Are Christians allowed to eat pork under the New Covenant?

Bible2+ said:

Are you thinking of the following verse?

Click to expand...

No, I’m not. Although, you can’t possibly use that verse to say that God does change, when it literally states that He doesn’t.

Malachi 3:6 - For I am the LORD, I change not; Therefore the sons of Jacob are not consumed.

James 1:17, Numbers 23:19 -
God is not human, that he should lie,
not a human being, that he should change his mind.
Does he speak and then not act?
Does he promise and not fulfill?

Note the emboldened section in the verse in Numbers, "Does He speak and then not act? Does He promise and not fulfill? He Himself said through a prophet about the end of times, and that an eater of swine's flesh will burn in hell. Does He speak and then not act? Does He promise and not fulfill?

Eating swines flesh does not please Him. It is a sin, and if He considered it a sin yesterday, He does today, and forever. Otherwise, He changes. Because what upset Him yesterday, doesn't upset Him today, or tomorrow. Therefore He would have to then change would He not? If I hate the Red Sox, but then in two weeks, I change my mind, isn't that a change? So, by the logic being used, that would mean that not only God changes, but that the scriptures can't be trusted, because they directly lie, on several occasions.

Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

If so, note that this verse means only that Jesus/God Himself is the same yesterday, today and forever, not that the letter of His law by which He deals with people has to remain the same forever. For it has changed under his New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-32, Hebrews 7:12).

Click to expand...

Also, compare what Genesis 22:2 and Genesis 22:12 say, to see how God's command can change.

Click to expand...

This is not displaying that God changes, at all. He was testing Abraham to see whether or not He would be faithful to Him. Genesis 22:1 shows what my previous sentence has said. And when he remained faithful, he was declared righteous because of his faith. To say that this displays that God can change, would mean that God deals with every person differently, when this isn't so. Actually, in verse Genesis 22:2, God tells Abraham to make a "burnt offering" which was a sacrifice only known about in the law. In what we today describe as the "Mosaic law", and when you then look to burnt offerings, Rams were acceptable sacrifices for it. So, not only does God never change, as can be proven in Genesis 22:1, but it can also be shown in Genesis 22:12, because not only did He justify Abraham by his faith, but He also gave him a Ram, an animal needed for a burnt offering.

Also, note what the apostle Paul says:

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
19 ¶Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Click to expand...

I agree, we aren't under the law. But, we have to understand what being "under" the law means. It means, that you are trying to justify yourself BY the law. No one can ever do that, ever. The law was never intended for that. It states this, in the 21'st verse of the passage you just linked. Not only does it state that the law isn't against the promises of God, but that justification was never meant to come through it.

Verse 23, shows that justification by faith was "revealed" it doesn't say that it was first made after Christ, but that it was revealed. There were several people throughout the bible that display that God expects us to follow the law, BUT that our knowledge of our salvation comes from God and His infinite mercies and grace.

This can be proven in the fact that Moses could walk with and talk with God, when all of Israel couldn't. Because of His faith. This can be proven in Abrahams justification by faith, although he still kept the laws of God Genesis 26:5. It's proven in the unclean and clean animals that Noah had knowledge of in Genesis 7:2, it's proven in countless psalms written by David. Psalm 119:94. To say that the knowledge of God's grace and mercy ONLY came about when Jesus came, discredits the writings of David. Psalm 86:5. How did David know that God was this merciful? He was to uphold the law, yet had faith that God would justify him. How? Because, he knew God. He was justified by faith, yet still upheld the law, how? This makes no sense under modern day theology. Because, keeping the laws, is how we walk by faith. We don't keep them for our salvation, we keep them because of our salvation. It's how we prove we believe, it's why faith without works is dead, and it's how we are separated from the world.

Christians no longer being under the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Galatians 3:24-25, Romans 7:6) means it's no longer needed in the lives of Christians. Moreover, Christians shouldn't even have any desire to go back under any part of it (Galatians 4:21 to 5:8). For it was merely Jesus Christ's shadow (Colossians 2:16-17, John 1:17).

