Dietary Laws

[whitestone]

OK, I'll bite, so to speak. I believe John 8:32 had it correct when he said that even Peter, who walked with Jesus was still, at times, sucked into the Jewish thought of the day that Gentiles were unclean and they had man-made laws prohibiting them from associating with so called "unclean' believers. This was the type of behaviour that Paul was so opposed to throughout his Epistles was the exclusion of Gentile believers into the greater Commonwealth of Israel. Even one who walked with the Messiah made mistakes, and Paul was correct to point that out.

Now if Peter walked, talked, prayed, and learned from Jesus, why could he not grasp a simple dietary exception in Mark 7:14-23? I submit that there never was any dietary changes. In Mark 7:19 in brackets (thus he declared all foods clean) was a man made addition into scripture that was never there in the Septuagint that you will only find in certain translations. You have to understand that this was kosher paradise they were living in, and if Jesus declared the dietary laws were done away with, he would have been called a blasphemer, false prophet and the Pharisees would have had credible grounds to try him. This parable is so clearly about the tongue defiling a person and what comes out of it as being evil, as well against the man made traditions of hand washing (ritually pure to be able to eat if you can believe that) of which Jesus so clearly opposes to when it was in contradiction to his commandments and the Word of God.

Mark 7:14-23 is no more about dietary laws as Mark 4:1-8 is about farming methods:
Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water’s edge. 2 He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said: 3 “Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8 Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, some multiplying thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times.â€

In both parables, afterwards he told the disciples the real meaning of the parable and explained it to them. In Mark 7:20-23 he explained it as greed, lewdness, slander, arrogance, etc as one making one unclean, nothing even remotely suggests it was bald eagle being on the menu as that wasn't the context of what Jesus was talking about. Similarly in Mark 4:13:20 Jesus even criticises the disciples for not knowing that the parable was about the conditions for those receiving the Word of God. Not about agricultural methods.

Last word, "foods" as taught in the Bible clearly meant food that God has given permission for us to eat. Unless one can point an example to me, "food" in the Bible are those defined in the dietary laws in Leviticus. That was their definition of what food was. That's why Peter was so disgusted by that vision, because he would never have considered non-permissible animals as being something to eat. It was abhorent to him, unthinkable, detestable. And later in Acts 10:28 he made it clear that the vision wasn't a dietary change, it was one of calling Gentiles clean He said to them: “You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with or visit a Gentile. But God has shown me that I should not call anyone impure or unclean," and further reinforced in Acts 10:34-36 "Then Peter began to speak: “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism 35 but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right."

Very well thought out and stated. It had nothing to do with legitimizing unclean food to consume.

 

[felix]

I submit that there never was any dietary changes. In Mark 7:19 in brackets (thus he declared all foods clean) was a man made addition into scripture that was never there in the Septuagint that you will only find in certain translations. You have to understand that this was kosher paradise they were living in, and if Jesus declared the dietary laws were done away with, he would have been called a blasphemer, false prophet and the Pharisees would have had credible grounds to try him

Neither does sermon on the mount (below) is in Scripture including Septuagint and Masoretic manuscripts.

• Matt 5:20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds [the] [righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
• Matt 5:22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire.
• Matt 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
• Matt 5:32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.
• Matt 5:34 But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne;
• Matt 5:44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you

Is Jesus a false prophet because He spoke things not in Scripture? Please note that Christ is the authority NOT Scripture. Scripture gets its authority only because it gives witness to Christ.

 

[rstrats]

whitestone,

re: "It had nothing to do with legitimizing unclean food to consume"

Just a suggestion, but in the future you might want to consider saying "unclean animals" inplace of "unclean food". I'm not aware of scripture ever referring to unclean animals as food.

 

[eddif]

I went through and cut down the size of some posts. There was much that I left out that was good, but I was trying to cut down on the size to make just a few points. If I missed someone (I am sure I did) I am sorry.

Acts 10 is often used as support for the teaching that the Levitical dietary laws are no longer in force. However, those who say that they ARE still in force argue that if they had been done away with, why didn’t Peter, who walked with and was taught by the Messiah for 3 plus years, and who was filled and guided by the Holy Spirit, know about it some 10 years later?

