Old Testament Diet - Was God being a Bully?

[Soyeong]

"Judaizers" was a term first coined and used by the heretic Marcion. It did not refer to those who were trying to get Gentiles to obey God's law, nor did Paul mean that when he used the word, but rather means "to adopt Jewish customs and rights, one who observes the ritual law of the Jews". It has to with someone who was trying to make Gentiles live as a Jew and become a Jew, and having him keep all of the customs of the Jewish people. They want the perspective person to live exactly as they do, keeping God's law in the same manner as they do in order to be saved. It has nothing to do with God's law except for the fact that Jewish customs were bound up in decisions made about God's law, also known as their yoke of the Torah.

 

[Soyeong]

I'm sure he is.
I don't go to synagogues though.

Maybe you should?

Maybe.
But everything changed after Jesus came. Hebrews says that something better has come - the law, which the Messiah fulfilled anyway - was only a shadow of what was to come, is the Old Covenant and is obsolete.

Again, fulfilling the law meant to explain or demonstrate how to obey it, not to do away with it, and Jesus fulfilled the law both by teaching and by demonstrating how to obey it. Shadows were important teachings about the Messiah and are rehearsals of what we will be doing in the world to come. Also, I have said a number of times that I'm not suggesting that we go back to the Old Covenant, but that God's law is based on who He is and is independent of any particular covenant. The New Covenant involves God writing His law on our hearts, so it was not God's holy, righteous, and good law that became obsolete, but rather God made a New Covenant so that His people would obey it.

Absolutey!.
But neither Jesus, nor anyone else, has ever told me that those good works include keeping all the Jewish food laws.

John 7:16 So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.

Jesus was not in disagreement with the Father, but did only the Father's will, and only taught what the Father had taught. God does not have two different standards for how to have a holy, righteous, and good conduct. Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 are both part of Scripture and Paul said that all Scripture is God-breathed and useful for training in righteous and in doing every good work, so God's dietary laws are part of that.

It won't.
But for the Jew, Jesus has fulfilled that law, and Gentiles have not been commanded, by him, to keep it.

Everyone since Moses who has loved their neighbor as themselves has fulfilled the law (Galatians 5:14), so it was not a once and for all thing that Jesus did, and in fact Jesus fulfilled the law six times in Matthew 5 by teaching how it should be obeyed. Jesus spoke mostly to Jewish audiences, but if we are to be his disciples or followers, then we need to follow his example of holiness and obedience to the law. The whole point of sanctification is about being made righteous and more like Christ in his holiness and his obedience to God's laws, but if you refuse to obey God's, then you are working at odds with that.

[/quote]Jesus commanded us to love as he loves us, and summarised the 10 commandments by saying "love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and love your neighbour as yourself." He did not say that if you eat a ham sandwich you are sinning against God and disobeying him.

If you keep the law, you have to keep ALL of it, and if you break one part of the law you are guilty of breaking ALL of it.[/quote]

If we love God, then we will obey his commands. Obeying God's dietary laws is part of His instructions for how we are to love Him with all of our heart, soul, mind, and strength. If we are trying to become justified by keeping the law legalistically through our own efforts, then we need to keep all of it or we won't be justified, but was never the purpose of the law. God's law is about how those who are justified should live and how we should express our faith and love.

So James wrote them a letter telling them to abstain from certain things - but expected them to know that actually he meant everything in the law, not just what's on this list?
Sorry, I don't believe that. What would be the point in doing that; it's confusing and misleading. If they had wanted the Gentile believers to abstain from pork, they could, and should, have made that clear. If eating pork was such a big deal for Gentile believers who had come to faith in Jesus, they/we should have been told and not just left to assume that we would work it out somehow from the OT.

The Bible defines sin as lawlessness and the law says that eating unclean animals is a sin and an abomination to God, and Gentiles don't have a licence to sin. It doesn't any more straightforward than that. As part of God's people, why would you want any part in something that is abominable to Him? If you join a new religion with a code of conduct, then you are expected to learn about how to follow it, this should be obvious. If you are told to train in righteousness or practice righteousness, then you are expected to learn how to do that. That's what Gentiles were doing every Sabbath in the synagogues.

