There are unironically people on Yea Forums that read the bible without reading the catechism of the catholic church

>Believing anything that says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father AND the Son.
Begone heretic

If anything the fact that Russian Patriarchate, aka the biggest Patriarchate, broke off with Constantinople is the truly showing that the Orthodox Faith is somewhat screwed. Maybe now the Schism will be over tho. Since the russians are going full on NazBol

I bet (in a friendly, lightheartedly competitive way) you can't elaborate on this distinction in any meaningful way, and are only regurgitating dogma you received from (I would guess) YouTube commentators on the subject.

Catholic Church is The Whore of Babylon and the pope is the anti-christ.

t. televangelist

>Bartholomew acts like a tard and tries to become pope 2.0
>Russians break communion
>every other patriarchate either remains silent or sides with Russia
Yes clearly the Orthodox faith is in grave danger because Bart and his 12 followers in Turkey and borderline-Episcopalian GOARCHfags in America are spazzing out

>there are unironically people on Yea Forums that read the cathechism of the catholic church without reading the 95 thesis

Attached: 1549861697563.jpg (887x1097, 43K)

t. hillsong consumer

t. reprobate

t. literally believes in predestination

Not him, but my beef is that it was done without a council. You just can’t change the Nicean Creed without an ecumenical council. That’s just not how it works.

If Jah is standing by my side
Then why should I be afraid
Of the pestilence that crawleth by night?

Sola Scriptura, nigger

Attached: 9e7.jpg (249x249, 16K)

t. Literally believes the pedo church and the poop are the intermediaries of god.

>Sola Scriptura
>not Sola WhateverIwannado-a

Attached: 1519007032520.jpg (354x500, 103K)

Can any Catholics here explain why being Orthodox isn’t a Christian Pascal’s wager?
>if I’m Orthodox and the Orthodox are right, I’m good
>if I’m Orthodox and the Catholics are right, I’m good

>if I’m Catholic and the Catholics are right, I’m still good
>if I’m Catholic and the Orthodox are right... I’m not good

t. literally thinks that the temporal authority of the pope or the temporal fault of the church is anything relevant regarding the sacraments

I have always thought that Catholic theology is completely asinine. Built entirely on the concept of keeping up appearances that you are religious. Traditions, ceremonies, just for the sake of them.
For example, Lent. You can split hairs about its "purpose" all day, but when you boil it down to its essence, it's a period of glorified New Year's resolutions.

Well if you think Catholic theology is stupid, you think the entire foundation of the Western civilization and philosophy is stupid by default

To me, nothing is more humourous than when a Catholic is confronted with a single point where their religion diverges with their own holy text.
>Th-that's Sola Scriptura! REEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!
No, that's literally just what your holy text says...

t. doesn’t use faith as a means of exegesis, has to rely on interpretations from pedos

Ibn Rushd wasn't a Catholic though, dumb kafir.

Imagine pretending the Reformation never happened, just to name one deviation.
History is far more intricate than your labels and paradigms could ever hope to describe.

at least they're not getting buttfucked by their clergyman at choir practice

>imagine disregarding aristotle and aquinas, and liberalizing 1500 years of tradition, simply because the pope was stupid and you were butthurt
But yeah! Kant was totally right!

>Catholicism
>Secular philosophy
Your own holy book is at odds with Plato and Socrates, did you know? It calls them, "the foolishness of man, who imagines themselves to be wise."

I remember when Aristotle took his first communion.

>aristotle and aquinas
>Catholic
WE WUZ

Where did Cicero or Aristotle quote Catholic theology?

Well the communists and faggots don't have to infiltrate their church because they are already irrelevant and controlled by their own nations
>HE UNIRONICALLY BELIEVES CATHOLIC THEOLOGY IS BASED SOLELY ON THE BIBLE
>HE UNIRONICALLY BELIEVES THAT CATHOLIC THEOLOGY IS BASED FROM THE BIBLE
holy shit you guys are fucking retards
holy shit
Yes, aquinas totally didn't care about aristotle right?

Attached: 1541038733332.jpg (717x1024, 64K)

Where did Aquinas not quote Aristotlean philosophy?

>thinks aristotle is catholic theology
>ignores that Aquinas rejected the immaculate conception

>believing protestant lies

too bad western civilization was already a thing before Aquinas. Want to try again?

Also quoting Aristotle isn't Catholic theology, otherwise Muslims would be Catholics

Agree 100% OP but this pic is of a heretical post-Vatican II catechism

Go here for the good stuff:
baltimore-catechism.com/

>too bad western civilization was already a thing before Aquinas. Want to try again?
Uhm did you know that prior to Aquinas the church relied hard on Plato right? Just like the Orthodox church do it today? Holy shit, Yea Forums is literally full of retards

>Imagine pretending the Reformation never happened, just to name one deviation.

It's wonderful to imagine that, but unfortunately it did happen. And we're still paying for it today.

The destroyers who took dumb Luther's ideas and went haywire with it are and always will be remembered as destroyers of the West and of all civilization

>HE UNIRONICALLY BELIEVES CATHOLIC THEOLOGY IS BASED SOLELY ON THE BIBLE
Here we go again. Even the slightest mention of where Catholic religion deviates from it sown holy text turns into
>REEEEEE SOLA SCRIPTURA!!!!

I am convinced that Catholics would burn and ban the Bible if they could, and will in the future. It is just too inconvenient for them right now.

And Plato was already centuries old, and well known throughout Western Civilization before Jesus was born. Even so, Plato isn't Catholic theolgy. Try again?

Which of Luther's ideas are destroying the West?

>Traditions, ceremonies, just for the sake of them.
>For example, Lent. You can split hairs about its "purpose" all day, but when you boil it down to its essence, it's a period of glorified New Year's resolutions.

None of them are for the sake of them.

Lent is good for the soul and body. You do know that Lent includes a 40 day fast? And they're far from resolutions - they are actual self denials, and good Catholics keep them, and they do make you closer to God, ie literally a better person.

Good reading here:

calefactory.org

Good vidya here:

youtube.com/channel/UCqqN2e5-zgkQhHOs-ailqBQ

>I am convinced that Catholics would burn and ban the Bible if they could
That's more than fine, they have plenty of texts from "Church Fathers" to replace it.

>Lent is good for the soul and body.
Doubt.

>You do know that Lent includes a 40 day fast?
Religion of the flesh, to be seen by other people, for approval. They have their reward already.