Click to expand...

We are not "under" the law, yes, absolutely correct. We shouldn't therefore, desire to justify ourselves by the law, you're absolutely right. But that isn't what it means, you're taking those verses out of context. In Romans 3:9-18 Paul talks on and describes the wicked. And in Romans 3:17, he tells us that they knew not the way of peace. What does the bible describe as the way of peace? Psalm 119:165.

Judah is the tribe out of the 12 tribes that was to always keep, forever, the laws of God. In Isaiah, 26:1 - In that day shall this son be sung in the land of Judah; We have a strong city; salvation will God appoint for walls and bulwarks.

We see this verse is talking of that tribe, the tribe which was prophetically always supposed to keep the law, forever. By always keeping the law, this means that, while the other 11 tribes (because of dispersion) were to fall away from the law, Judah would through all of it's generations, would keep the law. This can be proven today by the Jews living in middle eastern countries.

Then, in verse 26:2 - Open ye the gates, that the righteous nation which keepeth the truth may enter in.

They kept the law, so they kept the truth. My ultimate point, was that in Isaiah 26:3 - Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee; because he trusteth in thee.
Because they kept the truth, they were kept in peace.

We aren't under the law. This doesn't do away with the law however. It just means that our justification isn't by the law. Psalm 51:1-4 : 1 Have mercy upon me, O God, according to they loving kindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. 2 Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. 3 For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. 4 Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou tightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.

A sin, is only described as the transgression of the law. The law both shows us our sins, and convicts us of them. This isn't what condems us though. Us justifying ourselves by this law, is what condemns us. We cannot justify ourselves by anything. Only God in His infinite grace and mercy can do that. We keep the law because we're saved, not to be saved. There is a difference. Being under grace, in no way does away with the law. Can we get to heaven without following the law? It's possible, but Jesus says that even if we do, we'll be considered least in the kingdom of heaven. So, why aim for that? Why teach others that the law is done away with, when the bible, God, and Jesus all say otherwise. You're making it so, even if you do get into heaven, you will be the least in the kingdom, and so will those that you guided along the way.

Bible2+ said:

Are you thinking of the following verse?

Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

If so, note that this verse means only that Jesus/God Himself is the same yesterday, today and forever, not that the letter of His law by which He deals with people has to remain the same forever. For it has changed under his New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-32, Hebrews 7:12).

Also, compare what Genesis 22:2 and Genesis 22:12 say, to see how God's command can change.

Also, note what the apostle Paul says:

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
19 ¶Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Christians no longer being under the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Galatians 3:24-25, Romans 7:6) means it's no longer needed in the lives of Christians. Moreover, Christians shouldn't even have any desire to go back under any part of it (Galatians 4:21 to 5:8). For it was merely Jesus Christ's shadow (Colossians 2:16-17, John 1:17).

Click to expand...

You are taking alot of scripture out of context.
In Gal 3, If you try to rely on the law to bring you Salvation and reject the Messiah, that is what puts you under the curse of sin and death. You are NOT under a curse for trying to obey the commands of God.

in Gal 4-5, it is speaking of new believers that were once pagans before, so why would they go back to a law they never knew when they were pagans? It is not saying to not go back to the commandments of God.

Col 2 is once again addressing former pagans that are new believes and telling them to not let anyone judge them for actually keeping the commands of God, not the other way around.

Context is the key, in which we have to read an entire chapter and not just focus on a specific verse and ignore everything leading to to it and after it.

in the bible God just says that pork is an unclean meat. you may have to roast out the impurities in order to eat it. rare pork can make you very sick. shrimp is mentioned as unclean too. and any animal that has paws.

Genesis 9:3
Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

right there God is saying you can eat any meat. later God said which meats were unclean. you probably have to cook them thoroughly

unclean meats are not meant for sacrifice as it would pollute God's holy temple


here is another instance where God says you can eat all manner of meat

And he [Peter] 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.


in Peter's vision all the meat was clean because it was a vision. In the real world there is such thing as bacteria.

