Is the Law God gave through Moses still in effect today???

[Drew]

lol - I'm trying to compose replies to -- i don't know --- three different people? slow down a bit, please?

Or that's okay if you want to continue to discuss - but I'd ask that before any more comments are directly addressed to me i be given the chance to reply.

Fair enough - a very reasonable request. I will not post again for a few hours (if not more)......

 

[stovebolts]

Hi Drew,

Yes, I see what you are saying. Perhaps I'm just hung up on the phrase ;)

The way I see it, is that Jesus did what the Law could not do, and that was to bring about salvation. Thus, Jesus fulfills the law, he does not abolish it.

As far as the text you quoted, Romans 10:4, I believe Paul is making the case that the Jews were persuing salvation through works... they simply missed the mark.

As far as the passage in Eph 2, I seem to reflect back to what Paul said in Romans about how when Moses came down from the mountain with the Law that was to bring life to Israel, but instead the Law brought condemnation due to the sin of the people worshiping the golden calf.. Thus,the intent and purpose of the law wanted to bring salvation, but couldn't because sin was afforded an opportunity to be shown as sinful, wouldn't then sin be the enmity spoken about in Eph 2?

Just some theological thoughts, and oh, I agree that we can eat pig :D

Catch ya tomorrow!

 

[whirlwind]

I see.... :D Not only did you make the statement that Paul ate swine and can't back it up, you write "nothing is to be rejected if it received with gratitude." That is not what is written. The quote is....."which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving..."

Certain things, although good, were not CREATED TO BE RECEIVED. That aren't good for us.

When Paul says everything is "good to eat, that obviously include pigs. I have aleady shown that the 1 Timothy 4 text cannot reasonanbly be read you see it. If I thought I could make my explanation clearer, I would.

Where did Paul write...."everything is good to eat?" Is that the same place he said he dined on swine? EVERYTHING was not created to be eaten. Leviticus deals with many things not to be consumed. Paul said it was fine to eat things that GOD CREATED TO BE RECEIVED. No where is it written that swine, shell fish, etc. were good to eat. As Jesus said....

Matthew 5:17-18 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 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. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

He fulfilled the blood ordinances. He became the Passover Lamb. Did He also become the unclean foods? They are described in Leviticus 11 and the chapter ends with....

Leviticus 11:46 This is the LAW of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living creature that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon the earth. To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten."

I don't see them as "go to hell laws" but nevertheless...they are for our health, for our well being in this flesh life while the spiritual side are for our souls.

 

[wavy]

lol - I'm trying to compose replies to -- i don't know --- three different people? slow down a bit, please?

Or that's okay if you want to continue to discuss - but I'd ask that before any more comments are directly addressed to me i be given the chance to reply.

Feel free to take your time...you're going to need a lot of it to explain away your blunders.

I'll be waiting. ;)

Thanks,
Eric

 

[Sparkey]

Pardon my correcting you here but the part you bolded -AND- underlined cannot be found in the Greek at all.

[quote="follower of Christ":3mjfihbs]
Id be interested in seeing the evidence for this statement as MY resources show that that it is in the greek text itself.

Hi again
Firstly the English Majority Text version that is based on the GMTs instead of the TR shows that the passage contains the text in question.
The EMT society did their best to stay true to the GMTs so if its there I personally believe they had a good reason to include it.

because it does not enter into his heart but into the stomach, and passes into the latrine, thus purifying all foods?"
(Mark 7:19 EMTV)

The TR (Textus Receptus) includes the Johannine Comma which the GMT's do not support, so that the EMTV does not contain the Comma shows evidence that this particular version is more true to the ACTUAL GMT's than even the KJV is.

Secondly my Interlinear also contains the text, I'll have to see what manuscripts are being used for those.

Thirdly, the comment by Jesus isnt just in Mark. A similar statement is also in Matthew

Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach, and is cast out into a latrine? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man.
(Matthew 15:17-18 EMTV)

There was a preoccupation with 'cleanness' with the Jews because of the cleanness and ritual laws, for certain...its VERY peculiar that Jesus would make such a statement about nothing we take into our bodies defiles it (makes it 'unclean') if He were not talking about foods.
The 'thus purifying all foods' is simply a conclusion of common sense given what Jesus said.

[/quote:3mjfihbs]
Greetings Christian! (Follower of Christ):

Thanks for the reply. Of course you are correct when you point to the parallels and harmonize the gospels of Matthew and Mark.

Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach, and is cast out into a latrine? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man.
(Matthew 15:17-18 EMTV)

Your quote from the EMTV defines the truth well.

As far as your other "help" goes, could you PM me sometime to share your tools? When you refer to the "Majority Text" are you talking about Robinson/Pierpont Byzantine text? Even if all you have is bookmarks to sources, I'd appreciate it very much. Also, when you talk about TR (Textus Receptus) do you mean the downloadable module for ESword or is there more?

Again, thanks for your reply. Upon reading through this thread again, I don't think we are actually in any real disagreement here. Spoken clearly, I don't think that we (all that are saved - Messianic Jew and Gentile Christian alike) are under the law but under grace. Perhaps we simply have yet to find agreement about what the term "The Torah" can refer to? The Tanakh is the Jewish bible. It is divided into three sections: The Torah (the five books of Moses), the Nevi'im (writings of the Prophets) and Ketuvim (writings). If we understand the actual question about The Torah that is being raised here, we understand that "the Law" (that is, The Torah) includes Genesis (Bereshith, meaning 'In the Beginning') too.

I have several other replies to make. Who knew that I'd be opening such a can of worms? At least these are "meat" for some here.

~Sparrow
"One kohen (priest) was not corrupted and his temple was not destroyed."

 

[Sparkey]

lol - I'm trying to compose replies to -- i don't know --- three different people? slow down a bit, please?

Or that's okay if you want to continue to discuss - but I'd ask that before any more comments are directly addressed to me i be given the chance to reply.

Feel free to take your time...you're going to need a lot of it to explain away your blunders.

I'll be waiting. ;)

Thanks,
Eric

Okay, Eric -- you seem to be impatient so, maybe you next? You tone strikes me as rude. Although this is indeed a public forum we have never met. I am not accustomed to having strangers accuse me and have given you no cause to do so. Frankly, I'm offended.

I consider it better though that I suffer from the stones you throw. I do not intend to pick them up and toss them back at you.

~Sparhawk

 

[wavy]

Great. Dandy. Frabjous.

As long as you are now cognizant of the fact that you were demonstrably in error.

Thanks,
Eric

 

[whirlwind]

Of course it's His main point Drew. The Pharisees see their stupid religious trappings as having something to do with saving man's soul. That is substantiated in that same chapter about what enters a man....

Mark 7:20-23 And He said, "That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within and defile the man.

His "main point" is the sheer stupidity of man's thoughts on what makes one spiritually pure...or not. Kneel here, bow here, cross yourself, tithe this much, sit in this pew, etc., etc., etc.

Jesus' main point here is not a critique of the Pharisee's interpretation of the Law.

A little historical knowledge is helpful here. As I have already stated, Pharisees argued over how to interpret the law all the time, and there is no evidence at all that they killed each other over such disagreements.

So why does Jesus need to retreat inside a building to explain himself to his disciples?:

When he had left the crowd and entered (P)the house, (Q)His disciples questioned Him about the parable.

:naughty Was it that Jesus felt it necessary to retreat anywhere to explain it, as you are implying, or is it because....

Mark 7:17-18 And when He was entered into the house from the people, His disciples asked Him concerning the parable. And He saith unto them, "Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;

That event had nothing to do with Him feeling it necessary to retreat. ;)

And, more broadly why do the Pharisees ultimately seek the death of Jesus? Because he challenged their interpretation of the Law? Hardly.

What riled up the Pharisees was Jesus’ clear overturning of Torah.

OVERTURNING THE TORAH????? :o :

Whirlwind, would you please answer these questions:

1. Does the Levitical Law state that eating some foods make you unclean?

Yes

2a. Did Jesus say this: “there is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into himâ€Â:

Yes

2b. Is He talking about food?

No, I don't think so Drew. It is spiritual. We know it is a deeper lesson for He said, "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."

Mark 7:2 And when they saw some of His disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.

It isn't the food they are eating but their traditions of how they are eating being discussed. Here it was that they had not washed their hands.

7:4-5 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.) Then the Pharisees and scribes asked Him, "Why walk not Thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?"

Again...not the bread but the man made tradition of washing is the point. Jesus said....

7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.'

Instead of teaching God's commandements they teach...doctrines and rules of men.

7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye." (15)There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.

7:19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught," purging all meats?

