Food laws

PROPHECYKID

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 28, 2007
5,982
527
35
The isle of spice
Visit site
✟73,654.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acts 10:9-15, "About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

“Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

If you want to eat according to Old Testament law or today's kosher requirements go ahead. According to what God told Peter, you can eat what you want, including reptiles. It makes no difference to God.

Are you serious right now. The purpose of this vision was to teach Peter that he should call no MAN common or unclean. The vision was not about food. Food was used as a metaphor.
 
Upvote 0

pescador

Wise old man
Supporter
Nov 29, 2011
8,530
4,776
✟498,844.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Are you serious right now. The purpose of this vision was to teach Peter that he should call no MAN common or unclean. The vision was not about food. Food was used as a metaphor.

I have emphasized certain phrases to show you the passage is clearly about food...

Acts 10:9-15, "About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

“Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

Unless God is directing Peter to become a cannibal there is nothing about "calling man common or unclean". Peter believed he was following God's command to eat a certain way but God instructed him that all food is acceptable.

Don't read something into the Bible that clearly isn't there. God is not the author of confusion.
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,416
4,599
Hudson
✟281,635.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Acts 10:9-15, "About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

“Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

If you want to eat according to Old Testament law or today's kosher requirements go ahead. According to what God told Peter, you can eat what you want, including reptiles. It makes no difference to God.

Acts 10:14-15 But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.” 15 And the voice came to him again a second time, “What God has made clean, do not call common.”

It says that all kinds of animals were led down, so Peter could have obeyed God's command to kill and eat by simply killing and eating one of the clean animals, so the key to correcting understanding his vision is understanding why he refused to do what the Mosaic Law permitted him to do. It should be noted that Peter did not just object by saying that he had never eaten anything that was unclean, but also added that he had never eaten anything that was common. Furthermore, God only rebuked Peter for his use of the word "common" and not for his use of the word "unclean". In other words, Peter had correctly identified the unclean animals as unclean and had correctly declined to eat them in obedience to the Mosaic Law, but he had incorrectly identified the clean animals as common and had incorrectly declined to eat them in disobedience to God's command to kill and eat. So Peter's vision had nothing to do with a change in the status is unclean animals, but rather he interpreted his vision three times as being in regard to incorrectly identifying Gentiles.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟899,962.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
FYI, I am reprinting what I said above about keeping Kosher...

According to kosher tradition..

Abraham served meat and dairy in the same meal to God's messengers. So he violated the tradition of Kosher.

Can't you understand that?

I am quoting the actual text of Exodus regarding that rule and comparing it to Gen 18 to show that Abraham did nothing to violate the food laws we see in the Bible.. Can you understand that?
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟899,962.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I have emphasized certain phrases to show you the passage is clearly about food...

Acts 10:9-15, "About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

“Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

Indeed the symbols used in vision to make a point to Peter - where at no point does Peter rise up and slay a rat, bat, cat and have a cat sandwich as the text reminds us.

Unless God is directing Peter to become a cannibal there is nothing about "calling man common or unclean".

Until you read what Peter said was the whole point of that parable/vision

Acts 10
28 And he said to them, “You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a man who is a Jew to associate with a foreigner or to visit him; and yet God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean.

Acts 10:34 “I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, 35 but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him.

Acts 10: 47Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?” 48 And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.

Acts 11
Now the apostles and the brethren who were throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. 2 And when Peter came up to Jerusalem, those who were circumcised took issue with him, 3 saying, “You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them.” 4 But Peter began speaking and proceeded to explain to them in orderly sequence, saying, 5 “I was in the city of Joppa praying; and in a trance I saw a vision, an object coming down like a great sheet lowered by four corners from the sky; and it came right down to me, 6 and when I had fixed my gaze on it and was observing it I saw the four-footed animals of the earth and the wild beasts and the crawling creatures and the birds of the air. 7 I also heard a voice saying to me, ‘Get up, Peter; kill and eat.’ 8 But I said, ‘By no means, Lord, for nothing unholy or unclean has ever entered my mouth.’ 9 But a voice from heaven answered a second time, ‘What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy.’ 10 This happened three times, and everything was drawn back up into the sky. 11 And behold, at that moment three men appeared at the house in which we were staying, having been sent to me from Caesarea. 12 The Spirit told me to go with them without misgivings. These six brethren also went with me and we entered the man’s house. 13 And he reported to us how he had seen the angel standing in his house, and saying, ‘Send to Joppa and have Simon, who is also called Peter, brought here; 14 and he will speak words to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household.’ 15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as He did upon us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 Therefore if God gave to them the same gift as He gave to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God’s way?” 18 When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, “Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life.”

