And if they do, wouldn't that make abortion a morally sound thing to do for your child? Why let him live and risk the possibility of sinning and going to hell?
And if they don't, where do they go? Does God not consider them people either and not give them souls?
Other urls found in this thread:
nah they go straight to podestas house
>wouldn't that make abortion a morally sound thing to do for your child
If it's not moral to do it to a 1 year old it's not moral to do it to a fetus. It's that simple. If any pro murder/abortion idea fails that test then it's an invalid argument.
Jesus looked at a group of children and said the kingdom of heaven belongs to them. So yes they go to heaven.
>muh Bibble
Why wouldn't you kill your children then?
Isn't the point of life to get into heaven? You're giving them a one-way express ticket to everlasting paradise.
>Isn't the point of life to get into heaven
The point of life is to follow what God says. Following him is not thought of as fire insurance or a get out of hell free card. Even Jews think it's impossible for them to go to hell (for those of them who believe in hell) but they still follow God's commands (or at least they used to until they rejected Jesus).
And in regards to committing sin because you think it's what God wants the NT explicitly says it doesn't work that way. Even if you come up with some twisted logic to murder your children that's doing exactly what God does not want you to do. So murdering your kids because God wants them in heaven and it's a guarantee way to get them to heaven is totally and clearly wrong.
Dead babies are the crux of all Abrahamic religions(Jewish scams).
>Dead baby goes to hell
This is fucked up. A baby who never had a chance to live life and redeem themselves is sent to hell. This is unfair.
>Dead babies go to heaven
If all babies get to go to heaven, then why not kill all newborn babies. You're helping them, sending them to an eternal paradise whitch means killing a newborn baby, espically a fetus, is moral. You are a modern day jesus saving their souls.
So if i, as an post-birth abortion doctor, kill 300 babies do the babies go to Heaven or Hell?
Purgatory.
Based and redpilled
Purgatory is just delayed heaven. Spending 500 or 5,000 years in purgatory is pointless. 5000 + infinity = infinity. You are still guaranteed eternal paradise.
>So if i, as an post-birth abortion doctor, kill 300 babies do the babies go to Heaven or Hell?
read what I said above. I already answered every question you asked word for word.
There's no heaven, only nothing.
Neva forget...
Nazi pope said god told him there's no more purgatory. Hipster pope says no more hell. So. I guess they're like gnats in heaven.
souls are emergent properties that often times do not emerge in humans but unironically might emerge in non-humans
Underrated post
fucking kek
They go to heaven, you go to hell for being a butcher.
The whole universe is an emergent property of beginningless and eternal Souls.
You can’t have nothing without something... how would you know what nothing is unless you had something to compare it too?
>796▶
>File: 1531445671533.jpg (188 KB, 1600x1504)
This makes me sad :(
Limbo of the infants
The highest part of hell where there is no fire
I assume you're against IVF therapy then?
Freezing a 1 year old for years is probably immoral too, by your argument.
Nope.
It is'nt sentient so you can't really consider it alive anyway.
OP is trying to mind-fuck Christians here.... that’s fine. Bottom line is when I role play Elder Scrolls, I like to worship Talos. My main firmly believes in the divinity of Talos and will kill any High Elf that gets in his way. If he dies in battle, I turn the tv off and drink a Monster Energy drink and fap to happenings. Amen.
same
Traditional belief says they will go to heaven as they have yet to gain freewill commit any sin and life begins at conception.
>Why let him live and risk the possibility of sinning and going to hell
The mother will go to hell along with any who assisted in the abortion and the child will never grow up or have the opportunity to good in the world or to have his/her own child to do the same.
If you want to argue 'what is the point of all of it' then you are asking a question nobody on Earth has the answer to no matter their religious beliefs.
Christians respond to this.
IVF is literally taking fertilized embryos, and freezing them like some kind of a steak or bag of French fries. Occasionally the embryos are destroyed.
How do you allow IVF and not also allow abortion?
Maybe, since technically, they have not had the chance to be born again through baptism. Maybe not tho.
Who ever practices the procedure have a one way ticket to hell tho
If heaven is real, I would hope they do. If they don't, then it is surely punishment for them for our failure to keep our societies morals intact.
*** unless the offenders repent and accept Jesus as Lord and Savior
Yes. Embryo transplant IVF or reinsertion IVF is immoral, obviously. It's recklessly exposing a human being to a high chance of death. Most people just don't realize the science behind it and think it's turkey-bastering a load into a woman's vag, aka artificial insemination, like simulated sex or the way it's done with cattle..... people should be more informed.