We can take in unclean meat....false doctrine, lies, deception...but "because it entereth not into his heart," it doesn't defile us. We know that is the meat he is discussing for He then tells us....

Mark 7:21-23 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within and defile the man.

It isn't food being discussed. It is man's doctrines and traditions that hypocrites believe saves them. They can follow them until the cows come home but if what comes from their heart is evil then they are defiled.

 

[Sparkey]

Lol - usually I look to online sources to avoid having to type so much. M. R. Vincent "Word Studies in the New Testament" (Covenant Parsonage, NY October 30th 1886 and NY December 10th 1888) (published by Associated Publishers and Authors, 1972©) deals with this so well, I'll type it out.

Page 109 re: Mark 7
17: "The disciples."

• Matthew says Peter. There is no discrepancy. Peter spoke for the band.

18: "So."

• So unintelligent as not to understand what I uttered to the crowd.

19: "Draught (ἀÆεδÃÂÎν)

• Liddell and Scott give only one definition -- a privy, cloaca; and derive from (seat, breech, fundament). Compare English stool. The word does not refer to a part of the body.

20: "Purging all meats" (καθαÃÂίζÉ ÀᾶÂ Ã„ά βÃÂῶμα)

• According to the A.V. these words are in apposition with draught: the draught which makes pure the whole of the food, since it is the place designed for receiving the impure excrement.

In my reply to FoC I mentioned that the Tanakh (the Jewish Bible) was comprised of three sections, with The Torah being the first five books of Moses (including Genesis). But let's go back to what Jesus said to the Pharisees, Mar 7:13 " Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye."

He said that they were making the LOGOS to be of none effect (empty of good result). The question of the OP becomes then, is Jesus still effective today? Those with an ear to hear, let them hear.

~Sparrow

 

[follower of Christ]

No, I don't think so Drew. It is spiritual. We know it is a deeper lesson for He said, "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."

actually it IS about foods and of course it is spiritual...and it is in perfect harmony with Acts 15 where we gentiles are shown that blood and things strangled are the things we need to abstain from as far as eating animals.
Anything beyond that is added by you folks.

What I find VERY interesting is that SOME here seem to be in the same fallacious stance as the Pharisees who also wanted us to follow the Mosaic Law ;)

And certain men coming down from Judea were teaching the brothers, "If you are not circumcised in the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." Therefore when there arose a serious dissension and debate with Paul and Barnabus, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem about this issue. Therefore, being sent forth by the church, they were passing through Phoenicia and Samaria, telling in detail about the conversion of the Gentiles; and they were causing great joy to all the brothers. And having come to Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders; and they declared all that God had done with them. But some of those from the sect of the Pharisees rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses."

And the apostles and elders gathered together to see about this matter. And after much dispute, Peter arose and said to them: "Men, brothers, you know that from early days God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, the knower of hearts, bore witness to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as also He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

But through the grace of the Lord Jesus, we believe that we will be saved in the same manner as they." Then all the multitude stopped speaking and listened to Barnabas and Paul telling as many signs and wonders as God had done among the Gentiles through them. Now after they had finished speaking, James answered, saying, "Men and brothers, listen to me: Simon has declared how God first visited them to take from the Gentiles a people for His name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written: "After this I will return, and I will build again the tabernacle of David, which has fallen; and its ruins I will rebuild, and I will restore it, in order that the rest of men may seek out the LORD, and all the Gentiles who are called by My name, says the LORD who does all these things.' "Known from everlasting to God are all His works.

Therefore I judge that we must not cause trouble for those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles; but that we write to them to abstain from
-things polluted by idols,
-and from sexual immorality,
-from things strangled,
-and from blood.
(Acts 15:1-20 EMTV)

For it seemed best to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to put on you no greater burden except for these necessary things: that you abstain from
-meat offered to idols,
-and from blood,
-and from anything strangled,
-and from fornication;
from which keeping yourselves back, you will do well. Farewell.
(Acts 15:28-29 EMTV)

But concerning the Gentiles having believed, we wrote, having judged that they should keep no such thing, except that they should keep themselves
from things offered to idols,
from blood,
and from anything strangled,
and from fornication."
(Acts 21:25 EMTV)

Seems that *IF* we WERE to keep the laws concerning meats that the council here blew it entirely...




.



.

