"All things are lawful..."

[Brakelite]

Do you want christians to eat Kosha?
The apostles in acts do not agree with you.
Their discussion about gentiles upon whom the Holy Spirit fell where blessed by God but not clean in the ceremonial or food ways.
The dream Peter had about what God had made clean is not clean, was taken to mean all the identifying symbols of being Jewish were not gone.
Paul argued about the Sabbath being something of personal preference, rather than obligation. He went so far as to say food sacrificed to idols was actually just food as the idols were just pieces of stone, so it did not matter.

This is the position of the church since that time, so it is simple and plainly not dishonest or a lie.
If you personally want to eat Kosher, thats fine, but Paul teaches we are under no obligations in this regard.
Paul says simple love is the fulfilment of the law, so walking in love is obeying the commandments.
As a Pharisee, one of the most legalistic who wanted to kill christians before his encounter with Jesus, he is 100% the right person to set people free from Jewish traditions and practices.

God bless you

To follow your reasoning one must believe that the same loving God Who defined specifically to Noah and no doubt Adam and Eve and later Israel, what was good and healthy food and ideal for consumption... That is food...became an uncaring parent who allows His children to eat whatever they lust for. I say that God must have changed according to your belief because what is actually good for eating and what isn't good for eating hasn't changed. Science has since proven that those things which God called an abomination, does in fact kill you, whether through direct poisoning such as in shellfish, or indirect such as cancers inherent in pork and tobacco. The list of abominable food is endless.
EDIT. BTW. There is no such thing described in the bible as unclean food. If anything was described as unclean or common, it was never intended for consumption.

 

[face2face]

This goes along with being a new creation. You are entirely new, now entirely from God, no longer Adamic, no longer of the flesh.

Much love!

Certainly by promise!..but not yet the reality.

 

[quietthinker]

"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient/edify not".​

A popular interpretation of this is that "all things" include sin, for which the Christian will only suffer a loss of a few jewels in his crown of life, but not suffer loss of eternal life...the "carnal Christian", as identified by Dr. Charles Stanley. A similar verse is found in 2 Corinthians 5:18 KJV:

"All things are of God..."​

So, is adultery, theft, lying, Satan worship, etc., "of God" and we may freely engage in such? No, as the previous verse 17 qualifies verse 18:

"If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature.
Old things are passed away,
behold all things have become new."​

Does that mean "God's old opinion of our sin has passed away, and His new, tolerant, condoning, indulgent opinion toward our sin has replaced it" as many Christians cling to as an unprosperous cover for their presumptuous sins, of which they refuse to confess and forsake? Anyone can see it's referring to both our thinking and our actions, which become upright and holy by virtue of the "law of a new creature in Christ Jesus".

It's easy to see what "all things" refers to in verse 18 because the qualifier is right there in verse 17. However, sometimes we must look elsewhere to qualify a text in front of us, such as "All things are lawful for me...":

Galatians 5:19-21 KJV
[19] Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these ; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
[20] Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
[21] Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Could it be that God's love eclipses all rebellion from woe to go?....or has the expression 'God's love' worn thin and lost its meaning?
No, I'm not saying we have a license to sin, I am saying that God desires we trust he has our back ie, the back of sinners.

I know, I know, those who insist on contributing to their Salvation by their activity will also insist that they can impress God by their 'style'....and that they must.......which at a base level means they do not trust God can do what he says he would......they want some of the glory even though putting it in those terms would be denied.

If our best, our good works are deemed as filthy rags.....what are we going to do with them? ......insist God must be impressed because we are? Doesn't it tell us something about how we see? Doesn't it tell us about our lack of trust?

 

[Brakelite]

My faith informs me of a number of things.

• If I am faithful into death, I will be resurrected to life.
• If I am yet alive and abiding in Christ when Jesus comes, I will be translated.
• God, in His word, has promised all the power in the universe to all who struggle with sin.
• He has also promised that we may be filled with His righteousness if we have faith and hunger and thirst for it.
• He has also promised to change us into the image of Christ, if we are His and filled with His Spirit.
• He declares in His word that we are new creatures. Old things, such as bondage to sin, addictions, and evil habits, are passed away being a part of that old man that was crucified with Jesus.
• We have the power to raise up that dead old man, and return to the vomit and ugliness of our old life. We are free agents... We choose to sin, God hasn't taken that free will away.
• If we reject Him by surrendering our lives once again to bondage, the free gift of eternal life is relinquished just as Adam relinquished his. There will be no more sacrifice for sin.
• If we do choose to return to the world of sin and rebellion, I am convinced that Jesus will search and search and do everything possible, outside of compelling force, to convince is to return to Him.
• The choice of whether we are saved or lost will ultimately be our own, but I believe that to accomplish a rejection of God's grace to the point of losing our salvation, goes way beyond mere return to a life of sin, but rather must constitute a determined heart felt deliberate resistance to the grace of God, saying, I will not have this man to reign over me.
• Finally, believing that Christ does, through the grace of God by His death and resurrection, make it possible for me to cease from sin, and to encourage others to accept the same, is not a legalistic religion, but is an act of faith.

