Did Christ declare all foods clean?

[BarneyFife]

Now we don't. But I am sure the first time mankind came across it they tried it. We may never know. That didn't turn that fruit uncelan, just decayed and not healthy to eatr. It didn't mean that all "pears" didn't become unclean.

Animals were designated unclean because their "lifestyles" made them wholly unfit for food, just as moldy fruit is. The manner in which items become unfit for food was not the point I was trying to to make. God didn't arbitrarily declare certain animals as unfit for consumption and sacrifice.

A brief investigation into the nature of unclean animals reveals this unfitness, although the gap is narrowing between clean and unclean because of man's handling of all kinds of food items.

If a person wants whatever they eat, drink, or do all to be to the glory of God, these things will naturally matter.

.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Animals were designated unclean because their "lifestyles" made them wholly unfit for food, just as moldy fruit is. The manner in which items become unfit for food was not the point I was trying to to make. God didn't arbitrarily declare certain animals as unfit for consumption and sacrifice.

A brief investigation into the nature of unclean animals reveals this unfitness, although the gap is narrowing between clean and unclean because of man's handling of all kinds of food items.

If a person wants whatever they eat, drink, or do all to be to the glory of God, these things will naturally matter.

.

Scriptural proof for this is?

You need to remember that the fruit is still clean, but it is the adding of another entity (mold) that made a clean food unclean.

but I have never seen in my fifty years passages in the MOsaic Laws saying it is because of an animals lifestyle that God declared them unclean. After the flood and until the giving of the law, the bible clearly says everything that creeps, flies ,swim or walks is food!

One alsop has to remember that the "unclean" meant that the person was ceremonially unclean not morally unclean. Like if a man had sex with his wife during her menstrual cycle, he would be ceremonially unclean.

And Paul explicitly told the gentile churches ALL foods are to be received!

1 Timothy 4:4
For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

Last time I looked-every means every! No exceptions unless listed and there are none lsted here.

With all that said, I am a firm believer in Romans 14:

Romans 14

King James Version

​

14 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.
8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.
9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.

If someone in their personal conviction before God wishes to not eat pork or lobster- I defend that persons right. However no one has a right to judge someone if they choose to eat or not choose to eatr. If one tries to impose these liberties upon another- that is a real problem.

 

[BarneyFife]

Scriptural proof for this is?

You need to remember that the fruit is still clean, but it is the adding of another entity (mold) that made a clean food unclean.

but I have never seen in my fifty years passages in the MOsaic Laws saying it is because of an animals lifestyle that God declared them unclean. After the flood and until the giving of the law, the bible clearly says everything that creeps, flies ,swim or walks is food!

One alsop has to remember that the "unclean" meant that the person was ceremonially unclean not morally unclean. Like if a man had sex with his wife during her menstrual cycle, he would be ceremonially unclean.

And Paul explicitly told the gentile churches ALL foods are to be received!

1 Timothy 4:4
For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

Last time I looked-every means every! No exceptions unless listed and there are none lsted here.

With all that said, I am a firm believer in Romans 14:

Romans 14​

​

King James Version​

​

​

14 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.
8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.
9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.

If someone in their personal conviction before God wishes to not eat pork or lobster- I defend that persons right. However no one has a right to judge someone if they choose to eat or not choose to eatr. If one tries to impose these liberties upon another- that is a real problem.

I've never been able to figure out why this topic can't be discussed without the accusation of "judging" constantly popping up. It just comes across as some kind of ultra-sensitive desperation, which I believe is beneath a believer of your maturity.

And, Ron, you and I both know that words like "every," "always," and "forever" don't always express unequivocal absoluteness in Scripture, unless you'd like to concede to apply them to things like Sabbath-keeping, hating your parents, etc.

The things that make animals unclean aren't listed exhaustively and explicitly in Scripture, except for design features that identify them, but science has done a fairly decent job in making the distinctions except, of course, in the perception of folks who are hell-bent on excusing their consumption as food.

.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

And, Ron, you and I both know that words like "every," "always," and "forever" don't always express unequivocal absoluteness in Scripture, unless you'd like to concede to apply them to things like Sabbath-keeping, hating your parents, etc.

Well as I see people who want to follow the Mosaic dietary laws here judge those who do not wish to place themselves under the Mosaic law do lots of judging,, so I always remind people.

Sorry, but always and ever and forever (or literally ages unto ages) do mean what they say! God neither needs you nor I to correct what He inspired! If he meant just alot of time He being God knew how to inspire that!

But as for jews, even in this New TEstament age, Jewish believers are still required to do the Abrahamic circumcisiona dn to keep Sabbath for it is throughout all their generations (not most but all)

And a superficial reading of SCripture leads one to conclude Jesus was calling on disciples to loather their parents. But if one delves even just a little deep, they find out that the phrase is what is called a Hebraism and means that one is to prefer Jesus over their parents. Even to this day many Jews still for example going say shoe store shopping, they will say I love these but hate those. It simply means they prefer one over another.

