>"Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow ...

>"Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me."
>pic rel

What did they mean by this? Even if this verse isn't to be taken literally, doesn't taxing peasants to build massive opulent churches go against the spirit of what Jesus is saying?

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

  1. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    The peasants were by and large in favor because massive opulent churches are fricking awesome.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      More so it was a community-building effort. So while after Charlemagne it became an enterprise of the military elite all over western Europe to build churches for their revenue, in building them people of all classes in Europe could gather and organize and achieve a goal of beauty and spiritual symbolism together, learning valuable skills outside of their periphery or whatever trade they did if they were middle class/peasant tier or just intellectually curious. You could akshually contribute to something irl that would stand the test of time and inspire awe 1000+ years later.

  2. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    the poor are allowed in church

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      I know but I imagine peasants would rather keep their money to buy things they actually need rather than have it taken form them to pay for a marble statue or something

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >things they actually need
        They need to go to church, attend Mass, receive the Eucharist, and worship God.
        Those are necessities that churches fulfill.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          The opulence of pic rel isn't necessary for the things you listed. You may say that opulence better glorifies God, but not when it goes against what he taught

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The opulence of pic rel isn't necessary for the things you listed.
            Yes it is, in order to get across the image of God's glory. For most of history most people were illiterate so they couldn't read the Bible, so churches used images in the walls like statues and stained glass in order to teach the message of the Bible. And if you think it's "opulent", I'd suggest you open Exodus and Leviticus and read God's direct instructions about how the Tabernacle needed to had walls of solid gold.
            >You may say that opulence better glorifies God,
            I would to call it opulence, it's just doing justice to God's magnificence.
            >but not when it goes against what he taught
            None of it goes agains what He taught. Beautiful churches are spaces open for all that everyone gets to enjoy, it's not just for the priesthood.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >For most of history most people were illiterate so they couldn't read the Bible
            >"No I can't just tell you about the Bible! I have to take your money so I can commission a massive painting of it and put gold everywhere in the church. I'm also definitely not going to use that money to live lavishly as well"

            >None of it goes agains what He taught
            He told the rich man to give his money to the poor, not to tax the poor to construct massive buildings filled with gold and art

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >>"No I can't just tell you about the Bible!
            Indeed. Protestantism stands as irrefutable proof that common uneducated and untrained people absolutely should not have been given access to the Bible. Common people are ignorant and self absorbed.
            >I have to take your money so I can commission a massive painting of it and put gold everywhere in the church.
            A church that is accessible to all, it's a good that everyone in the community benefits from, like when the government builds a new bridge or highway.
            >I'm also definitely not going to use that money to live lavishly as well"
            Corruption exists everywhere money is present. You can't fault the Church for human failings. I don't see you complain this much anytime the government wastes your tax money.
            >He told the rich man to give his money to the poor,
            Rich, just like the Church does daily around the world. Also the Bible says that you can't perform charity if you don't make sure that you have enough for yourself.
            >not to tax the poor to construct massive buildings filled with gold and art
            See:

            >NAY, COMMANDS peasants to be taxed

            > For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

            Romans 13:6-7

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            >Common people are ignorant and self absorbed.
            Okay, would you tell that to Jesus?

            >And Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple, How say the scribes that Christ is the Son of David?
            >For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
            >David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he then his son?
            >And the common people heard him gladly.

            >Also the Bible says that you can't perform charity if you don't make sure that you have enough for yourself.
            it... doesn't say that; it only says that a benefit of hard work and industriousness is that you'll have extra money to give as charity.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Okay, would you tell that to Jesus?
            Yes? He went to the people that needed the Word the most, those who were ignorant and knew nothing of the Scriptures.
            >it only says that a benefit of hard work and industriousness is that you'll have extra money to give as charity.
            Exactly what I said. And it's not even about what the Gospel tells us, it's just pure logic, of course you can't perform charity if you don't have money yourself, so why do you fault the Church for having money?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Indeed. Protestantism stands as irrefutable proof that common uneducated and untrained people absolutely should not have been given access to the Bible. Common people are ignorant and self absorbed.
            "I can't just tell you about Moses, you're too stupid to understand so I have to take your money to make a grand statue of him on my tomb, which will help you understand him because... reasons" - Pope Julius II according to you