Acts 15
7 After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; 9 and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith.

In all of Peter's explanations ..not a word about now having rat sandwiches at potluck
 
Upvote 0

PROPHECYKID

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 28, 2007
5,982
527
35
The isle of spice
Visit site
✟73,654.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I have emphasized certain phrases to show you the passage is clearly about food...

Acts 10:9-15, "About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

“Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

Unless God is directing Peter to become a cannibal there is nothing about "calling man common or unclean". Peter believed he was following God's command to eat a certain way but God instructed him that all food is acceptable.

Don't read something into the Bible that clearly isn't there. God is not the author of confusion.

You are leaving out the verse that explains the conclusion of the vision. Its the most important verse. Did you even pay attention to context of the vision..the verses you left out of the chapter?

In verses 1 - 8 God gives a vision to Cornelius who is a Gentile and instructs him to send to Peter. God knew that there were things Cornelius needed to learn and wanted to use Peter for this purpose. However, the Jews at this time had an attitude towards the gentiles. They did not want to associate with Gentiles and considered them unclean. God had to then give Peter a vision to destroy this mindset in him.

Act 10:19 While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.
Act 10:20 Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them.
Act 10:21 Then Peter went down to the men which were sent unto him from Cornelius; and said, Behold, I am he whom ye seek: what is the cause wherefore ye are come?
Act 10:22 And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee.
Act 10:23 Then called he them in, and lodged them. And on the morrow Peter went away with them, and certain brethren from Joppa accompanied him.
Act 10:24 And the morrow after they entered into Caesarea. And Cornelius waited for them, and had called together his kinsmen and near friends.
Act 10:25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.
Act 10:26 But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.
Act 10:27 And as he talked with him, he went in, and found many that were come together.
Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how 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 hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Verse 28 gives you the point of the dream and once you examine the context it is clear. When did God show Peter that it should call no MAN common or unclean?? Peter recognized that this is what God was actually showing him in the vision using food as a metaphor to the gentile people.
 
Upvote 0

Jipsah

Blood Drinker
Aug 17, 2005
12,287
3,674
70
Franklin, Tennessee
✟217,988.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Are you serious right now. The purpose of this vision was to teach Peter that he should call no MAN common or unclean. The vision was not about food. Food was used as a metaphor.
Yea, says so right there on your doctrine. Kinda negates the "kill and eat" part, though, doesn't it? But anyway, St. Paul lays the subject to rest when he says:

25Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake: 26For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof. 27If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

'Nuff said
 
  • Winner
Reactions: charsan
Upvote 0

pescador

Wise old man
Supporter
Nov 29, 2011
8,530
4,776
✟498,844.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Acts 10:14-15 But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.” 15 And the voice came to him again a second time, “What God has made clean, do not call common.”

It says that all kinds of animals were led down, so Peter could have obeyed God's command to kill and eat by simply killing and eating one of the clean animals, so the key to correcting understanding his vision is understanding why he refused to do what the Mosaic Law permitted him to do. It should be noted that Peter did not just object by saying that he had never eaten anything that was unclean, but also added that he had never eaten anything that was common. Furthermore, God only rebuked Peter for his use of the word "common" and not for his use of the word "unclean". In other words, Peter had correctly identified the unclean animals as unclean and had correctly declined to eat them in obedience to the Mosaic Law, but he had incorrectly identified the clean animals as common and had incorrectly declined to eat them in disobedience to God's command to kill and eat. So Peter's vision had nothing to do with a change in the status is unclean animals, but rather he interpreted his vision three times as being in regard to incorrectly identifying Gentiles.

Your exegesis is unfounded. The passage is clearly about God declaring all foods clean. You should read the Bible for what it says, not project other meanings onto it.

Acts 10:9-15, "About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, [and as far as we know he was not a cannibal] and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill [animals not people] and eat.”

“Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.” [referring to animals, not people]

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.” [clearly referring to dietary restrictions, consumption of "impure" animals.]

