I’m a uh... lifelong atheist getting interested in Christianity.

[Anonymous No.15633280]

What should I do? Good entry-level recs to help me decide which sect is best?

[Anonymous No.15633283]

to your local church

[Anonymous No.15633291]

CS Lewis, Mere Christianity

Literally tailor made for someone with your interests.

[Anonymous No.15633301]

[Anonymous No.15633304]

>>15633291
>>15633283
wow actually some good posts, we got here before the orthodox and catholic larpers. OP is probably a nazi who wants to "embrace tradition" though.

get a good translation of the bible and read the gospels as well, don't read KJV it's too difficult so many words have changed meanings, NKJV is nice. Yeah just go to church maybe talk to priest ask him to explain some stuff, the exact denomination doesn't matter unless it's some WBC tier shit, you can always go to another church if after a few months you decide you don't like the theology

[Anonymous No.15633313]

>>15633280
Just read the bible, retard. This is why you don't go on /lit/ if you don't read, you'll fail to filter out the drooling dullards unironically suggesting you start with a year reading the sumerians before you can read the Illiad. DRV bible is what you want, shoo.

[Anonymous No.15633314]

>>15633301
kjv is objectively a bad translation

[Anonymous No.15633344]

>>15633313
>drv

fuck off papist, it's literally a ripoff off the kjv with some dodgy translations to support dodgy shit. There is no reason for a non catholic to read it, literally zero.

Half of their doctrine is just made up "tradition" with no biblical support (mary being born without sin, praying to mary, purgatory, missing mass once being a mortal sin, transubstantiation, having to confess sins to a priest in a box instead of a fellow believer or God, infant baptism, indulgences and prayers for the dead reducing the amount of time one would spend in purgatory, clerical celibacy, purgatory, "queen of heaven").

[Anonymous No.15633349]

>>15633304
>OP is a nazi who wants to “embrace tradition”
Not at all. I’ve just never really given theology a second glance having been surrounded by atheists for my childhood and most of my adult life so far.

[Anonymous No.15633373]

>>15633280
There's an easy way to meet god or the void yourself and settle the question once and for all

[Anonymous No.15633377]

>>15633280
"The Book of God" by Wangerin. Tells the core narrative accurately, but written in the form of a novel.

[Anonymous No.15633400]

>>15633301
it might be the best for literary merit but it's one of the least historically accurate translations you can get today (that's not made by like the Jehovah's witnesses or something

[Anonymous No.15633410]

>>15633344
Fuck off lollard, there is no reason for OP to put serious consideration into what version of the Bible they read. KJV, DRV, NIV, whatever, OP should just look at a few online and buy the one which is most pleasant to read. I find the DRV more pleasant to read than the KJV but to each their own.

[Anonymous No.15633425]

>>15633314
Wait, is the image saying KJV has removed those passages, or not? I think I’m just confused because you’re mocking it, but the image seems to say it’s got what the others don’t...

[Anonymous No.15633436]

>>15633280
Read the Bhagavad Gita and then the Vedas.

[Anonymous No.15633441]

Orthodox Faith and Life in Chirst by St. Justin Popović
Nihilism by Fr. Seraphim Rose

[Anonymous No.15633456]

>>15633349
oh ok, sorry. The picture in the OP set me off, there are a lot of orthodox and catholic larpers many of whom converted post trump and main motivation is that it's traditional and based. Not that there's anything wrong with tradition but you know what I mean. You can be a Christian and acklowedge certain realities about race, you could even think certain races are inferior in some respects and so on, but you can't be Christian and hate certain races

You see them arguing stuff like we need a new crusade to kill all protestants and stuff that blatantly goes against thousands year old doctrine of THEIR (alleged) own church.

mere christianity and other cs lewis books are great though, also chesterton. Lewis writes from an intentionally very generic Christian perspective, he's the best bet if you don't want a writer skewed to a certain denomination, 99% of Christians would agree with everything he says.

[Anonymous No.15633480]

>>15633425
they were removed for a reason, they aren't found in the earliest versions of the text we have so they are suspect. The real reason not to read KJV is that you need to have a really good understanding of 1600s english to get it since meaning of words have changed.

people will say dhouay rheims but it's a meme literally just a worse KJV, there's not much difference between protestant and catholic bibles, catholic bibles have a few extra books but they aren't read from often or very important.

Most bible translations are pretty good honestly, if you want more readable/easy to understand language you oftne lose poetic beauty or the exact meaning.

If you want an academic bible that is very accurate and precise go with the NASB (evangelical), RSV or NRSV (pozzed), academics usually use the latter.

if you want a MUH POETICS bible mainly for litererary reasons go KJV but it has a few dodgy verses that most bibles remove and it is almost certain you will misinterpret parts of it because meanings of some words have changed

If you want the above but updated for modern english and replacing thees and thous while still maintaining most of the poetic beauty and being accurate go for the NKJV which is my favorite.

If you want the most common, generic translation that loses some of the magic and is slightly pozzed go for the NIV

[Anonymous No.15633491]

>>15633301
http://www.thealmightyguru.com/Wiki/index.php?title=List_of_misunderstood_words_in_the_King_James_Bible

words that literally have the opposite meaning that they do to today

[Anonymous No.15633603]

If you are somewhat familiar with metaphysics, specially platonic one, Vladimir Lossky. I'd also suggest Alfeyev's The Mystery of Faith.

[Anonymous No.15633626]

>>15633304
Why do you dislike the Catholic church?
Catholicism is by far the best denomination.

[Anonymous No.15633627]

becoming religious when you weren’t raised religious is a huge larp. accept your meaningless life, faggot.

[Anonymous No.15633650]

I say this as a God fearing man, skip Christianity for now and start with the Bhagavad Gita, it’s literally a better introduction to religion.

[Anonymous No.15633656]

>>15633627
because you need religion to not be a depressed pseud?

[Anonymous No.15633664]

>>15633280
If you're coming from an atheist perspective, Edward Feser's The Last Superstition does a banner job of refuting bad materialist ideas while providing a solid general introduction to the philosophy of classical theism. If you're feeling bold and don't want to spend any money, you could also jump into the first part of the Summa Theologica. It's dense but by no means unreadable. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is also available online. It's book-length and constantly provides sources for further reading. If you're set on jumping directly into scripture, the Orthodox Study Bible is extremely useful no matter what denomination you're leaning toward (I say this as an obvious Catholic).

If you were looking for even entry-level-er stuff, I know that C.S. Lewis comes up a lot, especially Mere Christianity and The Problem of Pain. I haven't read either of them, but they're where a lot of people start. Chesterton's Orthodoxy, which I have read, also comes up a lot in this context. It's more autobiographical than philosophical, but there's something in the tone of your posts that makes me think you might appreciate it.

Good luck.

[Anonymous No.15633684]

>>15633627
I pity the people who are so irony-poisoned that they cannot conceive of someone making a major life change in a completely sincere way.

