Do you eat pork?

BobRyan said:

Consider reading a tiny bit more

Click to expand...

No answer, just deflection. Typical.

Maria Billingsley said:

Ok thank you. I use my phone and for some reason no one's denomination shows up. A laptop is different. Strange.

Thank you again!

Click to expand...

No worries, for reference, this is what we believe. https://adventist.org/beliefs

Anyway, I wish you well and always appreciate your sweet demeanor.

Hentenza said:

You need to do some study and you are still questioning my Christianity. JW’s are not trinitarian and are not allowed to post here. I am a trinitarian Christian.

Click to expand...

I see, so you can question the JW Christianity, but no one can question yours. Hmm!

Hentenza said:

Try addressing the Rom. 8:2-3 verses that I posted. It’s not hard to see. BTW- nothing about free will in the verses that I posted.

Click to expand...

Actually I already addressed this very verse, and you replied to my addressing this very verse, directed to someone else. Are you OK? Look, forgetfulness is not uncommon, but you are in luck, just go back and read what you yourself have posted, and see what you replied to.

I'm sure you remember, once you acknowledge your own post

Studyman said:

I see, so you can question the JW Christianity, but no one can question yours. Hmm!

Click to expand...

Yes. In this website you cannot question anyone’s Christianity since all that post here are trinitarian Christians that agree with CF statement of faith. If you don’t agree then you should not be posting here.

Xeno.of.athens said:

Got an answer to your puzzle that will not directly contradict what the scripture says?

Click to expand...

GWT 17"Don't ever think that I came to set aside Moses' Teachings or the Prophets. I didn't come to set them aside but to make them come true.

18 I can guarantee this truth: Until the earth and the heavens disappear, neither a period nor a comma will disappear from Moses' Teachings before everything has come true.

19 So whoever sets aside any command that seems unimportant and teaches others to do the same will be unimportant in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever does and teaches what the commands say will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

I feel very confident in stating the earth and heavens have not disappeared.

verse 19, what is the one Commandment that is the most unimportant and the most hated?? Number 4

Xeno.of.athens said:

The original post makes it very clear indeed that its main argument is NOT WHAT I PRESONALLY BELIEVE AND NOT WHAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH TEACHES. But some in this thread have ignored that. Catholics enjoy bacon as much as anybody else. I like ham too. I happily eat ham at Christmas time. I do not believe nor do I teach that pork in any form is "unclean" nor that it is a serious health risk. And I love a good BLT!

Click to expand...

Yes you made that clear. But I was confused by a post you made to my friend @jas3.

SabbathBlessings said:

We are told many misunderstand Paul to their own destruction 2Peter3:16 and I would say this seems to be one of those instances . . .

Click to expand...

In this case, the Scriptural basis is not just from St. Paul but also from the Acts of the Apostles and the four canonical Gospels.

2 Peter 3:16 likely refers to those who interpret St. Paul outside of the Church, privately, and in an eisegetical manner, ignoring what he says in some epistles or not making an effort to reconcile what he says in one chapter with the next, or between his writings and the rest of the New Testament. By way or example, memorialist and Zwinglian interpretations of the Eucharistt requires us to read 1 Corinthians 11 in a way that our Lord immediately contradicts himself, by using “this do ye in remembrance of me” as a negation of “this is my body” and “this is my blood” and additionally requires us to read it in a manner that contradicts the equivalent institution narratives in Matthew and Mark as well as the Eucharistic discourse in John ch. 6 and in the prior chapter of 1 Corinthians.

As I said in the preceding post St. Peter is doubtless warning, like he did about prophecy of the dangers of private interpretation - the interpretation of the Scriptures was the perogative of the Church, we know how the early church interpreted Scripture from the volumes of writings left behind by the Ante Nicene, Nicene and post Nicene fathers, because of the Council of Nicaea and the Nicene Creed we can instantly identify the early Christian Church in opposition to other psuedo-Christian sects of antiquity such as the Ebionites, Marcionites, Novatianists, Montanists, Donatists, Arians, Manichaens, et cetera. Unfortunately for the polemics you cite that ancient church clearly includes the ancient Roman Church among others, although I will not seek to further derail this thread by mentioning doctrinal issues other than pork, which we find being consumed by all Christian denominations included persecuted Christians, but you think those persecuted Christians, who are assured of salvation by the very words of Christ (“he who confesses me I will confess before the father”) are damned because of the application of a part of the ceremonial law of the Old Testament which is clearly included in those not applicable to Christians, even as your denomination intentionally encourages ignoring other parts of the Torah for … reasons which are not entirely obvious.