Interestingly the embryos cannot be allowed to grow for more than a few days outside a woman, due to international law, because that's dangerously close to growing a human in a laboratory.... because it literally is growing a human in a laboratory. Retarded abortionists just pretend it's not a human until the law, philosophy, and basic science catches up to their flawed thought process and they have to acknowledge that, yes, an embryo is a human being.
Try growing an embryo outside a woman's womb and see how that turns out. It was never born so it's not a human right? RIGHT????
Stupid single mom roasties in their 40's don't need to make new kids anyway. IVF should be outlawed anyway. I'm pretty sure it's heavily restricted in Europe but I'd need to check that.
IVF allows infertile women to have children, you fuckstick.
I had to go back and double check since I haven't read up on this subject in a while. It's not international law per se. It's an international consensus and most countries set individual limits on growing embryos (humans) in a lab.
They grow up in heaven but have no name until someone names them
they dont since they werent baptized
They go to hell because they are not baptised, they still have the original sin. They go to the Limbo, a place in hell where there is no fire, they live without God, so they will feel empty, but otherwise they will be in a natural state.
Pope Paul III: “If anyone shall say that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.” (Council of Trent, Canon 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism)
Pope St. Leo the Great: “For there are three who give testimony – Spirit and water and blood. And the three are one. (1 Jn. 5:4-8) In other words, the Spirit of Sanctification and the Blood of Redemption and the water of Baptism. These three are one and remain indivisible. None of them is separable from its link with the others.”(Dogmatic letter to Flavian, Council of Chalcedon, 451)
The last proves that baptism of desire is false.
So I guess that means if sacrificing children to Molech allows infertile women to have their own children that means it's ok to sacrifice children to Molech.... Neat philosophy you got there.
they werent baptised so they go to hell.
Pope St. Innocent, 414: “But that which Your Fraternity asserts the Pelagians preach, that even without the grace of Baptism infants are able to be endowed with the rewards of eternal life, is quite idiotic.” (Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 2016.)
Pope Pius VI, Auctorem fidei, Aug. 28, 1794:
“26. The doctrine which rejects as a Pelagian fable, that place of the lower regions (which the faithful generally designate by the name of the limbo of the children) in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of the punishment of fire, just as if, by this very fact, that these who remove the punishment of fire introduced that middle place and state free of guilt and of punishment between the kingdom of God and eternal damnation, such as that about which the Pelagians idly talk” – Condemned as false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools. (Denz. 1596)
I don't follow catholic nonsense invented by one of the many Popes who perpetually contradict past Popes. Purgatory is made up false doctrine. It's not in the Bible and neither is paying the catholic church lots of money to get your family out of purgatory.
1 Corinthians 3:11-15- “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid,
which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver,
precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for
the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try
every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built
thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he
shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.” (Purgatory)
1 John 5:16- “If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he
shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a
sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin:
and there is a sin not unto death.”
(Mortal and venial)
What if the mother is baptized while preggo? Doesn't that mean the fetus was baptized too?
My disgust at abortion made me religious, it’s purely satanic no other way I can discribe it
ROFL they had to add purgatory in parenthesis I see? Protip:they did that because it's not really there and they needed to remind people where their make believe doctrine is supposed to come from, because nobody would ever see it otherwise.
Think for yourself and stop reading the catholic bible with their side notes. Those passages are not talking about a place after life on Earth. They're talking about the process we go through during our life on earth.
I added that, though you would be blind to not see them, and you trust the catholic church when you read the Bible, they were preserving it.
No. Original Sin prevents all unbaptized infants the joys oof heaven. Hence the theory of Limbo.
Ignore protestants. Those of the evangelibapticostal persuasion are immune to reason.
Unironically thinking heaven is real. This is all we get m8. There is no god, there is no heaven we're all just a collage of cells that manifest into human bodies.
Do something with your life with the tools you've got. Don't sweat about shit that doesn't matter. Go get a job you enjoy. Find a girl you really like have some kids cause thats all this life can offer you.
Do the best to make yourself happy. That sure as fuck isn't gonna be anyone else's goal.
As a product of IVF I agree with you actually.
Go away Satan, nobody asked for your shitty modern materialist metaphysics free nonsense. You describe hedonism. That ain't welcome around here.
