Why Am I Eating a Pork Chop?

[LoveGodsWord]

Acts 15:20 isn't addressing circumcision.

Things polluted by idols - not about circumcision.

From sexual immorality - not about circumcision.

From things strangled, and from blood - not about circumcision.

What it appears to be saying is that Gentile Christians are to only abstain from eating meat that's been sacrificed to idols, meat from animals that have been strangled, and from blood.

What's more this is repeated in verse 29:

"For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well."

So what about that?

No. Read the post you are quoting from. Acts 15 is over the question "is circumcision a requirement for salvation?" *Read the context in Acts of the Apostles 15:1-2. They went to Jerusalem over this question. That is the context and topic of conversation and subject matter of Acts chapter 15.

 

[Ceallaigh]

No. Read the post you are quoting from. Acts 15 is over the question "is circumcision a requirement for salvation?" *Read the context in Acts of the Apostles 15:1-2. They went to Jerusalem over this question. That is the context and topic of conversation and subject matter of Acts chapter 15.

If all of Acts 15 is exclusively about circumcision, then why does it address telling Gentiles to only abstain from consuming meat that's been sacrificed to idols or that's from a strangled animal or blood?

What does Acts of the Apostles 15:20-29 have to do with circumcision?

 

[Ceallaigh]

Forget the Old Testament, it is not for Christians, and Jesus replaced it.

Well the OT is important because the main theme throughout it is Jesus Christ. He is the fulfillment of the OT.

However I would say that probably a Christian is only subject to the OT commandments repeated in the NT and also of course the new commandments given in the NT.

 

[Ceallaigh]

It clearly states in Deuteronomy 14:8 that we’re not to eat pork. In fact, Deuteronomy and Leviticus clearly state a lot of things that we don’t adhere to.

13:6 through18: We’re instructed to kill without mercy -even your own family members- anyone who tries to convince you to worship other gods.

17:2 through 13: Kill anyone who does evil-such as worshipping the stars- and violates the covenant. And if you’re not sure if the party is guilty, take it to court and if the Judge finds the party guilty and you refuse take part in stoning the defendant to death, then you should be killed too.

21:18: Kill your own son if he is rebellious.

Thou shalt not kill, but Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and Exodus is full of examples like this where we are to kill people for sinning. What about “as we forgive those who trespass against us”? I seem to have made executing people the theme here, but there are instructions/laws on other topics as well that we don’t follow, I’m assuming because they just don’t seem consistent with our faith.

So why is it OK to have a pork Bratwurst at the church fundraising event these days when God clearly forbids it?

You could argue that things were different back then and don’t apply today. But that would nullify the Ten Commandments. These laws I’m referring to were issued on the same day. They just didn’t make the top ten list.

So then why isn't okay to stone your rebellious son to death? Is it that same argument that things were different back then and don't apply today?

 

[1an]

Well the OT is important because the main theme throughout it is Jesus Christ. He is the fulfillment of the OT.

However I would say that probably a Christian is only subject to the OT commandments repeated in the NT and also new commandments given in the NT.

Yes, Jesus is the fulfillment of the OT indeed, and since the Old Testament looked forward to the coming of Christ, we can now look forward to His coming again. It is such a shame the Israelites turned away from the true God and offered burnt offerings to dead and ineffectual pagan gods.

The true God hates the pagan practice of sacrifice. The practice of offering sacrifices to pagan gods was an insult to the pre-incarnate Jesus in two ways, firstly because they were deep into the worship of pagan gods, and secondly only Jesus is the true sacrifice. All other burnt offerings are null and void. Here is what the living God says :-
.
Bring no more vain offerings; incense is an abomination to me. New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations—I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly. (Isaiah 1:13)

Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God: for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods. (Deu 12:31 KJV)

Isaiah 1:11 NKJV "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to Me?" Says the LORD. "I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams And the fat of fed cattle. I do not delight in the blood of bulls, Or of lambs or goats.

1 Samuel 15:22 NKJV So Samuel said: "Has the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, As in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed, is than the fat of rams.

Psa 40:5-6 Many, O LORD my God, are Your wonderful works Which You have done; And Your thoughts toward us Cannot be recounted to You in order; If I would declare and speak of them, They are more than can be numbered. Sacrifice and offering You did not desire; My ears You have opened. Burnt offering and sin offering You did not require.

