Debating rules applied

[StormyOne]

free, I know it's difficult for you to carry on a coherant and rational discussion most of the time, in that you attempts at sarcasim get in the way.

Do you have anything useful to add to the discussion?

When Jesus declared all foods clean (as some think He did) was he including humans? If not, why not?

wow....

 

[Adventtruth]

Yes, I understand it quite well.

Was Jesus saying we could eat other people here? If not, why not?
Was Jesus saying that ingesting human flesh was ok? If not, why not?

Oh you got jokes!

Just another Adventist who can't prove EGW from the bible, nor prove that Christians are to keep the law as Israel. Jesus came and chamged how believers relate to law.

AT

 

[Adventtruth]

free, I know it's difficult for you to carry on a coherant and rational discussion most of the time, in that you attempts at sarcasim get in the way.

Do you have anything useful to add to the discussion?

When Jesus declared all foods clean (as some think He did) was he including humans? If not, why not?

Oh you don't believe the bible I see. Shame on you

AT

 

[RND]

Oh you got jokes!

Just another Adventist who can't prove EGW from the bible, nor prove that Christians are to keep the law as Israel. Jesus came and chamged how believers relate to law.

AT

Why not just attempt to answer the questions instead of going off into "Tangentland?"

I'll assume your answers to the questions posed be in the negative otherwise.

 

[RND]

Oh you don't believe the bible I see. Shame on you

AT

Sure I do! Just not your interpretation! I like a little common sense and sanity to go along with my scripture reading.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

A. I am not sure the text is best rendered as He thus made all foods clean.

But if that is not the meaning does it really seem more likely that Jesus was saying all your food is purified by being excrement?

Which would be wholly scientifically wrong but would have practically no spiritual application.

For more see my article Clean and Unclean meat I posted it here also but it is so hard to find old posts here.

 

[RND]

But if that is not the meaning does it really seem more likely that Jesus was saying all your food is purified by being excrement?

Which would be wholly scientifically wrong but would have practically no spiritual application.

I suppose it would depend on how one choose to look at things:

Mat 15:17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

Mat 15:18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.

Mat 15:19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

Mat 15:20 These are [the things] which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

 

[Adventtruth]

A. I am not sure the text is best rendered as He thus made all foods clean.

You got a better rendering? I'll take a look.

B. If it were however you still have the question that some Adventists ask of "what is meant by food." That seems to be RND's question.

Only If you believe that He never changed the way the believer relates to the law, to which is the case with most Adventist.

C. You also have the issue here not being food as such but the uncleaness of not washing.

The context suggest not washing while eating bread. Under the old despensation the Pharisees made this bigger than the what the law said. It seems it was tradition of the fathers

The most interesting thing about this passage of scripture is that the frase "purging all meats" is missing from the account in Matthew. Mark was written before Matthews. Why would the writer of Matthews leave that frase out if he was using Mark as one of his sources, and writing to the Jewish nation? Was it of the Q document? I think not, but it may have been another source used by Mark only.

D. However, the question is not so much what constitutes food, but what was previously prohibited that would now be clean if that is how the passage was rendered?

From the context, I would have to say all previously unclean foods. Christ even qualified it by saying nothing from without defiles. That is...nothing eaten can cause one to be lost.

If He is making something clean then it has to mean that some things that were not clean now are. That of course hinges on A. But it tends to rule out the idea that "unclean meats are not food"argument. Because whatever was unclean before was also not food.

It was food for the nations other than Israel. I am not convinced any more of the Adventist argument that God told Israel to refrain from eating certain foods because of health reasons. I find more evidence in the bible that it was becasue he wanted to distinguish them from the heathen nations. I argue that from Acts 10. I have never ever seen a passage in the bible that says God told them not to eat becasue of health reasons. If you can, kindly show me and I will consider it.

AT

 

[Adventtruth]

Sure I do! Just not your interpretation! I like a little common sense and sanity to go along with my scripture reading.

In other words...you don't believe the scriptures. and btw...I only asked what you thought of the passage. I never gave an interpretation before that.

AT

 

[mva1985]

I suppose it would depend on how one choose to look at things:

Mat 15:17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

Mat 15:18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.

Mat 15:19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

Mat 15:20 These are [the things] which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

Yes!!!!!