Projecting this onto something about Gentiles is bizarre. I read the Bible for what it literally says. When he was hungry, Peter was sent a vision about food from God.

Maybe you should try some version other than the King James so you can understand what the Bible actually says instead of what you want it to say.
 
Upvote 0

Jipsah

Blood Drinker
Aug 17, 2005
12,287
3,674
70
Franklin, Tennessee
✟217,988.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Indeed the symbols used in vision to make a point to Peter - where at no point does Peter rise up and slay a rat, bat, cat and have a cat sandwich as the text reminds us.
where does the text say that St. Peter didn't tuck in to some roast possum while he was at cornelius's house? I missed that one. This is like the objection to the True Presence in the Eucharist "Jesus/God couldn't have really meant that! it was just a strange metaphor". That's the sort of thing that ol Bro Buford was talking about when he said "Every Christian sect or denomination has doctrines so dearly held that the Bible cannot be allowed to damage them."

St.Paul again, just for drill:
25Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake: 26For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof. 27If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: charsan
Upvote 0

chilehed

Veteran
Jul 31, 2003
4,710
1,384
63
Michigan
✟236,715.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
From reading the New Testament, I don't believe the food laws are still in effect today.
For those not of the Jewish faith, they're not. Never have been, actually.

This came to mind because I was researching an extreme primitive raw food diet, that includes drinking animal blood, and rotting flesh :scratch::sick::sick:. Sounds pretty gross, but apparently the people who have been doing this are healthy and claim to have research to back what they do.
They claim that, yes.

And just by looking a lot of them, they look malnourished.
They very well might be. Getting everything you need can be tricky with a vegan diet.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟899,962.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
where does the text say that St. Peter didn't tuck in to some roast possum while he was at cornelius's house? I missed that one.

Indeed you did read the details in this post -- #25 -- again if you think Peter's very detailed explanation in Acts 11 is of the form "and so they all sat down to eat rat sandwiches" as if that was the message given him in Acts 10.

Seems obvious that this is not the case - but for those in doubt please read "the details" in -- #25 --

Of course... everyone has free will and can ignore any detail they so choose to ignore... I have no problem with people doing that. And this is not my topic to start with.
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,416
4,599
Hudson
✟281,635.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Your exegesis is unfounded. The passage is clearly about God declaring all foods clean. You should read the Bible for what it says, not project other meanings onto it.

Acts 10:9-15, "About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, [and as far as we know he was not a cannibal] and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill [animals not people] and eat.”

“Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.” [referring to animals, not people]

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.” [clearly referring to dietary restrictions, consumption of "impure" animals.]

Projecting this onto something about Gentiles is bizarre. I read the Bible for what it literally says. When he was hungry, Peter was sent a vision about food from God.

Maybe you should try some version other than the King James so you can understand what the Bible actually says instead of what you want it to say.

Paul interpreted his vision three times as being in regard to wrongly identifying Gentiles (Acts 10:28, Acts 11:1-18, Acts 15:7-9) without saying word about being able to eat unclean animals, so it is you who are reinterpreting his vision in order to project another meaning onto it, and no only that, but another meaning that is contrary to the word of God in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. In Deuteronomy 13:4-5, the way that God instructed His people to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for him was if they taught against obeying His commands, so if Peter had been saying as you suggested, then we should be quicker to disregard Him as being a false prophet than to disregard anything that God has commanded. The bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man and God did not give His people any room to follow someone who spoke against obeying His law.

You have not explained why Peter didn't simply kill and eat one of the clean animals as the Mosaic Law permitted him to do, why Peter did not just say that he had never eating anything that was unclean, but added that he had never eaten anything that was common, and why God only rebuked Peter for his use of the word "common". Instead, you are interpreting his vision as if he had been rebuked for his use of the word "unclean" and are using that to derive an interpretation other than the one that he gave and that is contrary to the word of God. With no other vision in the Bible do we reinterpret to mean someone other than the stated interpretation. What you are wanting to do is justify eating unclean animals even though God's word prohibits it. Do you consider Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 to no longer be Scripture?

Acts 10:14-15 (KJV) 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.

