Was Peter’S Vision About Food Or About Men?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Eccl.12:13

New Member
Aug 28, 2010
558
10
0
Matthew 15:10-11
And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man."



You see!!!!! This is why I posted TWO lessons. Because there are always some that will try to use the above scripture to TRY to do away with God's dietary laws. Now you know I have a lesson posted PROVING that at no point was anyone questioning WHAT was being eaten!

At NO POINT was Jesus ever talking about His Dietary laws!

For those that may not have read my other lesson, let's read what it REALLY was that was being spoken about;

Here's the short version;

Matt.15
[1] 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.

Clearly the topic being discussed here is NOT about food. The problem the Pharisees have with Jesus disciples is the fact that they are eating bread without washing their hands. Let’s confirm this;

Mark 7
[1] Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.
[2] And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.

Again we see the problem is not with WHAT they are eating, but with the fact that the disciples are not washing their hands. Now let’s look at the 2[sup]nd[/sup] verse closer;

“And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.”

Above we were just given the definition of “defiled”, according to the context of this verse. Defiled - “that is to say, with unwashen hands.” At NO point was their discussion EVER about food. Now let’s confirm it just one more time;

[3] For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.

So ALL of the Jews held the practice of washing their hands “oft”, or often, or they did not eat their food. Now was this a tradition of God? NO! Just as the verse said; “holding the tradition of the elders.” So this was NOT something that God told them must be done. This was a tradition of “man”. Now let’s read to see if it was just the washing of hands that had become a tradition of the “elders”.

[4] And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.

So it wasn’t just hand washing they were consumed with. The Jews of the day had made a big deal about washing EVERYTHING!

But at what point is FOOD ever mentioned?

Can the scriptures be any more clear on the topic of conversation of the Pharisees and the problem they had with Jesus disciples?

“Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.”

Can the scriptures be any more plain about how the word “defiled” is used?

“…some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands,…”

So please bud02,

Do NOT try to use what Jesus said to justify what you are TRYING to imply! As a matter of fact, let's read the REST of what Jesus said.....


Now that we know the subject of the conversation AND the definition of the word “defiled”, as used in the context of the verse, let’s now read Jesus reply;

Matt.15
[11] Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

We know the subject here is about, “unwashed hands”. So is Jesus speaking about the type of food being consumed, or the fact that a man eating with unwashed hands does not harm him? The answer is obvious. Jesus is speaking about the very thing the Jews of the day had made a big deal about, the washing of hands. But let’s confirm this. Let’s see if Jesus told His disciples something different when they came to Him in private about the same matter;

[12] Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?


It seem the Pharisees got a little upset when Jesus put them in their place and said all of their tradition of washing everything meant nothing. Let’s continue;

[15] Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
[16] And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?

Understand that Peter and the rest of the disciples had been doing all of these “washing” traditions also, so they wanted to know just what did Jesus mean when he said what He said. Let’s read;

[17] Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

So the things that go into a man’s mouth are expelled.


[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:

But it’s what comes out of the mind that defiles man; evil thoughts, murders, adulteries etc. Now let’s read Jesus answer concerning the subject of unwashed hands;

[20] These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

Again….eating with unwashed hands does not defileth a man.

Now at what point did Jesus say ANYTHING about His dietary laws being done away with? At what point did Jesus say anything about ANY food?

The subject matter from the very start was about unwashed hands, and that is how Jesus ended and answered the question.
 

Xanderoc

New Member
Sep 10, 2010
125
1
0
You may want to clear up this misunderstanding with Moses as well. They were spoken.

Now note carefully that the following scripture is the very verse before the Ten Commandments. Exodus 20:1 “And God spoke all these words, saying.” So who spoke and gave them? God or Moses? Clearly they were spoken by God and you will also note from the scriptures below that they were also personally written by the finger of God. So we find the Ten Commandments were both spoken and written first by God Himself.


[sup]Det 4-1[/sup]Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the LORD God of your fathers giveth you. [sup]2[/sup]Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

[sup]3[/sup]Your eyes have seen what the LORD did because of Baalpeor: for all the men that followed Baalpeor, the LORD thy God hath destroyed them from among you.

[sup]4[/sup]But ye that did cleave unto the LORD your God are alive every one of you this day.

[sup]5[/sup]Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the LORD my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it.

[sup]6[/sup]Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.

[sup]7[/sup]For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is in all things that we call upon him for?

[sup]8[/sup]And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?

[sup]9[/sup]Only take heed to thyself, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life: but teach them thy sons, and thy sons' sons;

[sup]10[/sup]Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children.

[sup]11[/sup]And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the midst of heaven, with darkness, clouds, and thick darkness.

[sup]12[/sup]And the LORD spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice.

[sup]13[/sup]And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

[sup]14[/sup]And the LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it.

[sup]15[/sup]Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire:

bud 02 God's holy commandments were not added 430 years later. They have been around before man was on this planet!!! Satan got kicked out of heaven for his iniquity (sin)!!! Read Ezekiel 28 that will tell you that.
The law that was added 430 years later was the sacrificial law, I will show you through the scriptures.
let's start with sin's definition 1 Jn 3:4 [sup]4[/sup]Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
Now lets see what Israel agreed to.
Deut. 4: [sup]10[/sup]Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children. [sup]11[/sup]And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the midst of heaven, with darkness, clouds, and thick darkness.

[sup]12[/sup]And the LORD spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice.

[sup]13[/sup]And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

So the first covenant was the ten commandments. Now the people agreed to this covenant.

Ex. 24: [sup]3[/sup]And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do.