The commands in James' letter are from the law, and as James said, we are to be doers of the word. The things he listed were not intended to be an exhaustive list, but rather he said it to not make it too difficult for new Gentile believers coming to faith, not a list a for mature believers. It had a specific purpose of ensuring that Gentiles made a clean break from paganism and could have table fellowship with other Jews.

Maybe - I doubt that's how most Christians see it though. I don't consider that I have joined Judaism To me, and I suspect to most people, including those who write about world faiths, Christianity and Judaism are two separate religions.

I'd agree that most Christians don't see it that way, but they are in error. Today, the labels of Christianity and Judaism have become more distinct, but that was not the way it was with the early Christians. Christians have become separated from the Jewish roots of their faith and from the proper cultural context with which to interpret the Bible and Jews have become separated from their Messiah, which is a great loss to both.

So the law doesn't command Gentiles to be circumcised - which for a Jew was a sign that they were part of the covenant promise and belonged to God - but it does expect Gentiles to obey food laws to show that we are holy and belong to God? Doesn't make sense.
And I belong to God because of Jesus anyway, and through being born again and receiving his Holy Spirit.

Romans 2:26 So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?

Again, we are made holy by God through faith and having a holy conduct is not about showing that we are holy, but doing what is holy accordingly. Like you, Jews belong to God by faith and circumcision of the flesh is an outward sign of that, but according to Paul, it is those Gentiles who obey God's laws who will be regarded as having a circumcised heart, which all Jews and Gentiles should have, and which is much more important than circumcision of the flesh.

Yes, I am made righteous and holy by Christ, through Christ. I have every spiritual blessing in Christ. I belong to God, am his child and am an heir with Christ.
God HAS prepared good works for me to do and has a plan for my life - a plan which will not be thwarted by the occasional sausage roll or pork chop.

You can choose to do what is unholy, common, profane, sinful and of this world or you can choose to consecrate yourself, do what is righteous, holy, and of God. Even if you weren't included among God's people by faith, it would still be to your advantage to choose wisely.

 

[Strong in Him]

That text says specifically that it was related to illness..

Yes, of course.
Paul said, "because you have frequent illnesses, stop drinking only water, but take some wine". That suggests to me that the water may not have been that good for him and/or the source of the illness.

The Bible does not give the same remedy for every illness.

The Bible doesn't really give remedies for illness at all. That doesn't mean that surgery and antibiotics are wrong.

You seem to have strayed far away from the subject of the Ten Commandments.

The way that we read Scripture; whether we follow/apply everything in it just because it IS in it, is important and actually what this thread is all about. No one denies that God gave food and hygiene laws to the Israelites at Mt Sinai, the question is, does that mean that Gentile Christians who are living under the NEW covenant, who have Jesus as Lord and Saviour, who are born again through him, have received the Holy Spirit and been adopted by God as his children, have to obey all the laws that he once gave to his children, under the OLD Covenant which was broken time and time again because they were unable to keep it?
I say not; many other Christians also say not and that is what I believe the Bible says. It is also a fact, whether anyone admits it or not, that not everything in the Bible is for everyone - I can't be circumcised, men don't have to follow instructions about female uncleanliness or childbirth, and there are a number of personal things that were written only to one person, or problems that existed only in one church that would not have applied to other churches, like 1 Corinthians 11 where Paul is writing about the Lord's supper.

But I have said, regarding the 10 commandments, that they were endorsed by Jesus and summarised into two; love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength, and love your neighbour as yourself. So they are important.
Interesting though that they don't say, "you must obey all the laws I gave to Moses" - no mention at all of food and drink.

 

[Strong in Him]

Maybe you should?

Why? I'm not Jewish and I'm quite happy in the Methodist Church.

Again, fulfilling the law meant to explain or demonstrate how to obey it, not to do away with it, and Jesus fulfilled the law both by teaching and by demonstrating how to obey it.

