We are what we eat

  • 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!

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
You keep repeating this assertion, but haven't proven it.

A negative can't be proven. The burden of proof is upon you to prove your assertions. We're all still waiting.


No. It's the food being cleansed here, not the body. What we call "purging" is cleansing of the body (or the bowel, to be more specific), not the food

Again, one has to wonder how you're supposed to pull this off when it's going into the sewer. You never get around to explaining that part of your claim.


No. If 'katharizon' was agreeing with 'aphedrona' they would have to be in the same case, and they aren't. Care to try again?

Evidently you've already forgotten your own argument which was in reference to GENDER, not case. I never claimed they were agreeing in case, nor that they have to agree in case as that is idiotic. You're not only presenting a Strawman argument, but one that is inconsequential to boot. How about addressing the fact that I refuted your facile and erroneous observation?


Then why did you say it?

I didn't. The church was originally a Jewish sect, and clearly continued to be an observant Jewish sect until they could no longer celebrate the Jewish liturgy together. That's why the gospel narratives had to be committed to paper. The problems in interpretation emerged due to blatant ignorance on the part of a growing Gentile congregation.


But I wasn't talking about the Jewish church (even if it still was predominantly Jewish by the mid-first century when Mark was writing). I was talking about the predominantly/entirely Gentile church that developed in the second half of the first century. That's why I specified it was the Gentile church.

And that church didn't write the gospel narratives. They had no clue what they were even looking at, hence their false understanding and interpretations.


Nothing like the fact we are made in the image of God?

The body is not made in the image of God. The body is the temple that houses God's image. God's image is not corruptible like the body.

1 Corinthians 6:19
19What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Please explain how Christ's nullification of one set of laws makes all God's laws arbitrary?

Please explain how each and every law that is annulled isn't an example of God's capriciousness.

Here's the short list: the 4th, and 7th commandments, the dietary laws, and usury. These are all for the benefit of humanity, and yet we are not only told that they're done away, but that they're a burden. It's pure nonsense, and the ramblings of those who worship a capricious god.

The Jews certainly didn't have the right to nullify the dietary laws before Christ's coming!

They probably couldn't if they wanted to as it would have made them violently ill. Again, you have no clue what you're talking about. Observant Jews would never entertain the idea of eating swine as it would make them sick. Even today with modern methods of raising swine, they're still way to filthy for the constitution of anyone who has kept the dietary laws their whole lives.

Perhaps you could also explain whether you think Gentiles are now obliged to obey the entire Law of Moses.

It isn't a matter of obligation except for those who are still incapable of keeping God's law without fail. They must continue to rely upon Christ's sacrifice to cover their sin.

And if that's the case, why didn't Paul mention it in all his letters? It would have made his ethical instruction so much simpler...

He repeatedly distinguishes between those who must still rely upon Christ's sacrifice to cover their sins, and those who "walk after the Spirit no longer fulfill the lust of the flesh" The carnal mind is enmity against God and cannot please him regardless of how well they keep God's commandments. This is not an invitation to violate God's commandments. Paul knows that it is only those who have had their hearts regenerated that can keep God's laws perfectly.

The fact is that Paul is quite clear in pointing out the distinction between keeping God's law because one is a child of God verses keeping it to establish one's righteousness. The condemnation of the latter doesn't negate the former.

I dare you to come up with a single verse from any of Paul's letters that does away with any of the Mosaic law. In each and every case what you will find is a reference to justification or establishing one's own righteousness, or a reference to the sacrificial system, e.g. "the penalty"; "the curse"; the law that was added because of transgressions" "the cross" etc. Even then none of that is done away for those who still continue to sin. Those who continue to sin must continue to rely upon Christ's sacrifice to cover their sins, but when one has been regenerated, there is no longer a sacrifice to cover sin. Heb.10:26 No sin=no need for sacrifice.
 

Deborah_

Well-Known Member
Jun 7, 2015
901
855
93
Swansea, Wales
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
"It's the food being cleansed here, not the body. What we call "purging" is cleansing of the body (or the bowel, to be more specific), not the food"

Again, one has to wonder how you're supposed to pull this off when it's going into the sewer. You never get around to explaining that part of your claim.
You are completely ignoring the fact that the text says, "cleansing all foods" and that I said, purging was "cleansing the body". Neither the body nor the foods go into the sewer. The sewer can't be the thing that's doing the cleansing - either logically or grammatically. Why do you have such a fixation on it?

