Are Christians allowed to eat pork under the New Covenant?

  • Thread starter LittleLambofJesus
  • Start date

Is it lawful for Christians to eat pork under the NC?

  • Yes! It is now lawful under the NC!

  • No! It is still unlawful under the NC

  • I am not sure

  • Other


Results are only viewable after voting.

1213

Disciple of Jesus
Jul 14, 2011
3,661
1,117
Visit site
✟146,199.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single

Jesus said:

"Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill. For most assuredly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished. Whoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and teach others to do so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.
Mat. 5:17-19

If we love God, we keep His commandments:


For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. His commandments are not grievous.

1 John 5:3
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The problem with your analysis is that there are no unclean plants in Moses law.

In Genesis 6 and 7 there are unclean animals.

If the argument is that humans used to graze on grass, or eat poison plants (instead of fruits and grains as Genesis 1 says) then ignoring context and just taking Genesis 9 out of context would work as you say. And yet even Gen 9 affirms restrictions the same as we find in Acts 15 and Leviticus 17. So the "no restrictions" idea does not work even in Genesis 9, nor a diet of grass, nor a diet of poison plants.

3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs. 4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
In the NT everything is pure, even meat.

In the NT the Word of God still matters -- and the Isaiah 66 judgment specifically points to events that happen after the cross when it comes to eating rats, cats, dogs, bats, and even in the NT we don't graze on grass or eat poison plants.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,944
11,098
okie
✟214,996.00
Faith
Anabaptist
In the NT everything is pure, even meat.
Yes , several hundred years men have been repeating that.
But it is not YHWH'S WORD, originally or ever, and
All along the kosher Chrisitan Jews knew this - never changed since Jesus' Day, and longer.
However, in YHWH'S WORD, there are several reasons exposed why
men have been repeating error for hundreds of years - perfectly in harmony with all of YHWH'S WORD. (why the error is permitted and continued, both).
 
Upvote 0

W2L

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2016
20,081
10,988
USA
✟213,573.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Yes , several hundred years men have been repeating that.
But it is not YHWH'S WORD, originally or ever, and
All along the kosher Chrisitan Jews knew this - never changed since Jesus' Day, and longer.
However, in YHWH'S WORD, there are several reasons exposed why
men have been repeating error for hundreds of years - perfectly in harmony with all of YHWH'S WORD. (why the error is permitted and continued, both).
oh boy. OK.
 
Upvote 0

Bible2+

Matthew 4:4
Sep 14, 2015
3,001
375
✟91,195.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
1213 said in post #381:

Jesus said:

"Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill. For most assuredly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished . . .

Matthew 5:17-18 means Jesus Christ came the first time not to abolish the prophecies in the Mosaic law and the Old Testament prophets regarding the Messiah's/the Christ's first coming, but to fulfill all those prophecies (Luke 24:44-48; e.g. Acts 3:22-26, Isaiah 53). Matthew 5:17-18 can't mean Jesus came not to abolish the letter of the commandments of the Old Covenant Mosaic law, for He did come to do that, on the Cross (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19). Also, Matthew 5:17-18 can't mean Jesus came to fulfill the letter of all the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments, for He couldn't possibly have done that. For example, some of those commandments applied only to women after childbirth (Leviticus 12:4-8), or to wives suspected of adultery by their husbands (Numbers 5:19-31).

As the Christ (Matthew 5:17, Luke 24:44-46), the mediator of the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 12:24, Hebrews 7:22, Hebrews 8:6-9), Jesus had the divine authority to contradict the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments and replace them with His own, even better, New Covenant commandments (Matthew 5:38-44, Matthew 19:7-9, John 8:5-7), such as those He gave in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:19 to 7:29) and in the epistles of Paul the apostle (1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 4:2). And as the Christ, Jesus had the divine authority to allow His disciples to break the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments (Matthew 12:1-8).

