Just read the Church Fathers and they are insane retards

[Anonymous No.18332717]

>Irenaeus lied and said he heard from the apostles firsthand that Jesus died when he was over 50
>Origen cut his balls off because he thought the Holy Spirit told him to
>Ignatius was a psychotic, writing extensively, almost erotically about how he couldn't wait to be martyred, saying if the lions didn't eat him he would drive their teeth into his chest themselves, and then described what it would feel like to have his sinews ripped from bone
>Ignatius also called himself the word of God in his epistle to the Ephesians
It is absolutely hilarious to me after reading this that some people and religions idolize these freaks.

[Anonymous No.18332731]

Also,
>none of them could read Hebrew
>none of them knew anything about first century Judaism so they just wrote fan fiction about Jesus's circumstances
>they all claimed to know the apostles when they actually didnt

[Anonymous No.18332748]

I find the fact that Chrystostom almost got excommunicated after a sermon where he graphically described the Pythia (a Greek oracle) getting raped by Apollo hilarious tbqh.

>>18332731
I find this bit really interesting. Ultimately, the Church Fathers were just a bunch of second rate nobles and academics LARPing as ancient Jews. It's really eye opening to consider that your average grandma at Bible Study has read more of the Bible than the people who laid the foundations for the religion itself.

[Anonymous No.18332766]

>>18332748
Fairly certain no one in the church read Hebrew until the Reformation. For that matter, no one from like 300 to the Reformation was reading the Bible in Greek either. Its seriously hard to underestimate what a grievous type of retardation it is that an entire religion wasn't reading its scriptures in anything other than a second rate translation for centuries.

[Anonymous No.18332777]

>>18332766
>no one from like 300 to the Reformation was reading the Bible in Greek either
u wot m8

[Anonymous No.18332791]

>>18332717
Most early Christians were sexual deviants or they got got filtered by philosophy, so they became Christian to cope.

Or they just had a female family member that nagged them into it.

[Anonymous No.18332795]

ITT: Retards
The Septuagint was used far longer than Hebrew texts. Jews stopped using it because of seething over Christianity. The oldest complete old testament manuscript is the Septuagint.

[Anonymous No.18332798]

>>18332795
1960 called and wanted their scholarship back.

[Anonymous No.18332805]

>>18332795
Wow Moses knew Greek?????

The dead sea scrolls don't exist?????

[Anonymous No.18332816]

>>18332766
>Fairly certain no one in the church read Hebrew until the Reformation
The Septuagint was Greek. The Church fathers read and used a greek bible because that was the language of the eastern Mediterranean. Even the Jews of Israel at this point were incredibly Hellenized from contact with the greeks.

[Anonymous No.18332826]

>>18332798
>>18332805
>The oldest manuscripts of the Septuagint include 2nd-century-BCE fragments of Leviticus and Deuteronomy (Rahlfs nos. 801, 819, and 957) and 1st-century-BCE fragments of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and the Twelve Minor Prophets (Alfred Rahlfs nos. 802, 803, 805, 848, 942, and 943). Relatively-complete manuscripts of the Septuagint postdate the Hexaplar recension, and include the fourth-century-CE Codex Vaticanus and the fifth-century Codex Alexandrinus. These are the oldest-surviving nearly-complete manuscripts of the Old Testament in any language; the oldest extant complete Hebrew texts date to about 600 years later, from the first half of the 10th century.
Septuagint manuscripts were found among the dead sea scrolls so yeah no clue why you brought it up

[Anonymous No.18332834]

>>18332766
I find it interesting because you often see this criticism that Christianity is the successor of "Temple Judaism" and that "Rabbinic Judaism" isn't invented until 600AD when the Talmud is written (nevermind that the Talmud was actually compiled from texts going back to the second century BC starting in the mid 200s) so Christians are actually just carrying on "Temple Judaism" 2.0, but then you look at the Church Fathers and not a single one of them knew fucking anything about Judaism.

>>18332777
He might mean the Catholic Church.

>>18332816
The Hellenization of the Jews, and just how much of "Judaism" is just a ripoff of Greek philosophy, is something a lot of people miss out on. There's an entire literary tradition of Jewish apocalypticism seething about the evil Greeks, but it's in fucking Homeric Greek and uses shitty attempts at dactylic hexameter, so you end up with David being a Mountain Lion and he's gonna come back and enslave all of the filthy goyim when Rosy Fingered Dawn waggles out tomorrow, just you wait you filthy gentiles.

[Anonymous No.18332848]

>>18332834
The Jews are completely autistic, I've seen plenty of misinformed Christians believe them to be just pseudo Christians but misinformed. But they are a whole entire different can of worms.

[Anonymous No.18332853]

>>18332826
And what else was found there? Why are you so triggered? What language was the OT written in originally, Cpt. TRIGGERED?

[Anonymous No.18332864]

>>18332834
>you end up with David being a Mountain Lion and he's gonna come back and enslave all of the filthy goyim when Rosy Fingered Dawn waggles out tomorrow, just you wait you filthy gentiles.
Kek, great post all around

[Anonymous No.18332866]

>>18332826
What are you arguing here? The Hebrew bible was written in Hebrew so it would obviously be important to study it in Hebrew regardless of your arbitrary qualifications. A translation is still a translation. Just because at one time the septuagint was the oldest translation one had access to doesn't make it original, and it doesn't have some magic one to one correspondence to Hebrew in any sense.

This is the kind of argument a KJV only Baptist makes. Same odd logic based on hypothetical and subjective qualifications.

[Anonymous No.18332881]

>>18332848
>But they are a whole entire different can of worms.
It clearly works though. Name a people that is as old as them.

[Anonymous No.18332890]

>>18332881
Armenians? Greekoids?

[Anonymous No.18332893]

>>18332717
filtered

[Anonymous No.18332900]

Sounds kino desu

[Anonymous No.18332907]

>>18332717
Sounds schizo kino

[Anonymous No.18332912]

>>18332866
The Septuagint is more accurate to the original Hebrew text. Also divinely inspired. The Jews had to stop using it because they kept getting BTFO in debates with Christians

[Anonymous No.18332920]

>>18332890
Well Armenians and Greeks certainly descend from the ancient populations but I'd argue that preserving your religion(among other things too) as being a big part of what constitutes continuity.

Perhaps the Chinese and Zoroastrian Persians have a claim though.

[Anonymous No.18332947]

>>18332834
>The Hellenization of the Jews, and just how much of "Judaism" is just a ripoff of Greek philosophy, is something a lot of people miss out on. There's an entire literary tradition of Jewish apocalypticism seething about the evil Greeks, but it's in fucking Homeric Greek and uses shitty attempts at dactylic hexameter, so you end up with David being a Mountain Lion and he's gonna come back and enslave all of the filthy goyim when Rosy Fingered Dawn waggles out tomorrow, just you wait you filthy gentiles.

Top kek.

>nevermind that the Talmud was actually compiled from texts going back to the second century BC

Where did you read this, though?

[Anonymous No.18332955]

>>18332834
>There's an entire literary tradition of Jewish apocalypticism seething about the evil Greeks, but it's in fucking Homeric Greek and uses shitty attempts at dactylic hexameter, so you end up with David being a Mountain Lion and he's gonna come back and enslave all of the filthy goyim when Rosy Fingered Dawn waggles out tomorrow, just you wait you filthy gentiles.
Where is this from? I want to read it.

[Anonymous No.18332956]

>>18332912
Hmm this is just a dumb post all around and you brought inspiration into it so you're clearly a cultic nutcase which explains why you're so mad about translation issues. Grow up, loser

[Anonymous No.18332961]

>>18332912
>divinely inspired
oh you mean its right because your religious authority said it is? Well gee why didn't you say so. Pack it up boys we all got "btfo"!

[Anonymous No.18332979]

Why is the catholic spamming stuff about the septuagint? Every single translation the catholic church has used for the past 50 years incorporates the masoretic text and other Hebrew texts into its text, so the notion that the septuagint is divinely inspired appears to be something the catholic church itself disagrees with. Even its official Latin translation has been updated and redone several times based on protestant scholarship and Hebrew.

So whats the point of arguing this lol?

[Anonymous No.18332980]

>>18332866
>The Hebrew bible was written in Hebrew so it would obviously be important to study it in Hebrew regardless of your arbitrary qualifications.

I think his point is that even though it is inarguable that the hebrew version is the original text, the masoretic text we have is from the late 10th century and therefore practically guaranteed to be dissimilar in many ways to the text as it was known (if there ever was a hard-canonized version of the text back then, which is doubtful), especially considering the sectarian opposition of rabbinic judaism to christianity. Justin Martyr was already complaining about the jews being really fucky with the text in order to mess with christians, even given his bias it would be exceedingly unlikely that the text has not been tampered with since the days of hellenic judaism.

In other words, the masoretic text cannot uncritically be considered a guideline of what the scripture was like.

[Anonymous No.18332991]

>>18332912
>Also divinely inspired
Do Eastern Orthodox(or whatever sect you're from) subscribe to a type of KJV-onlyism but about the Septuagint instead? Fun stuff

[Anonymous No.18332999]

>>18332979
>Every single translation the catholic church has used for the past 50 years incorporates the masoretic text and other Hebrew texts into its text

This does not mean much. The masoretic text is used as a baseline but when it comes to theologically divisive (between judaism and christianity, that is) parts all churches follow the Septuaginta's readings, not the masoretic readings.

[Anonymous No.18333057]

>>18332947
The Talmud is a collection of Rabbinical opinions, and in some cases reports of Rabbinical opinion, on a variety of subjects. There's two, the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds (the Babylonian is finished about a century later, but is longer). A number of these stories are dated (internally) to well before Jesus. For example, about half of the Yeshus (figures who aren't Jesus, but are guilty of things that Jesus was technically guilty of, many of whom are suffering grievous punishment in hell) mentioned in the Talmud are from over a century before Jesus's birth.

Now, you might say
>well hold up a minute here, this IS the fucking TALMUD we're talking about here, how do you know we aren't being taken for a ride on the jewish trick train
and you're right, this is the text that argues that Aphrodite isn't real because you can take a shit in front of a statue of her after all, but if we're accepting "Temple Judaism" as having any historicity to its narratives or philosophical/theological validity at all then we're sort of forced to consider these stories and narratives as at least partially legitimate as they exist in the milieu that is writing the Talmud and leads up to Christianity (a few of these "old Rabbis" can actually be confirmed to have existed via evidence other than the Talmud, however).