[Anonymous No.15633737]

>>15633684
This. "Larp" is a cope for men of inaction

[Anonymous No.15633751]

I believe that I have what can only be described as a hellbent mind, I'm a very perverted person. A few years ago I came close to converting but I ended up getting sidetracked, maybe for better or worse. I still get moments where I get a strong feeling urging me to go back to Catholicism, another part of me is hesitant as I'm aware of my own vulnerability and I might even be mentally ill

[Anonymous No.15633772]

>>15633280
>which sect is best?
This is hugely subjective and will be hard for you to figure out. I grew up Protestant and am now converting to Orthodox, these sort of things aren't to be taken lightly. Your best bet is to try out a variety of different churches near you and see which ones you like. I would start off with the most basic bitch mainline Protestant ones like Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, etc. so you have a basic idea of it. I would then try C*tholic ones, including the shit like Latin Mass to see if you like that, and then maybe Orthodoxy last as it's the most involved from what I've seen. I wouldn't rush the process, it's about your immortal soul and the church isn't going anywhere, though I would be consistent about trying out what you like. Reading the Bible on top of that independently is a good idea as well, though start with the New Testament if you don't consistently read.

[Anonymous No.15633777]

>>15633491
I have an acceptable enough grasp on 17th century english.

[Anonymous No.15633805]

>>15633344
DRV is actually older than KJV, but it was then edited/updated after, largely borrowing from the latter. They're so similar that it can barely be said to matter, honestly.

[Anonymous No.15633816]

>>15633626
Jesus explicitly told me never to call another man father.

[Anonymous No.15633832]

>>15633627
this sort of. if it was not a larp you would just read the bible and change your personal behaviour. there would have been no need for this post.

[Anonymous No.15633849]

>>15633626
>Catholicism is by far the best denomination.
Sure, if you like your kids being molested.

[Anonymous No.15633853]

>>15633280
Orthodoxy by G.K. Chesterton.
Really nice book.

[Anonymous No.15633860]

>>15633280
http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=christiandenom
That'll get you a bit of a start for a ballpark of where your views currently are.
I'd recommend Mere Christianity by Lewis and then going to churches around you in order of your results, as well as reading through the Bible and a little bit of historical works. I don't know the Catholic equivalent to either of these books, but for the Orthodox I'd suggest The Orthodox Way by Kallistos Ware and for the Anglicans (But it's for the Anglo-Catholics, low churchers get out) I'd suggest The Catholic Religion by Vernon Staley; the former is more introductory and the latter is a full catechetical work though.
One last thing, they're usually called denominations, not sects. Good luck, may God help you, and don't take /lit/ too seriously for the most part when it comes to theology.

[Anonymous No.15633876]

>>15633280
Beautiful book.

[Anonymous No.15633888]

>>15633280

skip Christianity, it's just thinly veiled polytheism. Islam is closer to the truth

[Anonymous No.15633909]

>>15633280
Mere Christianity is really good, the anon who suggested going to church is also correct. Find a non-denominational church and attend a few sermons, see what makes sense to you.
t. filthy unwashed lutheran

[Anonymous No.15633920]

>>15633909
>filthy unwashed lutheran
Don't worry anon, even if a lot of the tradcaths hate you I'm fine with you.
ELCA, LCMS, WELS, or not American?

[Anonymous No.15633928]

>>15633627
>NEVER IMPROVE

[Anonymous No.15633951]

>>15633626
not a fan of the obvious bs traditions invented with no justification. afaik it's impossible to be a catholic and not pray to mary, it's perscribed by priests and you maybe say it in services

[Anonymous No.15633959]

>>15633627
>what are converts

[Anonymous No.15633969]

>>15633909
non denominational church usually just means baptist

[Anonymous No.15633991]

>>15633969
It's always either Baptist or Pentecostal, they just try to capitalize on "We're not with a denomination bro!" because either it's easier to sell their denomination to people that way or because they're too lazy/wrong/whatever to actually affiliate with a bigger body

[Anonymous No.15634153]

>>15633909

Mere Christianity is fantastic and is the book that got me interested in non fiction.

[Anonymous No.15634164]

>>15633991

Go Pentecostal and get the true Biblical lifestyle. Baptists are cool too though.

[Anonymous No.15634172]

>>15634164
whats the difference

[Anonymous No.15634193]

>>15633400
>>15633491
Ah, still mad that your version is secondary to the KJV? Face it, King James Version is the standard for a reason. It is the most beautiful of all translations and is timeless.
>b-but it's says x instead of y
You're no better than those that argue over Iliad translations

[Anonymous No.15634202]

>>15634172

In a nutshell, the Pentecostal church (or charismatic church, what Pentecostals are referred to nowadays) believe in continuationism, meaning that the spiritual gifts talked about in the New Testament continue today. Prophecy, healing, speaking in tongues, etc. Most Babtists will believe in cessationism,ie these gifts no longer exist. Although I will say Babtists tend to be closer to Pentecostal than other cessationism sects. They may believe in it, but they don't speak openly about it.

[Anonymous No.15634216]

>>15633491
do you tell people to not read shx or spenser for the same reason?

[Anonymous No.15634217]

>>15633280
Sect? Look into the life and teachings of the Lord Christ instead. He is the essence of "Christianity."

[Anonymous No.15634232]

>>15634193
>>15634216
if someone gets a word wrong in one of those it's of little consquence, le poetry isn't the most important thing

[Anonymous No.15634240]

>>15634172
>>15634202

Continuing from that, the charismatic movement isn't exclusive to the Pentecostal church. It has slowly seeped into other denominations, like Catholicism. Look into the charismatic Catholic church in South America. It's on fire right now. Denominational lines are starting to blur and it's exciting.

[Anonymous No.15634255]

>>15634232
if the word of God isn't captured beautifully, it is not the full word

[Anonymous No.15634258]

>>15633280
Gnosticism, is the only true Christianity.

[Anonymous No.15634355]

>>15633436
Which translation/version would you recommend?

[Anonymous No.15634365]

>>15634240
big in asia as well i think

[Anonymous No.15634461]

>>15634202
>>15634240
The fact that the Pentecostals try to make it some big deal to be continuationist is a load of shit. I say this as a Catholic. There's never been any point in the history of our Church where we ceased to have the "gifts of the spirit." The lives of the saints are full of these things. We even have a special term, "wonderworker," that refers to saints who were particularly known for performing miracles. It doesn't make the Pentecostals special or cool that they think this.

Just in the 20th Century, Saint Padre Pio had the Stigmata, was telepathic, and could bilocate. Pope Saint Pius X healed at least two people in his lifetime. Saint Maria Faustina had visions of Jesus Christ Himself and regularly conversed with Him; she wrote a diary about her experiences. This is all substantially more impressive than when the Pentecostals mumble demonic gibberish and call it "speaking in tongues". The fact that Protestants get so tied into knots about this stuff is a sad reflection on their present state.

[Anonymous No.15634479]

>>15634461
Just occurred to me why I always see Padre Pio with the fingerless glove looking things.
I'm retarded, aren't I?

