Eating pork and shellfish is a grave sin.

[EdmundBlackadderTheThird]

Oh now milk is bad for you? YOu have got to be kidding me, that is nothing but vegan propoganda. This is exactly the doctrine of demons refered to in 1 Timothy. It certainly lines up with that scripture.

 

[thereselittleflower]

SDA of course (don't roll your eyes) Thereslilflower, I'm not telling him what to do*insidej/k*

Anywho, I seem to missing your point. I was refuting what Andre thought ACTS meant.

The topic was eating pork grave sin?

Well let me clear something up. I don't think eating pork is a grave sin but it is a sin by defilling your body (temple). I'm not saying you will be rejected by Christ because you ate a "ham sammich" but God loves his children(right) and he wants to make sure that they stay healthy.

Now we all know that Scavengers are here to clean up the earth by eating "waste" right? And Scientist have even concluded that these animals are not good for your health.(something the Bible has mentioned long before they investigated) Let's not forget about the PIG and all of its nasty habits.

Now you can insist that these animals are clean all you(not directed towards deu58, but everyone)want but you really must look inside yourself and ask yourself is it worth it? The Bible says these animals are unclean, but somehow now they are good for you to eat all of a sudden? I don't think so. http://www.amazingdiscoveries.org/amazingdiet/clean-unclean.htm

The Bible and todays Scientist have declared these animals as "non-healthy aka unclean" but if you insist they are "good" then by all means... EAT UP. *pun intended*

Here Skillz151, is part of the dilema in this thread . .earlier, Symes posted that to eat swine was a grave sin and that those who did so would go to hell . .

Now you are posting something differnt, and I can accept that you have a different opinion than Symes does on this subject. . . . .


But there is also the issue of what it means to be "unclean" . .

When the Israelites were told which animals to avoid eating because they were "unclean", it was because they were CEREMONIALLY unclean . . and as a Jew under the law, they had to adhere to the kosher dietary laws regarding CEREMONIAL unclean foods in their daily lives . .

How you are using the word "unclean" here is different than the way it was used by the Jews in the Old Testament . .


These differences in how this word is being used in the Old Testament, and by some SDA's today is leading to gross confusion here in this thread . .



The bible never declared a food "unclean" because of aspects of that food . . but because ceremonially it could not be consumed or used for food, as something between the Israelites and God as part of their Covenant . .


The question of whether certain foods are unhealthy, is a different subject, and according to what you just posted above, it seems you make this distinction, albeit using the term "unclean" in this manner . .


But this is different than the strict requirement of the ceremonially unclean of the Old Tesament .

I am glad that you understand that just because someone eats a ham sandwich, that this act does not condemn them . .

I do appreciate and understand your concern regarding the health concerns different foods raise . .



We are free to eat these foods . .we may decide that we can be healthier by avoiding them, but if so, this is no something we push on others or make them feel their salvation is at stake based on the food they eat . .


Peace in Him!

 

[Skillz151]

Oh now milk is bad for you? YOu have got to be kidding me, that is nothing but vegan propoganda. This is exactly the doctrine of demons refered to in 1 Timothy. It certainly lines up with that scripture.

Ok why would Demon's warn you about your health?? Come on .. are you serious?
I am here to show you truth. Read Read Read. Don't just pass the links by.
Yes folks believe it or not Milk is not good for you. Remember God is in control but, Satan is the god of this world.


Genesis 3:1-5 Through Satan's deception and lie, Adam and Eve died.

John 8: 43-44 Christ said there was no truth in Satan and that he was a murderer from the beginning and the father of lies.

Luke 4: 4-7 This shows that Satan is in control of all the kingdoms of the world. Satan offered to give the power of all the kingdoms/governments of the world to Christ if he would worship him.

2Corinthians 4: 3-4 The god of this world has the power to blind the minds of those who chose not to believe God's words so that they can not see the light of the gospel of Christ.

Ezekiel 28: 13-17 Lucifer was in the Garden of Eden and was covered with every precious stone. God set Lucifer up as the anointed covering cherub (a particular rank of angels). Iniquity was found in him and he will be cast out of the mountain of God and destroyed.

Isaiah 14: 12-14 Lucifer will fall from heaven and be cut down to the ground. Lucifer thought he could exalt his throne above the stars of God. He thought he would be like the most High. Soon, men will see him (in the flesh) and be amazed that this is the guy that deceived the nations. This has not happened yet.

Revelation 12: 7-12 This is the war in heaven when Satan (the dragon) will be cast out into the earth. Woe unto the inhibitors of the earth for the devil is come down unto you. He knows he has only a short time.

