To eat or not to eat... THAT IS THE QUESTION!

[endure4him]

Hey Sis. B still *laughing* not doubting the seriousness of it...you just be telling it like it is and you don't hold back no punches *smile* ever think about Christian Comedy? You've been so many places, seen alot-I'm sure you got some stories to tell!!!!

Virginia...naw sis (piece of switchgrass hanging from lip), Texas be my home!

Hey Jas...I'm doing great, can't complain-DH is great (thanks for asking), kids are doing good. How has life been treating you?

Hey saints don't want to leave nobody out-how's it been going for everyone? Hey Living, what's up GDD and Kanyon, AndSuch, Krazeeboi...Hi Elder, how's the wife and new budle of joy...shout out to everybody-Heyyyyyyyyyy!

Got some xtra duties here at work-web work (maintaining), so I'm pretty much at it all day-everyday! Lot of work, but excellent learning experience, so I'm content. I do stop by and read in from time to time...ya'll keep on, keeping on!

BTW...Happy be-lated Mother's Day to all! Love you all-Peace Out

[Beck]

krazeeboi said:

Two words come to mind here: lawful and expedient.

And in context... what exactly does that passage mean?

[Beck]

auneeqsol said:

I think the Mark 7:19 account, was to show the pharisees that its not what goes in that has you messed up but what comes out, because thats coming fromt he heart. I think he was sending a message to the pharisees about their heart, even tho Jesus said purging all meats.

Well it could have been two - fold. Because about the meats he was saying no matter what kind you ate, or what you ate, or how you ate it, its coming out anyway.
But what is already in your heart is coming anyway too, so be aware, and check yourself.!!

Why did this topic even come up to Jesus? What does "all meats" mean? Just a FYI... Meats in that passage deals with all meats fit for human consumption.. Lev puts a band on the ones God said wasnt "fit" for eating.

[Beck]

krazeeboi said:

Two words come to mind here: lawful and expedient.

How so Krazee?

[krazeeboi]

It means just because I might have the liberty to do something doesn't always mean it's wise to exercise that liberty.

[stillfocused]

LANL..please check your pm

[Beck]

krazeeboi said:

It means just because I might have the liberty to do something doesn't always mean it's wise to exercise that liberty.

But thats the point... do we really have the liberty to eat anything we desire?

[Beck]

Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, 2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. 7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: 11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man. 12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying? 13 But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. 14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. 15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable. 16 And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? 17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? 18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the 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 unwashen hands defileth not a man.


What is this passage talking about?

[krazeeboi]

elderbeck said:

krazeeboi said:

It means just because I might have the liberty to do something doesn't always mean it's wise to exercise that liberty.

But thats the point... do we really have the liberty to eat anything we desire?

I think we find the answer in the account of Peter's vision in Acts 10.

[Beck]

krazeeboi said:

elderbeck said:

But thats the point... do we really have the liberty to eat anything we desire?

I think we find the answer in the account of Peter's vision in Acts 10.

Are you referring to Acts 10:9-45? a couple of points..First off I would like to give you credit because it was several talks with you that pushed me to look into context and not just taking everything at face value... I thank God for that! Having said that here are a few points about Peter's vision:

(1) Peter, even in vision, refused to eat unclean meats.

(2) He said he had NEVER done so, which proves he never did so during his three and one-half years’ experiences with Jesus Christ in the flesh.

(3) Peter was told, as a result of his refusal to eat unclean meats, not to CALL ANY MAN "UNCLEAN."

(4) He was NOT told to quit calling MEATS unclean!

(5) Peter learned that God was not a respecter of PERSONS; nothing was said whatsoever about changing the laws of clean and unclean meats.

(6) This occurred YEARS after the death, burial and resurrection of Christ; YEARS after Christ ascended to heaven! Anything which was "New" Testament in nature was long since in place, yet Peter still insisted that he had never eaten unclean meats!

His statement that he had NEVER eaten unclean things bears logical scrutiny. Clearly, Jesus Christ never said one word to His disciples during His earthly ministry about changing the laws concerning unclean meats. Had He done so, (and He had hundreds of opportunities), Peter would have learned long previously, directly from Christ, that pork and shellfish were clean.

