/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6795694]

>Catholics
>not burning in hell for being pagans

Hahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahhaahahhahaahah

[Anonymous No.6795704]

/lit/ - literature

[Anonymous No.6795712]

>>6795704
/thebible/ - a book

Fucking moron.

[Anonymous No.6795716]

>>6795694
What is pagan about Catholics?

[Anonymous No.6795717]

One holy church tier
Roman Catholicism

Acceptable tier
Orthodox

I understand your frustration tier
Lutherans

Culture destroying warmongering fat americans tier
Other Protestants

[Anonymous No.6795718]

>Rich man and Abraham

Much Luther
such protestant

wow!

[Anonymous No.6795722]

>>6795712
You clearly didn't make this thread to host a Bible discussion, fucking goober.

[Anonymous No.6795723]

>>6795717
>Jesus totally wanted a feudal hierarchy for his church
>oh here's a bunch of shit about Mary and the saint we forgot to add in the bible too man

[Anonymous No.6795726]

>>6795712
fucking mention the bible in your op then, assuming you're op

[Anonymous No.6795730]

>>6795718
well memed

[Anonymous No.6795734]

>>6795726
Duh okay, "Hey guys I want to discuss a book! Is that okay?" Wait actually fuck you and your lack of inferential skills.

[Anonymous No.6795737]

>>6795694
Christians in general are pagans.

[Anonymous No.6795738]

Is there a based kind of non-Catholic Christianity that doesn't follow the Bible a la lettre? Allowing that the Bible speaks metaphorically and that it isn't the "inerrant word of God"? Basically, is there a non-retarded kind of Christian denomination out there? One that allows you to think like a rational human being?

[Anonymous No.6795742]

>>6795738
Most Protestant denominations tbh

[Anonymous No.6795743]

>>6795738
>christian
>non-retarded

[Anonymous No.6795744]

>>6795738
Unitarianism. Let us be united.

[Anonymous No.6795746]

>>6795744
>unitarianism
>not blatant blasphemy

[Anonymous No.6795747]

>>6795694
>r u serious?
>2015
>being catholic child molester
>and not a pagan?
>why do you even live
reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
enjoy this rare pepe

[Anonymous No.6795749]

>>6795694
> Trinitarian Christian
> Any denomination
> Calling other groups pagan

Top kek fuck off. Karaite Judaism is the one true Abrahamic faith. Everything else is pure heresy.

[Anonymous No.6795750]

>>6795738
Quakers, Unity Church, Unitarian Universalism. The downside is you need to be a pasty, skinny limp-wristed lisp-voiced cuckold to join either.

[Anonymous No.6795756]

>>6795746
> not aligning yourself with the higher power, instead deferring to "Him" with cowardice

[Anonymous No.6795757]

Anyone else here stuck between catholicism, orthodoxy and judaism? Anybody here converted to either of these? What about converting from an atheistic/agnostic family?

[Anonymous No.6795770]

>>6795757
I hold a lot of respect for Jews, and their whole ideology. It's the circumcision thing I draw the line on.

[Anonymous No.6795774]

>>6795757
How could you be weighing Orthodoxy and Catholicism if you're not even sure of the Christ's Godhood?

[Anonymous No.6795778]

>>6795757
Judaism makes the most sense if you're throwing your lot with Abrahamic monotheism. Read of the countless prophecies Jesus hasn't fulfilled. Christianity stops making sense.

[Anonymous No.6795779]

Repent

[Anonymous No.6795781]

>>6795778
hi were are the proofs

[Anonymous No.6795784]

>>6795781
Bible. Mostly Isaiah.

[Anonymous No.6795786]

>>6795723
>sola scriptura
>personal Lord and Savior in your heart

[Anonymous No.6795790]

>>6795778
Are you jewish?

[Anonymous No.6795794]

>>6795790
Not yet, I'm converting. Raised Protestant.

[Anonymous No.6795796]

>>6795743
Well memed :^)

[Anonymous No.6795798]

>>6795794
That's pretty amazing. What is the conversion process like? How's learning hebrew? Were they welcoming?

[Anonymous No.6795823]

>>6795798
Well, they circumcize you first of all. They feed the skin to the elder Jew men that eat the foreskin to extend their lifespan. If you're lucky, you are then introduced to the Elders of Zion and from then on your career becomes brilliant. You easily achieve what you could never achieve before: promotions, lucrative investments, crazy profits, infinite credit.