Revelation 20: 1-3, 7 and 10-15 Satan will be bound for a thousand years. After the 1,000 years, Satan will be loosed and shall go out to deceive the nations. Satan will then be cast into the lake of fire just prior to judgment day when the world will be judged out of the books in heaven (Book of Life study

 

[Skillz151]

Here's another link for dairy.
http://64.180.102.203/amazingdiet/dairy.htm

 

[Skillz151]

Hi theresealilflower nice to see ya.

Check this out and tell me what you think.
http://64.180.102.203/amazingdiet/clean-unclean.htm

In Genesis 1:29 God said:
"I give you every seed-bearing plant (grains, legumes and seeds) on the face of the whole earth; and every tree that has fruit with seed in it," verse 29 (This includes nuts

In Genesis 7:2, there is reference to seven pairs of each kind of clean animal, and only two pairs of each kind of unclean animal going into the ark. Thus, the concept of clean and unclean, is not a Jewish concept and has no ceremonial connotations, but emanated from the times before the flood. We are going to make a brief study of this very concept of "clean" and "unclean".

God wants us to be healthy, and sets out specific guidelines as to what we should and should not eat.

"This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live; you must not eat any fat, or any blood." Leviticus 3:17

And the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron, saying unto them: 'Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, these are the beasts which ye shall eat amongst all the beasts that are on the earth'". Leviticus 11: 1,2

"Whatsoever parteth the hoof and is cloven-footed, and cheweth the cud among the beasts; that shall ye eat."

These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters; whatsoever has fins and ?scales in the waters, in the seas and in the rivers; them shall ye eat; and all that have not fins and scales, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you." Leviticus 11;9,10

Leviticus 11:37, 38 continues:
"If a carcass (of an unclean animal) falls on a seed which is to be sown, it shall remain clean; but if water falls on that seed, while the carcass is there, it is unclean. You must not plant it. You must not eat it."

God here is concerned not that the seed will yield bad fruit, but that it may be genetically impaired by the chemicals thus released when water is involved.
God is concerned with the health of all His creatures - man and beast

We can turn to a story in Acts 10, where Peter, some time after the Lord's resurrection, and after the stoning of Stephen, has a vision of unclean animals in a huge sheet; and a voice saying; "Arise, Peter; kill and eat," and what does Peter declare?
He had already been told by Jesus, some years previously, about what goes into our mouth and what comes out, and apparently had not taken it to heart, for he now says:
"Not so, Lord. For I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean!"

No, Jesus had been talking about something else at that time.

Peter, himself, was left wondering just what this symbolic dream meant; verse 17. He obviously knew it was symbolic and not literal and went downstairs to meet his visitors from Cornelius, still thinking about the vision; verse 19.

However, by the time he had started talking with Cornelius the following day Peter had realized just what the vision meant. In verse 28, he says:
"You are well aware it is against our law for a Jew to visit a Gentile; but God has shown me that I should not call any man unclean."

The visible effects of the Holy Spirit on all the household of Cornelius, confirmed God's intention of calling what was 'previously unclean, as now being 'clean' or acceptable. Peter had understood his vision correctly. Most Christians today do not. The vision of the unclean animals had nothing to do with what we should or should not eat.

This vision of Peter's was the Great Commission to go out to all nations and preach the gospel. The great prophetic clock had stuck. The 490 years for the spreading of the gospel amongst the Jews had come to an end in 34 A.D.

"I beseech you therefore brethren, by the mercy of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice; holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." Romans 12:1

Is it not reasonable to care for these bodies God has given us, for His Spirit to dwell in?

 

[thereselittleflower]

Hi theresealilflower nice to see ya.

Check this out and tell me what you think.
http://64.180.102.203/amazingdiet/clean-unclean.htm

In Genesis 1:29 God said:
"I give you every seed-bearing plant (grains, legumes and seeds) on the face of the whole earth; and every tree that has fruit with seed in it," verse 29 (This includes nuts

In Genesis 7:2, there is reference to seven pairs of each kind of clean animal, and only two pairs of each kind of unclean animal going into the ark. Thus, the concept of clean and unclean, is not a Jewish concept and has no ceremonial connotations, but emanated from the times before the flood. We are going to make a brief study of this very concept of "clean" and "unclean".

God wants us to be healthy, and sets out specific guidelines as to what we should and should not eat.

"This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live; you must not eat any fat, or any blood." Leviticus 3:17

And the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron, saying unto them: 'Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, these are the beasts which ye shall eat amongst all the beasts that are on the earth'". Leviticus 11: 1,2

"Whatsoever parteth the hoof and is cloven-footed, and cheweth the cud among the beasts; that shall ye eat."

