Not Eating Pork (Biblical Reason?)

I won't lower myself to your mindset.

Wow! First we were talking of a dietary ordinance. Hardly anything to get worked up over. Then out come words like blaspheme, sin and evil. Then resulting of accusing me of false prophecy and lying. I guess you don't want a civil discussion. I won't lower myself to your mindset. I'm am off this thread.

I really never knew that there were Christians that believed you couldn't eat pork and had to follow the dietary laws of the Old testament or you were sinning. If that is the case, then should a woman not be permitted to go to church during her monthly, and is every thing that she touches unclean during that time? What about a man if he hands her some Tylenol or something and accidentally touches her hand, is he unclean for 7 days and not even allowed to attend church...or what?

I don't really know much about the laws of the OT, but I can't understand how you could choose some to follow and not the others? I mean to me it sounds like if you are going to follow one, then you would have to follow them all...with exception to animal sacrifice, anyhow.

There's 613 quite a bit to follow, and one needs a tent to offer and a menstrual barn to hang out in.

LOL, honey...but yeah, I agree as long as it is the men that get the tent....hahaha

Oh wait, what am I saying...that would probably be a blessing for most men....

Seriously though, I would like to know how people who think they have to follow the dietary laws, view the other laws. Do they follow them or not? If not then, why not?

Acts 15:29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell. (Biblegateway)

According to the Word, and not our own preferential notions, sexual impurity is in the same command as the food laws. It appears that both are requirements so....

Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't take that into consideration that leaving out the link may appear as if I'm free handing and not a properly linked quote from a article. It wasn't my intention to be obstinate.

My girlfriend was looking at our conversation and agreed it's proper to use http// to sentences of other sources to ensure people don't assume the words are my own but she also said she could not see your link back to the website in your post that mentioned DUCK DUCK GO. I told her to Hoover the pointer over the word and click it, she said she felt stupid for not knowing that was a link to another site. She had always thought the high lightened color words was just that. people do that a lot on forums making colorful words etc. I said don't feel stupid not everybody is computer swavy and knows all the little ways to link stuff.

I apologize for being rude to you about your own thoughts about swine, I had read that pigs do not build up toxins in their body because of a lack of sweat glans and I surely could of said my point alittle more civil.

.. Gentiles are allowed to eat even snakes and rats.

"Most theologians assume that God’s laws regarding clean and unclean meats ended at Christ’s crucifixion. They suppose that the New Covenant removes the need for Christians to keep such laws. But is that what the Bible says?
The administrative change from the Levitical priesthood to the ministry of Jesus Christ did not void God’s expectations that His people obey His law of clean and unclean meats (or any other law) as part of their sanctification, or separation, as people of God (see Leviticus 11:44-47; Leviticus 19:2; Leviticus 20:7-26; Leviticus 21:8). Peter and Paul both speak of the continuing need for God’s people to be holy (Ephesians 1:4; 1 Peter 1:14-16).
Some Bible scholars acknowledge that members of the early Church continued to observe the distinctions between clean and unclean meats. However, because of the common misconception that the New Covenant abolishes much of God’s law, many assume these food requirements were simply Jewish cultural practices that continued until the Church became more gentile in composition and outlook. Such preconceived ideas have influenced interpretations of many New Testament passages. In theological circles this is known as eisegesis, or reading one’s own ideas into Scripture.
Let’s examine the New Testament passages dealing with food. As we do that let’s practice exegesis— drawing meaning out of Scripture by seeking a thorough understanding of the background of a passage as we seek to apply it.