He didn't SAY that Gentiles who believed in him were also expected/commanded to follow Jewish food and hygiene laws. What he DID say about food was that nothing which goes into the mouth can make someone unclean because it passes out again. So true uncleanliness is about what comes OUT of the mouth, not what goes into it. Mark added the comment that in saying this, he declared all foods to be clean, and that is what I see in the NT too where Paul, a former Pharisee, said that the kingdom of God is not about food or drink, and the council of Jerusalem did not insist that Gentiles follow the food laws, only that they abstained from blood and food offered to idols.
Anything else is making assumptions and reading between the lines; "he must have meant we do x, y and z as well", or "some Gentiles obeyed the laws given at Sinai, so therefore that must mean that all Christians have to as well."

GOD came to earth, in Jesus. GOD himself prophesied, instigated and then sealed the new covenant which centres entirely on his Son. GOD has reconciled us to himself, made us his children, filled us with his Spirit and given us eternal life - through his Son. We are children of God if we accept his Son; nothing else. Everything changed when Jesus came to earth; the old has gone, the new has come.

John 7:16 So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.

Jesus was not in disagreement with the Father, but did only the Father's will, and only taught what the Father had taught. God does not have two different standards for how to have a holy, righteous, and good conduct.

Except that in the OT, forgiveness, atonement, reconciliation and holiness came through the law; now they are through Jesus.
I am holy - set apart for God and divine use - when I commit myself to him, accept Jesus and do not conform to the standards and pattern of the world. Again, that is true and will not be negated or corrupted just because I may have a ham sandwich or bacon.

The Bible defines sin as lawlessness and the law says that eating unclean animals is a sin and an abomination to God, and Gentiles don't have a licence to sin. It doesn't any more straightforward than that. As part of God's people, why would you want any part in something that is abominable to Him?

Except that when I look at Jesus, his life, his teaching, his death on the cross and what that means for me, and as I spend time with him, living and abiding in him, being filled with his Spirit, I do not see, and have not been told by him or anyone else, that this IS a sin and abomination to him.
I had a good day yesterday, helped people, prayed for them and for God's help in my work. At no time did he say to me "if you decide to have a ham sandwich for lunch, you will have sinned against me and I will not hear you." When I had a ham sandwich, at no time did he convict me that I had just committed an abomination or that he was seriously displeased with me. I have days which are not so good, where I may hurt others, or myself, or just not stay as close to him or trust him as much as I could. Sometimes on those days I eat no ham/bacon/pork at all, but that doesn't make it any better or make me any the more righteous.
There are many things in my life which still need to change, need repentance and forgiveness; he has not told me, and I do not see from Scripture, that eating pork is one of them.

The commands in James' letter are from the law, and as James said, we are to be doers of the word. The things he listed were not intended to be an exhaustive list, but rather he said it to not make it too difficult for new Gentile believers coming to faith, not a list a for mature believers.

So where does James say "this list is only for new believers. Once they have accepted Jesus, are reconciled to God, made clean through his blood and have eternal life THEN we need to hit them with all the demands of the Jewish law"? That would make complete nonsense of everything that Paul said when he argued so fiercely against circumcision - part of the law - and reliance on the law to save.

You can choose to do what is unholy, common, profane, sinful and of this world or you can choose to consecrate yourself, do what is righteous, holy, and of God. Even if you weren't included among God's people by faith, it would still be to your advantage to choose wisely.

I do choose wisely; I consecrate myself to God.
Ham and pork do not affect what Jesus has done for me or prevent me from living in him.

 

[BobRyan]

The way that we read Scripture; whether we follow/apply everything in it just because it IS in it, is important and actually what this thread is all about. No one denies that God gave food and hygiene laws to the Israelites at Mt Sinai, the question is, does that mean that Gentile Christians who are living under the NEW covenant, who have Jesus as Lord and Saviour, who are born again through him, have received the Holy Spirit and been adopted by God as his children, have to obey

New Covenant? "this is the New Covenant that I will make with the house of ISRAEL and the house of JUDAH.. I will write My LAW on their mind and on their heart" Jer 31:31-33 - writing the moral LAW of God known to Jeremiah and his readers (using the rules of exegesis). And in Heb 8:6-10 we are reminded that that New Covenant promise is "unchanged" for New Testament Christians.