[Anonymous No.6795829]

>>6795798
Converting to Judaism is quite an experience, the feel is that you're converting to a people and a culture, not only a religion. Jews are usually really surprised that people want to convert for non-marriage related reasons - a couple of them literally told me "Why are you choosing the hard path?", lel. This has to do with Noahide laws. I didn't learn Hebrew yet. The rabbi I get counsel with said it's better to spend one year of "Jewish life" celebrating everything but the Shabbat, getting to know the community and studying Torah. And then make a final decision. I'm pretty sure I'll go in. Met some other converts, too, they are considered Jews like any other, and sometimes even role models because they chose it.

[Anonymous No.6795835]

>>6795829
do you have to get circumsised

[Anonymous No.6795837]

>>6795835
Yes. See: >>6795823

[Anonymous No.6795843]

>>6795829
How old were you when you first started talking to the rabbi? Why did you chose to convert from protestantism to judaism?

[Anonymous No.6795847]

>>6795843
>Why did you chose to convert from protestantism to judaism?
I needed a promotion

[Anonymous No.6795890]

>>6795835
On most denominations yes. I know Orthodox and Conservative for sure, and most Reform rabbis advise it too. Reconstructionist Judaism doesn't care. But of course it's not the same procedure as for a baby. It's not something grim really, just minor surgery.

>>6795843
I was 24, when I met a classmate who's Jewish and began talking to him about my personal views. He just told me to go for it if I felt the calling and gave me the rabbi's contact. So different from the idea people have of rabbis being older than the mountains with long hair and beard. I'm 26 now.

I went through an agnostic phase, then I started getting into mysticism, which ultimately brought me to Jewish Kabbalah (non-hermetic). I got into it and started to read the OT again, looking for the signs of man's covenant with G-d. The history and practice of Judaism hit me full-swing, especially their moody relationship to the divine, the constant need for an explanation of what surrounds us, the incentive to interpret Torah in order to build a better world. When reading the Prophets and some of the Talmud, I felt a personal urge to keep the mitzvot, I truly felt like I had been a part of Israel without realizing it prior. Something like this, it's difficult to explain.

[Anonymous No.6795902]

[Anonymous No.6795909]

>one and true church tier
the church as the corporeal expression of the body of christ on earth, indivisible and seeking only him, rather than the traditions of the institutions that have fallen into apostasy

>tare tier
everything else

[Anonymous No.6795914]

>>6795890
Just complementing: as I progressed on my readings I started to look for Jewish critiques of Christianity, which are centered in Jesus as Messiah or not, and the nature of the one G-d. The argument for non-fulfillment of prophecy is very strong, because it doesn't take wish-fulfillment or personal interpretation of Torah into question. It's literally written there in the OT. But you should look for more resources on it if interested because I'm not an authority on the matter of course.

[Anonymous No.6795924]

>>6795890
>>6795914
>>6795829
Either the best goy of all time or pic related

[Anonymous No.6795930]

>>6795924
>not taking a hint
Nobody is laughing, memelord

[Anonymous No.6795931]

>>6795924
well memed

[Anonymous No.6795970]

>>6795890
>man's covenant with G-d.
You cannot even name Him...
To you, G-d is not revealed... he is distant.
To us Christians, he has been revealed and we maintain a free relationship with him. We can name him properly: God.
Why not accept the True Religion instead of insisting to rebel against God's revelation?
You do know that the modern Judaism is defined as the "Synagogue of Satan".

[Anonymous No.6795973]

>praying to saints
>not obviously satanic

[Anonymous No.6795981]

>>6795970
Get fucked, churchie.

[Anonymous No.6795996]

The Lutheran revolt is the revolt of the individual against that subjection to the Divine Plan for order by which true personality is developed. God alone possesses personality in the full sense of the word, for He alone is fully independent, in His Being and in His Action, not merely of matter, but also of everything that is not Himself. Accordingly, human personality is developed, in proportion as we tend to union with God along the lines He has laid down. This means that, in our condition of fallen but redeemed beings, our personality is developed in proportion as we live in loving union with the Blessed Trinity present in us through membership of Christ's Mystical Body, the Catholic Church, thus observing the objective order of life incumbent upon us because of the actual Divine Plan. Growth of personality, therefore, implies a developed grasp of that ordered tendency and an intense love of the order so grasped. This love will manifest itself by a capacity for self-sacrifice, that is, by an increasing power of suppressing inclination to make of self the centre of life. In this way we respect the ordered tendency of all beings to God, the Common Good of the universe.