These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters; whatsoever has fins and ?scales in the waters, in the seas and in the rivers; them shall ye eat; and all that have not fins and scales, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you." Leviticus 11;9,10

Leviticus 11:37, 38 continues:
"If a carcass (of an unclean animal) falls on a seed which is to be sown, it shall remain clean; but if water falls on that seed, while the carcass is there, it is unclean. You must not plant it. You must not eat it."

God here is concerned not that the seed will yield bad fruit, but that it may be genetically impaired by the chemicals thus released when water is involved.
God is concerned with the health of all His creatures - man and beast

We can turn to a story in Acts 10, where Peter, some time after the Lord's resurrection, and after the stoning of Stephen, has a vision of unclean animals in a huge sheet; and a voice saying; "Arise, Peter; kill and eat," and what does Peter declare?
He had already been told by Jesus, some years previously, about what goes into our mouth and what comes out, and apparently had not taken it to heart, for he now says:
"Not so, Lord. For I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean!"

No, Jesus had been talking about something else at that time.

Peter, himself, was left wondering just what this symbolic dream meant; verse 17. He obviously knew it was symbolic and not literal and went downstairs to meet his visitors from Cornelius, still thinking about the vision; verse 19.

However, by the time he had started talking with Cornelius the following day Peter had realized just what the vision meant. In verse 28, he says:
"You are well aware it is against our law for a Jew to visit a Gentile; but God has shown me that I should not call any man unclean."

The visible effects of the Holy Spirit on all the household of Cornelius, confirmed God's intention of calling what was 'previously unclean, as now being 'clean' or acceptable. Peter had understood his vision correctly. Most Christians today do not. The vision of the unclean animals had nothing to do with what we should or should not eat.

This vision of Peter's was the Great Commission to go out to all nations and preach the gospel. The great prophetic clock had stuck. The 490 years for the spreading of the gospel amongst the Jews had come to an end in 34 A.D.

"I beseech you therefore brethren, by the mercy of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice; holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." Romans 12:1

Is it not reasonable to care for these bodies God has given us, for His Spirit to dwell in?

Hi Skillz151

First, let me ask you . . have you taken time yet to read my post on Paul's instruction to choose from any food found in the market place and to eat without question any food presented to you at a pagan feast?

I asked Symes at least twice now, but the best answer he could give was "I don't know" . ..

So, would you like to take a shot at it?

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=1735095&postcount=164



Peace in Him!

 

[EdmundBlackadderTheThird]

Dude the vegans are promoting their milk propoganda and nothing else. You are now straying beyond the food laws given in the OT, and that my friend has no Biblical backing so your argument of being strictly Bible 100% is right out the window.

A note on Peter's vision. He went and ATE at a gentiles house, something that was forbidden under the food laws. He did go and break them right after the vision. God simply re-iterated what Christ has said and used it to show Peter the truth, that if all meat is clean now then certainly gentiles are as well. You won't get far with vegan propoganda, I won't even bother to respond aside from calling it what it is. It is junk science and nothing more.

 

[EdmundBlackadderTheThird]

Hi theresealilflower nice to see ya.

Check this out and tell me what you think.
http://64.180.102.203/amazingdiet/clean-unclean.htm

In Genesis 1:29 God said:
"I give you every seed-bearing plant (grains, legumes and seeds) on the face of the whole earth; and every tree that has fruit with seed in it," verse 29 (This includes nuts

In Genesis 7:2, there is reference to seven pairs of each kind of clean animal, and only two pairs of each kind of unclean animal going into the ark. Thus, the concept of clean and unclean, is not a Jewish concept and has no ceremonial connotations, but emanated from the times before the flood. We are going to make a brief study of this very concept of "clean" and "unclean".

This designation was for sacrifices only and had nothing to do with food, anything you base off it having to with food it already false. Meat wasn't even eaten yet so how could it be a food designation?

God wants us to be healthy, and sets out specific guidelines as to what we should and should not eat.

"This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live; you must not eat any fat, or any blood." Leviticus 3:17

And the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron, saying unto them: 'Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, these are the beasts which ye shall eat amongst all the beasts that are on the earth'". Leviticus 11: 1,2

"Whatsoever parteth the hoof and is cloven-footed, and cheweth the cud among the beasts; that shall ye eat."