This sounds like a reasonable question. However, using the same reasoning, one might also legitimately ask why he didn’t know that it was ok to “keep company with or go to one of another nation�

Does anyone who believes that the dietary regulations are still in effect have any thoughts on why Peter didn’t know about the “keeping company†part of Acts 10?

Many of the posters are on the way to answering the question, and in one sense I am just going to say some things a different way.

The parables are IMHO using the physical (creation, human, behavior,etc) to contain spiritual truths but not reveal it to the multitudes. His disciples even struggled with the parables.

The old testament was basically the same situation as parables. The law was mostly physical outward symbols of a much deeper / higher truth. For instance: Jesus is the ultimate sacrafice that takes away the sins of the world (permanently).

Symbols exist, but they may not be the real ultimate truth trying to be revealed. God spoke secrets: in creation, in the law, by the prophets and by Jesus (who fullfilled the rest)

The NT takes the OT information and tells what the spiritual reality is for a lot of the things. It is still hidden in one sense, but we are to seek and understand.

Matthew 4:4
4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

So the Law (not always) usually dealt with the bread and method of preperation.

We have the principle of keeping a physical body alive in the Law, but we have the Word become flesh Jesus keeping a spirit alive for eternity. So this is what whitestone covers below.
+++++++++++++++++
Peter is just Peter. We all sin and fall short of the glory of God. Peter does not become lost he just does as we alll sometimes do. Some of his Jewish friends were convinced that the gentiles needed to be circumcised and follow the law of Moses. So although Peter had the vision and experience of dealing with the Gentiles, he fell away from felowship with gentiles, due to the friends influence. We all today find it hard to keep the faith reaveled to us. We get around folks that tend to get us out of faith and into works, sin, false teaching, etc (do not scream too loud anyone).

Leviticus 11:7 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.

Deuteronomy 14:8 And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase.

​

The message on the surface is to not consume the literal flesh which I assume was because they were created to clean the world of pollutants. When we consume them we then take in their poisons. Hence physical problems may arise. Perhaps years of taking in these "unclean" foods leads to arthritis, alzheimers, etc. The elderly diseases???

The deeper message is the swine, mouse, etc. are symbolic of spiritually unclean people...we shouldn't consume their teaching, their thoughts, their lifestyle. We can receive them "with Thanksgiving" if we "believe and know the TRUTH" for we can teach them but we cannot allow them to teach us.


Just as literal swine, shellfish, etc. are very tasty....so are the teachings of figurative swine. They tickle our ears but lead to death.

Good post. The preachers we listen too should not live in the pigpen and teach false doctrine. We all sin but we should try and take the principles of the law and spiritually see what the lesson is.

The clean animals chewed the cud. We should go over and over and over the Word of God till we extract the truth. A pastor / teacher who does not continually go over the word may not break it down correctly LOL. He will go with the first idea and not continue on working with the passage.
+++++++++++++++

Cooking two beans in a pot IMHO is trying to mix too many different thoughts at one time. I am for the Gentiles being without the law, but it does say that the Gentiles have the law written on their hearts.
+++++++++++++++

There is no reason to believe it has "nothing to do with 'food' that should or should not be consumed." Why would God use unclean food, telling Peter that "What God has made clean, do not call common," if such food was still unclean? That would make no sense. Rather, we see Jesus say something of importance here:

Mar 7:14 And he called the people to him again and said to them, "Hear me, all of you, and understand:
Mar 7:15 There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him."
Mar 7:16 [If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.]
Mar 7:17 And when he had entered the house and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable.
Mar 7:18 And he said to them, "Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him,
Mar 7:19 since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?" (Thus he declared all foods clean.)
Mar 7:20 And he said, "What comes out of a person is what defiles him.
Mar 7:21 For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery,
Mar 7:22 coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.
Mar 7:23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person." (ESV)

Jesus had already "declared all foods clean." Thus, when Peter is shown the sheet of food and told to "not call common" what "God has made clean," it is true and makes sense. That it seems Peter had not yet understood or fully understood what Jesus had said does not determine the truth of the matter.

But really, Paul's continual statements that the Law is no longer in force does away with any notion that anyone, never mind Christians, are still to abide by dietary restrictions as given in the Law.

Some have not come to the point of understanding what has happened.