How would that result in "eating rat sandwiches"??

all the laws that he once gave to his children, under the OLD Covenant which was broken time and time again because they were unable to keep it?
I say not; many other Christians also say not and that is what I believe the Bible says. It is also a fact, whether anyone admits it or not, that not everything in the Bible is for everyone

In Hebrews 7 and in Hebrews 10 we are told that the ceremonial law with its animal sacrifices ended at the cross.

In 1 Cor 7:19 Paul contrasts the law of ceremony with the Commandments of God saying "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God".

But I have said, regarding the 10 commandments, that they were endorsed by Jesus and summarised into two; love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength, and love your neighbour as yourself. So they are important.

Love God with all your heart Deut 6:5
Love your neighbor as yourself Lev 19:18

Are repeated by Christ in Matt 22 and there find that the Jews fully agree with Christ that the LAW and the Prophets are anchored on that immovable foundation - eternal. Neither Christ nor the Jews say at that point "the Law is replaced by Love your neighbor as yourself" in Rom 13 Paul affirms the commandments as upheld by that foundation as does James in James 2. James argues that they are all binding based on "He who said..." and argues that because of that "he who breaks one - breaks them all"

In Romans 8:4-9 Paul points out that the lost are at war with the Law of God and do not submit to it.

no wonder then "the saints KEEP the commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12

 

[Strong in Him]

I don't see the point in discussing this further.

I do not believe that Jesus has commanded Gentile Christians to obey all the food laws; some people here clearly believe that he has, despite not being able to produce the verses.
I believe that Jesus makes me holy and righteous and that will not change just because I may have a bit of bacon; others here clearly believe otherwise.
I do not believe that eating pork is a sin, nor has the Holy Spirit taught me that it is; some here are trying to make me feel that it is a sin. But it's the Spirit's job to convict people of sin, and he hasn't.

There's really no more to be said.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, through the pretensions of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and enjoin abstinence from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving; for then it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.
(1 Timothy 4:1-5)

It just doesn't apply anymore.

 

[rnmomof7]

I try to keep my diet as biblical as I can...

1. No pork
2. I deem beef and buffalo as biblical. I love making dishes with buffalo such as spaghetti
3. Fresh fruit and vegetables are good!

I do not think that God was being a bully when he wrote the dietary standards of the Old Testament. Bacon is high is saturated fat and cannot be good for the arteries. We have a local pizzeria that serves beef pepperoni on their pizzas, which I think as a good idea. God did not command us also to put all those chemicals in foods, which I also believe work against our physical system. The principle use of the chemical azodicarbonamide is in the manufacture of plastics, specifically as a blowing agent. The US uses it as a dough conditioner and a bleaching agent in its breads. As a food additive azodicarbonamide is not authorized in Australia and the EU. Subway removed this chemical from their bread last year...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...oga-mat-chemical-almost-out-of-bread/7587787/

My grandparents and I use to plant garden and there is nothing that tastes so good as food fresh out of the garden. Back in those August days we would eat well out of the garden and have Sunday meals with just garden vegetables.Fresh red potatoes so tender that you can peel them with your hand, tomatoes, corn on the cob, cucumbers in apple cider vinegar, fresh homemade bread, green beans with just a hint of sugar, along with fresh home made tea... Mmmm! Mmmm!

The purpose of the special diet had nothing to do with health ...remember the pagans around the Jews ate the "forbidden " food.... and were healthy and multiplied ...

The purpose of the dietary and dress laws were to make Israel a set aside people that was unlike the pagans that surrounded them.

 

[Soyeong]

Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, through the pretensions of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and enjoin abstinence from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving; for then it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.
(1 Timothy 4:1-5)

It just doesn't apply anymore.

