• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Eating pork and shellfish is a grave sin.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Symes

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2003
1,832
15
74
Visit site
✟2,069.00
Faith
Christian
1 Timothy 4:1-4


1 But the Spirit saith expressly, that in later times some shall fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons,


2 through the hypocrisy of men that speak lies, branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron;


3 forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by them that believe and know the truth.

4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving:



"them that believe and know the truth." When the truth is known and at this stage of development the early Christian Church only found the truth in the Old Testament. None of them would have wanted to eat pork. It was not on their menu. It was not considered a food to be eaten. So how you can twist this verse to say you can now eat pork is beyond me. The Jews did not eat pork, still do not eat pork. It is only the latter day Gentiles that twist Scripture in wanting to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season.

Imagine the Apostles saying that as of now we can all eat pork. Never!

Again, this does not say that unclean food is now clean. It is the same as the Sabbath issue. There is no command there for a change of the Sabbath and no command to say pork is clean. These verses are not saying unclean is clean. Do not put more spin on these words to make them try and mean something they do not.
 
Upvote 0

EdmundBlackadderTheThird

Proud member of the Loud Few
Dec 14, 2003
9,039
482
52
Visit site
✟31,417.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Symes we have posted the verses over and over again. Lets remind you one more time.

From the very mouth of our Saviour:

NOTHING that goes into a man's mouth can defile him

Peter's vision, the one with two meanings, where he is rebuked for calling unclean what God called clean.

All God's creatures are good, and NOTHING is to be refused.

If the part of the verse that says "those that know the truth" refered to the kosher laws then it wouldn't say ALL creatures God created. It states the truth that it is refering to and that is that ALL CREATURES GOD CREATED are good and not to be refused. To say that we should refuse any of them is saying one of two things, either Paul was wrong or God didn't create the unclean animals.

Noah was given EVERY creature for food. This pre-dates the Mosaic food laws.

Your theology is incorrect, we are not under the food laws, not in the least. In fact your very argument for the ten commandments being binding refutes your argument on pork. You claim that only the laws written in stone are still binding and yet the food laws were not written in stone. There was no food law prior to the giving of the Law, the food laws are part of the man made deliniation that you adhere to that seperates the Law from the commandments. There is no backing for your argument. We do not have to keep kosher as Christians. The verse that was posted DOES say that we do not have to worry about the meat we eat. Why do you refuse to see what the scriptures so plainly state?
 
Upvote 0

Symes

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2003
1,832
15
74
Visit site
✟2,069.00
Faith
Christian


Flesh99

How many times do you have to be told that these verses had nothing to do with making unclean food clean. It was to do with the taking of the gospel to the Gentiles. I will post again the verses in Acts to show you this.

Acts 10:28
"He said to them: "You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean."

Does this finally get through to you that God told Peter to eat the unclean food as a symbol to show the Jews that the Gentiles were not unclean.

Acts 10:17-20
"While Peter was wondering about the meaning of the vision, the men sent by Cornelius found out where Simon's house was and stopped at the gate. 18They called out, asking if Simon who was known as Peter was staying there.
19While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit said to him, "Simon, three[1] men are looking for you. 20So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them."


Peter did not understand the vision. Then God revealed to him what it meant. The Gentiles came and wanted to see Peter who was a Jew. Then Peter knew what it meant as he went with them.
 
Upvote 0

EdmundBlackadderTheThird

Proud member of the Loud Few
Dec 14, 2003
9,039
482
52
Visit site
✟31,417.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You can tell me as many times as you want, and that doesn't make it the truth, I haven't denied that meaning. You are the one that denies the very clear first meaning. God tells Peter to "kill and eat" Peter says "no way, I have never eaten anything unclean" God tells him "How dare you call unclean what I have called clean". Peter realized this had to do with food as a good part of the vision has nothing to do with Gentiles. He realized the second meaning further down the road. It has two meaning Symes and you cannot get around that. If it didn't have anything to do with food then when Peter referenced food God would not have rebuked him. Peter realized that if all meat was clean then he certainly could take the Gospel to the Gentiles. The entire second meaning was based on all meat being able to be eaten, as Christ had already said to his disciples. How hard is this to grasp, if all meat had not been cleansed then the vision would have made even less sense to Peter, who already knew that all meat was clean.
 
Upvote 0

Symes

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2003
1,832
15
74
Visit site
✟2,069.00
Faith
Christian
The entire second meaning was based on all meat being able to be eaten, as Christ had already said to his disciples. How hard is this to grasp, if all meat had not been cleansed then the vision would have made even less sense to Peter, who already knew that all meat was clean.


