vedas or other texts, its all so trivial. Whatever deity you believe in, whichever texts you read, there are older beliefs than yours, and they probably believed in them as hard as you. Its just all so trivial to me. I cant get into. After reading so much history, your culture and religion becomes just one among many, it loses its importance as first place.

Dont get me wrong, I enjoy reading the texts and mythologies of it, I love early christian history, in hand with later roman history, how it was formed and organized, the various 'heresies', and the greek disputes during the byzantine empire, etc. Is all fascinating. But i read it as i read about ancient egyptian religion or something else. Something that will probably fade away and be replaced with another belief or religion eventually... maybe.

(Raised christian (catholic), lost belief at around 15 or so)

Currently reading Eusebius.

>>5264764
How do you account for the empty tomb of Jesus?

>>5264764
Your argument seems to be "Because not all religions are true, none are true".

What logic do you use to arrive at that conclusion?

>>5264764
This is basically true, but I think it's important to keep in mind that the Abrahamic God is distinguished from all other gods of the period, with the exception of Socrates' conception of the Greek gods, by his not being thought of as a being having a body and a spatio-temporal location. Rather, from Exodus on it's clear that the Israelites thought that God *was* being itself. It's a genius leap for such a primitive culture to make.

So what do you Paul readers think of his condemnation of the malakoi and arsenokoites?

>>5264824
His argument is more "all religions play out more or less the same way, so they can't hold the complete truth"

The best comparison I can think is there are so many variations of the hero journey, but none of the heroes can be considered the ideal hero

>>5264833
It was my understanding that any unrepentant sinner is condemned.
I have to agree.
Anyone could be forgiven, if they repent from their sins.

Did he say that they could never be forgiven?
What particular verses are you talking bout?

>>5264852
1 Corinthians 6:9-10. I'm wondering more about whether or not to take it as an unequivocal condemnation of homosexual behavior. I know a lot of liberal readers of scripture jump through hoops to say that "malakoi" refers to prostitutes and not effeminate men, etc., but I'm more inclined to think that Paul really did mean to condemn all homosexual acts.

>>5264861
>but I'm more inclined to think that Paul really did mean to condemn all homosexual acts.
I would agree.
He condemns the acts, not the person.
Again anyone can be forgiven.

You might appreciate this answer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqTbXHsOrGM

>>5264849
>all religions play out more or less the same way

I would have to disagree.
Christianity is uniquely different in that it offers acceptance and forgiveness up front.
It is not based on our merit, but on that of Jesus.

John Lennox explains this concept quite well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMc38L44avA

Can you give me an example of another religion that does the same?

>>5264792
>How do you account for the empty tomb of Jesus?

Jesus wasn't even crucified, let alone missing from his tomb. All you icon worshipers who hang a crucifix around your neck and pray to the crucified man above the tabernacle are worshiping a lie.

>>5264928
>Christianity is uniquely different in that it offers acceptance and forgiveness up front.
You mean it offers original sin and a handy escape plan.

>>5264962
The baptism and crucifixion of Jesus are the two most historically certain facts of his life.

>>5264928
Not sure but I would bet on Islam and their emphasis on Submission. Besides the mythos of Christianity has a lot of similarities with Mithraism, its medieval theology borrows a lot from pagans.(Philosophy is more or less created by pagans) Of course a certain religion has something unique to it (else it won't be a religion) but the general 'theme' remains

Also is it me or are there so many 'references' in this thread? I get the Bible quotations, but there is a lot 'read this book/watch this video to know my position' Why can't people say their position and opinion instead of having the other side read a book/watch a video? This is a discussion afterall. If you need to rely on someone else to aid you in communication then maybe you don't really understand what you are trying to communicate in the first place.


Btw, I like the merit system more. Better to struggle to be better (helped by divinity), then to simply be better by submitting to divinity

>>5264968
>The baptism and crucifixion of Jesus are the two most historically certain facts of his life.

Nope. Jesus not being crucified on a cross is one of the most historically certain facts of his life. The biblical term is σταυρός (stauros), which meant an upright stake and almost certainly wasn't a cross. The "cross" is stolen imagery and mistranslation for the purpose of icon worship.


"The words "cross" and "crucify" are mistranslations, a "later rendering," of the Greek words stauros and stauroo, STAUROS denotes, primarily, an upright pole or stake. The shape of the two-beamed cross had its origin in ancient Chaldea and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz. In the third century A.D., pagans were received into the apostate ecclesiastical system and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. "
--Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words

"In the Egyptian churches the cross was a pagan symbol of life borrowed by the Christians and interpreted in the pagan manner."
--Encyclopaedia Britannica,

The most accepted reason for the "cross" being brought into Messianic worship is Constantine's famous vision of "the cross superimposed on the sun" in A.D. 312. What he saw is nowhere to be found in Scripture. Even after his so-called "conversion," his coins showed an even-armed cross as a symbol for the Sun-god. Many scholars have doubted the "conversion" of Constantine because of the wicked deeds that he did afterwards.

After Constantine had the "vision of the cross," he promoted another variety of the cross, the Chi-Rho or Labarum. This has been explained as representing the first letters of the name Christos (CH and R, or, in Greek, X and P). The identical symbols were found as inscriptions on rock, dating from ca. 2500 B.C., being interpreted as "a combination of the two Sun-symbols." Another proof of its pagan origin is that the identical symbol was found on a coin of Ptolemeus III from 247-222 B.C.

>>5265001
Baptism and execution then. I don't have any personal investment in the shape of the symbol or its origin.

>>5265001
Significantly outdated, but here's a lot more on the cross as a symbol before Christianity and the stauros debate for those who are interested: http://newadvent.org/cathen/04517a.htm..

>you will never be Roman Emperor and order the persecution of these new jewish cultists

>you will never be a righteous worshipper of the gods and write a refutation to these blasphemers and world ruiners

>>5265288
>tfw Mithraism could have been as big as Christianity and wouldn't purged the pagans/gnostics

>>5264982
>Not sure but I would bet on Islam
You would lose that bet.
Islam teaches that believers are saved by works.

To those who believe and do deeds of righteousness hath Allah promised forgiveness and a great reward. 5:9

But those who believe and work righteousness,- no burden do We place on any soul, but that which it can bear, they will be Companions of the Garden, therein to dwell (forever). 7:42

>Christianity has a lot of similarities with Mithraism
No it does not.
see (pic related)

>Why can't people say their position and opinion instead of having the other side read a book/watch a video?
I'm lazy, and I'm not going to type out a book for you.

How do you feel about related pics?
I find it much easier to post a pic than to keep typing up refutations of shit that has already been refuted.
But that is just my opinion.

>>5264962
>Jesus wasn't even crucified, let alone missing from his tomb

These facts have been confirmed by non Christian sources.
Most notably by Flavius Josephus.
"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." - Flavius Josephus - Antiquities of the Jews


Let us assume for a moment what you say is true.
Why didn't the Jews present the dead body to silence talk of a resurrection?
Also
What motivated the apostles to preach the Gospel?
If the story was a lie they would have known it.(being the ones who made it up)
Why did they not recant when faced with persecution, and death?

Before someone says the apostles made up the story.
I want you to just stop for a minute, and think about just how stupid that would sound.
If you are having a hard time imagining it, you could watch the following.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBLdHiaFYwk

To all the Catholics: were you raised as such or did you convert? What about the claims of Orthodoxy as being the closest to the apostolic faith?

>>5266625
You picked a bad time to ask a question.
The thread has reached the bump limit, and is about to 404.
You might want to start a new thread.

As for your question.
N/A
I'm not a Catholic.

>papist scum
>real believers