Dietary Laws

[whitestone]

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

Hello John,

When I finally awakened to truth I was actually angry that it isn't properly taught. Not only because I was going against the word of the Lord but that I have been harming my health through years of eating improperly.

My personal opinion is it is not a "go to hell" issue but one of obedience to Him as well as maintaining a healthly and long life. I pray others will consider what you have proven.

Thank you for your posts....well done!

 

[Free]

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.

​

But, again, this doesn't apply to us. The Law has accomplished it's intended purpose and is no longer in effect. It was never to be applied to Christians.

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.

The question then is: What does it mean "till all be fulfilled"? Has all been fulfilled? Has the Law accomplished it's purpose in the death and resurrection of Jesus? If not, why does Paul seem to think so, as he states many times:

Rom 6:15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! (ESV)

Gal 3:1 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified.
Gal 3:2 Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith?
Gal 3:3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?
...
Gal 3:10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them."
...
Gal 3:19 Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary. (ESV)

Gal 4:4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law,
Gal 4:5 to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. (ESV)

Gal 5:18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. (ESV)

Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Eph 2:14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
Eph 2:15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
Eph 2:16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. (ESV)

Heb 7:12 For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well. (ESV)

Those passages along with the ones I've previously given, show that without a doubt Christians are not under the Law. The Law was given to the Jews at a specific time for a specific purpose.

 

[Ryan]

originally posted by ryan : 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

You quote Hebrews 7, but what they are talking about is the transfer from the Levitical Priesthood, to the Melchizedik Priesthood now with Jesus being the mediator of the covenant. Hebrews 7:12 the word change and changed in the concordance as (G3346 and G3331) which literally means to transfer/change of something already instituted. What did he change? The Priesthood which tore down the veil from the Holy of Holies as foreshadowed and prophecied in Jeremiah 31. Here is an imperfect analogy. You have Donovan McNabb as the quarterback (Levitical Priest), a good quarterback whose getting the calls from the coach, but hasn't won the SuperBowl yet. You change the quarterback and now you got Tom Brady (Melchizedezek). Not any Tom Brady, but Tom Brady on steroids!!! He's the one who has won the whole thing. But not only that, he audiblizes instead of getting the calls from the coach. I'm getting a little carried away here, but the point is that there was a change in the quarterback, to a better quarterback, but the plays still stay the same. You can rip that analogy to pieces, but I hope you get my point.

God's laws were meant for all believers, whether alien, foreigner, whatever. It was not just a Jew thing, it's a God thing. I pointed out 4 verses from the Torah that makes that clear. Moses father in law (Jethro, a Midianite Priest) became a believer after hearing the "good news" of God's salvation to the Israelites Exodus 18:11-12. Further in Solomon's days, aliens were coming to worship the God of Abraham and practicing "the Law" 1 Kings 8:41-43 "Also concerning the foreigner who is not of Your people Israel, when he comes from a far country for Your name’s sake 42 (for they will hear of Your great name and Your mighty hand, and of Your outstretched arm); when he comes and prays toward this house, 43 hear in heaven Your dwelling place, and do according to all for which the foreigner calls to You, in order that all the peoples of the earth may know Your name, to [s]fear You, as do Your people Israel, and that they may know that [t]this house which I have built is called by Your name"

They were always commanded to be a "light to the nations" to show God's power and his righteous commandments and ordinances. Do these verses sound like God's laws were oppressive?

Deuteronomy 4:6-8 "So keep and do them, for that is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples who will hear all these statutes and say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’ 7 For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as is the Lord our God whenever we call on Him? 8 Or what great nation is there that has statutes and judgments as righteous as this whole law which I am setting before you today?"

They were always meant for all, never just one nation. 2 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some may count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for ANY to perish but for all to come to repentance"

 

[JCitoL]

Hi

basically the sin is the spiritual/religious iniquity, and hereof it contains (with-)in itself the contrivance to turn the things upside down so that the (use of) physical creations which fundamentally (is)are not sinful to be turned as sinful, while the spiritual/religious iniquity itself to be shown as holy, that is why in the time before the New Testament (the use of) many physical creations (was)were deemed as sinful starting with the sex and the other physical sense activities and continuing with the physical matter and world, here is why there is something like a restoration of the overridden creations of God in the New Testament