>>18332955
It's just an example I made up to describe an entire literary tradition. 3 Maccabees is an example that some Christians consider canon. If you google "ptolemaic greek apocalyptic jewish literature" you can get tons of papers on this, though. The problem with this stuff is that it neither fits in with Christianity or with Rabbinic Judaism, so it just sort of dies after Hadrian BTFOs the Jews as a political entity.

[Anonymous No.18333081]

>>18332980
>In other words, the masoretic text cannot uncritically be considered a guideline of what the scripture was like.
No kidding but thats literally no one's point

>>18332999
Yeah you definitely made that up. Please post a citation for this wild claim

[Anonymous No.18333087]

>>18332717
Nietzsche discusses this in the Genealogy to support his argument that Christianity entered Europe through the resentment of slaves, women, and other defectives. No one has ever proven him wrong.

[Anonymous No.18333088]

>>18333057
>For example, about half of the Yeshus (figures who aren't Jesus, but are guilty of things that Jesus was technically guilty of, many of whom are suffering grievous punishment in hell) mentioned in the Talmud are from over a century before Jesus's birth.

Have you read Peter Schäfer's book about this, that actually a good number of Yeshu's in the Talmud are Jesus, not in small part because the persian government encouraged the babylonian jews to ham it up due to their archnemesis, the byzantine empire being made up of christians for the most part by the time the babylonian talmud was being codified?

[Anonymous No.18333100]

>>18332979
>Every single translation the catholic church has used for the past 50 years
lol

[Anonymous No.18333121]

>>18332717
>>18332731
Divine inspiration. Unironically.

[Anonymous No.18333123]

>>18333088
No, and I'm not arguing that they're not clearly stand-ins for Jesus, but it's a simple fact that a dude who practiced necromancy in 150BC Egypt or whatever isn't Jesus. Clearly a stand-in for Jesus, but he's not literally Jesus himself.

I'll definitely check out Peter Schäfer, though, that sounds really interesting.

[Anonymous No.18333138]

>>18333121
I just realized that catholics are retarded. I think I unironically prefer gay loving prods over them. I can't handle the smug anti intellectualism.

[Anonymous No.18333141]

>>18333088
>the byzantine empire
Of course it's not *the* byzantine empire just yet at the time we're talking about but you know what I mean.

[Anonymous No.18333190]

>>18333138
CAN'T HANDLE IT? DIAL 1-800-EAT-SHIT

[Anonymous No.18333206]

>>18333190
Catholicism is uninspired because I said so. There now i win the argument on exactly the same grounds :)

[Anonymous No.18333224]

>>18332866
Are you arguing that the Church Fathers are btfo for not reading 3 different translations of the Old Testament in 200 AD? Cope harder that the Septuagint translation was consistent before Christ and after

[Anonymous No.18333235]

>>18333206
doesn't work that way because you're cringe and i'm based. nice try though cutie

[Anonymous No.18333237]

>>18333087
Yeah I guess we could go back in time and ask women and slaves and see what they thought to prove him wrong. Retard

[Anonymous No.18333268]

>>18333087
>No one has ever proven him wrong.
except, you know, Constantine and Charlemagne...

[Anonymous No.18333279]

>>18333087
I guess if we were using slave in an Epictetus-inspired way

[Anonymous No.18333289]

>>18333279
nDidnt he pick up christanity from a mixture of his sister and one his personal house slaves?

[Anonymous No.18333294]

>>18333279
Not him, but didnt he pick up christanity from a mixture of his sister and one his personal house slaves?

[Anonymous No.18333340]

>>18333294
Roman Empire, England, Sweden, Iberia(the Georgian kind), Russia, and Francia was all converted because of women influencing and converting the king/emperor.

[Anonymous No.18333358]

>>18333340
>works every time

[Anonymous No.18333382]

>>18333340
wtf i love women now?

[Anonymous No.18333401]

>>18333235
Based

[Anonymous No.18333422]

>>18333340
>Clotilde had wanted her son to be baptized, but Clovis refused, so she had the child baptized without Clovis's knowledge.
>Shortly after his baptism, their son died, which further strengthened Clovis's resistance to conversion.

[Anonymous No.18333430]

>>18333138
>Catholicism
>anti intellectualism
This r/atheist meme needs to die already. You’re on /lit/ how about you read a fucking book about the subject

[Anonymous No.18333442]

>>18333422
Good thing she baptized the kid just in time

[Anonymous No.18333447]

>>18333340
>paganism is strong
>every pagan gets btfo by womemes
Wow, truly the religion of strength and power...

[Anonymous No.18333449]

>>18333235

[Anonymous No.18333468]

>>18333358
>>18333382
>>18333422
Beware the eternal f*male. Also I remember reading about the first saint or the first non-apostle martyr or something, and it the story talks about how he entered a house of some Roman and it specifically mentions how all the women and slaves in the household were Christians. I forget which one it was though but it is a famous story.

Makes it pretty humorous when you hear trads constantly complain about the feminine "takeover" of the Church, and how there are no masculine men in it and the pews are filled by nothing but old ladies. Christianity is just retvrning to tradition.

[Anonymous No.18333474]

>>18333442
this desu

[Anonymous No.18333479]

>>18333447
Nothing can survive the onslaught of a unified woman and slave class alliance.

[Anonymous No.18333484]

>>18333468
post body

[Anonymous No.18333491]

>>18333468
kek

[Anonymous No.18333503]

>>18332717
retard.
>>Irenaeus lied and said he heard from the apostles firsthand that Jesus died when he was over 50
Source ?
>Luke 3, 23
> Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli,
Irenaeus knew his bible.
>>Origen cut his balls off because he thought the Holy Spirit told him to
Not the holy spirit, by his own decision, he chirugically castrated himself, like a shivaite would do.
Ignatius was like a soldier wanting to prove his worth in battle. His desire is no more stupid than that of a warrior. If you don't agree you just don't understand martyrdom
>>Ignatius also called himself the word of God in his epistle to the Ephesians
If true it can make sense analogically

>>18332731
Greek and/or latin because that's all they needed to read the bible in it's official translation by the 70 wisest hebrews (hence the name)
>>none of them knew anything about first century Judaism so they just wrote fan fiction about Jesus's circumstances
Plain ungrounded accusation
>>18332731
>>they all claimed to know the apostles when they actually didnt
They don't, since they knew the disciples of the apostles, and they recall this.

[Anonymous No.18333507]

>>18333484

[Anonymous No.18333538]

>>18333468
On the other hand, there is the leftist and progressist that spit constantly on christianity for blaming women and on saint Paul for telling them to obey their husband like their God.
Stop simple thinking.

[Anonymous No.18333735]

what a retarded midwit thread lol

[Anonymous No.18333748]

>>18332717
kek so did you actually learn latin and greek and read the church fathers? or are you just another lying atheist midwit?

[Anonymous No.18334400]

Reading patristic works are a waste of time if you aren't going into ministry. A lot of them believed in some really goofy stuff and are all over the place with their theology.

Augustine's Enchiridion and Confessions, Chrysostom's commentary on Galatians, Irenaeus On the Apostolic Preaching, and Athanasius On the Incarnation are all fairly orthodox and easy enough to understand for the laity.

If people want "Fathers" I can't think of any better than those in the New Testament though.

[Anonymous No.18334405]

>>18334400
t. filtered

[Anonymous No.18334527]

>>18332731
>they all claimed to know the apostles when they actually didnt
The apostolic fathers were but people like Irenaeus for example were taught by successors of the apostles. Irenaeus was taught by Polycarp who was taught by John. This is even testified to in Eusebius's Church History.

[Anonymous No.18334810]

>>18332717
>>18332717
Someone post the story about how one of those old fathers dug up and stole a woman's dead body

[Anonymous No.18334834]

>>18334810
>Someone post the story about how one of those old fathers dug up and stole a woman's dead body
My ancestor :)

[Anonymous No.18334897]

>>18332717
I came to the same conclusion, these guys really didn't know what they were talking about and believed random rumours or just made shit up. I was also shocked by Ignatius of Antioch, at one point he even instructs his associates in Rome to ignore him if he changes his mind about getting martyred. The guy was insane.

To add to your list:
>Papias believed that Judas swelled up so large that he was wider that a chariot and his eyes were covered by his fat, he pissed maggots and then exploded
>The Epistle of Barnabas quotes Old Testament laws that don't exist like washing offal in vinegar
>Justin Martyr quotes verses from the psalms that are forgeries and haven't been found in a single manuscript, Jewish or Christian.
>Justin Martyr also quotes spurious apocryphal works like the Sybilline Oracles as if they're scripture

[Anonymous No.18334913]

>>18332717
sorry you fell for the Origen meme. There is a reason his works were suppressed

[Anonymous No.18334924]

So based on the texts who are closer in their practises, catholics, orthodox or protestants?

[Anonymous No.18334925]

>>18334897
>>Papias believed that Judas swelled up so large that he was wider that a chariot and his eyes were covered by his fat, he pissed maggots and then exploded
>>The Epistle of Barnabas quotes Old Testament laws that don't exist like washing offal in vinegar
>>Justin Martyr quotes verses from the psalms that are forgeries and haven't been found in a single manuscript, Jewish or Christian.
>>Justin Martyr also quotes spurious apocryphal works like the Sybilline Oracles as if they're scripture
lel, reminder that the council of trent says that the church fathers are infallible under certain circumstances. i read them too and was not impressed. i'm assuming most of the time catholics just don't read them so they aren't aware of how goofy they are. in some cases, they have been caught making up quotes from the fathers to support later doctrine.

[Anonymous No.18334935]

>>18334924
>So based on the texts who are closer in their practises, catholics, orthodox or protestants?
probably protestants. their theology was all over the place, as was church polity. catholics tend to anachronistically read ideas back into them to justify dogma, but actual historical critical treatment soundly refutes this.

on the one hand, they generally seem to believe in baptismal regeneration. on the other, they universally reject the primacy of the bishop of rome, full stop. on the other, the earliest fathers speak of salvation through faith alone.

but it doesn't matter because they were sporadic, undereducated, and crazy. they shouldn't be a "model" and generally they didn't claim to be.

[Anonymous No.18334948]

>>18333468
>when you hear trads constantly complain about the feminine "takeover" of the Churc
Evola has always argued that the Church is a basically feminine institution.

[Anonymous No.18334954]

>>18334935
Interesting
I've heard that it's popular for protestants to read the Church Fathers so I suppose they're happy reading them?
What about the eucharist?