These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters; whatsoever has fins and ?scales in the waters, in the seas and in the rivers; them shall ye eat; and all that have not fins and scales, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you." Leviticus 11;9,10

You totally forgot where God gave Noah EVERY LIVING CREATURE for food

Leviticus 11:37, 38 continues:
"If a carcass (of an unclean animal) falls on a seed which is to be sown, it shall remain clean; but if water falls on that seed, while the carcass is there, it is unclean. You must not plant it. You must not eat it."

God here is concerned not that the seed will yield bad fruit, but that it may be genetically impaired by the chemicals thus released when water is involved.
God is concerned with the health of all His creatures - man and beast

We can turn to a story in Acts 10, where Peter, some time after the Lord's resurrection, and after the stoning of Stephen, has a vision of unclean animals in a huge sheet; and a voice saying; "Arise, Peter; kill and eat," and what does Peter declare?
He had already been told by Jesus, some years previously, about what goes into our mouth and what comes out, and apparently had not taken it to heart, for he now says:
"Not so, Lord. For I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean!"

No, Jesus had been talking about something else at that time.

Peter, himself, was left wondering just what this symbolic dream meant; verse 17. He obviously knew it was symbolic and not literal and went downstairs to meet his visitors from Cornelius, still thinking about the vision; verse 19.

However, by the time he had started talking with Cornelius the following day Peter had realized just what the vision meant. In verse 28, he says:
"You are well aware it is against our law for a Jew to visit a Gentile; but God has shown me that I should not call any man unclean."

The visible effects of the Holy Spirit on all the household of Cornelius, confirmed God's intention of calling what was 'previously unclean, as now being 'clean' or acceptable. Peter had understood his vision correctly. Most Christians today do not. The vision of the unclean animals had nothing to do with what we should or should not eat.

Of course it did, Peter went and ATE with them, and they did not keep kosher as they were Gentiles. He went right out and had a non-kosher meal! Imagine that, God tells him that everything is clean and he goes out and eats right away, but of course it had nothing to do with food. Not to mention you fail to point out that Christ said that nothing that goes into a man's mouth can defile him

This vision of Peter's was the Great Commission to go out to all nations and preach the gospel. The great prophetic clock had stuck. The 490 years for the spreading of the gospel amongst the Jews had come to an end in 34 A.D.

The great commission is in Mark 16, this vision was showing Peter what it meant and reaffirming Christ's words about nothing defiling the man that goes in thorugh his mouth, so Peter went and ate a non-kosher meal. It is in fact the first thing he does.

"I beseech you therefore brethren, by the mercy of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice; holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." Romans 12:1

I am healthy, very much so thank you. My temple is also ornately decorated with around 30 tattoos, is that a sin?

Is it not reasonable to care for these bodies God has given us, for His Spirit to dwell in?

 

[thereselittleflower]

Hi theresealilflower nice to see ya.

Check this out and tell me what you think.
http://64.180.102.203/amazingdiet/clean-unclean.htm

OK . . I have some thoughts, . . your post selectively quoted from this article, and you left some things in your post . .

In Genesis 7:2, there is reference to seven pairs of each kind of clean animal, and only two pairs of each kind of unclean animal going into the ark. Thus, the concept of clean and unclean, is not a Jewish concept and has no ceremonial connotations, but emanated from the times before the flood. We are going to make a brief study of this very concept of "clean" and "unclean".



After the flood waters had receded, the earth had little vegetation for a while afterwards. Perhaps Noah had seeds with him and planted these for this first food. However, there would have been no fruit nor nuts for a number of years. So, the Lord gave this command:

"Everything that lives and moves will be food for you; just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything." Genesis 9:3



​

One of the main staples of the mediteranian and middle eastern diets is olives . .



And this is what Noah found:

Gen 8:11​

​

And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.





​

Plants were already growing .. the Olvie trees were growing to provide food . .



To think that in all the time that it took to build the Ark . .some say 100 years, it does not make sense to also say that Noah and his family would not have had the forsighth to lay up provisions not only to last them during the time in the Ark, but for significant time afterwards . . .


Now, your article makes the assertion that the Clean Animals were not for ceremonial purposes . . but the scriptures say differently . .

Gen 8:20​

​

And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.





​

They were used for sacrifice . . sounds ceremonial to me!

Now, what about the food that Noah and his family were given to eat of after the flood? Did God differentiate between clean and unclean for them when it came to food they could eat? Even what the article quotes proves that God did not, and that they could eat all things . . .here it is in the King James Verison:

Gen 9:3​

​

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





​

Thre are no qualifcations to this, no limitations . .



EVERY moving thing! . .

ALL things!