            >A church that is accessible to all, it's a good that everyone in the community benefits from, like when the government builds a new bridge or highway.
            Again this isn't what he told the rich man to do. He said to give money to the poor, not take money from the poor

            >I don't see you complain this much anytime the government wastes your tax money.
            Because the government isn't purporting to be the organization that God founded and maintains. He also said you'll know them by their fruits

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >"I can't just tell you about Moses-
            Yes you can, that's what priests and missionaries do. What's the matter with you?
            >Again this isn't what he told the rich man to do.
            You're still on about that guy? Jesus told Him to give away His wealth because His earthly possessions were preventing him from following Christ. That is not comparable to the Church building a beautiful cathedral that is essentially a pro bono building that everyone has access to.
            >He said to give money to the poor, not take money from the poor
            How do you tie that with Romans 13?
            >Because the government isn't purporting to be the organization that God founded and maintains.
            It purports to be an organization that represents you and your interests and it's supposed to take care of your needs.
            >He also said you'll know them by their fruits
            Which is why I despise protestantism.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >He also said you'll know them by their fruits
            How do you think Catholicism and Protestantism compare when you line them up side by side and compare their fruits? Which set of "fruits" do you think would align more with the will of Jesus Christ?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            These protestants seem to have good fruits

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's funny how go straight for the Amish and ignore the rest of protestantism which is is crashing and burning.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Protestantism isn't one collective thing. I showed you a group of protestants who have good fruits

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I was referring to the fruits of each larger group on the whole. Neither side gets to exclude any smaller group within. Both groups have to own their gay hag faction. Both groups get to own their praiseworthy missionaries.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I think the difference is that the fruits of the RCC aren't coming from a small gay hag faction but from the very top of the leadership. Especially during the renaissance papacy the Popes, cardinals, bishops, etc produced some very bad fruits

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm talking about the entirety of each group, man. Why are you zeroing in on the most humble and powerless group within protestantism while focusing on a corrupt leadership from half a millennium ago when talking about Catholicism?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Why are you zeroing in on the most humble and powerless group within protestantism
            Because they have good fruits

            >while focusing on a corrupt leadership from half a millennium ago
            Because the successor of St. Peter bearing bad fruits is lot more important than a layman in any church bearing bad fruits

            Luke 16:19
            >There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day.

            Then it goes on to the story in the OP.

            That verse is just saying he's rich. Where does it say he made an idol of his wealth?

            >Apostolic Palace
            Not a mansion, it's the Vatican's state building, one of its main sites of operation, basically the equivalent of the US Congress, are they greedy too for commissioning a beautiful building that represents the nation's ideals? Are you a communist? Do you think everything should be gray and depressing for the sake of "not being greedy"? Is brutalism the peak of beauty to you?

            There's no way you aren't trolling

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >There's no way you aren't trolling
            I'm dead serious. Why do protestants hate beauty so much?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Where does it say he made an idol of his wealth?
            It's in the context in the description of his overabundance. Terms like sumptuously.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Because the successor of St. Peter bearing bad fruits is lot more important than a layman in any church bearing bad fruits
            My brother in Christ I wholeheartedly agree. Protestantism is the fruit of that corruption centuries ago.

            Also thank you for trying to be manipulative by refusing to answer my question honestly. I’ll take the pivot away from it as a tacit admission that the fruits of Catholicism are so far superior that you’ve needed to resort to manipulation. The more dishonest schismatics seem, the more people will understand how devious they are. God bless you.