Genesis 3:1-7 "Now the serpent(i.e. and lo, the devil came from the "darkness", and it) was more subtil than any beast(i.e. than any thing) of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of(i.e. which is beyond) the garden(viz. the "tree" which to the humans is occultism/esotericism), God hath said, Ye shall not eat of(i.e. you must not follow/practise) it, neither shall ye touch(i.e. neither shall you explore) it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened(i.e. then there will come occult/yogic perceptions/senses in you), and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil(i.e. and you shall be(-come) as the God Himself, viz. with omniscience and omnipotence like Him). And when the woman saw that the tree was(i.e. that the forbidden "tree" ostensibly looked) good for food, and that it was(i.e. and that it ostensibly looked) pleasant to the eyes(i.e. to the human mind), and a tree to be desired to make one wise(i.e. to make the human being omniscience and omnipotence), she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were opened(i.e. and there came occult/yogic perceptions/senses in them both), and they knew that they were naked(i.e. and from that moment on they began to perceive the sex and the other creations of God as shameful/sinful); and they sewed fig leaves(i.e. and they found (great) false spiritual knowledge) together, and made themselves aprons(i.e. and made themselves human(666) religion/spirituality starting defile the sex and the other creations of God thus).",

Romans 14:14-23 "I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself(i.e. that there is no such unclean thing which the true God has made/created): but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat(i.e. but if any human be offended because of your spiritual/religious condemnation/defilement), now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him(i.e. do not ruin any human) with thy meat(i.e. with your spiritual/religious attitude), for whom Christ died(i.e. because the Lord Himself - Jesus Christ has died for the salvation to all humans in the true God). Let not then your good be evil spoken of(viz. let your good not to be bad/evil to one or another human): For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink(i.e. for the service to God is not a practising of human religion and spirituality); but righteousness(i.e. but overall provision of life), and peace(i.e. peacekeeping/peacemaking), and joy(i.e. and grace/benediction) in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace(i.e. which keep/make (for) overall peace), and things wherewith one may edify another(i.e. wherewith one may bring (round) another toward(-s) the love). For meat(i.e. for the sake of human religion/spirituality) destroy not the work of God. All things(i.e. all things which the true God has made/created) indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence(i.e. who defiles by doing of spiritual/religious iniquity). It is good neither to eat flesh(i.e. neither to practise human(666) religion), nor to drink wine(i.e. nor to practise occultism), nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth(viz. blessed is that who does not risk doing an iniquity in the faith). And he that doubteth(i.e. and that who does an spiritual/religious iniquity) is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith(i.e. not of right faith): for whatsoever(i.e. for any spiritual/religious activity which) is not of faith(i.e. of right faith) is sin.",

1 Timothy 4:1-11 "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith(i.e. some spiritual servants/workers may deviate from the right faith toward wrong), giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines(i.e. creeds) of devils; Speaking(i.e. preaching/testifying) lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron(i.e. with strong satanic spirituality); Forbidding to marry(i.e. forbidding the sex life), and commanding to abstain from meats(i.e. from natural consumptions), which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving(i.e. which the true God has made/given to be used for good purposes) of them which believe and know the truth(i.e. of those who believe right(-ly) as well as of those who do not commit spiritual/religious iniquity). For every creature(i.e. for each creation) of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving(i.e. if it is used for good purposes): For it is sanctified by the word of God(i.e. of the work of the true God) and prayer(i.e. and by the prayers of true Saints). If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ(i.e. of the true Lord), nourished up in the words of faith(i.e. of right faith) and of good doctrine(or: and of the good creed), whereunto thou hast attained. But refuse profane and old wives' fables(i.e. but avoid the traditions of defiling and misleading creeds), and exercise thyself rather unto godliness. For bodily(also: for overweening/self-interested) exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God(i.e. in the true God), who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe(i.e. that do not commit spiritual/religious iniquity). These things command and teach.",

