Horus is ready to discredit the Christian faith again, this time armed with some devastating information courtesy of your 19 year old atheist cousin's blog.
inkdragon155 The idea that Jesus was a pagan copy cat food was the brain child of Liberal Theologians and Liberal new Testament scholarship in Germany.
I really like that spiel at the end. Seriously, this faith has been around for 2000 years. There are people who dedicate their life to understanding this stuff. You can't make presumptions about the depths of a Christian argument. Yeah, there are Christians who don't spend much time understanding their faith. It's easy to go toe-to-toe with them. Try going up against St. Augustine, or anyone who substantially developed the canon of Christian theology. It's a different story. There are entire libraries on the faith for a reason.
Yeah, that's what great about the Councils and Patristics. You can see arguments made by people who actually studied theology, and were some of the most brilliant thinkers of their day. It can get pretty amazing.
Yup. The old "cherry-picking Leviticus" argument is a classic example of a composition/division fallacy, wherein it is assumed that one part of something has to be applied to all, or other parts of it.
I’ve been studying apologetics for 2 years and this video resumed and taught the law better than all the books I’ve read on the subject. PS I’m a messianic Christian so that should hint people how accurate this video is! Nice! 👍
"Okay, Patrick, tell us about yourself." "Yeah, Patrick, we're sociable folks." "Vat do you mean 'Patrick'? I am Horus, ze Egyptian god of ze sun. Vhy you so dense?"
Wish list for Easter, 2017: Horus doing a bit on how Easter is really a knock-off of Ishtar, the Babylonian fertility goddess. "How 'bout it, preacher mannn?"
Listening to a German effeminate for 5 minutes makes me wish Mike Myers had done a Dieter movie (from "Sprockets") instead of a Wayne's World movie, amirite?
Listening to a German effeminate for 5 minutes makes me wish Mike Myers had done a Dieter movie (from "Sprockets") instead of a Wayne's World movie, amirite?
You have no idea how many times I've shared this video with people online. It's incredibly helpful, thank you SO MUCH for collapsing all this information into a helpful video!
Laws that distinguish Israel as a nation are no longer applicable. Ceremonial laws are these laws-circumcision, food laws, clothing laws. These laws are clearly meant to define Israelite culture and distinguish them from the pagans. Civil laws are laws dealing with the political life of Israel- so penalties for crime, rules for the monarchy. Moral laws are reaffirmed as still binding today (do not steal, do not kill, don't me a moron, etc). These are binding for everyone, not just Israel as a nation.
Deuteronomy 13 is part of the civil law-Israel's life as a political body. Under the old covenant, Israel acted as the instrument of God's wrath on the Canaanite nation. Because the church is not a political body, and because this applied to Israel only with respect to the Canaanites only, it is not applicable. Israel's role under the old covenant was fulfilled when the Messiah came-thus the purpose of the Old covenant was fulfilled, and no longer applies.
PASTOR: "That is the worst song I have ever heard." HORUS: "So says the preacher-man who just led his congregation in singing 'Forgive us, Lord, for shallow thankfulness.'" PASTOR: "Okay, that's the second worst song I've ever heard." 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Transformers own Gobots. *Literally*. Hasbro owns Gobots. While the original toy molds still belong to other companies (like Transformers first few waves, the molds were all from other toy lines) and (sadly) the animation rights to the Gobots cartoon, the rest belongs to Hasbro/Takara... though because of complications, they are very careful when using new molds to represent Gobot characters. It does get complicated due to a combination of strange IP laws and the concern to avoid lawsuits (even unfounded ones).
Thank you kindly for making this video. While I am generally Bible-Literate, my knowledge doesn't expand much outside the Gospels, the Letters of Paul, Genesis, Exodus, and the Prophets (Give me a break, I'm only 15). I've seen SO many people argue about how we Christians cherry-pick the Bible because we exclude what I NOW know to be the Ceremonial Law, and I've never been able to counter their statements very well. Once again, thanks.
The Bible does manifest a separation btwn moral laws which deal with basic human behavior, which are universally applicable to all peoples at all times from the time there were given (adultery is sin in any culture), as well as culturally applied codes which are based on the moral law (though shalt not murder=innocent live is sacred =build a fence around your [flat] roof [Dt. 22:8]) as well as ceremonial laws. The NT clearly makes a distinction btwn transcendent moral laws, reiteration 9 out of the 10 commandments for instance, and that of typological ceremonial laws under the prophesied (Jer. 31:31-34) new covenant, which related to diet, liturgical days, and temple ordinances (pork and Gentiles were unsanctified, illustrating what sin does). Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (Hebrews 9:10) Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. (Colossians 2:16-17) But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? (Galatians 4:9) However, the moral laws are reinforced and magnified, so that adultery is not simply the act, but lusting after another man's wife. And a true believer is one whose saving faith effects characteristic obedience to Christ, including repentance when convicted of not doing so. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. (John 10:27-28)
Slavery was permissible in the fallen world but not wanted. He made laws concerning slavery, as they were to do it; it was not desirable but permissable in the fallen world. Note it's not chattel slavery but mostly bond servants.