I would agree in most points. There is a difference in: strictly old testament; transition period with Jesus teaching; and the final time when you do not need seasons to decide when to eat or plant spiritual truth.

You did a good job of not calling declared clean foods common. If a person does not see the spiritual side of the law yet, you sometimes have to keep on teaching and let God give the growth (I tend to want to stuff it down throats, and that does not work).

Matt 5:17-19 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches [them,] he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Which Commandments?

1. Matt 5:20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds [the] [righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
   
   Can you please refer me where in the Moses law, "these commandments" mentioned above are found. Christ is not speaking about the law of Moses but His Law which He speaks out according to the New Covenant.
   
   Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man." ... So Jesus said, "Are you also still without understanding? Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is eliminated? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. These are [the things] which defile a man ... (Matt 15:11-20a).

1. 
   
   We sure have to exceed the rightousness under the law. Thank you Jesus for what you did to become the Word and pay the price demanded by the law.
   ++++++++++++
   Let us all:
   chew the cud
   part the hoof
   not cook more than one bean in the pot (I think I blew that with this post)
   
   eddif

 

[Ryan]

I guess the larger question and this is for all to decide based on their interpretation of scripture is whether the Torah/Law is still in effect. I for one am in that boat and have been working (sometimes successfully, sometimes not) on living a Torah observant lifestyle for over the last half a year. The dietary laws was one of the first things I started to change about myself. People asked why are you doing this, that's stupid, yadda yadda yadda. I have found information that it was a health thing and better diet for a person. I don't necessarily buy that. Another thing was sanitation of the meat and trichtyosomethingoranother in pork, but chicken has salmonella and cow can have ecoli. Another theory was the "Circle of Willis" and slaughtering a kosher animal was more humane due to the structure of different animals and their anatomy. That has some merit to it. But the bottom line for me, is I just want to be obedient to God.

God wants to be involved in every aspect of our life, and our diet is one of them. When I go to the grocery store, I have made a habit of looking at whether it is Kosher or not. This is a reminder to me, even being at the grocery store, that I am living my life to the Lord and based on what he wants me to do. Just the practice of scrupulously looking at ingredients is also teaching me another invaluable habit of constantly testing and evaluating if something is suitable for me to partake in, such as, movies, TV shows, friendships, etc. As well it's teaching my kids the same habits, but also their evaluation of behaviours, friendships, or choosing a mate based on biblical standards. I have a hard time and will never believe that once what God said (who we know Jesus is God), is to be detestable for us, has now changed his mind and foods permissible to eat. That would fly smack dab in the face of Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever." If he changed the rule book, how can I possibly ever trust him?

 

[Ryan]

Neither does sermon on the mount (below) is in Scripture including Septuagint and Masoretic manuscripts.

• Matt 5:20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds [the] [righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
• Matt 5:22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire.
• Matt 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
• Matt 5:32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.
• Matt 5:34 But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne;
• Matt 5:44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you

Is Jesus a false prophet because He spoke things not in Scripture? Please note that Christ is the authority NOT Scripture. Scripture gets its authority only because it gives witness to Christ.

My bad, I mis-worded or misrepresented what I wrote. My assertion is yes, there have been additions to scripture from when Genesis - Deuteronomy was written through to Revelations. I was meaning the rule of thumb when interpreting scripture is a later verse in the Bible, cannot contradict an earlier scripture. If it does there are two things wrong. 1. Poor translations or 2. misinterpretations. Yes scripture has been added on, but there has never been any additions or deletions to the commandments of God as stated in the Torah/Law (Genesis-Deuteronomy). Everything after the fact is commentary, prophecy or further commentary and explanations or interpretations of the Law. The Word of God will never contradict itself from an earlier commandment.


What Jesus was explaining above was an explanation of the Laws he had given to Moses. Yes, Scripture was added on, but it wasn't in contradiction of any earlier commandments he had given earlier. To do so would have been blasphemous. Hope that helps understanding where I was coming from.

 

[rstrats]

Delete

 

[felix]

What Jesus was explaining above was an explanation of the Laws he had given to Moses. Yes, Scripture was added on, but it wasn't in contradiction of any earlier commandments he had given earlier. To do so would have been blasphemous. Hope that helps understanding where I was coming from.