>they are actual self denials
Just like New Year's resolutions! It only counts if you keep them, right?

>and good Catholics keep them
No true Scotsman? :^)

>literally a better person
Some of the worst people I have ever met were devout Catholics. Some of the best people I have ever met too, but the first renders your argument invalid, at least form my own anecdotal perspective.

>Good reading here
Already read, good read indeed, unfortunately the reality is much different from written theory.

>Can any Catholics here explain why being Orthodox isn’t a Christian Pascal’s wager?
>>if I’m Orthodox and the Orthodox are right, I’m good
>>if I’m Orthodox and the Catholics are right, I’m good
>>if I’m Catholic and the Catholics are right, I’m still good
>>if I’m Catholic and the Orthodox are right... I’m not good

Post-V2 satanic theology makes it confusing.

The Orthodox are more than schismatic - their idea of the very essence of God is alien to Christianity. Their clergy have valid orders, but sadly there are far more troubles with them. Of course the Catholic Church has the greatest of troubles with the Novus Ordo "newchurch" destroying the old.

But to answer your question, #2 would be "I'm not good"; you would only be good after abjuring from the heresies involved in the Orthodox schism. I don't know about #4, which is interesting - do the Orthodox now claim that that professing the Catholic faith makes one non-Christian?

m8, the bible was created by the church, why the hell would they burn it? The bible is supposed to be a guide of the apostolic tradition.
Oh so the Roman Empire isn't the birth of Christianity now? Also I can tell that you haven't once read Plato to affirm that the culture of the Roman Empire was the affirmation of Platos Ideas. Please explain where do the affirmation of the myth of Eros, or the concept of love as a supreme beauty regarding the truth as abstraction of everything and living by it and not simply carnal supremacy is contained within the Roman Empire prior to its conversion? Yeah, Jupiter and the Emperors sure followed that principle right?

>m8, the bible was created by the church
This, the pope was there, he asked Mary to bless it and they all fasted for 40 days Lent before publishing it.

>too bad western civilization was already a thing before Aquinas. Want to try again?

Without Aquinas, it would be a pale figment of what it has been with him.

Are you seriously attempting to downplay the roles of St. Thomas Aquinas and St Augustine - universally acknowledged to be two of the smartest men of ALL TIME - in the building and blooming of Western Civ?

All of them, combined. It's a syncretism of errors.

The bible wasn't wrote when Jesus was born m8. Holy shit I am speaking to literal retards

>Not starting with Guenon to understand your modernist biases
On May 25, 1925, Guenon participated in a round table discussion that included Maritain, where Guenon defended Hindu metaphysics. Guenon denied that it was either pantheist or idealist, contrary to academic consensus. Rather, it is connected more closely to the Aristotelian tradition, including the scholastic philosophy of the Middle Ages as exemplified by Thomas Aquinas.
"Guenon reminds us, for “Aristotle and his Scholastic successors .. the intellect was in fact that faculty which possessed a direct knowledge of principles.” In other words, Thomism does indeed admit a gnosis, though its full consequences have not been incorporated into theological thinking insofar as it may present a threat to the primacy of faith.
Evola also accepts Guenon’s judgment about Thomism, which he sees as part of the process of “rectification”"

Thomism is the only authentic living tradition of the west that has any resemblance to authentic spirituality. Traditional Thomism along with the Catholic Church will be the backbone of European spiritual revival. Contrary to what this board may tell you, there are a plethora of modern Thomists who have not got the recognition they deserve in secular philosophy due to the fact they are from the Dominican order or monasteries and not from academia.

Attached: 1547211339880.jpg (400x401, 39K)

You seem to have a false dichotomy going on here. Intellectuals existing within the context of a society is not a justification of the society.

No, I'm agreeing with you. The pope held mass and the Bible was published. The Saints came down from heaven and distributed it, but only to people who paid penance into a tin coffer so that their souls would be released from purgatory.

t. NazBol shill

How? You sound as though you have no argument...

Both nationalism and Bolshevism are anti-traditional pseudo-religions so no, I am not a shill

In what way?

Watching arguments between Christian denominations from the sidelines makes Christianity just about seem like the least appealing religion conceivable, all that shrill and autistic bickering. Why can't you guys resolve your interdenominational disputes like the Muslims? By fighting to the death, like real men.

It's metaphorical

>>Lent is good for the soul and body.
>Doubt.

I don't want to insult you, but that's so dumb it's sad. I'm sorry.

In the case that you are perhaps just ignorant of these concepts (easy and common today where most are victims of satanic mass media and educational system indoctrination), here is some Yea Forums approved reading material:

newadvent.org/cathen/09152a.htm

>>You do know that Lent includes a 40 day fast?
>Religion of the flesh, to be seen by other people, for approval. They have their reward already.

I don't understand. But I assure you, no one of my work acquaintances knows that I'm fasting or knows of my hunger. The only "appearances" part of Lent is the taking of ashes on Ash Wednesday.

>>they are actual self denials
>Just like New Year's resolutions! It only counts if you keep them, right?

Are you actually saying that people only pretend to observe Lent?

Well, you're probably right. In the Novus Ordo, it's all a social club, very empty, and all about appearances. But that's not the Catholic way.

>>literally a better person
>Some of the worst people I have ever met were devout Catholics. Some of the best people I have ever met too, but the first renders your argument invalid, at least form my own anecdotal perspective.
>>Good reading here
>Already read, good read indeed, unfortunately the reality is much different from written theory.

Keep reading, my friend.

Get yourself a Rumble & Carty. There might be PDFs online - I know there were at one point. I wish I could send you one.

I don't think anyone cares what is thought from a secular perspective, at least no a religion that almost universally believes that you aren't even humanly able to believe in it unless God grants you a supernatural gift of faith to believe in it.

>there aren't denominational disputes in Islam
You realize the sunni shia divide is one of the key reasons there is so much violence in the middle east. Obviously it's not the only one, but it plays a huge part

>The pope held mass and the Bible was published.
The Council of Constantinople standardized the bible to be used as a guide for the church, not the other way around it
>but only to people who paid penance into a tin coffer so that their souls would be released from purgatory.
Indulgences are now regarding spiritual salvation and not temporal punishment? Holy shit, how can one be so retarded, do you even know the meaning of the word?
NazBol is mainly built on Gnostic affirmations

Can't believe it took you that long to type out these non-arguments. Not surprised, just disappointed, but it's typical of intellectually dishonest Catholics.