St. Paul clearly warns that if one does part of the Law one is required to observe all of it.

The Liturgist said:

Yes you made that clear. But I was confused by a post you made to my friend @jas3.



In this case, the Scriptural basis is not just from St. Paul but also from the Acts of the Apostles and the four canonical Gospels.

2 Peter 3:16 likely refers to those who interpret St. Paul outside of the Church, privately, and in an eisegetical manner, ignoring what he says in some epistles or not making an effort to reconcile what he says in one chapter with the next, or between his writings and the rest of the New Testament. By way or example, memorialist and Zwinglian interpretations of the Eucharistt requires us to read 1 Corinthians 11 in a way that our Lord immediately contradicts himself, by using “this do ye in remembrance of me” as a negation of “this is my body” and “this is my blood” and additionally requires us to read it in a manner that contradicts the equivalent institution narratives in Matthew and Mark as well as the Eucharistic discourse in John ch. 6 and in the prior chapter of 1 Corinthians.

As I said in the preceding post St. Peter is doubtless warning, like he did about prophecy of the dangers of private interpretation - the interpretation of the Scriptures was the perogative of the Church, we know how the early church interpreted Scripture from the volumes of writings left behind by the Ante Nicene, Nicene and post Nicene fathers, because of the Council of Nicaea and the Nicene Creed we can instantly identify the early Christian Church in opposition to other psuedo-Christian sects of antiquity such as the Ebionites, Marcionites, Novatianists, Montanists, Donatists, Arians, Manichaens, et cetera. Unfortunately for the polemics you cite that ancient church clearly includes the ancient Roman Church among others, although I will not seek to further derail this thread by mentioning doctrinal issues other than pork, which we find being consumed by all Christian denominations included persecuted Christians, but you think those persecuted Christians, who are assured of salvation by the very words of Christ (“he who confesses me I will confess before the father”) are damned because of the application of a part of the ceremonial law of the Old Testament which is clearly included in those not applicable to Christians, even as your denomination intentionally encourages ignoring other parts of the Torah for … reasons which are not entirely obvious.

St. Paul clearly warns that if one does part of the Law one is required to observe all of it.

Click to expand...

So your view is not to do any of the law or just the parts you feel are okay?

Does Paul override what God the Creator says what He is going to do at His Second Coming? What we are speaking of in context.

Paul warned of this type of following

1 Cor 1:12-13 "Now I say this, that each of you says, 'I am of Paul,' or 'I am of Apollos,' or 'I am of Cephas,' or 'I am of Christ.' Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?"

The apotles taught to obey God over man

Acts 5:29 But Peter and the other apostles answered and said: “We ought to obey God rather than men.

If we reconcile Paul to God and not the other way around, our Bible is much more harmonized because that's what the apotles did- there is nothing above a Thus saith the LORD.

Sadly, this is the central issue, I see people elevating Moses over God calling it Moses law, when God and even Moses said it is God's Exo20:6 Deut4:13 Exo32:16 Exo31:18 and then they do same with Paul elevate Paul over God to get rid of the law of God when Paul plainly taught the opposite and confuse what God said with Moses that Paul speaks of. If we stick with what God says and no one comes before Him, our Bible will make complete sense.

God does not change and sadly either does humans.

Jer 7:22 For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices. 23 But this is what I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be My people. And walk in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well with you.’ 24 Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but followed[b] the counsels and the [c]dictates of their evil hearts, and went[d] backward and not forward.

Xeno.of.athens said:

You're not asking a question here so much as making an accusation and I do not take well to that accusation. Take the trouble to read more of my posts in this thread if you have not read them all. There is no hesitancy on my part to agree that eating pork is fine. In fact, the only condemnations of pork eating (aside from my deliberately constructed argument in the first post) are those from some SDA contributors.

Click to expand...

On this point and forgive me for this digression, because you know of our friendship, I was briefly confused by a post you made to @jas3 and thought you were saying the basis for not eating Pork was the Council of Florence which would be problematic since we know pre-Florentine and non-Florentine Christians such Copts have always consumed pork. Only Christians in those lands where pork is not available traditionally do not eat it (thanks to Islam).

So it appears there was merely some confusion which also involved myself and @jas3 but there is no problem, I remain as ever, your friend, and remain appalled by the horrible things some people say about the Roman church.

Xeno.of.athens said:

What is a GWT?
Looking at what you posted I suppose a book and a chapter went astray, and you've merely put some verse numbers.

Did you meant to type: Matthew 5:17-19?