Our salvation does not depend on our maintaining a relationship with God, it depends on our believing that He stands at the door and knocks, seeking always to maintain that relationship with us, unless we break it off.
If anyone is saved at last, it will be due to God's initiative, from first to last. Of anyone is lost at last, it will be their own initiative. Jeremiah 31:3 John 3:16-19.

 

[WalkInLight]

To follow your reasoning one must believe that the same loving God Who defined specifically to Noah and no doubt Adam and Eve and later Israel, what was good and healthy food and ideal for consumption... That is food...became an uncaring parent who allows His children to eat whatever they lust for. I say that God must have changed according to your belief because what is actually good for eating and what isn't good for eating hasn't changed. Science has since proven that those things which God called an abomination, does in fact kill you, whether through direct poisoning such as in shellfish, or indirect such as cancers inherent in pork and tobacco. The list of abominable food is endless.
EDIT. BTW. There is no such thing described in the bible as unclean food. If anything was described as unclean or common, it was never intended for consumption.

Here is the difference between advice to a nation and advice to the individual.
Good food is a good idea, and the Lord laid out principles that Israel had to follow as their identity of Gods people.
At this point the whole could not be broken into its parts of good advice and that which is spiritual relationship orientated.

The shift of identity from being part of Israel to be saved to knowing Jesus is a major change.
AD70 and sacrifices for sin stopped, because the temple was destroyed.

The new covenant with an indwelling Holy Spirit was a big change, taking identity from the national level to the believer level.
Gods law written on peoples hearts, not exercised through the written word and explained by priests and festivals through the year.

Paul was very insistent, this change was eternal, and personal, a whole different level of communion.
So the question is what is cleansing and holiness today? It is in the heart and how we dwell in love and grace.

Jesus says simply what comes out of the heart makes us unclean not what we eat.
Jesus showed emphasis was most important where the small things matter but the larger issues relating to relationships and love are much more important. So gaining communion with the Lord through the Holy Spirit comes first, and healthy behaviours second.

Paul talked about the Sabbath rest in Christ, meaning it is eternal, we are resting in His grace, so keeping 1 day a week was our freedom to choose not something we had to be sensitive about. In truth 1 day a week break keeps me sane, and it essential to coping with life. It is why the world follows this schedule because it works for us as humans.

Jesus's heart expression is in the two greatest commandments, to love God with everything we are and to love our neighbours as we love ourselves. Though in Christ we are free from observance, reminding ourselves of the blessing we have every day is very important.

God bless you

 

[Phoneman777]

Could it be that God's love eclipses all rebellion from woe to go?....or has the expression 'God's love' worn thin and lost its meaning?
No, I'm not saying we have a license to sin, I am saying that God desires we trust he has our back ie, the back of sinners.

Is that why He gave us marriage - to teach us that "love" eclipses all infidelity, neglect, even physical and emotional spousal abuse?

Can't understand how it is that the same "Christians" who divorce a cheating spouse and remarry before the ink has a chance to dry insist a "relationship" with God must include continued unfaithfulness to Him because "we can't keep the law" -- as if some unseen gun is being held to their head everytime the devil comes around dangling his temptations. What do you think?

 

[Brakelite]

Jesus says simply what comes out of the heart makes us unclean not what we eat.