Rofl did you even read my post

these little posts? Yeah, that's so based

Gnosis and Gnosticism are by no means the same. Gnosis, simply the Greek word for spiritual wisdom is understood to be completely orthodox in all spiritual traditions. I don't know why you keep bringing up Nazbol though. Completely irrelevant to what I said. It's anti-traditional and contrary to orthodox religion.

In case anyone does not understand the religious terminology or is otherwise confused, this guy is actually defending the practice of paying real money to religious figures to forgive your sins.

No ROFL!!

>Holy shit
>retarded
You sound so religious. Clearly, you are correct in matters of holiness and purity.

unironically (and perhaps ironically?) based

The authority to forgive sins was granted to us by Jesus himself. We can charge money for it if we want :^)

>Without Aquinas, it would be a pale figment of what it has been with him.

That's irrelevant as you can't prove it, but nice attempt at moving the goalposts.

That sounds like a good deal, though. Developing virtues is difficult, and successfully doing so often has more to do with the
momentum of your drives and motives then with "free choice". Makes sense to offer the sinners who can't help sinning due to desires or habits that are too strong to overcome a way to make amends.

>judging another's entire character based on online Yea Forums banter

Attached: 1550453256483.png (446x435, 86K)

>is actually defending the practice of paying real money to religious figures to forgive your sins.
SINS ARE RELATED TO SPIRITUAL MATTERS YOU FUCKTARD. YOU CAN ONLY ABSOLVE A SIN BY CONFESSION, INDULGENCES ARE TEMPORAL PUNISHMENTS AFTER YOU HAVE CONFESSED, YOU ARE EXEMPT FROM SIN AFTER CONFESSING NOT THE OPPOSITE, TEMPORAL PUNISHMENT IS SOMETHING THE PRIEST DOES TO DISCIPLINE THE SINNER SUCH AS PRAYING HAIL MARYS.

HOW THE HELL CAN YOU GUYS BE SUCH RETARDS
Yes, puritanism sure comes hand in hand with faith right my fellow american prottie?

>. Makes sense to offer the sinners who can't help sinning due to desires or habits that are too strong to overcome a way to make amends.
How about the free, everlasting forgiveness from sin as offered only by the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ?

Oh so the Roman Empire isn't the birth of Christianity now?

Sure, but there was a Roman emperor already when Jesus was born, and he didn't need Catholic theology as a foundation as stated.

This. Who needs the cross when you can make amends through the flesh?

Attached: 1538859133581s.jpg (217x232, 6K)

Anonymous words are honest words. I see your character laid bare.

Yeah, but what do you have against money

Both of them recognize the validity of each other's sacraments.

Where does number 4 come from

You have made my father's house into a den of robbers!

>Catholics are modern-day Pharisee Jews
Seems fitting.

Monetary transaction is theft? How the fuck am i supposed to buy shit now

Imagine having such a shallow religion that you can get out of having to do religious rituals by paying a fee. Sounds like the pay-to-win mobile game of religions.

>that almost universally believes that you aren't even humanly able to believe in it unless God grants you a supernatural gift of faith to believe in it.

This isn't true

You are addressing the wrong person, but that's simply too basic of a viewpoint. Half the stuff people say on here they emphasize for a reaction. You are just defaming another anyways if you think common curse words are enough to sully a person's entire character. Trying to claim his character is "laid bare" is so laughably judgemental; you fall into the same thing you criticize others of.

This. In fact, Peter said these exact words to Jesus when he said the whole "den of robbers" thing.

I said "almost universally," not universally.
I wasn't talking about fringe cults.

You're not supposed to buy shit; rather you're commanded to deny yourself and take up your cross.

>Sure, but there was a Roman emperor already when Jesus was born, and he didn't need Catholic theology as a foundation as (You) stated.
So explain to me, how the Roman Empire and its culture of the 1st century was the affirmation of the thoughts of Aristotles and Plato.
Imagine being this incapable of reading what I just wrote. TEMPORAL PUNISHMENT, AKA INDULGENCES, DOESN'T MEAN SPIRITUAL SALVATION, do I need to draw it to you?

I did not say, "spiritual salvation," not even once.
I said, "religious rituals."

You are getting angry, which is typical of a liar with nothing left to cling to.

Christian bugmen pay to win heaven

Or the first and largest "denomination" apparently

but we live in a society

>Sounds like the pay-to-win mobile game of religions.
Pretty much describes Catholics. They are the most shallow religious folk. Even Methodists have them beat in terms of religious depth.

Idiot, I'm Catholic. Read more! We also believe that faith is a gift.

RELIGIOUS RITUALS IN CATHOLICISM ARE SPIRITUAL. THE EUCHARIST AND THE SACRAMENTS ARE NEEDED TO GO TO HEAVEN, holy shit. I never expected people to debate catholic theology without having this much knowledge, it's literally Catholicism 101

This is the first time that this phrase seemed unironically deep to me.

Typing in all caps doesn't make you correct, it just makes you look stupid.

Paid for indulgences were only valid because the can only be dispensed by a priest acting "In Persona Christi". The same way that a Mass is still valid even if the priest is not in a state of Grace.

It has been against canon law to dispense an indulgence for money since 1563

Someone pissed off the papal nutcase lmao

Well if you are a sophist, sure the form predates the context right?

>there are people on this board who don't remember caps lock guy

>typing all in lowercase and smugly makes you right
Socrates literally died for this

>RELIGIOUS RITUALS IN CATHOLICISM ARE SPIRITUAL
Said increasingly nervous works-of-the-flesh guy for the 7th time today

You read more! Faith is intrinsic to the human rational soul. Faith is required for a soul to be saved, and every soul is capable of being saved. You are no Catholic if you believe that there are people who can't reach salvation

>typing all in lowercase
But I used an uppercase letter. Sorry, Socrates.

>Faith is required for a soul to be saved
And everyone is given that gift.
I am apparently more read than you. Still going through your /pol/ LARP phase?