Evidently you've already forgotten your own argument which was in reference to GENDER, not case. I never claimed they were agreeing in case, nor that they have to agree in case as that is idiotic. You're not only presenting a Strawman argument, but one that is inconsequential to boot. How about addressing the fact that I refuted your facile and erroneous observation?
What is idiotic - that they have to agree in case? Sorry, but that's a basic principle of Greek grammar, and anything but inconsequential. Grammatically, the toilet/sewer can't be the thing doing the cleansing, which was why I didn't include it as an option - my only error was to assume that you knew that.

The body is not made in the image of God. The body is the temple that houses God's image. God's image is not corruptible like the body.

1 Corinthians 6:19
19What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
That's a new one on me. Unbelievers do not have God's image in any sense, then?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
"It's the food being cleansed here, not the body. What we call "purging" is cleansing of the body (or the bowel, to be more specific), not the food"

The problem with this analysis is that food is not being cleaned by going through the digestive system. Food is already clean before one begins to eat it. All food is clean unless something happens to it that makes it unclean, e.g. rotting, mold, etc.


Neither the body nor the foods go into the sewer.

He explicitly states: " and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats"



The word "draught" is the translator's term for "sewer".

The sewer can't be the thing that's doing the cleansing

Correct which is why your analysis is incorrect. The subject brought to Jesus' attention is defilement of the body through neglecting ritual washing. It has nothing to do with cleaning food. Hence your non sequitur.

- either logically or grammatically. Why do you have such a fixation on it?

I'm not the one fixated on it. You are. You're the one (along with the rest of mainstream Christianity) who is looking for some justification to eat what the bible explicitly refers to as "filth; pollution". I'm simply pointing out that there is no scriptural justification for this idea.


What is idiotic - that they have to agree in case? Sorry, but that's a basic principle of Greek grammar, and anything but inconsequential.

And the belly, the sewer and the cleansing are ALL in the Nominative case. Didn't you catch that point already?

Grammatically, the toilet/sewer can't be the thing doing the cleansing, which was why I didn't include it as an option - my only error was to assume that you knew that.

See above.


That's a new one on me. Unbelievers do not have God's image in any sense, then?

Don't know what you're referring to here. Everyone is created in God's image, and everyone digests food too. And there is nothing about the digestive process that can cleanse anyone from their ontological state of defilement, or abolish God's laws. It's preposterous on the face of it.

Whenever I hear preachers get up and use this as a justification for abolishing the dietary laws, I can't help but laugh out loud. it's pure nonsense.
 

JohnPaul

Soldier of Jehovah and Christ
Jun 10, 2019
3,274
2,567
113
New Jersey
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Did Jesus not say all that my father created is clean? or something to that effect, liberating us from the dietary laws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

Deborah_

Well-Known Member
Jun 7, 2015
901
855
93
Swansea, Wales
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
The problem with this analysis is that food is not being cleaned by going through the digestive system.
Nobody is claiming that it is. Jesus is declaring all foods clean.

And the belly, the sewer and the cleansing are ALL in the Nominative case.
WRONG. Wasn't it you who mentioned, earlier on, that the sewer was in the accusative case? As is the stomach also.

Don't know what you're referring to here.
This:
The body is not made in the image of God. The body is the temple that houses God's image.
And only believers 'house' the Holy Spirit in their bodies.
 

Deborah_

Well-Known Member
Jun 7, 2015
901
855
93
Swansea, Wales
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Did Jesus not say all that my father created is clean? or something to that effect, liberating us from the dietary laws.
This is from the first letter to Timothy, so it's not Jesus but Paul. Paul is arguing against those who would "order people to abstain from certain foods" (I Timothy 4:3) (Doesn't that remind you of someone...) "Everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer." (I Timothy 4:4,5)
 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Nobody is claiming that it is. Jesus is declaring all foods clean.

No, he isn't, and even if he were, it doesn't then follow that the dietary laws are abolished because the context of the gospel narratives is 'under the law', and pork, shellfish, etc. are not considered food to begin with. There is no place in the entire bible where they are referred to as food. This is simply your false assumption. Again, he's referring to the digestive system, and that doesn't abrogate any of the commandments. This is just your tradition which you are using to make null and void God's commandments. Jesus himself condemns this. It makes no sense to then turn right around and annul God's commandments.