John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible has this to say on this verse:





<B>

Gen 9:3</B> - Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you,.... That is, every beast, fowl, and fish, without exception; for though there was a difference at this time of clean and unclean creatures with respect to sacrifice, yet not with respect to food; every creature of God was good then, as it is now, and it was left to man's reason and judgment what to make use of, as would be most conducive to his health, and agreeable to his taste: and though there was a distinction afterwards made under the Levitical dispensation among the Jews, who were forbid the use of some creatures; yet they themselves say​

(k), that all unclean beasts will be clean in the world to come, in the times of the Messiah, as they were to the sons of Noah, and refer to this text in proof of it; the only exception in the text is, that they must be living creatures which are taken, and used for food; not such as die of themselves, or are torn to pieces by wild beasts, but such as are taken alive, and killed in a proper manner:





​

I find it interesting that the Jews understood that the restriction on eating unclean foods would be done away with in the world to come . . in the times of the Messiah . .





Peace in Him!

 

[Skillz151]

Hi Skillz151

First, let me ask you . . have you taken time yet to read my post on Paul's instruction to choose from any food found in the market place and to eat without question any food presented to you at a pagan feast?

I asked Symes at least twice now, but the best answer he could give was "I don't know" . ..

So, would you like to take a shot at it?

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=1735095&postcount=164



Peace in Him!

I've got the target in my crosshairs..

1 Corinthians 10:25-29 says that "anything that is sold in the market eat, and ask no questions for conscience sake. If an unbeliever invites you [for dinner] and you consent to go, eat whatever is put before you and ask no questions for conscience sake [but, of course, you can ask questions for health sake, and many already do: low sodium diets, fat-free diets, allergies etc.]. But if anyone tells you, 'This food has been offered in sacrifice', abstain from eating it for the sake of him who warned you, and for conscience sake - I mean his conscience, not your own". The point this passage is making is that it is best to courteously warn your host ahead of time as to your food preferences.

Besides, the above passages are in reference only to meats "offered in sacrifice" (1 Corinthians 10:28). Only clean animals were offered in sacrifices, never unclean animals. In the sacrifices, usually only a part of the animal was consumed. The rest was given to the priest or sold again in the market. Anyone might therefore unknowingly purchase meats offered to idols, and Paul was saying that it was okay to eat meat that was offered in sacrifice.

Remember that the apostle Paul was writing to folowers of Christ whose sole "Scripture" was what we term the Old Testament! His teaching to the Corinthian Church was founded on the writings of the Old Testament. They were thoroughly familiar with the division of food into "clean and unclean"! As Paul wrote to Timothy: "Cling to the truths that you have learned and of which you are convinced, knowing who your teachers were, and that from infancy you have known the sacred writings which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousness:" (2 Timothy 3:14-17). With their respect for the Old Testament, it would take some convincing that Paul was telling them to flaunt God's Laws! Especially in view of Jesus' attitude to God's Law - "I have not come to destroy [abolish] the Law" (Matthew 5:17).

 

[leecappella]

Colossians 2:16 - "....Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:....."

 

[theFijian]

I don't know what a modern Jesus would do if all
He had was a bag of pork rinds and a ham sandwich
available for 60000 people at the superdome.
I think we all know what the original Jewish Rabbi
Jesus ate --a Torah diet.

I presume you are saying that Christ ate a Torah diet to prevent making himself unclean. Why then did Christ in Mark 5 take the hand of the dead girl when bringing her back to life. In touching a dead body he would have made himself cereminially unclean. Also why did he not rebuke the woman who touched the hem of his garment in this same chapter? She was unclean because of her bleeding and in touching Jesus would have made him unclean also, yet no mention of this in the passage.

I would be interested in your thoughts.

Andy

 

[clinzey]

I presume you are saying that Christ ate a Torah diet to prevent making himself unclean. Why then did Christ in Mark 5 take the hand of the dead girl when bringing her back to life. In touching a dead body he would have made himself cereminially unclean. Also why did he not rebuke the woman who touch the hem of his garmen in this same chapter? She was unclean because of her bleeding and in touching Jesus would have made him
unclean, yet no mention of this in the passage.

And don't forget to mention touching lepers.

May I direct everyone to Jesus' words in Mark 7:18-19. "Are you so dull? Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him unclean? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." In saying this he declared all foods clean.

If Jesus doesn't settle it, who does? How can you still claim to hold to OT food laws?

 

[EdmundBlackadderTheThird]

I've got the target in my crosshairs..