All the true God requires is that we make a sacrifice of our heart.
.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

If all of Acts 15 is exclusively about circumcision, then why does it address telling Gentiles to only abstain from consuming meat that's been sacrificed to idols or that's from a strangled animal or blood?

What does Acts of the Apostles 15:20-29 have to do with circumcision?

Read post # 207 linked. Your just repeating yourself. The context is to circumcision. It was being forced on new gentile Christians as a requirement for salvation. Read the chapter in context. Acts of the Apostles 15:1-29 needs to be read together not in isolation to Acts of the Apostles 15:20-29. Acts 15:20-29 is only the outcome of if circumcision is a requirement for salvation.

Here look at the whole context.....

ACTS 15:1:21
[1], And certain men who came down from Judea taught the brethren, and said, EXCEPT YOU BE CIRCUMCISED AFTER THE MANNER OF MOSES YOU CANNOT BE SAVED.

NOTE: ACTS 15:1 is the question that needs to be answered and the topic of conversation and CONTEXT of the chapter of ACTS 15. Here we have Jewish believers coming to Paul and Barnabas saying if the new GENTILES believers are not circumcised and made proselytes then they cannot be saved. This is the chapter context and issue of contention.

[2], When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, THEY DETERMINED THAT PAUL AND BARNABAS AND CERTAIN OF THEM SHOULD GO UP TO JERUSALEM UNTO THE APOSLTLES AND ELDERS ABOUT THIS QUESTION.

NOTE: ACTS 15:2 Which question? Weather your salvation depends on being CIRCUMCISED.

They then traveled to Jerusalem about this question to determine if new gentile believers needed to be CIRCUMCISED in order to be saved. Once they got to Jerusalem, the question was then asked and the discussion continued with the Pharisees stating their case first..

[5], But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, saying, It is needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

NOTE: KEEP in mind here the question was never over if gentile believers should obey God's 10 Commandments but to keep the Shadow laws of Moses, in this case CIRCUMCISION as a means of salvation. CIRCUMCISIONS is from the law of MOSES not God’s 10 Commandments written by God on two tables of stone.

[6], And the apostles and elders came together TO CONSIDER THIS MATTER.

NOTE: Again the topic of discussion and chapter CONTEXT that is being considered is the question stated in ACTS 15:1 which was IS CIRCUMCISION A REQUIREMENT OF SALVATION?

[7], And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, you know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
[8], And God, who knows the hearts, bore them witness, giving them the Holy Spirit, even as he did unto us;

NOTE: After much discussion between the Apostles, Peter then rose up showing that God gave the gentile believers the Holy Spirit being UNCIRCUMCISED.

[9], And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
[10], Now therefore why test God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
[11], But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

NOTE: They came to the conclusion then that salvation is not by being circumcised but be what circumcision pointed to. A new heart by faith. This is made plain latter in other scripture written by PAUL here...

ROMANS 2:28-29 [28], FOR HE IS NOT A JEW, WHO IS ONE; NEITHER IS THAT CIRCUMCISION, WHICH IS OF THE OUTWARD FLESH: [29], BUT HE IS A JEW WHICH IS ONE INWARDLY; AND CIRCUMCISION IS THAT OF THE HEART, IN THE SPIRIT AND NOT IN THE LETTER; WHOSE PRAISE IS NOT OF MEN BUT OF GOD.

If ACTS 15 was talking about the 10 Commandments then Paul's writings in to the CORITHIANS do not make any sense and makes Paul a hypocrite which we know he is not.

1 CORITHIANS 7 [19] CIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, AND UNCIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, BUT THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

The scripture above is a contradiction of how some interpret the outcome of ACTS 15. You do not believe Dan, that we are now free to break any of God's 10 Commandments now do you?

[12], Then all the multitude kept silence, and listened to Barnabas and Paul declaring what miracles and wonders God had done among the Gentiles by them.
[13], And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:
[14], Simeon has declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
[15], And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
[16], After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
[17], That the rest of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, says the Lord, who does all these things.
[18], Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
[19], THEREFORE MY JUDGMENT IS THAT WE TROUBLE NOT THEM WHO FROM THE GENTILES ARE TURNED TO GOD:
[20], BUT WRITE UNTO THEM THAT THEY ABSTAIN FROM THE DEFILEMENT OF IDOLS, FORNICATION AND THINGS STRANGLED AND FROM BLOOD.