Okay, I'm going to stop you there and won't bother with the Sabbath part, I suspect it's be the same irrelevant context as the above...no-one is suggesting that what we eat makes us unclean... Jesus didn't teach that eating makes is unclean, that was a Jewish concept and a wrong one. They thought the diet was merely a religious exercise, thinking that by following it they were righteous and holy...and if they ignored it, they became unclean. Here you are advocating the same idea...a wrong one. Gd didn't give anyonea true diet, explaining what was good and what was bad, as an arbitrary religious exercise, but as a matter of literal physical life and death. Eat this crap and you will die young. I see you are from London. I have never been there, but would I be correct of I suggested that they health problems plaguing the British people is similar to that affecting the whole western world? Diabetes... Heart issues... Early onset dementia... Weight problems...organ failure... Cancers of all types? You know what the base problem is don't you. Diet. To much crap and ignoring the Manufacturers instructions. Please don't tell me or anyone else that prayer and the sacrifice of Calvary changes the nature of poisonous animal products such as unclean birds, reptiles, crab meat, lobsters, ham and bacon.

 

[Phoneman777]

That, however, misses the point of the problem with idols.

That point being that it is against God--a sin against God; and although there is no power in such that one should be fearful, the danger is in leading others to believe what is not true. Which if it had been stated as "common", it would not be error to elaborate it as an "unclean" matter before a perfect and jealous God. The different use of words, is simply a mute point. It's semantics and of no value to the message to point out.

I dare say, I should think that semantics was not your intended Original Point.

Let's focus on the problem: the proper translation of "koinos".

If the KJV translators had correctly chosen "common", no problem.
But since they chose "unclean", we do have a problem: is pork now OK? Let's examine the evidence:

1) no record of anyone eating anything unclean in the NT
2) Jesus never once told Peter or anyone else unclean animals will soon be fit fare
3) Peter's refusal to eat anything unclean shows he believed his loyalty to the prohibition was being tested
4) Peter eventually understood the vision had to do with ethnicity, not eats
5) Isaiah says pork and mice eaters will be burned up with idolaters at the fiery Second Coming

So, the Biblical evidence points to the proper interpretation of "koinos" as "common", not "unclean" - and science has confirmed God's wise choice to prohibit the consumption of unclean meat: it will cause serious illness or kill you.

Concerning "harmless idolatry", sure a clean lambchop is still clean after being sacrificed to idols because Paul said, based on the above evidence, that there's nothing "common of itself"... but Paul, again, was concerned about evangelism and that if eating such a lambchop threatened the success of their evangelism, it was best to not eat it.

 

[WalkInLight]

Okay, I'm going to stop you there and won't bother with the Sabbath part, I suspect it's be the same irrelevant context as the above...no-one is suggesting that what we eat makes us unclean... Jesus didn't teach that eating makes is unclean, that was a Jewish concept and a wrong one. They thought the diet was merely a religious exercise, thinking that by following it they were righteous and holy...and if they ignored it, they became unclean. Here you are advocating the same idea...a wrong one. Gd didn't give anyonea true diet, explaining what was good and what was bad, as an arbitrary religious exercise, but as a matter of literal physical life and death. Eat this crap and you will die young. I see you are from London. I have never been there, but would I be correct of I suggested that they health problems plaguing the British people is similar to that affecting the whole western world? Diabetes... Heart issues... Early onset dementia... Weight problems...organ failure... Cancers of all types? You know what the base problem is don't you. Diet. To much crap and ignoring the Manufacturers instructions. Please don't tell me or anyone else that prayer and the sacrifice of Calvary changes the nature of poisonous animal products such as unclean birds, reptiles, crab meat, lobsters, ham and bacon.

If you won't bother then you have nothing really to say other than agreeing with my points.
So thankyou for agreeing.

The difference between the law and Jesus is an important one, which you are not addressing.
But maybe this is the point, this difference is hard to understand and summarise.

Across denominations it has split believers from dispensationalists, free grace believers, hyper grace believers, calvanists, armenians, Seventh Day Adventists, JW's, rcc, reformed, charismatics etc. So this subject is vast and small differences have major implications when worked out.

Pauls foundation is his encounter with Jesus and having love blow his life apart.
I argue a lot, and want to define things well. Except this does not work in the Kingdom, because you cannot reduce everything, it is intertwinned and living. How can you look one place, and find certain emphases, and then look elsewhere and find a different set. It is the nature of who God is and how love works.

For me this is walking with sight and love at the front and letting this guide and work through encounters and issues, as a celebration of sharing life one with another, rather than everything has a purpose and a series of conclusions.

So this interaction hopefully will encourage you more in Christ, and desire to know and express Him and His ways more. It certainly has this affect on me,

God bless you

 

[quietthinker]

Is that why He gave us marriage - to teach us that "love" eclipses all infidelity, neglect, even physical and emotional spousal abuse?

