Really?
Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble.
I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean.
All I am doing is applying the English language to the verses quoted. You are the one seeking to overturn sola scripture here, not me. I will leave you to your contradictions. Goodbye dear friend
Yes really. Read the scripture context you leave out proving that Romans 14 is not even talking about Gods' dietary laws...
ROMANS 14:2,3,5,6,14,17,20 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteems any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
The New Testament writers referred to two concepts of unclean, using different Greek words to convey the two meanings.
Unclean could refer to animals God did not intend to be consumed as food (listed in
Leviticus 11 and
Deuteronomy 14).
Unclean could also refer to
ceremonial uncleanness.
In
Romans 14 Paul uses the word
koinos, which means “common” (W.E. Vine,
Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, 1985, “Unclean,” p. 649). In addition to the meanings of “common” and “ordinary” (see Acts 2:44; Acts 4:32;
Titus 1:4;
Hebrews 10:29), the word also applied to things considered polluted or defiled. This word, along with its verb form
koinoo, is used in
Mark 7:2,
Mark 7:15-23, where it obviously refers to ceremonial uncleanness.
Koinos and
koinoo appear throughout the New Testament to refer to this kind of ceremonial uncleanness. Something could be “common”—ceremonially unclean—even though it was otherwise considered a scripturally clean meat.
An entirely different word,
akathartos, is used in the New Testament for those animals Scripture specifies as unclean. Both words,
koinos and
akathartos, are used in Acts 10, where Peter distinguished between the two concepts of uncleanness by using both words in Acts 10:14.
When Paul said in
Romans 14:14 that “I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean [
koinos, or ‘common’] of itself,” he was making the same point he had made earlier to the Corinthians: Just because meat that was otherwise lawful to eat may have been associated with idol worship does not mean it is no longer fit for human consumption. As seen from the context, Paul wasn’t discussing biblical dietary restrictions at all.
Paul goes on to state in
Romans 14:20 that “all food is clean” (NIV). The word translated “clean” is
katharos, meaning “free from impure admixture, without blemish, spotless” (Vine, “Clean, Cleanness, Cleanse, Cleansing,” p. 103).
“Clean” meats as such aren’t addressed in the New Testament, so there isn’t a specific word to describe them.
Katharos is used to describe all kinds of cleanliness and purity, including clean dishes (
Matthew 23:26), people (
John 13:10) and clothing (
Revelation 15:6;
Revelation 19:8-14), “pure” religion (
James 1:27), gold and glass (
Revelation 21:18).
Realize also that, in both
Romans 14:14 and
Romans 14:20, the word
food or
meat doesn’t appear in the original Greek, but was inserted by later translators. No specific object is mentioned relative to cleanness or uncleanness. The sense of these verses is merely that “nothing [is] unclean [
koinos: common or ceremonially defiled] of itself,” and “all is clean [
katharos: free from impure admixture, without blemish, spotless].”
We can also see as
Romans 14:14 is continued in
Romans 14:15 that says [15], But if your brother be grieved with your meat (G1033;βρῶμα; Broma), now walk you not charitably. Destroy not him with your meat, for whom Christ died. Paul is talking about food that God's Word already defines as being lawful for eating from
Leviticus 11 and
Deuteronomy 14.
Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries w/TVM, Strong - G1033
βρῶμα (brōma | bro'-mah)
Derivation: from the base of G977;
Strong's: food (literally or figuratively), especially (ceremonially) articles allowed or forbidden by the Jewish law
KJV: —meat, victuals.
Paul’s point is that association of food with idolatrous activity had no bearing on whether the food was inherently suitable or unsuitable for eating. Understood in its context,
Romans 14 does
not convey permission to ignore the biblical laws as to which meats are clean or unclean..
....................
SUMMARY: Romans 14 nowhere is talking about abolishing God's dietary laws. I am still waiting for a response to the scriptures provided here that prove why the scriptures you provided separated from their context is not talking about God's dietary laws.
.....................
Let's talk more latter when you have some scripture talking about God's dietary laws. For now we will have to agree to disagree.
Nice talking to you.
