He was talking a human principle that relates to the Word.
A principle that mature adults can understand.....
Dietary laws, do you keep them?
- Thread starter Hakawaka
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
He was talking a human principle that relates to the Word.
A principle that mature adults can understand.....
I agree that God knows what is best..
The food has only gotten worse and the principles from God are all the more important.
Okay this will be the deciding point....
Did God clean the unclean animals so we could consume them or was it an illustration to show that the Gentiles were now clean to witness to?
The illustration that Peter was given is used to prove we can eat anything now but was it just an illustration with spiritual application not physical?
When it come to truth... some gather support for their preconceived religious ideas. Their minds are not open to be taught by God's Holy Spirit, and therefore they can manipulate the sacred texts to mean exactly what they want to believe.
There is heaps in the Bible teaching that unclean foods are a curse. Not fit for consumption... one place in Acts 10 Peter has a vision. If we look at this with an honest heart you will see it is a vision about people not what we eat.
There is no example of anyone eating unclean food when they are following Jesus.
There is heaps in the Bible teaching that unclean foods are a curse. Not fit for consumption... one place in Acts 10 Peter has a vision. If we look at this with an honest heart you will see it is a vision about people not what we eat.
There is no example of anyone eating unclean food when they are following Jesus.
It is literally true that you can prove almost anything you want to prove by using a single, isolated text of Scripture. That is why it is so important to bring together the consensus of what Moses, David, Jesus, Paul and all other inspired authors have to say on the subject.
Show me from the word.
That the principles of health given by God have been changed.
Show me from the word.
That the principles of health given by God have been changed.
[QUOTE="TMS,
There is heaps in the Bible teaching that unclean foods are a curse. Not fit for consumption... one place in Acts 10 Peter has a vision. If we look at this with an honest heart you will see it is a vision about people not what we eat.
There is no example of anyone eating unclean food when they are following Jesus.[/QUOTE]
You might want to consider changing the word food to the word animals. I don't think unclean animals were ever referred to as food.
There is heaps in the Bible teaching that unclean foods are a curse. Not fit for consumption... one place in Acts 10 Peter has a vision. If we look at this with an honest heart you will see it is a vision about people not what we eat.
There is no example of anyone eating unclean food when they are following Jesus.[/QUOTE]
You might want to consider changing the word food to the word animals. I don't think unclean animals were ever referred to as food.
One popular argument used to support the eating of unclean meats is in Matthew 15:11.
Jesus said, "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man."
Without consideration of the context, this verse seems to be saying that we may eat anything without being condemned or contaminated. But when we examine the entire chapter, we find that it has nothing to do with diet. From verse 2, we learn that Jesus was dealing with a controversy by the Pharisees, who insisted that the disciples give their hands a ceremonial washing before they ate food. The purpose of this bath was to cleanse away the defilement of touching any Gentile person or object.
Afterward, Peter asked Jesus, "Declare unto us this parable." Matthew 15:15. This statement proves that Christ's words were not to be taken literally, because a parable is merely a story or statement to illustrate a point. Notice how Jesus explained the meaning of His figurative statement: "Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen handswith unwashen hands defileth not a man." Verses 17-20.
Now the whole story begins to clear up. Jesus knew that these religious leaders had murder in their hearts against Him, and yet their greatest concern was not over those evil dispositions, but only for a foolish tradition based on prejudice. That was the meaning of His parable. It did not refer to eating food, but rather to ceremonial washing.
Jesus said, "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man."
Without consideration of the context, this verse seems to be saying that we may eat anything without being condemned or contaminated. But when we examine the entire chapter, we find that it has nothing to do with diet. From verse 2, we learn that Jesus was dealing with a controversy by the Pharisees, who insisted that the disciples give their hands a ceremonial washing before they ate food. The purpose of this bath was to cleanse away the defilement of touching any Gentile person or object.
Afterward, Peter asked Jesus, "Declare unto us this parable." Matthew 15:15. This statement proves that Christ's words were not to be taken literally, because a parable is merely a story or statement to illustrate a point. Notice how Jesus explained the meaning of His figurative statement: "Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen handswith unwashen hands defileth not a man." Verses 17-20.
Now the whole story begins to clear up. Jesus knew that these religious leaders had murder in their hearts against Him, and yet their greatest concern was not over those evil dispositions, but only for a foolish tradition based on prejudice. That was the meaning of His parable. It did not refer to eating food, but rather to ceremonial washing.
Hi @TMS
God's word on food hasn't ever changed for the Gentiles.
The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands. Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.
That's what God said man could eat. This is copied from my version of the Scriptures and I imagine you'll find it in yours too. He gave one restriction concerning meat:
“But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it."
Now, I don't know how this might apply to some 'principle of health' that you've found in God's word, but these are His very words to Noah after Noah returned to the dry land. He told Noah, a man just like you and I, there were no 'Jewish' people at that time because God's plan of salvation hadn't really started yet, that he could eat everything that lives and moves about.