Can't understand how it is that the same "Christians" who divorce a cheating spouse and remarry before the ink has a chance to dry insist a "relationship" with God must include continued unfaithfulness to Him because "we can't keep the law" -- as if some unseen gun is being held to their head everytime the devil comes around dangling his temptations. What do you think?

let me ask this; do you keep the Law?

 

[Enoch111]

This is a completely dishonest reading of Paul's words, and it has become predictable for adherents of counterfeit Christianity to use these passages as "proof" that Christ abolished the kosher law.

You are the one who is dishonestly calling a plain understanding of what is stated in the New Testament as "dishonest". There are absolutely no dietary laws for Christians, and you should not falsely accuse others of dishonesty. So just to keep you honest, I will post the passage that makes this clear.

1 TIMOTHY 3: ALL MEATS MAY BE EATEN BY CHRISTIANS
1. Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. 4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: 5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

This passage is self-explanatory and in line with what Christ taught about what defiles a man. It is not food which goes into the stomach but what comes out of that man's heart.

So will we see an honest apology from you?

 

[quietthinker]

So will we see an honest apology from you?

I see you hold him to the moral Law, Enoch

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Certainly, these two were among them and is why Isaiah says a fiery fate awaits those who willfully eat pigs and mice while convinced they shouldn't.

I do get your saying if the conscience says don’t eat, then don’t eat. But my perspective of that verse from Isaiah is different from yours. Isaiah 66:17-20. First) as I pointed out about behind one tree in the midst, for me was never addressed. Second) the passages moves on to “those that escape” “I will send to the nations, to those who are afar off who have not seen my glory, they (that escape) shall declare (Christ) among the Gentiles. Which to me contradicts the timing suggested of God showing up in the end to burn those who drink swines blood. Because they were sent to the Gentiles to declare Christ.

Concerning swines blood …I wonder what Christ was given to drink in the cup? We say “he drank of our sin” “he drank down Gods wrath for us” “he drank of the abomination” so with much talk about “swines blood” I’m staring to wonder exactly what it was Jesus Christ drank of? It says he pleaded not to drink of it. That he sweated in sight of facing this cup. And that in his thirst they gave him gall and bitterness to drink. Swines blood? I get that may sound like an abomination to think Jesus Christ drank of swines blood? To me, no more than “he drank of our sin”

3) as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the Lord.

There is only one way I can think of a vessel being clean to bring an offering into the house of the Lord. And (to me) it is not by calling that which Jesus died for unclean. All things are lawful…but not all things edify. Still for me I wonder why “but not all things edify” is never discussed but dropped off.
1 Corinthians 14:3-4 But he that prophesieth speaks unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. [4] He that speaks in an unknown tongue edifies himself; but he that prophesieth edifies the church.
^Where has it gone? Am I missing it? Are those just a bunch of empty words?

 

[marks]

Certainly by promise!..but not yet the reality.

The Bible speaks of this as reality.

Romans 6:3-12 KJV
3) Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4) Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5) For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6) Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7) For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8) Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
9) Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
10) For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
11) Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
12) Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.

Our old man is crucified with Him. The purpose of that crucifixion is to destroy the power of our flesh, so that we will no longer serve sin.

We've been freed from sin. But unless our believing matches this truth, we will live as though the flesh and sin still have power. So God tells us to reckon ourselves dead indeed to sin, but alive unto God. Reckoning ourselves dead aligns us with this truth.

Much love!

 

[ScottA]

Let's focus on the problem: the proper translation of "koinos".

If the KJV translators had correctly chosen "common", no problem.
But since they chose "unclean", we do have a problem: is pork now OK? Let's examine the evidence:

1) no record of anyone eating anything unclean in the NT
2) Jesus never once told Peter or anyone else unclean animals will soon be fit fare
3) Peter's refusal to eat anything unclean shows he believed his loyalty to the prohibition was being tested
4) Peter eventually understood the vision had to do with ethnicity, not eats
5) Isaiah says pork and mice eaters will be burned up with idolaters at the fiery Second Coming

So, the Biblical evidence points to the proper interpretation of "koinos" as "common", not "unclean" - and science has confirmed God's wise choice to prohibit the consumption of unclean meat: it will cause serious illness or kill you.

Concerning "harmless idolatry", sure a clean lambchop is still clean after being sacrificed to idols because Paul said, based on the above evidence, that there's nothing "common of itself"... but Paul, again, was concerned about evangelism and that if eating such a lambchop threatened the success of their evangelism, it was best to not eat it.