More twist and spin of Scripture. Peter did not know what the meaning of the vision was. "While Peter was wondering about the meaning of the vision" He did not know what it meant. When the men came along he then understood its meaning. It was not a vision about being able to eat pork now. There is no mention of them going out and killing a pig and eating it. There is only mention of the men who came and got Peter to go to the house of a Gentile.

There is no record in the Bible of any of the Apostles eating pork. Just imagine if the disciples had eaten pork? The Jews never understood that what Christ said as being allowed to eat pork. Never did they think like this. It is only modern day Gentiles that want to enjoy the pleasure of sin for a seaon that do this.
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
Symes said:
"them that believe and know the truth." When the truth is known and at this stage of development the early Christian Church only found the truth in the Old Testament. None of them would have wanted to eat pork. It was not on their menu. It was not considered a food to be eaten. So how you can twist this verse to say you can now eat pork is beyond me. The Jews did not eat pork, still do not eat pork. It is only the latter day Gentiles that twist Scripture in wanting to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season.


SCRIPTURE PASSAGES in the NEW TESTAMENT to support your assertions please!


Were ALL the early Christians Jews?



Imagine the Apostles saying that as of now we can all eat pork. Never!

Never?? :eek: Yes I can well imagine them eating pork after understanding the law of freedom they were under . . would they have a taste for it? Probably not . . would they forbid it? Nope!

SCRIPTURE PASSAGES in the NEW TESTAMENT to support your assertions please!

Again, this does not say that unclean food is now clean. It is the same as the Sabbath issue. There is no command there for a change of the Sabbath and no command to say pork is clean. These verses are not saying unclean is clean. Do not put more spin on these words to make them try and mean something they do not
YES it DOES! There is no such thing as UNCLEAN food any more!


What does EVERY CREATURE mean?


The Word EVERY is translated from the Greek Word:


<B>
G3956


</B>​
&#960;&#945;&#834;&#962;

pas

Thayer Definition:

1) individually

1a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things,everything

2) collectively

2a) some of all types

Part of Speech: adjective

A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: including all the forms of declension

Citing in TDNT: 5:886, 795




And from Strongs:



<B>
G3956


</B>​
&#960;&#945;&#834;&#962;

pas

pas

Including all the forms of declension; apparently a primary word; all, any, every, the whole: - all (manner of, means) alway (-s), any (one), X daily, + ever, every (one, way), as many as, + no (-thing), X throughly, whatsoever, whole, whosoever.

Word CREATURE is translated from this Greek word:


From Thayers



<B>
G2938


</B>​
&#954;&#964;&#953;&#769;&#963;&#956;&#945;

ktisma

Thayer Definition:

1) thing founded

2) created thing

Part of Speech: noun neuter

A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G2936

Citing in TDNT: 3:1000, 481






From STrongs:


<B>
G2938


</B>​
&#954;&#964;&#953;&#769;&#963;&#956;&#945;

ktisma

ktis'-mah

From G2936; an original formation (concretely), that is, product (created thing): - creature.






It means what it says EVERY CREATURE , , . not SOME creatures and NOT OTHERS . . .


Paul goes on to say NOTHING is to be rejected!



the Word NOTHING is translated from the Greek word:


Thayers:



<B>
G3762


</B>​
&#959;&#965;&#787;&#948;&#949;&#953;&#769;&#962;

oudeis

Thayer Definition:

1) no one, nothing

Part of Speech: pronoun

A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G3761 and G1520




From Strongs:




<B>
G3762


</B>​
&#959;&#965;&#787;&#948;&#949;&#953;&#769;&#962;

oudeis

oo-dice'

Including the feminine &#959;&#965;&#787;&#948;&#949;&#956;&#953;&#769;&#945;oudemia

oo-dem-ee'-ah and the neuter &#959;&#965;&#787;&#948;&#949;&#769;&#957;ouden oo-den'

From G3761 and G1520; not even one (man, woman or thing), that is, none, nobody, nothing: - any (man), aught, man, neither any (thing), never (man), no (man), none (+ of these things), not (any, at all, -thing), nought.




There is no room in these words for the exclusion of any creature . whether declared clean or unclean under the Old Law . . . . ALL are included, and any distinction between clean and unclean have been obliterated!

" . . and know the truth"


This IS the truth . . EVERY CREATURE is CLEAN!

You can make all the assertions you want . . but assertions do not PROVE anything . . and so far, in all these threads, you have failed to prove even one of your assertions that set Adventist doctrine apart from mainstream Christianity . .