Colossians 2:8-23 "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition(i.e. the doctrine) of men, after the rudiments of the world(i.e. after the imperfect/unrighteous creeds), and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of(i.e. Who is above) all principality and power: In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins(i.e. of the spiritual/religious iniquities) of the flesh(i.e. of the bad side of human mind) by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism(i.e. in the Mark/Hold of Holy Spirit), wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses(i.e. having removed all your sins from you); Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us(viz. the bad ordinances (of old testament)), which was contrary to us(viz. the ordinances which are prejudicial/pernicious to the humans), and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities(i.e. the human creeds) and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat(i.e. let no human worsens you trying to enslave you with whatever human creed or with whatever prohibition or coercion for natural consumption), or in drink(i.e. or with whatever human spirituality or with whatever prohibition or coercion for natural pleasure), or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days(viz. as a traditional(ritualistic) day): Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels(i.e. of idols), intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly(i.e. by its unclean) mind, And not holding the Head(i.e. That One Who really is the true Lord Jesus Christ), from which all the body by joints(i.e. by parts) and bands(i.e. and liaisons) having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world(i.e. from the imperfect/unrighteous creeds), why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not(viz. must not have a sexual life); taste not(viz. must not consume an alcohol drink or an animal meat); handle not(viz. must not use your physical senses); Which all are to perish with the using; ) after the commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom(i.e. of spirituality) in will(i.e. in exonerative) worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh(i.e. to the true satisfaction of the human being against the appearance of the "darkness")."

Blessings

 

[eddif]

I feel like we are all walking up to trees and failing to see the forest, the deserts, glaciers, oceans, etc.

I personally was at one time just about convinced that an OT diet would be best. Over time scripture, and looking for answers just came up with the fact Jesus bore stripes that established my health through healing. That I am not to be concerned with a diet of food, but the word of God. That the law was a schoolmaster till Jesus was revealed.

I am to seek first the kingdom of God and all these other things will be given to me (maybe not just like my flesh wants--Man plans his way, but the Lord directs the steps).

Adam and Eve messed up...................................Thrown out of the garden
Mankind grew worse..........................................God shortened man's years
Mankind grew worse..........................................God sent a flood
Mankind failed to cover the earth........................God confused their language
God makes a covenant with Abraham.................. Sodom and Gomorah lost
Joseph helps world...........................................God's people are enslaved
Moses leads Gods people out of Egypt.................Are things looking up?
Gods people complain and sin............................ God adds Law
Gods people still complain and sin under the law.....In wilderness 40 years
Disobey in promised land....................................Placed in captivity

Jesus and Holy Spirit come and
establish and everlasting kingdom
Things changed​

Will we learn from previous history that the only things that help are the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Will we fall back into bondage? Will we crucify Christ again. The first 8 or so things did not change the inner man. Jesus changed the inner man. Behold I stand at the door and knock-----Open the door to all that God is----Invite all that God is inside. Food will not save----Jesus inside us is the only solution to sin. I doubt Paul got all Kosher meals in prison LOL.​

If I messed up the timeline or goofed on a minor issue I am sorry. The major point is that mankind was kept till Jesus came. When Jesus came he became our rightiousness. OT folks looked forward to Jesus. Choose your righteousness.​

The jerk from Mississippi
eddif​

 

[eddif]

Christianity has a Jewish base. Every OT scripture ultimately points to Jesus. God's love is both compassion and placing fear in man.
Jude 22-23
22 And of some have compassion, making a difference:
23 and others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.


The ultimate meal is the meal where we use symbols to eat the body and blood of Jesus the Messiah. Without the OT we would have little idea what it means. We do however, seek a revelation that understands that Jesus is that Messiah. God uses compassion for some and fear for others to bring us to the table and keep us at the table. Both compassion and fear are in the love of God. We also must understand that Jews and Gentiles have no wall between them as we all partake of that meal. Jesus broke down the wall seperating us. Any wall between us now is just rubble we have plastered over and called a wall. The Church is one: Jew / Gentile, male / female, bond / free, Jew / Greek. Do I understand all that. I doubt I do, it is a great mystery; but I am convinced the wall is gone.

eddif

 

[Ryan]

I could not agree more that our diets will not be the deciding factor to if we get "in" or not. I don't believe anybody here said they had to eat their way to salvation. I am kosher because I am saved. The dietary laws are just one example of the holiness to set us apart from other people. Example:

Ryan: I'll have the Boston Royale pizza please, minus the shrimp.
Eating companion: Why no shrimp?
Ryan: God doesn't want me to eat bottom feeders.
Eating companion: Really (sarcastically)? So you're saying if I eat shrimp, I am going to hell?
Ryan: Have you accepted the Lord Jesus as your personal Saviour and repented of your sins?
Eating companion: No.
Ryan: Then you got bigger problems then whether you are eating shrimp or not. (Never said it like this)

This is an example from my personal life, on how just saying no to shrimp, opened up the door to "Jesus" talk with a non believer. I livE by the example set forth by the Bible, and it has people asking why which opens up the door to witness about the love of our Savior who wants to be involved in every aspect of our life, including what we put into our bodies.