[Anonymous No.18334956]

>>18332731
>none of them could read Hebrew
Most Jews couldn't. Jesus and his contemporaries spoke Aramaic and Greek.
>none of them knew anything about first century Judaism so they just wrote fan fiction about Jesus's circumstances
The Christian Church is an outflow of several divergent Jewish traditions. To introduce an artificial break they were supposed to know nothing about is nonsense. There were Jewish Christians that openly worshipped in synagogues for quite some time.
>they all claimed to know the apostles when they actually didnt
Your claim requires evidence. Why should we believe that?

For more info: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fDG5U0inNlE

[Anonymous No.18334958]

>>18334948
Feminine in the sense of lunar isnt feminine in these sense of sissyboy. Stop shit posting.

[Anonymous No.18334973]

>>18334954
eucharist is a great example. for one thing, there was no such thing as a sacerdotal priesthood so the entire concept of a mass sacrifice was nonexistent. read the didache. in all the instructions about the communion meal there is no priest involved. this alone essentially refutes the central premise of catholicism. i'm not even sure when such an idea first develops.

initially the bishop and presbyter (elder not priest) were one office, and even jerome was noting this in the 300s.

protestants mostly like augustine.

[Anonymous No.18334974]

>>18334958
Yes, it is. He distinguishes between primitive Christianity and later (developed) Catholic Christianity, the former being distinctly feminine in the mercurial sense.

[Anonymous No.18334988]

>>18334954
>What about the eucharist?
one church father, i believe ignatius, call the bread the flesh of christ. but he also calls the scripture the flesh of christ as well. catholics quote the first part but not the second. i think that gives you a sense of how odd it can be to derive any real meaning from the church fathers. ignatius also refers to HIMSELF as the word of God.

so what does he mean when he calls the bread the flesh of God? if he means it literally, then he means it literally for the bible too. we can only really be certain that he didn't mean it in a catholic sense.

[Anonymous No.18335040]

>>18333468
Progressive women seriously do not know how good they have it with Christianity. I wonder how they would react to something like Mithraism, or how badly the old Hellenic religions treated women on average.

[Anonymous No.18335061]

Does anyone in this thread actually believe in God?

[Anonymous No.18335066]

>>18335061
Yeah, why?

[Anonymous No.18335069]

>>18332834
> but then you look at the Church Fathers and not a single one of them knew fucking anything about Judaism.
It's lost on a surprising number of people that Jesus and the apostles were followers of Judaism, and observant ones at that. Hell, wasn't it James that had to rein in Paul and basically force him to reaffirm his commitment to the Temple/Judaism well after Jesus' death? I think some people just have the view that once Jesus came around Christianitiy just split off and it was its own thing. Jesus and his followers were "Christian Jews" along with a small number of non-jewish followers as well.

[Anonymous No.18335074]

>>18335061
I've met God personally, and he is a misogynist.

[Anonymous No.18335076]

>>18335069
>It's lost on a surprising number of people that Jesus and the apostles were followers of Judaism, and observant ones at that.
Literally because of the church fathers

>Hell, wasn't it James that had to rein in Paul and basically force him to reaffirm his commitment to the Temple/Judaism well after Jesus' death?
No, Paul was an observant Jew. He was just radically against Gentiles observing the Law. There's a difference there, but it's subtle.

[Anonymous No.18335085]

For Paul, the Law was a cosmic entity, almost a demon, that invaded history and engendered sin. He did not believe it was delivered by God, but by angels who were not exactly following god will

[Anonymous No.18335101]

>>18335066
I think that trying to analyze the history of Christianity apart from their stated claim that God Himself guides them and directs them misses the point, a bit.

I think the idea that God is real, and that God is actively involved in Christianity, is a really interesting thing to consider, and the horrible messiness of how the Church comes to be almost strengthens this point. Hell, think of all these Early Church writers. Origen spirals off into heresy. So does Justin Martyr, to a lesser extent. Nobody really knows what they're doing.

But this almost seems like the logical continuation of the Twelve Apostles all being so bad at their jobs. The Gospels paint an extremely unflattering picture of most of them. Peter, in particular, is depicted as this pigheaded zealot that is also a lying backstabber. James and John are consumed with a desire for fame and fortune. They all argued about who was the best among them. None of them actually understood anything Jesus was saying to them at the time.

So why on earth did this weird collection of fuckups become so powerful? How did Christianity succeed, when it seems to be this collection of insane people who can't stop screwing up?

Contrast the beginnings of Christianity with the beginnings of Islam. Muhammad is literally a warlord and is very charismatic, and Islam spreads pointedly through conquest. People become Muslim because Muhammad and his acolytes put swords to their throats and force them to convert. Islam is a conquering religion that is explicitly constructed to succeed.

This is a contrast to Christianity, which seems set up to fail from the beginning, because its Founder isn't even on earth any more and all its earliest followers seem to just be huge failures.

And yet, thousands of years later, Christianity is the biggest religion on Earth.

It's enough to make you believe that maybe God is with them, after all. That maybe actual Divine power makes Christianity grow, almost in spite of the failings of its prominent leaders.

[Anonymous No.18335114]

>>18332881
Assyrians, Persians, wtf Anon i'm a moron and even i know this

[Anonymous No.18335125]

>>18335101
>why yes, I am a total fucking loser. How could you tell?

[Anonymous No.18335128]

>>18335101
>So why on earth did this weird collection of fuckups become so powerful?
Don't overestimate them. They were not widely read and were not "powerful" in the church. The church was extremely diverse and disconnected. The idea that the church fathers were representative is a serious misunderstanding. Imagine what percentage of Christians were familiar with their writings. 0.1%?

They also tended to describe their influence as they wanted it to be, not as it was.

[Anonymous No.18335132]

>>18335101
You raise a good point, but I wish to correct your assumptions about Islam. The religion almost totally collapsed on itself post Mo's death (because he never got a male heir). You had all of Mo's most trusted companions warring against each other, Aisha who Mo called the mother of the faithful went to battle against Ali who was Mo's chosen successor. Said successor would die later on. Umar tried to burn Fatima's house down (Fatima was Mo's daughter). This all leads to the current autistic state of Islam with the Sunni, Shia split. Contrast this to the early Christian Church, who mostly worked together with one and the other and its clear to see that the students of Jesus had more going for them than Mo's students.

[Anonymous No.18335140]

>>18333503
Based

[Anonymous No.18335141]

>>18335140
samefag

[Anonymous No.18335145]

>>18335128
That poster clearly meant Christianity's power, not power of individuals. Since you commented, you think christians had no familiarity with some theologians? You think convocations of theologians to councils and even decide and influence governors and emperors? Many were held saints in a short time after their deaths.

[Anonymous No.18335155]

>>18335145
>That poster clearly meant Christianity's power, not power of individuals. Since you commented, you think christians had no familiarity with some theologians? You think convocations of theologians to councils and even decide and influence governors and emperors? Many were held saints in a short time after their deaths.
You're equivocating so much here I can't even tell what you're arguing, but the fact that you use the term "saint" anachronistically for its time tells me you're just a brainwashed catholic without any actual sources that aren't catholic propaganda.

[Anonymous No.18335173]

>>18335076
I suppose you're right. Though his preaching was radical enough that on a visit to the Temple he was almost killed on sight. In principle he was observant but many Jews of the time certainly didn't see him in that light.

[Anonymous No.18335188]

>>18335155
>You think convocations of theologians to councils and even decide and influence governors and emperors?
You think [these] mean that the percentage of christians familiar with their writings was ''0.1%''? That is what I wanted to convey but I'm sleep and forgot to finish my statement.

>the fact that you use the term "saint" anachronistically for its time
What do you even mean here? Are you really implying there was no canonization back then?

[Anonymous No.18335189]

>>18335173
In the Christian world it was due to Paul's apocalypticism combined with his experience of the Resurrected Christ. Paul believed things like Death and Sin were actual demonic entities, not just ideas. Same with the Law. So when the Galatians and Romans talked about Gentiles becoming observant, Paul viewed this as idolatry, because to him the Law was not just a list of rules. It was a living entity in direct contradiction to Christ. That's why he literally calls it idolatry. This was at odds with James, Peter, etc. He toned this rhetoric down later in his career, but he won the day in the end, with his view becoming orthodoxy. HOWEVER, Christians took Paul to mean these things were ideas/concepts and not demons. That mistake seriously misreads Paul and makes him hard to get. But once you see this, he makes sense.

[Anonymous No.18335197]

>>18335188
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. You're a brainwashed historical illiterate and I'm not interested in continuing to talk to you. Don't reply to me again, junior college.

[Anonymous No.18335201]

>>18335173
Well that's because he was radically interpreting and reinterpreting the Law, making it stricter in some ways, looser in others, all in ways that didn't really fit with what the High Priest was saying at the time, and in what the Pharisees were saying.

And when he was asked to prove that he had the authority to reinterpret the Law, and do the things he did, he said, "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again."

And then they got mad at him and put him to death via crucifixion, just as he himself predicted.

And then what happens?

Does the story end there?

Because if Christianity has any authority at all, it can't. Christianity's entire claim to truth hinges on the idea that Jesus literally rose from the dead. This was the piece of evidence that Jesus himself offered as proof that he was exactly who he said he was, and that he had authority to transform Judaism and the Law.

So, did he rise from the dead, or not? It's the most important question of all time. Because all of Christianity's authority hinges on the truth or falsehood of the Resurrection. There's no avoiding this central point. You either believe, or don't. But there is no way to avoid it.

[Anonymous No.18335207]

>>18335201
That picture is wrong. Christ didn't resurrect with a flesh and blood body. Read Paul. He had a pneumatic body.

[Anonymous No.18335210]

Barnabas was the only one who mattered

[Anonymous No.18335212]

>>18335210
isn't he that cartoon elephant in kids books?

[Anonymous No.18335220]

>>18335197
I'm not even catholic. Not even orthodox (heretic). You are throwing a fit because of a word, 'saint', and mainly because it is intimately connected with Roman Church's canonization, when the equivalents in greek and latin were employed in the same way. But you are so blind that you can only see what you hate.

[Anonymous No.18335222]

>>18332717
>These guys are insane retards, not like us sane, rational christians!

[Anonymous No.18335237]

>>18332731
they were also all incels. explains it all, really

[Anonymous No.18335238]

Smells like a lot of bitter Jews in this thread....

[Anonymous No.18335252]

>>18335220
can you show me a single secular source that attests to a formal canonization process in the early church?

(no, you can't)

[Anonymous No.18335256]

>>18335238
catholic church says anti-semitism is a moral sin

[Anonymous No.18335264]

>>18335222
Presbyterians are literally as rationalistic as Christianity gets.

