Discussion Why are a lot of american christians so cucked?

S

SoytanEnthusiast

Guest
I've seen a lot of american "muslims" not do anything to adhere to Islam except like, not eat pork, but even they don't support faggots and trannies. What's up with american christians supporting them?
1716059745709.png

1716059819167.png

1716059782326.png

Picrel is on a video of a bunch of faggots in dresses singing outside of a church [doctos]
 
This one especially made me confused
1716059900874.png

>As a christian who dosent act like one, I wouldn't do this to you and I'm sorry about the ones who did this to you
What do you mean "as a christian who dosent act like one" (esl award)?
 
I've seen a lot of american "muslims" not do anything to adhere to Islam except like, not eat pork, but even they don't support faggots and trannies. What's up with american christians supporting them?
Picrel is on a video of a bunch of faggots in dresses singing outside of a church [doctos]
because they aren't real Christians. They either don't go to church at all, go to a libshit protestant church, or were raised Christian and just treat it as an identity, similar to race.
 
Well, the best way to explain this is that "love" as a term is, of course, very far encompassing in the English language. Love for your wife is different than the love for your mother, and that is different from the love for your brother or sister, and that is different from a love for your children. Meanwhile, in a language like Greek you have contrasts and differences to this word, like "eros" and "agape" and "caritas", and all sorts of other terms that can more uniquely describe love. The thing is, this all-encompassing term in English of "love" (I can love a girlfriend and I can love my dog, you can already see a clear difference just in either of these meanings both falling under the umbrella of the word "love") has caused for some very dangerous misconceptions in scripture for societies like America. With this in mind, perhaps some of the most common sins of the average Christian in the West today are rather: not separating the sin from the sinners they encounter (so that they can hate the sin and love the soul of the person), or wanting to "love everyone". Either of these are terrible for the Christian mind, because these are misunderstandings of God's intention for how we are to treat others. To get the latter out of the way, wanting to "love everyone" instead of the people you've been blessed with being around is an attempt at desiring the same power as what God has, of being able to bless and love literally every person alive. It's simply an impossibility to "love" every person in the way that these people, like in your images you've attached, mean to, since they mean this in the way of the Greek word "agape", this term meaning "self-sacrifice", as in the love that a parent could have to their children. Because we are finite in our ability of love because we are human and not like God, we have the obligation to love our family, our community, our neighbors; those we have a close proximity with, before people on a different continent, since we can show love more effectively in our own community. This is a long discussion of it's own and I'm getting off-topic, but it's still relevant, because we're trying to understand this misunderstanding of love, and this is where I'm going with this whole thing: a quality of this mixture of misconception that these misguided Christians have, of the mistake of not properly separating a hate of sin for the love of the sinner then being put alongside the 'love everyone" thing is that these poor, mind-muddled Christians in the liberal West have fallen to a level of agape and caritas that they are specifically showing to the sin-ridden folk like the homosexuals, yet in doing this, by showing them this charity and level of love, they harm them by encouraging their behavior (their sin) with the sheer power of this love for them, so they're not only loving these people so heavily as for it to be defined as agape (as in, you would sacrifice yourself to save the life of this person because you love them so much), but in addition, their mental-combining of the sin and the sinner only means that they are heavily encouraging sin itself to continue to destroy these people, and therefore, they are misled into loving sin as they should love their neighbor. I hope that I wrote all of that out in a decently understandable way. Sometimes, I get in the mood of writing, and then I start rambling incomprehensibilities.
 