Not so true. Jesus created a new covenant using His own blood who became the High Priest for us to intercede with God who is at the right hand of God.

The law is the old covenant. If He just added to the old covenant, why are you not sacrificing lambs today? Why are you not coming before the temple thrice and why are you not giving tithe to a levite today? why are you not keeping the Sabbath and why are you not following the feasts? If you being a Gentile, a dog (as referred by Christ Himself), how can you even become an Israelite to inherit the promises?

Because, we are no longer under the old covenant but the new covenant where gentiles are also included, all are equal "in Christ" which is not specific to Jews anymore. The old covenant does not include gentiles. So, unless you are a Jew, even if you follow the old covenant, it is useless for none of the promises are for you nor you inherit anything.

 

[Shannon H]

originally posted by ryan :

"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever." If he changed the rule book, how can I possibly ever trust him?

Heb 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. Well here is one example of the "rule book" being changed. Also Hebrews 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: 9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. Again, After the flood God made a Covenant with Noah, ALL animals were to be for meat (genesis 9:3), They were OK to eat then, and they are Ok to eat now, If of course received with thanksgiving to God, The dietary laws were given to the Jews under the law, as Christians we are not under the mosaic law. If you place yourself under the law you must keep ALL of it. Gal 4:21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace

 

[Deborah13]

Indeed and yet we, as children of God, are held to a different standard.....

Deuteronomy 14:2 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto Himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.

26:18 And the LORD hath avouched thee this day to be His peculiar people, as He hath promised thee, and that thou shouldest keep all His commandments;


​

Were the restrictions given to punish us? No, rather to protect us so that it would be "well with thee," to keep us healthy.....

4:40 Thou shalt keep therefore His statutes, and His commandments, which I command thee this day, that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days upon the earth, which the LORD thy God giveth thee, for ever.

​

Are the laws still in effect? If "for ever" means just that then that is further substantiated by Jesus.....

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.​

Nope the law is the law and it does not change. Why should it? However, I am not bound to the law of Moses anymore than any other NT believer is and Gentiles were never bound to the law of Moses.
​

 

[Ryan]

Not so true. Jesus created a new covenant using His own blood who became the High Priest for us to intercede with God who is at the right hand of God.

The law is the old covenant. If He just added to the old covenant, why are you not sacrificing lambs today? Why are you not coming before the temple thrice and why are you not giving tithe to a levite today? why are you not keeping the Sabbath and why are you not following the feasts? If you being a Gentile, a dog (as referred by Christ Himself), how can you even become an Israelite to inherit the promises?

Because, we are no longer under the old covenant but the new covenant where gentiles are also included, all are equal "in Christ" which is not specific to Jews anymore. The old covenant does not include gentiles. So, unless you are a Jew, even if you follow the old covenant, it is useless for none of the promises are for you nor you inherit anything.

Leviticus 17:8 "Then you shall say to them, ‘Any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who offers a burnt offering or sacrifice,

Leviticus 24:22 "There shall be one standard for you; it shall be for the stranger as well as the native, for I am the Lord your God."

Numbers 9:14 "If an alien sojourns among you and observes the Passover to the Lord, according to the statute of the Passover and according to its ordinance, so he shall do; you shall have one statute, both for the alien and for the native of the land."

Deuteronomy 31:11-12 "when all Israel comes to appear before the Lord your God at the place which He will choose, you shall read this law in front of all Israel in their hearing. 12 Assemble the people, the men and the women and children and the alien who is in your town, so that they may hear and learn and fear the Lord your God, and be careful to observe all the words of this law

I just posted this here earlier on another thread.

 

[felix]

Leviticus 17:8 "Then you shall say to them, ‘Any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who offers a burnt offering or sacrifice,

Leviticus 24:22 "There shall be one standard for you; it shall be for the stranger as well as the native, for I am the Lord your God."

Numbers 9:14 "If an alien sojourns among you and observes the Passover to the Lord, according to the statute of the Passover and according to its ordinance, so he shall do; you shall have one statute, both for the alien and for the native of the land."

Deuteronomy 31:11-12 "when all Israel comes to appear before the Lord your God at the place which He will choose, you shall read this law in front of all Israel in their hearing. 12 Assemble the people, the men and the women and children and the alien who is in your town, so that they may hear and learn and fear the Lord your God, and be careful to observe all the words of this law

I just posted this here earlier on another thread.