[Anonymous No.18335268]

>>18333268
>Charlemagne
Total Chad

[Anonymous No.18335271]

>>18333503
Now this is a refutation

[Anonymous No.18335274]

>>18335264
Do the Prots even have mystical traditions? Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Coptic Christianity all have mystics, but I've never heard of a Protestant mystic.

[Anonymous No.18335278]

>>18335252
Can you show me a single secular source that attests to the process of declarations of relics, all the processes of ordinations of clergy, in the Early Church from 200AD to the end of medieval times?

[Anonymous No.18335283]

>>18335274
No, because mysticism is fucking retarded. Maybe all those people sitting in monasteries should get jobs?? Have you ever read the desert fathers? They are literal insane people.

>>18335271
Saying "source???" is not a refutation unless you're a braindead zoomer nick fuentes sycophant.

>>18335278
So that was a no then.

[Anonymous No.18335286]

>>18335252
you protestants are a joke, really. disregard everything early fathers and theologians wrote about anything similar to the catholic church. cherrypicks whatever you want.

[Anonymous No.18335288]

>>18335286
still waiting on a source, my dude. copes aren't sources.

[Anonymous No.18335291]

>>18335283
If you disregard the writings of the time, which were produced by christians, then what is the point of discussing anything here, you retard?

[Anonymous No.18335292]

>>18335291
you don't need to keep replying if you can't produce a source. really. don't bother.

[Anonymous No.18335302]

>>18335292
>>18335288
Will you disregard everything Eusebius wrote because there are things pointing to Catholicism's tradition or you just cherrypick?

[Anonymous No.18335306]

>>18335302
so now asking for a single source is considered cherrypicking? sounds like projection to me, cathocuck

[Anonymous No.18335307]

>>18335256
racism is immoral, shitposting is not

[Anonymous No.18335318]

>>18335283
>No, because mysticism is fucking retarded. Maybe all those people sitting in monasteries should get jobs?? Have you ever read the desert fathers? They are literal insane people.

Maybe they are alive with the Spirit. Have you thought of that? Do you think that this is some normal, ordinary bullshit? God is coming into the world. God burns the souls of those who encounter Him. Do you think God is some cute thing? Do you think the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, He who set the stars in their courses, can come into the world and it's some "normal" thing, some "sane" thing? Do you think you can commune with the Almighty and not become insane in the eyes of the world? The world does not know God so it does not understand those who know Him.

>Let no one deceive himself. If any of you thinks he is wise in this age, he should become a fool, so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight. As it is written: “He catches the wise in their craftiness.” And again, “The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile."

The Spirit of God is not of this earth and it drives people insane. All the saints are insane. Because they belong to the world beyond the world.

[Anonymous No.18335322]

>>18335306
You were demanding a secular source on the interior ecclesiastical methodology of canoniaztion in 200-800AD Christianity. With this demand you can't even accept the secular sources which depend on the christian accounts. But then you have Augustine, Cyprian, Eusebius, Kemp. You can have as many as you want.

[Anonymous No.18335326]

>>18335318
Ah yes Teresa, the one who had orgasms and attributed it to the holy spirit. Yeah very normal and orthodox. Didn't read btw.

>>18335322
And yet you can't provide one.

[Anonymous No.18335332]

>>18335326
>You can't provide one
>But then you have Augustine, Cyprian, Eusebius, Kemp.
You want me to do everything here, right? I know you have a narrow understanding of such things but you could just look those names up.
>Canonization and Authority in the Western Church, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

By the way, are you really a protestant? You sound even worse than one.

[Anonymous No.18335346]

>>18335318
You are right and Plato knew this. Remember that passage in Phaedrus he writes about divine madness and how it is blessed. You should not care about the person to which you are replying. He is the truly insane one. You can see he is as insane as a beat, trying to attack Christianity. See how he proceeds, each post I make confronting his demands and affirmations, he dodges what I say trying to escape. He literally reached the level of demanding a secular source on the interior ecclesiastical methodology of canoniaztion in 200-800AD Christianity.

[Anonymous No.18335347]

>>18335332
Your best attempt was a book written in 1948 by a literal Anglican bishop? Holy shit. And what does this book say, pray tell? You are really pathetic ahahahahahahaha
>Catholic intellectuals

[Anonymous No.18335354]

[Anonymous No.18335363]

>>18335347
I gave you Augustine, Cyprian and Eusebius too, don't forget, please. But let me guess, now you want a book published in the 21st century?

[Anonymous No.18335372]

The absolute state of Catholics itt. I can't wait until your religion finally dies when the boomers go. Tick tock, 10-15 years left, pedos.

[Anonymous No.18335374]

>>18335283
>mysticism is fucking retarded
Yet you believe a Jew during the reign of Augustus was born of a virgin, was the son of God and rose from the dead.

[Anonymous No.18335395]

>>18335374
>Yet you believe a Jew during the reign of Augustus was born of a virgin, was the son of God and rose from the dead.
Correct. Read B.B. Warfield: Counterfeit Miracles. An excellent treatment from a Presbyterian theologian from the Princeton school on this topic.

[Anonymous No.18335414]

>>18332866
>hehehe look at those gospel contradictions, stupid goy cucks
>THE HEBREW BIBLE WAS WRITTEN IN HEBREW I SAID SO, DISREGARD EVERY ARCHEOLOGICAL FIND, MOSES SPOKE AND WROTE PERFECT MODERN HEBREW
The oldest Masoretic Talmud is from the 9th century, the text was compiled in the 7th century, 600 hundred years after Christ. Modern Judaism is almost a Muslim sect.

The Septuagint is a direct translation from the otherwise lost original, the Masoretic text has two more intermediary translations separating it from the source text.

[Anonymous No.18335417]

>>18335395
>Yes, I believe in Jesus. Here, read this book attacking the Catholic Church, it is an excellent treatement from a protestant!
You people are obsessed. That is why nobody takes you seriously.

[Anonymous No.18335534]

>>18333087
The passages where he quotes the early christians who were basically getting off by the thought of watching the heathens get raped in hell are hilarious. Christianity is a joke.

[Anonymous No.18335572]

>>18335283
Seethe harder, Calvinist wagecuck

[Anonymous No.18335605]

>>18335395
From the blurb,
>Warfield is unquestionably the best-known opponent of the rationalism and antisupernaturalism which threatened the life of the Church in the 20th Century; for him a non-miraculous Christianity was no Christianity at all
That's interesting, because I agree, without the miracles the entire religion has no leg to stand on.

the book begins,
>When our Lord came down to earth He drew heaven with Him. The signs which accompanied His ministry were but the trailing clouds of glory which He brought from heaven, which is His home. The number of the miracles which He wrought may easily be underrated. It has been said that in effect He banished disease and death from Palestine for the three years of His ministry.
My question is, as someone raised outside the church, why should I have faith in the miracles of the Bible, e.g. that Jesus had the power to "banish disease and death". A book speaking to Christians that argues that Scriptural miracles are true but those of the Catholic Church are fiction, doesn't really help me.

[Anonymous No.18335883]

Yawl heretics need anabaptism.

[Anonymous No.18336154]

>>18333503
Based

[Anonymous No.18336185]

>>18333503
Quality argumentation

[Anonymous No.18336881]

>>18335141
no

[Anonymous No.18336907]

>>18335283
>Saying "source???" is not a refutation
See :
>Luke 3, 23
> Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli,
Irenaeus knew his bible.

[Anonymous No.18337106]

>>18333503
>Source ?
It’s in Against Heresies

[Anonymous No.18337423]

Christ cucks seething

[Anonymous No.18337445]

>>18332717
Thank you.

[Anonymous No.18337594]

>>18335128
>Don't overestimate them. They were not widely read and were not "powerful" in the church.
Most were bishops, many played key roles in the councils, Jerome’s latin translation was The Translation in western europe for 1000+ years, the earlier fathers were the ones choosing what went into the new testament— in conclusion, wtf are you talking about

[Anonymous No.18337663]

>>18332717
Give me a PDF and I will.

[Anonymous No.18337709]

>>18337594
he's just a coping prot

[Anonymous No.18337761]

Protestants or people in this thread don't seem to care or mention that many of the fathers (such as Irenaeus or Athanasius) defended the trinity against several Christological heresies, identified the biblical canon, spoke out against Gnosticism, and died for the faith as martyrs. This thread is just shameless cherrypicking of there personal practices and small inaccuracies which were probably done with good intentions. By doing this, you are ignoring the vast amount of good that they did which has influenced many of the Christian orthodoxies you hold today.

[Anonymous No.18337778]

>>18337761
Origen didn't even castrate himself. He was just a nofap autist that got made fun of by his peers. Then their jokes became a meme and everyone thought he actually did it.

[Anonymous No.18337796]

>christian
>intellectuals

[Anonymous No.18337799]

>>18332717
Yup, they sound like the fathers of Christianity alright

[Anonymous No.18337858]

>>18337778
>Origen didn't even castrate himself.
that is just wrong, he literally cut his balls off because the holy spirit told him it would help him fight demons

[Anonymous No.18337867]

>>18337858
I don’t see any demons, so he was right.

[Anonymous No.18337922]

>>18332731
>hebrew
Who the fuck needed it? No Christian work was ever written in hebrew (always either in greek or aramaic), and the Septuagiant Old Testamente, the oldest version of the Old Testament aviable back them and so the most reliable, was a greek translation

[Anonymous No.18338043]

>>18335274
They do, it is called Charismatic Christianity. From what I've seen, it's fucked up.

[Anonymous No.18338078]

>>18335283
>Maybe all those people sitting in monasteries should get jobs??
lol

[Anonymous No.18338082]

>>18337922
>lmfao dude everyone can just make up whatever shit they want and everyone's interpretation is just as good as anyone else's
peak protty

[Anonymous No.18338134]

>>18333503
Based

[Anonymous No.18338149]

>>18333057
>The problem with this stuff is that it neither fits in with Christianity or with Rabbinic Judaism
Christians don't accept what contradicts them. How odd.

[Anonymous No.18338215]

>>18337594
any book on Christian origins contradicts you .

[Anonymous No.18338229]

Reminder catholics... don't contradict your protestant superiors

[Anonymous No.18338248]

>>18338229
lower iq = less prideful = more holy

[Anonymous No.18338260]

>>18338248
Oh man that is some fucking tasty cope

[Anonymous No.18338281]

>>18338260
your iq doesn't matter to God anon

[Anonymous No.18338310]

>>18338229
>Personal philosophy
>one of the lowest
Snowflake contrarians confirmed brainlets

[Anonymous No.18338345]

>>18338229
Look at the chart again, anon

[Anonymous No.18338349]

>>18335101
>Origen spirals off into heresy
dont you mean tertullian?