Jason_apostle said:

in the bible God just says that pork is an unclean meat. you may have to roast out the impurities in order to eat it. rare pork can make you very sick. shrimp is mentioned as unclean too. and any animal that has paws.

Genesis 9:3
Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

right there God is saying you can eat any meat. later God said which meats were unclean. you probably have to cook them thoroughly

unclean meats are not meant for sacrifice as it would pollute God's holy temple


here is another instance where God says you can eat all manner of meat

And he [Peter] 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.


in Peter's vision all the meat was clean because it was a vision. In the real world there is such thing as bacteria.

Click to expand...

Leviticus commands came after Gen 9, so it takes greater priority. If Noah ate pig off the boat, they would be extinct. Unclean animals were on the boat, only as a means to reproduce.


Peter's vision in Acts 10 is explained in verse 28. the fact that he said nothing unclean has ever touches his lips decades after the death of Jesus, shows they were still keeping the dietary instructions of God.

Acts 10:28
28 Then he said to them, “You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean.


God made us and specifically said what was meant to be food for us and what was not, so he knows better than we would. The facts that pigs have a terrible digestive system and dont sweat, means they keep all their toxins and is probably the reason why God said dont eat it.

Devin P said in post #501:

There were several people throughout the bible that display that God expects us to follow the law . . .

Click to expand...

Note that Hebrews 7:18-19 shows that all Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, should stop trying to keep the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law. For it has been "disannulled". (It hasn't been "refreshed", as is sometimes claimed.)

Devin P said in post #501:

Because, keeping the laws, is how we walk by faith.

Click to expand...

Note that the law is not of faith (Galatians 3:12).

Devin P said in post #501:

Why teach others that the law is done away with, when the bible, God, and Jesus all say otherwise.

Click to expand...

Note that the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law is "done away", "abolished" (2 Corinthians 3:6-18).

SAAN said in post #502:

You are no under a curse for trying to obey the commands of God.

Click to expand...

Note that people are under the curse if they're trying to obey the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic commands of God (Galatians 3:10).

Bible2+ said:

Note that people are under the curse if they're trying to obey the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic commands of God (Galatians 3:10).

Click to expand...

People are under a curse if they are relying on works of the law(their own ability) instead of Christ for salvation. Context is important here.

Paul is not teaching people to disobey God's commandments, but rather he is teaching people not to rely on their own ability to be righteous and to rely on Christ - but this doesn't mean to discard God's commandments.

Dkh587 said in post #507:

Paul is not teaching people to disobey God's commandments . . .

Click to expand...

Note that Hebrews 8:13 means when the prophet Jeremiah in the 6th century BC prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31-34 about the 1st century AD making of the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 9:15-17; 1 Corinthians 11:25; 2 Corinthians 3:6), which wouldn't be according to the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Jeremiah 31:32, Romans 7:6), Jeremiah's prophecy, as soon as it was made, had immediately made the letter of the Mosaic-law covenant "old" and headed inexorably toward a future extinction (Hebrews 7:18-19). This extinction occurred at the moment Jesus Christ died on the Cross (Matthew 27:50-51a) and abolished the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19), which was the same moment He brought the New Covenant into effect (Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 9:15-17, Hebrews 10:19-20, Matthew 27:51a).

Jason_apostle said:

in the bible God just says that pork is an unclean meat. you may have to roast out the impurities in order to eat it. rare pork can make you very sick. shrimp is mentioned as unclean too. and any animal that has paws.

Genesis 9:3
Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

right there God is saying you can eat any meat. later God said which meats were unclean. you probably have to cook them thoroughly,
unclean meats are not meant for sacrifice as it would pollute God's holy temple,
here is another instance where God says you can eat all manner of meat

And he [Peter] 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.

in Peter's vision all the meat was clean because it was a vision. In the real world there is such thing as bacteria.

Click to expand...

It matters not that I put effort into what I post for clarity, all the valid points I make are disregarded, and such as this is posted, without looking to things already posted previously, with repeating the same ignorant errors.

Indeed context shows what is reality, there is no extra permission for what to have.

