Killing is not forbidden in Christianity. Murder is sinful. I can easily prove it both by using Scripture and by referring to the Church fathers because it's consistently so.
It is horrible that you think you're on the side of God, while all you do is arrogantly promote yourself with the text "everyone needs to watch this", and it's some information known already, that you present in the slowest and most boring way possible.
Since when promoting your work is unchristian? The guy presents good information and Christian based views. Wtf is your problem? Go watch Blue Dionysius guy.
For the state - yes.
So why should the state treat men and women the same in they are different in reality? Shouldn't the state be based on reality?
No. Again, men and women have equal rights in Russia for more than a century. I do not observe any noticeable gender role shift. Being able to realise some right does not mean you have to. So men and women do their choices, what rights they want to realise, and what they don't want. Men can work as nurse, but only few do that. Women can serve in military, but only few do that. When conscious of people is not poisoned by all that jewish perversions (career, selfishness, ultimate competition with everybody including your own family, anti-merit crap, praising degeneracy and so on,), equal rights for men and women could not do any harm.
Russia and the Eastern bloc (I'm from one such country) are lagging because Stalinism was conservative and the iron curtain along with deep rooted Christian orthodox morality and tradition, which is very patriarchal, held western cultural revolutions at bay. The relative conservatism we witness in our countries is due to the lack of common market with the west until the 90's. But we're catching up and society is getting more liberal and women are more emancipated (especially in the big cities). Russia is going their own way and this may reverse some of those trends but my country is in the EU and there's a strong western influence, despite the general population being against it and pro-Russia (mostly due to communist nostalgia). The funny thing is both sides believe Russia is the same as the USSR and they either love them or hate them for that.
Hypothetically, you could grant equal rights but there needs to be a certain type of government, economy and society if you want the scenario you described. This is untenable in any civilized modern society I can think of mostly because of globalism and the mono-culture. Even if some government like say China can pull it off, they'd rather have women in the workforce too and not at home caring for children. That's one of the reasons such totalitarian regimes prefer feminism and communal raising of kids over the big traditional family which was characteristic for China and Russia. There are other reasons such as control and indoctrination but that's the purely economical one.
Imagine you have son and daughter. If you love them equally, does that mean you obliged to dress them in same clothes and buy them same toys? Is equal love to both of your children somehow bad?
Jews do simple thing. They replace meaning and usage of "equality" with their insane meaning and usage. In Russian we have two different words - "равенство" and "уравниловка". First means "equality" like in mathematical sense, and second means "make everything the same, regardless of any circumstances". Kikes replaced first, initial meaning of "equality" with second one. And you bought it.
I am well aware of the distinctions you bring up. We're back at the everlasting problem of what a government should be at all. I believe a government should represent the divine order and hierarchy here on Earth because that's the ultimate reality. Which means it should be a monarchy, since the Trinity is monarchical and Christ is the King of Kings. Moreover, I already wrote men and women's roles and duties should be informed by the same principles given to us by the Lord.
If one goes the atheist route, there's really nothing to base government on - it all becomes arbitrary and a matter of preference. A sandbox, which leads to the insane regimes we got after the monarchies were toppled. You think everyone should have equal rights, but others may think otherwise and in the end what you get is Darwinian rule of the most powerful, or realpolitik (which usually is the jew).
And that "communism" thing. Communism is inevitable. Not in jewish, marxist sense, but more like in Star Trek. If humans will survive that clown world and defeat those bastards, sooner or later that replicators will be created. When human being will have everything he need to live, there will be no any sense in money and all that capitalism stuff. Values will shift to usefulness for others, knowledge, goodness, skills and so on. You know, that's how Johannes' Revelation ends. I hope you don't think that there will be capitalism with all that stocks, profits and money making under the ruling of Jesus and Saints :) Mindblowing, isn't it?
It's not. This is the biggest jewish lie of all. Jews invented communism, this is their kingdom of the Antichrist and they've been trying at it since the 1600's. It seems it's about to finally work now and make them masters of the world. I think it's inevitable but whenever they succeed, their rule will be short-lived and Christ will come blazing.
Communism is an inversion of the Christian idea of Eden that the jews want to enact on Earth (utopia) so in a sense you're right - there will be no property, profits or capital in the Kingdom of God, because it won't be material or worldly in any sense :)
It means state does not make difference between men and women. Women can do anything men can do in relation to the state. That is feminism of the healthy human.
This assumes men and women aren't different though. The gender roles shift was a result of women getting into government and workforce which happened because of the feminism you think is good.