>I added that, though you would be blind to not see them
It's so blindingly obvious you felt the need to point it out to so people can see it. Sure buddy.
>you trust the catholic church when you read the Bible, they were preserving it
The council of Nicaea established Biblical canon 700 years before the cathlic church started acting like purgatory was a literal place. Don't act like they're the same group.
Actually the Bible was compiled across 4 councils. Nicea was a Catholic (and technically Eastern Orthodox) council comprised of Catholic Bishops that succeeded the Apostles. They were absolutely the same group.
Also the Bible never uses the word trinity, theotokos etc but we know the Bible absolutely describes these things. The Bible is even somewhat vague on the particular judgement one undergoes immediately upon death but it still describes these things.
Mormon here. Yes, they do. Christ's atonement covers all children under the age of accountability (8 years old). Aborted babies are automatically celestial.
The problems come in with the parentage. When my son died unexpectedly in utero I was told I would get him back as my son for time and eternity if I am faithful and endure to the end of my life repentant, with proper ordinances, and replete with good works. When parents kill their children, those children are no longer considered theirs and the kid is grafted into another faithful lineage of God and their choosing later on in the Celestial level of heaven. The parent(s) that decided and carried out the child's murder is held accountable for that. Is it possible to fully repent of murder? Yes, but it's REALLY difficult and I don't know the full requirements.
Is it morally good to kill your child so they can go to heaven? No; the child loses a lot of opportunities to create great works, go through trials, get their ordinances done of their own choice, etc. The parents must face judgement for denying their child these opportunities and for not providing for them. The child goes to the highest degree of heavenly glory, but the parent(s), abortionists, and lawmakers are condemned for the consequences and legal justification of the murder.
Mortal sin means sins that will send you to hell, venial means those sins which don't send you to hell, I put it there because if someone did not know that, as for the biblical quote it's clearly the teaching of the catholic church, and again in the purgatory quote, they are saved, but they are burned beforehand, that's purgatory.
Church fathers have taught purgatory, and a council did not define all the dogmas.
St. Gregory of Nyssa, Sermon on the Dead, 383 A.D.- "[a man]… finds that he is
not able to partake of divinity until he has been purged of the filthy contagion in
his soul by the purifying fire."
Ignore him, mormons believe in absurdity, anyone could say that they are a prophet of Christ, it does not make them one,
yeah same group in name only. It was the 700 years later part that I was getting at. Most groups change a little bit after 700-800 years and adopt crazy new ideas. Are Catholics today still torturing people in order to convert them as part of the inquisition or slaughtering them in the Crusades? No. Same group, but totally different.
Actually, we are the real Church of Jesus Christ, administered by Christ Himself. If you have a problem with it, take it up with The Lord.
>This cuck counter signals the crusades and inquisition
> His assertion that the Catholic Church isn't the Catholic Church implies that the Holy Spirit fell asleep at the switch and that the faith wasn't preserved until either Martin Luther or John Calvin made shit up and removed books from the Bible 1500 years after pentacost.
Seems legit
That would be the Catholic Church you described. Mormons aren't even Christian friendo
"Lord, what was that Mormon thing they kept talking about?"
>wails heard in distance
"Dunno. Cmon, gotta introduce you to my Dad."
My question to you is, who was the real Church in that 700 year stretch? And no "Trail of Blood" bullcrap.
>Church fathers have taught purgatory, and a council did not define all the dogmas.
>Matthew 23:9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
I don't have to put into parenthesis what is blindly obvious about this verse.
I'm not familiar with many random quotes by "saints" throughout history and what context they used and how figurative and how literal they were being. However I do know that purgatory being referred to as a literal place started in the 12th century, that's when the name itself came into existence.
The term trinity wasn't used until the 4th century, what's your point?
> DUUUURRRRRR CALL NO MAN ON EARTH FATHER
Don't call your own dad father then.
Saint Paul called himself a spiritual father to both Saint Timothy and those under him
You complain about taking it literal then:
In 1 Thessalonians 2:11:
As you know, we treated each one of you as a father treats his children,
In 1 Timothy 5:1:
Do not rebuke an older man, but appeal to him as a father. Treat younger men as brothers,
In Hebrews 12:9:
Besides this, we have had our earthly fathers to discipline us, and we respected them. Should we not [then] submit all the more to the Father of spirits and live?
In James 2:21:
Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?
In 1 John 2:13:
I am writing to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning.