***** That perspective is not biblical. Slavery was not only permissible, but god explicitly commanded it. Read Deut. 20. God commanded his followers to kill entire people groups for the simple reason that they did not worship him, unless they surrender without a fight. "[T]hen all the people who are found in it shall become your forced labor and shall serve you."
Sorry for not seeing this, but "kill entire people groups for the simple reason that they did not worship him" is not true, as well as exhibiting a very superficial understanding of why idolatry is wrong. God actually never destroyed kill entire people groups simply bcz they did not worship him, but because of the effects of that idolatry, which was gross long term iniquity, contrary to what they had known to be true. "for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: (Leviticus 18:24) The Bible actually shows relatively moral pagans in a relatively good light (though all are sinners in need of salvation).. I dare say that if idolatry required and produced the holiness that true worship of God does then God would be for it. However, what you worship will order your life, and created things will fail or mislead us, while only God is perfect and never able to fail you, thus it is only right and best for man that God calls all men to repent and worship Him. And enables us to do thru His own Divine Son, the risen Lord Jesus!.
You perfectly summed up the large portion of what I encounter regularly. They love to quote the Old Testament, but fail to even understand the exegesis of Old Testament scripture, let along the hermeneutics. Also they take the liberty of trying to quote Narrative History as though every single verse is a moral principle and everything people in the old testament did was things we should. It's laughable.
Great work. Very informative and entertaining, both at a time. Thanks to the LORD for enabling the spirit filled knowledge in Hans Fiene and Mathew Carver. You guys rock. I will share this among my friends and I will pray for you guys. Let the videos rolling
Gracenotes Novel I guess this is a bad time to mention that I too own a dachshund :3 Swear I haven't eaten him though. He would give me a heart attack with all his blubber.
Well done, Pastor! That was a great review of ceremonial and moral laws. The better the teaching, it seems, the more furious the frenzy of outrageous statements in the comments, which is a little sad because one or two honest questions just got buried in recycled horse fodder.
This is great, as someone who just finished Leviticus I was wondering how the cerimonial laws and moral laws applied to different things. This sums it up nicely.
Katie Malbraaten Way to go Katie! It seems like a long boring slog through Leviticus (though there are some fascinating nuggets), but it really helps in the New Testament when Jesus and the Pharisees start arguing law and gospel!
I've never heard this concept before. Thank you for explaining it. I mean, the whole notion of abandoning even part of the Mosaic code still rubs me the wrong way (which is part of why I'm Jewish and not Christian), but at least I now know that Christianity has a consistent reasoning on the subject.
It's one of several fairly carefully-reasoned interpretations -- and probably the most common. Remember (as you know, I'm sure!) that the first Christian theologians were either predominantly Jews (some of them highly-educated pharisees!), or trained by highly-educated Jews. :) And I agree, very well laid out!
It's a fantastic articulation of the best argument for eating unclean meat. I love this channel. But it still applies Peter's vision literally when Scripture applies it figuratively. So it's at least partly wrong, but oh so well articulated.
Beautifully summarised. It took me a couple of years to reach that conclusion of trying to reconcile Jesus' moral law (a fulfillment of the ten commandments) with Leviticus.
I can't get over the fact that Horus is speaking in a totally German accent, even going so far as to use 'und' in place of 'and'. This series really is hilarious.
@GG GG No because young adults, even teenagers are being told to accept society's fickle decisions of "right and wrong" and not to carefully examine why something is considered right and wrong and why it is ultimately right or wrong?
Has anyone tried looking that website up? I tried, once, and got nothing, but I may have also scuffed something in the german accent. Great work! I WILL use this whenever someone asks!
I have just recently found this channel and I absolutely love it! The Horus videos included. But there is just one thing that erks me every time that is just a small detail but, Horus is not the Egyptian god of the sun...that is Ra.
Is it also part of the joke that Exodus 19 is used to define ceremonial law, but actually describe the 10 commandments, which are labeled moral law in this video?
GoBots better than Transfomers? You must be shrooming! Awesome content, by the way! Thanks for the laughs, and bringing a whole lot of information to light!
How I wish! Donnel: Okay, Patrick. Tell us a bit about yourself. Connel: Yeah, Patrick. We're sociable folks. Horus: Vhy did you just call me "Patrick"? Zat is not my name. I am Horus, ze Egyptian god of ze sun, and you really ought to vorship ME. Donnel: And why would be wantin' to do that, Patrick? Connel: Yeah, Patrick. Do be kind as to fill us in on that.