[Anonymous No.18338376]

>>18335101
Such a great post

[Anonymous No.18338441]

>>18338345
lmao

[Anonymous No.18338446]

>>18332834
The talmud is a compilation of "oral teachings" and "commentaries" (i.e. a bunch of rabbis made up nonsense to ensure the survival of the jewish race and called it a religion)

[Anonymous No.18338451]

>>18335238
o

[Anonymous No.18338462]

>>18338446
Sure, but that's Abrahamic religion as a whole.

[Anonymous No.18338467]

>>18338349
I believe Origen was also deemed heretical for certain teachings but I can't remeber what at the moment

[Anonymous No.18338487]

>>18338462
what is your religion or belief or philosophy/theosophy anon?

[Anonymous No.18338527]

>>18338487

[Anonymous No.18338612]

>>18333087
I once filled your mum with cum, she enjoyed it so much she lost consciousness and couldn't remember. No one has ever proven me wrong.

[Anonymous No.18338616]

>>18333087
>pagan Rome is so strong and based bro!
>*gets btfod by slaves, women, and other defectives*
Guess it wasn’t so strong then eh? The light of Christ is more powerful than the bolts of Zeus.

[Anonymous No.18338633]

>>18338616
I know catholics don't know actual church history, but early Christianity was always middle class and lower middle. Just like today. Neetch didn't have access to the data we have today so he didn't know.

[Anonymous No.18338636]

>>18338215
such as

[Anonymous No.18338653]

>>18338636
bart ehrman. Introduction to new testament studies, 2018

[Anonymous No.18338714]

>>18338467
That happened several hundred years later according to fragments that were merely attributed to him. Specifically Jerome seemed to hate him but he has epistles in which he discusses fragments of Origen's teachings, and sometimes his paraphrase of what Origen said is quite far from what current scholarship offers as a proper translation of him. Other times, a message of Origen's seems to be twisted, such as when Origen attempts to interpret the beginnings and the ends of this world, this life, in his style (often assuming particular counter-points you could expect to be raised and then arguing all of the points systematically), and whereas he's professing a lengthy discourse entertaining many possibilities, he ultimately ends the section without defining that any one of the possibilities is the ineffable truth, and leaves the question open to reader to think about (Origen rarely addressed his reader so when he did it stands out); Jerome more or less attacks him for doing this.

One of the thoughts is that, given the fragmentary nature of his available writing at the time, and again tying it in with fragments that were only attributed to him (but were later identified to be extracts of other writers interpolated into Origen's work), Jerome and others may possibly have been reading corrupted texts. Rufinus began work on collecting together and translating a more a unified body of Origen's work into Latin and at some point, Rufinus and Jerome had a following out and began to feud. Jerome accused Rufinus of tidying up the text and removing heresies, and also issued in response that he would do his own unadulterated translation into Greek, in order to expose what Origen "actually" said.

The actual matter is still up for debate. Rufinus' translations are the only ones we have in full, whereas Jerome's translations may have been lost entirely, or not actually finished at all? The only other extant translations of Origen which existed since antiquity are the Greek translations in the Philocalia. For the sections of Rufinus' Latin translation that also exist in Greek in the Philocalia, the differences are often very small but share in the same spirit, and nothing of which reads particularly heretical in the least.

[Anonymous No.18338905]

>>18338633
>I know catholics don't know actual church history

[Anonymous No.18339034]

>>18338527
oh just a /pol/tard, as expected

[Anonymous No.18339047]

>>18338633
we know many early christians were gentry, basil, nyssa, nazianzen, off the top of my head

[Anonymous No.18339069]

>>18335101
This exactly, blessed post. I also think this when people try to discredit Protestantism due to issues with figures of the Reformation. While many hold them high as the Catholics do others, I do not. I figure that God uses them to achieve His will for His church and that does not make them all knowing. Luther didn't see any value in the Book of Revelation. I consider it to be at least equal with the Gospels and Acts. Humans are a mess, to say the least, but still here today God has made Himself findable to any of us who seek. His book is the best seller of all time. In just about any town in any non Muslim or Asian country there are churches that one can be called into, and in some of those other places they are there in the underground.

[Anonymous No.18339198]

>>18335101
great post

[Anonymous No.18339248]

>>18339198
>>18339069
Fuck off protestards

[Anonymous No.18339249]

>>18338487
He's right though. The talmud is just the Jewish equivalent of Church Tradition.

[Anonymous No.18339304]

>>18338633
Christianity attracted literally all classes, including the bodyguards of emperors, prostitutes, artisans, slaves, wealthy land owners, etc.

[Anonymous No.18339312]

>>18339248
who are you calling prot? Never heard of Belloc?

[Anonymous No.18339324]

>>18338633
>I know catholics don't know actual church history,

[Anonymous No.18339397]

>>18339069
>God's whole salvation mission was to become a best selling author self help guru
this is your brain on protestantism

[Anonymous No.18339404]

>>18338248
This is exactly what I thought as well, there is nothing smarter than following God. Higher IQ leads to powerful temptation to lean on one's own understanding.

[Anonymous No.18339433]

>>18339397
(You) didn't pay attention to what I actually said and are interpreting it as likening a means to an end. God made sure His book is there for anyone to feel called to and interact with Him through. It can't do that nearly as well if it's some random obscurity.

[Anonymous No.18339457]

>>18339433
you stupid fucking esl nigger. do you actually not understand that mass printed bibles didn't exist until at least 1500 and even then its not like you could just go out to walmart and get one at any time. you are so fuckin dumb

[Anonymous No.18339547]

>>18339324
>makes a post proving he doesn't know church history
Epic

[Anonymous No.18339565]

>>18339324
can you provide a single non-Catholic source that claims that any of those things were responsible for forming the canon of the Bible?

[Anonymous No.18339569]

>>18339457
>God's plan doesn't bloom over time like a tree or vine from seed

[Anonymous No.18339598]

>>18338616
You're right. The success of Christianity is undeniable proof that sheer quantity of biomass wins over nobility and quality every time in the long run. Enjoy being a minority surrounded by the genetic dregs of the Third World.

[Anonymous No.18339600]

>>18339324
Once God's word was established it became all that anyone needs to find Him.

[Anonymous No.18339628]

>>18339565
can you provide a single non-Catholic source that proves which books of the NT are canonical?

[Anonymous No.18339632]

>>18339600
so you don't need the grace of God? nice heresy

[Anonymous No.18339655]

>>18339598
might does not make right now, huh? you people are pathetic

[Anonymous No.18339682]

>>18339628
Sure the Westminster Confession of Faith

[Anonymous No.18339684]

>>18339600
God’s Word, incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, descended from heaven and became MAN, not a BOOK
You idolize PAPER

[Anonymous No.18339699]

>>18339628
The historical attestation of the early Church as to which letters were broadly considered authoritative by apostles.

[Anonymous No.18339702]

>>18339547
You don't have the trinity or the Nicene Creed without these councils.

>>18339565
>Pic related
Protestant Church Historian J.N.D Kelly in Early Christian Doctrines p.53

https://books.google.com/books/about/Early_Christian_Doctrines.html?id=UivDgM0WywoC

>Augustine:
[T]here are also others too, of a
different order . . . But as to those two books, one of which is
entitled Wisdom and the other of which is entitled Ecclesiasticus and
which are called “of Solomon” because of a certain similarity to his
books, it is held most certainly that they were written by Jesus
Sirach. They must, however, be accounted among the prophetic
books, because of the authority deservedly accredited to them
[Christian Doctrine 2:8:13 (A.D. 397)]

We read in the books of the Maccabees [2 Mc 12:43] that sacrifice
was offered for the dead. But even if it were found nowhere in the
Old Testament writings, the authority of the Catholic Church, which is
clear on this point, is of no small weight, where in the prayers of the
priest poured forth to the Lord God at his altar, the commendation of
the dead has its place [Care to Be Had for the Dead 3 (A.D. 421)].

[Anonymous No.18339714]

>>18339702
The nicene council didn't establish a canon you idiot and that quote just proves catholics got the ot canon wrong. Lol you might be illiterate

[Anonymous No.18339760]

>>18339699
will you accept everything else that came from the early church, including the traditional institutions which form catholicism?

[Anonymous No.18339762]

>>18339714
>The nicene council didn't establish a canon
When did I say that. If you read the sentence I was talking about the trinity.

>and that quote just proves catholics got the ot canon wrong.
The quote was to show that the early church held the deuterocanonical books to be authoritative and canon

[Anonymous No.18339772]

>>18339760
You're confusing tradition with historical fact. The question is not accepting the authority of your cherry picked tradition. Its determining which books the apostles either wrote or considered authoritative using the early Church as a witness. Nothing about that entails submission to authority... accept of course the apostles

[Anonymous No.18339779]

>>18339762
>The quote was to show that the early church held the deuterocanonical books to be authoritative and canon
but they didn't. They didn't even have a set list of those books, and that's literally not the point or how the ot canon is determined. Jesus determined it

[Anonymous No.18339784]

>>18339772
Do you deny apostolic succession?

[Anonymous No.18339785]

>>18339699
the first evidence of a church father prophesing the NT canon was St Athanasius in AD 367, and the first council to formally pronounce the canon was the Council of Rome in AD 382, only 15 years later. before this, there was a lot of debate about the canon and the earliest list of books was the Muratorian canon dated around AD 150, which excluded Hebrews, James, and 1 and 2 Peter, while also including as canon the Apocalypse of Peter. up until St Athanasius and the Councils of Rome, Hippo, and Carthage, there was a lot of debate about the canonicity of the four books previously mentioned. St Irenaeus did not include them (aside from 1 Peter) and he also excluded Philemon, 3 John, and Jude. so the only sources you can cite to prove the canon of the NT are in fact catholic since St Athanasius and the Council of Rome were catholic.