1213 said in post #381:

". . . Whoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and teach others to do so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.
Mat. 5:17-19

Matthew 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

This refers to the New Covenant/New Testament commandments/sayings (Matthew 5:19, Matthew 7:24-29) which Jesus, as the Christ (Matthew 5:17b, Luke 24:44-46), was just about to give in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:19 to 7:29), and which New Covenant commandments "exceed in righteousness" (Matthew 5:20 to 7:29) the (now) abolished letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19), which was kept by the Pharisees. Compare what Paul says about himself:

Philippians 3:5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9 ¶And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

--

Jesus shows in the Sermon on the Mount how his New Covenant, Christian commandments are stricter than the letter of the commandments of the Old Covenant Mosaic law. For the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law forbade murder (Matthew 5:21, Exodus 20:13), while Jesus' New Covenant law forbids even calling people names (Matthew 5:22). And the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law forbade adultery (Matthew 5:27, Exodus 20:14), while Jesus' New Covenant law forbids even looking at another woman with lust (Matthew 5:28). And the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law permitted divorce and remarriage (Matthew 5:31, Deuteronomy 24:1-2), while Jesus' New Covenant law forbids it (Matthew 5:32, Mark 10:11-12, Luke 16:18), except for a single exemption granted only to husbands who discover that their newlywed wife is not a virgin, but had committed fornication (Matthew 19:9).

Jesus also shows in the Sermon on the Mount that while his New Covenant, Christian law is stricter than the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law, at the same time it is also more merciful. For the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law required taking an eye for an eye (Matthew 5:38, Deuteronomy 19:21), while Jesus' New Covenant law requires turning the other cheek (Matthew 5:39). And the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law required hatred for one's enemies (Matthew 5:43, Deuteronomy 23:6), while Jesus' New Covenant law requires love for one's enemies (Matthew 5:44). And the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law, the ministration of death (2 Corinthians 3:7), required, for example, that adulterers be put to death (Leviticus 20:10), while Jesus showed mercy to the woman caught in adultery (John 8:4-11). And, for another example, the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law required that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death (Exodus 31:14, Numbers 15:32-36), while Jesus allowed his disciples to work on the sabbath and said that they were guiltless (Matthew 12:1-8), just as Jesus himself worked on the sabbath (John 5:17-18).

So in obeying Jesus' New Covenant commandments (Matthew 5:19 to 7:29, John 14:15; 1 Corinthians 14:37), believers, whether Jews or Gentiles, are both more merciful and loving, and also exceed in righteousness those who mistakenly try to keep the abolished letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Matthew 5:20-48, Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19).
 
Upvote 0

Bible2+

Matthew 4:4
Sep 14, 2015
3,001
375
✟91,195.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
BobRyan said in post #382:

And yet even Gen 9 affirms restrictions the same as we find in Acts 15 and Leviticus 17.

Regarding Acts 15, note that the historical account of the forbidding of Christian Gentiles to eat certain foods at the time of Acts 15:29 isn't in line with the scriptural teachings which show 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, Romans 14:14,20, Mark 7:18-19; 1 Corinthians 10:25-30, Colossians 2:16-17, Hebrews 9:10). But it may have seemed good to the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:28) to allow Acts 15:29 as an only-temporary compromise among the Church leaders at that time, so that a schism wouldn't arise within the Church (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:25) so shortly after its inception, between those leaders who at that time still (mistakenly) wanted to continue keeping the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Acts 15:21, Acts 21:20b), and those leaders who knew the truth that all Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, shouldn't try to keep the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Acts 15:10, Romans 7:6, Galatians 4:21 to 5:8, Galatians 3:2-25, Galatians 2:11-21; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Hebrews 7:18-19, Hebrews 10:9b).

BobRyan said in post #382:

And yet even Gen 9 affirms restrictions the same as we find in Acts 15 and Leviticus 17.

In Acts 15, the meeting was about whether or not Christian Gentiles must keep the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Acts 15:5-6,24). The Church leadership as a whole in Jerusalem wasn't ready at that time to say the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law didn't have to be kept by Jews either, because it had been abolished, even for Jews (Romans 7:6, Hebrews 7:18-19, Galatians 2:11-21, Galatians 4:21 to 5:8, Galatians 3:2-25; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18), on the New Covenant Cross of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 10). But this truth was known full well by Peter (Acts 15:5,10-11), even though he sometimes didn't act like he knew it, and so he was admonished one time by Paul away from the leaders in Jerusalem, while he was up in Antioch (Galatians 2:11-21). Paul and other apostles who knew the truth got it directly from Jesus, not from other apostles (Galatians 1:11-12; 2 Peter 1:16). That's why they could fend for themselves in arguing against those Jews who were pressuring Christian Gentiles to keep the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Acts 15:2a).

But when they couldn't convince those Jews to stop their pressuring, they got yet other leaders (Acts 15:2b), such as James, whom those Jews' hopefully would obey (Galatians 2:12), to get them to stop, through a letter which showed Christian Gentiles that none of the leaders of the Church were commanding them to keep the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Acts 15:24).

