Romans 14:14,15 Did Paul declare all foods clean?

[LittleLambofJesus]

Dancing in the rain sounds safer.

A lot cooler too

 

[bbbbbbb]

Glad to see ya back, LLoJ. Missed ya.

 

[Jpark]

All food is cleansed. Man defiles the food. Man's heart defiles the food.

Matt. 15:18-20

Rom. 14:14 I know and am convinced in [Literally 'through'] the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

 

[Deut 5:29]

It helps to know that it was a difficult lesson for Peter, yes. No one would doubt that Deut. Peter was quite hard headed about it for sure.

That is why God had to repeat Himself three times, so it would sink in to Peter. Yet later, we read it really hadn't yet sunk in so Paul totally reprimanded Peter;

(Gal 2:11) But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
(Gal 2:12) For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
(Gal 2:13) And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

So let's not be in error as Peter, in siding with those who refuse to eat what the Lord has cleansed.

This is not talking about Peter eating things God has commanded us not to eat, it's talking about Peter eating with people that jewish tradition said not to eat with, not God.

 

[Frogster]

This is not talking about Peter eating things God has commanded us not to eat, it's talking about Peter eating with people that jewish tradition said not to eat with, not God.

he still ate unclean food. Why do you think there was food on the sheet?


Acrs 11:3 “You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them.”

he was also eating with them in antioch, read gal 2.

 

[Deut 5:29]

he still ate unclean food. Why do you think there was food on the sheet?


Acrs 11:3 “You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them.”

he was also eating with them in antioch, read gal 2.

Your point is not made by anything you've said.
And there's no such thing as "unclean food".

 

[Frogster]

Your point is not made by anything you've said.
And there's no such thing as "unclean food".

lets put it this way, he ate at a gentiles house. There...

He was eating with gentiles in antioch, it was not a one time thing, he was "living" as a gentile.

 

[Deut 5:29]

Peter had much more than a hard head, he had knowledge.
You have to have some serious testicular fortitude to tell God "no I'm not going to do what you told me" (three times) without knowing that God is not talking about what it sounds like on the surface.

 

[Deut 5:29]

lets put it this way, he ate at a gentiles house. There...

He was eating with gentiles in antioch, it was not a one time thing, he was "living" as a gentile.

As usual you miss the point completely.
Peter was breaking jewish tradition (i.e. traditions of men) not the laws of God.

 

[Frogster]

Peter had much more than a hard head, he had knowledge.
You have to have some serious testicular fortitude to tell God "no I'm not going to do what you told me" (three times) without knowing that God is not talking about what it sounds like on the surface.

sure, then he realized mark 7;19, it was clean, same as paul said, and don't let silly food laws declare gentiles unclean, like hard headed petrer later did in antioch. So he did good eating at the roman guards house, despite the law.

 

[Frogster]

As usual you miss the point completely.
Peter was breaking jewish tradition (i.e. traditions of men) not the laws of God.

the context show mosaic law. please bro..

15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

Then paul went on to say, died to law in 2:19-20, it was not the traditions contextually.

 

[Deut 5:29]

the context show mosaic law. please bro..

15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

Then paul went on to say, died to law in 2:19-20, it was not the traditions contextually.

Like I said, you keep making my point.
As usual you miss the point completely.
Peter was breaking jewish tradition (i.e. traditions of men) not the laws of God.

 

[patience7]

Did Paul declare all foods clean?

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon
Strong's Number G1033 matches the Greek βρῶμα (brōma), which occurs 17 times in 15 verses in the Greek concordance of the KJV

YoungLT]Romans 14:14 I have known and am persuaded in Lord Jesus that nothing unclean thru himself, except to the one accounting any being-unclean/koinon <2839> to be, to that one being-unclean/koinon <2839>.
[Genesis 9:33]
15 and if through victuals/brwma <1033> thy brother is grieved, no more dost thou walk according to love; do not with thy victuals destroy that one for whom Christ died.
16 Let not, then, your good be evil spoken of,
17 for the reign of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit;

1033. broma bro'-mah from the base of 977; food (literally or figuratively), especially (ceremonially) articles allowed or forbidden by the Jewish law:--meat, victuals.

I would say "other":

Romans 14:2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

v5b. . .Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
v6. . . He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks;

And Paul said:

v14 I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

v17a For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink;
v20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.

v22,23 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.


Which goes back to:

For one believeth that he may eat all things: . . . . .

. . .Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.


Paul did teach that all foods were clean but he taught it because he was fully persuaded by/in the Lord Jesus.

 

[Frogster]

Like I said, and you keep making my point.
As usual you miss the point completely.
Peter was breaking jewish tradition (i.e. traditions of men) not the laws of God.

how am i making your point, when you are not posting scripture?

The text shows it was mosaic food laws.

read 2;16 again, and tell me if that was tradition.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

the sheet had funky creatures on it.

Wonder if it had any wabbitz on it

Young) Deuteronomy 14:7 `Only this ye do not eat, of those bringing up the cud, and of those dividing the cloven hoof: the camel and the hare and the rabbit,
for they are bringing up the cud but the hoof have not divided; unclean they [are] to you;

YouTube - &#x202a;White Rabbit&#x202c;&rlm;

 

[visionary]

Why doesn’t Peter ever interpret his own dream as having anything to do with food?

 

[daydreamergurl15]

I'm pretty sure that God declared all food clean when He gave that vision to Peter in Acts 10.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I would say "other":

Romans 14:2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

v5b. . .Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
v6. . . He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks;

And Paul said:

v14 I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

v17a For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink;
v20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.

v22,23 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.


Which goes back to:

For one believeth that he may eat all things: . . . . .

. . .Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Paul did teach that all foods were clean but he taught it because he was fully persuaded by/in the Lord Jesus.

Thank you for that excellent post!

 

[daydreamergurl15]

Why doesn’t Peter ever interpret his own dream as having anything to do with food?

When Peter interpreted the dream, I believed he said it to mean that even gentiles will receive the grace of God...because he said "But God have shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean..." Acts 10:28

I always used that verse as a double meaning, one that salvation is for all and that all food was declared clean.

The first, that salvation is for the gentiles as well, because of Acts 10:28
The second, food was declared clean when reading it in a literal way and pointing to all the other verses that speaks of food being clean in Romans, 1 (or 2) Corinthians and Timothy.

 

[visionary]

No indications that it had anything to do with food, Peter didn't even choose the clean animals to eat.. and another thing.. Luke doesn&#8217;t even mention this as being a challenge to the OT law, and Peter even retells his dream &#8211; to the circumcision party of all people. These were the ultra-conservative pharisaic believers in Jesus. And rather than question any change in the Torah, they heard about Peter&#8217;s vision and:

Acts 11:18 &#8220;they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life&#8221;