So the people agreed to the covenant the law, the ten commandments. Now we will read in Hebrews what law changed, and what law still stands unto this day!!!
Hebrews 8:
[sup]7[/sup]For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
[sup]8[/sup]For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:


God said he found fault with the people!! Notice the New Covenant!!!! What is it, has something changed?


[sup]9[/sup]Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

[sup]10[/sup]For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Now God says He will put His same laws into the mind of the people. So again I asked what was changed? Lets see !!! Read


Heb 7:


[sup]11[/sup]If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

What Law did the people receive under the Levitical priesthood? The SACRIFICIAL LAW!!!

[sup]12[/sup]For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

THE SACRIFICIAL LAW CAME WITH THE PRIESTHOOD!!!!!
The Levitical priesthood, and the sacrificial law was added 430 later spoken by Paul in Gal 3


[sup]13[/sup]For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

[sup]14[/sup]For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

[sup]15[/sup]And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,

[sup]16[/sup]Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. The law of carnal commandment is the sacrificial law!!!


We know the royal commandment were not carnal Rom 8: [sup]4[/sup]That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

[sup]5[/sup]For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

[sup]6[/sup]For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

[sup]7[/sup]Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

Paul goes unto saying in Rom 7: [sup]10[/sup]And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
The law, the commandment was ordained to life. The law, sacrificial law was carnal and nailed to the cross!!!!

Why do you think when Jesus died in Matthew 27:


[sup]50[/sup]Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

[sup]51[/sup]And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

This is when the law that Paul spoke about was nail to the cross!!!!! THAT WAS THE SACRIFICIAL LAW!!!! THAT WAS THE LAW ADDED AFTER 430 LATER. JESUS CHANGED THAT LAW!!!!!!

Heb 7:


[sup]17[/sup]For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

[sup]18[/sup]For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

[sup]19[/sup]For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.


So I ask again... What Law was dis annulled that was weak and unprofitable? THE SACRIFICIAL LAW!!! VS 19 The sacrificial law made nothing perfect!!!!

Heb 10:[sup]1[/sup]For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
 

gregg

New Member
Oct 16, 2009
321
37
0
arab
if you all would ask yourselves how these animals BECAME unclean then you will see Gods cleansing of all creatures :rolleyes: it's when you understand that knowledge prevails to all :D
 

Eccl.12:13

New Member
Aug 28, 2010
558
10
0
bud 02 God's holy commandments were not added 430 years later. They have been around before man was on this planet!!! Satan got kicked out of heaven for his iniquity (sin)!!! Read Ezekiel 28 that will tell you that.
The law that was added 430 years later was the sacrificial law, I will show you through the scriptures.
let's start with sin's definition 1 Jn 3:4 [sup]4[/sup]Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
Now lets see what Israel agreed to.
Deut. 4: [sup]10[/sup]Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children. [sup]11[/sup]And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the midst of heaven, with darkness, clouds, and thick darkness.

[sup]12[/sup]And the LORD spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice.

[sup]13[/sup]And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

So the first covenant was the ten commandments. Now the people agreed to this covenant.

Ex. 24: [sup]3[/sup]And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do.



So the people agreed to the covenant the law, the ten commandments. Now we will read in Hebrews what law changed, and what law still stands unto this day!!!
Hebrews 8:
[sup]7[/sup]For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
[sup]8[/sup]For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:


God said he found fault with the people!! Notice the New Covenant!!!! What is it, has something changed?


[sup]9[/sup]Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

[sup]10[/sup]For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Now God says He will put His same laws into the mind of the people. So again I asked what was changed? Lets see !!! Read


Heb 7:


[sup]11[/sup]If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

What Law did the people receive under the Levitical priesthood? The SACRIFICIAL LAW!!!

[sup]12[/sup]For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

THE SACRIFICIAL LAW CAME WITH THE PRIESTHOOD!!!!!
The Levitical priesthood, and the sacrificial law was added 430 later spoken by Paul in Gal 3


[sup]13[/sup]For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

[sup]14[/sup]For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

[sup]15[/sup]And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,

[sup]16[/sup]Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. The law of carnal commandment is the sacrificial law!!!


We know the royal commandment were not carnal Rom 8: [sup]4[/sup]That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

[sup]5[/sup]For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

[sup]6[/sup]For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

[sup]7[/sup]Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

Paul goes unto saying in Rom 7: [sup]10[/sup]And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
The law, the commandment was ordained to life. The law, sacrificial law was carnal and nailed to the cross!!!!

Why do you think when Jesus died in Matthew 27:


[sup]50[/sup]Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

[sup]51[/sup]And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

This is when the law that Paul spoke about was nail to the cross!!!!! THAT WAS THE SACRIFICIAL LAW!!!! THAT WAS THE LAW ADDED AFTER 430 LATER. JESUS CHANGED THAT LAW!!!!!!

Heb 7:


[sup]17[/sup]For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

[sup]18[/sup]For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

[sup]19[/sup]For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.


So I ask again... What Law was dis annulled that was weak and unprofitable? THE SACRIFICIAL LAW!!! VS 19 The sacrificial law made nothing perfect!!!!

Heb 10:[sup]1[/sup]For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

AMEN to that Xander:

I was going to post something about the Levitical Priesthood, but I see you beat me too it.

If people would only search and try to understand the law that was 'added' and the law that was 'changed' are one in the same, and it was the ONLY laws that was nailed to his cross! ALL of the other are still to be obeyed!

Has anyone ever thought about it?

What law did God add and why?

What law did God change and why?