  3. 6 months ago
    Solitaire

    well, you see, Anon, because Ancient Israel had ONE SINGLE temple about the size of a football field, that means Christ in the New Testament condones, NAY, COMMANDS peasants to be taxed and for gold, silver, pearls, ivory, silk, etc. to be heaped up into Cathedrals on this earth.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >NAY, COMMANDS peasants to be taxed

      > For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

      Romans 13:6-7

      • 6 months ago
        Solitaire

        Thats not the Church taxing people, dog.
        That's the command to obey the ungodyl governments of this world.
        People are meant to voluntarily pay a tithe to the Church, and then the Church distributes it in a way to further the Gospel.
        And the New Testament makes clear that gold and silver do nothing to further the Gospel versus preaching and ministering.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Thats not the Church taxing people, dog.
          If the church establishes a tax, that verse commands us to pay it.
          >That's the command to obey the ungodyl governments of this world.
          It literally isn't, Romans 13 declares that all earthly powers are established by God:
          >Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.
          Romans 13:1-5
          >People are meant to voluntarily pay a tithe to the Church, and then the Church distributes it in a way to further the Gospel.
          Correct, exactly what the Church does. But it's not "voluntarily" as if just if you want, the Bible commands us to pay our taxes, it's an order. Have you forgotten about the fate of Ananias and Sapphira?
          >And the New Testament makes clear that gold and silver do nothing to further the Gospel versus preaching and ministering.
          It's not one or the other. You can have both, just like the ancient Israelites, they had the golden Temple of Jerusalem, as well as the Word of God.

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            >just like the ancient Israelites...
            surely, SURELY you understand that this is not the rule for New Testament Christians?
            Do you
            >practice circumcision
            >animal sacrifice
            >aaronic priesthood
            >levitical ministers
            >dietary restrictions
            etc. etc. etc. etc.
            ???
            The New Testament is the "Better Testament" which is better able to spread the Gospel than the Old. Ancient Israel would've worked if humanity were perfect.
            Now we are called to better principals by the revelation of Jesus Christ

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >surely, SURELY you understand that this is not the rule for New Testament Christians?
            When did I say that it was a rule? God showed us the kind of Temple that He wanted for Himself, He gave the Israelites clear instructions about its construction, so if a golden Temple is what He ordered, then it stands to reason that God would see nothing wrong with richly decorated places for worship today, God would be hypocritial otherwise. It's not that it's a necessity, but neither is it undesirable.
            >The New Testament is the "Better Testament"
            Into the fire you go, heretic.
            >which is better able to spread the Gospel than the Old.
            You can't compare these two, the Old Testament was for Israelites only, not gentiles, it was never meant to be spread at all outside of Israel. You can't say the NT is "bett able" to be spread when the OT wasn't meant to be spread to begin with.

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            >Into the fire you go, heretic.
            The Bible is heresy? I guess you think so...

            >But now hath he [Christ] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
            >For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
            >For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
            >Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

            Have you just not read Hebrews?

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            >Into the fire you go, heretic.
            The Bible is heresy? I guess you think so...

            >But now hath he [Christ] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
            >For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
            >For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
            >Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

            Have you just not read Hebrews?

            >By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Into the fire you go, heretic.
            The Bible is heresy? I guess you think so...

            >But now hath he [Christ] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
            >For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
            >For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
            >Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

            Have you just not read Hebrews?

            He's talking about the New Covenant, nothing to do with God's instructions about what a pleasing Temple for God looks like.

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            >Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days.
            James 5:3

            >And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
            >And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you. Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. Look! The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter. You have condemned and murdered the innocent one, who was not opposing you.

            He's talking about godless greedy rich people, who hoard and steal for themselves. Like I said, the churches and the cathedrals are for everyone to enjoy and to glorify God, they're not the priests' private resorts.

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            >it's not okay for them to hoard wealth for the last days
            >but it's okay for us to do it

            I'm thinking there's a word to describe this type of thinking... "hypo...crite"?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >>but it's okay for us to do it
            ......they're not........

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Look up the Apostolic Palace
            also pic rel

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            So tell me, is it green when gorvernment builds offices and headquarters for itself, to carry its operations and which are off limits to civilians for obvious reasons?

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            The Church ain't meant to be like a government, boss

            >But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
            >But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
            >And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:
            >Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The Church ain't meant to be like a government, boss
            I'm using the government as a parallel, come on man, keep up.