[Anonymous No.15634550]

>>15634461

Surely you're not going to argue that the gifts talked about in the books of Acts and Corinthians are flowing in the Catholic church at large. I've never heard or seen them used in the Catholic church or in Catholic friends. State side anyway. Like mentioned previously, there is a movement in South America and Asia where Catholics are embracing the gifts in the traditional Pentecostal sense.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWcujx1II2w

[Anonymous No.15634561]

>>15634461
>actually believing this shit

[Anonymous No.15634570]

>>15634550
Miracles, healings, apparitions, and prophecies have never been unfamiliar to the Church. As I said, the lives of the saints are full of them. There are all sorts of stories that come from across the Catholic world: of miraculous recoveries from terminal diseases after the Anointing of the Sick, of statues weeping blood, or tears, or oil, of people healed in the miraculous waters of Lourdes, of Eucharistic miracles where the Host bleeds or turns into heart flesh, and so on and so forth. This is not some unusual thing. It doesn't happen every single moment of every single day. A miracle, by its very nature, is unusual. God doesn't always work wonders. But it's never been such an unusual thing in Catholicism at all. The only reason the Protestants have ever denied it is because admitting that there are miracles in Catholicism would undermine their own position.

[Anonymous No.15634599]

>>15634570
what about non saints, owned

[Anonymous No.15634635]

>>15633280

>>15633291 (Most Catholic churches are at least partially open now.)
>>15633876
Do these, in addition to:
Reading the Bible (Dohay-Rheims or Vulgate if you are a Romeaboo)
Read the Church Fathers (St.Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. John Chystrostom, etc.)
Read Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas along with the Roman Stoics and Boethius
Read St. Theresa of Avila
Read some the works of modern saints like St Edith Stein (my saintfu), St. Therese of Liseux.
If you are really interested, read New Advent's articles on the history of the Church, the Sacraments, Sacred Tradition and other things in the Deposit of Faith.
Go to RCIA if you are certain that God is calling you to join the Church.
But finally and most importantly, PRAY. You can't foster a relationship with God without prayer. You can read any book on faith, it won't make you any closer to God without giving oneself completely and totally to the Source of Our Being , the King of Kings.

>>15633951
Asking for the intercession of Virgin Mary (the woman who holds the sole honor of giving birth to Jesus Christ) is not praying to her. Just as she was able to convince Jesus to perform the Miracle at Cana, so does she advocate and ask Christ, our One and only Lord, to advocate for out behalf.

>>15633816
You know you aren't supposed to take everything Jesus says with a literal spin on it, right? He also says to cut off your right arm if it causes you to sin, but mutilating your body is a sin against God since it is harming the beautiful creation He made. Jesus was shitting on the Pharisees for being all haughty and proud and not looking at God as a the source of all fatherhood but themselves.

P.S. Beardless Jesus looks better than bearded Jesus

[Anonymous No.15634676]

>>15634635
ok but why do I HAVE to pray to her

[Anonymous No.15634681]

>>15633969
I go to a nondenominational church and we are by no means Baptist or Pentecostal. I think the right term I've heard used there is "evangelical nondenominational".

[Anonymous No.15634690]

FUCK OFF WE'RE FULL

[Anonymous No.15634718]

>>15634676
You don't even as a Catholic. She's not God. You're not praying to her so much as you are asking her help and essentially getting a shortcut so that Jesus hears your prayer. It's even clear in the Ave Maria:

Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God, PRAY for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

If we were praying TO her, we would be asking her forgiveness, not for her to pray to God in order for him to grant her request which we asked for. It's like asking a friend to pray for you pretty much: there's no such thing as too much prayer.

If you want though, you can pray to Jesus and God directly and that's perfectly valid and fine. There is literally no problem with that. Again, Mary is a creature, not Creator. Even though she is exalted above all other creatures, she's not the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob whom she gave birth to in the person of Jesus Christ. She's the New Ark of the Covenant, but worshiping the Ark itself is heresy because we are not worshiping the Divine Essence within the Ark which is what our hearts and minds truly desire above all things.

[Anonymous No.15634741]

>>15634718
>essentially getting a shortcut so that Jesus hears your prayer
And Catholics call other sects heretical. Jesus doesn't work like the fucking DMV, you're not in a queue.

[Anonymous No.15634798]

>>15634718
what if the priest makes me say hail marys

[Anonymous No.15634801]

>>15634798
they're easier to say than our fathers

[Anonymous No.15634808]

>>15634741
I'm not being literal, mate. Of course, Jesus isn't a DMV. He's fucking God. What I'm saying is there's a scriptural basis for everything I've said, you can't argue with it because I'm right and now you focus on minutia like me using bad phrasing in order to get a point across. That's dishonest in my opinion. Plus, how the fuck do you think people prayed for the first 1000 years of Christianity and why do you think Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Coptics share so many beliefs despite them being different branches of Christianity yet you think your church (which was made 1500+ years after Christ ascended into heaven) is somehow magically right? Like, I don't think Occam's Razor is a good logical tool at all, but it makes more sense saying that Protestantism is a heresy rather than saying 3 churches who share the same deposit of faith, the same Tradition and have Apostolic succession are heretical, especially considering that the Church Fathers not only agree, but were actively involved with the theology of all said churches during the late Roman Empire.

[Anonymous No.15634814]

>>15634808
>all those words
>zero arguments

[Anonymous No.15634817]

>>15634808
Refrain from swearing, please.

[Anonymous No.15634820]

>>15633480
The best bible for Catholics is the Ignatius Bible (RSV2CE). Modernized language, but without the gender-cucked nonsense of the NRSV.

[Anonymous No.15634833]

>>15634814
>If I don't read it, there are no arguments

>>15634817
Okay, I'll behave.

[Anonymous No.15634864]

>>15634355
for the Gita, "the bhagavat gita as it is". for the vedas, idk. Just learn sanskrit if you enjoyed reading the gita.

[Anonymous No.15634915]

>>15633928
>becoming christian
>improvement

[Anonymous No.15635062]

>>15634915
yes.

[Anonymous No.15635086]

>>15633280
>lifelong
lol if you're asking questions like this on 4chan the chances are your life hasn't been very long yet. why don't you fuck off and get some life experience and learn some stuff then decide if there is any bunch of godbothering fucknuts that most appeals to you?

[Anonymous No.15635786]

>>15633280
anon, you don't have to have to join the church to meet other gay guys anymore.

[Anonymous No.15635806]

>>15633626
Because for the most part the interactions I have had with Catholics both online and in person is that they are insufferable and arrogant people. Coincidentally non-American Catholics seem to me to be more open to discussion but Catholic yanks are socially repulsive to me.

[Anonymous No.15635818]

Look at what fucking assholes the Christians are and ask if that is really the kind of person you want to be

[Anonymous No.15635851]

>>15635806
Could you expand on this? I hear this all the time but found barely any of these angry Catholics. In parishes, it’s mostly grandmas and WYD young adults with guitars. Even online, the trads are still very much the minority, and if they do get needlessly mad, it’s either at inane topics about how sleeveless dresses are demonic or a topic that most traditional Christians should be passionate about. What’s the difference between a pissed off online Catholic and a pissed off online Orthodox/Protestant? What do you consider to be arrogant or insufferable in a Christian?