I have asked over and over again....if you find a law that meets ALL of the following you will have found the law that was nailed to his cross; it failed, God never liked this law, this law could not make the comers there unto perfect, it was only to be around for a short time, it had to be added because of the breaking of God's other laws, and it was changed by God.
 

bud02

New Member
Aug 14, 2010
727
12
0
bud 02 God's holy commandments were not added 430 years later. They have been around before man was on this planet!!! Satan got kicked out of heaven for his iniquity (sin)!!! Read Ezekiel 28 that will tell you that.
The law that was added 430 years later was the sacrificial law, I will show you through the scriptures.
let's start with sin's definition 1 Jn 3:4 [sup]4[/sup]Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
Now lets see what Israel agreed to.
Deut. 4: [sup]10[/sup]Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children. [sup]11[/sup]And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the midst of heaven, with darkness, clouds, and thick darkness.

[sup]12[/sup]And the LORD spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice.

[sup]13[/sup]And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

So the first covenant was the ten commandments. Now the people agreed to this covenant.

Ex. 24: [sup]3[/sup]And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do.



So the people agreed to the covenant the law, the ten commandments. Now we will read in Hebrews what law changed, and what law still stands unto this day!!!
Hebrews 8:
[sup]7[/sup]For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
[sup]8[/sup]For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:


God said he found fault with the people!! Notice the New Covenant!!!! What is it, has something changed?


[sup]9[/sup]Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

[sup]10[/sup]For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Now God says He will put His same laws into the mind of the people. So again I asked what was changed? Lets see !!! Read


Heb 7:


[sup]11[/sup]If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

What Law did the people receive under the Levitical priesthood? The SACRIFICIAL LAW!!!

[sup]12[/sup]For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

THE SACRIFICIAL LAW CAME WITH THE PRIESTHOOD!!!!!
The Levitical priesthood, and the sacrificial law was added 430 later spoken by Paul in Gal 3


[sup]13[/sup]For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

[sup]14[/sup]For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

[sup]15[/sup]And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,

[sup]16[/sup]Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. The law of carnal commandment is the sacrificial law!!!


We know the royal commandment were not carnal Rom 8: [sup]4[/sup]That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

[sup]5[/sup]For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

[sup]6[/sup]For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

[sup]7[/sup]Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

Paul goes unto saying in Rom 7: [sup]10[/sup]And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
The law, the commandment was ordained to life. The law, sacrificial law was carnal and nailed to the cross!!!!

Why do you think when Jesus died in Matthew 27:


[sup]50[/sup]Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

[sup]51[/sup]And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

This is when the law that Paul spoke about was nail to the cross!!!!! THAT WAS THE SACRIFICIAL LAW!!!! THAT WAS THE LAW ADDED AFTER 430 LATER. JESUS CHANGED THAT LAW!!!!!!

Heb 7:


[sup]17[/sup]For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

[sup]18[/sup]For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

[sup]19[/sup]For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.


So I ask again... What Law was dis annulled that was weak and unprofitable? THE SACRIFICIAL LAW!!! VS 19 The sacrificial law made nothing perfect!!!!

Heb 10:[sup]1[/sup]For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

OK I'll give you the point about "added 430 years later" I was thinking you were debating the Law of Moses came first.
So where does that leave our differences. Unchanged IMO the evidence is in the NT. If eccl can agree the Levitical law Priest hood is over where does that leave the law they taught. I don't see or hear any of the Apostles making provision for particular parts of it.. In fact they begin to realize the Levitical law is dead. Along with Abraham's covenant of circumcision.

The bottom line is you believe differently. I and others have produced clear simple language from many verses that say there is no dietary law.
All you and eccl have produced is your interpretation or rendering of your opinion.
 

bud02

New Member
Aug 14, 2010
727
12
0
You see!!!!! This is why I posted TWO lessons. Because there are always some that will try to use the above scripture to TRY to do away with God's dietary laws. Now you know I have a lesson posted PROVING that at no point was anyone questioning WHAT was being eaten!

At NO POINT was Jesus ever talking about His Dietary laws!

For those that may not have read my other lesson, let's read what it REALLY was that was being spoken about;

Here's the short version;

Matt.15
[1] 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.

Clearly the topic being discussed here is NOT about food. The problem the Pharisees have with Jesus disciples is the fact that they are eating bread without washing their hands. Let’s confirm this;

Mark 7
[1] Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.
[2] And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.

Heres the verse
Matthew 15:10-11
And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man."

So then what is it that Jesus puts in His mouth If not to eat. A piece of chew? His unclean hand are no different than a piece of bacon. Unclean.
To say He is not speaking of anything that goes in your mouth is simply denying what the verse says.

You are like many other people that don't accept a clear teaching simply because it does not say don't eat pork shell fish ect.
 

Eccl.12:13

New Member
Aug 28, 2010
558
10
0
Heres the verse
Matthew 15:10-11
And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man."

So then what is it that Jesus puts in His mouth If not to eat. A piece of chew? His unclean hand are no different than a piece of bacon. Unclean.
To say He is not speaking of anything that goes in your mouth is simply denying what the verse says.

You are like many other people that don't accept a clear teaching simply because it does not say don't eat pork shell fish ect.

Did you real ALL of the lesson? The scriptures are VERY clear on WHAT was considered 'defiled' within the context of the verse! Let's read it.....


[2] And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.

Again we see the problem is not with WHAT they are eating, but with the fact that the disciples are not washing their hands. Now let’s look at the 2[sup]nd[/sup] verse closer;

“And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.”

Above we were just given the definition of “defiled”, according to the context of this verse. Defiled - “that is to say, with unwashen hands.” At NO point was their discussion EVER about food.

What was it was that was defiled? "That is to say, with unwashen hand..."! NOT FOOD!!!


Can the scriptures be any more clear?

So what was Jesus saying? He tells us! But you have to read further down in the chapter. Let's read it together.....