If that is your focus...you are indeed missing the point.

The point of any worldly law of God (food or otherwise) is not worldly, but heavenly. These things do not point to words or their translations, or the practices of men, but point to that narrow path of cleanliness in Christ who is without spot. And for this reason those laws were made void, as actually having no power in and of themselves. Peter may not have released such fare to be eaten, but Paul did (with the exception that it not cause a brother to stumble--which was the point all along--that being salvation, the saving of the soul, not so much the health of the body).

What may indeed kill the body is not the point.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

If that is your focus...you are indeed missing the point.

The point of any worldly law of God (food or otherwise) is not worldly, but heavenly. These things do not point to words or their translations, or the practices of men, but point to that narrow path of cleanliness in Christ who is without spot. And for this reason those laws were made void, as actually having no power in and of themselves. Peter may not have released such fare to be eaten, but Paul did (with the exception that it not cause a brother to stumble--which was the point all along--that being salvation, the saving of the soul, not so much the heath of the body).

What may indeed kill the body is not the point.

the air today I breathe being filled with all sorts of unclean contaminants and toxins may seriously be killing me, but as hard as I may try, I can’t stop breathing. I like how you put it …to me it helps because it takes the focus off how long can I keep this decaying body from doing what it is doing every day. and what hope is there in “the health of the body” which to me all along has possibly meant a different kind of “health of the body” to be desired, that health I long for. I’m not sure I have it. But I desire Proverbs 3:5-8 Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. [6] In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. [7] Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil. [8] It shall be health to thy navel, and marrow to thy bones.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The power to escape WHAT punishment?

Punishment for sins from which we repent and "sin no more"? Absolutely!

Punishment for habitual, deliberate, known, presumptuous, impenitent sins which means "sins from which we permanently choose to not repent"? Solomon in Proverbs 28:13 KJV says NO WAY.

What punishment? Eternity in the lake of fire. we may still experience the consequences of sin in this life, but God is done with HIs anger towards us if and when we fail. He punished Jesus in our place-

 

[Behold]

I don't get angry with those in error, I feel sorry for them. That's why I bear long with you, friend! I

Your level of patience, or lack of it, has nothing to do with me.
Listen, You dont trust Christ to keep you saved.
So, your faith is null and void.
Understand? You have broken faith, dead faith, that is not related to real Trust in Jesus, but is absolutely related to trying to stay saved, and trying not to lose your Salvation. And that is LEGALISM, that is disconnected from God's Grace.
THats a fact.
If you actually trusted Christ, I would not be having a discussion with you that points out that you dont actually have real faith in Christ.
So, you have nothing you can offer me, not doctrinally, not theologically..... as you are not a student of Paul, which means you are not a true student of the NT.
Like many...You think you are a real student of the NT, and that is your problem...one of them.

 

[amigo de christo]

All things are lawful for me , DONT INCLUDE SIN . Only meats drinks and days . Till the church figures this one out
its only in dire and deadly grave danger . JESUS aint a license to SIN . SIN aint lawful , never has been , never will .
But meats , drinks and days are up to the indvidual . FOR neither if i eat meat nor abstain from meat am i the better
Neither if i honor a certain day above another or honors all days alike am i the better .
BUT SIN is TRANSGRESSION . meats drinks and days are not sin in and of themselves . IT IS SIN for a man to eat with offence .
But that is cause he dont eat of faith . Paul knew that well . SEE paul knew he could eat by prayer whatever was set before him .
HE also knew , however if a man beleived it wrong to eat such a meat then that man ought not to eat .
THIS , HOWEVER , DONT apply TO SIN .

 

[Behold]

Bro, I assure you, I'm well versed in the truth of Historicism, as well as the error or your Jesuit Futurism. Here's a bit of advice: since Jesus said in the last days deception would be served up morning, noon, and night,

The biggest deceivers on this Forum, believe you can lose your salvation, and they obsess on commandment keeping, water baptism, self effort (works), and OSAS.
Every one of them, you included, have no understanding of the Grace of God, as a FREE GIFT.
Every one of you, believes you have to keep yourself saved by doing something or by not not doing something.
And THAT,= self saving.... fallen from Grace, theology, has no real faith in Christ.
See, its impossible to have real faith in Christ if you do not believe that CHRIST who is our Salvation, keeps you saved.
All who do not trust in Christ to keep you saved., obsess on OSAS, and live in James, Hebrews, and Matthew.