 

[follower of Christ]

Pardon my correcting you here but the part you bolded -AND- underlined cannot be found in the Greek at all.

http://www.scripture4all.org/[/url]

 

[Sparkey]

What I find VERY interesting is that SOME here seem to be in the same fallacious stance as the Pharisees who also wanted us to follow the Mosaic Law ;)

For it seemed best to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to put on you no greater burden except for these necessary things: that you abstain from
-meat offered to idols,
-and from blood,
-and from anything strangled,
-and from fornication;
from which keeping yourselves back, you will do well. Farewell.
(Acts 15:28-29 EMTV)

Seems that *IF* we WERE to keep the laws concerning meats that the council here blew it entirely...

Funny isn't it? And here I was thinking that it seemed like you said that I had to eat worms and stuff. Thx for the link -- going there now.

~Sparrow

[*Edit] ISA2 is very nice (understatement). Hebrew and Greek interlinear. 2

 

[whirlwind]

No, I don't think so Drew. It is spiritual. We know it is a deeper lesson for He said, "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."

actually it IS about foods and of course it is spiritual...and it is in perfect harmony with Acts 15 where we gentiles are shown that blood and things strangled are the things we need to abstain from as far as eating animals.
Anything beyond that is added by you folks.

[Mark 7] isn't about food being clean or unclean it is about the traditions of men, the traditions they place on how to eat food in order to be holy. That is the subject. The only food you see mentioned is bread and meat....which Biblically are the same thing....The moldy bread and spoiled meat of Satan's deception or the True Word of God. That is the lesson Jesus is teaching.

In reading [Acts 15] I found the following and repeat it here as it may be of interest to you....

Acts 15:24 Forasmuch as we have heard that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, (saying, 'Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law:') to whom we gave no such commandment.

The text doesn't show the part I put in parenthesis. I found that most interesting. Does that mean it was just the Pharisees that thought "it needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses?" [Acts 15:5]

Jesus fulfilled all blood ordinances...such as circumcision, blood sacrifice, etc. As I wrote previously...He didn't become unclean food. They can still harm our flesh bodies.

[quote:3dw01zlo]What I find VERY interesting is that SOME here seem to be in the same fallacious stance as the Pharisees who also wanted us to follow the Mosaic Law ;)
[quote:3dw01zlo]And certain men coming down from Judea were teaching the brothers, "If you are not circumcised in the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." Therefore when there arose a serious dissension and debate with Paul and Barnabus, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem about this issue. Therefore, being sent forth by the church, they were passing through Phoenicia and Samaria, telling in detail about the conversion of the Gentiles; and they were causing great joy to all the brothers. And having come to Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders; and they declared all that God had done with them. But some of those from the sect of the Pharisees rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses."

And the apostles and elders gathered together to see about this matter. And after much dispute, Peter arose and said to them: "Men, brothers, you know that from early days God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, the knower of hearts, bore witness to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as also He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

But through the grace of the Lord Jesus, we believe that we will be saved in the same manner as they." Then all the multitude stopped speaking and listened to Barnabas and Paul telling as many signs and wonders as God had done among the Gentiles through them. Now after they had finished speaking, James answered, saying, "Men and brothers, listen to me: Simon has declared how God first visited them to take from the Gentiles a people for His name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written: "After this I will return, and I will build again the tabernacle of David, which has fallen; and its ruins I will rebuild, and I will restore it, in order that the rest of men may seek out the LORD, and all the Gentiles who are called by My name, says the LORD who does all these things.' "Known from everlasting to God are all His works.

Therefore I judge that we must not cause trouble for those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles; but that we write to them to abstain from
-things polluted by idols,
-and from sexual immorality,
-from things strangled,
-and from blood.
(Acts 15:1-20 EMTV)

For it seemed best to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to put on you no greater burden except for these necessary things: that you abstain from
-meat offered to idols,
-and from blood,
-and from anything strangled,
-and from fornication;
from which keeping yourselves back, you will do well. Farewell.
(Acts 15:28-29 EMTV)

But concerning the Gentiles having believed, we wrote, having judged that they should keep no such thing, except that they should keep themselves
from things offered to idols,
from blood,
and from anything strangled,
and from fornication."
(Acts 21:25 EMTV)

Seems that *IF* we WERE to keep the laws concerning meats that the council here blew it entirely...

.[/quote:3dw01zlo][/quote:3dw01zlo]


In [Acts 21] the subject is circumcision and traditions (customs),....