>>18339682
retard

[Anonymous No.18339791]

> "Christian" chantards

[Anonymous No.18339808]

>>18339779
>They didn't even have a set list of those books
I'm not following you

>COUNCIL OF ROME
Now indeed we must treat of the divine Scriptures, what the
universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun:
Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book; Leviticus, one book;
Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Joshua [Son of] Nave,
one book; Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; Kings, four books [1
and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings]; Paralipomenon [Chronicles], two
books; Psalms, one book; Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one
book, Ecclesiastes, one book, Canticle of Canticles [i.e., Song of
Songs], one book; likewise Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus
[Sirach], one book; Isaiah, one book; Jeremiah, one book, with
Ginoth, that is, his Lamentations . . . Job, one book; Tobit, one book;
Esdras, two books [i.e., Ezra and Nehemiah]; Esther, one book;
Judith, one book; Maccabees, two books [Decree of Pope Damasus
2 (A.D. 382)].

>Jesus determined it
He did indeed. He gave authority to the apostles who gave their authority to successors which settled the canon at the Council of Rome, Hippo, and Carthage. We see thereafter people like Augustine testifying to this authoritative stance on the canon.

[Anonymous No.18339836]

>>18339808
yeah, they'll accept the NT canon which was ratified at the Council of Rome, but not the OT canon. then when you ask them about how they get the NT canon, they just say "muh church fathers," when St Athanasius was the only one to leave behind an actual list of the NT canon before the Council of Rome, only 15 years before. its utter insanity.

[Anonymous No.18339837]

>>18339785
>formally pronounce the canon was the Council of Rome in AD 382
That was not authoritative for the whole church. Subsequent councils declared different canons for centuries

[Anonymous No.18339846]

>>18339808
Jesus determined it by recognizing the books considered authoritative in his lifetime by the Jewish church in Jerusalem. He and the pharisses agree on the term scripture and never debate it.

[Anonymous No.18339866]

>>18339837
lmao go ahead and cite them then

[Anonymous No.18339874]

>>18339866
The councils of Carthage

There were 3 of them. So much for dumb catholic knowing his own history in any way.

[Anonymous No.18339890]

>>18339772
there is no tradition without historical facts. and as the other anon pointed, there is apostolic succession, and from the apostles we have the tradition, forming the biblical canon and the institutions which will determine the authorities to safeguard the canon and form the religion itself.

[Anonymous No.18339905]

>>18335238
Chuck

[Anonymous No.18339907]

>>18333503
>His desire is no more stupid than that of a warrior.

so completely retarded then

[Anonymous No.18339914]

>>18339655
But Pagans don't, and have never, supported "might makes right". I mean come the fuck on anon the book "Might Makes Right" is a fucking Christian Anarcho-Socialist text. Even literal fucking Vikings didn't support this shit.

[Anonymous No.18339920]

>>18339874
Carthage 397 gave the current NT canon.

[Anonymous No.18339982]

>>18339920
That was a regional council that conflicted with other rulings. Look let's cut to the chase. No official catholic canon was established until trent and your revisionism isn't a good look. You are so brainwashed you didn't even know there were other councils. A second ago Rome did it and now its Carthage. Your waffling proves you don't know a damn thing about this topic. No more replies.

[Anonymous No.18339986]

>>18339890
>there is apostolic succession
where? it's not in the Bible. Paul even actively refutes the concept lol

[Anonymous No.18339998]

>>18339907
This post oozes onions milk

[Anonymous No.18340026]

>>18339982
lmao you haven't cited a single actual source, and you can't even comprehend that the councils of Rome, Hippo, and Carthage all professed the NT canon. The first of which was decreed by the Pope himself. These were the councils, along with St Athanasius' testimony, that solidified the canon, the only reason Trent had to solemnly reiterate the canon was because the prots removed 7 books from the canon which existed for a thousand years, they were making sure everyone was on board with the fact that the prots were retarded.

you haven't even made a single argument and yet you call me the retard and tell me not to reply to you. you are an obstinate reprobate.

[Anonymous No.18340040]

>>18339914
then why bring power, (material) nobility and influence to the discussion? these are quantity and you take them to be qualities because you confound what is material with what is spiritual. this is common among every person who misses the point of christianity.

[Anonymous No.18340056]

>>18340026
Why were there more councils if the pope had already decreed a canon? Hmm awfully weird huh? Almost like that in itself proves catholicism false...

[Anonymous No.18340069]

Pretty fucking based. I wish I could be half as fanatical

[Anonymous No.18340070]

>>18339986
1 Corinthians 11:2
1 Timothy 4:14
Matthew 16:18

[Anonymous No.18340105]

>>18340056
because this was the 4th century and the internet didn't exist

[Anonymous No.18340125]

>>18339986
We have biblical evidence of apostles being given authority by Jesus (Luke 10:1,16) (John 20:19-23). There is historical testimony to this authority being given to their successors. Eusebius details this as well as Clement's epistles which were written before 70 AD.

[Anonymous No.18340191]

>>18332717
>Irenaeus lied and said he heard from the apostles firsthand
Irenaeus didn't know the apostles firsthand, and never claimed to - his teacher St. Polycarp did. Either you're lying, or haven't read the text you're alluding to.
>Origen cut his balls off
This is a myth. He himself denied this, and there is no evidence he did this besides contemporary detractors.
>Ignatius was a psychotic, writing extensively, almost erotically about how he couldn't wait to be martyred
As martyrdom is following completely in the divine dharma shown by the incarnate Jesus Christ, this is perfectly understandable of a religiously oppressed holy man. Your description that it is "almost erotic" shows that you are probably sexually deviant.
>Ignatius also called himself the word of God
He never said this - you are a liar and a slanderer. Read the full epistle below:
https://www.orderofstignatius.org/files/Letters/Ignatius_to_Ephesians.pdf

Imagine being such a waste of space that you spend your time talking shit and lying online about holy martyrs? Your grandparents would be ashamed of you.

[Anonymous No.18340224]

>>18340070
None of those show an apostle transferring authority to a non apostle

>>18340125
So all those verses prove is that only Jesus makes apostles. Which is the Protestant point.

[Anonymous No.18340231]

>>18340191
Your fag pedo religion will be dead within 20 years. Once the boomers are gone, catholicism is done. Evangelicals are taking over Latin America from catholics too. Only 17 percent of catholics are under 30 right now. And most of them will leave.

[Anonymous No.18340306]

>>18339699
So what's wrong with 1 Clement?

[Anonymous No.18340330]

>>18340306
The church fathers outright state their writing isn't scripture. And clement wasn't an apostle. So uhh... that?

[Anonymous No.18340342]

>>18340224
>presbyter
at least read the passages

[Anonymous No.18340343]

>>18340231
lol such a vindictive jab, you must be jewish.

[Anonymous No.18340363]

>>18335101
>Contrast the beginnings of Christianity with the beginnings of Islam. Muhammad is literally a warlord and is very charismatic, and Islam spreads pointedly through conquest. People become Muslim because Muhammad and his acolytes put swords to their throats and force them to convert. Islam is a conquering religion that is explicitly constructed to succeed.

I think it's even worse than you think it is because for most of the dhimmis conversion was not a matter of faith, but of practicality, of cynical self-interest and convenience. There was plenty of that in the post-Constantine world too but in the case of islam the materiality and "this-worldness" of the religion was affirmed from the very beginning, perhaps as a residual characteristic of the semitic exaltation of the material and the ritualistic over the spiritual and the mystic.

[Anonymous No.18340375]

>>18339632
What you don't need is a bunch of gatekeeping middle men. How you took that from the above can only be explained by retardation.

[Anonymous No.18340389]

>>18340342
A presbyter, which is an elder not a priest btw, isn't an apostle.

[Anonymous No.18340392]

>>18340375
Didn't Jesus himself put middle men between? John 20:21-23 for example.

[Anonymous No.18340406]

>>18340375
uh yeah you do need gatekeepers. the kingdom of Heaven is a gated community and Peter got the keys from the Big Guy (4u). no one keeps the gates of Hell, because that gates always wide open for any faggot who wants in.

[Anonymous No.18340416]

>>18340389
elder is another word for apostle, along with ancient

[Anonymous No.18340422]

>>18340389
and that is the point. acts 6 and acts 23 too

[Anonymous No.18340424]

>>18340231
>Evangelicals are taking over Latin America from catholics too
Not even close, pr*tie

[Anonymous No.18340427]

>>18335534
Do you have the primary sources for those 'quotations' or do you believe what a legitimately mentally ill person says?

[Anonymous No.18340437]

>>18338229
Prots arent Christians, they just go to Church for business networking.

[Anonymous No.18340446]

>>18340416
No it isn't. It literally means old man. The word for apostle is.... apostle. You have no source for that ridiculous claim. Any dictionary proves what the word means it koine Greek.

>>18340422
Those specifically state that apostles can be made, but only if they meet the qualifications that they were with Jesus from the beginning of his ministry whole alive, saw him crucified, and witnessed him resurrected before his ascension. Does Pope Francis or any living bishop meet that requirement? No. So they cannot fill an apostolic office.

[Anonymous No.18340457]

>>18340424
Tick tock retard

[Anonymous No.18340463]

I shouldnt, but I fucking hate protestants.

[El Arcón No.18340469]

The Time Travel Interpretation of the Bible
https://vixra.org/abs/2104.0068
>We describe the Biblical work of ages as a time travel program for saving humanity from extinction. God's existence is proven as a consequence of the existence of time travel, which is supposed. We present the case that Abraham's grandson Jacob, also called Israel, is Satan. We make the case that the Israelites are described as God's chosen people in the Bible despite their identity as the children of Satan because God's Messiah is descended from Abraham through Satan. They are chosen as the ancestors of the Messiah rather than as Satan's children. We propose an interpretation in which God commanded Abraham to kill his son Isaac to prevent Isaac from becoming the father of Satan. We suggest that God stayed Abraham's hand above Isaac because preventing the existence of Satan would also prevent the existence of Satan's descendant the Messiah. The history of the Israelites is summarized through Jesus and Paul. This paper is written so that the number of believers in the world will increase.

[Anonymous No.18340472]

>>18340463
Pope Benedict and Francis say go to hell. They also said Protestants aren't heretics so you're sinning and judging in spite of your church you supposedly love. Go to confession.

[Anonymous No.18340509]

>>18340446
no, they say that the apostles can be made by the authority of the very apostles.

[Anonymous No.18340526]

>>18340509
No those verses literally say what I just said. An apostle per biblical definition has seen the resurrected Christ. There's no getting around that. Or you can, but feel free to go circle jerk about it in your own little cult.

[Anonymous No.18340551]

>>18340463
me too i want to kill them all. they're false teachers. i don't feel any love to any prot in this thread who argues so vehemently for a false religion. i want you all dead in the ground. retards who are just too retarded or lazy to actually do some research and find the true faith are another story.