Said the guy spamming protestant bullshit and has ran out of things to say due to his complete ignorance about the subject

There is nothing more embarrassing than being a protestant. You are nothing more than a crypto-atheist whose children will grow up to be either fundamentalist Bible worshippers or atheist sjws. Protestantism not only reinforced the secular, individualistic, and anti-traditional view of the religion that emerged in the renaissance, but ushered it forward to become modern neo-liberalism. No one takes Protestantism seriously. Even Martin Luther resented what he had done at the end of his life and wished that Catholic Church never had split into the thousands of Protestant factions. One may even say that Protestantism isn't even a religion, never mind not Christianity, since it has no genuine sacraments, no authentic initiatory rites, no spiritual traditions, and no great saints. Just give up already. England, once the bastion of European Protestantism is soon to be eclipsed by Catholicism. Truly a sign of the times.

Attached: 75d17a8fc544ae74568c382dda99b3566ab693250a8f6f64a990775f2d08cdb3.png (960x721, 638K)

>protestant bullshit
This is Cathol*c for "things that come from our own holy text which contradicts our own religious practices"

>no genuine sacraments, no authentic initiatory rites
Look at all these works of the flesh.

>No great saints
Literally all of the saints are Christians. By the way, we're Christians, but Catholics aren't.

>You are nothing more than a crypto-atheist whose children will grow up to be either fundamentalist Bible worshippers or atheist sjws.
And this is somehow worse than being a Catholic, religious in name only but atheist in all other aspects of life.

Catholics are perhaps some of the biggest hypocrites in religion.

>"things that come from our own holy text which contradicts our own religious practices"
Like what? Liberal interpretation like Protestants do means that anything in the Bible can interpreted the way you want to attack the mainstream interpretation. Or do you believe that words can't be interpreted differently?

You apparently don't becuase you don't understand the concept of the rational soul, which is a cornerstone of Catholic Theology

From the first post I responded to
>you aren't even humanly able to believe in it unless God grants you a supernatural gift of faith to believe in it.

But, the Catechism teaches that the human soul is intrinsically rational and therefore is capable of faith. Which directly contradicts your claim that it isn't humanly impossible, because without that gift you are not a human.

I am a Baptized and confirmed Catholic, and one who has actually read the Catechism

>This is Cathol*c for "things that come from our own holy text which contradicts our own religious practices"

Look at this user who definitely knows every single teaching of the Council of Nicaea even better than the Bishops who attended it, and the Church that enforces them.

based and midwestpilled

Imagine having nothing for an argument but "no you." Who said I am even Catholic anyways. It's obvious from a secular perspective that Protestantism is so hideously bland, devoid of any depth, and lacking in any sort of tradition.

I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

There is nothing more embarrassing than being a Catholic. You are nothing more than a modern-day Pharisee whose children will grow up to be either anti-christ worshippers or atheist sjws. Catholicism not only reinforced the secular, collectivist, and anti-traditional view of the religion that led to the fracturing of Christ's body, but ushered it forward to become modern neo-liberalism. No one takes Catholicism seriously (especially not Catholics, they get drunk all the time!). Even the popes resented what their "church" had done, looking for every excuse to divert attention from or else explain away things such as inquisitions and pedophilia among high-ranking officials, just to name a few examples. One may even say that Catholicism is just another religion, but not Christianity, since it relies on works of the flesh and the traditions of men, rather than the saving grace of God made perfect in his son Jesus Christ. Just give up already. Hollywood, once and still the bastion of degeneracy, has never had anything nice to say about Christianity. But when it does, it's about Catholicism. Truly a sign of the times.

99:6.1.Sectarianism is a disease of institutional religion, and dogmatism is an enslavement of the spiritual nature. It is far better to have a religion without a church than a church without religion.

99:6.3.But as religion becomes institutionalized, its power for good is curtailed, while the possibilities for evil are greatly multiplied. The dangers of formalized religion are: fixation of beliefs and crystallization of sentiments; accumulation of vested interests with increase of secularization; tendency to standardize and fossilize truth; diversion of religion from the service of God to the service of the church; inclination of leaders to become administrators instead of ministers; tendency to form sects and competitive divisions; establishment of oppressive ecclesiastical authority; creation of the aristocratic "chosen-people" attitude; fostering of false and exaggerated ideas of sacredness; the routinizing of religion and the petrification of worship; tendency to venerate the past while ignoring present demands; failure to make up-to-date interpretations of religion; entanglement with functions of secular institutions; it creates the evil discrimination of religious castes; it becomes an intolerant judge of orthodoxy; it fails to hold the interest of adventurous youth and gradually loses the saving message of the gospel of eternal salvation.

Attached: urantiab.jpg (1400x1400, 219K)

>protties can't listen to this without raging
youtube.com/watch?v=2H5rusicEnc

Attached: 24ab0e8b11d686ab508e47c8a60e73aff5c0b6a0a0dae096d42f507b70b8fd15.jpg (850x1202, 349K)

Said the guy spamming catholic bullshit and has ran out of things to say due to his complete ignorance about Christianity.

>using graven, sacrilegious icons
Repent, blasphemous wretch

Why are Protestants so willfully ignorant to the fact that the sacraments were instituted by Christ in the Gospels

>that picture
You're going to hell

Catholic education would tell you to read the KJV for English literature. The Catechism is for religious education, and if you're reading it past your confirmation you probably have memory problems that make it hard to remember how to tie your shoes. Since anyone who is awaiting their confirmation would be about eleven years old, I have to assume OP is underage banned or has never been a member of the Church or legally retarded.
You'd need to explain the Orthodox doctrine. Catholic doctrine means more Catholics are going to burn than Orthodox or tribal religions or whatever though, so I object to the idea if you're Catholic and the Catholics are right you're good. If you're Catholic and the Catholics are right, you're fucked.
Lent is a period of self inspection and compassion with our Lord. The idea it's just about giving up sweets is like the idea the government is just about talking to people.
It's unlikely you're a trad Catholic.
It is highly unlikely you are a trad Catholic as you've just commited one of the greatest heresies against God's Grace. And you should know what that heresy is from those last two words and which Saint avoided it if you are trad Catholic and want to prove it.
>Lent is good for the soul and body. You do know that Lent includes a 40 day fast?
It is not a forty day fast for Lent. Sundays are feast days still, as are other feast days of obligation.
>self-denials
It's like none of you know about the positive commitments of Lent. Self denials are supposed to only be part of it and most devout use them to sponsor positive contributions.
Indulgences are releases from punishment for sins which can be given by the Church but even a plenary indulgence will only release you from minor sins and not mortal ones. It does not release you from purgatory, it reduces time spent in purgatory, but short of being the Virgin Mary, you still have to go through purgatory. So you're both wrong.
You can only be given an indulgence after the sin has already been forgiven. Without remission of guilt, the indulgence is invalid. It's also incredibly hard to purchase one now they built the cathedral.
>But, the Catechism teaches that the human soul is intrinsically rational and therefore is capable of faith
The age of moral reason doesn't start till about six or seven. Though we (humans) are all capable of grace, rather than faith.