Eddif you also mentioned the wall of partition that divides Jew and Gentile. There was an actual wall truly dividing Gentiles from entering into the Temple the Jews put up because they thought Gentiles would defile the temple. That wall of separation was man made, and not God made or sd in any way. I believe there are enough verses from page 3 from the Old Testament that always testified about Gentile inclusion. The Jews made it appear one had to be a Jew to serve the God of Abraham. That was never the case, and I cannot believe the God in the Old Testament ever allowed exclusion of foreigners. Israel was commanded to be a light to the nation's, which they failed miserably. I digress, as it's food we are talking about. If God said to Moses once that pig is to be detestable to you, I take his word for it as his word is unchanging.

 

[eddif]

I could not agree more that our diets will not be the deciding factor to if we get "in" or not. I don't believe anybody here said they had to eat their way to salvation. I am kosher because I am saved. The dietary laws are just one example of the holiness to set us apart from other people. Example:

Ryan: I'll have the Boston Royale pizza please, minus the shrimp.
Eating companion: Why no shrimp?
Ryan: God doesn't want me to eat bottom feeders.
Eating companion: Really (sarcastically)? So you're saying if I eat shrimp, I am going to hell?
Ryan: Have you accepted the Lord Jesus as your personal Saviour and repented of your sins?
Eating companion: No.
Ryan: Then you got bigger problems then whether you are eating shrimp or not. (Never said it like this)

This is an example from my personal life, on how just saying no to shrimp, opened up the door to "Jesus" talk with a non believer. I livE by the example set forth by the Bible, and it has people asking why which opens up the door to witness about the love of our Savior who wants to be involved in every aspect of our life, including what we put into our bodies.

Eddif you also mentioned the wall of partition that divides Jew and Gentile. There was an actual wall truly dividing Gentiles from entering into the Temple the Jews put up because they thought Gentiles would defile the temple. That wall of separation was man made, and not God made or sd in any way. I believe there are enough verses from page 3 from the Old Testament that always testified about Gentile inclusion. The Jews made it appear one had to be a Jew to serve the God of Abraham. That was never the case, and I cannot believe the God in the Old Testament ever allowed exclusion of foreigners. Israel was commanded to be a light to the nation's, which they failed miserably. I digress, as it's food we are talking about. If God said to Moses once that pig is to be detestable to you, I take his word for it as his word is unchanging.

I am surely for getting to the point that foods are not an issue. I have been more close to being a practicing Jew than a lot of Jews. At one point I had a beard that would touch my naval: unmarred around the edges the whole shot. Probably looked like a Jew. The beard came straight out of the OT. I had a tough time working through all of that. I probably still have issues. I was a lot like this though. Many suffered while I was in the mode.

Philippians 3:8
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

Several folks still have scars where I hit them with the bible. Been there and done that. Probably still do at times. May be doing it now. Do I understand? Yes somewhat I think I do. Did I change myself ? No I think I pretty much had my verson of being approached for a higher walk than where I was. Have I made it? No. I am still trying (if trying is not an unclean word lol). I hope to be able to deal with all men. Do I put myself in high esteem? Not really. It will be according to my faith (at times it seems pretty small so knock down what I accomplish to an honest level). This conversation may be my highest level (pretty low accomplishment on my part).

I Corinthians 9:9-10
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

This came from Deuteronomy 25:4
4 Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn.

We could worry about the oxen (which is ok), but the greater thing is that a preacher is worthy of his hire.

Matthew 12:6
6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.

I Kings 8:1-66
This is a description of the purpose of the temple. Jesus is now the place where we direct our prayers.

While symbols are not to be made fun of, there are higher things than a shadow. The shadow of an ox is cast from the reality of paying the preacher that is doing his job. His shadow just looks like an ox to God when he created the animals (boy God you sure think strange --Oh yeah you told us that you do not think like man thinks).

I can get way to long winded. The thing is. Look beyond the OT diet into what it stands for to us today. May Jew and Gentile agree and worship together in the thing that cast the shadow: A clean meal at the table where we eat His body and Drink his blood.

eddif

 

[Ryan]

I am surely for getting to the point that foods are not an issue.

