Why Am I Eating a Pork Chop?

[LoveGodsWord]

I'm still wondering why it was decided that a few of the 603, such as Leviticus 11:7, should be kept, while most others are not kept?

There are many laws in the old testament that are applicable today for Christian living according to the scriptures and the dietary and hygiene laws are examples of other laws that God has given for our benefit even in the new covenant. God has made us and knows what is good for us. If your wondering why some laws are applicable today and others are not? This is because there are two covenant. The old covenant with all of it's laws for remission of sins; that is, the Sanctuary laws, the laws associated with the Levitical Priesthood, the laws of the animal sacrifices and sin offerings and the Feasts are all prophetic laws pointing to the coming of the Messiah in Jesus and God's plan of salvation is giving his only begotten son as the sacrifice for the sins of the whole world *John 1:29. In the new covenant these laws are fulfilled in Christ to who they pointed to and are fulfilled and continued in Him. In the new covenant Jesus is now our great High Priest ministering on our behalf in the heavenly Sanctuary that the Lord pitched and not man *Hebrews 8:1-6 and is our sacrifice for sins once and for all *Hebrews 7:25-27. These laws for remission of sins are "shadow laws" that pointed to Jesus and Gods plan of salvation for mankind in the new covenant. These "shadow laws" *Hebrews 10:1-17 are not the same as Gods' "eternal law" for example in the 10 commandments. Where as the "shadow laws" for remission of sins pointed to good things to come in Jesus Gods 10 commandments made, spoken and written by God alone *Exodus 32:16 in the new covenant have the same role they always have and that is to give us the knowledge of good (moral right doing) and evil (moral wrong doing); sin and righteousness *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4; Psalms 119:172 and according to James if we break any one of them we stand guilty before God of sin in James 2:10-11. The purpose of God's law is to show us what sin is and that we all have sinned *Romans 3:9-20 and to lead us to Christ that we might be forgiven through faith and made free from sin to walk in God's Spirit and his new covenant promise to love *Hebrews 8:10-12 from Jeremiah 31:31-36; Ezekiel 36:24-27. If your wanting to learn more about why we no longer keep the "shadow laws" for remission of sins of the old covenant I suggest you read Hebrews 7:1-25, Hebrews 8:1-13; Hebrews 9:1-28; Hebrews 10:1-39. The difference between the two covenants is that in the old covenant laws for remission of sins God's people through faith looked forward to the coming of Christ. In the new covenant today we by faith look backwards to Christ who has now come.

Hope this is helpful

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Zilch; there should be no controversy about this at all, but since the Millerite movement in the 19th century Adventists have embraced an unusual theology around diets. Read the history of Graham’s Crackers or J.W. Kellog for more details. Later, my understanding is much of this was doctrinally formalized by Ellen White. A friend of mine who grew up SDA with a Catholic mother was mistreated at Adventist elementary school because she would pack meat in his lunches, by one of the teachers, and this was recent, I reckon it would have been in the early 90s, I would guess 89-95 or thereabouts. His father had a change of religious perspective and joined the UCC, and his son became a liberal Christian of the sort that are frequently encountered in the UCC, which is how I met him, but he was a decent guy and my theological traditionalism did not preclude a friendship. He told me he is glad his father left when he did, because the Adventists have a system of boarding schools called “academies” for middle school aged children.

Seriously, what nonsense. Do you want to talk scripture?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Freth was the first one who mentioned the Sabbath in post #113

I was just following your posts to me. No worries though. ;/

 

[Leaf473]

One thing I've often wondered about is our teeth. If we were never intended to eat pork or other meat, why do we have teeth capable of eating both plants and animals?

And our digestive systems. I don't think we can live on a diet of uncooked plants. Were Adam and Eve cooking in the garden? Maybe the story is intended to be read as highly metaphorical/ allegorical?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

But Peter said, “By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything unholy and unclean.” Again a voice came to him a second time, “What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy.”
— Acts 10:14-15

The answer was partly addressed in the scripture you quoted but more so in the chapter context (see second half of post # 198 linked already addressed).