What if giving women equal rights to men (and even all men equal rights) is not a good thing and opens a pandora box? Because that's exactly what happened. Remember that first wave feminism was precisely about women being equal in state matters. Do you believe for a second it was just going to stay that way and women would be content with their stupid right to vote (which they didn't want to begin with)? Same happened with the gay rights movement and look where we are today. It's a long complex chain of causes and effects. Overtone window going wild.
All feminism in the west was promoted by jews because feminism's cosmology is based on Marxist dialectic - it describes the sexes as being in a constant struggle for power and in a master/slave relation.
This is opposite to what the patriarchal Christian view is on the matter where man and woman were both created in God's image with specific roles with man being the leader and woman being in submission. Once this is lost, all hell breaks lose. The reason it was lost is because men turned away from God, which made them weak and deluded and made women turn against men, screwing the whole hierarchy. Jews helped of course but it was ultimately our weakness and sin that allowed things to come to this.
"Feminism of the healthy human" sounds like "cancer of the healthy human". It's a poisonous ideology and it always was. People are not equal as a whole and should have different roles and places in society. Not everyone is supposed to govern, it's a duty of great responsibility. Equality is another poisonous jewish communist idea brought to fruition by the French revolution. The correct hierarchy is in fact an inverted pyramid, not the masonic one with the monarch being at the bottom carrying the weight of all people.
What does "equal rights" even mean? This is based on secular humanist ideology which is freemasonic. The French revolution was the first major feminist revolution and guess who was behind that. As a rule of thumb, any revolutionary movement having to do with "freedom, equality, fraternity" and doing away with the old Christian order is run by the jews.
Why is hate or degeneracy bad in your godless worldview?
The fuck you talking about? I was brought up catholic i an area almost exclusively Catholic. I was an altar boy.
You were a pretty fucking stupid Catholic then which makes sense since you regressed to atheism probably because "there's no evidence for God".
You are a few centuries off. It was in the late 4th century.
Noted, I should have checked that. It was still after the first 3 councils.
In any case, St. John Chrysostom wasn't an Apostle, he lived centuries aft all the Apostles had died.
He was a Church father/Apostle of the Church. The word apostle refers to Church fathers and Saints not just Jesus' disciples. He is part of the apostolic succession.
Also, the Apostolic Succession is a tradition and a doctrine but not confirmed by evidence. There is no mentioning in the NT that the Apostles ordained Bishops.
Peter was one of the 12 Apostles AND the first bishop (Pope) of Rome. Are you retarded or just lying by reflex, dude? He ordained Timothy (by laying hands on him) as his successor.
Why mentioning the obvious? Your sad rebellion just proves that - no one rebels against a non existing power.
No, don't tell him that! I bet this guy thinks disciplining your children is unchristian too because you're being mean to them which means you do not love them. We must all be like passive feminized hippy-Jesus his talmud overlords cooked up as a subversion: "Listen, goy, disregard what the Church stance is and what the Church fathers said throughout the years. When you're interpreting Scripture, make sure to listen to your feels and base it off the anti-christian masonic culture we promote. Did I mention the Church fathers were antisemites?"
Why do you hate something that's not even real? You militant atheists are all delusional sad pathetic little cucks.
You misinterpreted the context I implied which I provided you with. That's ok, even you are wrong sometimes.
You just don't know Church history but that's understandable considering most Christians around you are protestant.
There's an uninterrupted apostolic succession originating from Jesus. Jesus taught His apostles and established His Church on Pentecost sending them the Holy Spirit.
Then they wrote the gospels and taught other Christians forming Churches all around the world. The priesthood lineage was continued through laying of hands (that's how Peter gave his blessing to Timothy).
Then, once Rome (Byzantium) was Christianized, they called ecumenical councils which ruled on theological and canonical questions solidifying the common true faith of all Christians, the way it was taught by Jesus and the prophets before Him.
Only after that did they compile the Bible as we know it (7th c. I think). Yes, most prots don't realize it, but It was that Christian tradition, the apostolic Church tradition that gave us the Bible.
So it logically follows that the correct interpretation never leaved the Church Christ Himself established here on Earth on Pentecost, giving the key to Peter and the apostles. And that's what exactly Jesus told us in Mathew 16: "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it."
Above all else in their human nature, mr. gematria reductionist spergatron.
Their problem is they see a contradiction when in fact there is none. God exhibits righteous anger throughout the Bible. He's also all loving and merciful. We should be like him and apply discernment and wisdom to every situation.
No, you're just quote mining and misinterpreting things out of context. I can show you places in the Scripture where God seemingly contradicts Himself, which is impossible.