These laws are for aliens who are in the promised land of Israel given to Jews where an alien cannot own any land permanently nor do they have any inheritance with the Jews.

So, what is you point in quoting these verses?

 

[John 8:32]

Your quote in Timothy needs to begin with verse 3:

1 Timothy 4:3-4 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
​

Was swine or shellfish, etc, "created to be received" into our bodies? If not then we are to abstain.

1Ti 4:5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

G37
ἁγιάζω
hagiazō
hag-ee-ad'-zo
From G40; to make holy, that is, (ceremonially) purify or consecrate; (mentally) to venerate: - hallow, be holy, sanctify.

What meats are sanctified by the word of God?

Lev 11:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses and to Aaron, saying unto them,
Lev 11:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, These are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth.

and continues through verse 47

 

[John 8:32]

Romans 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. Gen 9:3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. The verse in Genesis, Before the law, everything that liveth (all animals) were given unto man for food.

Really?

Gen 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

Gen 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth,

Seems that God is telling Noah here to take 7 pairs of clean animals and 1 pair of unclean animals and yet, there is not a single word of instruction here about what is clean and unclean. Noah already knew about clean and unclean meats.

After the law, Paul teaches that every creature is sanctified (made clean) by the word of God. During the time of the law, the "dietary restrictions were meant for Jews". Don't know what else you are trying to say.

Does this mean fugu (blowfish) is OK to eat now? Or do you think the creator of the human body might know a little more about what to put into it for fuel than His creation?

Paul is actually teaching the opposite here...

1Ti 4:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

G1033
βρῶμα
brōma
bro'-mah
From the base of G977; food (literally or figuratively), especially (ceremonial) articles allowed or forbiden by the Jewish law: - meat, victuals.

The Greek word broma means food.

The Diaglott has it....

1 Timothy 4:3 forbidding to marry, to abstain from foods, which the God created for a partaking of
with thanksgiving by the faithful ones and they have known the truth.

We have seen that Noah already knew about clean and unclean meat at the time of the flood.

Seems not everyone knows the truth.

(Mat 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.)

1Ti 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
1Ti 4:5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Sanctified = Set apart

Where do we find meats set apart?

Lev 11 and Deut 14.

Seems this scripture applies to more than one thought...

Mar 12:24 And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?

 

[John 8:32]

Acts 10...

Act 10:11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
Act 10:12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
Act 10:13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
Act 10:14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

And this was repeated two more times. What was Peter's response?

Act 10:14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

What? You mean in 3-1/2 years of constant contact with Christ, Peter didn't understand a very simple doctrine? Everything is food?

Act 10:19 While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.

He didn't run right down stairs and order the shrimp and crab legs, now did he?

Why not? He knew God was teaching something much deeper than food here.

Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Now, do we have to qualify this a little by realizing the audience Peter was speaking to? How about this guy...

Gaëtan Dugas (French: [ɡaetɑ̃ dyˈɡa]; February 20, 1953 – March 30, 1984) was a French Canadian who worked for Air Canada as a flight attendant.[1] Dugas became notorious as the alleged patient zero for AIDS, though he is now more accurately regarded as one of many highly sexually active men who spread HIV widely before the disease was identified... Dugas is featured prominently in Randy Shilts's book And the Band Played On, which documents the outbreak of AIDS in the United States. Shilts portrays Gaëtan Dugas as having almost sociopathic behavior by allegedly intentionally infecting, or at least recklessly endangering, others with the virus. Dugas is described as being a charming, handsome sexual athlete who, according to his own estimation, averaged hundreds of sex partners a year. He claims to have had over 2,500 sexual partners across North America since becoming sexually active in 1972. - Wikipedia

So is Gaëtan numbered amongst the clean now? Or are there still clean and uncelan persons? If we are to believe that Acts 10 cleanses all meat then we must list Hitler, Stalin, Torquemada and many others as clean in God's sight? How about Alexander?

2Ti 4:14 Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works:
2Ti 4:15 Of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words.

Is he just a wonderful guy and high on the rewards list with God?