[20] These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.


Did Jesus say ANYTHING about FOOD?


.
 

bud02

New Member
Aug 14, 2010
727
12
0
Look both what Jesus said and Peters vision are about FOOD.
The vision was the unclean animals that made a man unclean.
Peter said he had been shown not to consider any man unclean. The food in the vision is what made the man unclean.
The Lord also told Peter to eat but he refused. Was the Lord making a mistake about telling Peter to eat the unclean. I say NO.
Jesus addressed the Pharisees about unclean hands that defiled the food they ate.
If a Gentile had touched the bread it would have been considered unclean if a pig had touched it, it would have been unclean.
In any case its still about food, and yes the bread was unclean period. Other wise the Pharisees would have never open their mouth about it.

I don't know how clearer the scripture can be. Are you CALLING THE LORD A LAIR? or is the bible in error?

[sup]12[/sup]Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
[sup]13[/sup]And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat [sup]14[/sup]But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.................................it pretty clear these are unclean animals according to the Levitical law. .

[sup]15[/sup]And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common................. see this part God has made it clean.

I'll quote Jesus in leaving, you strain at gnats yet swallow camels.
I'm done with this conversation if you don't understand plain English there is nothing more I can say.











 

Eccl.12:13

New Member
Aug 28, 2010
558
10
0
Look both what Jesus said and Peters vision are about FOOD.
The vision was the unclean animals that made a man unclean.
Peter said he had been shown not to consider any man unclean. The food in the vision is what made the man unclean.

Really? That's not what Jesus said. Let's read it again....


[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:

But it’s what comes out of the mind that defiles man; evil thoughts, murders, adulteries etc. Now let’s read Jesus answer concerning the subject of unwashed hands;

[20] These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.


So are you saying you REALLY cannot say how God was just COMPARING unclean beast to men and NOT that He was saying it is the FOOD that makes men unclean?

Really? You really cannot see that? Let's read....

Acts 10
[28]......but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

And let's read AGAIN what he told the other Jews and their response...

Acts 11
[4] But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying,

So Peter went over this things to make sure he got his story correct. And did it change? Let's read.....


[9] But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

And WHAT was it that God cleansed? It was NOT the unclean beast! God is speaking about PEOPLE! The scriptures tells us how they were cleansed.....


[14] Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.

These Gentiles were cleansed by the WORDS Peter spoke. Was there any mention of any animals being cleansed? Of course not! Let's continue....


[17] Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?
[18] When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.


Now PLEASE show me and everyone else reading at what point did God's word ever say what you claimed,

The food in the vision is what made the man unclean.

Which verse is it that says, the FOOD made the man unclean?



.
 

jiggyfly

New Member
Nov 27, 2009
2,750
86
0
63
North Carolina
Look both what Jesus said and Peters vision are about FOOD.
The vision was the unclean animals that made a man unclean.
Peter said he had been shown not to consider any man unclean. The food in the vision is what made the man unclean.
The Lord also told Peter to eat but he refused. Was the Lord making a mistake about telling Peter to eat the unclean. I say NO.
Jesus addressed the Pharisees about unclean hands that defiled the food they ate.
If a Gentile had touched the bread it would have been considered unclean if a pig had touched it, it would have been unclean.
In any case its still about food, and yes the bread was unclean period. Other wise the Pharisees would have never open their mouth about it.

I don't know how clearer the scripture can be. Are you CALLING THE LORD A LAIR? or is the bible in error?

[sup]12[/sup]Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
[sup]13[/sup]And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat [sup]14[/sup]But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.................................it pretty clear these are unclean animals according to the Levitical law. .

[sup]15[/sup]And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common................. see this part God has made it clean.

I'll quote Jesus in leaving, you strain at gnats yet swallow camels.
I'm done with this conversation if you don't understand plain English there is nothing more I can say.












Bud2 great post it makes perfect sense.
smile.gif
 

Mercy777

New Member
Sep 13, 2010
48
1
0
Let's read God’s holy word to see for ourselves.

Acts 10
[1] There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,

So we see that Cornelius was a non-Jew.

[2] A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.
[3] He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius.

But Cornelius and his family feared God, gave to the poor and prayed always.

[5] And now send men to Joppa, and call for one Simon, whose surname is Peter:
[6] He lodgeth with one Simon a tanner, whose house is by the sea side: he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do.

So he was given a vision and instructions to seek after Peter and would be told what to do.

[9] On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:
[10] And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
[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:

While this was taking place Peter also was given a vision.

[12] Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
[13] And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.




Peter saw ALL manner of food and was told to kill and eat. Now let's take in Peter's reply;


[14] But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

So even AFTER Jesus died on the cross Peter STILL did not eat anything that was unclean. But some say Jesus did away with the dietary laws! Peter must have missed that sermon. Let's continue;

[15] And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
[16] This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

In Peter's vision this was done (3) times.

[17] Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made inquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,

Peter DOUBTED what this vision could mean. While he was thinking about it the men the angel sent arrived.

[19] While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.
[20] Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them.

The meeting of Cornelius, a Gentile; and Peter, a Jew was SUPPOSED to happen. The (2) visions were connected. And Peter was told not to doubt anything when he met with the men, for they were sent by God.

[25] And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.
[26] But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.
[27] And as he talked with him, he went in, and found many that were come together.

So they met and there were many with Cornelius.

 

[28] And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation;

Peter then told them how it was unlawful (by the Jews law) for him to have a non-Jew, or ANY of another nation come into his house.

BUT LOOK WHAT WAS REVEALED TO PETER..............

[28]......but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Was the vision about God's dietary laws? Of course not! The vision was to let Peter know it was now time for the Gentiles and ALL other nations to receive the word of God.