Well, the best way to explain this is that "love" as a term is, of course, very far encompassing in the English language. Love for your wife is different than the love for your mother, and that is different from the love for your brother or sister, and that is different from a love for your children. Meanwhile, in a language like Greek you have contrasts and differences to this word, like "eros" and "agape" and "caritas", and all sorts of other terms that can more uniquely describe love. The thing is, this all-encompassing term in English of "love" (I can love a girlfriend and I can love my dog, you can already see a clear difference just in either of these meanings both falling under the umbrella of the word "love") has caused for some very dangerous misconceptions in scripture for societies like America. With this in mind, perhaps some of the most common sins of the average Christian in the West today are rather: not separating the sin from the sinners they encounter (so that they can hate the sin and love the soul of the person), or wanting to "love everyone". Either of these are terrible for the Christian mind, because these are misunderstandings of God's intention for how we are to treat others. To get the latter out of the way, wanting to "love everyone" instead of the people you've been blessed with being around is an attempt at desiring the same power as what God has, of being able to bless and love literally every person alive. It's simply an impossibility to "love" every person in the way that these people, like in your images you've attached, mean to, since they mean this in the way of the Greek word "agape", this term meaning "self-sacrifice", as in the love that a parent could have to their children. Because we are finite in our ability of love because we are human and not like God, we have the obligation to love our family, our community, our neighbors; those we have a close proximity with, before people on a different continent, since we can show love more effectively in our own community. This is a long discussion of it's own and I'm getting off-topic, but it's still relevant, because we're trying to understand this misunderstanding of love, and this is where I'm going with this whole thing: a quality of this mixture of misconception that these misguided Christians have, of the mistake of not properly separating a hate of sin for the love of the sinner then being put alongside the 'love everyone" thing is that these poor, mind-muddled Christians in the liberal West have fallen to a level of agape and caritas that they are specifically showing to the sin-ridden folk like the homosexuals, yet in doing this, by showing them this charity and level of love, they harm them by encouraging their behavior (their sin) with the sheer power of this love for them, so they're not only loving these people so heavily as for it to be defined as agape (as in, you would sacrifice yourself to save the life of this person because you love them so much), but in addition, their mental-combining of the sin and the sinner only means that they are heavily encouraging sin itself to continue to destroy these people, and therefore, they are misled into loving sin as they should love their neighbor. I hope that I wrote all of that out in a decently understandable way. Sometimes, I get in the mood of writing, and then I start rambling incomprehensibilities.
Verdict: male award
1716063131307.png
 
What centuries of secularism, "judeo-christian values" and zionism does to a motherfucker. The west in general hasn't been truly Christian since 1789, it's not just Americans.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've seen a lot of american "muslims" not do anything to adhere to Islam except like, not eat pork, but even they don't support faggots and trannies. What's up with american christians supporting them?
View attachment 6634
View attachment 6636
View attachment 6635
Picrel is on a video of a bunch of faggots in dresses singing outside of a church [doctos]

Christians are being led by freemason pastors, it's all part of the plan. Same shit happened in Nazi Germany...
 
Well, the best way to explain this is that "love" as a term is, of course, very far encompassing in the English language. Love for your wife is different than the love for your mother, and that is different from the love for your brother or sister, and that is different from a love for your children. Meanwhile, in a language like Greek you have contrasts and differences to this word, like "eros" and "agape" and "caritas", and all sorts of other terms that can more uniquely describe love. The thing is, this all-encompassing term in English of "love" (I can love a girlfriend and I can love my dog, you can already see a clear difference just in either of these meanings both falling under the umbrella of the word "love") has caused for some very dangerous misconceptions in scripture for societies like America. With this in mind, perhaps some of the most common sins of the average Christian in the West today are rather: not separating the sin from the sinners they encounter (so that they can hate the sin and love the soul of the person), or wanting to "love everyone". Either of these are terrible for the Christian mind, because these are misunderstandings of God's intention for how we are to treat others. To get the latter out of the way, wanting to "love everyone" instead of the people you've been blessed with being around is an attempt at desiring the same power as what God has, of being able to bless and love literally every person alive. It's simply an impossibility to "love" every person in the way that these people, like in your images you've attached, mean to, since they mean this in the way of the Greek word "agape", this term meaning "self-sacrifice", as in the love that a parent could have to their children. Because we are finite in our ability of love because we are human and not like God, we have the obligation to love our family, our community, our neighbors; those we have a close proximity with, before people on a different continent, since we can show love more effectively in our own community. This is a long discussion of it's own and I'm getting off-topic, but it's still relevant, because we're trying to understand this misunderstanding of love, and this is where I'm going with this whole thing: a quality of this mixture of misconception that these misguided Christians have, of the mistake of not properly separating a hate of sin for the love of the sinner then being put alongside the 'love everyone" thing is that these poor, mind-muddled Christians in the liberal West have fallen to a level of agape and caritas that they are specifically showing to the sin-ridden folk like the homosexuals, yet in doing this, by showing them this charity and level of love, they harm them by encouraging their behavior (their sin) with the sheer power of this love for them, so they're not only loving these people so heavily as for it to be defined as agape (as in, you would sacrifice yourself to save the life of this person because you love them so much), but in addition, their mental-combining of the sin and the sinner only means that they are heavily encouraging sin itself to continue to destroy these people, and therefore, they are misled into loving sin as they should love their neighbor. I hope that I wrote all of that out in a decently understandable way. Sometimes, I get in the mood of writing, and then I start rambling incomprehensibilities.
TL;DR?
 
Many modern believers in Christ falter to a false idea of "loving everyone" within a bad path of then embracing the sin of this "everyone" as a lovable characteristic, when, really, that sin should be what challenges them to love these people, a challenge which they must instead persist through in guiding them away from sin as the ultimate form of love.
 
Back
Top