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 He therefore that shall break one of these least commandments, and shall so teach men shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. But he that shall do and teach, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Douay Rheims Bible)

Do you think that this passage makes the Law of Moses of perpetual obligation? If you do then how completely do you keep kosher, make sacrifices for sins, and observe the festivals and feast days of the Law of Moses? Or do you ignore some of those things? Do you implement the gleaning laws and sabbath years that the Law of Moses legislated? Remember not one jot nor one tittle (period or comma) will pass until all is fulfilled.

Somehow, I cannot take that line of reasoning seriously.

Click to expand...

GWT "God's Word Translation" just another of the hundreds, I use many, as translators all translate in accord to their own beliefs. pure human nature.

Read what Christ said.

till heaven and earth pass away -- not even one jot will pass

What the Many can not come to understand -- the Torah reveals to mankind the Divine, Holy and Righteous Nature and Mind of God.
All judgement is given to Christ and He judges all creation by the Torah, that is the Family of God's standard rule of law.

When God the Father does transform heaven and earth into spirit, the physical Torah will no longer be --- as there will be no flesh and blood only spirit.
there can be no murder when all are immortal spirits.

The Old Covenant was a physical marriage contract between Christ as the children of Israel, it is a physical contract for a physical people with a physical law, physical promises and a physical priesthood

The NEW is a spiritual contact between Christ and His Bride thus; for a spiritual people with spiritual law, spiritual promises and a spiritual priest --Christ. sin is now in one's mind not just by their hands.

and in God's Family , all made Spirit, sin will be impossible but all will know what sin is according to The Father. sin is sin!

SabbathBlessings said:

So your view is not to do any of the law or just the parts you feel are okay?

Click to expand...

My view is to follow the instructions of Christ and His Apostles, as interpreted by the Church, whose tradition is authoritative according to 1 Corinthians 11:2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and to separate myself from those who reject that tradition as per 2 Thessalonians 2:37; specifically with regards to this issue, the Apostolic doctrine can be found in Acts 15 which makes it clear gentiles are only required to refrain from eating blood and food offered to idols and the meat of things strangled.

SabbathBlessings said:

f we reconcile Paul to God and not the other way around, our Bible is much more harmonized because that's what the apotles did- there is nothing above a Thus saith the LORD.

Click to expand...

Since the epistles of St. Paul are God-breathed, it is impossible to diminish what God said by using them exegetically. Also, as I pointed out, the basis for not regarding the consumption of pork as damnatory is spread throughout several parts of the New Testament including the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles.

You frankly would have been closer to the mark if you had s/Paul/Luke (since Acts 15 is by far the biggest problem with the idea of pork consumption being forbidden, and also with other Adventist doctrines since you’d think that when the Apostles gathered to decide what was required for gentile Christians they would have mentioned abstinence from pork, but according to Acts 15 , as long as that pork was not strangled or offered to an idol, we’re good to go) but then again you don’t have a convenient verse to eisegetically employ to unilaterally disregard Lukan, Markan, Petrine or Johannine scriptures as you do with Pauline scriptures.

But I do understand the preoccupation with St. Paul since as far as I can tell, while Acts 15 and Acts as a whole create the greatest problems for individual doctrines that the more legalistic members of your Church take offense over, the real problem is of course Galatians 3:15-5:15 which makes it clear that this legalism is itself erroneous, and so naturally a desire existed among those poelmicists whose writings you quote, not you personally I don’t think, to try to mitigate St. Paul, downplay the divine inspiration of his writings, and use 2 Peter eisegetically to invalidate any Pauline text that’s inconvenient, and then concurrently frame every argument from a non-Catholic against Adventist doctrine as being reliant soely on St. Paul even if St. Paul is only a very secondary source (indeed with regards to pork consumption, his writings are barely on my radar; the words of our Lord about what comes out of a man are defiling, not what goes into a man, and the dream of St. Peter and the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 are far more important). This is basically a source-based logical fallacy closely related to the ad hominem against the Roman Catholic Church and the knee-jerk rejection of doctrines just because the RCC teaches it and the SDAs have assumed that the RCC is “Babylon” which is an anachronistic reading of Revelation, which is clearly referring to Paganism and secular worldliness, of which Babylon is symbolic throughout Scripture consistently (and the idea that Catholics are worldly or pagan is not sustainable upon a close examination of their praxis and extreme Christian devotion).

To clarify, my criticism in the preceding paragraph is directed at your argument and at the SDA polemics you quote in constructing it and their arguments and not at you or at them personally as that would be argumentum ad hominem, a logical fallacy.

Since Christ is the Logos, we cannot worship Him in spirit and truth while being illogical.