Acts 21:21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.

That was a lie for Paul didn't teach to "forsake Moses." He taught that blood ordinances were nailed to the cross. As far as "blowing it" by not adding the food laws please consider....they also didn't add Thou Shalt Not Kill. And, the Mosaic laws were already well taught to the those "gentiles are turned to God:" [Acts 15:19]....

Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day."

In reading what was to be stressed to the converted Gentiles, abstain from "meat offered to idols, (pollutions of idols), blood, and from anything strangled, and from fornication," I see more health rules. If one follows them you will be healthy physically and spiritually. No diseases picked up from sexual indiscretion or pollutants from contaminated food and....no taking in of false traditions (meat offered to idols).

 

[follower of Christ]

Reposted with additions...

[Mark 7] isn't about food being clean or unclean it

Sorry but it IS about food. You seem to think it has to be about one or the other...it doesnt.
The CONTEXT is VERY clearly ABOUT taking FOODS into our bodies and their not defiling us.
You folks can play any semantics game you want but facts are facts

In [Acts 21] the subject is circumcision and traditions (customs),....

Acts 15 (FIFTEEN) is about PHARISAICAL men demanding that we follow the Mosaic Law....did you miss that part somehow ?

But some of those from the sect of the Pharisees rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses."

When THAT topic was being discuss it was decided that we gentiles are NOT to be bothered with the Mosaic Code beyond those 4 items.

And the apostles and elders gathered together to see about this matter.
And after much dispute, Peter arose and said to them: "Men, brothers, you know that from early days God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, the knower of hearts, bore witness to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as also He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

....Therefore I judge that we must not cause trouble for those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles; but that we write to them to abstain from
-things polluted by idols,
-and from sexual immorality,
-from things strangled,
-and from blood.
(Acts 15:1-20 EMTV)

So much for any valid argument for those who want to remain under law.... :crazy

That was a lie for Paul didn't teach to "forsake Moses."

Sorry but that DOESNT fit the actual EVIDENCE....
If you will READ this you will see very clearly that Paul HAD TO HAVE BEEN laying aside the law of Moses in order to be ACCUSED of doing so...

What then? It is necessary for an assembly to come together; for they will hear that you have come. Therefore do this, which we say to you: There are four men with us who have taken a vow upon themselves. Take them and purify yourself with them, and pay for them that they may have their head shaved, and that all may know that those things of which they have been informed about you are nothing, but that you are agreeing with and keeping the law yourself.

But concerning the Gentiles having believed, we wrote, having judged that they should keep no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, and from anything strangled, and from fornication."

Then Paul, having taken the men, on the next day having been purified with them, entered into the temple, thus giving notice to the completion of the days of the purification, until the time when the offering was offered in behalf of each one of them.

Now when the seven days were about to be completed, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, were stirring up all the crowd and put their hands on him, crying out, "Men, Israelites, help! This is the man who is teaching all people everywhere against the people and the Law and this place; and furthermore he has brought Greeks into the temple and has made common this holy place." For they had seen Trophimus the Ephesian in the city with him, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.
(Acts 21:22-29 EMTV)

VERY plainly there it is shown that Paul HAD to have been teaching in such a way that the JEWS believed him to be teaching AGAINST the Mosaic law that they supposedly cherished so much....WHY else would he even have to be TOLD to purify himself ? *IF* he was observing the law this 'pharisee of pharisees' would KNOW to do it all by his little self.

 

[follower of Christ]

Funny isn't it? And here I was thinking that it seemed like you said that I had to eat worms and stuff. Thx for the link -- going there now.

~Sparrow

[*Edit] ISA2 is very nice (understatement). Hebrew and Greek interlinear. 2

I love ISA and Esword.
They make study so much easier.
I have a friend who still uses paper books but the bulk and the time consumed trying to find something in all those books and pages is much better spent in actually studying, I think

 

[whirlwind]

Reposted with additions...

[Mark 7] isn't about food being clean or unclean it

Sorry but it IS about food. You seem to think it has to be about one or the other...it doesnt.
The CONTEXT is VERY clearly ABOUT taking FOODS into our bodies and their not defiling us.
You folks can play any semantics game you want but facts are facts

In [Mark 7:1-23] the subject is being defiled...not by bread or meat but by how those foods were eaten, "that is to say, with unwashen hands, they found fault."

Mark 7:3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.