[Anonymous No.15635859]

>>15633280
sects are sinful

[Anonymous No.15635862]

>>15634681
It could also descend from another tradition. Congregationalist, Restorationist, even Presbyterian, etc. Or just a mix. Baptists are simply the most prominent American Protestant church, and have been a major factor in developing it since the 1600s. And the spread of American culture has also spread many Baptist features. I think it's unfortunate that Pentecostals and fundamentalist minorities tend to get catalogued with that, however.

This is the problem I have with many nondenom churches, though. They try to skirt the fact that they have a theological tradition that inspired them. Especially the Restorationist kinds, who are very disingenuous when they make their laughable claim to exclusivity, the "one true church," when they have a perfectly clear founding in the 1800s. Real church history is muddy and broad.

[Anonymous No.15635882]

>>15634915
this except unironically

[Anonymous No.15635891]

>>15635851
>Even online, the trads are still very much the minority

wrong

[Anonymous No.15635892]

>>15635818
This
The ones that are fine with the gays and have theology that make sense don't believe in it, and everyone else trends towards being an asshole, except for some of the Orthodox; they're open to them in theory and some priests (and bishops) will even give their relationships blessings (since they can't get married in the Orthodox Church) but trads online like to seethe about it and make people feel bad so the point is moot

[Anonymous No.15635901]

>>15635806
That's the opposite of my experience with Catholics. In my parish (and yeah I am a convert so I'm talking about my pre-conversion days), they just act like normal people, but they hold their faith very dear to them. There might be like one or two rad-trads that everyone sorta kinda knows to avoid because they generally are the autistic types that cause problems for no reason, but even then the trad community is filled with nice people. It might be because we're in the deep South so people are generally nice to one another unless someone does something to deservingly lose that cordiality. Where was the parish that you went to where the Catholics were so arrogant?

>>15635851
I agree with >>15635891. There are a shitton of rad trads online.

[Anonymous No.15635902]

>>15635851
Catholics are so fucking annoying, they don't admit that catholics don't read the bible (statistical fact google it) and say dumb shit like there's no salvation outside the catholic church when official doctrine is that MUSLIMS can go to heaven...

le one true church, they have no understanding of scripture literally all they have is

ON THIS ROCK
WILL NOT PREVAIL

[Anonymous No.15635908]

>>15635892
> trads online like to seethe about it and make people feel bad so the point is moot
Because homosexuality is an abomination towards God and his creation. It's not even a fucking strictly Christian view. Even Musonius Rufus and the Roman Stoics agree with that (and a lot of Christian ethics desu)

[Anonymous No.15635913]

>>15635891
As much as I’d like this to be unironically true, Facebook/Reddit/Twitter/Instagram and virtually any popular social media will have a vastly greater number of “non-trads” than “trads”. 4chan is not the entire internet.

[Anonymous No.15635933]

>>15635908
The Romans aren't exactly the best source of morality desu, but more importantly, the arguments for homosexuality being permissible in Christianity are far more compelling than those against imo
>>15635913
Facebook has a lot of trad groups, but there's also a lot of non-trads
A sizeable portion of Reddit is trads, check out r/Catholicism some day
Twitter is a mix because it's far leftists and literal fascists, there is no middle ground
Instagram is a mix like Facebook

[Anonymous No.15635984]

>>15635902
All I'm getting out of this is that you are just a prottie version of a rad trad Catholic

>when official doctrine is that MUSLIMS can go to heaven...
If they follow natural law AND don't have access to the Gospel, there's no reason to assume they at the very least don't go to Limbo. You can't be punished for what you don't know but if you actively reject Christ, no matter how good your deeds are, you can't make it to heaven. A bit more nuanced than how you put it. Also, the Bible (which was formally made into the way it is today around 350 AD, by the CATHOLIC Church (including the 7 books Martin Luther cut out to actively get rid of things he found to give too much credence to Catholicism) is only one part of God's Revelation.

Also, at the end of John or Matthew I believe Christ literally makes Peter the first Pope and in Acts the first Council is held in Jerusalem on whether Gentiles should get circumcised or not, ehich means there were already bishops, cardinals, priests and other clergy. The rest of the things listed there are basically sacramentals which while they may augment the faith through a particular devotion, are in no way necessary. Even clerical celibacy (which is rooted in the fact that the Apostles John and Paul were virgins and pretty much the rest of the Apostles were called to chastity after the Great Commission) is technically optional since if you are part of an Anglican ordinate that became part of the Catholic Church or you are Eastern Catholic, if you are a married priest (or in the case of Anglicans, if you are married clergy) you're allowed to be married and still be a priest. The only limitation is that in Easter Catholic rites, you can't be a bishop or higher and be married.

It would do you well to actually read instead of being full of blind zeal. I'm not even urging you to convert but even when I have discourse with a Reformed Protestant, he sounds like he's a rational human being when he's making his points. You just sound blindly mad.

[Anonymous No.15636049]

>>15635891
>>15635901
>shitton

Because you are spending time on 4chan and /christian/ and the weirder parts of Catholic Twitter. Go to the average Facebook Catholic group, like >>15635913 says, and you will see a shitton of really harmless Boomer Catholics sharing silly memes.

Fuck, a lot of so-called Trads don't even attend weekly Mass.

[Anonymous No.15636050]

>>15635984
>Limbo.
No such thing

Sure Peter was the first pope, but Saul was more important and disagreed with him, and while Peter might have chosen a good sucessor there is no certainty that that successor chose a good one, there's no real certaintly that the Roman Catholic church maintained true to Christ's teachings beyond those two verses which can easily have holes picked in them.

Also Peter was like Jesus's worst disciple, constantly misunderstanding things and being stupid at the end of John not understanding what Jesus meant.

Imo Christianity isn't about following orders from some pope, executive council or cardinal, everyone should have equal authority. That's not even getting into things like how most catholics think if you pray to saint jude he'll help you find your lost car keys or that if you donate money you can get out of purgatory faster and things like that. 30% of Catholic priests are gay and a lot of Catholics I talk to seem like they don't even believe in God and it's some kind of metaphor or something, very pro evolution and based boy science kind of thing. Cardinals literally covered up and perpetrated child sexual abuse on a massive scale.

It's doctrine that prayers for the dead are twice as effective in getting indulgences or whatever during all hallows eve, it's a fucking double xp weekend, and how the hell does the pope know that they are worth double? catholic tradition is loosely based on scripture and "well this random pope/priest said it so it's true"

[Anonymous No.15636054]

>>15635984
>dissapointed_witch_girl.jpg
that's megumeme you fucking faggot

[Anonymous No.15636061]

>>15636049
well only boomers use facebook, on reddit and 4chan there are a TON of young trads, not nessecirly nazis tho there are a lot of those. Idk where else you can discuss Christanity on the internet actually and would like to know if you know somewhere.

literally anyone under 30 whose a Catholic is trad. Cultural catholics who go to church once every 5 years and are gay and take birth control etc aren't catholic.