NOTE: JAMES conclusion is that new Gentile believers should not be troubled with CIRCUMCISION as a requirement of salvation which was the matter being considered and the question being discussion as shown in *ACTS 15:1-2; ACTS 15:6 but asks them to abstain from idols, fornication and from things strangled and from blood.

[21], FOR MOSES OF OLD TIME HAS IN EVERY CITY THEM THAT PREACH HIM, BEING READ IN THE SYNAGOGUES EVERY SABBATH.

NOTE: The reason why JAMES sends this letter to the new Gentile believers is that they would continue learning God's WORD EVERY SABBATH.

……………

CONCLUSION So the conclusion of the matter with CONTEXT added back in is found in v19-20 We are not to trouble the new gentile believers with CIRCUMCISION as a means of salvation. They are new converts that will learn more about GOD'S WORD when? EVERY SABBATH. In the meantime you should abstain from anything offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication.
NOPE nothing written about the 10 Commandments being abolished in this chapter. Here is what PAUL says of the matter here...

1 CORITHIANS 7 [19] CIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, AND UNCIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, BUT THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

ACTS 15 is about “CIRCUMCISION” as a requirement for salvation and is not even considering Gods 10 Commandments. “Circumcision” is one of the shadow laws of the MOSAIC BOOK of the COVENANT.

Hope this helps.

 

[TJB]

So why is it OK to have a pork Bratwurst at the church fundraising event these days when God clearly forbids it?

I have come a little bit late to this thread, and haven't looked at all the replies, so apologies if this point is already made - But the moment of Peters Vision in Acts 10.where he has a vision of animals being lowered from heaven, and hears a voice from heaven say 'what God has made clean, do not call unclean' .... is the key moment where a Christian understanding of dietary laws supercedes the earlier laws. Peter has already been given a particular authority amongst the apostles by Jesus 'to bind and loose...... ' and in the early church these dietary changes as well as the Pauline pressure to change the requirements on circumcision were key to define how Christianity was not just a sect of Judaism. ...... So enjoy the Bratwurst with a clear conscience!!!!

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I have come a little bit late to this thread, and haven't looked at all the replies, so apologies if this point is already made - But the moment of Peters Vision in Acts 10.where he has a vision of animals being lowered from heaven, and hears a voice from heaven say 'what God has made clean, do not call unclean' .... is the key moment where a Christian understanding of dietary laws supercedes the earlier laws. Peter has already been given a particular authority amongst the apostles by Jesus 'to bind and loose...... ' and in the early church these dietary changes as well as the Pauline pressure to change the requirements on circumcision were key to define how Christianity was not just a sect of Judaism. ...... So enjoy the Bratwurst with a clear conscience!!!!

Yes your a little late TJB but welcome. This has already been addressed with the scriptures. Please see post # 198 linked

 

[1an]

So then why isn't okay to stone your rebellious son to death? Is it that same argument that things were different back then and don't apply today?

The OT commandments, the Mitzvot Laws were only given to the Jews.
.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Read post # 207 linked. Your just repeating yourself. The context is to circumcision. It was being forced on new gentile Christians as a requirement for salvation. Read the chapter in context. Acts of the Apostles 15:1-29 needs to be read together not in isolation to Acts of the Apostles 15:20-29. Acts 15:20-29 is only the outcome of if circumcision is a requirement for salvation.

Here look at the whole context.....

ACTS 15:1:21
[1], And certain men who came down from Judea taught the brethren, and said, EXCEPT YOU BE CIRCUMCISED AFTER THE MANNER OF MOSES YOU CANNOT BE SAVED.

NOTE: ACTS 15:1 is the question that needs to be answered and the topic of conversation and CONTEXT of the chapter of ACTS 15. Here we have Jewish believers coming to Paul and Barnabas saying if the new GENTILES believers are not circumcised and made proselytes then they cannot be saved. This is the chapter context and issue of contention.

[2], When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, THEY DETERMINED THAT PAUL AND BARNABAS AND CERTAIN OF THEM SHOULD GO UP TO JERUSALEM UNTO THE APOSLTLES AND ELDERS ABOUT THIS QUESTION.