I love how the preacher man talks to Horus like he wants him to be saved. Am I the only one who wishes there could be some kind of moving conversion video? I get that that is completely impossible with Biblical theology, but you can hear the preacher wanting Horus to get saved, at least from my perspective.
Would it be better to describe this as "Natural Law" and not "moral law?" I say this because people like to say that the Law of Moses is split between the moral, civil, and ceremonial laws, the latter two of which no longer apply. Whereas, Christ fulfilled ALL of the Law of Moses, not just the civil and ceremonial portions, we Christians are freed from those things. But God's Natural Law remains, the law written upon our hearts, and yes, explained in the Old Testament, although the Law of Moses is not a summation of Natural Law. Thoughts? Thank you.
So basically; A = {Moral Law} B = {Ceremonial Law} C= {All requirements pre-messiah} D= {All the required law post-messianic sacrifice} C = AUB D = A - A’ Or in word form: The only law we’re required to follow is the Moral Law (which includes some parts of the Ceremonial Law) and no other law is equal to that of the moral law. Edit: Wow, I suck at Set Notation.
There's actually a lot of debate on the clean food thing. I'm not going to weigh in because I'm sort of afraid I might end up preaching a false gospel.
I really enjoy your work, but where do you get this Moral Law/Ceremonial Law dualism from? Other Christians have said the same thing to me, but I have yet to see where in the Bible this is explained. I am a Christian, I don't eat pork or shellfish (G-d called it an abomination), and I am sabbatarian. I don't boast about it, because it's not hard (Moses said so), but primarily because my salvation comes through Jesus Christ who took the penalty for when I had failed to keep G-d's commandments.
jred7 Jesus is our Sabbath, "I will give you rest." The Sabbath is not a day, the day appointed in the Law looked forward to Jesus. Also, on what day did Jesus rest from His work of salvation? On the Sabbath. Therefore, Jesus fulfills the Sabbath. The work is done.
+nathanyamaha465 That's a pretty big leap you took there. Only wish it was clearly outlined in the bible instead of what is basically "connect the dots" thinking akin to conspiracy theory.....
ShouVertica I concur. nathanyamaha465 see Exodus 31:12-14 and Exodus 20:8-11. If Jesus changed this, He would not be G-d, since He would be contradicting G-d, and He certainly would not be the Messiah.
bill I'm more upset that had jesus simply instructed *simple* sanitary procedures/precautions, *billions* of lives could have been saved and our society could have been hundreds of years in the future.
all I want for Christmas is more of your videos.....well and peace on earth....I can't even spell apolagetticks...it is really a blessing to send someone to your channel for an explanation of some doctrinal question....Sometimes instead, I just yell at em while shouting Matt 10:14 .. ..Thank you!!!...fantastic stuff...this is one of your gifts...
The idea that Jesus is just a copy of Horus (if you have watched the original Horus video on this channel: 'Horus ruins Christmas'), originally stems from liberal theologians in Germany in the 1800s. So I'm guessing it's a reference to that.
Ohhh cool, that makes sense. :) Yep I've watched the other Horus video (along with most of the videos on this channel) - I'm pretty sure Horus and the unfazed pastor are my favourite Lutheran Satire characters. :D
Matthew 5:18-20 - Jesus himself said you cannot ignore the least of the laws. He's talking about Mosaic law. Matthew was an Ebionite text written in response to Paul's Gentile/gnostic theology
+Liv Jackson Probably because it would be considered "racist" if he tried to do an Egyptian accent... And because German accents are the funniest accents.
Nothing, as long as they remain chaste. But then that's not what you meant by a homosexual relationship, now is it? You meant a relationship that included sodomy and fellatio and a whole bunch of other degrading sexual acts didn't you?
dlwatib My best conclusion is that homosexuality is a perversion of God intended of sex and marriage. God made these to be a very special union between man and woman. Then we go and mess it up and God gets annoyed. Kind of like throwing a football through a basketball hoop. It just wasn't made for that purpose. No, being gay doesn't hurt anyone, but that's the secular argument for it. Being religious and wanting something that God wants for the sole reason that God is awesome is a whole separate argument entirely.
The vision given to Peter is not about food at all. Peter never does “rise, kill and eat,” and Peter himself explains what the vision is about when he says that God has shown him to not call any man unclean. It was a vision about bringing the gospel to the Gentiles without making them Jews. The laws about which food was clean or unclean are not ceremonial. They don’t point to Christ. They are health laws and apply to Christians today. Animals like pigs are scavengers and very unhealthy. God is trying to keep our bodies healthy so that we can serve Him blameless with body and spirit (1 Thess. 5:23). That’s why praying over your food doesn’t stop you from being overweight, having heart conditions, and becoming diabetic. God expects us to follow His natural laws as well as His moral ones.
