Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It contains claims that need citation. Also I see incorrect conclusions. Like: "d. They teach poverty as a virtue and the highest form of spirituality. Rather then God wanting to prosper us "be Fruitful and Multiply". Be fruitful and multiply means to procreate, rather than to acquire wealth. What you concluded sounds like a prosperity movement claim.
No, it means to be fulfilled and become all that you were meant to be. That is what prosperity means. Wealth may be part of it but it's not all of it. A healthy balanced life is what God wants for us. But not poverty. Shows you don't understand what prosperity is according to the Scriptures.
Noah was allowed to eat anything that moved and so was everyone else between the time Noah landed the ark after the flood all the way up until God gave the dietary laws at Mt Sinai.
Not from the scriptures no, just several historical websites.
Lol if they cared at all about the Levitican laws they wouldn’t have been making sacrifices to idols to begin with.Somebody was eating those pigs, and in the chain of events from field to dinner table, there almost certainly had to be a marketplace involved. So there were unclean things in the marketplace, seems reasonable
Also, there were parts of clean animals that weren't to be eaten. So unless the gentiles were very careful to follow the rules in Leviticus, that was another way that there were unclean things at the market.
At the end of Leviticus 3
“‘It shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings, that you shall eat neither fat nor blood.’”
I hear that. And I agree that there's no Bible text that states that some things sold in the marketplace or offered to guests for dinner were unclean. But that makes a lot of sense to me, while going from a single incident where a pagan priest offers oxen to the conclusion that the gentiles were only sacrificing clean animals in a clean way, doesn't make sense to me.
Not so, Noah was instructed to take 7 clean animals per kind and 2 unclean per kind, so obviously there were animals that are clean to eat and those that are unclean. The scripture you’re missing is where it says unclean foods are now deemed for eating. There is never in scripture that says once God deemed foods unclean and an abomination that He later said were clean.
Yes it’s a blatant misuse of the scriptures. That verse in Acts 14 was only intended to record that specific event not to formulate a doctrine on how pagans performed sacrifices to idols.
Let me explain it AGAIN. Genesis was written by Moses who knew the difference between clean and unclean animals. So it’s not entirely implausible that God told Moses that He told Noah to bring 7 of each clean animal instead of listing each animal that Noah was to bring 7 of. God could’ve very well told Noah bring 7 sheep, bring 7 oxen, bring 7 goats, bring 7 cows, bring 7 deer, etc, etc, etc, etc, and Instead of going thru the entire list that He gave Noah it was just much simpler to say that He told Noah to bring 7 of each of the clean animals. The fact is that Noah was told that he could eat ANYTHING THAT MOVED. PERIOD, there were no stipulations other than he could not eat it with its blood. Why would God include that one stipulation and not the rest of the dietary law stipulations?
You don’t have to explain and I know who Genesis was written by, but appreciate the information. We have to look at context, it does not say anything that moved that is unclean. Noah knew what was clean versus unclean and God made that abundantly clear. If you don’t want to head the warning in scripture that’s your choice, but considering what’s at risk, not something I am comfortable with, there is an abundance of good, clean foods to eat that God gave us, God is good. Peter knew which foods were unclean and this is long after the cross Acts 10:14 so nothing changed and God gives His people warnings in hopes we will believe and listen, but sadly not everyone does Isaiah 66:17
Is anybody going to comment on this or did I do such a good job that no one can challenge this? Pavel???? Anyone.
Well, the first place we might not be seeing things the same way is that when Peter is given the keys to the kingdom, Jesus also says that he will build his church and the Gates of hell will not prevail against it. But... If the church as a whole became corrupted, then it looks to me very much like the gates of hell did prevail.
You mean the foods that God told Peter to eat in Acts 10? Now I know that vision was about entering the house of a gentile. But along with that would be the foods that Cornelius and other gentiles would be serving. Remember it's not just the animal itself that's clean or unclean, but all the stipulations regarding the preparation, that if not followed make even clean animals unclean. So it seems highly likely Peter was being served and eating unclean animal flesh according to Levitical law - after Peter was told, “Do not call anything unclean that God has made clean.” Acts 10:15
That is a terrible translation. Soaked is not implied. It is misleading. And the verse needs to be understood within the context of the passages in which it is in. With that said, what kind of water Leaf?
Well all of the church except for the latter day remnant that obeyed God by keeping the sabbath (Revelation 12:17).