[Anonymous No.6796000]

>>6795996
To develop one's individuality, on the other hand, is to lead a self-centred existence allowing one's will to be swayed against order under the impulse of passion. Luther's history is the story of a revolt against order under the sway of passion. "As Luther gets older, his energy becomes less and less a soul's energy, and more and more, the energy of a temperament. Driven by great desire and vehement longings . . . possessed by the passions, loosing the tempest around him, breaking every obstacle and all external discipline. . . . Luther is the very type of modern individualism (the proto-type of modern times, Fichte calls him). But in reality his personality is rent asunder and ruined. . . . All that comes from the same cause: the absolute predominance of Feeling and Appetite . . . With Luther . . . the will has the primacy, truly and absolutely. . . . That attitude of soul naturally goes with a profound anti-intellectualism, which was besides helped by the Ockhamist and Nominalist training in philosophy, which Luther had received. . . . So in Luther the swollen consciousness of the self is essentially a consciousness of will, of "realization of freedom", as German philosophy said later on. We should have to stress too his egocentrism, and show how the self is centre for him, not certainly, as in Kant, from a chain of the human intelligence to be the measure of intelligible things, but from the chain of the individual will, cut off from the universal body of the Church, to stand solitary before God and Christ, in order to ensure its justification. . . . Behind Luther's appeals to the redeeming Lamb, behind his outbursts of confidence and his faith in the forgiveness of sin, there is a human creature which . . . will follow the will to power . . . and work its will in the world."

(Three Reformers, J. Maritain)

[Anonymous No.6796003]

>>6796000
The Lutheran revolt, therefore, in the last resort consisted in the setting-up of the passionate will of a human creature against the Divine Plan. It inaugurated the conflict of the Gospel and Law, of Faith and Works, and gave rise to the immanentist and subjectivist tendency by which the objective order of the world is considered to be an obstacle hampering the development of the inner self. With it, the Germanic peoples began to set up their will to mould the world against ordered subjection to the Mystical Body of Christ. The philosophy of Kant, Fichte and Hegel definitely put man in the place of God.

[Anonymous No.6796004]

>>6795973
God loves to work through intermediaries.

[Anonymous No.6796007]

>>6796004

How do you know? Did God tell you that himself?

[Anonymous No.6796018]

>>6796007
The Scriptures declare it, the entire order of the world declares it. If God didn't prefer to work through intermediaries He would appear to every person directly to reveal Himself, when he clearly has preferred and continues to prefer to reveal Himself through the prophets and then the apostles and their descendants.

To have a personal relationship with God is certainly not evil, but the Protestant's endow it with an egalitarian spirit that makes God practically equal with themselves. They rush straight to God without any fear, without respecting the vast hierarchy of beings that God has set up between Himself and the individual. It's like a man that demands to be in personal contact with the President of the United States whenever he wants something from the government.

[Anonymous No.6796019]

>>6796003

*mitre tipping intensifies*

[Anonymous No.6796033]

>>6796018
Whether we ought to call upon the saints to pray for us?

Objection 1. It would seem that we ought not to call upon the saints to pray for us. For no man asks anyone's friends to pray for him, except in so far as he believes he will more easily find favor with them. But God is infinitely more merciful than any saint, and consequently His will is more easily inclined to give us a gracious hearing, than the will of a saint. Therefore it would seem unnecessary to make the saints mediators between us and God, that they may intercede for us.

Objection 2. Further, if we ought to beseech them to pray for us, this is only because we know their prayer to be acceptable to God. Now among the saints the holier a man is, the more is his prayer acceptable to God. Therefore we ought always to bespeak the greater saints to intercede for us with God, and never the lesser ones.

Objection 3. Further, Christ, even as man, is called the "Holy of Holies," and, as man, it is competent to Him to pray. Yet we never call upon Christ to pray for us. Therefore neither should we ask the other saints to do so.

Objection 4. Further, whenever one person intercedes for another at the latter's request, he presents his petition to the one with whom he intercedes for him. Now it is unnecessary to present anything to one to whom all things are present. Therefore it is unnecessary to make the saints our intercessors with God.

Objection 5. Further, it is unnecessary to do a thing if, without doing it, the purpose for which it is done would be achieved in the same way, or else not achieved at all. Now the saints would pray for us just the same, or would not pray for us at all, whether we pray to them or not: for if we be worthy of their prayers, they would pray for us even though we prayed not to them, while if we be unworthy they pray not for us even though we ask them to. Therefore it seems altogether unnecessary to call on them to pray for us.

[Anonymous No.6796034]

>>6796033
On the contrary, It is written (Job 5:1): "Call . . . if there be any that will answer thee, and turn to some of the saints." Now, as Gregory says (Moral. v, 30) on this passage, "we call upon God when we beseech Him in humble prayer." Therefore when we wish to pray God, we should turn to the saints, that they may pray God for us.