[Anonymous No.15636068]

>>15633280
you oughta skip straight to gnosticism, which is a meme but still better than """"christianity""" (falsified by (((st. paul))))

[Anonymous No.15636069]

>>15633627
>anyone who lives a different lifestyle is larping

[Anonymous No.15636073]

Catholics be like yeah we have 12321512421 members bro, half of them are boomers who use church as a social club, half of them are retarded south americans who pray to saint death and ignore the pope another half are people who are LITERALLY athiests, buddhists, muslims etc but we count them for some stupid reason as Catholics because they were baptised as Catholic and then there's a fair chunk of kinda based schizo trads and some cringe return to tradition literalt nazis who want to kill all n words

[Anonymous No.15636077]

>>15636068
Paul is based and owned the jews

[Anonymous No.15636090]

>>15636077
This. I don't understand why people get mad at Paul. Paul is awesome. The idea that he "Judaized" Christianity is a dumb meme from the 19th Century. He pretty clearly lays out multiple ways in which Christianity is distinct from the Judaism of his time.

[Anonymous No.15636146]

>>15636050
Whatever schizo. You clearly just want to shit up this board more so whatever. If you want to use your interpretations, distorted realities and outright lies as actual arguments (and not even bother to source them), then it's clear you aren't doing anything but making a fool of yourself. I just find it funny that you are so egotistical to think your barely researched version of Christianity is somehow correct, despite there being about 2000 years of theology and philosophy (even more if you go back to the virtue ethics of Aristotle) from people more knowledgeable and humble than you are. Just take your meds.

[Anonymous No.15636177]

>>15633280
please kys, moron.

[Anonymous No.15636186]

>>15636146
>According to The Enchiridion of Indulgences, An indulgence, applicable only to the souls in purgatory, is granted to the faithful, who devoutly visit a cemetery and pray for the departed. The indulgence is plenary, under the usual conditions, each day from the first to the eighth of November; a partial indulgence is granted on any other days of the year.

[Anonymous No.15636301]

>>15636186
You can get indulgences from praying the rosary or for praying for a group of people ffs.

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07783a.htm

[Anonymous No.15636308]

>>15636301
Just wanted to add that's what I'm talking about. That's disingenuous as fuck to go through there and not note you can get indulgences (and more often then not DO get indulgences) from things that don't cost money. No wonder people don't like you. You have a terrible personality.

[Anonymous No.15636337]

>>15633280
>Edward Feser - Beginners Guide to Aquinas
>St. Augustine - Confessions
>C.S. Lewis - Mere Christianity
>Alasdair MacIntyre - After Virtue
>St. Thomas Aquinas - Summa Theologiae (Concise Translation)
>Charles Taylor - A Secular Age
Go check out Aquinas 101 they will give you systematic weekly readings (essays and stuff) to help you through
God bless anon

[Anonymous No.15636343]

>>15633313
Bumping for DRV
only proper translation of the Latin Vulgate
but if you really want to - the best thing is to read it in the Greek one day

[Anonymous No.15636359]

>>15633280
>Boy renounces faith, gets Atheism. Tries to rediscover religion, chooses Christianity. Many such cases. Sad!

[Anonymous No.15636360]

>>15636308
>It's doctrine that prayers for the dead are twice as effective in getting indulgences or whatever during all hallows eve

Where did I say it cost money, it's just retarded

[Anonymous No.15636387]

>>15636360
That's your opinion then. I don't care nor does anyone else. They either agree with you or they don't. IDK.

[Anonymous No.15636398]

>>15633280
Honestly, read a bible
then go for the early church fathers

[Anonymous No.15636403]

>>15635892
>muh precious homos

[Anonymous No.15636681]

>>15635984
>You can't be punished for what you don't know but if you actively reject Christ, no matter how good your deeds are, you can't make it to heaven
Wouldn't it be optimal, then, for all Christians to be massacred and their entire history wiped out, in order to save the rest of the world from potential damnation? I'm not trying to be argumentative or rude, just wondering if that wouldn't be more ethical than dooming billions. Obviously it wouldn't work out well nowadays with our population but back in the earl Church days, wouldn't that have been a pretty good deal? Collectively suicide, martyrdom for the sake of humankind's blissful ignorance.

[Anonymous No.15636727]

>>15633280
sects are retarded, if you are christian you should be orthodog.

[Anonymous No.15636738]

>>15636681
if ur reject christ ur a retard and deserve it tho

[Anonymous No.15636764]

>>15636738
But isn't conversion attempts/evangelism immoral, knowing that some people will certainly reject Christ? By never trying to convert, they aren't doomed to damnation right? And the only certain way to prevent conversion and evangelism is by outright removing the entire existence of Christianity. You would be saving the souls of not just millions but billions upon billions of future humans. Maybe trillions, who knows how long the human race survives. Nobody has to suffer a terrible afterlife if we choose to be martyrs, and it's as Christ-like as it gets.

[Anonymous No.15636791]

>>15636764
if someone doesn't know christ they can't live a moral life and won't be able to have eternal life

[Anonymous No.15636800]

>>15636791
But >>15635984 said that you can't be punished for what you don't know.

[Anonymous No.15636805]

>>15636800
they won't be punished but they won't be rewarded either

[Anonymous No.15636829]

>>15636805
1,000,000,000 unpunished/unrewarded souls is better than 100,000,000 rewarded and 900,000,000 punished or whatever statistic you want to use. Even a single damned soul is a tragedy if you could have prevented it, which is what I'm trying to say.

[Anonymous No.15636835]

>>15636829
yeah probably, but that's a pretty utalitarian perspective on it. Jesus said make disciples of all nations. simple. as.

[Anonymous No.15636855]

Not OP but how would I know god is real? I always come to that and what if Christianity isn’t the right religion? There are so many ones

[Anonymous No.15636865]

>>15636835
Oh well that makes sense then. Maybe he made a mistake saying that though. Did he actually want people to suffer eternal hellfire and brimstone and torture? I suppose salvation makes up the potential of damnation but I just don't understand why he would accept that and make it doctrine, especially if he loves us all. Maybe I'm too retarded to understand what is meant by love.

[Anonymous No.15636886]

>>15633313
I'm not even a Christian, but imagine thinking that one group's viewpoint of an entire, fluid and dynamic religion is the ultimate and infallible viewpoint and that no other input or contribution is necessary. Do you really advocate for all Christians to only read The Bible and nothing else? Would you say the same for... anything else?

[Anonymous No.15636915]

Lutheranism but study alone and do a the oldest you can find. Start with Kierkegaard

[Anonymous No.15637387]

>>15633480
KJV is based because it is just so beautiful, but yes, if you want to do some actual Bible study, then go with a different translation.

[Anonymous No.15637409]

>>15633280
just skip it and embrace neo indo europeanism

[Anonymous No.15637572]

[Anonymous No.15637579]

>>15634461
>first saint to have stigmata was St. Francis
>several reports of people seeing it publicly
>now, in the age of photograph, the only stigmatised saint...wore gloves and his stigmata were only seen by a handful of people
really makes you think

[Anonymous No.15637593]

>>15634635
>You know you aren't supposed to take everything Jesus says with a literal spin on it, right?