No, the dietary laws are not abridged here just as all men are not instantly rendered righteous and clean here. This kind of thinking is a very subtle form of universal salvation. The fact that there are still clean and unclean meats teaches us that there are still clean and unclean men. Peter was making the point here that Cornelius and the two with him were being called to salvation even though they were Gentiles. The lesson is that God calls gentiles and they can become clean, not that everything is clean regardless.

 

[Shannon H]

originally posted by John 8:32

Originally Posted by Shannon H View Post
Romans 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. Gen 9:3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. The verse in Genesis, Before the law, everything that liveth (all animals) were given unto man for food.
Really?

Gen 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

Gen 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth,

Seems that God is telling Noah here to take 7 pairs of clean animals and 1 pair of unclean animals and yet, there is not a single word of instruction here about what is clean and unclean. Noah already knew about clean and unclean meats.

Noah knew of clean and unclean animals as it regards animals to be offered in sacrifice, which were probably given to Adam and Abel, This did not refer to food, as men did not eat animals before the Flood (Gen. 1:29). This was changed after the Flood, (Gen. 9:3).

Does this mean fugu (blowfish) is OK to eat now? Or do you think the creator of the human body might know a little more about what to put into it for fuel than His creation?

Don't be ridiculous.

So is Gaëtan numbered amongst the clean now? Or are there still clean and uncelan persons? If we are to believe that Acts 10 cleanses all meat then we must list Hitler, Stalin, Torquemada and many others as clean in God's sight? How about Alexander?

There are Only saved or unsaved, in the eyes of God, you are either washed in the Blood of Christ, or you are condemned.

 

[Shannon H]

Acts 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

Why no mention of refraining from eating "unclean" animals here ?

 

[rstrats]

Shannon H,

re: " Why no mention of refraining from eating 'unclean' animals here ? "


Or for that matter no mention of refraining from having other gods, or from making graven images, or from taking the Lord's name in vain, or from honoring one's parents, or from committing murder, or from stealing, or from bearing false witness against one's neighbor, or from coveting.

 

[Shannon H]

originally posted by rstrats

Or for that matter no mention of refraining from having other gods, or from making graven images, or from taking the Lord's name in vain, or from honoring one's parents, or from committing murder, or from stealing, or from bearing false witness against one's neighbor, or from coveting.

Which one of these is not like the other ? which one of these just isn't the same ?

EX 34:27 And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. 28 And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

you are listing those things contained in the "Ten Commandments" Dietary restrictions does not fit there.

 

[eddif]

Acts 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

Why no mention of refraining from eating "unclean" animals here ?

I am reading and listening last few posts. This thread sounds a lot like the discussion in:
Acts 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.

This was after some mission work was already done with the Gentiles (by those sent from Jerusalem). The discussions were causing problems with the mission work, so
Acts 15:2
2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.

When in Jerusalem they had a long discussion among leadership as to what the Apostles thought. A long discussion much like this thread LOL. After the long discussions a decision was made:
Acts 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

Redneck Mississippi thoughts
1.. Abstain from meats offered to idols.
The Gentiles used to do this offering and their conscience would be weak as they did this and to keep from offending their weak faith. This statement was made, IMHO, not about the law of Moses, but it was about I Corinthians 8:4 area.
2.. I do not know about the blood and things strangled (some of my opinions are from traditions and not necessarily from bible passages).
3.. From fornication
Gentiles were from a society that practiced fornication and had no idea it was not good.

The Gentiles were learing to do the things written on their hearts and not the Law of Moses (I do not at this time know all about that statement, but I just accept the scripture Romans 2:14 ). They were without the law of Moses but after receiving Jesus and the Holy Spirit they with their new nature are a law unto themselves.
Romans 2:14
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:


As I said before they had discussed it all and (Acts 15:28) is their final statement, after a long lengthy discussion in which they all decide that the Gentiles are called of God, but have a little different situation.

That was the end of all discussion they went back on the mission field with the Great Commission and this final statement as their guide.
Before the were teacjng: repent; accept Jesus as savior; be filled with the Holy Spirit and all things Jesis had commanded the disciples (even Marks version of the Great Commission -- evidenced by actions on previous mission trips to the Gentiles).

There comes a time to just look at the fact that Jerusalem issued Acts 15:28 as the final word.

The jerk from Mississippi
eddif