Let's read what Peter says after he hears the complete story from the men that came with Cornelius;

[33] Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.

Peter is now about to say EVERYTHING that resulted in his vision and the events that followed, as they were, "ALL THINGS THAT ARE COMMANDED THEE OF GOD."

Now let's read if one of the things that was "...COMMANDED THEE OF GOD...", was doing away with His dietary laws;


[34] Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
[35] But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Again....no mention of food. Would not this have been the time to say it?


After all, Peter said he would say, "ALL THINGS THAT ARE COMMANDED THEE OF GOD."! So why did he not say anything about God‘s dietary laws being done away with?


So now Peter understood the vision. It was about MEN not being called unclean and NOT food.

Now let's confirm this. Let's see if Peter said anything about God's dietary law being done away with when he told the story over.

Acts 11
[1] And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God.
[2] And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him,
[3] Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.

So when the Jews of Jerusalem heard what Peter had done they were mad at him. Now do you think the Jews were upset about what food was being eaten? NO! They were mad because one of their own not only had associations with Gentiles, but had given them the word of God. But let's read what Peter did and said;

[4] But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying,

Peter went over everything that happened, because Peter knew how upset those Jews would be.

First Peter tells of his vision;

[5] I was in the city of Joppa praying: and in a trance I saw a vision, A certain vessel descend, as it had been a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me:
[6] Upon the which when I had fastened mine eyes, I considered, and saw fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
[7] And I heard a voice saying unto me, Arise, Peter; slay and eat.
[8] But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth.
[9] But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
[10] And this was done three times: and all were drawn up again into heaven

 

Then Peter tell what happened next;

[11] And, behold, immediately there were three men already come unto the house where I was, sent from Caesarea unto me.
[12] And the spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting. Moreover these six brethren accompanied me, and we entered into the man's house:
[13] And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;
[14] Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.
[15] And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

Now let's see at what time God's dietary law was mentioned;

[16] Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

No mention of food there;

[17] Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

Not there;

[18] When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying,

And why did they hold their peace? Let's read;

[18]......Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

So even when Peter repeated his story the outcome was still the same.


Now at what point was Peter’s vision ever about God's Dietary laws?

 


Did you know Jesus will kill people for eating certain foods when He returns? Lesson to come soon.



..

Hello Eccl.12:13


Matthew 15: 10Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "

Acts 11: 9"The voice spoke from heaven a second time, 'Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.'

Genesis 1: 24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Now Peter had a problem with the Gentiles recieving the promise, otherwise Peter would have never spoken;

Acts 11: 15"As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16Then I remembered what the Lord had said: 'John baptized with[a]water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' 17So if God gave them the same gift as he gave us, who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could oppose God?"

Maybe a deeper question is why did God give the Israelites these dietary laws when the Lord clearly reminds us, what goes into a man's mouth, does not make him unclean and God declaring in Genesis all was good and also in Acts, do not call anything impure that God has made clean.

God Bless,
Mercy
 

bud02

New Member
Aug 14, 2010
727
12
0
Maybe a deeper question is why did God give the Israelites these dietary laws when the Lord clearly reminds us, what goes into a man's mouth, does not make him unclean and God declaring in Genesis all was good and also in Acts, do not call anything impure that God has made clean.

God Bless,
Mercy

I went threw this with him. Trying to point out the 10 commandments and the law of Moses are not the same.

If we look at Dt 31:26 we will see that the two are not one and the same.

[sup]24[/sup] So it was, when Moses had completed writing the words of this law in a book, when they were finished, [sup]25[/sup] that Moses commanded the Levites, who bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying: [sup]26[/sup] “Take this Book of the Law, and put it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there as a witness against you;

They don't hold the same position in the tabernacle as the 10, and its function is, that it may be there as a witness against you;
You can follow this up with Hebrews, the end of the Levtical order but he just can't separate the two. IMHO its all about your vs his perception of the NT, the new covenant.
If you want to see the modern NT Levitical system still in use today look and study the catholic church.
Were are being restored to the condition of man in the garden. The 10 commandments are still in play so that all men receive salvation threw grace. Jesus left us a command "one" just like Adam had one.
To love one another. Thats the message and the working power of the new covenant. God now dwells in man threw the Holy Spirit. God moved out of the temple and now dwells with in us.

"I would like to learn just one thing from you," Paul writes. "Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?"

You people that think you have received the Spirit by being baptized in water, eating magic cookies, or by obeying some law need to rethink your faith.
If you don't believe what you have heard or read in the scriptures, then I presume you to be a stranger to the Spirit, and the gospel as a whole.
[sup]
Romans 8-1[/sup] There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. [sup]2[/sup] For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. [sup]3[/sup] For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, [sup]4[/sup] that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Which verse is it that says, the FOOD made the man unclean?


Leviticus 11
Leviticus 11:1: Yahweh spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying to them, 2 "Speak to the children of Israel, saying, `These are the living things which you may eat among all the animals that are on the earth. 3 Whatever parts the hoof, and is cloven-footed, and chews the cud among the animals, that you may eat.

4 "Nevertheless these you shall not eat of those that chew the cud, or of those who part the hoof: the camel, because he chews the cud but doesn't have a parted hoof, he is unclean to you. 5 The coney, because he chews the cud but doesn't have a parted hoof, he is unclean to you. 6 The hare, because she chews the cud but doesn't part the hoof, she is unclean to you. 7 The pig, because he has a split hoof, and is cloven-footed, but doesn't chew the cud, he is unclean to you. 8 Of their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch; they are unclean to you.