1Peter 1:15-16 but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; 16 because it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.”

Where else was this written?

 

[eddif]

Romans 14: 17
17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

Once it was said ( let thy foot be seldom in thy neighbors house lest he come to hate thee). From memory.

changed to​

More or less Acts 2:46​

46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,

Where once people could not visit too muich (wear out welcome); this changed to wanting daily felowship with others, after receiving the Holy Spirit.

Some changes did take place.

eddif

 

[Ryan]

1Peter 1:15-16 but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; 16 because it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.”

Where else was this written?

Anyone else wanna take a crack at it?

 

[Free]

Anyone else wanna take a crack at it?

Lev 11:44 For I am the LORD your God. Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am holy. You shall not defile yourselves with any swarming thing that crawls on the ground. (ESV)

And? Peter is most likely using the quote out of context, since it is clear that he is not discussing foods. It is, after all, a statement that stands on it's own.

 

[rrowell]

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?

Paul explains this in 1 Corinthians 13:9, the entire revelation of God was never given to any one Apostle:

1 Corinthians 13:9 (KJV)
For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

What Paul knew Peter may not, what Peter new John may not...

 

[BornAgain]

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?

I read this in Acts 10:13-15 KJV

And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. 14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. 15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Peter was told to "rise." Rise from his knees in prayer, or his reclining posture. The animals were clean and unclean, but the clean animals had become unclean by contact with the unclean, and Peter is told by a voice from heaven to break the Mosaic law, and in his eating do away with the distinction between Jew and Gentile.

14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; Peter refused to ease his hunger by violating the law by which he had been governed as a Jew. He had never "eaten anything that is common and unclean."

This was one of the distinctions which separated the Jews from the Gentiles, but Peter is to learn that there is a better, truer distinction between God's people than that of choosing different kinds of animals for food. Peter showed his determination by the answer that he gave. He is polite but refuses. He gives his reason for his decision. He had never violated this law and he firmly states that he will not do so now.

15, 16 And a voice came unto him again the second time, After Peter's clear refusal, the voice stated, "What God hath cleansed, make not thou common." The lesson for Peter was clear. He should not make "common" that which God had "cleansed." "And this was done thrice."

Does this mean that the whole vision was repeated three times, or that the voice gave the command three times? Some say that the whole scene was repeated three times, but many others understand that the voice came three times to emphasize the one lesson: Peter was not to call the Gentiles "common" or "unclean" when God had arranged to give to them the blessings of salvation through Christ.

It seems that the vessel was let down from heaven only once, and then taken back "up into heaven." Peter was to learn that all nations might be admitted to the kingdom of God upon the same terms of the gospel.

 

[eddif]

I read this in Acts 10:13-15 KJV

And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. 14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. 15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Peter was told to "rise." Rise from his knees in prayer, or his reclining posture. The animals were clean and unclean, but the clean animals had become unclean by contact with the unclean, and Peter is told by a voice from heaven to break the Mosaic law, and in his eating do away with the distinction between Jew and Gentile.

14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; Peter refused to ease his hunger by violating the law by which he had been governed as a Jew. He had never "eaten anything that is common and unclean."

This was one of the distinctions which separated the Jews from the Gentiles, but Peter is to learn that there is a better, truer distinction between God's people than that of choosing different kinds of animals for food. Peter showed his determination by the answer that he gave. He is polite but refuses. He gives his reason for his decision. He had never violated this law and he firmly states that he will not do so now.

15, 16 And a voice came unto him again the second time, After Peter's clear refusal, the voice stated, "What God hath cleansed, make not thou common." The lesson for Peter was clear. He should not make "common" that which God had "cleansed." "And this was done thrice."

Does this mean that the whole vision was repeated three times, or that the voice gave the command three times? Some say that the whole scene was repeated three times, but many others understand that the voice came three times to emphasize the one lesson: Peter was not to call the Gentiles "common" or "unclean" when God had arranged to give to them the blessings of salvation through Christ.

It seems that the vessel was let down from heaven only once, and then taken back "up into heaven." Peter was to learn that all nations might be admitted to the kingdom of God upon the same terms of the gospel.

Some of my later comments have nothing to do with your post and I am only using the post for one area. I am not in conflict. but just wondering.