NOTE: ACTS 15:2 Which question? Weather your salvation depends on being CIRCUMCISED.

They then traveled to Jerusalem about this question to determine if new gentile believers needed to be CIRCUMCISED in order to be saved. Once they got to Jerusalem, the question was then asked and the discussion continued with the Pharisees stating their case first..

[5], But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, saying, It is needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

NOTE: KEEP in mind here the question was never over if gentile believers should obey God's 10 Commandments but to keep the Shadow laws of Moses, in this case CIRCUMCISION as a means of salvation. CIRCUMCISIONS is from the law of MOSES not God’s 10 Commandments written by God on two tables of stone.

[6], And the apostles and elders came together TO CONSIDER THIS MATTER.

NOTE: Again the topic of discussion and chapter CONTEXT that is being considered is the question stated in ACTS 15:1 which was IS CIRCUMCISION A REQUIREMENT OF SALVATION?

[7], And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, you know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
[8], And God, who knows the hearts, bore them witness, giving them the Holy Spirit, even as he did unto us;

NOTE: After much discussion between the Apostles, Peter then rose up showing that God gave the gentile believers the Holy Spirit being UNCIRCUMCISED.

[9], And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
[10], Now therefore why test God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
[11], But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

NOTE: They came to the conclusion then that salvation is not by being circumcised but be what circumcision pointed to. A new heart by faith. This is made plain latter in other scripture written by PAUL here...

ROMANS 2:28-29 [28], FOR HE IS NOT A JEW, WHO IS ONE; NEITHER IS THAT CIRCUMCISION, WHICH IS OF THE OUTWARD FLESH: [29], BUT HE IS A JEW WHICH IS ONE INWARDLY; AND CIRCUMCISION IS THAT OF THE HEART, IN THE SPIRIT AND NOT IN THE LETTER; WHOSE PRAISE IS NOT OF MEN BUT OF GOD.

If ACTS 15 was talking about the 10 Commandments then Paul's writings in to the CORITHIANS do not make any sense and makes Paul a hypocrite which we know he is not.

1 CORITHIANS 7 [19] CIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, AND UNCIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, BUT THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

The scripture above is a contradiction of how some interpret the outcome of ACTS 15. You do not believe Dan, that we are now free to break any of God's 10 Commandments now do you?

[12], Then all the multitude kept silence, and listened to Barnabas and Paul declaring what miracles and wonders God had done among the Gentiles by them.
[13], And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:
[14], Simeon has declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
[15], And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
[16], After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
[17], That the rest of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, says the Lord, who does all these things.
[18], Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
[19], THEREFORE MY JUDGMENT IS THAT WE TROUBLE NOT THEM WHO FROM THE GENTILES ARE TURNED TO GOD:
[20], BUT WRITE UNTO THEM THAT THEY ABSTAIN FROM THE DEFILEMENT OF IDOLS, FORNICATION AND THINGS STRANGLED AND FROM BLOOD.

NOTE: JAMES conclusion is that new Gentile believers should not be troubled with CIRCUMCISION as a requirement of salvation which was the matter being considered and the question being discussion as shown in *ACTS 15:1-2; ACTS 15:6 but asks them to abstain from idols, fornication and from things strangled and from blood.

[21], FOR MOSES OF OLD TIME HAS IN EVERY CITY THEM THAT PREACH HIM, BEING READ IN THE SYNAGOGUES EVERY SABBATH.

NOTE: The reason why JAMES sends this letter to the new Gentile believers is that they would continue learning God's WORD EVERY SABBATH.

……………

CONCLUSION So the conclusion of the matter with CONTEXT added back in is found in v19-20 We are not to trouble the new gentile believers with CIRCUMCISION as a means of salvation. They are new converts that will learn more about GOD'S WORD when? EVERY SABBATH. In the meantime you should abstain from anything offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication.
NOPE nothing written about the 10 Commandments being abolished in this chapter. Here is what PAUL says of the matter here...

1 CORITHIANS 7 [19] CIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, AND UNCIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, BUT THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

ACTS 15 is about “CIRCUMCISION” as a requirement for salvation and is not even considering Gods 10 Commandments. “Circumcision” is one of the shadow laws of the MOSAIC BOOK of the COVENANT.

Hope this helps.

It helped to give me the SDA perspective.