AGAIN:


1TIM 4:4

For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving:





PLEASE PROVE from NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURE that

  1. the word EVERY does not mean EVERY!
  2. that Creature does not mean Creature,
  3. that NOTHING does not mean NOTHING!
Peace in Him!

 
Upvote 0

EdmundBlackadderTheThird

Proud member of the Loud Few
Dec 14, 2003
9,039
482
52
Visit site
✟31,417.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
There is little record in the Bible of anyone sitting down to a meal, much less the menu. You logic is flawed and you ignore Christ's words that NOTHING that goes into a mans mouth can defile him. Peter was rebuked for saying he had never eaten anything unclean, how could it not do with food? You are so wrapped up in SDA doctrine that you cannot see the truth of the scriptures. There is so much proof that we are not under the Law and yet you claim we are under random parts of it, there is not a Biblical backing for this. Noah was given EVERY animal for food, we are given the same. This is clear by Christ's words, Peter's vision, Paul's words to Timothy and other places. You refuse to see the truth. You don't have to eat pork if you don't want to but it doesn't make you any more righteous in the eyes of the Lord.
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
Symes said:
They did not go out and eat pork after the vision. The Gentiles came along and Peter went with them. They did not have a BBQ and kill a pig and eat it.

Symes . . .what are you talking about . . the Gentiles came along and Peter went with them? You mean to go see Cornelius?

How do YOU know what they ate?



PROVE FROM NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURE what they ate!


The vision given Peter . . .


Act 10:9 On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:

Act 10:10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,

Act 10:11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:

Act 10:12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

Act 10:13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

Act 10:14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

Act 10:15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.


This was given Peter to prepare him to go to a gentile . . but also to show him that nothing is unclean . . no man, no creature . .



Peace in Him!
 
Upvote 0

EdmundBlackadderTheThird

Proud member of the Loud Few
Dec 14, 2003
9,039
482
52
Visit site
✟31,417.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Symes you still need to prove the following, and I am adding to the list:

NOTHING doesn't mean NOTHING

NOTHING is to be refused...

EVERY doesn't mean EVERY

Every creature God created is good...

CREATURE doesn't mean CREATURE

Every creature God created is good...

Why God didn't correct Peter on the meaning of the vision when it is clear he thought it was about food, and realized the second meaning later.

Why Christ himself said "It is not what goes into a man's mouth that defiles him."
 
Upvote 0

deu58

Senior Veteran
Dec 12, 2003
3,099
75
69
Philippines
Visit site
✟26,169.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
hello symes
<FONT face=Verdana>

4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving:
In the Old Testament The Jews were given food laws. Where are the unclean food laws in the new testament?

Please give actual new testament verses

yours in Christ
deu58
 
Upvote 0

Symes

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2003
1,832
15
74
Visit site
✟2,069.00
Faith
Christian
In the Old Testament The Jews were given food laws. Where are the unclean food laws in the new testament?

Please give actual new testament verses

yours in Christ
deu58


They did not need a new set of food laws. What food had been declared unclean by God to Moses was still unclean in the New Testament. The New Testament all of a sudden did not make pigs clean.
 
Upvote 0

EdmundBlackadderTheThird

Proud member of the Loud Few
Dec 14, 2003
9,039
482
52
Visit site
✟31,417.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Symes the food laws were to Moses and never to Gentiles. What of the gentile churches who had no idea of the food laws, how were they to know without being told? And yet we have no record of the food laws being taught to them. You ignore that the rules for food in Noahs time were different than in the Mosaic Law, you espouse that God does not change and yet Noah was given every living creature for food. At the time the clean and unclean designation had to do with sacrifice only. You ignore that Christ's words take us back to that point, back further than Law. We are not under the Law of Moses, but we are under the same rules given to Noah, which is every living thing. You have yet to prove that Christ's words didn't mean what they said, that 1 Tim doesn't mean what it says, and that Peter's vision didn't have two meanings.
 
Upvote 0

deu58

Senior Veteran
Dec 12, 2003
3,099
75
69
Philippines
Visit site
✟26,169.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
flesh99 said:
Symes you still need to prove the following, and I am adding to the list:

NOTHING doesn't mean NOTHING

NOTHING is to be refused...

EVERY doesn't mean EVERY

Every creature God created is good...

CREATURE doesn't mean CREATURE

Every creature God created is good...

Why God didn't correct Peter on the meaning of the vision when it is clear he thought it was about food, and realized the second meaning later.

Why Christ himself said "It is not what goes into a man's mouth that defiles him."
hello flesh

Well here is another post symes is sure to ignore

But I have found some support for symes's position.