The Jews obeyed God's dietary laws that is why Peter never ate unclean foods. The vision was never about God making a random decision out of nowhere and changing his mind saying it is now ok to eat unclean food. This is proven when context is added back in as Peter considers the dream and the interpretation he sees that it is a reference to the Gentiles not being unclean...

14, But Peter said, NOT SO LORD FOR I HAVE NEVER EATEN ANYTHING THAT IS UNCLEAN AND COMMON.

15, And the voice spake unto him again the second time, WHAT GOD HAS CLEANSED, THAT DO NOT CALL COMMON.

16, This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

17, Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made inquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,

Now the question here to consider is what was it that God had cleansed and we should not call common, this is what Peter was thinking about. WHILE PETER WAS THINKING ABOUT THE MEANING OF THE VISION. The praying gentile that believed God was at his gate asking for Peter...

18, And called, and asked whether Simon, which was surnamed Peter, were lodged there.

19, While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.

20, Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them.

What was it that God was teaching Peter.....

27, And as he talked with him, he went in, and found many that were come together.

28, And he said unto them, YOU KNOW THAT IT IS AN UNLAWFUL THING FOR A MAN THAT IS A JEW TO KEEP COMPANY, OR COME UNTO ONE OF ANOTHER NATION; BUT GOD HAS SHOWN ME THAT I SHOULD NOT CALL ANY MAN COMMON OR UNCLEAN

So Peter's dream was not a random decision by God saying he changed his mind and all unclean foods are now clean. Peter's interpretation of the dream was about all men are now clean in God's eyes and that the Believers can preach the Gospel to the Gentiles who are no longer unclean...

Throughout this chapter there is two stories going in sequence. One about Peter's dream and interpretation and the story of the Angel appearing to Cornelius (the gentile believer) who was told to go and meet with Peter who the Jews considered unclean..

Hope this is helpful.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

You need to go back and reread my posts because (a) I have never advocated sin or even mentioned lawlessness, (b) I have never put the church above God and (c) I have never contradicted 1 John 3:4.

But you just contradicted Matthew 16:18, which gives His ministers the authority to forgive or retain sin in God’s name. This is why in even the Anglican and Lutheran churches there is, in addition to general confession and absolution pronounced over the entire congregation, private auricular confession. To say this is not to put the Church over God; Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church and its members comprise the Body, and the power to bind and loose is authority delegated from God to His ministers, like the authority to exorcise demons.

Again, not what the scriptures teach us:

Mark 2:7 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

 

[LoveGodsWord]

One thing I've often wondered about is our teeth. If we were never intended to eat pork or other meat, why do we have teeth capable of eating both plants and animals?

And our digestive systems. I don't think we can live on a diet of uncooked plants. Were Adam and Eve cooking in the garden? Maybe the story is intended to be read as highly metaphorical/ allegorical?

Good point Leaf, that is because we were never designed by God to eat meat in Genesis. If you look at all the animal of the earth we have the same teeth as herbivores not carnivores hence our original diet was fruits nuts grains and vegetables. We were only allowed to eat meat after the flood when there was no food to eat. Salads are uncooked plants and very healthy. Some other plants and vegetables however need cooking

God bless

 

[Leaf473]

Good point Leaf, that is because we were never designed by God to eat meat in Genesis. If you look at all the animal of the earth we have the same teeth as herbivores not carnivores hence our original diet was fruits nuts grains and vegetables. We were only allowed to eat meat after the flood when there was no food to eat. Salads are uncooked plants and very healthy. Some other plants and vegetables however need cooking

God bless

As I understand it, we have omnivore teeth, multi-purpose. Capable of eating plants and animals, but not optimized for either one.

Salads are very healthy, but when most people today think of salads they include salad dressing, loaded with fat.

Living on a diet of just salad vegetables would be a real challenge, I think.

God bless you, too!

 

[LoveGodsWord]

As I understand it, we have omnivore teeth, multi-purpose. Capable of eating plants and animals, but not optimized for either one.