These verses from the KJV have the same meaning as the ESV. God did not rebuke him for calling the unclean animals unclean, but for calling the clean animals common, so his vision had nothing to do with a change in the status of unclean animals.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟899,962.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Paul interpreted his vision three times as being in regard to wrongly identifying Gentiles (Acts 10:28, Acts 11:1-18, Acts 15:7-9) without saying word about being able to eat unclean animals, so it is you who are reinterpreting his vision in order to project another meaning onto it, and no only that, but another meaning that is contrary to the word of God in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. In Deuteronomy 13:4-5, the way that God instructed His people to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for him was if they taught against obeying His commands, so if Peter had been saying as you suggested, then we should be quicker to disregard Him as being a false prophet than to disregard anything that God has commanded. The bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man and God did not give His people any room to follow someone who spoke against obeying His law.

You have not explained why Peter didn't simply kill and eat one of the clean animals as the Mosaic Law permitted him to do, why Peter did not just say that he had never eating anything that was unclean, but added that he had never eaten anything that was common, and why God only rebuked Peter for his use of the word "common". Instead, you are interpreting his vision as if he had been rebuked for his use of the word "unclean" and are using that to derive an interpretation other than the one that he gave and that is contrary to the word of God. With no other vision in the Bible do we reinterpret to mean someone other than the stated interpretation. What you are wanting to do is justify eating unclean animals even though God's word prohibits it. Do you consider Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 to no longer be Scripture?

Acts 10:14-15 (KJV) 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.

These verses from the KJV have the same meaning as the ESV. God did not rebuke him for calling the unclean animals unclean, but for calling the clean animals common.

Excellent point. Very well done.
 
Upvote 0

Jipsah

Blood Drinker
Aug 17, 2005
12,287
3,674
70
Franklin, Tennessee
✟217,988.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Indeed you did read the details in this post -- #25 -- again if you think Peter's very detailed explanation in Acts 11 is of the form "and so they all sat down to eat rat sandwiches" as if that was the message given him in Acts 10.
Sorry mate, but I don't see a a doggone thing there that says anything about did or didn't eat at cornelius's may have been rat sammiches, shrimp cocktail, bagels and lox, or bread an wine. The "see, he didn't eat anything that warn't kosher is just your dotrine talking again; the Scriptujre says nothing on the subject at all.

Of course... everyone has free will and can ignore any detail they so choose to ignore.
Those details especially easy to ignore when they don't exist. But hey, what do you reckon they ate, gefilte fish?

BTW, This Just In: 1 corinthians 10: 25Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake: 26For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof. 27If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

'Quik, 'splain that one away.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: charsan
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟899,962.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Sorry mate, but I don't see a a doggone thing there that says anything about did or didn't eat at cornelius's

Good thing we are not talking about eating food at cornelius's house then...

Funny how Some things just seem to work out.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,005
2,817
Australia
✟157,641.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
From reading the New Testament, I don't believe the food laws are still in effect today.

But would it still be good to follow for respect to God, and healthier? God gave this law for a reason did he, and what was the reason for? Was it to protect the health of his people?

This came to mind because I was researching an extreme primitive raw food diet, that includes drinking animal blood, and rotting flesh :scratch::sick::sick:. Sounds pretty gross, but apparently the people who have been doing this are healthy and claim to have research to back what they do.

And then there is the other extreme diet of Vegan. But people back in the Old Testament times have been eating meat, and I find most Vegans to be anti-God and Anti-Bible. And just by looking a lot of them, they look malnourished.

I believe all of God's laws were given for reasons. Some were for physical, mental or spiritual well being, but others were to point to Jesus and his work on the cross or to set the Israelites apart from the other nations. We are not under those laws but we can glean some principles and information from them.

Certainly, pork should be cooked well to be safe. In a modern oven this should be no issue (but something to keep in mind while cooking pork) but certainly could be an issue for people wandering around in a desert. Eating undercooked pork can lead to trichinosis, a parasitic infection.

The new testament forbids consuming blood. That definitely applies.

God gave people meat after the flood because the climate had changed.
Going vegan and forgoing all animal products makes it hard to get all the nutrients.
 
Upvote 0

PROPHECYKID

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 28, 2007
5,982
527
35
The isle of spice
Visit site
✟73,654.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Indeed the symbols used in vision to make a point to Peter - where at no point does Peter rise up and slay a rat, bat, cat and have a cat sandwich as the text reminds us.