When Peter was away from Jerusalem living among the Gentiles in Antioch he rightly lived "after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews" (Galatians 2:14). It was only when some Jews came to Antioch who were "from James" (Galatians 2:12) that Peter reverted back to their (mistaken) practice. For James, and those who followed him, "zealously" (yet still mistakenly) held that the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law was still in effect for Jews (Acts 15:21, Acts 21:18-24). Such Old Covenant Mosaic law-zealous Jews griped to James over what Paul was telling Jews (Acts 21:21).
 
Upvote 0

Tangible

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato
May 29, 2009
9,837
1,416
cruce tectum
Visit site
✟59,743.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
It's a sin to eat swine. Stay away

In fact, God warned that when He returns, He's going to consume the people who eat swine flesh & other abominations like rats.

Isaiah 66:15-17
Context fail. The operative part of that verse is "those that sanctify themselves." Eating pork or mice is just descriptive of those who seek to justify themselves before God by their works.

Jesus declared all foods clean. Pass the bacon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ViaCrucis
Upvote 0

FredVB

Regular Member
Mar 11, 2010
4,507
921
America
Visit site
✟265,291.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
FredVB said:
Eating other meats is common otherwise and is a very strong attraction to others as well. But none of it is too hard to give up, every person who has changed to being vegan thought it was too hard to give up before.
But what animal was distinguished for being clean or unclean in the beginning was not for food, when it had not been permitted for it, but for sacrifice only, which was to Yahweh at first. And the animals are not to remain being permitted for food, it is not why they were made.

Bible2+ said:
Man was originally vegetarian, insofar as in the earliest days of mankind described in the Bible, God allowed man to eat only plants (Genesis 1:29). It was only after Noah's Flood that God allowed Noah and his family to start eating animals as well as plants, and they could eat any animal that moved (Genesis 9:3)

Only food from vegetation indeed was permitted, from the time of creation with the perfect design from Yahweh and for many centuries afterward.

It is yet neglected as generally that meat from animals being permitted was under extreme conditions when the vegetation for food was not growing with enough abundance, it was not said to be for always, it was not even said to be required, and importantly yet really overlooked or neglected though it really shouldn't be, it was linked with discussion on murder, with showing responsibility to animals, on whom dread of humans came :doh:, and with the requirements with preparing meat from them, which are not being observed now, but there is widespread violation to Yahweh's will. It should be acknowledged what is really happening, instead of disregarding how and from where you get your meat. Yes, Yahweh cares, see Proverbs 12:10.

Also, in the future, on the New Earth, God will miraculously make it so that all animals will be herbivores (Isaiah 65:17,25).

Indeed, we were told, none will hurt or destroy in all God's holy mountain. Having meat from animals will not persist, we will return to the perfect diet, for this, creation that is under the curse from our doing is groaning, with hope which will be fulfilled, Romans 8:20-22.

But beware of the idea (which is sometimes put forth) that Christians must be vegetarians:

1 Timothy 4:1 ¶Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

6 ¶If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.

Here the enforced vegetarianism, like the enforced non-marriage ("Forbidding to marry" in 1 Timothy 4:3), refers to what the future Antichrist will bring upon the world. For he will be a Gnostic (1 John 4:3; 2 John 1:7), and Gnosticism forbids eating animals, and forbids marriage.

I would really prefer to not hear the straw man argument that I keep hearing from many on this subject, when the scriptures they use is for other issues in the context of the passages, those of concern with idolatry and those of heretics departing from scriptural truth from God. I speak of real truth, the perfect diet from the beginning has support from studies, www.forksoverknives.com, and I speak from the scriptures, I can say it is better, in truth, and say there is God's perfect will, and it is desirable for us to have it here on this earth as it is in Heaven. There is no case of giving commandment to not eat meat, or the other products from animals. But truly it is not as good to have those, just as you would see for not eating rat, or drinking dog's milk. I can speak of that. And also neglected is that Paul who gets quoted for such discussion as this would have given up having meat with what he hears for that, which such who argue against this don't.
 
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
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Context fail. The operative part of that verse is "those that sanctify themselves." Eating pork or mice is just descriptive of those who seek to justify themselves before God by their works.
.

Or is it>

The text does not say "those who wear shoes and sanctify themselves" - rather the text points to "eating mice" which both the writer (Isaiah) and his contemporary readers would understand to be "abomination". Exegesis demands that the meaning of the text when rendering it - but "informed" by the intent of the author and the way it would obviously be received by his intended readers.