You are comparing a clear allegory to a very direct statement to not call any men father or master, because we only have one Father and Master.

[Anonymous No.15637621]

>>15633280
also get the faith explained by leo j trese

[Anonymous No.15637638]

>>15633280
Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis
Orthodoxy by G.K. Chesterton

[Anonymous No.15637672]

>>15633291
You are probably not going to find a better book for your purposes than this.
Not overly long as a read, either.
Mere Christianity was made for this purpose.
Also, I'd recommend going to churches to see, since the service and community will ultimately have a huge impact on your experience.

[Anonymous No.15637815]

Not OP, but I'm in a similar situation. I was raised by abusive boomer evangelicals and became an atheist when I was young. I realized through my studies the importance of religion in upholding a functioning society, and now I'm extremely opposed to athiesm/nihilism and feel obligated to convert to something.

The idea terrifies me, though. I am horrified by the idea of an afterlife and feel that if God really does exist that virtually everything I do is meaningless. Could any Christian anon share with me their experience and thoughts? Thanks.

[Anonymous No.15637919]

>>15637815
Sounds like the religious community is going to make a huge impact on your experience more so than fine details regarding theology itself.
And there's nothing wrong with that at all.
Maybe try out some churches, see what they offer.
I'm guessing that you want to contribute to and be appreciated by something greater than yourself, which I think must be a huge part of the journey. I personally find that my impacts may be small, but are certainly measurable and may lead to further impacts. Christ asked us to do things for the least, after all.

[Anonymous No.15638009]

>>15637919
Thanks for the incisive reply, Anon. I admit that I am more influenced by what other people find acceptable and I often wish I was born into a religion so I wouldn't have to decide. I'm very torn on what sort of Christianity to look in too, because each of my friends promotes one and disdains all the others.

And yes, that's a good observation. I'm already part of something much bigger than myself, and that's my fear—I know what my purpose in life is, and I'm afraid that if I convert that I will have to abandon it.

I have visited a number of churches, but I just can't shake off the feeling of existential dread. Attending church makes me profoundly uneasy and I get a sense that I'm an outsider who shouldn't be there.

[Anonymous No.15638125]

>>15638009
I know the feeling well.
I've found it passes pretty quickly if you've got a good welcoming community and leadership. Feeling accepted is a pretty big hill to get over, but good groups will try to help you. Not a bad thing to discuss with leadership or mentors.

[Anonymous No.15638200]

>>15637593
>Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples, Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy and insupportable burdens, and lay them on men's shoulders; but with a finger of their own they will not move them. And all their works they do for to be seen of men. For they make their phylacteries broad, and enlarge their fringes. "Phylacteries": that is, parchments, on which they wrote the ten commandments, and carried them on their foreheads before their eyes: which the Pharisees affected to wear broader than other men; so to seem more zealous for the law. And they love the first places at feasts, and the first chairs in the synagogues, And salutations in the market place, and to be called by men, Rabbi. But be not you called Rabbi. For one is your master; and all you are brethren. And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters; for one is your master, Christ.

He's clearly talking about how the Pharisees are trying to act pious in order to get prestige and act like fathers in order to get said honors. Not honest spiritual fathers that are doing so out of piety and love of God, the Father of all men, first and foremost. If the thesis about not using certain titles, then this passage in 1 Corinthians 4:14-15 would be a nono:

> I write not these things to confound you; but I admonish you as my dearest CHILDREN. For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you.

Clearly, Paul has no problem with calling himself the father of the Christian community in Corinth and this is canon so it's rational to assume the title of father is honorific but only so much as one does the work of God the Father. There's no problem in calling someone your spiritual father, so long as they are doing it with honest intentions and you realize tat it's only a title to reflect the work they do for God, Our Father and Master. Again, it's a bit more nuanced that a literalist reading would give you.

[Anonymous No.15638248]

>>15633280

>I'm an atheist getting into christiany because it's the based and trad thing to do, which denomination is the most racist and can I still masturbate to big titty milfs?

[Anonymous No.15638260]

>>15638248
Episcopalians

/thread

[Anonymous No.15638285]

>>15638200
How heard would it be for Christ to simply say: but do not call THEM fathers upon earth; instead, he said call NONE your father upon earth.
And then you follow up with a epistle from Paul, a man who shows no sign that there were Gospels written during his time. Is it not best and more coherent to simply say these two texts very clearly contradict themselves? That the teaching of Christ in the first exert, if properly followed, would advise against Paul calling his disciples "children"?
This is what ultimately tires me; the texts of the NT are in very clear contradictions among themselves as far as a statement being directly opposed to another, either narratively, dogmatically or in terms of discipline. And yet we are to believe these have been divinely inspired and then make a bunch of sophistry to retcon things and say "akshually...". Why would such blatant contradictions happen if the Holy Spirit could simply be more specific? Couldn't the first exert just be clear that it isn't a general, but particular condemnation? I find it baffling to believe that God needed men to twist His Sacred Scripture into making sense.

[Anonymous No.15638350]

>>15635933
>the arguments for homosexuality being permissible in Christianity
the wot

[Anonymous No.15638398]

>>15638350
maybe he means attracted to men and not acting on it, because otherwise he's a retard

[Anonymous No.15638440]

>>15637579
>imblying

[Anonymous No.15638454]

>>15638285
What do you call your father?

[Anonymous No.15638488]

>>15633280
>Good entry-level recs to help me decide which sect is best?

Spiritual Journeys, ed. Robert Baram, is a very good collection of conversion stories, written by people from all walks who found their way into the Catholic Church. Ranges from housewives to academics, and everything in between. Each account is well-written and engaging.

The book is currently out of print, but many reasonably priced used copies are available:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B003YIZDR0/

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (ISBN-13: 978-0385479677) is an excellent summary of Catholic belief. A work of beautiful concision, imho. Also available online, but the version noted above is a nice paperback edition.

The webpage of James Likoudis has numerous well-written articles that explain the Catholic pov vis a vis the Orthodox regarding many points of theology and other disputed issues. Likoudis is a convert to Catholicism from Orthodoxy.
>http://www.jameslikoudispage.com/jlindex.htm

Do not neglect prayer, anon. Ask God to lead you, and to open the eyes of your mind to the truth.

[Anonymous No.15638502]

>>15638454
He uses two terms: father and master; the idea is not a takedown of the biological use of the word, obviously, but apparently a criticism of the blind obedience and necessity of serfdom towards men, since they are not the Christ nor the Father in heaven. But don't ask me to dispel ambiguity in these texts. I'm not the one to defend them anymore.

[Anonymous No.15638520]

>>15638440
is this photo supposed to be convincing? I mean what are we even seeing? Looks more like a scorched hand that one stigmatised by nails.

[Anonymous No.15638582]

>>15638502
You're interpreting literally an allegory and that's why you're thinking there is a contradiction.