9 These you may eat of all that are in the waters: whatever has fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, that you may eat. 10 All that don't have fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of all the living creatures that are in the waters, they are an abomination to you, 11 and you detest them. You shall not eat of their flesh, and you shall detest their carcasses. 12 Whatever has no fins nor scales in the waters, that is an abomination to you.

13 "These you shall detest among the birds; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the vulture, and the black vulture, 14 and the red kite, any kind of black kite, 15 any kind of raven, 16 the horned owl, the screech owl, and the gull, any kind of hawk, 17 the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, 18 the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, 19 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe, and the bat.

20 "All flying insects that walk on all fours are an abomination to you. 21 Yet you may eat these: of all winged creeping things that go on all fours, which have legs above their feet, with which to hop on the earth. 22 Even of these you may eat: any kind of locust, any kind of katydid, any kind of cricket, and any kind of grasshopper. 23 But all winged creeping things which have four feet, are an abomination to you.

24 "By these you will become unclean: whoever touches the carcass of them shall be unclean until the evening. 25 Whoever carries any part of their carcass shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the evening.

26 "Every animal which parts the hoof, and is not cloven-footed, nor chews the cud, is unclean to you. Everyone who touches them shall be unclean. 27 Whatever goes on its paws, among all animals that go on all fours, they are unclean to you. Whoever touches their carcass shall be unclean until the evening. 28 He who carries their carcass shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the evening. They are unclean to you.
 

Mercy777

New Member
Sep 13, 2010
48
1
0
I went threw this with him. Trying to point out the 10 commandments and the law of Moses are not the same.

If we look at Dt 31:26 we will see that the two are not one and the same.

[sup]24[/sup] So it was, when Moses had completed writing the words of this law in a book, when they were finished, [sup]25[/sup] that Moses commanded the Levites, who bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying: [sup]26[/sup] “Take this Book of the Law, and put it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there as a witness against you;

They don't hold the same position in the tabernacle as the 10, and its function is, that it may be there as a witness against you;
You can follow this up with Hebrews, the end of the Levtical order but he just can't separate the two. IMHO its all about your vs his perception of the NT, the new covenant.
If you want to see the modern NT Levitical system still in use today look and study the catholic church.
Were are being restored to the condition of man in the garden. The 10 commandments are still in play so that all men receive salvation threw grace. Jesus left us a command "one" just like Adam had one.
To love one another. Thats the message and the working power of the new covenant. God now dwells in man threw the Holy Spirit. God moved out of the temple and now dwells with in us.

"I would like to learn just one thing from you," Paul writes. "Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?"

You people that think you have received the Spirit by being baptized in water, eating magic cookies, or by obeying some law need to rethink your faith.
If you don't believe what you have heard or read in the scriptures, then I presume you to be a stranger to the Spirit, and the gospel as a whole.
[sup]
Romans 8-1[/sup] There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. [sup]2[/sup] For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. [sup]3[/sup] For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, [sup]4[/sup] that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.




Leviticus 11
Leviticus 11:1: Yahweh spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying to them, 2 "Speak to the children of Israel, saying, `These are the living things which you may eat among all the animals that are on the earth. 3 Whatever parts the hoof, and is cloven-footed, and chews the cud among the animals, that you may eat.

4 "Nevertheless these you shall not eat of those that chew the cud, or of those who part the hoof: the camel, because he chews the cud but doesn't have a parted hoof, he is unclean to you. 5 The coney, because he chews the cud but doesn't have a parted hoof, he is unclean to you. 6 The hare, because she chews the cud but doesn't part the hoof, she is unclean to you. 7 The pig, because he has a split hoof, and is cloven-footed, but doesn't chew the cud, he is unclean to you. 8 Of their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch; they are unclean to you.

9 These you may eat of all that are in the waters: whatever has fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, that you may eat. 10 All that don't have fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of all the living creatures that are in the waters, they are an abomination to you, 11 and you detest them. You shall not eat of their flesh, and you shall detest their carcasses. 12 Whatever has no fins nor scales in the waters, that is an abomination to you.

13 "These you shall detest among the birds; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the vulture, and the black vulture, 14 and the red kite, any kind of black kite, 15 any kind of raven, 16 the horned owl, the screech owl, and the gull, any kind of hawk, 17 the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, 18 the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, 19 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe, and the bat.

20 "All flying insects that walk on all fours are an abomination to you. 21 Yet you may eat these: of all winged creeping things that go on all fours, which have legs above their feet, with which to hop on the earth. 22 Even of these you may eat: any kind of locust, any kind of katydid, any kind of cricket, and any kind of grasshopper. 23 But all winged creeping things which have four feet, are an abomination to you.

24 "By these you will become unclean: whoever touches the carcass of them shall be unclean until the evening. 25 Whoever carries any part of their carcass shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the evening.

26 "Every animal which parts the hoof, and is not cloven-footed, nor chews the cud, is unclean to you. Everyone who touches them shall be unclean. 27 Whatever goes on its paws, among all animals that go on all fours, they are unclean to you. Whoever touches their carcass shall be unclean until the evening. 28 He who carries their carcass shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the evening. They are unclean to you.

Hello Bud02,

Amen! I completely understand this. Christ Crucified!
Quote you on this,....Were are being restored to the condition of man in the garden. Yes we are by Christ Himself.
Nothing good in me except Jesus!
The only reason I had asked the last question of my reply was for those who did not understand to consider the words of Christ Himself. Father, Son and Spirit are always in agreement.

