Tfw no traditionalist conservative Catholic e-gf

>atheist pagan larpers.

Imagine going from arguing that christianity is nothing but a fairy tale to full on pretending to believe in a fairy tale. The kike brainwashing is truly outstanding.

Are you aware that Saint Clement affirmed the notion of salvation by faith alone in the first century AD? The notion that the Roman Catholic Church denies in 2019?

I don't see anything wrong with that gathering. Am I supposed to be offended by people dancing? Oh wow, how outrageous.

As opposed to Christians pretending they are actually eating and drinking the flesh and blood of some Jewish rando from the 1st century?

Attached: 1554679459125.jpg (234x250, 20K)

Galaxy brain pagans

Attached: paganism.jpg (637x321, 121K)

>>The way Christianity has been practiced for the past 2000 years isn't traditional, the TRUE traditionalism is my form that was existed almost nowhere before 1800s America.

Not that poster, but that's really not true.

Beginning not that long after the fall of Rome, pretty much like clockwork every century or so Christendom (both the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox varieties) would be convulsed by "heretical" movements trying to purge its polytheistic elements (Mary worship, the veneration of the saints) and its idolatrous elements (the veneration of relics and icons). Most of them would go after the two churches' accumulation of worldly wealth and power as well. These sentiments aren't *new*, it's just that the forces of corruption in both churches were strong enough to fight them off repeatedly...until Luther.

go fuck yourself you worthless kike worshiper

Attached: 1555463129020.jpg (1023x789, 91K)

Salvation is a result of faith and we are justified through works. This has always been the position of the Church and that is what Saint Clement taught.

>we are justified through works
>We are justified not by our own works
OH NO NO
ewtn.com/library/patristc/anf1-1.htm

Attached: first-epistle-of-clement.png (562x260, 26K)

The Church does not and has never condoned the worship of mary or any of the other saints. Why was the Church almost imminently sized control by supposed polytheists when Christ explicitly said that the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church? Don't you think it makes the holy spirit seem a bit weak if for the vast majority of Christian history virtually all Christians were idolators and polytheists? Even after the reformation most Protestants had no problem with continuing to ask saints to pray for us, Luther is particular had a deep love for mary.

He never says the phrase 'fath alone' which is and always has been the Catholic contention. That quote fits perfectly with what the Church outlined at the Council of trent

>In what manner it is to be understood, that the impious is justified by faith, and gratuitously.

>And whereas the Apostle saith, that man is justified by faith and freely, those words are to be understood in that sense which the perpetual consent of the Catholic Church hath held and expressed; to wit, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation, and the root of all Justification; without which it is impossible to please God, and to come unto the fellowship of His sons: but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.

I recommend Buddhism. As a philosophy, it's much more conducive to mental health and well-being that spooked Christianity, or even any of the Abrahamic religions.

Also, shit thread.

Attached: guanyin-avalokitesvara.jpg (450x529, 49K)

I can't understand why you lot always resort to this kind of pilpul. The actual phrase "FAITH ALONE" does not need to be used for the theological concept of "faith alone" to be affirmed.
We are not justified by works.
We are justified by faith.
Therefore, we are justified by faith alone. Unless there is some third justifier, that logical syllogism is sound.
You are brushing over the fact that your initial claim is an exact contradiction of the claim in the 1st Epistle of Clement.

The words of Saint Clement simply do not prove what you say they prove, he also said

>Let us clothe ourselves with concord and humility, ever exercising self-control, standing far off from all whispering and evil-speaking, being justified by our works, and not our words.

The Church has always thought that we are initially justified through our faith and once that initial justification is attained we are further justified through our works because faith without works is dead. Honestly, this is bearly even a point of contention between Protestants and Catholics anymore because it is just arguing about different ways of saying the same thing. The 1999 JDDJ has had churches representing a couple hundred million Protestants along with the Catholic Church essentially agree on this point.

Who gives a shit, it's not real anyways.

Attached: 1555688364710.png (270x344, 52K)

I am not claiming that this proves anything; I get my theology from Scriptures, not Church fathers. I referenced Clement because you claimed that Roman Catholicism was old and the "alternatives" were not, and I was demonstrating that the idea of salvation by faith alone has been around since the beginning of the Church.
The Scriptures also state both that justification is "not of works" and "by works," so context is obviously necessary. John 3:16 states that all (exhaustive) individuals who believe in Christ will be saved. This either means that all individuals with faith will perform sufficient works, or it means that works are not necessary for salvation. Either way, it means focusing on works for salvation is foolish. Quoting John 3:16 for this argument is often treated as "boomerish" but it is irrefutable.

>The Church does not and has never condoned the worship of mary or any of the other saints.

Yeah, they just build statues of her everywhere, specifically pray to her for her "intercession", and (in the case of the Eastern Orthodox church) invested mere mosaic pictures of her with the mystical power to change the weather and defeat enemy armies.

Sure, they are always careful to specify that they're not engaged in "worship", but the semantic distinction there is incredibly weak. They believe that she is a distinct personality that exists in a supernatural realm and you can ask that personality to do shit for you. That's "worship", even if technically all she's supposedly doing is leveraging the power of the Father to answer your prayers.

>traditionalist
bigot gf
>conservative
No fun allowed gf.
>catholic
delusional gf
>e-gf
Fake gf of whom is really a gay guy.

Jewish people infected pagans. White people were never meant to be abrahamic, only jewish people were but gnosticism was all about racism. The jew looks white, gets along with pagans, corrupts them. Abrahamic religion is part of what killed The Roman Empire, a place that was strong that allowed for fun, rather than call fun sin to pretend that that would create efficiency for whites. A slave race from Egypt can cuck itself, whites were driven crazy by it, so were the shitskins that never should have been given The Blight.

If people really need to believe in something we really should just go the fuck back. Maybe the Romans really did have aays on those planets. I

>bigot
AHAHAHA, did the strong viking get his feelings hurt by the toxic masculinity in the room? Pathetic. How's it feel that all of your pagan literature was originally transcribed by the Christians you hate?

It wasn't though. Jewish people escaped from Egypt and corrupted people dumb ass and I obviously don't believe in those old poly gods, but poly is older than monotheism, obviously.The jews believed in the Pharos and such as their poly gods, then they made the abrhamic shit up after that. then whites were INFECTED rather than evolve to their own mono god. Like Hindus evolved to thinking all about buddha, they had evolved to believe in no god though technically but you are buddha, but nevermind if you don't get the point of ONE.

Faggot look up the evolution next time.

It simply is not worship. She is a great figure in the history of the Chuch so we of course revere her but building statues doesn't equal worship. I have a statue of Link, that doesn't mean I worship him. We ask her to pray for us just as we ask any other Christian and she intercedes for us just as she did at the wedding feast in Cana.

And you weren't able to answer what is probably my fundamental problem with Protestantism since I was a former evangelical. Why did the holy spirit allow for the Church to be taken over almost immediately by idolators and polytheists? If that isn't the gates of hell prevailing against the Church I don't know what else would be.

My God let Himself willingly be executed for my sake. Compassion like this is why the religion prevailed over paganism, which practiced stuff like trial by ordeal.
But all those pagan guys got BTFO (or converted) by Catholics. Pictured: something that actually happened.

Attached: St.-Boniface-cutting-down-tree-of-Thor-1200x450.png (1200x450, 1.02M)

There is surely a great many number of people asking Mary for intercession at one point in time. How can she (or any saint for that matter) listen to all of these at once? Being God's operator doesn't sound very enjoyable. Why I think that intercession to deceased saints is invalid (not through currently living humans though, as this is mentioned in Job [I don't believe in the confessional practice of a priest having the authority to forgive sin]), I don't think it necessarily makes Catholics idolaters and polytheists. The correct doctrine of Christianity did not succumb to the power of Hell, as it has now been awakened. The ancient Israelites very much used the First Temple as a site of polytheism and Ezekiel says that God Himself departed from it. This did not mean that God had given up on Christianity (it was Christianity even then despite the terminology we usually use) just because its followers had gone astray.

Why would you assume time operates in heaven the same way it operates on earth? I don't know the precise way that the saints answer our prayers (and yes prayer is the right word, prayer is just an old English word that means 'ask') because that has not been revealed to us but I am sure there are any number of ways God could make that happen.

>he correct doctrine of Christianity did not succumb to the power of Hell

Christ does not promise that the abstract doctrine of Christianity would never have the gates of hell private against it. If that was all he promised then it would have been a very little thing to promise because an abstract idea can always remain pure even well everyone else goes against it. Christ promised that the Church itself would never have the gates of hell prevail against it.

Just as the high priests of the Temple became very corrupt in their doctrine, the Roman Catholic Church became incorrect in its doctrine. I wouldn't say that the gates of Hell prevailed against it, as it still remained Christian by staunchly defending important doctrines such as the Trinity, but the RCC is wrong in the doctrine of justification via works among other things. An establishment being older does not mean it is correct. If your argument is that the RCC is always right since Christ said the gates of Hell would not prevail against the church, then what of the popes that fornicated after they had taken their vows? They were the "vicar of Christ" as deigned by the RCC, yet committed a grave breach of the RCC's doctrine.

Yeet in peace bog man

Attached: 5FA8E9EF-A43E-469A-8584-0F6B89F940D7.jpg (685x456, 44K)

Lol and Christ is based on like twenty-someodd similar archetypes before him. It's fun to argue fictional ideas, then you can never be wrong!

>Tfw no traditionalist conservative Catholic gf
e-gfs are heretical