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            It's not supposed to be a parallel. Jesus literally says so.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            No one thinks that's an issue. The issue is when you claim to be the organization that God himself founded but then ignore when he said to give away your wealth to the poor. Instead of giving to the poor you take from them to build lavish mansions with the finest artworks, gold, and gems

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >lavish mansions with the finest artworks, gold, and gems
            What freaking mansions? The churches? The cathedrals? Those are not the priests' mansions, what are you on about? They're pro bono buildings, you can go and stay in the church as much as you want and enjoy it, even an atheist can jus enter and enjoy the art and architecture.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I said look up the Apostolic Palace

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Apostolic Palace
            Not a mansion, it's the Vatican's state building, one of its main sites of operation, basically the equivalent of the US Congress, are they greedy too for commissioning a beautiful building that represents the nation's ideals? Are you a communist? Do you think everything should be gray and depressing for the sake of "not being greedy"? Is brutalism the peak of beauty to you?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >>And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
            >>And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
            ..............He's talking specifically about the Jerusalem Temple, man c'mon.......

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            the same temple which is supposedly a pattern meant to be followed in the New Testament, as you allege

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >the same temple which is supposedly a pattern meant to be followed in the New Testament, as you allege
            No, the Temple of Jesus' time was the Second Temple, the one that was built after the first one was destroyed, as you surely know. And it wasn't destroyed because it contained a lot of gold, but because the Israelites had desecrated it beyond repair.
            And in any case what are you saying? That God changed His mind?

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            >but because the Israelites had desecrated it beyond repair.
            huh?
            there were no idols when it was destroyed.
            Jesus even commanded the lepers to give offerings to the priests...

            You don't really read/care about the Bible do you?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >there were no idols when it was destroyed.
            There doesn't need to be idols for a place to be desecrated, and there absolutely were.
            >Jesus even commanded the lepers to give offerings to the priests...
            What does this have to do with anything?
            >You don't really read/care about the Bible do you?
            You're the one ignoring God's instructions for the Temple.

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            >You're the one ignoring God's instructions for the Temple.
            huh?
            God does not command the building of a physical New Testament Temple.
            If so, and the Catholic Church is somehow obeying God's explicit command; show me the replica temple I can go visit.
            The Tabernacle had explicit dimensions, and so did Solomon's Temple. So, show me the 1:1 replica.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God does not command the building of a physical New Testament Temple.
            >If so, and the Catholic Church is somehow obeying God's explicit command; show me the replica temple I can go visit.
            >The Tabernacle had explicit dimensions, and so did Solomon's Temple. So, show me the 1:1 replica.
            Now you're just being silly, I'm using the Jerusalem Temple to showcase that God is not displeased by richly decorated places of worship dedicated to Him. That's the bottom line.

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            Fair enough;
            though I'm used to the argument being
            >real churches have gold and silver etc.
            >fake churches are boring looking

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            No, I'm making the opposite argument, that just because it has gold and silver doesn't mean that it's not a "real" church. That's what protestant say.

            And even beyond that, let's all be honest and admit that protestants have a terrible sense of aesthetic beauty. The Bible doesn't directly command us to make churches with gold and silver, but neithe does it command us to make them insidiously ugly and depressing.

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            It's not "protestants" it's "modernity"
            Look up Baptist Churches from the 1800s
            Look up modern strip mall Catholic Churches.
            Most Catholic Churches are just old.

            I take an issue with tradcath LARPers who really truly are enamored by all the pretty pretty decorations on old Catholic Churches like it means something.
            My position is
            >IF you've already covered the essentials, sure, spend money to decorate a church
            Not
            >Decoration itself is wrong

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It's not "protestants" it's "modernity"
            Modernity is protestant.
            >Look up Baptist Churches from the 1800s
            Miserable.
            >Look up modern strip mall Catholic Churches.
            Anying inside a strip mall is ugly.
            >Most Catholic Churches are just old.
            And they age like fine wine.

            >I take an issue with tradcath LARPers who really truly are enamored by all the pretty pretty decorations on old Catholic Churches like it means something.
            Well it does mean something, at the very least it means that the artists and craftsmen had passion and believed in what their creations were meant to glorify.

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            >at the very least it means that the artists and craftsmen had passion and believed in what their creations were meant to glorify.
            would you say this about the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake?
            I would not say so.