1 Corinthians 10:25-29 says that "anything that is sold in the market eat, and ask no questions for conscience sake. If an unbeliever invites you [for dinner] and you consent to go, eat whatever is put before you and ask no questions for conscience sake [but, of course, you can ask questions for health sake, and many already do: low sodium diets, fat-free diets, allergies etc.]. But if anyone tells you, 'This food has been offered in sacrifice', abstain from eating it for the sake of him who warned you, and for conscience sake - I mean his conscience, not your own". The point this passage is making is that it is best to courteously warn your host ahead of time as to your food preferences.

It says nothing to about telling your host in advance. The term "for conscience sake" meand that nothing sold in the market will affect you in a moral or spiritual manner. Food sacrificed to PAGAN gods was forbidden and here way have Paul saying it's allright to eat it? He is saying to maintain an appearance for the sake of the non-believer but that it has no affect on us, as CHristians.


Besides, the above passages are in reference only to meats "offered in sacrifice" (1 Corinthians 10:28). Only clean animals were offered in sacrifices, never unclean animals. In the sacrifices, usually only a part of the animal was consumed. The rest was given to the priest or sold again in the market. Anyone might therefore unknowingly purchase meats offered to idols, and Paul was saying that it was okay to eat meat that was offered in sacrifice.


Wrong answer. The pagans had no such clean and unclean regulations for sacrifices. Again in the food laws eating meat that was offered to pagan gods was called unclean and here you are saying it's not? You don't agree with yourself!

Remember that the apostle Paul was writing to folowers of Christ whose sole "Scripture" was what we term the Old Testament! His teaching to the Corinthian Church was founded on the writings of the Old Testament. They were thoroughly familiar with the division of food into "clean and unclean"! As Paul wrote to Timothy: "Cling to the truths that you have learned and of which you are convinced, knowing who your teachers were, and that from infancy you have known the sacred writings which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousness:" (2 Timothy 3:14-17). With their respect for the Old Testament, it would take some convincing that Paul was telling them to flaunt God's Laws! Especially in view of Jesus' attitude to God's Law - "I have not come to destroy [abolish] the Law" (Matthew 5:17)

Do all SDA forget the rest of the scripture in Matthew where Christ says he came to fulfill the Law and in doing so make the covenant which required the keeping of the law non-binding? This is how covenants work, when it is fulfilled it is over. Christ fulfilled the covenant. If you deny this then tell me where are the tassles on your clothes?

.

 

[thereselittleflower]

I've got the target in my crosshairs..

1 Corinthians 10:25-29 says that "anything that is sold in the market eat, and ask no questions for conscience sake. If an unbeliever invites you [for dinner] and you consent to go, eat whatever is put before you and ask no questions for conscience sake [but, of course, you can ask questions for health sake, and many already do: low sodium diets, fat-free diets, allergies etc.]. But if anyone tells you, 'This food has been offered in sacrifice', abstain from eating it for the sake of him who warned you, and for conscience sake - I mean his conscience, not your own". The point this passage is making is that it is best to courteously warn your host ahead of time as to your food preferences.

Well, I have to say that is a rather unique rendition of this passage of scripture . . I don't think I have heard anyone say before that the point of this passage is to be courteous and warn your host ahead of time regafding YOUR food preferences .. .

Here is the passage:

1Co 10:25 Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:

1Co 10:26 For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof.

1Co 10:27 If 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.

1Co 10:28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

1Co 10:29 Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience?
​

The onlly thing Paul is telling us to do here is to

1) eat anything put before you UNlESS




2) someone else tells you the food was offered to idols, because of the reason that particular person told you . . their conscious not being as strong and who would be scandalized by your eating food offered to idols . .



​

Obvioulsy Paul is not speaking of the conscience of the host, as the host is the one offering the food!




There is absolutely nothing in this passage that tells one to "Warn" their host ahead of time about food preferences . . it is saying the exact opposite . . it is saying, don't worry about the food put in front of you . . don't be concerned at all unless someone else whom Christ died for thinks it is wrong to eat food offered to idols, because then you can harm their faith . .


The only way one could read into this passage that you are to warn your host of food preferences is to make an assumption of some sort . .



That said, I agree . . there is nothing there that says you can't ask questions . . you are free to ask questions . .

But that is not the point of the passage . .


The point of the passage is you are free NOT to ask questions!

The point of the passage is you are FREE to NOT be concerned about the food put in front of you . .

The point of the passage is you are FREE of any dietary commands, regulations,

and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, that you are FREE from CONDEMNATION when you eat ANYTHING!