The Liturgist said:

My view is to follow the instructions of Christ and His Apostles, as interpreted by the Church, whose tradition is authoritative according to 1 Corinthians 11:2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and to separate myself from those who reject that tradition as per 2 Thessalonians 2:37; specifically with regards to this issue, the Apostolic doctrine can be found in Acts 15 which makes it clear gentiles are only required to refrain from eating blood and food offered to idols and the meat of things strangled.

Click to expand...

This seems to be out of context to how Paul said to reconcile traditions...

Traditions over Christ and God's commandments? Its that what Paul taught and more importantly Jesus who is God, no its what they warned about.

Col 2:8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ

Paul reconciled everything to Christ - sadly this step is missed by most who use these verses.

This is what Christ said when we keep mans traditions over God's commandments- it makes the word of God void- which means all of His promises void. Our worship to Him in vain and our heart far from Him.

Mat 15:3 ” 3 He answered them, “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ 5 But you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or his mother, “What you would have gained from me is given to God,”[a] 6 he need not honor his father.’ So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. 7 You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:

8 “‘This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart is far from me;
9 in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”

Which is exactly what Isaiah predicted the fear of God comes through men and not God.

Isa 29:13 Therefore the Lord said:
“Inasmuch as these people draw near with their mouths
And honor Me with their lips,
But have removed their hearts far from Me,
And their fear toward Me is taught by the commandment of men,

What Moses said to do after God spoke His commandments Exo20:1-17

Exo 20:20 And Moses said to the people, “Do not fear; for God has come to test you, and that His fear may be before you, so that you may not sin.”

What we are being called out from, the fear of men over fear of God in these last days and back to worship our Creator, if one will hear and respond to the everlasting gospel...

Rev 14:6 Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell on the earth—to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people— 7 saying with a loud voice, “Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who made (Exo20:11) heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water.”

8 And another angel followed, saying, “Babylon[f] is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she has made all nations drink of the wine (false doctrine) of the wrath of her fornication.”

9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”

12 Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

Its all about choices.

The Liturgist said:

You frankly would have been closer to the mark if you had s/Paul/Luke (since Acts 15 is by far the biggest problem with the idea of pork consumption being forbidden,

Click to expand...

Paul never says anything about eating unclean meats that God deemed an abomination to Him.

Paul would never go against God leading people to their own destruction Isa66:17

Obviously Paul is being taken out of context. But you are free to believe as you wish and I guess we shall see how it works out, I know if we put God above everyone else, He only leads us back on the narrow path to reconciliation Rev22:14

Xeno.of.athens said:

What is a GWT?
Looking at what you posted I suppose a book and a chapter went astray, and you've merely put some verse numbers.

Did you meant to type: Matthew 5:17-19?

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 He therefore that shall break one of these least commandments, and shall so teach men shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. But he that shall do and teach, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Douay Rheims Bible)

Do you think that this passage makes the Law of Moses of perpetual obligation? If you do then how completely do you keep kosher, make sacrifices for sins, and observe the festivals and feast days of the Law of Moses? Or do you ignore some of those things? Do you implement the gleaning laws and sabbath years that the Law of Moses legislated? Remember not one jot nor one tittle (period or comma) will pass until all is fulfilled.

Somehow, I cannot take that line of reasoning seriously.

Click to expand...

xeno

I have a suggestion, there is a group, not a church, that I have found that has more truth then any of the 45,000 churches, only God's Church has more. I am not in total agreement but they understand much. They, as I, know the Torah and the Old T is the Word of God, it is the only Truth.

it is MESSIAH 2030, watch it let me know your thoughts

it is on youtube

Hentenza said:

No answer, just deflection. Typical.

Click to expand...

pointless post... again?

Christ's Bride said:

xeno

I have a suggestion, there is a group, not a church, that I have found that has more truth then any of the 45,000 churches, only God's Church has more. I am not in total agreement but they understand much. They, as I, know the Torah and the Old T is the Word of God, it is the only Truth.

it is MESSIAH 2030, watch it let me know your thoughts

it is on youtube

Click to expand...

That is a 2 hour video.. Do you have a synopsis?

Christ's Bride said:

GWT 17"Don't ever think that I came to set aside Moses' Teachings or the Prophets. I didn't come to set them aside but to make them come true.

18 I can guarantee this truth: Until the earth and the heavens disappear, neither a period nor a comma will disappear from Moses' Teachings before everything has come true.

19 So whoever sets aside any command that seems unimportant and teaches others to do the same will be unimportant in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever does and teaches what the commands say will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

I feel very confident in stating the earth and heavens have not disappeared.

verse 19, what is the one Commandment that is the most unimportant and the most hated?? Number 4

Click to expand...

Do you mean Matt 5?