"Peter was told to "rise." Rise from his knees in prayer, or his reclining posture. The animals were clean and unclean, but the clean animals had become unclean by contact with the unclean, and Peter is told by a voice from heaven to break the Mosaic law, and in his eating do away with the distinction between Jew and Gentile."

Gets kind of hard to work through all our thoughts I guess. Noah knew what was clean and unclean, but since men were not eating meat, how to tell was not mentioned.
Leviticus 11:3
3 Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that shall ye eat.

A lot of definitions in 4-7

Leviticus 11:8
8 Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you

I suppose this defines what we see as clean and unclean.
Deuteronomy 14:7 is still another place to look at what defines clean / unclean.

I thought Peter would know that touching the unclean would defile him, and the let down animals were unclean. I suppose there could have been clean animals let down before him, but I thought he would have been looking at the Leviticus and Deuteronomy lists to define un-clean. I do not remember any passage where a clean animal touching an unclean animal became unclean itself. I do remember a person touching an unclean animal is defiled. Not that it makes a hoot of difference, but I was just wondering.

I do understand that Peter thought he would be defiled if he touched unclean animals.
+++++++++++
What suddenly made the animals clean was a declaration from God. God just gets around the law with a statement (these are declared clean by me).

When Jesus dealt with sickness it was usually with a statement but sometimes statements and actions. Being made clean or raised from the dead is clean touching unclean and having the reverse happen. Santicifying the unclean to make clean is really a NT thing.

Everything in creation started out good. Sin brought briars and fallen to belly situations (I sure do not know how much happened).

Restoration to health, raised from dead, given a new diet, changed hearts, changed minds, etc.; these are all things in the power of Jesus. As we discuss diet a lot of other things exist. If other changes exist, why can not diets change.

I hope we clean up the holidays with a good declaration too.

eddif

 

[John 8:32]

Some of my later comments have nothing to do with your post and I am only using the post for one area. I am not in conflict. but just wondering.

"Peter was told to "rise." Rise from his knees in prayer, or his reclining posture. The animals were clean and unclean, but the clean animals had become unclean by contact with the unclean, and Peter is told by a voice from heaven to break the Mosaic law, and in his eating do away with the distinction between Jew and Gentile."

Gets kind of hard to work through all our thoughts I guess. Noah knew what was clean and unclean, but since men were not eating meat, how to tell was not mentioned.
Leviticus 11:3
3 Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that shall ye eat.

A lot of definitions in 4-7

Leviticus 11:8
8 Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you

I suppose this defines what we see as clean and unclean.
Deuteronomy 14:7 is still another place to look at what defines clean / unclean.

I thought Peter would know that touching the unclean would defile him, and the let down animals were unclean. I suppose there could have been clean animals let down before him, but I thought he would have been looking at the Leviticus and Deuteronomy lists to define un-clean. I do not remember any passage where a clean animal touching an unclean animal became unclean itself. I do remember a person touching an unclean animal is defiled. Not that it makes a hoot of difference, but I was just wondering.

I do understand that Peter thought he would be defiled if he touched unclean animals.
+++++++++++
What suddenly made the animals clean was a declaration from God. God just gets around the law with a statement (these are declared clean by me).

I do not for one moment believe God EVER circumvents His own laws. He is able to make laws that need no exceptions. Why would He give laws (and put people to death for breaking them) only to surreptitiously discard them later? That doesn't sound like it harmonizes with...

Mal 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

When Jesus dealt with sickness it was usually with a statement but sometimes statements and actions. Being made clean or raised from the dead is clean touching unclean and having the reverse happen. Santicifying the unclean to make clean is really a NT thing.

Everything in creation started out good. Sin brought briars and fallen to belly situations (I sure do not know how much happened).

Sin brought briars and thorns, but was ground glass ever good for food? Noah knew about clean and unclean at the time of the flood. Were cats and rats and skinks created to be food? How about scavengers that cleaned the ocean bottoms? Were they ever created to be food? This is answered in...

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.

Notice there are two conditions, 1) set apart by prayer and 2) set apart by the word of God. This is where Lev 11 and Deut 14 come in.

Restoration to health, raised from dead, given a new diet, changed hearts, changed minds, etc.; these are all things in the power of Jesus. As we discuss diet a lot of other things exist. If other changes exist, why can not diets change.

I hope we clean up the holidays with a good declaration too.

eddif

Let me show you how to clean up the holidays...