Further, the saints who are in heaven are more acceptable to God than those who are on the way. Now we should make the saints, who are on the way, our intercessors with God, after the example of the Apostle, who said (Romans 15:30): "I beseech you . . . brethren, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the charity of the Holy Ghost, that you help me in your prayers for me to God." Much more, therefore, should we ask the saints who are in heaven to help us by their prayers to God.

Further, an additional argument is provided by the common custom of the Church which asks for the prayers of the saints in the Litany.

I answer that, According to Dionysius (Eccl. Hier. v) the order established by God among things is that "the last should be led to God by those that are midway between." Wherefore, since the saints who are in heaven are nearest to God, the order of the Divine law requires that we, who while we remain in the body are pilgrims from the Lord, should be brought back to God by the saints who are between us and Him: and this happens when the Divine goodness pours forth its effect into us through them. And since our return to God should correspond to the outflow of His boons upon us, just as the Divine favors reach us by means of the saints intercession, so should we, by their means, be brought back to God, that we may receive His favors again. Hence it is that we make them our intercessors with God, and our mediators as it were, when we ask them to pray for us.

[Anonymous No.6796037]

>>6796034
Reply to Objection 1. It is not on account of any defect in God's power that He works by means of second causes, but it is for the perfection of the order of the universe, and the more manifold outpouring of His goodness on things, through His bestowing on them not only the goodness which is proper to them, but also the faculty of causing goodness in others. Even so it is not through any defect in His mercy, that we need to bespeak His clemency through the prayers of the saints, but to the end that the aforesaid order in things be observed.

Reply to Objection 2. Although the greater saints are more acceptable to God than the lesser, it is sometimes profitable to pray to the lesser; and this for five reasons. First, because sometimes one has greater devotion for a lesser saint than for a greater, and the effect of prayer depends very much on one's devotion. Secondly, in order to avoid tediousness, for continual attention to one thing makes a person weary; whereas by praying to different saints, the fervor of our devotion is aroused anew as it were. Thirdly, because it is granted to some saints to exercise their patronage in certain special cases, for instance to Saint Anthony against the fire of hell. Fourthly, that due honor be given by us to all. Fifthly, because the prayers of several sometimes obtain that which would not have been obtained by the prayers of one.

Reply to Objection 3. Prayer is an act, and acts belong to particular persons [supposita]. Hence, were we to say: "Christ, pray for us," except we added something, this would seem to refer to Christ's person, and consequently to agree with the error either of Nestorius, who distinguished in Christ the person of the son of man from the person of the Son of God, or of Arius, who asserted that the person of the Son is less than the Father. Wherefore to avoid these errors the Church says not: "Christ, pray for us," but "Christ, hear us," or "have mercy on us."

[Anonymous No.6796038]

>>6795996
A-fucking-men

[Anonymous No.6796041]

>>6796037
Reply to Objection 4. As we shall state further on (3) the saints are said to present our prayers to God, not as though they notified things unknown to Him, but because they ask God to grant those prayers a gracious hearing, or because they seek the Divine truth about them, namely what ought to be done according to His providence.

Reply to Objection 5. A person is rendered worthy of a saint's prayers for him by the very fact that in his need he has recourse to him with pure devotion. Hence it is not unnecessary to pray to the saints.

[Anonymous No.6796055]

>>6796034
>Further, the saints who are in heaven are more acceptable to God than those who are on the way. Now we should make the saints, who are on the way, our intercessors with God, after the example of the Apostle, who said (Romans 15:30): "I beseech you . . . brethren, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the charity of the Holy Ghost, that you help me in your prayers for me to God." Much more, therefore, should we ask the saints who are in heaven to help us by their prayers to God.

This is the quickest way of proving why we ought to pray to the saints. If we ask our fellow men to pray for us, and if this has been an honoured tradition since the time of St. Paul, then why should we not ask the already perfected saints in heaven to pray for us? If asking the saints to pray for us to God were evil then so would it be evil to ask our fellow men on earth to pray for us.

[Anonymous No.6796056]

>>6796033
>Objection 2. Further, if we ought to beseech them to pray for us, this is only because we know their prayer to be acceptable to God.

Can you explain this objection? As a perfectly just an omniscent being shouldnt prayer have basis only as a scriptural command?

[Anonymous No.6796057]

>>6796055
> If we ask our fellow men to pray for us, and if this has been an honoured tradition since the time of St. Paul, then why should we not ask the already perfected saints in heaven to pray for us?

Isnt that working on the assumption that asking others to pray for us is necessary/beneficial in the first place?

[Anonymous No.6796061]

>>6796056
Are you saying that we should pray merely as a duty, because God is omniscient and so will grant whatever grace He pleases when He pleases?