When God raised up His people from Egypt and brought them out of their bondage, He then restricted many of the living creatures that they could eat. Personally, I believe that He did it, not so much for health reasons, but to keep them separated from the nations of the earth as they spent the next 1,000 years working out the plan of His coming salvation. Even today, many devout Jews are troubled to eat with Gentiles. Especially during the High Holy Days. I believe that's why Jesus changed that when he came because now the purpose of their special diet was not necessary. The Jews had kept themselves separated and completed the work that God raised them up to do.
So, when Jesus came, he seems to have taught that there's nothing that we can eat that God will frown on and tell us we shouldn't eat. Then that message seems to have also been made to Peter. The dietary laws were given for a purpose. I don't believe it was health, but it was very specific and particular in a few matters and prevented the Jews from sitting down to eat with people who didn't keep those restrictions. Now the need for the Jew to keep separated from the Gentiles is no longer there.
God told Noah that he could eat of anything that moves about the earth. That has always been the allowable diet for any of us who aren't practicing Judaism. He has never changed it.
Hi @NightTwister
So, when he then continues with that teaching and says that whatever it is that he's referencing goes into the mouth and then to the stomach, is that where our spiritual heart is? Stomach is a metaphor for heart?
Unclean had nothing to do with filth.
Its was a taboo mentality established by God to make the Jews conscious of standards of good and bad as to condition the Jews to separate from those who live under Satan's domain.
Before the angels eyes watching the Jews God was setting up camp with His people vs the people under Satan.
It was social conditioning giving Jews a system of Divine standards vs the world's ways.
Since "unclean" had nothing to do with filth as we know it, and meant actually to be ceremonially unclean? Once the Cross
knocked down the old barrier that used to separate Jews from others, the dietary taboos could be dropped.
In Christ .............
I didn't watch conspiracy theory videos. Just admit you told me what to eat and we can move on.
You're being to
You're being too literal. Whatever you watch or read is spiritual "food" whether good or bad, just like whatever you eat can be good or bad physically. I'm actually very conscious of what I consume both spiritually and physically. But if I have a Twinkie once it twice a year it's not going to kill me.
Hi @NightTwister
And these teachings or spiritual truths go into the stomach and are then expelled. Is that what happens to all the spiritual food that a man 'eats'? 'Cause I mean, that would mean that even the truth of God goes into the stomach and is expelled. I mean Jesus did say 'whatever' a man eats...
Hi again @NightTwister
And when the sheet came down and Peter was told not to call anything unclean that God had made, those animals that he saw were to be understood as 'metaphorical' spiritual food? I mean, Peter is told not to call anything that God has made unclean, yet God, in His law to Israel called a number of animals unclean. He even referenced it way back in his command to Noah when telling him that he was to bring a certain number of 'clean' animals onto the ark with him. So, it would naturally follow then that there must have been 'unclean' animals.
But somehow this is all about spiritual food. Hmmmmm.
And when the sheet came down and Peter was told not to call anything unclean that God had made, those animals that he saw were to be understood as 'metaphorical' spiritual food? I mean, Peter is told not to call anything that God has made unclean, yet God, in His law to Israel called a number of animals unclean. He even referenced it way back in his command to Noah when telling him that he was to bring a certain number of 'clean' animals onto the ark with him. So, it would naturally follow then that there must have been 'unclean' animals.
But somehow this is all about spiritual food. Hmmmmm.
Hi @NightTwister
I'm not clear on what 'rolling eyes' is meant to tell me. Does that mean that you think it's a 'story' (rolling eyes) that a sheet came down from heaven? Or is it a 'story' (rolling eyes) that Peter was told not to call anything unclean? Or do you mean it's a story (rolling eyes) that God's law called certain animals unclean?
I'm sorry, but I'm missing the inference.
I'm not clear on what 'rolling eyes' is meant to tell me. Does that mean that you think it's a 'story' (rolling eyes) that a sheet came down from heaven? Or is it a 'story' (rolling eyes) that Peter was told not to call anything unclean? Or do you mean it's a story (rolling eyes) that God's law called certain animals unclean?
I'm sorry, but I'm missing the inference.
That Peter was not to call anything 'unclean' reveals the intent as to what it meant to those who lived under ceremonial law.
It could not refer food with spoilage or having dirt on it. For if it did? God could be telling Peter to eat meat that was rotting.
Clean and unclean was in reference to kosher and unkosher.
It speaks of something religious and ceremonial.
God declaring any food clean could not mean we can eat anything we wish as long as we give thanks.
If some meat was found to contain salmonella it does not give one license to simply eat it after a prayer.
In other words?
Peter was told that he could now eat as much bacon as he wished.
But, not bacon that was spoiled. Some confuse the two...