Does that make the Bible incorrect, or does that mean there is such a thing as context and tradition of correct interpretation within the Church of Christ, where the Holy Spirit resides and gives discernment to the Church fathers?
Do you know the difference between killing and murder?
He's not a false prophet. He's an early Church father following the apostolic succession. He's as much a false prophet as is Paul. You know, the Church which gave you the Bible in the first place.
What makes you confident your interpretation of Scripture is correct? What if I tell you St. John Chrysostom and the Church was well aware of what Jesus said? There's no contradiction. What you do is called quote mining and misinterpreting things without context.
Here come the "muh Bible" sola scriptura folks. Ok, we're doing this obviously: Who gave you the Bible and who interprets the Bible for you?
Tell me you don't know anything about Christianity, its theology, Church history and tradition without telling me.
Saying things like that makes you sound like a retarded kid walking into a postgrad-level physics lecture.
Exactly. I've heard the term was cooked up by protestants in the 19th c. but I'm suspicious as to how big of a nose those protestants had. Regardless the Reformation itself which spawned Protestantism, just like any divisive and revolutionary movement, was instigated and aided by the jews (Calvin for one, was a jew).
People are completely lost and confused. I'm sad because they are family. I'm also sad there's no human law in place punishing those disgusting demons (mostly jews) behind the ceremony here and now. We live in a cucked anti-christian world. But anyone who doesn't repent will surely get the fire and brimstone treatment eventually. They are too prideful and deluded though, I don't see it happening save for a miracle.
I've listened to him, he's somewhat entertaining but his stupid pagan larping ass has no idea what he's talking about in terms of Christianity being somehow jewish. Has he even red the NT and what JC said to the jewish pharisees, reprimanding their hypocrisy, the practice of whoring and of trade and usury within the temple? Last time I checked, jews promote all of this in our society.
Strawman and no. They are dying excessively and suddenly from cardiovascular diseases, strange syndromes and turbo cancer at the ripe age of 30-50. The excess mortality for western countries is steadily 10-30% higher than baseline since the coof.
Yep, globo-homo sportsball culture is only a means to an end.
You should care because sportsball is the biggest cult today along with politics. I don't watch it either but there are few things that are as culturally significant as sportsball.
Correct, a family exhibits the above. But the family has a specific meaning tied to specific ends. It's a man and a woman united in a sacred marriage for the purpose of multiplying and attaining eternal salvation in God's Kingdom. How do you extrapolate that relationships within that unit to broader society? In the Christian paradigm, you can't because society (people) has another set of relationships codified in it - it's a yet another circle around the family. There you have your neighbor, community and people you exchange goods, services and trade with. There is equality too - but it's equality before God to whom every person and t heir soul is equally important and precious.
What communism does, is basically obliterating any distinctions and boundaries - not just between family and community, but up to the single individual who is now fully integrated and ceases to be a unique person made in the image of God. It's a demonic monist worldview, characteristic of the Eastern religions, platonism and Kabbalah ("We're all one and distinctions are an illusion" - aka Maya and the subsequent liberation from it through nirvana, or "We were once all one but fell into multiplicity, and now we must return back to unity" - a symbol of this is Eliphas Levi's Baphomet - the demon signifying the single origin of male and female and of all dichotomies, masons (jews) love that shit).
This is the occult metaphysics behind communism and it was well understood within the highest ranks of the Party - those guys weren't your usual diamat goobers because materialism is the dumbest philosophy ever created. They were decent philosophers who understood metaphysics more in the vain of O'Brian in 1984. They knew communism is a giant satanic cult and the ultimate form of government meant for the coming Antichrist.
That's why I said it's the greatest jewish lie. The reason you fell for it is because from what I gather you're not against Christianity, but you're also not grounded in the orthodox worldview and can't discern the subtle inversion of Christianity communism presents. There are 3 major red flags:
But why would I use their term "communism" to describe what a Christian family should be when I have a worldview that supplies all the terms and meanings I need? This is like using "cisgender" to describe a healthy sexual proclivity.
This is in fact a common jewish strategy. Jews know that if you just slip a new word and offer an identical meaning they can be like "but it's still the same thing, a synonym - not a biggie, you see?" But that's the first step in subversion of language and meaning. Then they gradually skew the context and add more meaning to the initial term, until it becomes a completely new concept and meanwhile they use culture and media to saturate the language with the new term. This was also explained brilliantly in 1984 and I think this was the most important part of the book. The way people think is governed by the words (concepts) they know and use.