Lewis
Member
- Aug 5, 2005
- 15,483
- 621
Some Christians do avoid the eating of pork because of the biblical laws mentioning this. The Seventh Day Adventist denomination is one which observes this practice. The majority of Christians believe that the laws do not apply to them and that this law, along with others, passed with the sacrifice of Christ.
Answer
The teaching to eat "unclean" exists because of a misunderstanding that has been passed down and is now "tradition." There is no change to the dietary law in the New Testament (NT).
Here is a list of the passages used to defend changing the dietary commands and you can easily see that this traditional teaching is not upheld from Scripture; it is the creation of man.
In Matthew 15:1-20, Jesus is discussing hand washing with Pharisees, not changing non-food into food. Verse 20 makes this clear.
However, men have inserted into many translations:
"(And thus Jesus declared all foods clean.)"
If you check with the original Greek, or even a King James Bible, you will not find this parenthetical clause. Therefore, this is the addition of men, not the instructions of God.
In Acts 10, Peter's vision was about MEN, not food. Jewish tradition was to not enter the home of a gentile because they and their home would be "unclean." The vision of the sheet with unclean items uses the same terminology that Peter uses in verse 28, proving this point:
28) "And he (Peter) said to them (gentiles), 'You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a man who is a Jew to associate with a foreigner or to visit him; and yet God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean.'"
The whole point of the vision was that gentiles were to be included in the covenant, not to change non-food to food.
1 Timothy 4:1-5 talks about eating what God created to be eaten, and that everything God created to be eaten was good.
The word "food" or "meat" in this passage is the Greek word broma which means:
broma, bro'-mah; food (lit. or fig.), espec. certain allowed or forbidden by the Jewish law. (Strong's definition, broma, #1033).
Paul's warning was that in the last days, teachings would arise that men should not eat what God calls clean, such as chicken or beef or fish, not to turn non-food into food.
Therefore, this passage is talking about eating what is allowed under the dietary commands and avoiding what is forbidden by them.
The bottom line is this: Christians are supposed to be Christlike. If Jesus did it, we do it. If He didn't we don't.
There is no record of Jesus or the disciples ever eating anything unclean. If the dietary commandments had been changed, don't you think God would have given at least ONE example of His Son eating something unclean as an example to us that we could?
Since no such example exists, then this is the teaching of men, not God.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_do_Christ ... _forbidden
Answer
The teaching to eat "unclean" exists because of a misunderstanding that has been passed down and is now "tradition." There is no change to the dietary law in the New Testament (NT).
Here is a list of the passages used to defend changing the dietary commands and you can easily see that this traditional teaching is not upheld from Scripture; it is the creation of man.
In Matthew 15:1-20, Jesus is discussing hand washing with Pharisees, not changing non-food into food. Verse 20 makes this clear.
However, men have inserted into many translations:
"(And thus Jesus declared all foods clean.)"
If you check with the original Greek, or even a King James Bible, you will not find this parenthetical clause. Therefore, this is the addition of men, not the instructions of God.
In Acts 10, Peter's vision was about MEN, not food. Jewish tradition was to not enter the home of a gentile because they and their home would be "unclean." The vision of the sheet with unclean items uses the same terminology that Peter uses in verse 28, proving this point:
28) "And he (Peter) said to them (gentiles), 'You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a man who is a Jew to associate with a foreigner or to visit him; and yet God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean.'"
The whole point of the vision was that gentiles were to be included in the covenant, not to change non-food to food.
1 Timothy 4:1-5 talks about eating what God created to be eaten, and that everything God created to be eaten was good.
The word "food" or "meat" in this passage is the Greek word broma which means:
broma, bro'-mah; food (lit. or fig.), espec. certain allowed or forbidden by the Jewish law. (Strong's definition, broma, #1033).
Paul's warning was that in the last days, teachings would arise that men should not eat what God calls clean, such as chicken or beef or fish, not to turn non-food into food.
Therefore, this passage is talking about eating what is allowed under the dietary commands and avoiding what is forbidden by them.
The bottom line is this: Christians are supposed to be Christlike. If Jesus did it, we do it. If He didn't we don't.
There is no record of Jesus or the disciples ever eating anything unclean. If the dietary commandments had been changed, don't you think God would have given at least ONE example of His Son eating something unclean as an example to us that we could?
Since no such example exists, then this is the teaching of men, not God.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_do_Christ ... _forbidden