>>6796057
Do you think St. Paul would have asked for it if it weren't beneficial? More pertinently, do you think that the Sacred Scriptures would recommend it if it weren't beneficial?

[Anonymous No.6796089]

>>6796061
>Are you saying that we should pray merely as a duty, because God is omniscient and so will grant whatever grace He pleases when He pleases?

As an all knowing and just being outside of demonstrating personal dedication there seems little rational justification outside of scriptural duty.

>Do you think St. Paul would have asked for it if it weren't beneficial?

Its hard to say he was a human with incomplete knowledge and likewise could have meant it in the above sense.

>do you think that the Sacred Scriptures would recommend it if it weren't beneficial?

Putting the cart before the horse, because it seems beneficial because the scripture discusses it rather than it being something with inherit value.

Of course if one can demonstrate it having value outside of demonstrating dedication then there would be a better counter argument.

My issue is whether

[Anonymous No.6796096]

>>6795996
>>6796000
>>6796003
All in all, most rebellions against orthodoxy are oedipal.

[Anonymous No.6796105]

>>6796089
Well, I would just refer you to an Article of the Summa of St. Thomas Aquinas, because he deals with it all there.

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3083.htm#article1

In Question 2, "Whether it is becoming to pray?", the first objection he deals with is, ". It would seem that it is unbecoming to pray. Prayer seems to be necessary in order that we may make our needs known to the person to whom we pray. But according to Matthew 6:32, "Your Father knoweth that you have need of all these things." Therefore it is not becoming to pray to God."

His answer is:

"Reply to Objection 1. We need to pray to God, not in order to make known to Him our needs or desires but that we ourselves may be reminded of the necessity of having recourse to God's help in these matters."

It's just as Kierkegaard said. We don't pray to change God, but to change ourselves.

[Anonymous No.6796110]

>>6796105
Which like I said strikes me as being a matter of duty more so than an act of benevolence to another or something with inherint vaule.

In this sense praying for someone is akin to performing the cross or attending church.

[Anonymous No.6796111]

>>6796105
"In order to throw light on this question we must consider that Divine providence disposes not only what effects shall take place, but also from what causes and in what order these effects shall proceed. Now among other causes human acts are the causes of certain effects. Wherefore it must be that men do certain actions. not that thereby they may change the Divine disposition, but that by those actions they may achieve certain effects according to the order of the Divine disposition: and the same is to be said of natural causes. And so is it with regard to prayer. For we pray not that we may change the Divine disposition, but that we may impetrate that which God has disposed to be fulfilled by our prayers in other words "that by asking, men may deserve to receive what Almighty God from eternity has disposed to give," as Gregory says (Dial. i, 8)"

[Anonymous No.6796114]

>>6796110
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3083.htm#article7

>Article 7. Whether we ought to pray for others?

>[...]

>I answer that, As stated above (Article 6), when we pray we ought to ask for what we ought to desire. Now we ought to desire good things not only for ourselves, but also for others: for this is essential to the love which we owe to our neighbor, as stated above (25, 1 and 2; 27, 2; 31, 1). Therefore charity requires us to pray for others. Hence Chrysostom says (Hom. xiv in Matth.) [Opus Imperfectum, falsely ascribed to St. John Chrysostom]: "Necessity binds us to pray for ourselves, fraternal charity urges us to pray for others: and the prayer that fraternal charity proffers is sweeter to God than that which is the outcome of necessity."

[Anonymous No.6796115]

>>6796111
>For we pray not that we may change the Divine disposition, but that we may impetrate that which God has disposed to be fulfilled by our prayers in other words "that by asking, men may deserve to receive what Almighty God from eternity has disposed to give," as Gregory says (Dial. i, 8)"

Outside of duty that seems to be akin to praying to the force of gravity to ensure one doesnt float off.

[Anonymous No.6796122]

>>6796114
Once again it comes down to being nothing but duty though.

Likewise it doesnt flow from the futher quote you posted about prayer being such a personal thing (and one that isnt really a distinct necessity) how it could then be considered a legitimate act of charity.

[Anonymous No.6796127]

>>6796115
No, because God does not give to us what we have out of necessity, but gives us all things by a free act of his own will. You can refer to the Aquinas's discussion on the freedom of God's will:

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1019.htm#article3

[Anonymous No.6796137]

>>6796127
I never said that he did only that in both instances these forces are wholly out of our control and that the act of reminding ourselves of this seems to be equally problematic if one wishes to hold prayer as something special or valuable.

[Anonymous No.6796147]

>>6796137
You seem to be set against it in thought.

I will just post a treatise on prayer by St. Alphonsus.
http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/prayer/mustpray.htm