>professes itself as a simple introduction to the common teachings of all Christians
>is extremely biased towards Catholic/Anglican/Methodist theolgy
>professes itself as a simple introduction to the common teachings of all Christians
>professes itself as a simple introduction to the common teachings of all Christians
>is extremely biased towards Catholic/Anglican/Methodist theolgy
Hmm...I shit on your grave.
>most LULZerate posters
>no argument
>doesn't follow
homosexual
Hw was subtly saying that prots aren’t christian.
>extremely biased towards Catholic theology
Wtf bros, how could this be happening? Those ancients guys hadn't even heard about fatalism, divorce and worshipping israel.
Nigga Jesus literally talks about divorce and predestination is written into scripture. That was a major aspect of Augustine's philosophy.
>Jesus literally talks about divorce
Indeed, to ban it.
>predestination is written into scripture.
Indeed, how is that connected to my post? You aren't one of those reading fatalism into predestination?
Why do I feel the need to respond to bait pretending to have zero reading comprehension?
So they had heard about it.
>predestination
Where?
Romans 8
Predestination as a word is not found anywhere but it's contrarian not to translate προοριζω as predestine (fatalists would spout their bullshit no matter what other term you used anyway).
What does the original Greek really mean
>https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E1%BD%81%CF%81%CE%AF%CE%B6%CF%89
The word is quite vague by itself and you're basically left to context to determine an interpretation. It's only used six times in the new testament and in different subtleties of meaning (certainly in Acts it doesn't mean the same thing as in the other).
The descriptions of st Paul himself show explicitly what he means by this word. It is an act linking a specific creature to a specific benefit when planning creation. It is grounded on the (logically preceding) knowledge that said creature would respond to calling. This free spontaneous answer from the creature is of course itself conditioned by the predestination.
People that can't into logic and modality have trouble understanding the above so they remove one of the last two sentences depending on their flavor of heresy.
Free will vs. predestination is too far beyond me to understand correctly, that's all I know.
What is up with prots (specifically Calvinists) worshiping Israel?
>threatening to desecrate a grave with faeces
>anti-Semitism
>"homosexual"
Welcome to a LULZ thread about C.S. Lewis.
cope and seethe
i chuckled reading your post anon, cheers
also it's very much true
I like his writing style, but I did not find his actual arguments convincing. Just like Chesterton.
What is presented in his theology that you are disagreeing with? Not sure if you're coming from an Orthodox perspective or as some kind of ultra liberal heretic protestant denomination.
I am a bible-believing reformed baptist.
Ah so a random heretic that denies biblical teaching
>pagans are evil
>has a pagan god be a major protagonistic figure in narnia
>says apollo probably existed
It's a special time of year whenever my fiancée has diarrhea. During the holiday season, when families come together to cherish the warmth and comfort of that year's memories and the promise and hope of the year to come, my fiancée consumes three blisters of laxatives containing 20 tablets each. For the next three days, I harvest her diarrhea in mason jars and she uses it as a base for her famous, hearty holiday stew. I can hardly wait for the holiday season to arrive - The laxatives rest peacefully atop the shelf in our cupboard waiting to be opened; the mason jars are in the garage, clear and clean. The soup pots clank and jingle, as if to also express anticipation for the gourmand thrill to come, as my fiancée prepares other dishes less sumptuous than our holiday treat.
He makes a lot of arguments for deism and then assumes you’ll just jump from “something rather than nothing” to “my personal denomination of christianity is correct about everything”. It’s just a mental block Christian writers tend to have. You don’t get from “there’s a creative force” to Jesus was the incarnation of God without a ludicrous amount of work.
After reading way too many evangelical texts my conclusion is that while they pretend they exist to convert people the vast gaps in what they say and the expectation of a Christian default make these books targeted to lapsed Christians or those with doubt. Whether the authors actually realize this or not.
From what I recall his view is explicitly the teleogical view of the universe which precludes deism from the outset
tbf, he did mention in the book that it would be written with an Anglican bent.
Why not Orthodox?
He teaches Filioque.
"there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12
He barely talks about theology.