Are those teaching obedience to God's commands really giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils (1 Timothy 4:1)? Is obeying God departing from the faith (4:1)? Would such teaching be considered lies and hypocrisy (4:2)? Are the same teaching others not to marry (4:3)? What things are stated to be consecrated by the word of God and declared to be food and to be received in thanksgiving (4:4-5)? Is Leviticus 11 no longer good doctrine (4:6)? Are God's commands old wives fables (4:7)? Are God's commands profane? (4:7) Are God's commands in Leviticus 11 not Godliness (4:7)? Is Leviticus 11 no longer Scripture and thus no longer instruction in righteousness or a basis for rebuking and correcting (2 Timothy 3:16)? If you think that 1 Timothy 4:3-5 is abolishing the teachings of Leviticus 11, then answering these questions becomes problematic.

2 Peter 3:14-18 Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. 15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. 17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. 18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

In other words, Paul letters plus being ignorant and unstable equals the error of breaking God's law.

1 Timothy 4:3-5 who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.

What does it mean to know the truth in verse 3? God's law, which includes dietary restrictions, is declared by Scripture to be the truth (Psalms 119:142). If all animals are clean and not suitable for eating, then Leviticus 11 is no longer the truth, but Paul said that all Scripture is true and instruction in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Those who know the truth are those who know what animals God has given as food to eat, so verse 3 is talking about people are teaching people to abstain from eating meat that God has already said is good to eat according to the truth of His Word (Leviticus 11). So these false teachers were not telling people to abstain from eating pork, which is not defined as food in Scripture. Keep in mind that when this letter was written to Timothy, "Scripture" meant the OT. In verse 3, the greek word for "food" is "broma" which is used to refer to foods that have already declared to be clean.

In verse 5, what does it mean to be made holy by the word of God and prayer? For something to be holy, it means to be set apart, which is the opposite of common or profane. If all animals are clean, then the animals would not be holy or set apart because animals that are set apart for eating must be set apart or separate from animals that are not set apart for eating. By definition, the very fact that there are a group of animals that are holy means that there must be some other separate group of animals that are not holy. If all animals are made clean, then by definition they would all be common, unholy, or not set apart. If all animals are made clean and set apart, then what are they set apart from? It is an oxymoron to say that all animals are sanctified. So those who believe and know the truth, God's law, will understand the only creatures to be received with thanksgiving as food are creatures that have been set apart by the Word of God and prayer. This is why verse 4 uses the qualified "if" because the only animals to be received by prayer and thanksgiving are those listed as such in Leviticus 11. We are to be thankful for clean animals as food, not for unclean things. Why would we be thankful for eating animals God told us were unclean?

If we pull in even more context, then we run into more problems. Was Paul really saying that God's commands old wives fables, profane and ungodly? As absurd a that is, that's what must be asked if conclude that verse 4 is speaking against those teaching God's dietary commandments. In 1 Timothy 1:4, 2 Timothy 4:4, Titus 1:14, and 2 Peter 1:16, "fables" is contrasted with the truth, the law, and God's Word. The whole problem in the 1st century was false doctrines, traditions, and teaching of men that were nullifying the law of God (Mark 7:6-13). The commandments Leviticus 11 are not fables, common, unholy, ungodly and profane, and are not doctrines of devils, so 1 Timothy 4 is actually in favor of keeping God's dietary laws.

 

[rockytopva]

I have in my possession a 1996 Mustang and a 1994 Ranger. I bought these vehicles new back in the 1990'... Nearly 20 years ago! I am an absolute fanatic about maintenance and upkeep. I have run Mobile 1 Synthetic in both vehicles and the only trouble I have had is from brakes and tires, which is understood in this mountainous region.

I also consider the bible as the maintenance and upkeep book. Now Christ is our sacrifice so I do not believe the Levitical rituals as necessary. But I do think it beneficial to observe the ten commandments and the dietary standards listed.

9 On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:

10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon 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. - Acts 10

If you read the tenth chapter of Acts in its entirety you will find that this message is not dietary but in reference to the gentile people.