Thank you so much,
Mercy
 

bud02

New Member
Aug 14, 2010
727
12
0
Hello Bud02,

Amen! I completely understand this. Christ Crucified!
Quote you on this,....Were are being restored to the condition of man in the garden. Yes we are by Christ Himself.
Nothing good in me except Jesus!
The only reason I had asked the last question of my reply was for those who did not understand to consider the words of Christ Himself. Father, Son and Spirit are always in agreement.

Thank you so much,
Mercy

Thanks Mercy, my reply was not directed at you personally, but your question to Eccl allowed me to bring forward the heart of the matter, salvation vs religion.
I liked your point in the other thread, its one Im sure the Spirit will bring to my remembrance in the future about this topic.

"When you enter a house, first say, 'Peace to this house.' 6If a man of peace is there, your peace will rest on him; if not, it will return to you. 7Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house."
 

Mercy777

New Member
Sep 13, 2010
48
1
0
Thanks Mercy, my reply was not directed at you personally, but your question to Eccl allowed me to bring forward the heart of the matter, salvation vs religion.
I liked your point in the other thread, its one Im sure the Spirit will bring to my remembrance in the future about this topic.

"When you enter a house, first say, 'Peace to this house.' 6If a man of peace is there, your peace will rest on him; if not, it will return to you. 7Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house."

Yes, to the last scripture. We do not even know if some of these homes were pagans or Jews.
I did not take your post personally, I had in fact thought about the 10 commandments and I had known before about taking us back to what we were in the beginning because of another subject spoken about concerning our rulership over the earth God had given to us before sin.
I still have a couple of points on this post, but I need to look up scripture. To my recollection, didn't the Iraelites give the food they were not to eat to others that were not God's chosen people? I will get back on this.

God Bless you Bud02!
 

Mercy777

New Member
Sep 13, 2010
48
1
0
Hello Bud02,

Amen! I completely understand this. Christ Crucified!
Quote you on this,....Were are being restored to the condition of man in the garden. Yes we are by Christ Himself.
Nothing good in me except Jesus!
The only reason I had asked the last question of my reply was for those who did not understand to consider the words of Christ Himself. Father, Son and Spirit are always in agreement.

Thank you so much,
Mercy
Just thought of something that is true to this you spoke Bud02,
Your quote; I went threw this with him. Trying to point out the 10 commandments and the law of Moses are not the same.

Remember when Jesus was speaking about divorce and... have to write this to have the words the Lord spoke to you ring true.

Matthew 19:8
Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.

Mark 10:5
"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied.
Jesus, right back to the beginning! Praise the King of Kings!
 

Eccl.12:13

New Member
Aug 28, 2010
558
10
0
Matthew 15: 10Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.'

Now let's read ALL of what happened and see if at ANYTIME the topic of conversation was about food;


Matt.15
[1] 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.

Clearly the topic being discussed here is NOT about food. The problem the Pharisees have with Jesus disciples is the fact that they are eating bread without washing their hands. Let’s confirm this;

Mark 7
[1] Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.
[2] And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.

Again we see the problem is not with WHAT they are eating, but with the fact that the disciples are not washing their hands.

[3] For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.

So ALL of the Jews held the practice of washing their hands “oft”, or often, or they did not eat their food.

[4] And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.

So it wasn’t just hand washing they were consumed with. The Jews of the day had made a big deal about washing EVERYTHING!

But at what point is FOOD ever mentioned?

Can the scriptures be any more clear on the topic of conversation of the Pharisees and the problem they had with Jesus disciples?

“Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.”

let’s now read Jesus reply;

Matt.15
[11] Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

We know the subject here is about, “unwashed hands”. So is Jesus speaking about the type of food being consumed, or the fact that a man eating with unwashed hands does not harm him? The answer is obvious. Jesus is speaking about the very thing the Jews of the day had made a big deal about, the washing of hands. But let’s confirm this. Let’s see if Jesus told His disciples something different when they came to Him in private about the same matter;

[12] Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?

It seem the Pharisees got a little upset when Jesus put them in their place and said all of their tradition of washing everything meant nothing. Let’s continue;

[15] Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
[16] And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?

Understand that Peter and the rest of the disciples had been doing all of these “washing” traditions also, so they wanted to know just what did Jesus mean when he said what He said. Let’s read;

[17] Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

So the things that go into a man’s mouth are expelled.

[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:

But it’s what comes out of the mind that defiles man; evil thoughts, murders, adulteries etc. Now let’s read Jesus answer concerning the subject of unwashed hands;

[20] These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

Let's read it once more.....

"...but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man."


Now at what point did Jesus say ANYTHING about His dietary laws being done away with? At what point did Jesus say anything about ANY food?

The subject matter from the very start was about unwashed hands, and that is how Jesus ended and answered the question.


Now on to your next verse......


Acts 11: 9"The voice spoke from heaven a second time, 'Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.'


Let's read just what it was that was revealed to Peter, but to do that we must go to the previous chapter, chapter 10;

Acts 10
[28] And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Let's read it again......

"......but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean"

So did God reveal to Peter that no FOOD was unclean? No!! God was letting Peter know that His word was fit for ALL men, Jews AND gentiles! Let's confirm this in the following verses.....


[34] Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
[35] But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Now did Peter say at ANYTIME it was FOOD that was accepted with God? No! What Peter now knew is that God is not a respecter of PERSONS....NOT FOOD!!!!

Again...at what point was it ever revealed to Peter that His vision was about FOOD?

Now let's read it again in the next chapter...

Acts 11
[4] But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying,

So Peter went over this over and over again before going to the Jews! WHY!! Because those Jews thought that God's word was ONLY for them.

[9] But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Again.....let's see if Peter changed what it was that was revealed to him, or if the other Jews thought his vision was about food.....

[15] And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
[16] Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
[17] Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

So now these Jews understood that God's word was NOT just for them, but was for ALL that believed on the Lord.