Jesus declared all foods clean. Pass the bacon

Not according to those who heard Jesus. In Acts 10 Peter stands firm on the fact that he was not eating rats to that very day. Jesus never argued in favor of eating rats. That is "not the Gospel" at all.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
BobRyan said in post #382:

And yet even Gen 9 affirms restrictions the same as we find in Acts 15 and Leviticus 17.

Regarding Acts 15, note that the historical account of the forbidding of Christian Gentiles to eat certain foods at the time of Acts 15:29 isn't in line with the scriptural teachings which show that under the New Covenant, all foods are in themselves okay, for all Christians,

On the contrary - there is no NT teaching about eating rats or the idea that the Gospel was put in place so Christians can start eating rats or eating meat with blood in it.

What we see is continued appeal to the rule of Lev 17 against eating meat with blood in it - as we find in Acts 15.

And in Acts 10 Peter confirms that even to that late date - - he knows of no instruction in favor of eating rats -- or anything that is condemned by the word of God.

whether Jews or Gentiles, to eat (1 Timothy 4:4-5,

1 Tim 4 says the only food that is approved - is that which the Word of God approves

Romans 14:14,20,

Rom 14 contrasts vegetarianism with meat eating - it cannot be bent to arguments for eating rats. As we all know -- the OT religious system required eating meat. The vegetarian question came up in the NT by those gentiles who feared eating meat offered to idols.

Mark 7:18-19;

Mark 7 is not about eating meat at all - it is about eating wheat that was ceremonially unclean (unclean - via Jewish tradition)

But it may have seemed good to the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:28) to allow Acts 15:29 as an explicit irrefutable reminder that the Lev 17 restriction still apply.

In Acts 15, the meeting was about whether or not Christian Gentiles must keep the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Acts 15:5-6,24).

That is not what the text says. Ex 20:7 condemns taking God's name in vain - that is still a sin even in the NT.

Matt 22 - Christ says Mosaic law contains the two greatest commandments.
Deut 6:5 Love God with all your heart
Lev 19:18 Love your neighbor as yourself.

And the Jews agreed.

Eph 6:2 the still-binding Ten Commandment unit appealed to by Paul who says in that text that the 5th Commandment "is the FIRST commandment with a promise" - first in what unit of LAW? Answer: Ten Commandments.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
In Genesis 6 and 7 there are unclean animals.

If the argument is that humans used to graze on grass, or eat poison plants (instead of fruits and grains as Genesis 1 says) then ignoring context and just taking Genesis 9 out of context would work as you say. And yet even Gen 9 affirms restrictions the same as we find in Acts 15 and Leviticus 17. So the "no restrictions" idea does not work even in Genesis 9, nor a diet of grass, nor a diet of poison plants.

3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs. 4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.

In the NT everything is pure, even meat.


Nothing in the NT condones eating rats - and that is not even a part of the Gospel.
Acts 15 flat out condemns eating even clean meat with blood in it - a Lev 17 demands.

Scripture. 66 books not just 27.
 
Upvote 0

W2L

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2016
20,081
10,988
USA
✟213,573.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Nothing in the NT condones eating rats - and that is not even a part of the Gospel.
Acts 15 flat out condemns eating even clean meat with blood in it - a Lev 17 demands.

Scripture. 66 books not just 27.
Paul said all things were pure. You can disagree with it if you wish, but thats what he said. Jesus said food doesn't defile a person.
 
Upvote 0

Tangible

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato
May 29, 2009
9,837
1,416
cruce tectum
Visit site
✟59,743.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Not according to those who heard Jesus. In Acts 10 Peter stands firm on the fact that he was not eating rats to that very day. Jesus never argued in favor of eating rats. That is "not the Gospel" at all.
Peter seems to have had a change of heart after having had the Lord speak to him, saying,"Arise, kill and eat." and,“What God has made clean, do not call common.”
 
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
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Peter seems to have had a change of heart after having had the Lord speak to him, saying,"Arise, kill and eat." and,“What God has made clean, do not call common.”

Indeed he did - he reports on this event two or three times - and each time he says the meaning is "call no MAN unclean" -- just when many had speculated that he might say "call no rat sandwich unclean".

Peter sticks with the "actual Gospel" - that God loves all mankind , that God so loved the World, that Peter was to preach the Gospel to "all" and it was not "just for Jews". This was the big new that peter then reports in chapter after chapter in Acts from 10 to chapter 15.