Why would Jesus Christ wait for YEARS after the resurrection, and then, through an enigmatic vision, show Peter that it was alright to eat pork? Why only Peter? Why did not ALL the disciples receive the same vision, if that was the purpose of the vision? Clearly, the purpose of the vision was understood by Peter, and was immediately confirmed by his meeting with Cornelius and other gentiles; his witnessing to them, and God’s forgiveness and mercy extended to them by sending His Holy Spirit to convert them! There is not the slightest hint in this passage of scripture that God ever changed His laws concerning unclean meats.

[keita]

AMEN, my brother, AMEN!!!!!

HALLELUJAH!!!

(More and more these days, it's sound teaching that makes me want to get my praise on!)

Every WORD of GOD'S LAW was and is, already, and ever will be, PERFECT. Not Father, Son, nor Holy Spirit would or ever have changed a word of it.

GOD'S LAW IS ALL AND ALWAYS GOOD!

In many ways, Jesus' perfectly keeping The Law was the very measure of, and essential to His sinless life and qualification as the perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world. I believe that same perfection was both established as and yet remains the mark toward which the Body of Christ, whose members are instructed to "present your bodies, a living sacrifice..." (Romans 12:1), is empowered to press.

For me, Jesus makes His position on and relationship to The Law so very clear with His words in Matthew 5:

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

and breaks it on down in Matthew 22:

37 Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang ALL THE LAW[/i][/b] (emphasis mine) and the prophets.[/i][/b]


With regard to so many scriptural matters like this topic, I think we have, especially as "Christians", confused "fulfilled" and "done away with".

I believe that has been and continues to be to our detriment, both individually and corporately.

In other words, just because God won't immediately cast me into eternal fire for putting a shrimp or sparerib in my mouth, (Thank you, Jesus!), doesn't mean He's pleased when I do... even in moderation.


Did anybody check out this link? It's from the banner at the top of this page.

[Beck]

That link is just awesome sister Keita... Thanks for posting it.

[krazeeboi]

Good points guys, but here's my problem with that. If I hold that the dietary sections of the Law are still in force, then everything about the Law is still in force, including the parts of about women on their period, mixing fabrics, etc. If I keep one part of the Law, I'm obligated to the entire thing. What do you guys say about that?

[auneeqsol]

I say that's the word and also I look at this:

This is what the word says:

Gal 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

Gal 3:25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.


That's why the scripture says that Jesus came to FULFILL the law, bring this thing all together so we can enter into relationship and see what the will of God is for our lives. Like others have said, just because we can do a thing we have to see what works with our body.

But as far as the account in acts goes

Acts 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.

Because of the work that Christ did on the cross we are now free, we operate in a totally different way, not to say that God changed, but as far as us being Gentiles, we were not under any dietary law, we were never taught that, and so the laws and rituals do not apply per se to us. Now we can choose to follow them because they are principles,. Now I dont mean the 10 commandments or something, I mean like the ceremonial laws, and the dietary laws and so forth.

When Jesus came he presented the law of love. And in that there is a whole lot. Where there was no compassion, now there is,
Where there was no grace now there is. He bridged the gaps.

[keita]

krazeeboi said:

If I hold that the dietary sections of the Law are still in force, then everything about the Law is still in force, including the parts of about women on their period, mixing fabrics, etc. If I keep one part of the Law, I'm obligated to the entire thing. What do you guys say about that?

As a new covenant believer who (nevertheless) therefore holds that neither God's Law nor our obligation to it has (yet) passed away, I say that you have spoken rightly! Then I would say that is precisely why I Bless God For Jesus and Thank Him for Holy Spirit.

Hope Egan is the author of (what I found to be) a really good and wonderfully balanced book on the dietary laws and new covenant believers. Our journeys of discovery have been quite similar. Here's an excerpt from her book, Holy Cow! Does God Care What We Eat?:

"In the churches I have attended, “fellowship” is often synonymous with “eating,” but I have rarely heard the topic of food addressed from the pulpit. When I hear it discussed on Christian radio, the teachers make it clear that God does not care about what we eat. They cite verses like Matthew 6:25, where Jesus tells His disciples not to worry about what to eat or drink. But is that possible? Could God really not have an opinion about an activity that every human being must do several times a day? Does the Bible address every aspect of life, including birth, death, marriage, sex, work and money, but forget this one?