Until you read what Peter said was the whole point of that parable/vision

Acts 10
28 And he said to them, “You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a man who is a Jew to associate with a foreigner or to visit him; and yet God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean.

Acts 10:34 “I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, 35 but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him.

Acts 10: 47Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?” 48 And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.

Acts 11
Now the apostles and the brethren who were throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. 2 And when Peter came up to Jerusalem, those who were circumcised took issue with him, 3 saying, “You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them.” 4 But Peter began speaking and proceeded to explain to them in orderly sequence, saying, 5 “I was in the city of Joppa praying; and in a trance I saw a vision, an object coming down like a great sheet lowered by four corners from the sky; and it came right down to me, 6 and when I had fixed my gaze on it and was observing it I saw the four-footed animals of the earth and the wild beasts and the crawling creatures and the birds of the air. 7 I also heard a voice saying to me, ‘Get up, Peter; kill and eat.’ 8 But I said, ‘By no means, Lord, for nothing unholy or unclean has ever entered my mouth.’ 9 But a voice from heaven answered a second time, ‘What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy.’ 10 This happened three times, and everything was drawn back up into the sky. 11 And behold, at that moment three men appeared at the house in which we were staying, having been sent to me from Caesarea. 12 The Spirit told me to go with them without misgivings. These six brethren also went with me and we entered the man’s house. 13 And he reported to us how he had seen the angel standing in his house, and saying, ‘Send to Joppa and have Simon, who is also called Peter, brought here; 14 and he will speak words to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household.’ 15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as He did upon us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 Therefore if God gave to them the same gift as He gave to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God’s way?” 18 When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, “Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life.”

Acts 15
7 After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; 9 and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith.

In all of Peter's explanations ..not a word about now having rat sandwiches at potluck

Isn't it interesting to note that after Peter reiterated the vision to the Jews who had an issue with him, that he never told that them because of the vision they are now free to eat anything. Its interesting that after he told them about the vision none of the asked him if this means they can now eat anything. Nobody concluded that the vision meant that now all foods are clean including Peter himself.

It also tells me that in Matthew when Jesus said not what goes into the mouth defiles, Peter didn't understand that to mean that all foods are clean either. Because up to this point, Peter had still not eaten any unclean food. So even in Matthew, if Jesus was declaring all foods clean like some terrible versions of the bible like to put it, Peter and none of the disciples understood it to mean that and if that is what Jesus meant he would have made sure they understood that.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: BobRyan
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟899,962.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Isn't it interesting to note that after Peter reiterated the vision to the Jews who had an issue with him, that he never told that them because of the vision they are now free to eat anything. .

True. They were balking at the idea of eating food - at the house of a gentile (no matter how pristine the food).

Imagine if Peter had suggested that Christians should now be eating rat sandwiches!! :)

It also tells me that in Matthew when Jesus said not what goes into the mouth defiles, Peter didn't understand that to mean that all foods are clean either. .

That is another excellent point - in Mark 7 and Matthew 15 - the debate is over "eating bread" with hands that are not baptized. It was not about "eating rat sandwiches". The OT has no warning against "eating bread". Their controversy was that the bread was being eaten with hands that were not ceremonially baptized to cleanse from the contamination of the market place. Contamination due to touching something a gentile touched.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Jipsah

Blood Drinker
Aug 17, 2005
12,287
3,674
70
Franklin, Tennessee
✟217,988.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Good thing we are not talking about eating food at cornelius's house then... Funny how Some things just seem to work out.
Hmmm... so then we have to conclude that your notion that God hadn't shown St. Pete that it was OK to eat critters that He (God) said were OK, but solely to show him that it was OK to sit down with the Goyyim, but not to eat with them, for crying out loud, because nothing those uncircumsized bozos ate was kosher!

Oh. I see. Or not. So all the stuff about "arise, kill and eat", was just to wind Peter up a bit, get his attention, and then show what He really meant, although that happens off screen so we have to assume it. Ah. Yeah. Man, God really is a card, isn't He?

Funny how Some things just seem to work out.
Even funnier is how people manage to learn to swallow that kind of, shall we say creative, exegesis. "Oh no no no no! God was just kidding about that part!

A shame that St. Paul didn't get the word. He really loved a good joke.

1 Corinthians 10: 25Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake: 26For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof. 27If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.
 
Upvote 0