Nothing at all from Peter about "and from then on I eat rat sandwiches" -- as I am sure we all know - Jesus did not die on the cross to "cleanse rat meat" or to "approve rat sandwiches" -- that is not at all "the Gospel" that we find in the NT.
 
Upvote 0

Tangible

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato
May 29, 2009
9,837
1,416
cruce tectum
Visit site
✟59,743.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
"actual Gospel"
The actual Gospel is the good news about what God has done through Jesus Christ for us and for our salvation.

People not being allowed to eat animals of any particular description is Law, which Christ fulfilled for us so that now those who are in Christ are free to enjoy the fruits of God's green earth with thankfulness and joy.

Have you ever stopped to think that there are actually places in the world where a rat could make the difference between living and starving to death?

Dietary laws were put in place to differentiate the nation of Israel from pagan Canaanites. Now that Jesus Christ has broken down the wall of hostility that separated Jew from Gentile, uniting the two into one people through faith, there is no more need for dietary restrictions and prohibitions.

Matthew 15
And he called the people to him and said to them, “Hear and understand: it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person.” Then the disciples came and said to him, “Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?” He answered, “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be rooted up. Let them alone; they are blind guides. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.” But Peter said to him, “Explain the parable to us.” And he said, “Are you also still without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled? But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.”
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Paul said all things were pure.

Paul says that which is sanctified by the Word of God - is pure. But Paul says nothing about eating rats.

In Mark 7 Jesus confronts "Jewish tradition" -- in this case it is about "eating bread" with "impure hands" -- hands that were not ceremonially cleansed from 'sin' which was supposedly gotten by touching something from a gentile in the market place)

Mark 7
The Pharisees and some of the scribes gathered around Him when they had come from Jerusalem, 2 and had seen that some of His disciples were eating their bread with impure hands, that is, unwashed.

Ceremony -- dipping of pots to wash the sin off of them - lest you eat the bread and it have sin on it - and then you get sin inside you in that way - and are then a sinner, defiled.

Mark 7
3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders; 4 and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing of cups and pitchers and copper pots.)

This is not at all about tossing the Bible out the window -- it is about tossing man-made-tradition out the window.

Mark 7
5 The Pharisees and the scribes *asked Him, “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?”

=============================== Jesus' response.

Jesus response is not of the form "stick a rat in that bread please - toss your Bible out the window.. this is my Gospel".

Rather Jesus says to toss the man-made-traditions out the window that dare to contradict what "Moses said" --- that dare to contradict the OT "commandment of God" that dare to contradict the scriptures in the OT text that Jesus calls "the Word of God".

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.

9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

Jesus shows a clear contradiction - a war - between the "Commandments of men" - the "traditions of men"

vs the TRUTH which Jesus called "The Word of God" - and He called it the "Commandment of God" and also called "Moses said" by Jesus.

I am indeed thankful that those who would like to claim Jesus said to trash "what Moses said" and trash "The Word of God as found in scriptures of his day" -- are rushing headlong into Mark 7 to make their case.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The actual Gospel is the good news about what God has done through Jesus Christ for us and for our salvation.

Indeed. It is "Call no MAN unclean" as Peter said in Acts 10.

It is not the gospel of "more rat sandwiches" as a few people have supposed.

Have you ever stopped to think that there are actually places in the world where a rat could make the difference between living and starving to death?

That was the thinking of many people in the dark ages at the time of the plague -- they were in fact eating rats and dying from it.

But not the Jews in Europe. They knew that God had made the distinction long ago - long before Moses - even at the time of Noah - before the flood.

Dietary laws were put in place to differentiate the nation of Israel from pagan Canaanites. Now that Jesus Christ has broken down the wall of hostility that separated Jew from Gentile, uniting the two into one people through faith, there is no more need for dietary restrictions and prohibitions.

Matthew 15
And he called the people to him and said to them, “Hear and understand: it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person.” Then the disciples came and said to him, “Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?” He answered, “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be rooted up. Let them alone; they are blind guides. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.” But Peter said to him, “Explain the parable to us.” And he said, “Are you also still without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled? But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.”

That is a repeat of what we also find in Mark 7. (as we just saw).

================================= mark 7

In Mark 7 Jesus confronts "Jewish tradition" -- in this case it is about "eating bread" with "impure hands" -- hands that were not ceremonially cleansed from 'sin' which was supposedly gotten by touching something from a gentile in the market place)

Mark 7
The Pharisees and some of the scribes gathered around Him when they had come from Jerusalem, 2 and had seen that some of His disciples were eating their bread with impure hands, that is, unwashed.