Salads are very healthy, but when most people today think of salads they include salad dressing, loaded with fat.

Living on a diet of just salad vegetables would be a real challenge, I think.

God bless you, too!

Well they call our teeth omnivore teeth because we eat meat and plants so this is just a man-made name in my opinion. If you look at all the herbivore and carnivore animals you will see whose teeth we most resemble in real life. There is many ways to eat healthy and much of what a healthy diet consists of if we take the time to learn tastes easily as good of better then anything unhealthy. Also, one thing I did notice when I changed my diet is that your taste buds change and adapt to what your diet principally is made up of. I no longer crave the same unhealthy foods I use to eat.

God bless leaf

 

[pescador]

Let’s examine the entire verse because your leaving out a very key portion.

“But I have a few things against you, because you have some there who hold the teaching of Balaam, who kept teaching Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit sexual immorality.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭2:14‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

So are we free to commit sexual immorality as well as long as ”it’s done in faith”? Only the gentiles have received an actual statement allowing them to eat meat offered to idols. Nowhere in the scriptures are the Jews ever given this privilege. They are forbidden to eat meat offered to idols.

Oy vey!

a) I quoted the verse in its entirety, as did you (although we used different translations, they say the same thing.

b) In case you're not aware, the subject is about "eating a pork chop", i.e., dietary restrictions, so you're wrong to change the subject. Nobody, including me, said anything like "So are we free to commit sexual immorality as well as long as ”it’s done in faith” That is changing the subject entirely, so I won't respond.

c) Your statement "Only the gentiles have received an actual statement allowing them to eat meat offered to idols. Nowhere in the scriptures are the Jews ever given this privilege" is not only wrong but is changing the subject.

1 Corinthians 8:1-8, "Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that “We all possess knowledge.” But knowledge puffs up while love builds up. Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know. But whoever loves God is known by God.

So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do."

 

[Leaf473]

Well they call our teeth omnivore teeth because we eat meat and plants so this is just a man-made name in my opinion. If you look at all the herbivore and carnivore animals you will see whose teeth we most resemble in real life. There is many ways to eat healthy and much of what a healthy diet consists of if we take the time to learn tastes easily as good of better then anything unhealthy. Also, one thing I did notice when I changed my diet is that your taste buds change and adapt to what your diet principally is made up of. I no longer crave the same unhealthy foods I use to eat.

God bless leaf

Well, from what I could find on the internet, herbivore teeth are basically flat. Carnivore teeth, like a dog or cat, are all pointy.

Humans have a mixture, so we can eat plants or animals, but our teeth are not perfect for either one.

That's how I understand it.

As modern humans we can take advantage of processed vegetable oils. Take that out of our diet and we will get a real hankering for meat or cream.

I suppose we could eat more nuts. But unless they are mechanically separated at a factory, it's a lot of work to get them out of the shells, especially if all you have are crude stone tools.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

That has nothing to do with Jesus amending Sabbath Law as the Lord of the Sabbath. He also said the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, which Moses never wrote about the Sabbath. Jesus being God got to change things without it being a sin.

What law did He amend??

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

It's in my interlinear Greek NT. And it's in our Bibles now.
If it was added to Mark's manuscript after his death and before the Bible was compiled, the church saw fit to keep it in.

That added phrase actually makes no sense when you understand the context of the original Greek words in the passage...

 

[BNR32FAN]

Oy vey!

a) I quoted the verse in its entirety, as did you (although we used different translations, they say the same thing.

b) In case you're not aware, the subject is about "eating a pork chop", i.e., dietary restrictions, so you're wrong to change the subject. Nobody, including me, said anything like "So are we free to commit sexual immorality as well as long as ”it’s done in faith” That is changing the subject entirely, so I won't respond.

c) Your statement "Only the gentiles have received an actual statement allowing them to eat meat offered to idols. Nowhere in the scriptures are the Jews ever given this privilege" is not only wrong but is changing the subject.

1 Corinthians 8:1-8, "Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that “We all possess knowledge.” But knowledge puffs up while love builds up. Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know. But whoever loves God is known by God.