Food controversy in the Church
When reading through the New Testament, we do find references to a controversy in the early Church involving food. However, an examination of the Scriptures reveals the issue to be different from what many assume.
In 1 Corinthians 8 the apostle Paul discussed “the eating of things offered to idols” (1 Corinthians 8:4). Why was this an issue?
“Meat was often sacrificed on pagan altars and dedicated to pagan gods in Paul’s day. Later this meat was offered for sale in the public meat markets. Some Christians wondered if it were morally right for Christians to eat such meat that had previously been sacrificed to pagan gods” (Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 1995, “Meat”).
It is interesting, though not conclusive, to note that in Acts 14:13, the only passage in which the type of animal sacrificed to idols is mentioned, it was oxen—clean animals—that were about to be offered.
This controversy was not over the kinds of meat that should be eaten. Obedient Jews of the day, in accordance with God’s instruction, did not consider unclean meat even to be a possible source of food. Instead, the controversy dealt with the conscience of each believer when it came to eating meat— clean meat—that may have been sacrificed to idols.
Paul explained that “an idol is nothing” (1 Corinthians 8:4), clarifying that it was not intrinsically harmful to eat meats that had been sacrificed to an idol. That an animal had been sacrificed to a pagan god had no bearing on whether the meat was suitable for food.
Paul continued: “However, there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. But food does not commend us to God; for neither if we eat are we the better, nor if we do not eat are we the worse” (1 Corinthians 8:7-8).
When a believer bought meat in the market or was invited to a meal at which meat was served, it was not necessary to determine whether anyone had offered it to an idol, said Paul (1 Corinthians 10:25-27). His concern was that the brethren be considerate of others who believed differently. He taught that in such cases it was better for them not to eat meat than to risk causing offense (1 Corinthians 8:13; 1 Corinthians 10:28).
The question of meat sacrificed to idols was a considerable controversy in New Testament times. It is the foundation of many of Paul’s discussions of Christian liberty and conscience. Unlike God’s law of clean and unclean animals, which was straightforwardly recorded in the Old Testament, the Hebrew Scriptures are not explicit about the matter of food offered to idols. But, in the first-century world of the New Testament, this issue varied in significance and importance to members according to their conscience and understanding.
The timing of Paul’s letters
The chronological relationship between Paul’s letters to the members in Corinth and his correspondence with those in Rome is another important piece of background information people often overlook.
Many believe Romans 14 supports the idea that Christians are free from all former restrictions regarding the meats they may eat. Romans 14:14, in which Paul wrote, “I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean,” is often cited as a proof text for this view.
This approach, however, fails to consider Paul’s perspective and the context of his letter to the Roman church. Many Bible resources agree that Paul wrote the book of 1 Corinthians around A.D. 55 and that he wrote his epistle to the Romans from Corinth in 56 or 57. As demonstrated above, the food controversy in Corinth was over meat sacrificed to idols. Since Paul was writing to the Romans from Corinth, where this had been a significant issue, the subject was fresh on Paul’s mind and is the logical, biblically supported basis for his comments in Romans 14.
Understanding Paul’s intent
Those who assume the subject of Romans 14 is a retraction of God’s law regarding clean and unclean animals must force this interpretation into the text because it has no biblical foundation. The historical basis for the discussion appears, from evidence in the chapter itself, to have been meat sacrificed to idols.
Romans 14:2 contrasts the one who “eats only vegetables” with the one who believes “he may eat all things”—meat as well as vegetables. Romans 14:6 discusses eating vs. not eating and is variously interpreted as referring to fasting (not eating or drinking), vegetarianism (consuming only vegetables) or eating or not eating meat sacrificed to idols.
Romans 14:21 shows that meat offered to idols was the dominant issue of this chapter: “It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak.” Romans of the day commonly offered both meat and wine to idols, with portions of the offerings later sold in the marketplace.
The Life Application Bible comments on Romans 14:2: “The ancient system of sacrifice was at the center of the religious, social, and domestic life of the Roman world. After a sacrifice was presented to a god in a pagan temple, only part of it was burned. The remainder was often sent to the market to be sold. Thus a Christian might easily—even unknowingly—buy such meat in the marketplace or eat it at the home of a friend.
“Should a Christian question the source of his meat? Some thought there was nothing wrong with eating meat that had been offered to idols because idols were worthless and phony. Others carefully checked the source of their meat or gave up meat altogether, in order to avoid a guilty conscience. The problem was especially acute for Christians who had once been idol worshipers. For them, such a strong reminder of their pagan days might weaken their newfound faith. Paul also deals with this problem in 1 Corinthians 8.”...........................

What rule do you follow in meat diet...for example...pork?

Wow! First we were talking of a dietary ordinance. Hardly anything to get worked up over. Then out come words like blaspheme, sin and evil. Then resulting of accusing me of false prophecy and lying. I guess you don't want a civil discussion. I won't lower myself to your mindset. I'm am off this thread.

Wish I could PM you. Don't get off this thread. That is what they want. If we run from conflict in a printed medium like an Internet forum how are we going to face down the adversary in everyday life?
You don't have to lower your standards to reply to such as that. In fact, holding to who you are in Christ while that continues to flail in their way makes their point less impactful. And your example highly righteous and encouraging to any who may come here seeking to witness what it is to live the Good News .

I don't condemn you or anyone else for anything. That is not my job or any man's job. Let us each be persuaded we are within our Lord's graces. If you are happy with your walk with Jesus, I will call you brother and be happy with you. If in fellowship and I notice evil about you; I simply will separate myself from you and leave you to God.

Send me all yer unwanted Pork.

...with exception to animal sacrifice...

Wish I could PM you. Don't get off this thread. That is what they want. If we run from conflict in a printed medium like an Internet forum how are we going to face down the adversary in everyday life?
You don't have to lower your standards to reply to such as that. In fact, holding to who you are in Christ while that continues to flail in their way makes their point less impactful. And your example highly righteous and encouraging to any who may come here seeking to witness what it is to live the Good News .