I've seen a lot of focus by SDA members regarding the 10 commandments. But not eating pork isn't one of the 10. It's one of the 603 laws in addition to the 10. So I'm still wondering why it was decided that a few of the 603, such as Leviticus 11:7, should be kept, while most others are not kept?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Exactly. So how do we pick and choose which ones to obey? Why should Leviticus 11:7 be obeyed while other commandments in Leviticus are ignored?

Most Christians probably don't even know what any of the others in Leviticus are. It's just the one about pork that stands out to them. And I wouldn't be surprised to find out that was started by the cattle industry.

What about Leviticus 24:16?

Or better yet, Deuteronomy 21:18-21.
Does anyone here want to have unruly children stoned to death?

The laws that apply to you at that time...you do not understand Torah

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

The OT commandments, the Mitzvot Laws were only given to the Jews.
.

Was Adam or Abraham a Jew? How about Noakh?

 

[Ceallaigh]

The laws that apply to you at that time...you do not understand Torah

So how many of the 613 don't apply any longer?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

So how many of the 613 don't apply any longer?

Many...for one thing, there is no Temple standing. Even Yeshua Himself could never keep all "613"...for one thing, He was not a woman...nor a priest in the Temple.

 

[The Liturgist]

The 2 taught by Yeshua appear originally IN THE TORAH. In Deuteronomy and Leviticus...the 10 were given on Har Sinai BY God...not Moshe. Yeshua did and taught Torah...the Will of His Father. If not, a divided house can not stand...

Are you an Eastern Orthodox Christian? Because if so, you ought to know that the consumption of pork is licit in all jurisdictions, and the only meat the Athonite monks allow themselves much of the time is shellfish (Greek Monastery stew with bits of clam and other assorted shellfish in a thick tomato base is fabulously delicious, and you won’t find it in any Greek restaurant).

 

[Ceallaigh]

Was Adam or Abraham a Jew? How about Noakh?

They died a long time before Moses wrote the Mitzvot.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Are you an Eastern Orthodox Christian? Because if so, you ought to know that the consumption of pork is licit in all jurisdictions, and the only meat the Athonite monks allow themselves much of the time is shellfish (Greek Monastery stew with bits of clam and other assorted shellfish in a thick tomato base is fabulously delicious, and you won’t find it in any Greek restaurant).

What does that have to do with what we are discussing? Did you read what I wrote?

I replied to what you wrote:

because the Ten Commandments were epitomized by our Lord into two, and his more concise way of expressing them is superior to the more verbose manner they were expressed by Moses (I believe that the Two Commandments were on the two tablets of stone, and the Ten Commandments were an exegesis thereof, but since I was not present on Mount Sinai, this is what the Greeks call a theologoumemnon, or Theological Opinion. As such I do not teach it in church or regard it as doctrine).

 

[Ceallaigh]

Many...for one thing, there is no Temple standing. Even Yeshua Himself could never keep all "613"...for one thing, He was not a woman...nor a priest in the Temple.

What number of them should still be kept by Christians today?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

They died a long time before Moses wrote the Mitzvot.

You don't even know what Mitzvot are, do you...there were Mitzvot in Gan Eden too...as well as to Abraham and Noakh...as well as Covenants prior to Sinai...

 

[The Liturgist]

If all of Acts 15 is exclusively about circumcision, then why does it address telling Gentiles to only abstain from consuming meat that's been sacrificed to idols or that's from a strangled animal or blood?

What does Acts of the Apostles 15:20-29 have to do with circumcision?

Zilch; there should be no controversy about this at all, but since the Millerite movement in the 19th century Adventists have embraced an unusual theology around diets. Read the history of Graham’s Crackers or J.W. Kellog for more details. Later, my understanding is much of this was doctrinally formalized by Ellen White. A friend of mine who grew up SDA with a Catholic mother was mistreated at Adventist elementary school because she would pack meat in his lunches, by one of the teachers, and this was recent, I reckon it would have been in the early 90s, I would guess 89-95 or thereabouts. His father had a change of religious perspective and joined the UCC, and his son became a liberal Christian of the sort that are frequently encountered in the UCC, which is how I met him, but he was a decent guy and my theological traditionalism did not preclude a friendship. He told me he is glad his father left when he did, because the Adventists have a system of boarding schools called “academies” for middle school aged children.