Wasn't it you who mentioned, earlier on, that the sewer was in the accusative case? As is the stomach also.

Yep. All food is purged into the sewer. That's literally what he says. This doesn't then make pork or shellfish food. That's a blatant non sequitur. The subject is ritual washing, not what they were eating. If they had claimed that his disciples were eating something unclean like catfish, you would have a better chance of making an argument.



And only believers 'house' the Holy Spirit in their bodies.

Nah, Paul was quoting a pagan poet/philosopher as he was preaching to pagans. Everyone is created in God's image. Everyone has God's spirit in them, and everyone can manifest God's gifts of the Spirit regardless of their beliefs.
 

JohnPaul

Soldier of Jehovah and Christ
Jun 10, 2019
3,274
2,567
113
New Jersey
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This is from the first letter to Timothy, so it's not Jesus but Paul. Paul is arguing against those who would "order people to abstain from certain foods" (I Timothy 4:3) (Doesn't that remind you of someone...) "Everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer." (I Timothy 4:4,5)
Thank you Deborah, for correcting me and clarifying this for me, I'm learning from good people like you and others here on this forum.
 

Nancy

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2018
16,761
25,324
113
Buffalo, Ny
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well, I did google it - and I found articles referring to variant readings of Mark 7:19 in many different manuscripts! If it's in lots of manuscripts, it can't simultaneously be only in one.


That is the normal definition of food. There's no separate "Bible definition" - that's your personal interpretation.


Where in the Bible does it say that people vomit after eating pork?


I merely pointed out that ex-Muslims who start eating pork products don't get sick as a result. So why should anyone else? That's not by any stretch of the imagination a justification of my position; it's just evidence against your argument. Find a better one.
I don't know what homosexuals have to do with it - Christ never abrogated the rules for sexual behaviour, and do you not know that homosexuals who become Christians stop having homosexual sex?

Hi Deborah,
Shnarkle is either a Jew, living under the Law, or he himself has put himself under the Law...so, let's hope he does not break any of the other 613 Laws. He will be judged by the Law and...well, good luck there, eh?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deborah_

Deborah_

Well-Known Member
Jun 7, 2015
901
855
93
Swansea, Wales
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
All food is purged into the sewer. That's literally what he says.
Except that it isn't. I'm starting to wonder if you and I are inhabiting the same planet and reading the same Bible.

Nah, Paul was quoting a pagan poet/philosopher as he was preaching to pagans.
But he was writing a letter (I Corinthians) to Christians at the time.

Everyone has God's spirit in them, and everyone can manifest God's gifts of the Spirit regardless of their beliefs.
Your beliefs are so unorthodox... perhaps you should set them out in another thread. Then I might have a chance of understanding where you're coming from.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Thank you Deborah, for correcting me and clarifying this for me, I'm learning from good people like you and others here on this forum.
Here's a more complete quote:

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.

Note that he specifically mentions foods that God created to be received? God didn't create swine to be received. To then point out that it is sanctified by the word should be your first clue to look in the word to find where God says it is now acceptable to eat what he explicitly states is "an abomination".
 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Hi Deborah,
Shnarkle is either a Jew, living under the Law, or he himself has put himself under the Law...so, let's hope he does not break any of the other 613 Laws. He will be judged by the Law and...well, good luck there, eh?

Ad hominem attacks are not what i would characterize as Christian behavior. i am always amazed how people can't help but post personally insulting material when a simple argument defending their position would be more than satisfactory. Paul points out that those who sin are automatically under the law. He points out that he is "under the law to Christ" as well. He didn't put himself there, nor did I, except for the fact that we're all sinners, and must rely upon Christ's sacrifice to cover our sins. Those who refuse to place themselves under Christ's protection are willfully damned. To break one commandment is to break them all, but this is only when one is attempting to justify themselves by their works. Your accusation is tantamount to suggesting that I am attempting to justify myself by my works. This is not only bad theology, it's bearing false witness against me. I've never made any such claims, and don't deserve that kind of treatment. This is especially disturbing coming from someone who professes to be a Christian.

Unfortunately, it's all too common today. As I've pointed out in other posts, labels mean nothing. The fruit people produce is more than enough to see who they really are.
 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Except that it isn't. I'm starting to wonder if you and I are inhabiting the same planet and reading the same Bible.

I supplied the relevant verses repeatedly proving that's exactly what it says. I don't see how you could have missed it.


