Is it okay to eat pork?

[Soyeong]

OK, so you agree that stoning is the correct judgement for adultery.

Indeed, and Jesus was not in disagreement with the Father about this.

 

[Akjv]

The specific set of laws that God has chosen to give teach us about the nature of who He is, for example, we can see that God is wise by seeing that He has given wise laws, we can see that God is holy by seeing that he has given holy laws, we can see that God is just by seeing that He has given just laws, and so forth. By doing what is wise, holy, just and so forth in obedience to God's laws we are testifying about the nature of who He is, and by doing that we are also expressing what we believe to be true about the nature of who He is, or in other words, we are believing in Him, hence God's command to be holy as He is holy. Likewise, by doing good works, we are testifying about God's goodness, which is why our good works bring glory to Him (Matthew 5:16), and testifying about God's goodness, we are also expressing the belief that God is good.

A different set of laws would corresponds to a different God with a different nature. For example, a God who commanded His people to commit adultery would have a different nature, set of character traits, or identity than that of the God of Israel. God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), so any instructions that God has given for how to testify about His righteousness are eternal valid (Psalms 119:160), and the same is true for the other aspects of God's nature, including His holiness. It is contrary to the holiness of the God of Israel to eat unclean animals and if that were to ever change, then His holiness would not be eternal, and a God who does not command against eating unclean animals does not have the same eternal identity as the God of Israel. Someone who refuses to obey the God of Israel's instructions for how to be holy as He is holy lives in a way that testifies that the God that they follow is not holy.

I see your point. I go by the new covenant that Jesus taught his disciples and taught some himself.

 

[RileyG]

It's ok to eat pork. Read Acts 10 and 11. All food is clean now.

 

[Soyeong]

It's ok to eat pork. Read Acts 10 and 11. All food is clean now.

In Acts 10:10-15, it should be noted that Peter did not just object by saying that he had never eaten anything unclean, but also added that he had never eaten anything that was common. Furthermore, it should also be noted that God did not rebuke Peter for referring to what He has made clean as being unclean (as the interpretation that it is ok to eat pork requires), but rather God only rebuked Peter for referring to what He has made clean as being common. In other words, Peter correctly identified the unclean animals as being unclean and correctly knew that he was not supposed to eat them in obedience to God's commands in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14, but he incorrectly identified the clean animals as being common and incorrectly declined to eat them in disobedience to God's command to kill and eat. Peter interpreted his vision three times as being in regard to incorrectly identifying Gentiles without saying a word about it now being ok to eat pork, so his vision has nothing to do with a change in the status of unclean animals.

 

[RileyG]

Matthew 15:11

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Matthew 15:11

Keep reading- Jesus wasn't speaking about food, he was using an illustration (parable) and explains His parable and its not about food.


Mat 15:11 Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.”

12 Then His disciples came and said to Him, “Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?”

13 But He answered and said, “Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. 14 Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.”

15 Then Peter answered and said to Him, “Explain this parable to us.”

16 So Jesus said, “Are you also still without understanding? 17 Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is eliminated? 18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. 20 These are the things which defile a man, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man.”

The last verse brings us back to what this was about found in the first verse of the chapter, keeping traditions (in this example-eating without washing hands) over the commandments of God.

Mat 15:1 Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying, 2 “Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.”

Jesus made an illustration using food, but it was never about food which Jesus clearly clarifies. He also condemned them for keeping their traditions over the commandments of God quoting directly from the Decalogue-see Mat 15:3-9 These same principles apply today.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Indeed, and Jesus was not in disagreement with the Father about this.

No? Why did he not stone the woman caught in adultery?

 

[Soyeong]

No? Why did he not stone the woman caught in adultery?

Because that would have been sinning in violation of God's law and disqualifying himself as our Savior.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Because that would have been sinning in violation of God's law and disqualifying himself as our Savior.

You can't have it both ways. Either you adhere to the law of Moses and its sanctions, or you are governed by the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus. Jesus in me does not tell me to obey the sabbath rules or desist from eating pork. He made it clear what matters: love God, love your neighbour and love the brethren.