>10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that, “‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’

[Anonymous No.15638606]

>>15634676
>ok but why do I HAVE to pray to her
>>15634718
>You don't even as a Catholic. She's not God

As abundantly demonstrated in scripture, God works through intercessors. For example, in Mark 9, the paralyzed man whose friends lowered him through the roof -- what would have happened to the man if his friends hadn't helped him, i.e., interceded for him?

In Luke 7, the Roman centurion asks for Jesus's help through intermediaries -- "some elders of the Jews."
>When they came to Jesus, they pleaded earnestly with him, “This man deserves to have you do this, because he loves our nation and has built our synagogue.” So Jesus went with them.

Jesus helped the centurion because of the request of those who earnestly interceded on his behalf.

Mary intercedes at the wedding at Cana and occasions Jesus's first miracle (John 2:1-5). It is quite clear from the text that He would *not* have done this absent her intercession.

The practice of prayer to saints simply developed out of the experienced reality of the early Christians -- their prayers to the saints were sometimes answered miraculously.

Catholic Encyclopedia, Intercession
>https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08070a.htm

Praying to Saints
>https://www.catholic.com/tract/praying-to-the-saints

[Anonymous No.15638615]

Swedish Lutheranism was the complete and most based form of Christianity. Basically nationalist Catholicism which accepted the most accurate criticisms of Luther while maintaining all the traditions going back to the church fathers.

Unfortunately the Swedish government ruined it.

[Anonymous No.15638658]

>>15636073
>Catholics be like yeah we have 12321512421 members bro, half of them are boomers who use church as a social club, half of them are retarded south americans who pray to saint death and ignore the pope another half are people who are LITERALLY athiests,

How is this inconsistent with the teaching of Christ in the kingdom parables about the nature of the Church:

Mt. 13:24-30 The kingdom of heaven may be compared…good seed …weeds… Let them both grow together until the harvest…

Mt. 13:47-50 (kingdom compared to a net thrown into the sea into which were gathered both good fish and bad fish.)

Mt. 25:3-12 The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and… (Ten maidens in the kingdom; five of them had oil, and five didn’t.)

In the parables, Matthew uses the phrase “kingdom of heaven” whereas Mark and Luke use “kingdom of God”. You’ll note that the kingdom includes the whole gamut; it begins on earth (Church) and continues into heaven (judgement and separation of good from bad with the good going in to be with God).

[Anonymous No.15638701]

>>15636855
Pray earnestly, and ask God to lead you to the truth.

And try reading: Michael Green, Was Jesus Who He Said He Was?

Link: https://www.amazon.com/Was-Jesus-Who-He-Said/dp/0892836245

The case for the Resurrection is much stronger than many realize. I don't think the case can be made "beyond a reasonable doubt," but I do think there is "clear and convincing evidence" for the Resurrection, and certainly a preponderance of the evidence points to the Resurrection.

With some hesitancy, I also recommend the book More Than a Carpenter by Josh McDowell. I hesitate because the book is unfortunately written in a rather golly-gee-whiz style that seems to be aimed at cornfed midwestern junior high school students.

That said -- the FACTS and the argument set forth in the book (which is essentially the same argument Michael Green makes) are really very strong and quite persuasive, imho. With the caveat about its unfortunate style in mind, I recommend the book quite strongly; indeed, it sets forth a more thorough and compelling body of facts regarding, say, the manuscript evidence, than does Green's book.

Link: https://www.amazon.com/More-Than-Carpenter-Josh-McDowell/dp/1414326270

Both the Green and the McDowell are quite short, and written in a lucid, straightforward style.

[Anonymous No.15638716]

>>15636865
Here is a concise version of how Catholics explain hell:
https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P2O.HTM

[Anonymous No.15638738]

>>15638701
Not that anon, but thanks for the recommendations, I'll give them a look. I too struggle with believing something I don't know for certain to be true.

[Anonymous No.15638757]

>>15637815
>I am horrified by the idea of an afterlife and feel that if God really does exist that virtually everything I do is meaningless.

If there is no God, then nothing has any meaning. We're just little specks of life that happened to have evolved, to no purpose, in an extremely large, and very cold, insentient universe.

Query, however, whether it makes sense that everything evolved out of nothing.

And otoh, if there is a God, then he created you, and did so for a purpose. In the Christian understanding, we are given the opportunity to cooperate with the work of God -- which has meaning and importance for eternity.

Now, that idea itself - existing for eternity - can be a bit overwhelming, if not frightening.

But recall the fundamental teaching of Jesus: God is "our Father." Moreover, the word Jesus used that is translated "Father" is "Abba," which would be more accurately translated as Papa.

A picture of God the Father as "Abba" is given to us in the parable of the prodigal son -- in which we see that God is a loving father.

That is the truth, and something you can hold onto.

[Anonymous No.15638792]

>>15638009
>I know what my purpose in life is, and I'm afraid that if I convert that I will have to abandon it.

I know that feeling. It is a question of trusting God to lead you to the truth -- often easier said than done.

Possible books of interest, two memoirs by people who had to struggle with the same or similar issues:
Thomas Merton, The Seven-Story Mountain

Sheldon Vanauken, A Severe Mercy

[Anonymous No.15638889]

>>15638009
What is your purpose in life anon

[Anonymous No.15638906]

>>15638889
his purpose is to larp

[Anonymous No.15638963]

>>15638701
>The case for the Resurrection is much stronger than many realize. I don't think the case can be made "beyond a reasonable doubt," but I do think there is "clear and convincing evidence" for the Resurrection, and certainly a preponderance of the evidence points to the Resurrection.
lol
this thread makes me so happy

[Anonymous No.15639188]

>>15638488
>>15638606
>>15638658
>>15638701
>>15638757
>>15638792
God bless you.

[Anonymous No.15639198]

>>15633291
100% this.

[Anonymous No.15639257]

I'm glad there is so much discussion of the Resurrection in this thread, because that really is the crux of the matter, isn't it? Did Jesus rise from the dead or not? Because all his other claims, and especially his claim to be God made flesh, kind of hinge on it. Jesus said multiple times that he would be killed and then he would rise from the dead on the third day. If he was right about that, why wouldn't he be right about everything else he said? If he is capable of rising from the dead, what couldn't he be capable of?

There's a reason St. Paul puts such a big emphasis on the Resurrection in his letters. It really is the major fulcrum around which all of Christianity turns.

[Anonymous No.15639507]

>>15638757
Thanks for your response. I understand your argument and almost agree, but it's quite the opposite to me. If there is no greater purpose, we are free to make our own, and our actions have weight and meaning, at least to us. But if there is one definitive purpose, what does anything I do beyond that purpose matter at all? If I exist to pray and give glory to God, everything which does not directly support my doing that seems absolutely worthless. If I knew for certain that God exists, I would have to abandon everything I know and care about in order to serve Him—what does any action or experience matter if eternity is on the line? I feel as though I would be constantly anxious and paranoid about how I lived my life.
What's more, the only thing that helps me get through life now is the knowledge that eventually my suffering will end and I'll be able to rest forever. The idea of existing without end seems like the worst punishment imaginable.