That is the subject. :yes

[quote:1lbop1c8]In [Acts 21] the subject is circumcision and traditions (customs),....

Acts 15 (FIFTEEN) is about PHARISAICAL men demanding that we follow the Mosaic Law....did you miss that part somehow ?

But some of those from the sect of the Pharisees rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses."

When THAT topic was being discuss it was decided that we gentiles are NOT to be bothered with the Mosaic Code beyond those 4 items.

And the apostles and elders gathered together to see about this matter.
And after much dispute, Peter arose and said to them: "Men, brothers, you know that from early days God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, the knower of hearts, bore witness to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as also He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

....Therefore I judge that we must not cause trouble for those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles; but that we write to them to abstain from
-things polluted by idols,
-and from sexual immorality,
-from things strangled,
-and from blood.
(Acts 15:1-20 EMTV)

So much for any valid argument for those who want to remain under law.... :crazy[/quote:1lbop1c8]


Consider....James speaking....[Acts 15:18-20] "Wherefore MY SENTENCE IS, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

[quote:1lbop1c8]That was a lie for Paul didn't teach to "forsake Moses."

Sorry but that DOESNT fit the actual EVIDENCE....
If you will READ this you will see very clearly that Paul HAD TO HAVE BEEN laying aside the law of Moses in order to be ACCUSED of doing so...

What then? It is necessary for an assembly to come together; for they will hear that you have come. Therefore do this, which we say to you: There are four men with us who have taken a vow upon themselves. Take them and purify yourself with them, and pay for them that they may have their head shaved, and that all may know that those things of which they have been informed about you are nothing, but that you are agreeing with and keeping the law yourself.

But concerning the Gentiles having believed, we wrote, having judged that they should keep no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, and from anything strangled, and from fornication."

Then Paul, having taken the men, on the next day having been purified with them, entered into the temple, thus giving notice to the completion of the days of the purification, until the time when the offering was offered in behalf of each one of them.

Now when the seven days were about to be completed, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, were stirring up all the crowd and put their hands on him, crying out, "Men, Israelites, help! This is the man who is teaching all people everywhere against the people and the Law and this place; and furthermore he has brought Greeks into the temple and has made common this holy place." For they had seen Trophimus the Ephesian in the city with him, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.
(Acts 21:22-29 EMTV)

VERY plainly there it is shown that Paul HAD to have been teaching in such a way that the JEWS believed him to be teaching AGAINST the Mosaic law that they supposedly cherished so much....WHY else would he even have to be TOLD to purify himself ? *IF* he was observing the law this 'pharisee of pharisees' would KNOW to do it all by his little self. [/quote:1lbop1c8]


He taught that blood ordinances had been fulfilled. He did not teach that God's laws, commandments and statutes were to be disregarded. Truly, it all goes to Jesus telling us that He didn't come to change the law. As written in Leviticus....what we are to eat is a law.

 

[whirlwind]

Throughout all this discussion I have been saying that there is both a physical and spiritual aspect to the food laws, what is clean and unclean. Please consider the following I wrote on this subject several months ago....


~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Leviticus 11:7-8 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.

Carcase #5038 a flabby thing, i.e. a carcase or carrion (human or bestial, often collect); fig. an idol: (dead) body, (dead) carcase, dead of itself, which died, (beast) that (which) dieth of itself.

As most topics in the Bible the deeper meaning of what is written in the Scriptures is spiritual. Concerning the deeper meaning of the ban on certain foods, I have pasted the section referring to swine below. I thank "C" for this explanation.......


~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"C"~ 1/13/09


Lev 11:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, These are the living things which ye may eat among all the beasts that are on the earth.
Lev 11:3 Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that may ye eat.
Clovenhooted means they are surefooted on unsteady ground. These "people" can go through difficult times and stay on their feet, because they know the Word. They "cheweth the cud" which in reality in Hebrew means "bring up" ( ) but that is what we must do with the Word. We must chew it again and again. Meditate on it day and night.

Now you may "eat" these animals (people) You may partake of them, because they are in the Word.Jesus has flesh too and we are told to partake of Him.

Lev 11:7 And the swine, because he parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, but cheweth not the cud, he is unclean unto you.
Some people are walk in works (parteth the hoof ) but do not know the Word.(cheweth not the cud ) so do not partake of them. Do not follow them.

