Can we eat pork, shellfish and crustaceans? And what about blood in meat?

Goodhuman said:

Acts 15:29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

Click to expand...

Something not usually realized is that those specific four activities were common practices of pagan temple worship. Those prohibitions were in line with what Paul was teaching to the converted gentile congregations.

Dkh587 said:

It was not an exhaustive list - they were given those commandments to start. That’s why in the next verse(which you conveniently left out), James mentions the law being read every sabbath.

The Gentiles coming into the fold would learn more of the law when they gathered with the assemblies every sabbath. Those are clearly not all the commandments that we are expected to obey, and I would assume that you don’t even think we are only responsible for those 4.

it’s like when someone is new to church - they have to be acclimated. You don’t just throw them in the deep end. They gotta learn.

I’m pretty sure you don’t teach that witchcraft, drunkenness and coveting are permissible(considering they were not commanded in the Jerusalem Council).

Click to expand...

So you're saying the plan was to let the gentiles sin for a while before tightening them up?

If that's the case, why was there a problem with Peter separating himself to eat with the Jewish Christians at Galatia instead of the gentile Christians?

Soyeong said:

So why would you think that it makes sense to interpret Galatians 5:2 was Paul warning us against doing that as though obedience to God were somehow a negative thing?

Click to expand...

It's not up for interpretation. Paul said that if you go back to the law, you have fallen from grace. We're under a new law and it is those statutes that we must keep.

All throughout the Bible, God wanted His people to repent and to return to obedience to His law

Click to expand...

Right. That law which was in effect. In Adam's time, there was a single law, don't eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. There have even been times before the law of Moses where there were no unclean animals.

There were no laws nailed to the cross.

Click to expand...

You really need to read your bible more.

3 When you were dead in your trespasses and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our trespasses, 14 having canceled the debt ascribed to us in the decrees that stood against us. He took it away, nailing it to the cross! 15

In regard to Colossians 2:14, whenever someone was crucified, the people would write out a sign that listed the charges that were against them and nail it to their cross in order to announce why they were being executed (Matthew 27:37). This served as a perfect analogy for the list of our violations of God's law being nailed to the cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty for our sins, but has nothing to do with ending any of God's laws, especially because they are all eternal (Psalms 119:160).

Click to expand...

It was the law and the transgressions which were nailed to the cross. He goes much further in the letter to the Hebrews explaining that the old covenant was done way with and replaced with a new covenant.

God is not in disagreement with Himself about which laws we should follow, so the Law of Christ is the same as the Law of the Spirit and the Law of the Father, which was given to Moses.

Click to expand...

This is totally against what the scripture says. They are not the same thing.

We aren't justified by obeying God's law because it was never given for that purpose in the first place.

Click to expand...

For those who were under that law it is exactly how they were justified. You're right, God isn't confused. He replaced the old law with a new one and he expects us to follow the new law of Christ which is NOT the law of Moses.

If you really believe this, then when's the last time you sacrificed a goat for your sins?

RDKirk said:

So you're saying the plan was to let the gentiles sin for a while before tightening them up?

If that's the case, why was there a problem with Peter separating himself to eat with the Jewish Christians at Galatia instead of the gentile Christians?

Click to expand...

The plan was for them to progressively learn the law when gathering in the synagogues on the Sabbath. These were Gentiles who grew up without knowledge of God and the Scriptures. It’s a process.

HARK! said:

What does Peter have to say about what Paul says?

Click to expand...

That he was correct. Scripture doesn't argue with scripture.

There was a new covenant that did away with the old and reconciled Jews and Gentiles under one system.

Dkh587 said:

It was not an exhaustive list - they were given those commandments to start. That’s why in the next verse(which you conveniently left out), James mentions the law being read every sabbath.

The Gentiles coming into the fold would learn more of the law when they gathered with the assemblies every sabbath. Those are clearly not all the commandments that we are expected to obey, and I would assume that you don’t even think we are only responsible for those 4.

it’s like when someone is new to church - they have to be acclimated. You don’t just throw them in the deep end. They gotta learn.

I’m pretty sure you don’t teach that witchcraft, drunkenness and coveting are permissible(considering they were not commanded in the Jerusalem Council).

Click to expand...

I do not understand how you reached the conclusion that I offered that as an exhaustive list.

Al Touthentop said:

It's not up for interpretation. Paul said that if you go back to the law, you have fallen from grace. We're under a new law and it is those statutes that we must keep.

Click to expand...