1 Tim 4:4 Clear Word
God created everything. Nothing should be rejected which he said we can eat and we should do so by offering thanksgiving and praise.

Those foods not only have the approval of the word of God but will also be blessed by him through our prayers

There you see? Problem solved. Symes is right and we are all wrong. The confusion comes from those of us who still read bibles that are still translated from the Hebrew and the Greek.

But If you start to read something that has been translated by the SDA Spirit of Prophecy everything just clears right up! I guess thats why the SDA's call it the Clear Word.^_^

yours in Christ
deu58
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
flesh99 said:
Symes the food laws were to Moses and never to Gentiles. What of the gentile churches who had no idea of the food laws, how were they to know without being told? And yet we have no record of the food laws being taught to them. You ignore that the rules for food in Noahs time were different than in the Mosaic Law, you espouse that God does not change and yet Noah was given every living creature for food. At the time the clean and unclean designation had to do with sacrifice only. You ignore that Christ's words take us back to that point, back further than Law. We are not under the Law of Moses, but we are under the same rules given to Noah, which is every living thing. You have yet to prove that Christ's words didn't mean what they said, that 1 Tim doesn't mean what it says, and that Peter's vision didn't have two meanings.
I would like to know also where in the New Testament it tells us of Gentiles, upon converting to Christianity, were taught what foods they were allowed to eat and what foods they weren't allowed to eat as well as where it says they were expected to go through such fundamental changes in diet . .

It is one thing to want to follow the Old Testament dietary laws when it comes to which foods to eat because one beleives it is beneficial for them to do so . .

It is quite another to say that ANY CHRISTIAN is required to!!

I think if Gentiles, upon coming into the Church had been required to make such drastic and complicated changes to diets they had been used to all their lives, there would be some clear record of this in the New Testament or the Early Church Fathers . .

But we find NOTHING to that effect . .not even the remotest hint of such a thing . .


Now, something that should be taken into consideration, in my opinion, is the issue of meats offered to idols, and the instructions in the New Testament about them, especially Paul's. .

This is what Paul said:

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.

Now, the question is, what kinds of meats were offered to idols?

Just Jewish Kosher meats? Just meats declared CLEAN by the Jewish Law?


Why would someone think this since pagans were not Jewish and not under Jewish dietary laws? Is it reasonable to think this?


I had to do some searching, and becaue there is an abundance of SDA and other sites which want Christians to be restricted to Jewish kosher dietary laws (which are going to give me biased information) it took a long time to go through it, I didn't have time to contiune searching for more information.

But I believe that determining what kinds of food would find their way into the market place after being offered to an idol is essential to helping us to understand the freedom we have in the New Testament . .

I found this as an example:

Worship

The most widespread public act of worship in ancient Greece was sacrifice , especially the blood sacrifice of animals. The temple s of the Greek religion generally were not public gathering places where people gathered socially for collective indoor prayer; most temples were little more than boxes that held a cult idol of the deity. Rather, the temples were part slaughterhouse and part barbecue;ox en, sheep , horses, swine , dogs, various birds, and almost every kind of beast, be it fur, fish, or fowl, were offered as sacrificial victims to one deity or another, again depending chiefly on local custom. When we are told in studies of mythology that "horses are sacred to Poseidon " or roosters to Hermes , what this meant first and foremost was that these animals were customarily offered as sacrifices to those gods. Most sacrificial victims were food animals; for these, the usual practice was to offer the god the blood, bones, and hide of the victim, while the worshippers kept and ate the rest.

The Roman formula expressed the attitude of worshippers to their gods in the formula do ut des; I give sacrifices, so that the god will reward me in return. Public worship was aimed at pleasing the gods so that the gods would send rain, good harvest, military victories, and other public blessings. Private sacrifice was offered for personal goals. Prayer was highly formulaic and ritualized. Most places did not have professional full-time clergy ; priests were local officials whose priesthoods were not full time jobs. Major religious sites such as the oracle s of pilgrimage brought in enough spiritual tourism to need a full time clerical staff.
http://www.tutorgig.com/encyclopedia/getdefn.jsp?keywords=Greek_religion


Now . . looking at what would be the usual foods offered to idols Paul is speaking of, and his instruction to eat whatever was put before one without asking if it was offered to an idol, we see this . .

Here are several translations of this verse from above:


1Co 10:25

(ALT) Whatever is sold in the meat-market, eat, examining nothing, for the sake of the conscience.

(ASV) Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, eat, asking no question for conscience' sake,

(BBE) Whatever meat may be had at the public market, take as food without question of right or wrong;

(CEV) However, when you buy meat in the market, go ahead and eat it. Keep your conscience clear by not asking where the meat came from.