Follow those who walk in the works of God AND know the Word (Grace)


~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I agree with that and believe that is what is being said in His Word. But...does that mean we can, or should, eat pork, shrimp, crab, etc.? Does it mean the health laws are null and void? What else does our Father say about it?

Isaiah 65:2-4 I have spread out My hands all the day unto a rebellious People, which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts; A People that provoketh Me to anger continually to My face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick; Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat swine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels.

Matthew 8:28 And when He was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met Him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way.

It is interesting that the above Isaiah Scripture mentions..."remain among the graves" while here in Matthew it is written..."coming out of the tombs." Both having to do with swine! What or who are in the tombs....the dead, the spiritually dead or....dead spirits.


8:30-32 And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding. So the devils besought Him, saying, "If Thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine." And He said unto them, "Go." And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters.


Waters are symbolic of people....humanity. The demons went into the swine and into humanity. If that is where they "perished" then that is where they remain. Swine are scavengers and all the poisons they consume stay with them as they don't have sweat glands.

When God instructs us to not partake of the flesh of swine He is saying not to partake of the lies of the devil. The opposite is.....

John 6:51-52 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is My flesh, which will give for the life of the world." The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, "How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?"

6:54-56 Whoso eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He that eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, dwelleth in Me, and I in him.


When we eat His truth then He dwells in us. When we eat Satan's lies, the forbidden foods, then....who dwells in us?

For me, I now see it more in a spiritual vein. It represents Satan and his filthy, unclean, abominations that we should not partake of but....does that mean it is alright to eat swine? Because it is spiritual is the physical taken away? It is both. We may not partake of Satan's filth as it contaminates our spirit. We may not partake of the swine filth as it contaminates our bodies.


Malachi 4:4-6 Remember ye the law of Moses My servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statues and judgments. Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

Blood ordinances are no longer in affect...as He fulfilled them. But, what of the commandments, statutes and judgments? I see the words..."it shall be a statute for ever in all your dwellings throughout your generations," when He gives us those words. Did "for ever" change when Christ was born?

Leviticus 26:3-4 If ye walk in My statutes, and keep My commandments, and do them; Then I will give you rain in due season.........(9) For I will have respect unto you, and make you fruitful, and multiply you, and establish My covenant with you.

Deuteronomy 5:31 But as for thee, stand thou here by Me, and I will speak unto thee all the commandments, and the statues, and the judgments, which thou shalt teach them, that they may do them in the land which I give them to possess it.' (33) Ye shall walk in all the ways which the LORD your God hath commanded you, that ye may live, and that it may be well with you, and that ye may prolong your days in the land which ye shall possess.


I believe that last verse gives us the answer to the question. We will live spiritually if we only partake of the clean things. We will live a longer physical life if we only partake of the clean things and....He "will have respect unto you." A longer, healthier life...physically and spiritually!

 

[Drew]

It is commonly held that in the Mark 7 encounter over purity laws (and the parallel account in Matthew), Jesus’ central aim is to critique the Pharisees for adding man-made traditions to the pure core of Torah. I suggest that this position rests on the extremely weak implicit supposition that since Jesus begins his critique with an attack on Pharasaic add-ons, that focus must be preserved throughout the encounter. There is obviously no “rule†that prohibits a person (such as Jesus) from shifting the target of his critique from one thing to another. And this is clearly what is happening in the Mark 7 encounter.

The person who thinks that Jesus is not overturning the Levitical food laws is faced with an enormous challenge: the Torah clearly asserts that eating certain foods make the Jew unclean, and yet Jesus says these things:

there is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile the man. 16["If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear."] 17When he had left the crowd and entered (P)the house, (Q)His disciples questioned Him about the parable. 18And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, 19because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?"

I am, frankly, mystified at why the argument does not end here – Jesus is clearly talking about food in this section and is saying that no foods defile. This is a direct challenge to the Levitical food laws. And yet some insist on trumping the plain meaning of what Jesus is saying by (apparently) appealing to the notion that the initial focus of Jesus’ critique – Pharisaic distortions to Torah – is still the central matter on the table. I am not sure how this really works – Jesus clearly is saying that all foods are clean in direct contradiction to the prescriptions of Torah.