Every form of communication is up to interpretation, which is why multiple people can read the same verse and come away with different understandings about what the author was intended to communicate. For example, I do not consider Paul to be an enemy of God, so I do not interpret that passage as Paul teaching us to rebel against God, however, the bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man, so if you think that is what Paul was doing, then you should be quicker to disregard everything that he said than to disregard anything that God has commanded.

Likewise, it would make no sense to think that we fall from grace by obeying God. In Psalms 119:29, David wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him how to obey His law, so do you interpret that as David wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him how to fall from grace? Do you interpret Romans 1:5 as saying that we have received grace in order to bring about our fall from grace? Or Titus 2:11-14 as describing our salvation as being trained by grace in how to fall from grace?

Paul spoke about multiple categories of law, such as God's law, works of the law, and the law of faith, so it is critically important to correctly interpret which law he was speaking about in order to avoid making the mistake of misinterpreting him as teaching us to rebel against God. For examples, in Romans 7:25, Paul contrasted God's law with the law of sin, and in Romans 3:27, he contrasted a law that was of works with a law of faith, so if you always interpret him as speaking about the same law, then you are guaranteed to misunderstand what he was saying.

Right. That law which was in effect. In Adam's time, there was a single law, don't eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. There have even been times before the law of Moses where there were no unclean animals.

Click to expand...

All of God's righteousness laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160) and the way to act in accordance with God's righteousness has existed for as long as God's righteousness has been eternal. The Mosaic Law divides between good and evil. In Genesis 7:2, Noah was instructed in regard to what to do with clean and unclean animals without being told how to tell the difference, an in 8:20, he knew to offer a clean animal, so he must have been given instructions in that regard.

You really need to read your bible more.

3 When you were dead in your trespasses and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our trespasses, 14 having canceled the debt ascribed to us in the decrees that stood against us. He took it away, nailing it to the cross! 15

It was the law and the transgressions which were nailed to the cross. He goes much further in the letter to the Hebrews explaining that the old covenant was done way with and replaced with a new covenant.

Click to expand...

Again, that verse doesn't say anything about any laws being nailed to the cross. The decrees that stood against us were our violations of the law, not the laws themselves. Crosses were never used for the purpose of disposing of laws and they didn't have to legislate new ones to replace the old ones every time someone was crucified. In Titus 2:14, it doesn't say that Jesus gave himself to end any laws, but in order to redeem us from all lawlessness. In Hebrews 8:10, the New Covenant still involves following God's law.

This is totally against what the scripture says. They are not the same thing.

Click to expand...

Then you need to address the serious implications of interpreting Jesus as being in disagreement with the Father. If you agree that Jesus set a sinless example of how to obey the Mosaic Law and did not hypocritically preach something other than what he practiced, then why would you think that the Law of Christ was something other than what he taught by word and by example? In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul contrasted both God's Law and the Law of the Spirit with the law of sin and death, so he equated the Mosaic Law with the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ. After all, the Mosaic Law was given by God and Jesus and the Spirit are God, so it is the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ. Likewise, Paul said in a parallel statement in 1 Corinthians 9:21 that he was not outside God's law, but under the Law of Christ, so again he equated the Mosaic Law with the Law of Christ.

For those who were under that law it is exactly how they were justified. You're right, God isn't confused. He replaced the old law with a new one and he expects us to follow the new law of Christ which is NOT the law of Moses.

Click to expand...

In Genesis 6:8-9, it says that Noah found grace in the eyes of God and that he was a righteous man, so he was justified by grace through faith in the same one and only way as everyone else. God had no need to provide an alternative and unattainable means of becoming justified through His law, so that was never the purpose for which it was given. In Romans 3:21-22, it does not says that the Law and the Prophets testify that the righteousness of God comes through our obedience, but rather they testify that it comes through faith in Christ for all who believe, so again this has always been the only way to become justified. God did not make any mistakes when He gave the law, so he had no need to send Jesus to replace His own laws.

If you really believe this, then when's the last time you sacrificed a goat for your sins?

Click to expand...

That would not be in accordance with what the law instructs me to do due to there being no temple with a presiding Levitical priesthood, though Paul did continue to make sin offerings in Acts 18:18 in accordance with Numbers 6 and was on his way to pay for the sin offerings of others in Acts 21:20-24 in order to show that he continued to live in obedience to the Mosaic Law.

HARK! said:

You are correct


(CLV) Mt 5:18
For verily, I am saying to you, Till heaven and earth should be passing by, one iota or one serif may by no means be passing by from the law till all should be occurring.

Click to expand...

And it all occurred. And when it occurred, the law passed away.