Jason_apostle said yet:

Genesis 9:3
Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

right there God is saying you can eat any meat. later God said which meats were unclean. you probably have to cook them thoroughly,
unclean meats are not meant for sacrifice as it would pollute God's holy temple

Click to expand...

As I had had already said a little previous to that,
Noah did know of the distinction of clean and unclean animals, as maybe others of the time did, before permission to have the animal meat was given, and before it was known it would be given, as it was evidently not known until it was, though there may have been desire for it already. Certainly if the other animals were eaten then, their kinds would not still survive afterward. The distinction already known before was for sacrifices of animals, which were already happening, indeed Noah had just made a sacrifice when the permission then came. But that permission was under such circumstances explained already, and had connection to sacrifices, with responsibility to life explained, and it was not said that it was to continually persist, and with it not being better, it won't.

And it is disregarded as it always is having it needed to be pointed out that there is not permission at all to have any meat if respect of life and compassion are not shown, with removing all the blood to start with, and not cooking the meat with it, "to remove it", because that fallacious thinking just results with cooked blood, not removing it at all. Obedience to permission from God that is claimed would require just having bloodless meat for that.

SAAN said in post #502:

You are no under a curse for trying to obey the commands of God.

Click to expand...

Bible2+ said:

Note that people are under the curse if they're trying to obey the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic commands of God (Galatians 3:10).

Click to expand...

It's a terrible thing to be under a curse.........

Galatians 3 Pulpit Commentary

Gal 3:13
Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree'

Acts 23:14
Who any coming to the Chief-priests and to the Elders say: "to-anathema/anaqemati <331> we anathemtize/aneqematisamen <332> ourselves of no yet nothing to taste till of which we may be killing Paul."

Reve 22:3
and every anathema/kat-ana-qema <2652> not shall be still.
And the throne of the GOD and of the Lamb in Her shall be,
and His bond-servants shall be offering divine-service to Him.

Strong's Greek: 331. ἀνάθεμα (anathema) -- that which is laid up, i.e. a votive offering
Strong's Greek: 332. ἀναθεματίζω (anathematizó) -- to declare anathema, devote to destruction

2652. katanathema kat-an-ath'-em-ah from 2596 (intensive) and 331; an imprecation:--curse.
331. anathema an-ath'-em-ah from 394; a (religious) ban or (concretely) excommunicated (thing or person):--accused, anathema, curse, X great.
334. anathema an-ath'-ay-mah from 394 (like 331, but in a good sense); a votive offering:--gift


History of God's Holy Bible and the so-called Jews
*snip*
....The Hebrew word translated "utterly destroy" is 'cherem.' Both the people and the land of Canaan were 'cherem,' meaning FORCIBLY dedicated to God as withdrawn from His service and worship wherein He was not glorified, and by the hands of another, devoted to Him for destruction whereby He will be glorified. The equivalent Greek word is "anathema.".......

.

ImaginaryDay said:

Many people have posted in this thread where Paul has taught it is 'lawful' even to eat meat sacrificed to idols. How can you then say you can't use the Bible to justify eating "unclean foods"?

Click to expand...

How many would eat food that is known to have been sacrificed to idols?

Acts 15:20
Instead, we should write and tell them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals, and from blood.

Corin 8:4
Concerning the eating then of the things sacrificed to idols, we have known that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God except one;

Rev 2:20
“Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow[fn] that woman[fn] Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce[fn] My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols.

Rev 9:20
But the rest of mankind, who were not killed by these blows, did not repent of the works of their hands,
that they should not worship demons, and idols of gold, silver, brass, stone, and wood, which can neither see nor hear nor walk.

Open Heart said:

This site goes into detail of the various forms of bleeding.
"Bleeding after stunning
The objectives of bleeding are to kill the animal with minimal damage to the carcass and to remove quickly as much blood as possible as blood is an ideal medium for the growth of bacteria....