He’s saying all that shit to justify his pederasty

t. seething Prottie who has to copy posts, just like his theology, to have anything of value

>copy
You mean correct, to its original intent. Yours is nothing more than a satanic perversion. Your pride and malice only serves to accentuate my point.

>Catholic doctrine means more Catholics are going to burn than Orthodox or tribal religions or whatever though

There is literally no Church Teaching that says this

My cousin got molested by a catholic priest

Catholics are judged by adherence to Catholic law. Non-Catholics are judged by invincible ignorance. So if you're Catholic and eat steak on Ash Wednesday, that's a sin you should be judged for, but if you're not Catholic, you can have steak any day of the week, including Fridays in ordinary time.

They learn how to rape children in the seminary. They woukd literally prefer to molest children than take a wife.

You are projecting so much it is laughable. It seems rather impious of you to insinuate that I am malicious anyways. I have nothing to say to you personally. Meanwhile you accuse me of being a bad person. Rather ironic.

>Non-Catholics are judged by invincible ignorance.

Non Catholics are only judged by invincible ignorance if their ignorance is actually invincible

Do you even know what invincible ignorance is?

Speaking from a purely non-religious perspective, the Catholic Church seems to me like the Pharisees as described in the four Gospels.
In my own humble opinion, religious persons wishing to maintain the authenticity of their religion ought to avoid relying on traditions and symbols to satisfy themselves, and should try to understand the meanings behind such things. Perhaps some of you do, but being raised and growing up in an area largely dominated by Catholic churches, I can see that many of you treat it as a superficial status symbol.
I don't have a problem with religious people, so long as their religion makes them a better person. But your religion is useless if you don't get to the heart of the matter.

>Catholic education would tell you to read the KJV for English literature. The Catechism is for religious education, and if you're reading it past your confirmation you probably have memory problems that make it hard to remember how to tie your shoes. Since anyone who is awaiting their confirmation would be about eleven years old, I have to assume OP is underage banned or has never been a member of the Church or legally retarded.
So those that read the bible don't want to study religion nor understand it? It's that really what you are saying? Also does the fact that I am reading past my confirmation to affirm my faith means that I am retarded? Have you ever considered that the catholic teaching around the world is not really uniform and in some cases even subversive?
>Indulgences are releases from punishment for sins which can be given by the Church but even a plenary indulgence will only release you from minor sins and not mortal ones. It does not release you from purgatory, it reduces time spent in purgatory, but short of being the Virgin Mary, you still have to go through purgatory. So you're both wrong.
Yes, but the point here was that indulgences would buy their way to heaven. Confession is the main way to absolve sins, in some cases the only way

If God allowed Mary to be born without original sin, why didn't he just do that for everyone?

because God wants humanity to submit to Him

People's ignorance to the Catholic Faith if they are not catholic is vincible at best, crass at worst.

Only infants, literal retards, and isolated tribesman have invincible ignorance

>projecting
Not the person you were replying to, but I see this so often and I always wonder, but never say anything. But I just have to ask. Why do people love to use the word "projecting" when they clearly have no idea how to use it, and maybe even have no idea what it means?

Because Mary is God's wife.
Christians won't admit it, but Mary is just another actor in the virginal goddess archetype.

T. Went to a lay Catholic highschool in America and is now a Theology expert

What are you even trying to imply here. If you even believe in religious archetypes you could say the same thing about Jesus or any of the people in the Bible as being nothing but archetypes. That doesn't affect the validity of anything.

Non Catholics can also be judged by vincible ignorance, as can Catholics, but for non Catholics it mitigates guilt, while for Catholics it expands guilt.
So if you're Catholic and you forget it's Ash Wednesday and have steak, that is a larger sin than eating the steak knowingly, as you add your lapse of dilligence (forgetting it's a day of obligation) to your original affected lapse of dilligence (the sin of vincible ignorance you would have commited if you knowingly ate the steak). While for non Catholics, their lack of dilligence in eating steak even though they know it's Ash Wednesday for Catholics mitigates their knowledge it's a sin (they get in less trouble than the Catholic who eats the steak knowing what day it is)
And yes, I do know what it means as does every user who googled it when I brought it up.

>So if you're Catholic and eat steak on Ash Wednesday
Here's something that always bugged me. Full disclosure: I was raised in a Catholic family
I was given a bible, and my family was really religious, but no one really read it in my family. So I was reading through it, and I found a part that said something like, "don't observe special days, don't tell people they shouldn't eat certain kinds of food" and I decided I didn't want to deal with religious shit if it's so self-contradictory. (I was going through my edgy highschool atheist phase)

So my question to the Catholics on this board is, how does your religion reconcile the contradictions in the bible to your own religion's practices? Now, I'm aware of the "old testament vs. new testament" argument, so I know that some of the old testament stuff was jewish religion and Christians don't consider it law anymore, but what I read was in the new testament. Anyone know what I'm talking about?

>Without Aquinas, western civilization would be a pale figment of what it has been with him.
>this is what catholics actually believe

>you could say the same thing about Jesus or any of the people in the Bible as being nothing but archetypes
That is exactly what I am implying.

>That doesn't affect the validity of anything.
Actually, it's the other way around. Validity, or lack thereof, affects your religion.

>>So my question to the Catholics on this board is, how does your religion reconcile the contradictions in the bible to your own religion's practices
Bible alone doesn't dictate the apostolic tradition, that is mainly a protestant dogma. Also the interpretation of the Bible needs to be accordingly to the tradition, hence some versicles like the ones in the Old Testament should be read as a preparation of God towards the world of Jesus, not really as if the bible is the supreme law of God

Didn't Mary submit to him?

>So if you're Catholic and you forget it's Ash Wednesday and have steak, that is a larger sin than eating the steak knowingly, as you add your lapse of dilligence

No

Intent matters. Intent distinguishes venial from mortal sin.