So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do."

You seem to have forgotten the conversation we were having.

Only the Gentiles are given permission to eat meat offered to idols

All Christians, Jews and Gentiles, may eat whatever they want as long as it is done in faith and doesn't affect others' faith.

Ok that’s not what Jesus said in Revelation 2:14

Oh now I get it. One half of one verse, taken out of context and misinterpreted, is what you base your argument on?

Here is that verse in its entirety: "Nevertheless, I have a few things against you: There are some among you who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to entice the Israelites to sin so that they ate food sacrificed to idols and committed sexual immorality."

And from this -- Balak enticing some of the ancient Israelites to eat food sacrificed to idols -- you think that all Christians, Jews and Gentiles, may not eat whatever they want as long as it is done in faith and doesn't affect others' faith. Your exegesis is so wrong!!

Right here your completely ignoring the fact that eating meat offered to idols is being just as condemned as sexual immorality.

Let’s examine the entire verse because your leaving out a very key portion.

“But I have a few things against you, because you have some there who hold the teaching of Balaam, who kept teaching Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit sexual immorality.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭2:14‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

So are we free to commit sexual immorality as well as long as ”it’s done in faith”? Only the gentiles have received an actual statement allowing them to eat meat offered to idols. Nowhere in the scriptures are the Jews ever given this privilege. They are forbidden to eat meat offered to idols.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Peter didn't know that at the time of his vision.
Acts of the Apostles 10:19 - "while Peter was still thinking about this ...."

That comes later in the chapter.

In the vision God did not use the word "anyone"; he said "what God has declared clean, do not consider unclean". He showed Peter a sheet of unclean animals, but told him not to think of any thing as unclean.
Jews considered Gentiles to be unclean, so when Peter is asked to meet a Gentile he immediately applies the words of the vision.

Again, it had nothing to do with actually allowing the consumption of non-kosher food

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

It's in the Alexandrian text. Where did you get the word "aphedroma" from? I Googled it and only got 2 hits, one of which is this thread.

From the original Greek text

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

That’s incorrect. What Eastern Orthodox jurisdiction are you a member of? Do you realize you are accusing the monks of the Holy Mountain and other Greek monasteries of sinning in their diet?

It is not incorrect. You keep trying to interject things that have nothing to do with the context of the text...please try to follow the discussion and respond to what I have written.

 

[The Liturgist]

Again, not what the scriptures teach us:

Mark 2:7 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

Dude, that was said by a Pharisee who was wrong! Read Matthew 16. Seriously. Because right now you just quoted a Pharisee, and they were consistently opposed to our Lord, and conspired with the Sadducee High Priests of the Temple to have Him crucified. You can’t quote them in defense of doctrine. They are among the major villains of the New Testament, who we are warned to beware of.

 

[The Liturgist]

It is not incorrect. You keep trying to interject things that have nothing to do with the context of the text...please try to follow the discussion and respond to what I have written.

But what you are writing appears to contradict Eastern Orthodox doctrine and praxis, which I know, as I studied EO theology academically and considered being a priest (in retrospect it would have been a better decision to go to SVS and become an EO priest than to go to Andover and become a UCC priest, given how bad the United Church of Christ has become). So in short, I am completely confused by your posts. Are you agreeing with the Adventists or merely trying to explain Jewish doctrine?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

But what you are writing appears to contradict Eastern Orthodox doctrine and praxis, which I know, as I studied EO theology academically and considered being a priest (in retrospect it would have been a better decision to go to SVS and become an EO priest than to go to Andover and become a UCC priest, given how bad the United Church of Christ has become). So in short, I am completely confused by your posts. Are you agreeing with the Adventists or merely trying to explain Jewish doctrine?

You have driven my conversation and original discussion completely off topic. It never had anything to do with monks on Mt Athos. Go back and read the thread again. Everyone, including you I assume since you are arguing with me, was trying to prove that the passages posted were about God suddenly allowing the consumption of non-kosher food. My point was that was not true in the context of those passages. That was it...