I do not believe that the Jewish Christians of the day ate pork. But if pork was the only thing served, and they were hungry enough, I do see them eating pork, along with a heart felt blessing over the food.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Are those teaching obedience to God's commands really giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils (1 Timothy 4:1)? Is obeying God departing from the faith (4:1)? Would such teaching be considered lies and hypocrisy (4:2)? Are the same teaching others not to marry (4:3)? What things are stated to be consecrated by the word of God and declared to be food and to be received in thanksgiving (4:4-5)? Is Leviticus 11 no longer good doctrine (4:6)? Are God's commands old wives fables (4:7)? Are God's commands profane? (4:7) Are God's commands in Leviticus 11 not Godliness (4:7)? Is Leviticus 11 no longer Scripture and thus no longer instruction in righteousness or a basis for rebuking and correcting (2 Timothy 3:16)? If you think that 1 Timothy 4:3-5 is abolishing the teachings of Leviticus 11, then answering these questions becomes problematic.

2 Peter 3:14-18 Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. 15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. 17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. 18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

In other words, Paul letters plus being ignorant and unstable equals the error of breaking God's law.

1 Timothy 4:3-5 who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.

What does it mean to know the truth in verse 3? God's law, which includes dietary restrictions, is declared by Scripture to be the truth (Psalms 119:142). If all animals are clean and not suitable for eating, then Leviticus 11 is no longer the truth, but Paul said that all Scripture is true and instruction in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Those who know the truth are those who know what animals God has given as food to eat, so verse 3 is talking about people are teaching people to abstain from eating meat that God has already said is good to eat according to the truth of His Word (Leviticus 11). So these false teachers were not telling people to abstain from eating pork, which is not defined as food in Scripture. Keep in mind that when this letter was written to Timothy, "Scripture" meant the OT. In verse 3, the greek word for "food" is "broma" which is used to refer to foods that have already declared to be clean.

In verse 5, what does it mean to be made holy by the word of God and prayer? For something to be holy, it means to be set apart, which is the opposite of common or profane. If all animals are clean, then the animals would not be holy or set apart because animals that are set apart for eating must be set apart or separate from animals that are not set apart for eating. By definition, the very fact that there are a group of animals that are holy means that there must be some other separate group of animals that are not holy. If all animals are made clean, then by definition they would all be common, unholy, or not set apart. If all animals are made clean and set apart, then what are they set apart from? It is an oxymoron to say that all animals are sanctified. So those who believe and know the truth, God's law, will understand the only creatures to be received with thanksgiving as food are creatures that have been set apart by the Word of God and prayer. This is why verse 4 uses the qualified "if" because the only animals to be received by prayer and thanksgiving are those listed as such in Leviticus 11. We are to be thankful for clean animals as food, not for unclean things. Why would we be thankful for eating animals God told us were unclean?

If we pull in even more context, then we run into more problems. Was Paul really saying that God's commands old wives fables, profane and ungodly? As absurd a that is, that's what must be asked if conclude that verse 4 is speaking against those teaching God's dietary commandments. In 1 Timothy 1:4, 2 Timothy 4:4, Titus 1:14, and 2 Peter 1:16, "fables" is contrasted with the truth, the law, and God's Word. The whole problem in the 1st century was false doctrines, traditions, and teaching of men that were nullifying the law of God (Mark 7:6-13). The commandments Leviticus 11 are not fables, common, unholy, ungodly and profane, and are not doctrines of devils, so 1 Timothy 4 is actually in favor of keeping God's dietary laws.

It's kind of like when Elijah used God's fire to incinerate the military to protect himself but in the new testament age, the sign of fire falling from heaven is a sign of the antichrist. In the same way, dietary laws are no longer a matter of obedience, and to insist people do follow the dietary laws in the places where it is said to abstain from eating certain types of foods is actually a doctrine of devils as Paul said.

 

[BobRyan]

I don't see the point in discussing this further.

I do not believe that Jesus has commanded Gentile Christians to obey all the food laws; some people here clearly believe that he has, despite not being able to produce the verses.