            >judge not after the outward appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

            >Modernity is protestant
            Modernity is atheist. But I see you're deep in a schizo worldview. What if I claimed that modern atheist France was "catholic"?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >would you say this about the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake?
            Absolutely, all in all it's an absolutely breathtaking building. I most of all love the effect of the white lights.
            not after the outward appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
            There's nothing wrong with the former if you have the latter.
            is protestant
            >Modernity is atheist.
            It was first protestant.
            >What if I claimed that modern atheist France was "catholic"?
            France isn't Catholic anymore, sadly, it's a husk of its former self, it gave a lot to Christendom, but it's time has passed, the Fleur de Lis, as beautiful as it once was, like all flowers it withering and dying.

          • 6 months ago
            Solitaire

            >would you say this about the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake?
            Absolutely, all in all it's an absolutely breathtaking building. I most of all love the effect of the white lights.
            not after the outward appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
            There's nothing wrong with the former if you have the latter.
            is protestant
            >Modernity is atheist.
            It was first protestant.
            >What if I claimed that modern atheist France was "catholic"?
            France isn't Catholic anymore, sadly, it's a husk of its former self, it gave a lot to Christendom, but it's time has passed, the Fleur de Lis, as beautiful as it once was, like all flowers it withering and dying.

            >Because the successor of St. Peter bearing bad fruits is lot more important than a layman in any church bearing bad fruits
            My brother in Christ I wholeheartedly agree. Protestantism is the fruit of that corruption centuries ago.

            Also thank you for trying to be manipulative by refusing to answer my question honestly. I’ll take the pivot away from it as a tacit admission that the fruits of Catholicism are so far superior that you’ve needed to resort to manipulation. The more dishonest schismatics seem, the more people will understand how devious they are. God bless you.

            >Protestantism is the fruit of that corruption centuries ago.

            so... we now see
            >Modernity is Catholic

  4. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Religion is a scam

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Frogposters are scammers. They attract your attention but have nothing interesting to say.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Reminder that anybody who uses the term "frogposter" is from Reddit, and should be ignored.

  5. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Four points:

    1. Matthew clarifies that the man was seeking perfection. Yes, perfection is selling all possessions and following Christ. Who would argue against that?

    2. That rich man had the opportunity to follow Christ and be remember for eternity.

    3. The rest of Luke explains the context. See pic related. Not even a very wealthy person can obtain heaven without God.

    • 6 months ago
      Solitaire

      The man asked the entirely wrong question and Jesus answered him immediately
      >there is none good but God

      The actual flow of the conversation was
      >What good thing must I do to inherit eternal life?
      >There is none good but God
      ...
      >But if thou wilt be PERFECT...

      You have to be perfect to inherit eternal life based on your own merit.

  6. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    The Bible is a tradition.

    • 6 months ago
      Solitaire

      Amen, makes you wonder why they don't believe it.

  7. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    What you imagine
    >the church builds palaces for itself while everyone else starves
    Reality
    >a king wants a very nice church (and also to show they are very religious), so funds the construction of a huge church
    >the masses also get a nice church

  8. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Well, he was talking to a rich man who made an idol of his belongings. His prescription to the rich man is to sell all of his belongings. And as you should do with any idol. Get rid of the idol.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >he was talking to a rich man who made an idol of his belongings
      Where is this said?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Luke 16:19
        >There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day.

        Then it goes on to the story in the OP.

  9. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >cathedrals are gaudy
    so are state capitals
    >saint peter's basilica is gaudy
    so is the nation's capital
    These "gaudy" cathedrals are regional capitals of the faith.
    They're meant to be beacons of light that draw people to the true Church. The Statue of Liberty serves a purpose just as St Peter's Square or the Sistine Chapel serves a purpose.
    Like an anon above said, local churches are completely normal looking. If you think those are gaudy then you're probably just coming from an aggressively iconoclastic denomination.

  10. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Obviously the Catholic Church isn't the true church and we can discern this by a great deal many means. Especially in the sermon on the Mount where Jesus says that we will know false teachers by their rotten fruit. It's interesting they claim Peter is their first pope, yet Peter tells a man who bows before him to stand up. That he is but a man himself. The Catholic Pope just has everyone bow to him.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *