what a surprise, we remove downvotes and instantly all kinds of religious posts are downvoted

regarding revolutions, probably the Anti-Christ will achieve some illusion of a kind of change that seems like a “wonderful, salvific policy that will change everything”.

But then it will come crashing down into the chaos the OP image talks of

interesting emoji response, didn’t get as many bites when posting this elsewhere (maybe because I posted in “quotes”?)… and yet this seemed like one of the top software pieces I’ve encountered in a while… perhaps ever!

some youtube comments were fascinated with this software being dropped: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=15_-hgsX2V0

God does respect some liberty but only so much

He punishes the wicked sometimes, other times lets them off the hook for a season

Also holy obedience in religion is something of an authority being in control with the people obeying the authority (kind of the authority “controlling” the subject, although the subject is somewhat consenting)

I think I see what you’re saying and I kind of agree that it’s not a competition, in that there aren’t limited slots in heaven; it’s just about being the good person God wants you to be. You don’t need to be “better” than anyone else, but to simply be “good” as God wants of you. It’s not as if someone else doing more or less good, affects if you are saved in the end or not.

I think the author is trying to get people to question if they are that person God wants them to be though, and if they are not, then to pray and think about how to become that person.

Yes, no?

sorry, yeah I have it, I can try to check the chat more often! thanks

I see downvotes are back and the godless of lemmy have piled on with the skepticism, doubt, anti-Christian hate, etc.

edit: with respect to the pic, indeed God sometimes allows difficulties to continue to encourage people to struggle onward

Regarding bitter replies about innocents struggling, God’s goodness is affirmed, the malice of sin (original and actual) and the consequences of death and destruction are also affirmed; many such cases of innocent suffering exist in the Bible, from the stories of Job to that of Jesus’ Passion. Why exactly God wills some to suffer and others not to is a mystery.

off topic response but when did downvotes come back

so far the left seems to want to double down on politically unviable approaches, so I guess let them continue with it and see what happens

CNN says Trump approval rating surging ‘like a rocket’ on immigration

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/3436206/cnn-trump-approval-rating-surging-rocket-immigration/

in fairness to the prots, since they have no barrier to entry it is easy for non-prots to set up some kind of fake church or beliefs and then just teach other prots “this is the true protestantism”, which is what seems to have happened. like at one point previous prots probably didn’t believe like this, but “wronger” beliefs seemed to become more popular over time and become their mainstream

the roof, the roof, the roof is on fire

well any press is good press lol

F

pointless drama distraction

pretty standard response that killing the unborn doesn’t make the situation any better

Wolf

edit: hey actually I saw a post scrolling earlier that was stickied that was yours (but I cant find it now) saying lemm.ee refugees are welcome… I guesss my question was if anyone posted about HC in their “we’re closing” stickied post

I feel like ASL should be taught to more of like everyone, I see circumstances where it seems like it would be useful frequently (either quiet or really loud places, like libraries or where there is heavy machinery, or from driver to driver in cars where you can’t hear them)

also not sure of all the SLs that exist and what attempts have been made towards standardication. I imagine there is more than just American SL / ASL for SLs but I haven’t looked in to all the ones that exist

The basic Catholic / Lutheran (protestant) rift was: Catholics believe faith and works justify, protestants believe “faith alone” justifies. Ergo saying Luther is correct on justification seems to logically imply no need for works for salvation which is contrary to Catholic teaching.

And actually a lot of “evangelicals” according to recent polls (2017) do seem to believe salvation is by faith and works (even though this is traditionally associated with Catholicism): https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2017/08/31/poll-most-protestants-and-catholics-believe-faith-and-works-are-necessary

At the very least, it would be important for “Francis” to make sure this distinction is upheld and to affirm Luther was justly excommunicated for heresy. The continued acts of “Francis” show he is clearly trying to bend or deny this distinction. He hasn’t done something like this once, but literally dozens of times, for example this defunct site lists some questionable statements made: https://web.archive.org/web/20200115152651/http://www.francisquotes.com/

Y / N ?

a leader who will condemn non-believers

While a leader might be kind and caring in speech, he’d also have to be subject to the rules and enforce them at some level (note that popes are “above the law” to some extent, but this is a different discussion).

Think for example of a forum like this that we are using: “rulebreakers” are banned. Imagine someone posting illegal content for example, they might be banned (and arrested) in society.

Now imagine unbelievers being in danger of being sent to prison forever (hell). Wouldn’t the “kind” thing be to follow the rules yourself and set a good example for others, as well as to explain the rules clearly? Wouldn’t someone who teaches people the wrong rules, that ends up getting such people in trouble, be thought to be a “bad” leader?

I think that’s how Francis is viewed, he says words that are thought to be “kind”, but which are ultimately harmful to people. Imagine if you were going to drive a car that was not safe to drive, and someone “kindly” instructs you that you’re fine to drive it, to go ahead, and then you crash and are injured. This was not “kindness” then; instead, the person could have “kindly” warned such a person not to drive such a dangerous car.

Francis seemed to consistently speak and do bizarre things against a traditional Catholic way of life; we could discuss the matter further if it doesn’t seem clearer upon further investigation.

this is a common objection, although there are clear differences

Francis for example had said, “Nowadays, Lutherans and Catholics, and all Protestants, are in agreement on the doctrine of justification: on this very important point he was not mistaken.”: https://onepeterfive.com/recant-lutheran-heresy-francis/

By this logic, it wouldn’t matter if a person is Catholic or protestant to be “justified”. Ergo it seems Francis would be the one in error and leading people in to error, more like the protestants than the sedevacantists

However, I think ordinarily these conversations become more unproductively antagonistic as they are part of temporary confusing conflicts. To me it seems clear the current papal lineage is invalid, and all those who claim to be Catholic ideally need to come to agreement about this, and then elect a pope that is actually valid. We are living in the temporary period of confusion leading up to this future moment of clarity.

my understanding:

The Catholic belief is when a person dies, they are judged either to heaven or hell.

Purgatory is for those on the way to heaven who die with some accrued debt from sin, for example: you steal a car and are sorry for having done so, so are forgiven, but you are still legally required to pay the car amount back, but say you die before doing so. The ultimate “debt” of having stolen the car, the infinite debt of sin, you confessed to, and Jesus paid that debt, so you were forgiven. But still you had done wrong. This “wrong” was usually to be made up with penances in life (where the indulgences controversy came in). I think this is a sound enough explanation but you could search out others. If you had paid the car off so to speak, and were sorry for the sin of theft, you would be in a position to go straight to heaven.

I have read orthodox have some idea of “toll houses”, which is not like the Catholic conception of purgatory at all, and which I am not entirely acquainted with.

The Catholic idea of limbo is basically a place in hell, but not one of active suffering, for those who die unbaptized but otherwise lived “good enough” of a life (naturally virtuous ignorant pagans, or unbaptized infants, for examples). This speculative state arose because all who enter heaven must be baptized, but these such people are not baptized, but they have also not chosen to be evil with their will (in the case of infants certainly, but even with "virtuous ignorant non-Christians). In the case of infants, it is also hard to apply the idea of a “baptism of desire”, or that such infants would have desired baptism if they had the opportunity to obtain it, and even is difficult in the case of those who are unaware of the need for baptism, like an otherwise virtuous ignorant non-Christian.

Souls may be prayed “out of purgatory”, and purgatory is a place of suffering “purification”, like hell is a place of suffering. So, as people metaphorically say they are “going through hell”, I could see a Catholic possibly expressing praying a soul out of Purgatory as “praying them out of hell”, but they wouldn’t mean this literally, and I would wonder if some theological cross-confusion might have resulted from speaking in this way.

An exception (skimming the article) might be some mirculous-like stories where people have died temporarily and come back from hell to tell the tale, or had a near-death vision of hell. This is the only instance I can think of from a Catholic view where a person might “go to hell” and come back, possibly due to the prayers of others.