That is nothing but rationalizing the cherry picking. Tell me who decides which laws are ceremonial laws and which are moral laws? The Bible doesn't make the distinction, instead they are "interpreted".
Have you done your research on the moral law - ceremonial law distinction to say that it's cherry picking? Or do you just feel that way? Sounds to me as if you're acting like this cartoon is the first to introduce this idea.
@@GermanFreakvb21 2 Timothy 3:16 _"All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right."_
@@user255 Yes. So? ALL scripture is inspired, which is why you have to look at all passages in context and in relation to each other. It also helps to look at how Christians understood them throughout the ages. And then you see in Acts 10: "Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common." Jesus uses the same wording himself. He also worked on the sabbath and he let his disciples gather corn on the sabbath. This coupled with the fact that Christ himself told us that he came not to abolish the law but to fulfil it. What does "fulfilment of the law" mean? Does it mean that the law is gone? No. Paul states that we are still under the law These different points have historically been put into context and were logically explained by christian to mean that the moral law is still active, but the ceremonial law isn´t as such. Sometimes the ceremonial law is described as the mosaic covenant. Circumcision, the priesthood of Aaron, the sacrifices, Sabbath, dietary laws. All of these were part of the mosaic covenant. The moral law has always been true. God instituted it in the beginning of time. The ceremonial law he instituted with Abraham regarding Circumcison and with Moses regarding the rest. Now at the evening before his crucifiction he took the cup and told his disciples "Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." What is another word for "testament"? It´s "covenant". Christ´s establishment of the twelve disciples, his establishment of a new covenant, his establishment of baptism to replace circumcision, his sacrifice to replace the sacrificial lamb of the old covenant. All of Christ´s doing was the fulfillment of the law and the replacement of the old covenant with a new one. A new priesthood, even new believers. Now any believer is baptised into God´s family. There is neither jew nor gentile. I think the Bible and Christian history makes no sense without the distinction of moral and ceremonial law.
@@GermanFreakvb21 Yes, there are contradictions like that. Show me where in the Bible there is distinction made between ceremonial law and moral law. I understand that is your attempt to make sense to it, but it is not there.
Frank, since it seems so very obvious to you that the defense of the Christian faith is merely for condoning alleged "hate" from Christianity, please tell me, where is there *any* sign of encouragement or empowerment to hate, whether from Christ or any of the apostles? There is literally none whatsoever; you will find no "hate" being preached from Christ, nor the early Church. And to assume that a moral stance against a behavior implies "hate" is fallacious, dishonest and unfair. Christians are commanded (no matter how much we suck at carrying it out), due to Christ's mercy and love expressed toward us, to "love thy neighbor as ourselves" (Mark 12), "to love and pray for our enemies" (Matt. 5), and much more along those lines, which you will find consistently taught by Christ and His apostles through the scriptures. Even with those who actively live in sin against God, or sin against us, God warns us about taking justice into our own hands (e.g. Romans 12, Leviticus 19), because He is the Judge. Thus, even as we talk of what God views as sinful, we are not to condemn anyone for their sin, for we'd have to condemn ourselves first (we aren't any more perfect) - but that does not mean we aren't also responsible to hold each other accountable within the Church (e.g. Matt. 7:1-5). Christ certainly did not ignore the sin of sinners...indeed He acknowledged the sin, but He chose not to condemn, but to forgive (e.g. John 8:1-11). The Church is called to do the same, and leave the judgement to God.
Oh my now surely after listening to this marvellous and enlighten video all homosexuals will magically mutate and become heterosexual no matter the fact that a homosexual person naturally doesn't feel any attraction or sexual drive to a person of the other sex and is so since birth the pastor told them so!
I get that this is an old comment, but the Catholic catechism covers this. (2358) The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition. (2359) Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
@@strider7557 Yes pal I know the tune of it already heard that nice little bit of sophistry... A virtue is not a virtue if it's forced on someone... If a man is forced unto chastity because every other option would lead to punishment that isn't a virtuous choice, that isn't a choice at all, that is compelment under threat because you are giving the person no other real option. God doesn't make mistakes my little dearies but you were made to have the wrong version of love, what? Free will to experience love and affection for a partner? no... The Big Guy decided that free will wasn't an option here guess he decided you were essentially going a monk 👌 Thank you big man always a pal "Give bread to the child or I shoot you" isn't charity... Not exactly convincing
5:11-5:41 Ouch. As a Catholic, I commend you for finding a new method to talk about your Faith. I have laughed my head off with these videos, especially the Conall and Donall videos. Keep up the great work!