(Darby) Everything sold in the shambles eat, making no inquiry for conscience sake.

(DRB) Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, eat: asking no question for conscience' sake.

(EMTV) Eat everything being sold in the meat market, questioning nothing, for conscience' sake;

(GB) Whatsoeuer is solde in the shambles, eate ye, and aske no question for conscience sake.

(GNB) You are free to eat anything sold in the meat market, without asking any questions because of your conscience.

(HNV) Whatever is sold in the butcher shop, eat, asking no question for the sake of conscience,

(ISV) Eat anything that is sold in the meat market without raising any question about it on the ground of conscience,

(KJV+) Whatsoever3956 is sold4453 in1722 the meat market,3111that eat,2068 asking no question350, 3367 for conscience sake:1223, 4893(KJVA) Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:

(LITV) Eat everything being sold in a meat market, examining nothing because of conscience,

(YLT) Whatever in the meat-market is sold eat ye, not inquiring, because of the conscience,

Given the wide range of, to the Jews, UNCLEAN anmals offered to idols and sold in the markest, the "WHATEVER" "EVERYTHING" and "ANYTHING " sold in the markets would include these unclean animals . . And Paul was instructing them that they could eat anything they found there . .


WHY?

(I have to shorten this post, so will continue it in the next one following this . . . :) )



Peace in Him!



 
  • Like
Reactions: deu58
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
WHY?? (continued)



Paul tells us:


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



Then Paul goes on to say MORE! :
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.


If Christians are not to eat Jewish Unclean meats, yet the Christian is at a feast given by pagans who eat unclean animals all the time, why would Paul tell them to eat whatever is put in front of them . . and not to even ask questions about it? You were not to ask what animal this meat was from, or if it were offered to an idol . . you were to simply eat it!

NOW AGAIN . .. the meats that the pagans ate were of all types . .they did not hold to the food restrictions of the Jews . . so swine could be offered, anything could be set before you . . and what comes next begs a very important question!

This is what comes next:


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?

IF it was SO important to abstain from unclean animals, then WHY did Paul only mention to not eat ONLY because it was offered to idols? (And not because it was wrong, but because you could injure the conscience of the one who brought it to your attention because they thought is was wrong . . Paul is advocating acting in a loving way that puts the other's needs before our liberty in Christ . . )


In fact, IF it was SO important to abstain from unclean animals, then WHY did Paul NOT tell them to make sure that they were ONLY eating CLEAN meats?


He didn't tell them to be careful to do that . . !!!


He told them to eat ANYTHING fully knowing that this ANYTHING most likely would be UNCLEAN animals according to Jewish dietary laws!!:eek:



I see absolutely NO evidence that Christians were EVER expected to eat only those meats declared clean by Jewish dietary laws . .

Quite the contrary, I see we are told to eat ANYTHING put before us because the earth is the Lord's and the FULLNESS thereof . .



1Co 10:30


For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?




We are under the Law of Liberty . . :)





Peace in Him!
 
Upvote 0

Gary777

Gary777
Jan 1, 2004
383
19
55
Southern Sweden
✟23,118.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
kosh said:
I have read in the Bible that eating pork and shellfish is prohibited by God Himself. From God's own mouth he commands this. So why do so many Christians that I have known throughout my life so blatantly ignore God's command? I was not even aware of this before I became a Christian, but now that I know, I have gievn up pork and shellfish and have asked God to forgive me for my ignorance.

I ask this question to my fellow Christians: are you aware of this law and if so then why to you ignore it? I'd really like to know, because it upset me greatly to know that so many of brothers and sister defy God's law.

You know better than this.
 
Upvote 0

Dominus Fidelis

ScottBot is Stalking Me!
Sep 10, 2003
9,260
383
51
Florida
✟33,909.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
holo said:
kosh,
These laws were given to the jews. We were never under those laws. Anyway, if you're going to follow the pork and shellfish rules, you'll also have to start sacrificing sheep and all that. The list would get pretty long.
As a Christian, you need Jesus and Him only.

True...but Jesus gave us more than freedom from the Old Covenant. He set up Sacraments which are necessary. Read John 6, etc.
 
Upvote 0

deu58

Senior Veteran
Dec 12, 2003
3,099
75
69
Philippines
Visit site
✟26,169.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Hello Symes

You are always going on about the vision in Acts 10 not being about food.

Ac 11:3 Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them

When Peter went into the house of Cornelius he ate with them which was a violation of the food Laws. He, as a Jew ate gentile food which was unlawful.

yours in Christ
deu58
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.