Sorry but every and all and ofrever unless modified by something in the passage mean they are unequivocal. That is how we understand it in all other writings and it is God who created communication so we can communicate one to another in a way we can understand.

 

[BarneyFife]

Well as I see people who want to follow the Mosaic dietary laws here judge those who do not wish to place themselves under the Mosaic law do lots of judging,, so I always remind people.

Sorry, but always and ever and forever (or literally ages unto ages) do mean what they say! God neither needs you nor I to correct what He inspired! If he meant just alot of time He being God knew how to inspire that!

But as for jews, even in this New TEstament age, Jewish believers are still required to do the Abrahamic circumcisiona dn to keep Sabbath for it is throughout all their generations (not most but all)

And a superficial reading of SCripture leads one to conclude Jesus was calling on disciples to loather their parents. But if one delves even just a little deep, they find out that the phrase is what is called a Hebraism and means that one is to prefer Jesus over their parents. Even to this day many Jews still for example going say shoe store shopping, they will say I love these but hate those. It simply means they prefer one over another.

Sorry but every and all and ofrever unless modified by something in the passage mean they are unequivocal. That is how we understand it in all other writings and it is God who created communication so we can communicate one to another in a way we can understand.

Oh, I see, superficial vs. unequivocal—to be decided by Ron or Barney or whomever, I guess. Ok, Brother Ron.

Peace multiplied to you in any case, Brother.

.

 

[dev553344]

I like my pork sandwich meat. It is the only sandwich meat that isn't processed. So I hope it's OK with God that I'm eating it. Cheers!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The things that make animals unclean aren't listed exhaustively and explicitly in Scripture, except for design features that identify them, but science has done a fairly decent job in making the distinctions except, of course, in the perception of folks who are hell-bent on excusing their consumption as food.

Well NOah could eat pig and lobster and bugd and catfish.

Genesis 9

King James Version

​

9 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

Can you show me the secret list of things that god told Noah He couldn't eat?

I know I am a simple rube, but when the Creator of the Universe says in verse 3 "Everything" and then "all things" without listing any exceptions, I think He meant what He said. Why don't you???

Oh, I see, superficial vs. unequivocal—to be decided by Ron or Barney or whomever, I guess. Ok, Brother Ron.

Not decided by us, but by language and culture. We 21st cwentury English speakers are so arrogant and haughty because we think that Bibles like the KJV or one of the other excellent translations are as infallible as the original autographs.

But what we puffs of dust have failed miserably on is forgetting that these words were written in a language and culture we are terribly ignorant of! That is what I meant by superficial. And if one does a cursory study of culture, they can easily see Jesus wasn't saying for His disciples to hate their parents as we think of hate, but to prefer them less than Jesus. That is how the disciples understood it .

Also when you read the rest of the gospels, you see that if Jesus was saying to hates one parents it goes against all HIs other teachings about parent child relationships! that should be a second red flag that goes up in ones mind.

As 21 st century American Gentile believers we are so far removed from the culture, language and setting of Scripture, we are ignorant of many things in Scripture because we are academically lazy and do not study deeper. That is why the american external church is so corrupt. We won't go past basic study.

To get a real hands on knowledge of the Bible we need to do far more than just study the Scriptures (though too man do not do that) but study how and why words were used in the days they were spoken.

Example- If the Lord tarries 500 years and some person uncovers a writing that talks about a rock group being "so cool" and the euphemisms of our day are long gone- the first natural conclusion they would draw is that their are groups of stone that are colder than others!

These are just teh facts we as believers in the 21st century face.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

It is the only sandwich meat that isn't processed.

That's not true... you can get unprocessed beef, turkey, and chicken

people who want to follow the Mosaic dietary laws

It's not required under the New Covenant and you cannot earn your salvation by doing this

 

[BarneyFife]

you cannot earn your salvation by doing this

...which is something virtually no one except straw man artists like you believes exists.

.

 

[Jay Ross]

That's not true... you can get unprocessed beef, turkey, and chicken

But it is only unprocessed if the meat is uncooked.

Hope you like raw meat on your sandwich.

 

[marks]

You are amkming a guess that this was dietarty clean. but all we have for dietary instructions prior to the flood was than man was only to eat herbs with its seed and fruit with its seed. Animals were forbidden to eat.

Noah did know about animals that were clean/unclean to offer sacrifice to God.

I think you misunderstood me. For Noah, clean and unclean was not about which were for food. We can speculate that it was about sacrifice, but we're not told this.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Again, you prove how we know it was fermented.

Check the wedding feast in Cana, wine got them drunk.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Animals were designated unclean because their "lifestyles" made them wholly unfit for food, just as moldy fruit is.

Why do you think this? "Clean" and "unclean" animals were determined before allowing any animals to be eaten, and when animals were allowed to be eaten, it was all animals, not just the clean ones.

Isn't it only - only - the Mosaic covenant that connects clean and unclean to eating? And of course as a gentile I'm not included in that covenant, right?

Much love!