The most hygienic system of bleeding and dressing is to shackle the animal immediately after stunning, then hoist it on to a moving rail.
The animal is stuck while being hoisted to minimize the delay after stunning. Bleeding continues until the blood flow is negligible when carcass dressing should begin without further delay"

Click to expand...

The backwater Cajuns put a bullet thru the head before hoisting it..........Gotta love their music and dancing........

.....................................

LittleLambofJesus said in post #512:
Rev 2:20
“Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow[fn] that woman[fn] Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce[fn] My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols.

Click to expand...

Note that this, like Revelation 2:14, doesn't contradict that under the New Covenant all foods are in themselves okay for all Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, to eat (1 Timothy 4:4-5). Instead, Revelation 2:14b,20b refers to the same principle as 1 Corinthians 10:20-21, which refers to those who eat meat sacrificed to idols with the intent, or the idea, that in doing so they're actually "fellowshipping" with the idols, as opposed to having the true knowledge (1 Corinthians 8:10a) to eat the meat just as meat, without ascribing any evil spiritual significance to it whatsoever (1 Corinthians 8:4-8; 1 Corinthians 10:25-31).

1stcenturylady said:

↑

Animals were certainly herbivorous in the beginning before the curse that came with humanity's fall. And they would have had more than grass. There were leaves and stalks, for some there were possibly roots, and there were certain fruits and seeds. Meat for us actually takes longer to digest, and rots a bit in us before adequate digestion, the healthier vegan meals will move through us more quickly, eliminating many problems to health or well-being, I will just say that much. It's great that with this whole food plant-based way of eating, we can eat to our contentment, and approach the ideal weight for us individually. This is such a good choice in life to make, with wonderful choices for it, it is win win, and nothing to lose.

They changed from that herbivorous living, certainly. But change in such can happen in either direction. I know of a lioness that became vegan, on her own initiative. And a carnivorous shark did too. And there is now a species of spider that is herbivorous, a very big exception to spiders. And there are now pet cats and dogs thriving on vegan pet food for them, with supplements included for things they need.

My guess, as we can do that here, is that the animals becoming carnivorous did it gradually, as it was likely not a response to Yahweh telling them, "As I gave you the green vegetation for food, I now give other animals that you can catch for your food." It was more likely opportunistic, when it happened early on. Or, when there was not enough vegetation growing after the global flood, the same as it was for the humans, for which Yahweh spoke to them about permitting meat, when the animals departed from the ark, there were those which had capacity to catch and eat other animals that were doing that very soon after, then, which then persisted for many of those doing so, in their lineages, when it hadn't been so needed before when there was abundant food growing.

Click to expand...

Of course, there was also an abundance of fish.

Click to expand...

View media item 55901
Yes, there was abundance of fish. There is not such abundance now as actually fish are rapidly being depleted in the seas. But how does the statement about abundance of fish respond to what I had posted?

LittleLambofJesus said:

How many would eat food that is known to have been sacrificed to idols?

Acts 15:20
Instead, we should write and tell them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals, and from blood.

Corin 8:4
Concerning the eating then of the things sacrificed to idols, we have known that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God except one

Click to expand...

If some eat meat without all the blood first removed, which is in disobedience to the permission which gets claimed to have the meat, there would as easily be disregard to whether there is sacrifice to idols. Though it remains that having such with willing disregard to whether animals that were used for getting that meat were horribly abused is also disobedience. But Paul is so misunderstood in so many things. That is the reason some reject Paul as an authority, or an apostle, when it is being understood that Paul contradicts certain scriptures. But the correct understanding does not have any contradiction in scriptures. In this case, if food is known to have been used in idolatrous activity, it shouldn't be acquired or used by believers.

FredVB said in post #515:

But the correct understanding does not have any contradiction in scriptures.

Click to expand...

But note there was a progression from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant (Hebrews 7:18-19).