Paul was asked to bear the expenses of 4 men taking the Nazorean vow, to prove that he embraced the law. Do you know how expensive it is for even one person to take this vow?

(CLV) Ac 21:24
Taking these along, be purified together with them, and bear on their expenses, that they should be shaving their heads, and all will know that what they have been instructed concerning you is nothing, but you also are observing the elements and you yourself are maintaining the law.

Click to expand...

But we know he preached against going back to the law of Moses. So his intent was that they would hear him, not to validate Christians going back to the law. God's intent was that he would go to Rome to preach the gospel.

So when's the last time you offered an animal sacrifice?

HARK! said:

Yahshua said the the law won't pass away before heaven and earth. I haven't seen that happen.

Click to expand...

No, he didn't say that. He said that heaven and earth would pass away before his words would, not the law. He said the law would be fulfilled when his words came to pass.

When is the last time you sacrificed an animal for your sins?

123flower said:

I've been reading about the food laws. Some christians believes you may eat all meat and some believes you may only eat clean meat.

I don't know what is right. The christians I know eat all meat. Some arguments are that we are not under the law anymore and Peter's vision (but Peters visions was about the gentiles to my opinion).

But in the Old Testament God warns us about eating unclean meat, especially the shellfish and crustaceans where he repeats multiple times that it is an abomination. Now science also says pork, shellfish and crustaceans are full of toxins and bad for your health. So thats makes it more sense to keep the commandment and not eat pork, shellfish and crustaceans anymore.

And what about blood in meat? God has warned us about that a couple times in the Old Testament and also in the New Testament.

So what's right? I don't know it anymore. I am actually more convinced to obey the food laws. But circumstances makes it difficult to obey the food laws. It's not a problem for me to not eat pork, shellfish and crustaceans anymore. The problem is that there are not really shops in my country that sells kosher meat to buy chicken and beef. There is actually only one kosher butcher in my country and the prices are expensive too. My husband would never agree with that. We are not rich. So that's not an option.

Does God mind that I still eat chicken and beef with blood in it, because I have no other choice?

Click to expand...

Eat whatever you wish.
Seems meats should be cooked and not bloody.

HARK! said:

Yahshua's words are the Father's (YHWH's) words. The Torah (Law) are the Father's words.

Click to expand...

And then as prophesied, the law was abolished.

3 In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

By the way, Jesus was named Ιεσου - and there isn't an English word for his name other than Jesus which is a transliteration of the Greek word.

And you still haven't answered when was the last time you sacrificed a goat? Why don't you answer that question?

123flower said:

I've been reading about the food laws. Some christians believes you may eat all meat and some believes you may only eat clean meat.

I don't know what is right. The christians I know eat all meat. Some arguments are that we are not under the law anymore and Peter's vision (but Peters visions was about the gentiles to my opinion).

But in the Old Testament God warns us about eating unclean meat, especially the shellfish and crustaceans where he repeats multiple times that it is an abomination. Now science also says pork, shellfish and crustaceans are full of toxins and bad for your health. So thats makes it more sense to keep the commandment and not eat pork, shellfish and crustaceans anymore.

And what about blood in meat? God has warned us about that a couple times in the Old Testament and also in the New Testament.

So what's right? I don't know it anymore. I am actually more convinced to obey the food laws. But circumstances makes it difficult to obey the food laws. It's not a problem for me to not eat pork, shellfish and crustaceans anymore. The problem is that there are not really shops in my country that sells kosher meat to buy chicken and beef. There is actually only one kosher butcher in my country and the prices are expensive too. My husband would never agree with that. We are not rich. So that's not an option.

Does God mind that I still eat chicken and beef with blood in it, because I have no other choice?

Click to expand...

The law is the whole entire law, either you are under all of it or none of it.
I believe Jesus fulfilled the law and that we are now under grace. That we now follow God's moral law guided by the Holy Spirit, not set of written directives.

The law was given not only for health concerns of the day but to set the people apart from surroundings nations and so they could see they couldn't keep God's laws (because they needed a saviour) If you have a health concern about a food would be a good reason to avoid it, but that isn't a law. You might find a safer organic source.

I do believe Peter's vision was about both us the gentiles now being clean as well as the animals in the vision.

The only thing I don't do is eat meat with blood. Not that I would want to as personally I find that disgusting but the New Testament says not to do so.
Acts 15:29
29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.

Romans 14:3
The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them.

Romans 14
Do Not Pass Judgment on One Another
14 As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. 2 One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. 3 Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

Colossians 3:17
And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.