Arguments can and do evolve – there is no rule that say “if you begin a discussion attacking item x, the rest of what you say in that encounter must be an elaboration of that critique of xâ€Â. Clearly the debate does indeed begin with a focus on Pharasaical add-ons to Torah. But when Jesus says that nothing that goes into the mouth defiles you, it is clear that Jesus is steering the conversation in another direction and is making the more general claim that the time of the Levitical food laws has come to an end. How can the food laws survive this claim by Jesus?

When we get statements like the following, it is obvious that the matter on the table is no longer Pharasaic distortions to Torah (which is clearly the focus of verses 1-13):

And He was saying, "(T)That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. 21"For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, (U)envy, slander, pride and foolishness. 23"All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man."

This is clearly not an argument against the Pharisees adding things on to existing rules about how foods defile. If Jesus is still concerned specifically with the addition of man-made traditions to Levtical food laws, why is He challenging the very premise of the Levitical food laws, which is that foods that go into the man defile him?

Clearly, Jesus is not still focused on the addition of distortions to food laws that are otherwise to be upheld. No – he is overturning the food laws. With the re-definition of the people of God to include Gentiles, there is no longer any room for symbols that set the Jew apart from the Gentile – and that is precisely what the food laws did. So now, they must be set aside. And this is what Jesus does.

 

[Drew]

Where did Paul write...."everything is good to eat?"

From 1 Timothy 4

3They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. 4For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving.

Remember - Paul is criticizing people who abstain from certain foods. Perhaps you can explain to us how this is not effectively a statement by Paul that all foods can be eaten.

 

[whirlwind]

It is commonly held that in the Mark 7 encounter over purity laws (and the parallel account in Matthew), Jesus’ central aim is to critique the Pharisees for adding man-made traditions to the pure core of Torah. I suggest that this position rests on the extremely weak implicit supposition that since Jesus begins his critique with an attack on Pharasaic add-ons, that focus must be preserved throughout the encounter. There is obviously no “rule†that prohibits a person (such as Jesus) from shifting the target of his critique from one thing to another. And this is clearly what is happening in the Mark 7 encounter.

The person who thinks that Jesus is not overturning the Levitical food laws is faced with an enormous challenge: the Torah clearly asserts that eating certain foods make the Jew unclean, and yet Jesus says these things:

there is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile the man. 16["If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear."] 17When he had left the crowd and entered (P)the house, (Q)His disciples questioned Him about the parable. 18And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, 19because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?"

I am, frankly, mystified at why the argument does not end here – Jesus is clearly talking about food in this section and is saying that no foods defile. This is a direct challenge to the Levitical food laws. And yet some insist on trumping the plain meaning of what Jesus is saying by (apparently) appealing to the notion that the initial focus of Jesus’ critique – Pharisaic distortions to Torah – is still the central matter on the table. I am not sure how this really works – Jesus clearly is saying that all foods are clean in direct contradiction to the prescriptions of Torah.

Arguments can and do evolve – there is no rule that say “if you begin a discussion attacking item x, the rest of what you say in that encounter must be an elaboration of that critique of xâ€Â. Clearly the debate does indeed begin with a focus on Pharasaical add-ons to Torah. But when Jesus says that nothing that goes into the mouth defiles you, it is clear that Jesus is steering the conversation in another direction and is making the more general claim that the time of the Levitical food laws has come to an end. How can the food laws survive this claim by Jesus?

When we get statements like the following, it is obvious that the matter on the table is no longer Pharasaic distortions to Torah (which is clearly the focus of verses 1-13):

And He was saying, "(T)That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. 21"For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, (U)envy, slander, pride and foolishness. 23"All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man."

This is clearly not an argument against the Pharisees adding things on to existing rules about how foods defile. If Jesus is still concerned specifically with the addition of man-made traditions to Levtical food laws, why is He challenging the very premise of the Levitical food laws, which is that foods that go into the man defile him?

Clearly, Jesus is not still focused on the addition of distortions to food laws that are otherwise to be upheld. No – he is overturning the food laws. With the re-definition of the people of God to include Gentiles, there is no longer any room for symbols that set the Jew apart from the Gentile – and that is precisely what the food laws did. So now, they must be set aside. And this is what Jesus does.

Drew, Mark 7 is not about the foods that defile. No where are clean or unclean FOODS mentioned. It is the traditions of how one eats food being discussed...with UNWASHEN HANDS, washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables or, to put it another way...."Why walk not Thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread WITH UNWASHEN HANDS?"

It isn't the bread, it isn't the meat it is TRADITIONS OF MAN being discussed.