For example, Galatians 3:2-25 shows that all Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, should stop trying to keep the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law. For Galatians 3:2-25 says the works of the Old Covenant Mosaic law are works of the flesh instead of God's Holy Spirit (Galatians 3:2-3). And Galatians 3:2-25 shows that all people, whether Jews or Gentiles, who try to do the works of the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law place themselves under its curse (Galatians 3:10). And Galatians 3:2-25 says the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law was only a temporary schoolmaster which Christians, both Jews and Gentiles (so that Paul, a Jew, can say "we"), are no longer under (Galatians 3:24-25, cf. Romans 7:6).

FredVB said:

View media item 55901If some eat meat without all the blood first removed, which is in disobedience to the permission which gets claimed to have the meat, there would as easily be disregard to whether there is sacrifice to idols. Though it remains that having such with willing disregard to whether animals that were used for getting that meat were horribly abused is also disobedience. But Paul is so misunderstood in so many things. That is the reason some reject Paul as an authority, or an apostle, when it is being understood that Paul contradicts certain scriptures. But the correct understanding does not have any contradiction in scriptures. In this case, if food is known to have been used in idolatrous activity, it shouldn't be acquired or used by believers.

Click to expand...

Bible2+ said:

But note there was a progression from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant (Hebrews 7:18-19).

For example, Galatians 3:2-25 shows that all Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, should stop trying to keep the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law. For Galatians 3:2-25 says the works of the Old Covenant Mosaic law are works of the flesh instead of God's Holy Spirit (Galatians 3:2-3). And Galatians 3:2-25 shows that all people, whether Jews or Gentiles, who try to do the works of the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law place themselves under its curse (Galatians 3:10). And Galatians 3:2-25 says the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law was only a temporary schoolmaster which Christians, both Jews and Gentiles (so that Paul, a Jew, can say "we"), are no longer under (Galatians 3:24-25, cf. Romans 7:6).

Click to expand...

You are right in maybe many things that you post. But what is this dealing with of what I posted? If you say idolatry has become alright, you are wrong. What was posted does not even invoke old covenant law, Yahweh is always consistent about it, not ever changing. The apostles said it was wrong, and for Gentiles joining them in Christ, it was still wrong along with having blood, brutality to animals such as strangling, and sexual immorality, shown in Acts of the Apostles 15:22-29. So are you saying there is a progression from that? I say there is the consistent understanding of what Paul says, that we are not answerable to acquiring or partaking unknowingly of things involved in idolatry, but for the sake of our Christian witness, which we should always act in accordance with, we should not take acquire or take part in what was involved with idolatry knowingly. And I don't see that this involves what I said about using animals, which did not invoke old covenant law, but discusses what I hear all responding with permission they talk of having which has the requirements told to Noah in Genesis 9:2-5 (universal for what permission there is, and not old covenant law), which is stated by the Apostles with the leading of Yahweh's Spirit still. So I don't see there would be progression from it right after that.

And I made many other points showing it is not good to keep having meat, that aren't considered in the discussion still. Permission for meat isn't ongoing, it isn't even so good for us, with healthier ways without it. And as I point out now more, such is with tasty meals too, which should be considered too, instead of all that I say be neglected.

FredVB said in post #517:

Permission for meat isn't ongoing . . .

Click to expand...

Note that it is, but only so long as a Christian has faith regarding that (Romans 14:14-23).

FredVB said:

You are right in maybe many things that you post. But what is this dealing with of what I posted? If you say idolatry has become alright, you are wrong. What was posted does not even invoke old covenant law, Yahweh is always consistent about it, not ever changing. The apostles said it was wrong, and for Gentiles joining them in Christ, it was still wrong along with having blood, brutality to animals such as strangling, and sexual immorality, shown in Acts of the Apostles 15:22-29. So are you saying there is a progression from that? I say there is the consistent understanding of what Paul says, that we are not answerable to acquiring or partaking unknowingly of things involved in idolatry, but for the sake of our Christian witness, which we should always act in accordance with, we should not take acquire or take part in what was involved with idolatry knowingly. And I don't see that this involves what I said about using animals, which did not invoke old covenant law, but discusses what I hear all responding with permission they talk of having which has the requirements told to Noah in Genesis 9:2-5 (universal for what permission there is, and not old covenant law), which is stated by the Apostles with the leading of Yahweh's Spirit still. So I don't see there would be progression from it right after that.
And I made many other points showing it is not good to keep having meat, that aren't considered in the discussion still. Permission for meat isn't ongoing, it isn't even so good for us, with healthier ways without it. And as I point out now more, such is with tasty meals too, which should be considered too, instead of all that I say be neglected.