1. the difference between Jews and gentiles - is not "biology"
2. No text says Jesus died on the cross so that mankind could eat rat sandwiches.
3. Gen 6 and 7 both affirm the distinction unclean and clean animals for gentiles long before there is even a single Jew.
4. Is 66 says that long after the cross God still views the eating of rat sandwiches as wrong.
5. Acts 10 informs us that Peter - long after the cross -- was not eating rat sandwiches and affirms this point 3 times.
6. 1Cor 6 tells us that God holds us guilty of sin if we sin against or bodies.

19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

I believe that obeying the Word of God is right.
1 John 3:4 says "sin IS transgression of the Law" -

Having said - that if these are details that are not important to some - I say all have free will and can make that choice if they wish.

 

[BobRyan]

It's kind of like when Elijah used God's fire to incinerate the military to protect himself but in the new testament age, the sign of fire falling from heaven is a sign of the antichrist. In the same way, dietary laws are no longer a matter of obedience,

The Word of God is ALWAYs a matter of obedience according to Christ in Mark 7:6-13 and in Matt 5.

Matt 5:17-19
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
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.
19 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.

 

[BobRyan]

I have in my possession a 1996 Mustang and a 1994 Ranger. I bought these vehicles new back in the 1990'... Nearly 20 years ago! I am an absolute fanatic about maintenance and upkeep. I have run Mobile 1 Synthetic in both vehicles and the only trouble I have had is from brakes and tires, which is understood in this mountainous region.

I also consider the bible as the maintenance and upkeep book. Now Christ is our sacrifice so I do not believe the Levitical rituals as necessary. But I do think it beneficial to observe the ten commandments and the dietary standards listed.

Indeed we have the manufacturers instruction manual in Lev 11 as to "what is food" and what is "not food".

 

[Gregory Thompson]

The Word of God is ALWAYs a matter of obedience according to Christ in Mark 7:6-13 and in Matt 5.

Matt 5:17-19
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
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.
19 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.

Jesus replaced the function of the law on the cross, now we simply need to obey Jesus. When Jesus was speaking of the Kingdom, he was speaking of the covenant currently in effect, the reason why it was important to teach all the commandments because it was the age of the proclamation of the law and the prophets, now a different mandate is in effect.

 

[Strong in Him]

1. the difference between Jews and gentiles - is not "biology"
2. No text says Jesus died on the cross so that mankind could eat rat sandwiches.
3. Gen 6 and 7 both affirm the distinction unclean and clean animals for gentiles long before there is even a single Jew.
4. Is 66 says that long after the cross God still views the eating of rat sandwiches as wrong.
5. Acts 10 informs us that Peter - long after the cross -- was not eating rat sandwiches and affirms this point 3 times.
6. 1Cor 6 tells us that God holds us guilty of sin if we sin against or bodies.

1. I didn't say it was.
2. I don't know why you keep mentioning rat sandwiches; that is just daft. Rats aren't food and you know full well we were discussing pork.
3. Yet God wanted to preserve some unclean animals, whatever they were, so Noah took them into the ark. For 40 days he and his family were in close contact with unclean animals, even if they didn't eat them (and we don't know.)
This is still Old Testament.
4. See 2. I don't eat rat sandwiches, so you shoot yourself in the foot every time you mention them.
5. See 4 and 2.
6. Eating a ham sandwich is not a sin against my body - especially when compared with cream, sugar, fatty meats, starch and so on. None of these is even mentioned in Leviticus, yet eaten regularly or exclusively they would be very bad indeed for me.

And 7 - which is most important and which some people don't seem to want to address - Jesus, the Messiah, the fulfilment of the Jewish law, has come and saved us. Everything changed when God came to earth to make a new covenant. I believe in him, follow him and try to live by his teachings, which were NOT "abstain from certain foods."

 

[BobRyan]

Jesus replaced the function of the law on the cross

"Love Me and KEEP My Commandments" Exodus 20:6
"If you Love Me KEEP My Commandments" John 14:15
"the saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12
"what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19

Heb 8:6-10 says that the Ten Commandments given at Sinai - are given by Jesus - Jesus' commandments.

