W mans

Great acting!

W mans (again)

Bro, he literally said NOTHING about the peter-was-the-first-pope argument (even though it's a pretty good one)

@AMBROSEtherapper You should have listened to the video. Check the 10 minute point. The entire papacy argument is man made religious nonsense.

It's true, but add Baruto's Dad instead, both him and Jesus can walk on water. Not to mention that folks can heal themselves and others with Chakra.

​@@epicparty Don’t you mean Naruto??? Who is also Baruto's dad???? Like did I miss something?

​@@quarterhalf1836Nah, unlike Naruto - Baruto's Dad can do anything through the power of the Lord. Nice try though man, everyone loses the plot every once in a while. ❤

​@@epicpartyWha? What acid are you on dude 💀💀💀

Thanks!

Excellent point!

Thank you for the insightful reply! I’m engaging you because of your insight, hoping to understand your perspective better. I did not expect push back on this video… tbh didn’t think it would garner views, since this is a question most Christians don’t even wonder about. Unless I am mistaken, the position that Christians cannot eat pork is held almost exclusively by Seventh day Adventists. (I guess I could google that, but I’ll allow you to correct me if I’m wrong). When I read Acts 15, I see the early church debating circumcision specifically, and yet at the end it seems they limit prohibitions to abstain from from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. I think most Christians understand that to mean that other dietary and ritual laws are no longer binding. Obviously the moral law is still binding… so if pork is wrong because it’s morally wrong, we’d be bound. I don’t think scripture is actually sufficiently clear on the point to be adamant about either interpretation. Paul rejects Judaizers, but maybe we can say that’s only about circumcision. So my question is this- is abstaining from pork only the view of one small, 200 year denomination of Christians, or is there a robust tradition in the worldwide 2000 year old church of rejecting pork? Was this even a conversation around the time that the nicene creed was formulated and the Canon of scripture founded? My sense is that among gentile Christians there was no hint of controversy in the early church, but I’d be very interested to be proven wrong!

@@Petervankampen I am not part of the Seventh-day Adventist Church but they are not the only denomination who holds this View. There is also the Seventh-Day Baptists and Hebrew roots that I know of probably many more but I do believe they are in the minority. I attend a non-denominational church who does not share the same belief with me on this matter but the belief of the majority does not determine truth. The way I came about my view on pork was after reading the entire Bible it just did not line up with what my pastor taught. Reading the entire Bible didn't just change my view on pork could also change my view on the Sabbath, Passover, Jesus's birth date, Christmas and Easter. I personally believe all these things were inherited from the Catholic Church. I agree the book of Acts made it very clear that us Gentiles should not practice circumcision but it did not say that we should disregard God's food laws any more than it said we should disregard God's moral laws. I think the point of Acts is God first grant salvation he then commands repentance and gives an abundance of Grace but this does not mean he expects us to disregard his laws because he gives us a change of mind that leads us to turn away from sin and obey his law. For argument's sake I think I could prove my point not just arguing about pork but also about the Sabbath because both of them go hand-in-hand and it is another law of God that is rejected for the same reasons so regarding your question about the early church I would like to talk about the Sabbath. I'm not sure if you are familiar with the Didache it is a short manuscript from the early Christian Church probably about a 20-minute read. It was written by the early Apostles of the first church and it shows that they were keeping the Sabbath. Didache Beginning of chapter 8 "But let not your fasts be like the hypocrites where are they fast on the 2nd and 5th day of the week. Rather fast on the 4th day and the preparation day Friday" Note: preparation day is the day they prepare for the Sabbath. This means they were preparing to not do work the next day which would be the Sabbath the seventh day of the week Saturday not the first day Sunday. Also the reason for a preparation day is so they do not have to do any normal work on the Sabbath day something that the majority of mainstream Christians reject today. To show that the early church did not eat pork we can go to Peter's vision which you brought up where Peter says he have never eaten anything unclean. From his statement I would think both of us could agree that Jesus never taught him that it was okay to eat pork because this book takes place well after Jesus's death and Resurrection. So we have pretty good evidence that up to this point no one in the church was eating pork. If you isolate Peter's vision from the rest of the Bible then yes it would look like God is declaring pork to be clean but if you put the vision in context with the rest of the book God is Not declaring pork to be clean he is declaring the Gentiles to be clean that was the interpretation of the vision. Read on in the book of Acts at least tell11:18 "When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, “So then, even to Gentiles God has granted repentance that leads to life." After reading the entire book of Acts I was not able to get from it that we should now eat pork what I got from it was that God Grant's salvation to the Gentiles who eat pork and also Peter told the Gentiles which sins to repent of immediately like sustaining from sexual immorality, things strangled and Foods offered to idols. He said they can learn God's other laws in the synagogue every Sabbath he did not say God's other laws should be disregarded. I really do think that Christian's today read the Bible with a natural biased towards their current lifestyle of eating pork and going to church on Sunday but if you throw away all of your preconceived ideas and read the Bible like a child as Jesus says you will not end up with the idea that we should disregard the Ten Commandments or any of God's laws. Jesus himself said that he did not come to destroy the law and that whoever shall break one of the least Commandments and shall teach men so shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 5:17-19)

@@cameronstolhand7149 I think you're right, I think those things are inherited from the Catholic Church. I would argue that the trinity, the nature of the afterlife, and the canon of scripture itself are also inherited from Catholics. I think your interpretation of scripture is valid, but I also think mine is. I liked your Didache point... I have heard that Christians started emphasizing Sunday more, etc, after the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD, and that passage seems to support that idea. In short, without an authority besides scriptures, I guess it's just everyone's best guess! I suspect that if it was important enough, God would have made in clear in scripture... unless of course he clarified somewhere else and we're not looking.

@@Petervankampen Although the Catholic Church teaches the Trinity the teaching did not originate from the Catholic Church it originated from Jesus and is recorded in the Bible. John 14:8-11 very clearly teaches the trinity. Even the Old Testament has clear teachings of the trinity " let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Genesis 1:26). Then it goes on to say "God created man in his own image" (Genesis 1:27). My view about churches is that we should not follow them we should however go to church but we should go to follow Jesus not to follow the church. Most of the stories about Jesus are about him rebuking the church for adding to or taking away from his laws for example in Mark 7 when Jesus went against the church by refusing to wash his hands. The Catholic Church did not create the Canon however I do believe God used the Catholic Church to put the Canon together and I believe God also use the Catholic Church to preserve his word just as he used the Pharisees to preserve his word but I also believe the Catholic church has added to his law as the Pharisees did for example paying for indulgences or even giving them away. This is a teaching that originated from the Catholic Church and is nowhere in the Bible. Only Jesus has the authority to forgive sins and anyone who uses an Indulgence has not been changed and is turning to sin not from it. Why do I need the Catholic Church to interpret the Bible for me when I could read the Bible myself. Anyone who misunderstands the Bible could just as easily misunderstand the Catholic Church so when learning from the Catholic church we end up with the same problem and now we need someone with the authority to interpret the Catholic Church this can go on in an endless cycle. God never promised that man's word would be inerrant and if men could be inerrant he wouldn't have needed to give his Commandments at Mount cyanide because they would have remembered them.

I’m surprised how much pushback I get on this one. If anyone is wondering who’s right, read Acts 15, and you can see for yourself that the Church did not uphold the dietary laws.

@@Petervankampen ask 15 was about circumcision for salvation. question. if God says something is wrong can it ever be right

God said circumcision is good who said circumcision is wrong. God never said you must be circumcised to be saved. If he did please show me the scripture. Abraham was saved before he became circumcised