I am writing to you, young men, because you have conquered the evil one.
St. Paul also used it in Acts 22:1:
“My brothers and fathers, listen to what I am about to say to you in my defense.”
>Does spirit go back to itself if locked out from a fetus?
If spirit has entered the fetus then yes.
Also if you're gonna trot that line out, have you gouged your eyes out yet for lusting after young lady's? Have you chopped your hand off for touching yourself?
If it is possible that a soul can be denied entry into heaven as a result of circumstances completely separate from any act of free will, then isn't that a case for Calvinist predestination?
It's a matter of sanctifying grace not a matter of will before the age of reason.
>trinity
It mentioned God, son, and holy spirit. Putting that in singular name form is just grammar, it's not inventing some brand new concept out of a single verse which is so "blindingly obvious" it needs to be explained to people what it means.
The body of Christ is and always has been the church. Just because the church got tangled up with a false doctrine theocracy that practically ordered them around under threat of death doesn't mean the holy spirit was asleep.
>removed books
I'm pretty sure the Catholic church doesn't consider the apocrypha canonical thus would not be "part of the Bible"...
Top kek its about the baptism of fire Cathocucks are retarded
>11I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: 12Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
He never used father as a title , its church elders
1 Peter 5 King James Version (KJV)
5 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed:
2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;
3 Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being examples to the flock.
4 And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.
5 Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.
Well purgatory was described in the Bible in the verse above and it's merely a grammatical shorthand. Don't try to be a weasel by saying that's ok with the trinity but not with purgatory.
The Mystical Body is the Catholic Church. They are inseparable. There are schismatic groups with apostolic ties but only One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. No false doctrines here. As for society, theocracy/Christian monarchy is a GOOD thing. Stop being such a goofy baptist.
There are 73 books in the Bible not 66. We do not have an "apocrypha" that's a protestant excuse to remove books that disprove their doctrines. You removed Judith, Tobit, Sirach, Baruch, Wisdom, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees and whole chunks of Esther and Daniel. These were in the Bible going back to the councils that declared the canon. Did the Holy Spirit err? Did the Early Church fail already?
answered here: If the verse means absolutely nothing why have it then? Calling yourself a "spiritual father" is not the same as calling you or someone else your father.
"as a father" is not the same as calling someone your father. Each case is either figurative or referencing the father-son relationship, not directly calling anyone your father. It's like using "legal paternal guardian" in context vs directly calling someone "father"
The goughing out eyes is literal, but it's not an order. It's merely saying it's better to do that than lose your soul. If you honestly will lose your soul over lust you better gouge out your eyes. I'm not even kidding. That's what it means.
Calling someone father in the old testament doesn't apply. The rule was set in the NT.
Sorry no commentary from the communions scheduled for collapse in 28 easters
Rofl
Be fruitful and multiply, idiot.
>If you honestly will lose your soul over lust you better gouge out your eyes.
I'm not someone who believes that the point of life is swinging your cock around, but it seems strange for God to have created man with the desire to have sex with women and then to punish him with eternal torture for even thinking about it
Abortion Is Dhe Most Sincere Form Of Flattery
Christ uses hyperbole to deliver a point. Calling no man father is about having a rightly ordered priority in who our true father is and placing faith in God over temporal leaders. But it's not a prohibition against calling your father father or spiritual father the same. Christ does not expect you to literally gouge your own eyes out and cut hands off. That is illustrating the point of cutting off sources and occasions of sin. In this case it could be taken to mean Custody of the eyes, avoiding idle hands etc. Mutilating our body's that God gave us without grave reason is actually sinful.
There is no bullshit shortcuts to heaven.
Yes they go to heaven, but YOU don't.
>Well purgatory was described in the Bible in the verse above and it's merely a grammatical shorthand. Don't try to be a weasel by saying that's ok with the trinity but not with purgatory.
It's not mentioned there. It's so clearly not mentioned in that verse that other user had to specifically point it out while lying to himself saying it's obvious for anyone to see...he was contradicting himself through his very actions.
>Mystical body
Get out of here with that mysticism nonsense.
The term mystical body of Christ is in the Bible. Your opinion can now be discarded because you know nothing of the scriptures or theology
That's why marriage is a thing.
The Trinity wasn't mentioned only alluded to. Direct access to Heaven by the faithful departed as disembodied souls is only briefly mentioned in passing in the epistles and only the Apocalypse (Revelation) really covers the saints in Heaven at length but these are all de dide notions we may not deny
And yet it's realistically impossible even in a traditional society for most men to get married for years after they have entered puberty and have begun to feel sexual urges -- let alone our own society, in which most women don't wish to marry until their late twenties at the earliest. And that's even leaving aside the problem of men who can't attract women at any stage of their lives. What are they supposed to do?
I personally have been married for more twenty years, but I feel a great deal of sympathy for any young man consumed with the desire for women who has no realistic prospect of finding a wife for years to come. This is one of the points on which Christianity is at its most arbitrary and unrealistic
And here we go the absolute state of papist , they cannot post one thing without falling in heresies
Main article: Names of Easter
>The modern English term Easter, cognate with modern Dutch ooster and German Ostern, developed from an Old English word that usually appears in the form Ēastrun, -on, or -an; but also as Ēastru, -o; and Ēastre or Ēostre.[nb 3] The most widely accepted theory of the origin of the term is that it is derived from the name of an Old English goddess mentioned by the 7th to 8th-century English monk Bede, who wrote that Ēosturmōnaþ (Old English 'Month of Ēostre', translated in Bede's time as "Paschal month") was an English month, corresponding to April, which he says "was once called after a goddess of theirs named Ēostre, in whose honour feasts were celebrated in that month".[22]
>In Latin and Greek, the Christian celebration was, and still is, called Pascha (Greek: Πάσχα), a word derived from Aramaic פסחא (Paskha), cognate to Hebrew פֶּסַח (Pesach). The word originally denoted the Jewish festival known in English as Passover, commemorating the Jewish Exodus from slavery in Egypt.[23][24] As early as the 50s of the 1st century, Paul, writing from Ephesus to the Christians in Corinth,[25] applied the term to Christ, and it is unlikely that the Ephesian and Corinthian Christians were the first to hear Exodus 12 interpreted as speaking about the death of Jesus, not just about the Jewish Passover ritual.[26] In most of the non-English speaking world, the feast is known by names derived from Greek and Latin Pascha.[2][27] Pascha is also a name by which Jesus himself is remembered in the Orthodox Church, especially in connection with his resurrection and with the season of its celebration.[28]
>Christ uses hyperbole to deliver a point
I should have stopped reading right here.
God's just exaggerating on some things now? He's not really totally serious but sometimes he's totally serious?
>Calling no man father is about having a rightly ordered priority in who our true father is
So there is no restriction on calling someone father even though it's stated word for word huh?
>Mutilating our body's that God gave us without grave reason is actually sinful
The reason given in the passage is losing your soul for eternity. That's a grave reason. The passage is literal, IF your eyes WILL cause you to lose your soul for eternity, you should gouge them out. I've never met anyone quite like that, maybe almost no one who has ever lived as been like that, but if there is someone who fits that definition they've been instructed on what to do.
There was a sect in Russia in the 1800s whose members would castrate themselves in order to fulfill Jesus's teaching about discarding body parts so as not to fall into hell. They were regarded as heretics, but to be fair they were just taking the Gospels at their word
The terms Easter and Pascha are interchangeable. Playing word games due to the static nature of fossilized language is retarded. That's like an Odinist that says I'm not REAAAAAALLLLY Christian because I use the names of the days of the week such as Thursday in casual conversation and --teehee-- didn't you know that's actualyy... THORSday? STUPID CHRISTIAN. Yeah so congrats you're using a non-argument.
>The term mystical body of Christ is in the Bible. Your opinion can now be discarded because you know nothing of the scriptures or theology
It's mentioned in the Catholic apocrypha ROFL. IE a pure fiction of Catholic theology.
God can absolutely use dramatic language to illustrate a point.
Its literally not its just crap made up it should be called passover not easter . but to hell with biblical terms lets make up Christmas also
Well seeing as Catholics are the first and only true Christians with the only complete bible...
Fuck biblical terms they mean nothing
2 Chronicles 35:1 Josiah celebrated the Passover to the LORD in ...
Josiah celebrated the Passover to the LORD in Jerusalem, and the Passover lamb
was slaughtered on the fourteenth day of the first month. ...
> Passover lamb
B-ut b-ut Jesus is the easter lamb
Passover, Pasch, Pasch or Easter, it all describes the same event. Should we not say Jesus Christ and call him Yahashua Hamashiak or w/e Hebrew roots judaizers say?