If you ain't Catholic/Orthodox why are you even a Christian? You're not doing it right. At all.
 |
 |
|
If you ain't Catholic/Orthodox why are you even a Christian? You're not doing it right. At all.
If you ain't Catholic/Orthodox why are you even a Christian? You're not doing it right. At all.
|
|
|
>catholicism
>muh pope
>priests have been raping for at least the past 100 years with the Church actively covering up their crimes
>be orthodox
>sort of the same thing, but even more corrupt
That is because overcoming one's subconscious, instinctual, impulses, is a part of being an ascended, sovereign unto yourself (for a time). Also, I strongly suspect the Environment, namely Magnetic convergences, for certain promotions of ideas to include sex.
To see other people be unable to resist temptations, sex, dugs, money, power, or even fake things, fake acolades or titles or importance...most usually stop early because 'that one thing' was the thing presented to them. A very self damning kind of thing.
Even in ancient times its easy to fill your short life with cheap distractions, and Nature is kind here to not make it easy, the thing thats trying to make you fail is also trying to show how to succeed, but by inversion, not oversion.
Related to Developmental Psychology and its ultimate roots, why sex and cults are almost ALWAYS tied to each other.
...I could post more but...yeah, Im high.
>well yes Apostolic tradition just means we make it up, how can you tell?
I know right.
>Catholic/Orthodox
Nice try, Latinoid, but you're not one bit better than the Protestants. Your errors are of a different kind, but you're just as heretical.
Not enough "DEVIL!.....GIT GONE!"
[seizures on the ground in tongues]
Doesn't matter as protestants were right about most things in there doctrine. They were right about Sola scriptura, symbolic baptism, believer's baptism, aniconism, no veneration of saints, no intercession of saints, decentralized church polity, home churches and priesthood of the believer. But the big issue is that they were wrong about Sola fide.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Perspective_on_Paul
Also they should of based there ethics on the 1st century israeli roman interpretation of the bible not the medieval interpretation.
In the 20th century we had more scholarship on how to do bible hermeneutics an could figure out the intended meaning of the texts. We got a lot of new manuscripts and learned about the literary devices the bible was written in. But also that Catholicism, Oriental Orthodoxy and Eastern Orthodoxy was wrong on most of it's special doctrines/interpretations because it takes a medieval interpretation to a 1st century israeli roman text. It utterly butchers the doctrine(basically making it a different religion).
>sola scriptura
>Jesus never says he's God
>why yes we still believe in trinity and idolatry is fine why did you ask
never says he's God
wrong
>>why yes we still believe in trinity
it's biblical
>and idolatry is fine why did you ask
no it isn't that's a serious point of conflict against caholicism
>no it isn't that's a serious point of conflict against caholicism
Orthos and protties also use crosses everywhere so they're no different
I knew I shouldn't have indulged you.
>oh no don't tell me the TRUTH!! anything but that!
Only atheists complain about megachurches. It's a completely moronic talking point from a christian pov.
So the better question is why do terminally online atheists embrace catholicism and orthodoxy and the answer is they try to make upfor their lack of personality or veritable life skills with flashy imagery.
>doing it right
Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide.
I do not recognize Catholicism and Orthodoxy which are heretical, paganfilled perversions of Christianity.
the only reason you have a bible is cause those groups scribes wrote it down for you
Neither denomination did exist at the time and literally not a single biblical author believed anything close to either of them. Might as well say Peter was a Mormon and gave the keys to Joseph Smith. Completely ahistorical
actually israeli scholars translate the bible from hebrew
where did you get your new testament from? what manuscript or codex is your source? where did you get your list of books? (hint: it was written by catholic/orthodox hands).
Every book in the bible is older than the Papacy.
Which specific manuscript/codex are you using as your source though? You keep ignoring the question troony. Also the papacy was founded in 33 AD. Your Jim Bob church was founded in 1990.
Nestle Aland for nt masoretic nor ot.
No it wasn't.
>The word pope derives from the Greek πάππας (páppas), meaning 'father'. In the early centuries of Christianity, this title was applied, especially in the East, to all bishops[17] and other senior clergy, and later became reserved in the West to the bishop of Rome during the reign of Pope Leo I (440–461),[18] a reservation made official only in the 11th century.[19][20][21][22][23] The earliest record of the use of the title of 'pope' was in regard to the by-then-deceased patriarch of Alexandria, Heraclas (232–248).[24]
>written in greek
>written in greece
>but it wasn't orthodox who wrote it down. it was heckin proto-baptists.
Yeah...
in greek
Yes
in greece
Mostly
>>but it wasn't orthodox who wrote it down
Correct.
>it was heckin proto-baptists.
What an immature response to getting all your claims refuted.