Ceremony -- dipping of pots to wash the sin off of them - lest you eat the bread and it have sin on it - and then you get sin inside you in that way - and are then a sinner, defiled.

Mark 7
3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders; 4 and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing of cups and pitchers and copper pots.)

This is not at all about tossing the Bible out the window -- it is about tossing man-made-tradition out the window.

Mark 7
5 The Pharisees and the scribes *asked Him, “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?”

=============================== Jesus' response.

Jesus response is not of the form "stick a rat in that bread please - toss your Bible out the window.. this is my Gospel".

Rather Jesus says to toss the man-made-traditions out the window that dare to contradict what "Moses said" --- that dare to contradict the OT "commandment of God" that dare to contradict the scriptures in the OT text that Jesus calls "the Word of God".

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.

9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

Jesus shows a clear contradiction - a war - between the "Commandments of men" - the "traditions of men"

vs the TRUTH which Jesus called "The Word of God" - and He called it the "Commandment of God" and also called "Moses said" by Jesus.

I am indeed thankful that those who would like to claim Jesus said to trash "what Moses said" and trash "The Word of God as found in scriptures of his day" -- are rushing headlong into Mark 7 to make their case.
 
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

Bible2+

Matthew 4:4
Sep 14, 2015
3,001
375
✟91,195.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
BobRyan said in post #392:

Eph 6:2 the still-binding Ten Commandment unit appealed to by Paul who says in that text that the 5th Commandment "is the FIRST commandment with a promise" - first in what unit of LAW? Answer: Ten Commandments.

Note that nothing in the 10 commandments of the Old Covenant forbids Christians from eating pork.

Also, note that the idea of each of the 10 commandments is repeated in the New Testament/New Covenant.

For the New Covenant repeats the ideas of the first and second of the 10 commandments of the Old Covenant (Deuteronomy 5:7-10) in such verses as 1 Corinthians 8:4, Mark 12:29-30, and 1 John 5:21. The idea of the third of the 10 commandments (Deuteronomy 5:11) is amplified in the New Covenant to include our actions and not just our words (Titus 1:16). That is, we can profess the name of the LORD/YHWH, but we do so in vain if we don't obey Jesus Christ and God the Father (Matthew 7:21, Hebrews 5:9, Luke 6:46).

The idea of the fourth of the 10 commandments of the Old Covenant (Deuteronomy 5:12-15) is amplified in the New Covenant to include every day of our life in Jesus (Matthew 11:28-30, Hebrews 4:3,10, Luke 9:23). The idea of the fifth of the 10 commandments (Deuteronomy 5:16) is repeated in the New Covenant (Ephesians 6:1-3) and amplified to include honoring every person who is older than us (1 Timothy 5:1-2). The idea of the sixth of the 10 commandments (Deuteronomy 5:17) is repeated in the New Covenant (Revelation 21:8, Galatians 5:21) and amplified to include hatred by itself (1 John 3:15), or unjustified anger by itself, or name-calling by itself (Matthew 5:21-22).

The idea of the seventh of the 10 commandments of the Old Covenant (Deuteronomy 5:18) is repeated in the New Covenant (Galatians 5:19-21) and amplified to include lust by itself (Matthew 5:28). The idea of the eighth of the 10 commandments (Deuteronomy 5:19) is repeated in the New Covenant (1 Corinthians 6:10). The idea of the ninth of the 10 commandments (Deuteronomy 5:20) is repeated in the New Covenant (Matthew 15:19, cf. Revelation 22:15c). The idea of the tenth of the 10 commandments (Deuteronomy 5:21) is repeated in the New Covenant (Luke 12:15, Ephesians 5:5; 1 Corinthians 6:10).

So there's no need to go back to the 10 commandments of the Old Covenant. The New Covenant has all of them covered. Indeed, the New Covenant forbids all manner of sins (e.g. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatians 5:19-21).

But it doesn't forbid Christians from eating pork.

*******

BobRyan said in post #398:

In Mark 7 Jesus confronts "Jewish tradition" -- in this case it is about "eating bread" with "impure hands" . . .

That was the immediate issue in Mark 7:1-23, but note that it wasn't the whole issue. For in Mark 7:14-16, Jesus broadens the principle to include anything entering the body.

Mark 7:18-19 means that under the New Covenant, all foods are in themselves okay for all Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, to eat. For it shows that no food can defile people.
 
Upvote 0