But he was writing a letter (I Corinthians) to Christians at the time.

Strawman argument. It doesn't matter who he was writing letters to at the time. The fact is that Luke records Paul preaching to pagans, and quoting their pagan poets:

Acts 17:28 28For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

Your beliefs are so unorthodox... perhaps you should set them out in another thread. Then I might have a chance of understanding where you're coming from.

See the above quote, and note once again that you're not advancing an argument at all here. You're simply making baseless, irrelevant comments.

The bottom line is that you're taking an argument Jesus made supporting and defending the commandments as well as condemning those who would nullify the commandments by their traditions with regards explicitly to ritual washing, and fabricating an argument that is completely incoherent, i.e. the digestive system somehow negates God's dietary laws. It's preposterous on the face of it. Now you're claiming that "into the sewer cleansing all meats" doesn't mean that the food is going into the sewer and being cleansed. Prove it. Use the text.
 

Nancy

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2018
16,761
25,324
113
Buffalo, Ny
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Ad hominem attacks are not what i would characterize as Christian behavior. i am always amazed how people can't help but post personally insulting material when a simple argument defending their position would be more than satisfactory. Paul points out that those who sin are automatically under the law. He points out that he is "under the law to Christ" as well. He didn't put himself there, nor did I, except for the fact that we're all sinners, and must rely upon Christ's sacrifice to cover our sins. Those who refuse to place themselves under Christ's protection are willfully damned. To break one commandment is to break them all, but this is only when one is attempting to justify themselves by their works. Your accusation is tantamount to suggesting that I am attempting to justify myself by my works. This is not only bad theology, it's bearing false witness against me. I've never made any such claims, and don't deserve that kind of treatment. This is especially disturbing coming from someone who professes to be a Christian.

Unfortunately, it's all too common today. As I've pointed out in other posts, labels mean nothing. The fruit people produce is more than enough to see who they really are.

I'm sorry you feel that way Shnarkel and, also that I like, really offended you. I am with Deborah on this one. And the Word, of course.

"Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things." Genesis 9:3

"For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs." Romans 14:2
 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
"Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things." Genesis 9:3

Even as the green herb??? How about we all sit down and have a nice herb salad complete with ALL the fixins? Don't forget to bring the hemlock and the nightshade because we all know when God says "all" he means "all", right?

"For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs." Romans 14:2

So now we're all supposed to just assume that vegetarianism is somehow an integral part of the dietary laws??? What you and everyone else in mainstream Christianity fails to note is that these texts are all being written by observant Jews, and they don't look at swine or shellfish as food to begin with.

The really sad thing to note here is that only a capricious god would confine the benefits of his laws to one segment of society, while ignoring the rest. This is what is known as a god who is a respecter of persons. He has a bias towards his chosen people, but the church is on her own to engage in abominations to her hearts content. This doesn't sound like a god who has a very high opinion of Christ's bride at all. The law is holy, and spiritual, and yet for some reason this law which is for our benefit has been twisted into a burden because some people think that they can be justified by keeping God's law. When those of us who point out that it is for our benefit, we are maligned and falsely accused of trying to justify ourselves by keeping God's laws. Pathetic.

I've spent my life trying to defend Christianity, but when Christians treat others with this level of contempt and scorn, I wonder why I even bother anymore. Christianity is a misnomer.
 

Deborah_

Well-Known Member
Jun 7, 2015
901
855
93
Swansea, Wales
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
I supplied the relevant verses repeatedly proving that's exactly what it says. I don't see how you could have missed it.
And I responded by demonstrating that your interpretation of those verses is grammatically impossible. So you haven't proved anything.

Strawman argument. It doesn't matter who he was writing letters to at the time.
Not a straw man argument at all. The context of Paul's statement "you are a temple of the Holy Spirit" makes clear he is referring to Christians, not to everyone.

fabricating an argument that is completely incoherent, i.e. the digestive system somehow negates God's dietary laws. It's preposterous on the face of it. Now you're claiming that "into the sewer cleansing all meats" doesn't mean that the food is going into the sewer and being cleansed. Prove it. Use the text.
Now this is what a straw man argument is! Of course the argument "the digestive system somehow negates God's dietary laws" is preposterous - but then I never suggested it. And the idea that stuff is getting cleansed in the sewer is a misinterpretation based on the rather opaque KJV translation. Again, I have never put that idea forward - it's your own invention.