[Anonymous No.18340561]

>>18340526
so dumbass. what about St Paul? not an apostle i guess.

[Anonymous No.18340577]

>>18340406
Gatekeepers yes, but not human. Not a single human is capable of properly handling such a task.

[Anonymous No.18340589]

>>18340551
Well too bad the catholic hierarchy totally disagrees and would literally kick you out of a church for saying this kind of psycho shit. Get a grip.

>>18340561
Wow read the Bible. Paul did witness the resurrected christ. He details it explicitly.

[Anonymous No.18340608]

I think its funny that people get so defense/insistence that such and such person didn't actually know one of the apostles. I think it stems from their prior belief in the Gospels being fake. The capitulate that "oh okay there must have been some historical Jesus, but nothing like the gospels say" So that dont believe that many of the apostles even existed. But if there actually is a line from the apostles to the church fathers it challenges their belief of the ahistoricity of the gospels

[Anonymous No.18340614]

>>18340040
>confusing slave morality values with Aryan values lmao

[Anonymous No.18340622]

>>18340589
>Wow read the Bible. Paul did witness the resurrected christ. He details it explicitly.
>the qualifications that they were with Jesus from the beginning of his ministry whole alive, saw him crucified, and witnessed him resurrected before his ascension.
congratulations, you played yourself

[Anonymous No.18340623]

>>18340551
>. i want you all dead in the ground
Sent to the fbi. Unironically.

:)

[Anonymous No.18340629]

>>18332795
Literally what year are you living in?
This isn't the 1940s anymore.

[Anonymous No.18340631]

>>18340622
there's a difference between being an apostle and one of the 12. both are called apostles but if you actually read acts and the passages you cited you'd know this. seriously. No more spoonfeeding. Actually read the Bible.

[Anonymous No.18340641]

>>18340631
yeah you btfo'd yourself, thanks for making my job easy

[Anonymous No.18340647]

>>18340623
the world is your power, i answer to God.

[Anonymous No.18340663]

>>18340641
I'm sorry that you feel I had to explain to you this well known distinction that everyone knows. Are you actually claiming that the 12 and the apostles are the same unit? Again, read Paul. He explains the distinction in Galatians. The 12 are apostles. They have certain qualifications. Then there are apostles more broadly. They have the single qualification.

I'm actually shocked you need this explained. Are you the same one who didn't know there were multiple councils about the canon? I can see why you're Catholic.

[Anonymous No.18340672]

>>18340663
>read Paul, he'll explain why you should read Paul

[Anonymous No.18340676]

>>18340672
Oh ok I forgot catholics don't consider the Bible scripture. I think we're done here. Sorry I have a life. Ill just dip out assuming you conceded with that faggy little quip.

[Anonymous No.18340681]

>>18340663
so that makes you an apostle in the same way as St Paul then, right?

[Anonymous No.18340691]

>>18340676
>i btfo'd myself so i'm gonna leave and pretend i have better things to do

[Anonymous No.18340735]

>>18340614
>confusing universals with particulars

[Anonymous No.18340746]

>>18340663
>you can only be an apostle in this specific way
>no but you can be an apostle in this different way, but no not in the way that justifies catholicism
you are pathetic

[Anonymous No.18340760]

>>18340746
lol it's okay he ragequit

[Anonymous No.18340762]

>>18340663
ah yes Paul, the expert on the apostles and Jesus

[Anonymous No.18340831]

>>18339998
this post was typed by non-combatant hands

[Anonymous No.18340889]

>>18332766
the septuagint isn't a second rate translation and it has been shown to be more accurate in areas to dead sea scroll manuscripts which predate the earliest hebrew manuscripts. nobody read hebrew until the reformation? who is jerome, for one? learn church history, you're ignorant.

[Anonymous No.18340941]

>>18340463
pray for them

[Anonymous No.18340974]

>>18340676
I wasn't even the guy you were arguing with, kiddo

[Anonymous No.18340979]

>>18340457

[Anonymous No.18341030]

As a Christian, looking at this thread the whole catholic V protestant hatred always looks completely retarded.

[Anonymous No.18341064]

>As a Christian, looking at this council the whole Arianism vs Trinity hatred always looks completely retarded

[Anonymous No.18341114]

>>18341064
Protties theology is identical to Catholics, at least Arianism had a massive theological difference.

[Anonymous No.18341197]

>>18341114
The point is to show how differences between Christians have major consequences when they are not in union with the Catholic Church (Arianism). Many protestants are unknowingly Nestorian because of their view on Mary. And just look at Calvinists. A view on salvation which none of the fathers ever held.

[Anonymous No.18341208]

>>18341114
>Protties theology is identical to Catholics
pfffffffffffffffttttttt

[Anonymous No.18341266]

>>18340647
>i answer to God
And your stomach.

[Anonymous No.18341420]

>>18332766
Many did actually, some are not very popular so you never heard about them.
There were many Jewish converts who knew both Aramaic and Hebrew in the first millennium.
There were debates between Jews and Christians on the Hebrew text as well.

Now was this niche and not widespread? Sure.
But again they read Greek as it was the lingua franca of the Roman Empire essentially, at least the wealthier parts of it and for that they already had a 250-150 BC complete translation of all Hebrew texts, widely circulated.

Also it was the habbit of Christianity at large to translate to vernacular quite often, Gothic, Latin, Coptic and so on - very early translations.
Even new Greek translations kept appearing in 2nd-3rd centuries... Origen made a critical apparatus and put few of them side by side for comparison quite early alongside Hebrew text.

[Anonymous No.18341445]

>>18332991
Orthodoxy is indeed the original sect that split from Hebrews to become the body of Christ.

[Anonymous No.18341451]

>>18333294
That's how he picked up Arian (heresy) sympathies later on after he convened the first Christian worldwide council.

[Anonymous No.18341794]

>>18333235
>>18333401
>>18333449
samefag

[Anonymous No.18341830]

>>18335101
1 Corinthians 1:27 - "But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty"

[Anonymous No.18341890]

>I sure am glad I spent all that time on the internet squabbling with my brothers in Christ about sectarian irrelevancies

[Anonymous No.18342032]

>>18341890
Maybe it saved a Catholic or Orthodox from Satan's clutches.

[Anonymous No.18342105]

>>18341890
God will give you a crown of unfading glory for each prot you BTFO on 4chan

[Anonymous No.18342244]

Notice how the Protestant >>18342032 is concerned for souls and the Catholic or Orthodox >>18342105 chases the glory of a cool costume.

[Anonymous No.18344198]

>>18338527
>ancestor worship

[Anonymous No.18344741]

>>18342244
notice how your gay

[Anonymous No.18344825]

>>18344741
pretty sure more homosex has happened in catholic churches than protestant ones anon

[Anonymous No.18344860]

>>18344825
https://www.tiktok.com/@salty_chaplain/video/6955216845972458757?lang=en&is_copy_url=1&is_from_webapp=v1

[Anonymous No.18344892]

>>18344741

[Anonymous No.18344899]

>>18344860
I need a time machine to go back and strangle Martin Luther as a baby

[Anonymous No.18344906]

>>18344899
If Martin Luther were here he would strangle them.

[Anonymous No.18344938]

>>18344906
COPE

[Anonymous No.18344947]

>>18344906
Martin Luther believed in double predestination so the evil works these people are doing wouldn't matter to him.

[Anonymous No.18345137]

>>18335238
Chucky

[Anonymous No.18345290]

>>18335238
sad

[Anonymous No.18345323]

"To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."

[Anonymous No.18345399]

>>18345323
To worship history is to cease to be Protestant.

[Anonymous No.18345421]

>>18345399
post one history book you own

[Anonymous No.18345458]

>>18345399
Nobody worships history. We just believe the teachings of the Holy Martyrs and Saints who were disciples of the apostles, are more valuable than some coomer from the 16th century who forsook his vows, and was so controlled by his desires that he adopted Muhammad-tier double predestination to cope.

[Anonymous No.18345581]

>>18345399
This, or rather, cease to be Christian.
>>18345458
Imagine thinking all but a tiny minority of Protestants ever concern ourselves with Luther in any similar way to how the pagans do the "fathers" and "saints". God and His Scripture are the only teachers that matter.

[Anonymous No.18345640]

>>18345581
He is your intellectual and spiritual forefather, whether you accept it or not. Your probable adherence to the Solae and the idea of there not being a physical church created by Jesus Christ are the most obvious examples of this.
>God and His Scripture are the only teachers that matter
Thank God that the Catholic Church compiled your holy scriptures with the guidance of the Holy Spirit at the Council of Rome 382, presided over by Pope Damasus I. Without these holy saints, who you would derisively label "pagans", you would have no scriptures. This is why to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant - it is a set of ideologies united in their hatred of the authority of the successor of St. Peter, the bishop of Rome - and yet is wholly indebted to that same church which they label "pagan".

An intellectually incoherent, prideful, and vain mockery of the Christianity of the apostles and their successors - this is the state of Protestantism.

[Anonymous No.18345680]

>>18345631
>He is your intellectual and spiritual forefather, whether you accept it or not.
No he's not, he's one of the people God used to free us from the clutches of Satan's insitutional monopoly over churches and the Bible. The Catholics had tried to keep the Bible from us and would only let us know what they would read and interpret to us however they wanted and were implementing systems of abuse based on that. God used Luther to put a stop to that and now Catholicism is merely a choice for those they are able to fool. You do not get to define everything anymore, like you tried to do in what I quoted. Your power has been greatly reduced, Satan.

[Anonymous No.18345789]

>>18345581
lol just because you're too dumb to look into your beliefs doesn't mean you're not holding a position that Luther invented and popularized

[Anonymous No.18345794]

>>18345680
The Catholics tried to keep the Bible - that they compiled at the Council of Rome 382, under Pope Damascus I - from a culture which was first introduced to Christianity by that same Catholic Church? You have to have a damaged prefrontal cortex to be able to maintain this level of mental gymnastics without cognitive dissonance.

[Anonymous No.18345818]

>>18345680
St Jerome translated the bible into Latin so that the common man could learn it.

[Anonymous No.18345848]

>>18345789
>>18345794
I look very deeply into my beliefs constantly and they have nothing to do with what humans have said or done throughout history other than how God used any of it to carry out His will and plan. It seems that you types are very focused on the man side of the God/man interworks, whereas I see that as being 99.999+% God and a few instances of man having been fortunate enough to help God despite themselves.

[Anonymous No.18345943]

>>18345848
>I look very deeply into my beliefs constantly and they have nothing to do with what humans have said or done
newsflash: Jesus Christ is a man (or "human" as you would put it)
A Man redeemed the world with His blood.