Stop posting

yes, to the point of being filled with grace

Catholic here
Any instance of so-called "contradiction" is actually called Sola Scriptura, and you can safely disregard the bible in those cases. What's important is how the Church Fathers interpreted the text, which is vastly different from how the text is actually read, and needs to be supplemented with loads of Catholic propagan--I mean, literature, to make sure you're getting the correct spin on how the text should be interpreted.

This shit is so stupid.
So everyone can become a goddess like Mary if they submit to God?
How far do you have to submit before you're filled with grace to the point that Mary was?

>which is vastly different from how the text is actually read
It isn't
She isn't a goddess, if you submit to God as close as possible to Mary you become a Saint m8. Mary is unreachable in grace as she was touched directly by God

So what you're saying is that Christians are hypocrites who have to write a ton of literature to explain away core tenets of their main book, nice.
Or is the bible even their main book? Is their some other book with higher authority? The Bible Part II?

>So those that read the bible don't want to study religion nor understand it? It's that really what you are saying
If they're doing an English literature course, yes, the reason they read the KJV is because it's common to English literature. You have to read Boswell for English literature too even if you're not mad about hearing Johnson's pub thoughts on London, since it's also a major reference of English literature's canon. Doesn't mean you're going to move to London or convert to Protestant, it just means you're reading a major source of quotation in secular literature.>Also does the fact that I am reading past my confirmation to affirm my faith means that I am retarded?
You have to be able to recite it before the bishop to get confirmed, so yeah probably.
>Have you ever considered that the catholic teaching around the world is not really uniform and in some cases even subversive?
Yeah but getting a local cult recognised is pretty hard.
>Yes, but the point here was that indulgences would buy their way to heaven
Nope. They reduce the amount of time you spend in purgatory. Considering purgatory is infinite in temporal scope, and Heaven does not necessarily come after that, you might well be just shortening your path to hell.
>People's ignorance to the Catholic Faith if they are not catholic is vincible at best,
Look at you doing God's job for him a forgetting that vincible ignorance mitigates for non Catholics and aggravates for Catholics.
Don't call me American, I've been asking to get them banned from this board for years.

>It isn't
It literally is, in the basic definition of the word "literally."

>Any instance of so-called "contradiction" is actually called Sola Scriptura, and you can safely disregard the bible in those cases.
please tell me this is a joke

Attached: 1540502827026.png (640x480, 273K)

>>which is vastly different from how the text is actually read
>It isn't
This. That's why there are loads of Catholic apologists writing books longer than the bible to try and convince that you didn't read what you just read.

He's right. The bible needs to be read in the context of how the original church fathers interpreted it. You need to understand that you're reading it through the lens of your own modern bias, and you need proper instruction to tell you how the church fathers interpreted it.

>That's why there are loads of Catholic apologists writing books longer than the bible to try and convince that you didn't read what you just read.
Stop trying to make Catholics sound like Jews.

They probably didn't read the Bible because it risks personal interpretation, which is what the Protestants wanted to happen with their push for the vernacular. It's pretty rare for people to read the Bible for Catholics most everywhere in the world
There are Bibles that have official Church interpretation but they are big tomes and even then you risk misinterpretation of the interpretation. Catholicism stands on a tradition of Grace passed from Jesus to the apostles which they claim predates the Bible and guided the creation of the Bible and its interpretation.

Intent matters more than actions, but actions without intention are only judged less harshly. And, no I think I'll keep posting.

That intent matters more than action also confers virtuous intent with more grace than virtuous action. So the intention to go to Mass is more virtuous than actually just going to Mass.

>don't tell people they shouldn't eat certain kinds of food
This point comes up a few times in the NT, e.g. Mark 7:19. Catholics will say this means that no food is inherently spiritually defiling, but that doesn't mean God and the church can't still make rules about food. E.g. the Jewish dietary laws existed to teach discipline or something rather than because there's something evil about eating pork in itself.

>don't observe special days
Not sure, maybe Galatians 4:8-11 which is referring to pagan festivals.

>There are Bibles that have official Church interpretation but they are big tomes and even then you risk misinterpretation of the interpretation.
Ah so normal people don't get the "real" bible? How does that work, comes with a bunch of official appendices and whatnot?

Well I don't have a clue around English literature courses m8, I am not even a English native speaker.
>You have to be able to recite it before the bishop to get confirmed, so yeah probably.
Well not here in the largest catholic country of the world
>Yeah but getting a local cult recognised is pretty hard.
Lmao, you really understimate the power of subversion, especially in historically catholic countries
>Nope. They reduce the amount of time you spend in purgatory. Considering purgatory is infinite in temporal scope, and Heaven does not necessarily come after that, you might well be just shortening your path to hell.
Did you read what I wrote or do you want just to prove that you are smart, I was exposing the point I was debating to m8
>Heaven does not necessarily come after that, you might well be just shortening your path to hell.
First time I heard about this, care to expose some sources please or any books about it? I don't remember this in the Catechism
It isn't m8, most of the ongoing debates around Sola Scriptura can be debated by catholics in their favor using the Bible alone. The point here is that the Bible was never intended for liberal interpretation as it was written as a spiritual guide to the church not a rulebook as protestants claim

If I wanted to read a bunch of satanic propaganda, I would just read the Talmud.

Anyone who unironically believes that the only thing determining their everlasting condemnation to eternal torture is sola scriptura, and yet doesn't even know how to read the Bible in its original text is laughable. Everyone Protestant or Catholic recognizes that there are plenty of Hebrew or Greek words that you simply do not get all the nuances of when translated into English. You have to have cognitive dissonance to simultaneously place so much emphasis on worshiping a book and then neglect its study at the same time.

>most of the ongoing debates around Sola Scriptura can be debated by catholics in their favor using the Bible alone
Never seen this. Always ends in catholics appealing to Church Fathers™ and the foundations of their own religion, which they claim is synonymous with the foundations of Christianity.

So if God let all of Adam's children be born without original sin, they could still submit to him fine?

This. The common prole is too stupid to understand the bible. You need the church to tell you what it (((really))) says.

>Only the magic pope can read the secret code in the bible
cringe

There is a thing called bible study among catholics too, especially strong nowadays in the USA m8. You should try it m8, Scott Hahn is a really popular theologian

Attached: 1452803555671.jpg (1000x1510, 238K)

Why would I want to read a cult's interpretation (and I daresay perversion) of Christianity?