Lev 23:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Lev 23:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, Concerning the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts.

 

[John 8:32]

Hello John,

When I finally awakened to truth I was actually angry that it isn't properly taught. Not only because I was going against the word of the Lord but that I have been harming my health through years of eating improperly.

My personal opinion is it is not a "go to hell" issue but one of obedience to Him as well as maintaining a healthly and long life. I pray others will consider what you have proven.

Thank you for your posts....well done!

It is not a matter of salvation...

Rom 14:17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

but if one's attitude becomes that of "Don't tell me what to do, I'll eat whatever I want", then it does become a matter of salvation. This is an attitude of rebellion against God.

 

[John 8:32]

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.
[/INDENT]

Hmmm, not bound by the law of Moses?

Luk 16:27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
Luk 16:28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
Luk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Here Christ says that if one will not hear Moses and the prophets, then that person won't hear Christ, (you know, the one who rose from the dead).

 

[By Grace]

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?

I was certain that this issue would come up because i believe that there are some SDA leanings on this site. For those not knowing, the SDA church is a "salvation through health" church, and I was sort of amused that no one poster quoted her works to justify not eating certain meats. To be fair, it is my position that the SDA is a cult due to their disproved "message of health", their extra Biblical doctrines such as Investigative Judgment which essentially says that no one was saved prior to 1844, "soul sleep" and that the words of Ellen White are "a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction." (from Fundamental Belief 18)

On this thread, I have seen all sorts of references to many other parts of Scripture. But what I have NOT seen in this thread is an examination of what God ACTUALLY said to Peter. Let's look at that:

Acts 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:
12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.
17 Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,
18 And called, and asked whether Simon, which was surnamed Peter, were lodged there.
19 While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.
20 Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them.
​

Obviously, Peter was a stubborn fellow, because even after being told by God THREE TIMES, THE SAME MESSAGE, he still doubted. As the country song goes, "Old habits are hard to break". But it should be abundantly clear that following things remain true:

1) There were all sorts of animals on that sheet, including snakes, and other reptiles (creeping things) buzzards, and crows (foul of the air) wild boar, bear, pigs and lions (all manner of four footed beasts)
2) ALL of these were cleansed by god (What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.-- Verse 15)
3) THREE TIMES steps one and two were repeated to Peter. (Verse 16)
​

Now some well-meaning people will seek to justify the unjustifiable by citing verses from the OT. They seem to forget that the OT is a teacher of elementary practices according to Galatians 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith And the purpose clause eliminates the necessity of rules-keeping for the purpose of salvation; it is through grace, and we are justified by FAITH, not by rules-keeping. Therefore any appeal to the OT dietary rules is a false appeal.

There is a total of 630 or so rules which the Sadducees and others lorded over the 'common folk". The fact that there are so many should indicate to all the impossibility of keeping them all. For that reason, Jesus came to save all who believe in him.

But there are others who want to cite NT texts in order to enslave others into eating "healthy" or "kosher" or "clean" food. EACH of those appeals fall short on several parts:

FIRST, they are taken out of context. Any verse ripped from its context ALWAYS becomes a pretext.
SECOND, there are NONE if those out-of -context verses which rescind what God said in Acts 10. This is vital, and it is NOT an argument from silence as some may suggest. In Galatians 3;24 (above) there is an absolutely clear recension of the Law as a means of righteousness.
​

That gives a clear precedence that if ever God "changes His mind" (GIMME A BREAK ON THAT, FOR IT IS A RHETORICAL STATEMENT) that there will ALWAYS be a clear declaration of it. Thus the absence of any evidence of a recension of Acts 10:11 ff is prima facie evidence that what He said there is still in effect.

Therefore, it is my opinion that anyone, regardless of their intentions, stated, or unstated, who is attempting to lay a guilt trip on people who do not follow this dietary law or that dietary law, are actually seeking to enslave God's people, BACK into keeping the law. Any person who is attempting to keep the law in any way as a measure of righteousness, are breaking the entire law, and are reverting to a rules-keeping salvation, which, according to Galatians is a form of damnation:

Galatians 1:. 6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

​

I did not say it, Paul did. But now you know the reasons behind my position.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

The SDA believes that Jesus is God, that he is the second person of the trinity.
For this reason, they are not considered a cult.
All cults ultimately deny the deity of Jesus Christ.