[Anonymous No.18345969]

>>18335238
io

[Anonymous No.18346029]

>>18345848
If you neglect a major aspect of Jesus' latter teachings, namely the institution of the church of the New Covenant through the apostles, you will miss a huge portion of God's movement through society. Did not Jesus say to the apostles:
"I still have much to tell you, but you cannot yet bear to hear it. However, when the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all truth. For He will not speak on His own, but He will speak what He hears, and He will declare to you what is to come. He will glorify Me by taking from what is Mine and disclosing it to you."

And did not the apostles live the fulfillment of this prophecy on Pentecost, at the descent of the Holy Spirit:
"They saw tongues like flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them."

But the movement of God's Holy Spirit in the world did not cease with the deaths of the apostles, for we know that the Holy Spirit was transmitted through the laying on of the hands:
"On their arrival, they prayed for them to receive the Holy Spirit. For the Holy Spirit had not yet fallen upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit."

So how can we believe that this transmission of the Holy Spirit ceased at some point in history? It is only logical that this transference of the Holy Spirit, beginning with Christ sending the Holy Spirit to the apostles, and from the apostles to their successors, continues to this day, in an unbroken chain of apostolic succession.

Yet, the Protestant churches are divorced from this mystical and unbroken chain. Their ministers and bishops have not been ordained by the successors of the apostles. Their actions in this world are divorced from the chain of succession of the apostles and the Holy Spirit - and yet the Spirit moves in the church which Christ created, to this day. If you do not look at this eternal Church of the New Covenant, you are ignoring the major means Christ instituted to convey His graces, and the power of the Holy Spirit, to the world. Have you not heard that the gates of Hades shall not prevail over the church created by Christ? Why then have you abandoned it, based solely on the teachings of men who lived in the 16th century?

[Anonymous No.18346115]

>>18346029
>based solely
Wrong again. And isn't it odd how you never hear of Catholics experiencing the gifts of Pentecost despite the Holy Spirit through Apostolic Succession being their single biggest claim?

[Anonymous No.18346136]

>>18346115
lol he typed out an entire full length post with quotes and explanation and all you can say is "wrong again." you literally aren't capable of refuting anything, all you can do is be gay.

[Anonymous No.18346273]

>>18346115
I see you have refused to actually answer any of the claims that I made, and are simply saying "nuh uh". Anyways, while I recognize that you are probably too prideful to actually analyze your beliefs right now, I hope that what I am saying can lead to a change in opinion of some people who are lurking and reading this exchange.

With regards to your latter conjecture, it isn't odd that you haven't heard of it. People often refuse to look into things which challenge their preconceived notions. This is what happens when you are more interested in maintaining prior ideas, than finding the Truth.

Here are some resources you can check out if you want to see incontrovertible proof of the Holy Spirit moving today in the institution founded by Jesus Christ, just as He proclaimed it would.
Jacalyn Duffin, PhD hematologist, former President of the American Association for the History of Medicine and Canadian Society for the History of Medicine, member of the Order of Canada, 2019 Canadian Medical Hall of Fame inductee - analyzes the cases of medical miracles documented by the Vatican as evidence for the canonization of saints. Not a Catholic, and yet her medical perspective as a highly credentialed physician will challenge your claim that no Catholics experience the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
https://books.google.ca/books/about/Medical_Miracles.html?id=La7mCwAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y
There is also the ancient practice of exorcism, which is a gift of the Holy Spirit and is performed by those who have apostolic succession. For testimonies on the nature of exorcisms as a reality explicitly tested to be distinguished from psychological phenomenon, see:
https://www.ignatius.com/An-Exorcist-Tells-His-Story-P653.aspx
Further, you can look into the Charismatic Catholic movement, which is a rediscovery of the gifts of the Holy Spirit within the laity. The spirit moves in the apostolic churches in a unique way, which is exactly what one would expect of the church instituted by Jesus Christ. I hope you begin to critically look at your beliefs, and open your heart to re-analyzing your paradigm. I love you, brother, and as an anonymous poster, have no horse in this race beyond helping you come into the church created by our Saviour, and returning to the ancient Christianity of the apostles, church father, martyrs and saints, instead of the bastardized mockeries created in the 16th century onwards.

[Anonymous No.18346277]

>>18346136
"He" typed out a bunch of stuff reach a conclusion that the rejection of Catholicism is "based soley" on Luther and the gang, as if there is not a deep well of reasoning far beyond the men who served as the earthly catalysts for ending a mobster institutional stranglehold on the word and worship of God.

[Anonymous No.18346293]

>>18346273
You mean the "church" that invests in Hollywood movies, including the Elton John one that features graphic depictions of homo sex (so i have read, I will never watch such a film)?

[Anonymous No.18346323]

>>18346293
what the fuck even is this post? you are literally possessed by a demon, your brain is fried and you can't even engage in a dialogue. may God help you

[Anonymous No.18346325]

>>18346293
I mean the church created by Jesus Christ in Matthew 16:18, which compiled the Holy Scriptures in the Council of Rome 382. Individuals within an institution performing unethical actions does not invalidate the fact that Jesus Christ created this church. "For it must needs be that scandals come: but nevertheless woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh."

I hope you open your eyes, eventually. Until then, enjoy the New Testament we gave to you, friend, and hopefully you will soften your heart and allow God to guide you, and not your own pride and ego.

[Anonymous No.18346494]

>>18346029
>Their ministers and bishops have not been ordained by the successors of the apostles.
False

[Anonymous No.18346509]

>>18346323
Is this the operations of a Holy Spirit led institution?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-56413562

[Anonymous No.18346515]

>>18346325
>we gave to you,
GOD gave us the entire Holy Bible.

[Anonymous No.18346555]

>>18346515
The Bible was written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost.
>>18346509
no, that's some banker making a decision.

[Anonymous No.18346702]

>>18346494
Please show me a single Protestant minister or bishop on the entire planet which was ordained by a valid successor of the apostles, and is currently in communion with that institution. You literally can't do it, because the successors of the apostles are only those who have received ordination by a successor of the apostles.
>>18346515
Our universe is a result of God's grace. The New Testament was compiled by Catholic bishops at the Council of Rome 382, under Pope Damascus I. These Catholic bishops, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, gave you your Bible. Hence, the Catholic church gave you your Bible. Basic stuff - the Bible didn't just fall out of the sky. Its canon was compiled by Catholic bishops, and that's why you don't consider the Acts of Thomas as holy writ, but do consider the Epistle of James to be.

[Anonymous No.18346980]

>>18346555
>>18346702
GOD made sure humanity had the Holy Bible that He wanted us to *regardless and despite*, yet by His grace *including* the human involvement. To say "we did it" is as Satanic as it gets, but then piled on top of that you pray to beings other than God, thinking you know who is on the other side of the line, but you truly have no idea. You *bow before their icons and statues*, even, and think yourselves in any position to critique the churches of others.

Imagine having a "church" that features "bankers" investing in Hollywood movies, including outright celebrations of homosexual icons, and claiming yourselves under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, even the *only* that is.

Surely (You) must be trolls.

[Anonymous No.18347012]

I'm not even Christian but I've always been curious: how do protestants decide which books are canon or not when they don't have a central church authority figure?

[Anonymous No.18347049]

>>18346980
>yet by His grace *including* the human involvement
Yes, the human involvement of the church while He created - namely, the same church that gathered at the Council of Rome 382, which any scholar will tell you is the Catholic Church.
>To say "we did it" is as Satanic as it gets,
I mean, it is literally just a statement of the facts. The Catholic Church's Council of Rome 382 literally compiled the canon of the New Testament. Is it Satanic to say that Nikola Tesla invented A/C electricity, because actually all things are under God's providence? We all know God is running the show, but it is an incontrovertible fact that the Catholic Church compiled the canon of the New Testament.
>then piled on top of that you pray to beings other than God
Just like you ask a friend to pray for you, we ask our friends in heaven to pray for us. All prayers involved are directed towards God. No saint can do anything of their own authority, the intercession is only asked for because, being alive and in heaven, they are closer to the Father and Son than we are. Further, as beings in heaven, they are highly favoured by the Father and Son. I, a lowly sinner, is very far from God - and yet the blessed Virgin Mary is as close to the Son as one can be, and so by asking her to offer my prayer to God, I can hope that my prayer will be favoured.
>but you truly have no idea
Let me guess, it's a demon!
>You *bow before their icons and statues*
Bowing is a form of showing respect and veneration. No Catholic or Orthodox will say that this is an act of worship - only those with preconceived negativity towards the church of Christ will say that it is. It is all about paying respect.
>think yourselves in any position to critique the churches of others.
Well, your churches were only instituted in the 16th century and later, and we just point out the ridiculousness of this fact.
>Imagine having a "church" that features "bankers" investing in Hollywood movies, including outright celebrations of homosexual icons, and claiming yourselves under the guidance of the Holy Spirit,
Individuals within an institution performing unethical actions does not invalidate the fact that Jesus Christ created this church. "For it must needs be that scandals come: but nevertheless woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh."

>>18347012
They use the canon determined by the Catholic bishops at the Council of Rome 382, presided over by Pope Damascus I.

[Anonymous No.18347053]

>>18347012
The power of God is far greater than anything all humans ever put together could ever accomplish. He can do things in bits and pieces weaved throughout time that our tiny minds can barely begin to even consider.

[Anonymous No.18347069]

>>18347049
>you ask a friend
Yes, when they are still here living on the earth and I know for sure with whom I am speaking. But you people always trot out these same canned answers every time.

[Anonymous No.18347098]

>>18347069
So don't ask the saints for anything, then. There is nothing that says you have to do that in Catholic or Orthodox doctrine. To condemn it is just to be ignorant of the position of the fathers and saints on this issue, though. We know the saints are conscious in heaven, are aware of actions on earth (Revelation 6:9-11), and offer their prayers directly to God (Revelation 5:8). Why wouldn't we ask them to pray for us, seeing as their prayers are literally offered directly to God?
>But you people always trot out these same canned answers every time.
That's not an argument, but that's okay - it is your right to be bad at debating.

[Anonymous No.18347116]

>>18347069
prots:
>i know 100% for sure i'm going to Heaven because i believe and everyone who believes goes to Heaven
also prots:
>there's no way you can know if someone went to Heaven so you can't pray to them

[Anonymous No.18347149]

If God wants someone in Heaven to pray for someone on Earth then He can delegate the task just fine directly Himself.