Mostly ends in asking on what authority then the Protestants can edit the bible and remove certain books without implicitly having themselves (men) determine doctrine.

>He thinks orthodox tradition is somehow less arbitrary in design than any other human social system.

Jesus makes references to Jewish oral tradition in the Bible and nowhere is sola scriptura even mentioned. Sola scriptura is just a modern ideological tendency to reject authority and embrace egalitarianism; the German princes that embraced Luther in the first placed cared only about being able to reject the Pope and gain more free reign over their territory. Sola Sciptura, like other Protestant heresies has everything to do with politics and ideology and little to do with theology.The same thing can be seen in the tendency for egalitarianism in Protestant Churches etc.

Attached: roboprot.jpg (1496x2389, 704K)

You take that back heretic.

Attached: 1529424000448.jpg (295x378, 11K)

>Protestants can edit the bible and remove certain books
And Catholics can add books. What a circus.

I would rather be called a heretic by a satanic cultist like you than receive your praise.

The bible is the same since the council of nicea

t. brainlet prot who despite worshiping the Bible can't even read it in its original form. What a cope. You place so much emphasis on the Bible and yet reduce it to being as simple as a picture book or simple fable.

Attached: 1549047419253.jpg (1024x772, 97K)

Yes it is

The difference being they claim the church can determine doctrine.

>add books
???

How convenient. Forgive my inclination to doubt.

Convenient? It's part of their faith. One which protestants rejected, but then decided to be inconsistent with. Do you not understand the asymmetry present here?

based, tbwhy. There is no falsehood in this post. Especially about Luther's regret. Go read his letter to Antwerp. He never expected so many new heretical churches to spring up from his criticism. What a brainless idiot. Oh, yeah, and he tempted a nun away from the convent to marry her. He was truly a devil.

The sacraments have been the same since ever m8, the church can't determine what is holy and what isn't, what it can do is to discover a new understanding from the theological perspective therefore reinforce the sacraments.

>The sacraments have been the same since ever m8

Didn't say they changed, only that the church is an authentic source of doctrine.

They're real Bibles, but how you read them will just be your personal interpretation. A lot of them have appendices and footnotes and interspersed notes. So you might have a verse that says
>In like manner these men also defile the flesh, despise dominion, and blaspheme majesty.
Blaspheme Majesty has a specific meaning in Catholicism so in a footnote or interspersed different shade of text it will explain that blaspheme Majesty means to think you're God or can know His opinion (that is not the exact interpretation the Church gives so I'm probably going to hell for that too!)
>Well not here in the largest catholic country of the world
Things must have got more liberal since I was confirmed. I know they stopped bishops slapping people at the confirmation but for weeks before you had to go to a church with everyone else in the area and have the bishop point at random people and ask "What are the Seven Gifts of the Spirit?", "What is Chrism?", "Who is the ordinary minister of Confirmation?" And shit like that.
>Lmao, you really understimate the power of subversion, especially in historically catholic countries
You might want to look up "What is a cult?" in a Catholic reference, because it does take a fair amount to get them recognised.>First time I heard about this, care to expose some sources please or any books about it? I don't remember this in the Catechism
You can look up the explanation of Judgement, where they explain the difference between the judgement when you die and the Final Judgment and how the timescale works. I can't remember the name of the doctrine in English. It might show up under Purgatory in an encyclopedia too, but the two kinds of Judgement are your best bet to find it.

What version of the catechisms us the most lit?

>Catholicism is a satanic cult, not protestantism.
Protestantism only serves to dilute the canonical tradition with the influence from uneducated morons all having a say in what is 'correct' Christianity who only serve to, in the end, propagate some ill-denined 'spirituality'.

Attached: PlatoOnTolerance.jpg (900x978, 171K)

The Orthodox one because they won't share the big boy rites with you if you're just a catechumen and kick you out for being a pseud.

Protestantism started as a legit movement that served to critique the problems off the church at that time but it degenerated into downright heresy in no time due to letting in people with zero education in theology.

>mfw the history of Protestantism is identical to the history of Yea Forums's theology threads

Attached: wojakburninghatred.png (633x758, 335K)

Attached: file.png (635x462, 97K)

Thanks m8, things have gone to shit here in Brazil when the KGB basically took over the catholic church in the 60s and spread the Liberation Theology to the point of being the dominant theology in most of the country up till this day. Also care to share any Catholic Encyclopedias or references? I am dying to find one since ever. There are tons of words that have specific meanings that I cant really find easily in secular dictionaries.

>he doesn't realize that Yea Forums is mainly Americans being Americans

This thread is clearly just a barely Yea Forums related bait thread to for Catholics to argue with Protestants, but I'll bite, since it's bait that's custom tailored to this board.
Protestants removed books from the bible because they contained passages proving that there is no salvation outside of the catholic Church. ("catholic" meaning universal, first used in the 2nd century to describe all Christians in the earliest Christian Church)
The Catholic Church (big C) claims that it is that original Christian Church. But really, any denomination from that time period could have claimed that, and each denomination tried to claim its own authenticity. The Roman Catholic Church is simply in a unique and historical situation to make that claim, but if some other denomination had won the culture war of its day, it would also be making that claim, and what we call the "Catholic Church" could be wildly different from what we know it to be today.

So anyways, I like bible verses such as these:
>Woe to you, when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets.
>You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.
>If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you.
>But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

How can only a few find the way, and Christians be so unpopular, when Catholicism is one of the most popular religions, and has been almost universally accepted and loved in western history for millennia?
There are only two kinds of religions in existence: work or ritual based religions, where you have to earn your rewards, and Christianity, where your entire being is corrupt and therefore there is nothing you can possibly do to earn anything other than eternal damnation, and therefore you are in desperate need of God's grace to save you, because even your best deeds aren't enough to save you, coming from a corrupt spirit. Catholicism is more like the former than the latter. Just another dead religion based on your own deeds, and there is no logical reason to choose it over Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.

Catholicism is friends with the world. Christianity is not. The wheat will be separated from the chaff.

>Protestantism only serves to dilute the canonical tradition
There was nothing left to dilute. The "Catholic" church turned original Christianity into Judaism 2.0.

Based and gospelpilled. Catholics hate the Gospel

WE WUZ

Yeah, Catholics never talked about God's grace, I'm glad Luther invented it eventually.

>Catholics never talked about God's grace
You're being facetious, but you are more correct than you know, at least during Luther's time period.