So then what does Jesus say His mission was??

Matt 5:17-19
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
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.
19 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.

 

[BobRyan]

QUOTE="BobRyan, post: 68526357, member: 235244"]1. the difference between Jews and gentiles - is not "biology"
2. No text says Jesus died on the cross so that mankind could eat rat sandwiches.
3. Gen 6 and 7 both affirm the distinction unclean and clean animals for gentiles long before there is even a single Jew.
4. Is 66 says that long after the cross God still views the eating of rat sandwiches as wrong.
5. Acts 10 informs us that Peter - long after the cross -- was not eating rat sandwiches and affirms this point 3 times.
6. 1Cor 6 tells us that God holds us guilty of sin if we sin against or bodies.

19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

I believe that obeying the Word of God is right.
1 John 3:4 says "sin IS transgression of the Law" -

Having said - that if these are details that are not important to some - I say all have free will and can make that choice if they wish.[/QUOTE]

1. I didn't say it was.
2. I don't know why you keep mentioning rat sandwiches; that is just daft.

Until you notice that eating rats is condemned by God in Lev 11, and Is 66. Surely God is not 'daft'.

Rats aren't food and you know full well we were discussing pork.

So then you accept some of Lev 11 but not all of it? Was God's view of biology not quite correct? Did he need some correction?

3. Yet God wanted to preserve some unclean animals, whatever they were, so Noah took them into the ark.

Indeed - the clean animals went in by pairs of 7 - and the unlcean in pairs of two. Far more unclean than clean animals. They all serve a purpose - but not all of them are what God considers to be "food" for humans.

For 40 days he and his family were in close contact with unclean animals, even if they didn't eat them (and we don't know.)
This is still Old Testament.

NT writers do not use that term for "scripture" rather they call it "the Word of God" and "the Commandment of God" as Jesus does in Mark 7:6-13.

4. See 2. I don't eat rat sandwiches, so you shoot yourself in the foot every time you mention them.

How so? I am simply mentioning a point where you would actually agree with God's statement in Lev 11.

6. Eating a ham sandwich is not a sin against my body - especially when compared with cream, sugar, fatty meats, starch and so on. None of these is even mentioned in Leviticus

So then God did need a few pointers? Or maybe his view of trichanosis was too extreme? Or maybe He had a dozen other reasons for his list and the non-god beings of earth have not figured all of them out??

And 7 - which is most important and which some people don't seem to want to address - Jesus, the Messiah, the fulfilment of the Jewish law, has come and saved us.

"WE have had the Gospel preached to US just as THEY have also" Heb 4:2 speaking of OT saints.
"The Gospel was preached to Abraham" Gal 3:7
"There is only ONE Gospel" Gal 3:6-9.
"Abraham saw My day and was glad" John 8.
"they all drank from the same spiritual Rock and that Rock was Christ" 1Cor 10
"I do not change says the LORD" Malachi 3.
"Think NOT that I came to abolish the Law or the prophets" Matt 5.

Everything changed when God came to earth to make a new covenant. "

New Covenant.
"I will write My LAW on their mind and heart" Jer 31:31-33, Heb 8:6-10

 

[Strong in Him]

"If you Love Me KEEP My Commandments" John 14:15

JESUS's commandment was to love one another as he loves us.
He did the will of his Father which was to give eternal life to all who believed in him.

Abstaining from pork does not bring salvation or lead to life, and eating pork does not negate that salvation or life. Jesus saves, not food - end of.

Now I really am unsubscribing. Have fun.

 

[BobRyan]

Hebrews 8:6-10 says all of the Ten Commandments are Jesus' Commandments
James 2 does not limit itself to "Love others as Jesus loved you"
Rom 13 does not limit itself to that
Eph 6:2 does not limit itself to that.
Matt 5 - Jesus said not to teach others that Jesus was downsizing scripture-
Jer 31:31-33 the New Covenant says that God writes the moral law of God - the Commandments of God - on the heart and mind. The Law of God as known to Jeremiah and his readers.