Perhaps your last point is where my issue lies; I have never experienced unconditional love and have never had a loving father. I can't conceive of a God that loves me.

[Anonymous No.15639519]

>>15638701
What’s the “clear and reasonable evidence” anon?

[Anonymous No.15639525]

>>15638792
Thank you, Anon, I'll look into those books. I have lived a life full of suffering and I think the realization that my purpose is different and that my suffering was purposeless would crush me. Maybe someone else has experienced something similar.

[Anonymous No.15639545]

>>15639519
Hearsay bullshit that was added later, probably the same type of shit I predict we’ll hear about L. Ron Hubbard

[Anonymous No.15639615]

>>15633280
>don't read the bible chronologically. Start with matthew, mark, luke, and john and work out from there.
>read the desert fathers
>go to different churches and see what you like
>don't go all 100% in, that's a good way to lose out to doubt or dissatisfaction.

Faith is good but it takes time to build.
I was raised in an irreligious household, and have been coming to Christianity for a few years now, these things take time anon so just take it as it comes.

>>15633314
Lmao, you're just mad because you're not getting the full bible.

[Anonymous No.15639616]

>>15638701
>zombies are real, guys! I swear!
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.15639633]

>>15639616
What the fuck are you even doing showing interest in Christianity if you don't believe in the supernatural and the miraculous? A religion founded by a man who claimed to be God who was killed but rose from the dead is inescapably going to be outside the natural order. Anyone ITT who has a problem believing that miracles are real should probably just leave the thread right now.

[Anonymous No.15639644]

>>15638906
You're more right than you know. >>15638889
Well, it's a little outlandish, Anon, and would distract from the thread, so suffice it to say that I am a leader of men and that I live to help other people. I exist for a very singular purpose and that's all that keeps me going.

[Anonymous No.15639653]

>>15639257
>I'm glad there is so much discussion of the Resurrection in this thread, because that really is the crux of the matter, isn't it?
No, not at all.

>Jesus said multiple times that he would be killed and then he would rise from the dead on the third day. If he was right about that, why wouldn't he be right about everything else he said?
He was a magician, asshat. He was the David Blaine of his time, mixed with some cynic ethical philosophy. His last trick was going to be a real doozy. Unfortunately, although he was able to survive crucifixion as planned, the trick fucked up his internal organs and he died less than two months later. What a way to go out, though.

[Anonymous No.15639660]

>>15639653
You don't survive crucifixion. The Romans were very, very good at making sure people died of it.

[Anonymous No.15639663]

>>15639633
You're an idiot who has been brainwashed by the church into believing literal woo nonsense. Get a grip.

[Anonymous No.15639686]

>>15639660
Yes, and you don't survive being frozen in a block of ice. It's an illusion, brainiac.

[Anonymous No.15639691]

>>15639653
Also, didn't they take his body down early because there was some Jewish holy day starting that night, and the Romans didn't want any more trouble, so they wrapped it up at sunset and hoped the whole thing would blow over.

[Anonymous No.15639723]

>>15639663
It's completely real, Anon, the sooner you realize that the better off you'll be.

[Anonymous No.15639736]

>>15639691
He could have had a arrangement with Pilate. "Look, I can't just let you go at this point. Just give the Jews the little show they want to see, and then fuck off back to Galilee. My wife is all up my ass, bitching to me about her dreams and shit. This whole tempest in a teapot is the last thing I need right now."

[Anonymous No.15639744]

>>15639736
Something like that probably happened, but to me it doesn't invalidate the power of the faith, since the people in the community saved him because he was righteous.

[Anonymous No.15639754]

Someone should do a heretical spin-off about the thief that got crucified with Jesus. Like he also got resurrected by proximity, and then went on to do some holy shit.

[Anonymous No.15639760]

>>15639616
Nah, neither a zombie (they don't talk) nor a ghost:
>”Look at my hands and my feet; see that it is I myself. Touch me and see; for a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.”
Luke 24:39

[Anonymous No.15639761]

>>15639653
>>15639686
>>15639736
This all sounds substantially more outlandish than him just rising from the dead. Pilate has no good reason to spare him when he could just kill him outright. He was just an itinerant preacher in Pilate's eyes, whatever his wife was telling him.

[Anonymous No.15639775]

>>15639761
>This all sounds substantially more outlandish than him just rising from the dead.
Lmao. Are you listening to yourself?

[Anonymous No.15639787]

>>15639761
Maybe Pilates wasn't in on it. Maybe the low level Romans responsible for crucifying him were just softies. One time I was with this hippy kid who had a really nice glass weed pipe with like marbling in it and everything, and the cops showed up, but since we already smoked all they did was throw the kids pipe in the trash. Then he stupidly goes "lol it didn't break!" and the cop was like *sigh* "you want me to break it? ok fine" and he dug it out of the trash and cracked it in half. That beautiful glass pipe could have been resurrected from its cylindrical tomb like Jesus if only that nappy fuck had kept his yap shut.

[Anonymous No.15639809]

>>15639761
>He was just an itinerant preacher in Pilate's eyes
We have no idea what Jesus was "in Pilate's eyes". The gospels are very bare-bones, speculative and contradictory on that score. For all we know, Jesus could have been a popular entertainer among the Roman elites stationed in Judea. He could have had connections that allowed him to pull off the greatest trick of his career. Nobody really knows anything on that score.

[Anonymous No.15639822]

>>15639787
Beautiful story, anon. Truly parable-worthy.

[Anonymous No.15639832]

>>15639653
>resorting to whataboutism
lmao

[Anonymous No.15639851]

>>15639832
>whataboutism
That word doesn't mean what you think it does.

[Anonymous No.15639864]

>>15639851
What does it mean?

[Anonymous No.15639865]

>>15639760
That's because he didn't die on the cross.

[Anonymous No.15639876]

>>15639519
The *existence* of NT manuscript evidence (eg, physical parchments), and what can reasonably be inferred from that.

The *contents* of the NT manuscripts, and what can be inferred from *that*.

Analysis of the external evidence -- ancient testimonies and other evidence outside the NT.

On the basis of these three categories of evidence, an argument can be made as to the plausibility, or not, of the Resurrection as an actual historical event.

If, in turn, one is convinced that the Resurrection took place, then one may be more inclined to believe that Jesus was (or is) what his disciples claim him to be: the Savior of the world.

Of course, there are skeptical counter-arguments, and Christian counters to the skeptic counter, etc, etc, at each and every step in the argumentation.

The cited books are useful for presenting the evidence, and the argument that rests on that evidence, in a coherent and persuasive fashion.

Again, although the evidence does not, in my view, prove the Resurrection "beyond a reasonable doubt," there is, I think, "clear and convincing" evidence that the Resurrection took place. ymmv.

[Anonymous No.15639913]

>>15639865
see
>>15639660

[Anonymous No.15639921]

>>15639913
It's a magic trick, numbnuts. Follow the thread.