Besides, the above passages are in reference only to meats "offered in sacrifice" (1 Corinthians 10:28). Only clean animals were offered in sacrifices, never unclean animals. In the sacrifices, usually only a part of the animal was consumed. The rest was given to the priest or sold again in the market. Anyone might therefore unknowingly purchase meats offered to idols, and Paul was saying that it was okay to eat meat that was offered in sacrifice.

Well, I am so dissapointed that you did not read my post that you are responding to . .


This was a very important part of the post . .

I presented evidence that what you just posted above is false . .

I posted evidence that the pagans had many unlcean foods of all types sacrificed and that what was found in the market place or a pagan feast would be full of unclean animals . .


Comeing back and simply making an assertion that what were sacrificed would have only been JEWISH unclean foods in a PAGAN RELIGIOUS practice does nothing to dispute what I said, and absolutely nothing to disprove what I said . .

I find it absurd to suggest that the PAGANS were interested in the ceremonial unclean/clean animal status given to animals in the JEWISH religion . .

They had NO such interests, NO such practices, and my post proved this point . .

What you are saying here does not answer my post . . it only restates what has already been stated by Symes which is why I made that post in the first place . . to show clearly how false this idea that you presented above actually is . .


The truth of the matter is that the foods in the market place were VERY UNCLEAN . . horses, swine, dogs, etc . .

And Paul told the Corinthians to eat ANYTHING THEY FOUND in that same market place . . . no restrictions . . no demands to avoid unclean foods that would abound in such places . .

Remember that the apostle Paul was writing to folowers of Christ whose sole "Scripture" was what we term the Old Testament! His teaching to the Corinthian Church was founded on the writings of the Old Testament. They were thoroughly familiar with the division of food into "clean and unclean"

Were they? These were GENTILE believers! They were not brought up knowing what was clean or unclean by JEWISH standards or law . . . that they would have the Old Testament, well . . they would have after they became Christians . . someone probably was given charge of a copy . , , they would have been very expensive and most would not have access to it except through whoever was given safe charge of it . . . so no, I disagree with what you just asserted here . .. there is nothing to suggest that they were very familiar with the Old Testament teachings regarding Jewish dietary laws . . your statements are based on an assumption for which you have no clear evidence . . .

As Paul wrote to Timothy: "Cling to the truths that you have learned and of which you are convinced, knowing who your teachers were, and that from infancy you have known the sacred writings which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousness:" (2 Timothy 3:14-17). With their respect for the Old Testament, it would take some convincing that Paul was telling them to flaunt God's Laws! Especially in view of Jesus' attitude to God's Law - "I have not come to destroy [abolish] the Law" (Matthew 5:17).

Well, if the Old Testament Laws were still in effect, then yes, I would have to agree with you . .


But that is the whole point of this thread . . .these laws are NOT still in effect, otherwise Paul would not have been able to counsel the Corinthians to eat ANYTHING they find in the market place (Full of UNclean foods) or at a pagan feast (also FULL of UNclean foods) . .

Paul told the Corinthians to choose from anything that might be found in the market place . . not from only Clean foods found in the marketplace . . .


Your stance places an artificial limitation on Paul's words . . one that does not exist . . .



I suggest you read my post to which you were responding to again . . especially in regards to what foods PAGANS sacrificed to their idols . .


Understanding this KEY element is essential to understanding what Paul was really saying . .



We have been returned to the time of Noah after the flood in regards to what we are FREE to eat, when God told Noah that anything that creeps on the earth is ours for food . . without limitation .


Peace in Him!

 

[EdmundBlackadderTheThird]

thereselittleflower: Right on sister!

 

[clinzey]

I see a lot of debate in this thread about Pauline letters and meanings and Jewish customs and such, but I feel that the words of Jesus are being ignored. Would those who believe in strict OT dieting please comment on Mark 7:18-19?

 

[thereselittleflower]

I see a lot of debate in this thread about Pauline letters and meanings and Jewish customs and such, but I feel that the words of Jesus are being ignored. Would those who believe in strict OT dieting please comment on Mark 7:18-19?

Well, one of the issues that we have raised is that they don't believei n strict OT dieting . . they take some rules and discard others . .

Here is the first verse you asked about in a variety of translations:

Mar 7:18

​

​

(ALT) And He says to them, "So you* also are without understanding! You* do understand that nothing from outside entering into the person is able to defile him, do you* not?

(ASV) And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Perceive ye not, that whatsoever from without goeth into the man, it cannot defile him;

(BBE) And he said to them, Have even you so little wisdom? Do you not see that whatever goes into a man from outside is not able to make him unclean,

(CEV) He answered, "Don't you know what I am talking about by now? You surely know that the food you put into your mouth cannot make you unclean.