So you're telling me, I'm not going to heaven, even though I go to church every week, say a million Hail Mary's, give up getting blackout drunk during Lent, and I haven't killed anyone? Uh pretty sure I'm good enough to go to heaven, thank you very much!

You should be able to find a Portuguese version easier than I can. There's one in English published in 1909 on archive.org, which I found because I think I fucked up trying to spell Portuguese for you. I don't know if the other ones I found are the same or updated, but that one should satisfy most questions for terms. It'll be useless for the calendar and new additions though.

A prosperous people under one natural ruler declared by god's rule.

GOOD PEOPLE TRYING TO EARN OUR WAY TO HEAVEN

Fuck you I was baptised, I'm saved

>He thinks God has need for human acknowledgement to actualise his greatness.
Just go to church and listen to what the Catholic priest with the actual theology degree has to say instead of going to your kum ba yah community center.

Neat perspective. Somewhat ironic that the Catholic Church claims to be a religion that is at odds with "the world," despite being much of "the world" for millennia.
Also interesting that they burned at the stake people who actually read their bibles.

>The Roman Catholic Church is simply in a unique and historical situation to make that claim, but if some other denomination had won the culture war of its day, it would also be making that claim, and what we call the "Catholic Church" could be wildly different from what we know it to be today.

This is basic "if things were different things wouldn't be the same", which isn't an argument.

>
How can only a few find the way, and Christians be so unpopular, when Catholicism is one of the most popular religions, and has been almost universally accepted and loved in western history for millennia?

Firstly, because it is difficult to maintain a state of grace even if one knows what the correct action is, since we are filled with temptation. As well, the western world isn't the entirety of the world and if you would recall there were more than a few locations on the planet which viciously persecuted Christians at various times.

>There are only two kinds of religions in existence: work or ritual based religions

This is an oversimplification of the position of the RCC on the nature of works and how it relates to grace. To be brief they take the position that good works help to justify man, but are not sufficient for salvation.

>Catholicism is friends with the world.
Jesus was friends with sinners.

>Jesus was friends with sinners.
This is a bit different from saying, "Jesus was a sinner." Which is what you are doing when you make that comparison!

>good works help to justify man
Literally heresy. You are in the world's largest cult.

Good post. Catholics are just pagans with crosses.

>Which is what you are doing when you make that comparison!

No, it really isn't. Please explain how the church being friends with world is so terrible when that is it's ministry, just as with Jesus. I think what you meant to say was the Church is of this world, which is a little unbelievable if you actually read their teachings on poverty of the spirit and renunciation of the flesh.

>Going to masses organised by people with actual education on the subject matter
>Going to masses organised by a washed up band director living vicariously through his 'worship' band

Pick one or the other, this is literally the choice protestants have trouble making.

>they contained passages proving that there is no salvation outside of the catholic Church
That's not true. You're thinking of Cyprian. Most of the books missing from the Protestant Bibles are things like Maccabees and stuff they cut for length.
>The Catholic Church (big C) claims that it is that original Christian Church. But really, any denomination from that time period could have claimed that, and each denomination tried to claim its own authenticity. The Roman Catholic Church is simply in a unique and historical situation to make that claim, but if some other denomination had won the culture war of its day, it would also be making that claim, and what we call the "Catholic Church" could be wildly different from what we know it to be today.
The Catholic Church has recognised the Syriac and other apostolic churches since there was an official Roman Church. It's how they claim apostolic succession because it's obviously a bit hard to claim all the apostles besides Peter and Paul fucked off and died when Thomas is out in Asia teaching people Aramaic.

>Heretical cult claims it's "THE ONE TRUE CATHOLIC CHURCH"
According to Christian theology, the world and its kingdoms were given to Satan by God, and Catholicism has been part of the world's kingdoms and systems for centuries. Literally satanic religion.

>You come from the womb of your mother hence you are your mother

Why do protestants pretend to read the bible themselves when they are so very clearly barely literate. Just go to mass like a normal person and hear from the man with the education in the stuff

Love it when (((Catholics))) call anyone else heretics. Would rather a heretic call me a heretic than a friend.

Catholics aren’t even Christians.

>Catholicism is supposedly the original church
>Practices and teachings are nothing like 1st or 2nd century Christian practices or Bible readings
Yeah okay.

Woe unto you when Catholics speak well of you, for so did they of the false prophets.

based
cringe

Well yeah, early Christians were Gnostic heathens my guy. This is the CHURCH, not some hippy crap.

> European hours
Intellectual discourse substantiated with reason and articulated consideration.

> American hours
Rote, irrelevant response and lack of dialogue

Ironically, expressions of concern about the influence of hierarchy in the church seem to be a projection.

America is sliding into the abyss, let history be a lesson.

what i find difficult about christianity is that i can't really tell what is true for myself. unlike with buddhism or something. i've read the gospels. but i don't know what to believe from them. or what to do from there. do i just believe in jesus? then what? do i just do this my whole life? and at death, will i get lifted off to heaven or something? do i have to choose a church? i don't understand anything about the holy spirit or other concepts. it makes no sense to my reasoning and i don't know how to verify it further. if i want to follow christianity, how do i proceed? how do i know if jesus/god have heard and accepted me?

Well for catholics, the catholic church is the representative of God on earth. You just have to look up the official catholic dogma or ask a priest or something to answer all your questions. No independent thinking required, they got this all figured out, just trust them and don't pay attention to any heretics.

>do i just believe in jesus? then what? do i just do this my whole life?
No, not just that. You also get baptized, eat some bread and wine that are literally Jesus, confess your sins to a priest, and try to be a good boy. Btw, goodboys pay their tithes, not saying you HAVE to, but it can't HURT your chances of not roasting in eternal hellfie.

rude
Alaska's still awake, you know.

I used to be a Muslim and spoke to a Catholic priest about becoming Catholic. He told me just to remain Muslim.

>CCC states that Christians, Jews, and Muslims worship the same god

Yikes.

>Not reading Calvin's Institutes

>there are unironically people who read the bible and actually believe everything in it
lel

Yeah no, Catholics can catholick my balls
>W-WE WUZ DA FIRST CHURCH!!!
Mhmm, and that's why even wacky Charismatics who speak in tongues unironically look more like 1st century Christians than you.

I hope you read one, not that post vatican II trash fire, user.

Attached: jhlhkgkj,zhgb.jpg (696x663, 54K)