Most people have heard about Noah and the great flood that destroyed most of the earth’s life forms. In preparation for the downpour, Noah took only two of each animal onto the ark with him, right? Wrong. God actually tells Noah: You shall take with you of every clean animal by sevens, a male and his female; and of the animals that are not clean two, a male and his female. (Genesis 7:2)

While God did tell Noah to take one pair of each unclean animal, Noah was actually told to collect seven pairs of the clean ones.

What can we discern from this little-recognized fact? The distinction between clean and unclean animals appeared long before the existence of the Jewish people or the laws of the Covenant. In fact, since the flood occurred nearly 1,000 years before the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai , the distinction between clean and unclean animals appears to have universal application. It is not just a Jewish thing.

God’s design for marriage, for money stewardship, for servant leadership—it seems like God has wisdom for every subject imaginable. Following God’s Word in these matters brings good results. This makes me wonder: why did God designate some animals as clean and other as unclean? Is pork’s compatibility with the human digestive system really any different from cows’? Or did He just flip a coin to determine which would be which? Are the commands set forth in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 arbitrary? Or is there some kind of hidden wisdom in the dietary laws that we have overlooked?

Many traditional interpretations—both Christian and Jewish—claim that there is no rhyme or reason for God’s classification system. But this perspective implies that God essentially pulled names out of a hat when deciding how to categorize His many creatures. It also implies that our bodies, which He carefully designed, are totally indifferent to what we ingest.

I don’t buy it!

It is no surprise that Jesus obeyed God’s Word and therefore ate only clean animals. What about His contemporaries? Were they secretly hankering for baby back ribs or shrimp scampi? Probably not.

To any Torah-observant person of Jesus’ day, eating an animal that God designated as unclean would be abhorrent. Think about it. How do we react when another culture eats dogs, cats or horses—animals that we do not consider food? How much more repulsed would we be knowing that God’s Word also condemns it! Even during the early first century, when several different sects of Judaism (such as the Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes and the Way) each interpreted the Scriptures differently, they all agreed that only those animals designated fit for human consumption per the Scriptures would be considered food. Knowing that Jesus and His disciples likely followed Leviticus 11’s definition of food sheds some light on early first-century life.

Christian theologians have written reams of articles, books, commentaries and Bible footnotes about why Leviticus 11 is not applicable to believers. Before we examine the food-specific verses that they cite, let’s look at three general phrases that are often used to set aside the entire Torah (the Law): “Messiah fulfilled the Law,” “We are no longer under Law, we are under grace,” and “Messiah is the end of the Law.”

Could the original meaning of these three verses be different than what most of Christianity has historically taught? Here are some alternative interpretations to ponder.

It is clear to me that I don’t have to follow the Hebrew Scriptures’ laws as a means to gain right-standing before God. However, as part of my response to His loving presence in my life, and my desire to follow Him with my heart, mind, body and soul, I am excited to investigate His Word—all 66 books—to discover how He wants me to live.

Did you know that the Bible prohibits eating certain fats? In recent years, Atkins proponents have proclaimed the end of the “low-fat/no-fat” era. But perhaps there is biblical wisdom to avoiding certain fats.

So where does this leave my vegetarian friends?

As they raised me, my parents had two goals: to love me and to teach me to love others. But they did not ignore what I ate, since it was an integral part of loving me. Left to my own devices, I would have eaten only pizza and grilled cheese sandwiches. Thankfully, Mom had better ideas, and her annoying pleas to “eat your vegetables” contributed to my well-being. If Mom’s wisdom for my food choices was good for me, how much more so is the wisdom that comes directly from the Creator of anatomy, botany and zoology? God’s love for us is immeasurable, so He has carefully crafted both our bodies and the fuel for them.

When I read the Bible as a whole, I see a God who cares about the details of how we live our lives—including what we eat."