(Darby) And he says to them, Are *ye* also thus unintelligent? Do ye not perceive that all that is outside entering into the man cannot defile him,

(DRB) And he saith to them: So are you also without knowledge? Understand you not that every thing from without entering into a man cannot defile him:

(EMTV) So He said to them, "Are you also without understanding? Do you not understand that everything entering a man from outside cannot defile him,

(GB) And he sayde vnto them, What? are ye without vnderstanding also? Doe ye not knowe that whatsoeuer thing from without entreth into a man, cannot defile him,

(GNB) "You are no more intelligent than the others," Jesus said to them. "Don't you understand? Nothing that goes into you from the outside can really make you unclean,

(HNV) He said to them, "Are you thus without understanding also? Don't you perceive that whatever goes into the man from outside can't defile him,

(ISV) He said to them, "Are you so ignorant? Don't you know that nothing that goes into a person from the outside can make him unclean?(KJV+) And2532 he saith3004 unto them,846Are2075ye5210so3779without understanding801also?2532Doyenot3756perceive,3539that3754whatsoever thing3956from without1855entereth1531into1519the3588man,444itcannot1410, 3756defile2840him;846(KJVA) And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;

(LITV) And He said to them, Are you also so undiscerning? Do you not perceive that all that enters from the outside into the man is not able to defile him?

(YLT) and he saith to them, `So also ye are without understanding! Do ye not perceive that nothing from without entering into the man is able to defile him?
​

I would like an answer to your question as well . . . . It has always been sidestepped before . .



Peace in Him!

 

[deu58]

I see a lot of debate in this thread about Pauline letters and meanings and Jewish customs and such, but I feel that the words of Jesus are being ignored. Would those who believe in strict OT dieting please comment on Mark 7:18-19?

hello clinzey

Actually this has been mentioned many times but has been buried in the thread, also has been mentioned many times on the old eating pork is sin thread, use flesh 99 find all posts and you will see he is the one who has used these verses many times including explaining the the Greek used in the verses.

yours in Christ
deu58

 

[deu58]

Hello skilz151

Anywho, I seem to missing your point. I was refuting what Andre thought ACTS meant.

The topic was eating pork grave sin?

Yes and I am refuting what you are claiming Acts 10 is about, Acts 10 includes food also and Peter addresses and confirms this in Acts 11


Ac 11:3 Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.
Ac 11:4 But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying,
Ac 11:5 I was in the city of Joppa praying: and in a trance I saw a vision, A certain vessel descend, as it had been a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me:
Ac 11:6 Upon the which when I had fastened mine eyes, I considered, and saw fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
Ac 11:7 And I heard a voice saying unto me, Arise, Peter; slay and eat.
Ac 11:8 But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth.
Ac 11:9 But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.


Peter is confronted for eating with Cornelius and he uses the vision of acts 10 as his defense



Also it it is obvious that you did not read Therese's post completly considering your responses, You have posted a few links now and exhorted us to read read read and you can not even read one post?

Besides, the above passages are in reference only to meats "offered in sacrifice" (1 Corinthians 10:28). Only clean animals were offered in sacrifices, never unclean animals. In the sacrifices, usually only a part of the animal was consumed. The rest was given to the priest or sold again in the market. Anyone might therefore unknowingly purchase meats offered to idols, and Paul was saying that it was okay to eat meat that was offered in sacrifice.

Where do you come up with the Idea that the Pagans only used clean animals in their sacrifices? You show a serious lack historical understanding.
If youy would have actually read what Therese posted on this you would have seen that the Pagans sacrificed and ate all manner of animals including dogs, horse's and pigs.

1 Corinthians 10:25-29 says that "anything that is sold in the market eat, and ask no questions for conscience sake. If an unbeliever invites you [for dinner] and you consent to go, eat whatever is put before you and ask no questions for conscience sake [but, of course, you can ask questions for health sake, and many already do: low sodium diets, fat-free diets, allergies etc.]. But if anyone tells you, 'This food has been offered in sacrifice', abstain from eating it for the sake of him who warned you, and for conscience sake - I mean his conscience, not your own". The point this passage is making is that it is best to courteously warn your host ahead of time as to your food preferences.

Where did you get this interpretation for this verse?
Paul says,
1 Corinthians 10:25-29 says that "anything that is sold in the market eat, and ask no questions for conscience sake

You say,
The point this passage is making is that it is best to courteously warn your host ahead of time as to your food preferences.

The two completly contradict each other, Paul says do not ask questions and eat and you claim this means ask questions before eating so your host does not serve you something you are not supposed to eat.

yours in Christ
deu58