There is someone else out there that realizes this passage of scripture is referring to the practice of "eating with unwashed hands." That does NOT defile a person it is all the other things that Jesus listed.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

As I noted in my article. washing hands was never a part of the levitical code of behavior. However for health reasons it would have probably have prevented more sickness then most anything else one could do. Of course soap and running water were likely not plentiful though I would guess soap and even a common barrel of water would have been better then no washing.

It is interesting that for health benefits it appears the Jewish tradition was more useful then the Mosaic laws.

 

[Adventtruth]

As I noted in my article. washing hands was never a part of the levitical code of behavior.

And I agree. Christ even says in the text it was the traditions of the elders. They made this bigger than the law.

However for health reasons it would have probably have prevented more sickness then most anything else one could do.

I would think if God let not the shoes to ware-out, I'm sure he prevented alots of sickness.

Of course soap and running water were likely not plentiful though I would guess soap and even a common barrel of water would have been better then no washing.

Yep.

It is interesting that for health benefits it appears the Jewish tradition was more useful then the Mosaic laws.

How about the light of conscience that one should wash? They where not animals.

AT

 

[RND]

In other words...you don't believe the scriptures.

I believe them, just not your interpretation of them

and btw...I only asked what you thought of the passage. I never gave an interpretation before that.

Good Lord man I've seen enough of your posts to know your interpretation without having had heard it from your personally!

You've placed your views out there for all to see. I just disagree with them.

 

[Adventtruth]

I believe them, just not your interpretation of them



Good Lord man I've seen enough of your posts to know your interpretation without having had heard it from your personally!

You've placed your views out there for all to see. I just disagree with them.

Well if you feel that you can keep the law to perform it for righteousness, or to please God go right ahead.

AT

 

[tall73]

But if that is not the meaning does it really seem more likely that Jesus was saying all your food is purified by being excrement?

Which would be wholly scientifically wrong but would have practically no spiritual application.

For more see my article Clean and Unclean meat I posted it here also but it is so hard to find old posts here.

The point would not be that the excrement is clean but that what enters the body is not a lasting means of defilement. It goes through the system and is cleaned out by elimination methods. But what comes from within is that which defiles, the evil in one's heart.


In any case I have not for some years though the unclean foods rules for were health. They were not even eating meat when they were instituted. I am just not sure that this text is the easiest to prove it from given the nature of the phrase.

I don't eat any meat for health reasons.

 

[RND]

Well if you feel that you can keep the law to perform it for righteousness, or to please God go right ahead.

AT

Sticks and stones......

 

[Adventtruth]

Sticks and stones......

LOL! hahahahaha! You still got jokes! Its all good! Does us good not to argue over every little thing. Much love!

AT

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I am just not sure that this text is the easiest to prove it from given the nature of the phrase.

True enough clearly Jesus was talking about what comes out of a man thoughts. Yet that does not mean that He did not have other intentions in mind. Just as Peter's vision was about Peter was to associate with Gentiles there was more to it then that message. Why did the Jews not associate with Gentiles. Because they were unclean by Jewish standards. So Jesus and the apostles were opening up people to a new way of salvation. One that was not based upon following Jewish laws. As such we see in the New Testament a reduction in the acknowledgment of the need to follow Jewish laws. And we see it from Jesus through Paul. So when Paul says that there is nothing that is unclean he is very much in agreement with Jesus and Peter and it is never to just one person that this change in understanding is attributed.

So the text in Mark 7 is but the first in a chain.

 

[JohnT]

The point would not be that the excrement is clean but that what enters the body is not a lasting means of defilement. It goes through the system and is cleaned out by elimination methods. But what comes from within is that which defiles, the evil in one's heart.


In any case I have not for some years though the unclean foods rules for were health. They were not even eating meat when they were instituted. I am just not sure that this text is the easiest to prove it from given the nature of the phrase.

I don't eat any meat for health reasons.

Just curious, Tall73, and I am not baiting. From your present position if you were to eat pork do you believe as EGW said in the OP that that would cause cancer, or leprosy or TB in you?

Yeah, I know that eating pork is fatal to pigs, but that is another issue! .

 

[tall73]

Just curious, Tall73, and I am not baiting. From your present position if you were to eat pork do you believe as EGW said in the OP that that would cause cancer, or leprosy or TB in you?

Yeah, I know that eating pork is fatal to pigs, but that is another issue! .

I find it a bit unlikely. But since I don't eat meat I guess it is not an issue.

I am sure something else I eat will catch up to me though.