- May 19, 2015
- 125,492
- 28,588
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
A lot cooler tooDancing in the rain sounds safer.
Upvote
0
A lot cooler tooDancing in the rain sounds safer.
It helps to know that it was a difficult lesson for Peter, yes. No one would doubt that Deut. Peter was quite hard headed about it for sure.
That is why God had to repeat Himself three times, so it would sink in to Peter. Yet later, we read it really hadn't yet sunk in so Paul totally reprimanded Peter;
(Gal 2:11) But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
(Gal 2:12) For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
(Gal 2:13) And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
So let's not be in error as Peter, in siding with those who refuse to eat what the Lord has cleansed.
This is not talking about Peter eating things God has commanded us not to eat, it's talking about Peter eating with people that jewish tradition said not to eat with, not God.
he still ate unclean food. Why do you think there was food on the sheet?
Acrs 11:3 “You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them.”
he was also eating with them in antioch, read gal 2.
lets put it this way, he ate at a gentiles house. There...
He was eating with gentiles in antioch, it was not a one time thing, he was "living" as a gentile.
Peter had much more than a hard head, he had knowledge.
You have to have some serious testicular fortitude to tell God "no I'm not going to do what you told me" (three times) without knowing that God is not talking about what it sounds like on the surface.
As usual you miss the point completely.
Peter was breaking jewish tradition (i.e. traditions of men) not the laws of God.
the context show mosaic law. please bro..
15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
Then paul went on to say, died to law in 2:19-20, it was not the traditions contextually.
Did Paul declare all foods clean?
Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon
Strong's Number G1033 matches the Greek βρῶμα (brōma), which occurs 17 times in 15 verses in the Greek concordance of the KJV
YoungLT]Romans 14:14 I have known and am persuaded in Lord Jesus that nothing unclean thru himself, except to the one accounting any being-unclean/koinon <2839> to be, to that one being-unclean/koinon <2839>.
[Genesis 9:33]
15 and if through victuals/brwma <1033> thy brother is grieved, no more dost thou walk according to love; do not with thy victuals destroy that one for whom Christ died.
16 Let not, then, your good be evil spoken of,
17 for the reign of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit;
1033. broma bro'-mah from the base of 977; food (literally or figuratively), especially (ceremonially) articles allowed or forbidden by the Jewish law:--meat, victuals.
Like I said, and you keep making my point.
As usual you miss the point completely.
Peter was breaking jewish tradition (i.e. traditions of men) not the laws of God.
Wonder if it had any wabbitz on it
the sheet had funky creatures on it.
Thank you for that excellent post!I would say "other":
Romans 14:2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
v5b. . .Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
v6. . . He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks;
And Paul said:
v14 I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
v17a For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink;
v20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.
v22,23 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
Which goes back to:
For one believeth that he may eat all things: . . . . .
. . .Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
Paul did teach that all foods were clean but he taught it because he was fully persuaded by/in the Lord Jesus.
When Peter interpreted the dream, I believed he said it to mean that even gentiles will receive the grace of God...because he said "But God have shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean..." Acts 10:28Why doesnt Peter ever interpret his own dream as having anything to do with food?