And again.....let's confirm....

[18] When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

And when they heard these things they realized that God had granted the Gentiles repentance unto life.

So again I ask......at what point was Peter's vision EVER about food?

It was NOT!!!!

.

 

Mercy777

New Member
Sep 13, 2010
48
1
0
Now let's read ALL of what happened and see if at ANYTIME the topic of conversation was about food;


Matt.15
[1] 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.

Clearly the topic being discussed here is NOT about food. The problem the Pharisees have with Jesus disciples is the fact that they are eating bread without washing their hands. Let’s confirm this;

Mark 7
[1] Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.
[2] And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.

Again we see the problem is not with WHAT they are eating, but with the fact that the disciples are not washing their hands.

[3] For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.

So ALL of the Jews held the practice of washing their hands “oft”, or often, or they did not eat their food.

[4] And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.

So it wasn’t just hand washing they were consumed with. The Jews of the day had made a big deal about washing EVERYTHING!

But at what point is FOOD ever mentioned?

Can the scriptures be any more clear on the topic of conversation of the Pharisees and the problem they had with Jesus disciples?

“Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.”

let’s now read Jesus reply;

Matt.15
[11] Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

We know the subject here is about, “unwashed hands”. So is Jesus speaking about the type of food being consumed, or the fact that a man eating with unwashed hands does not harm him? The answer is obvious. Jesus is speaking about the very thing the Jews of the day had made a big deal about, the washing of hands. But let’s confirm this. Let’s see if Jesus told His disciples something different when they came to Him in private about the same matter;

[12] Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?

It seem the Pharisees got a little upset when Jesus put them in their place and said all of their tradition of washing everything meant nothing. Let’s continue;

[15] Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
[16] And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?

Understand that Peter and the rest of the disciples had been doing all of these “washing” traditions also, so they wanted to know just what did Jesus mean when he said what He said. Let’s read;

[17] Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

So the things that go into a man’s mouth are expelled.

[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:

But it’s what comes out of the mind that defiles man; evil thoughts, murders, adulteries etc. Now let’s read Jesus answer concerning the subject of unwashed hands;

[20] These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

Let's read it once more.....

"...but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man."


Now at what point did Jesus say ANYTHING about His dietary laws being done away with? At what point did Jesus say anything about ANY food?

The subject matter from the very start was about unwashed hands, and that is how Jesus ended and answered the question.


Now on to your next verse......





Let's read just what it was that was revealed to Peter, but to do that we must go to the previous chapter, chapter 10;

Acts 10
[28] And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Let's read it again......

"......but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean"

So did God reveal to Peter that no FOOD was unclean? No!! God was letting Peter know that His word was fit for ALL men, Jews AND gentiles! Let's confirm this in the following verses.....


[34] Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
[35] But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Now did Peter say at ANYTIME it was FOOD that was accepted with God? No! What Peter now knew is that God is not a respecter of PERSONS....NOT FOOD!!!!

Again...at what point was it ever revealed to Peter that His vision was about FOOD?

Now let's read it again in the next chapter...

Acts 11
[4] But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying,

So Peter went over this over and over again before going to the Jews! WHY!! Because those Jews thought that God's word was ONLY for them.

[9] But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Again.....let's see if Peter changed what it was that was revealed to him, or if the other Jews thought his vision was about food.....

[15] And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
[16] Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
[17] Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

So now these Jews understood that God's word was NOT just for them, but was for ALL that believed on the Lord.

And again.....let's confirm....

[18] When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

And when they heard these things they realized that God had granted the Gentiles repentance unto life.

So again I ask......at what point was Peter's vision EVER about food?

It was NOT!!!!

.

Now if we eat with unwashed hands (dirty), then when we touch the food, it would also be dirty. And if we put it in our mouth, our mouth would be dirty. Defiled is what is spoken and Christ knew they were nitpicking. This all has to do with them puffing themselves up over Christ and trying to trap Him. This whole scripture has to do with Clean and Unclean and Jesus declared it.
Matt. !5: 8" 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men

Jesus states the commandment

Matt: 15 3Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death. 5But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,' 6he is not to 'honor his father' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:

Then Jesus brings the crowd to him because He does not want them misled,
10Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "

Then the disciples come to Jesus,
12Then the disciples came to him and asked, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?" Why oh why were they offended?
Otherwise the 10 commandments are what Christ should be working in you. For the kingdom of God is not about food and drink.

This has nothing to do with being right, Christ is right. It does not matter about the dirty food going into your mouth, the truth be told all we eat is or has some sort of germs. Do you really think those Pharisees would sit down with a dirty beggar that hadn't washed his hands in days and share food with him? Could you imagine their thoughts as they watched him eat the food?
Also the Pharisee's not honoring their parents and using God to do their sin, Jesus knew their sins, through and through.
Jesus definetly didn't care about the disciples dirty hands making the food dirty. Love your brother.

God Bless,
Mercy
 

Eccl.12:13

New Member
Aug 28, 2010
558
10
0
Jesus definetly didn't care about the disciples dirty hands making the food dirty. Love your brother.


Jesus didn't care about them eating with dirty hands, this is correct. And this is what that topic of conversation is about....eating with dirty hands.

"...but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man."

At what point did Jesus ever say anything about His dietary laws? At what point did Jesus say anything about 'clean' or 'unclean' foods?

Let me ask you.......

Who do you think it was that gave His dietary laws to man in the beginning?
Do you know who it was that gave ALL of man ALL of His laws?

Do you not know that the same one that came and died, shed His blood and will be your judge is in fact the same one that spoke and then wrote His laws on stone and gave them to Moses?



.