Click to expand...

Bible2+ said:

Note that it is, but only so long as a Christian has faith regarding that (Romans 14:14-23).

Click to expand...

How is it that I make many great points, and you post a response to one thing, and would think this is enough to carry the argument contrary to me? And this is while it isn't even right. I have pointed out previously to you that misuse of the Romans passage, that you never responded to at the time, but what permission is stated, from Genesis, besides requiring that the blood be removed, you are not to have it, which is still disregarded, with disobedience then, is never with it actually stated that it is ongoing, for many hundreds of years that permission wasn't given, Yahweh as the Creator cares for the animals, as clearly showing in Proverbs 12:10, and there will be no more killing or any suffering in the coming rule, shown in Isaiah 11:6-9, and it is repeated in Isaiah 65. This shows clearly enough that having meat from animals slaughtered for it, which involves captivity and domination, suffering until being killed, is not of the permanent design from the Creator Yahweh, it is in fact only from curse in this world that we are contributing to, and it was in fact strongly connected with systematic sacrificing in the Bible, which is not ongoing. Christ who came gave the one effective sacrifice, that makes any who it applies to right with God, being cleaned in the necessary way. So no animal has to be killed for us now. That they are is only from choice of people such as you. But it isn't necessary, and I am showing effectively that it isn't better.

What I don't get about those who persist with not being vegan, while I was nonvegan before too, but did not persist with it when becoming informed, is their idea that those who become vegan are sacrificing what they would prefer, and don't have what they enjoy as much anymore. It is as if those persisting as vegans haven't found what they enjoy more. Is it really imagined they don't like what they have and how they are living, with changes they see, while they communicate for it so enthusiastically?

FredVB said in post #519:

. . . systematic sacrificing in the Bible, which is not ongoing.

Click to expand...

Note that it will be, during the future Millennium (Zechariah 14:21).

Which brings to mind Ezekiel chapters 40 to 48.

Ezekiel chapters 40 to 48 aren't necessarily a prophecy of future events which must happen, like those in the book of Revelation must happen (Revelation 1:1), but could have been a conditional vision which Israel had to fulfill while still in Old Testament/Old Covenant times (Ezekiel 43:11). For the vision refers to animal sacrifices for sin (Ezekiel 43:21-22), which were abolished by Jesus Christ on the Cross, along with all the rest of the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Hebrews 7:18-19, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18). Jesus' New Covenant sacrifice for sin (Matthew 26:28) completely and forever replaced all the Old Covenant animal sacrifices for sin (Hebrews 10:1-23).

Nonetheless, when Jesus Christ returns in our future and begins His Millennial reign on the earth (Revelation 20:4-6, Zechariah 14:3-21), He will still build a New Covenant, 4th temple building in Jerusalem; and New Covenant animal sacrifices will be offered in front of that temple (Zechariah 14:20-21, Zechariah 6:12-13). Instead of these sacrifices being for sin, they could be for thanksgiving (cf. Leviticus 22:29). Jesus could build that temple, and it could be operated according to the description in Ezekiel chapters 40 to 48, but leaving out the parts about animal sacrifices for sin. Another possibility is New Covenant animal sacrifices for sin will be made, but as a remembrance of Jesus' New Covenant sacrifice on the Cross for our sins (Matthew 26:28), like how Communion is currently partaken of in remembrance of Jesus' sacrifice (Luke 22:19). The current practice of Communion could cease at Jesus' return (1 Corinthians 11:26).

Also, after the future Millennium and subsequent events (Revelation 20:7-15), when the literal city of New Jerusalem will descend from heaven and land on the New Earth (Revelation 21:1-3), there will no longer be any temple building (Revelation 21:22).