Was Peter’S Vision About Food Or About Men?

[veteran]

So, Bud02, you're not SDA afterall?

To the OP,

You need to calm down. I too was in the USAF in many countries, and in some situations I HAD to eat what was put before me.


1 Cor 10:27-31
27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

That 27th verse is NOT about eating what is presented to an idol. Use your common sense. Paul says in that situation to eat, asking no questions.

28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

But that 28th verse IS about refusing to eat what is sacrificed unto idols. In this situation, Paul says to not eat what is sacrificed to idols for the unbeliever's sake.

I agreed that the Message Peter was shown in Acts 10 with the blanket of unclean animals was NOT about food, but about God sending The Gospel also to the Gentiles.

I also agreed that per God's Law, we are to eat only from His list of meats created to be received. It's for health reasons. We could go further with how man is even corrupting foods today that are on that list. Not everyone is capable of raising their own chickens and having a garden. Christ is NOT going to condemn any believer on Him for having to eat whatever is sold in the shambles. That's the point Paul made there also...

1 Cor 10:25
25 Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:
(KJV)


PETER'S REMARKS ABOUT PAUL'S EPISTLES:

The some things in Paul's Epistles that are hard to understand which Peter spoke of, is linked with the SUBJECT Peter was covering in the 2 Peter 3 chapter.

2 Pet 3:16
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
(KJV)

Just what "speaking in them of these things" was Peter talking about from Paul's Epistles?

Well, what were the things Peter was covering in the 2 Peter 3 chapter?

Peter was teaching about the idea of world ages, destruction upon the earth by a flood, and the coming end of this world by fire. THAT'S "these things" he was talking about within some of Paul's Epistles that many struggle with. Romans 8 is a prime example, but I won't go into it here.

 

[Eccl.12:13]

To the OP,


1 Cor 10:27-31
27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

That 27th verse is NOT about eating what is presented to an idol. Use your common sense. Paul says in that situation to eat, asking no questions.

28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

But that 28th verse IS about refusing to eat what is sacrificed unto idols. In this situation, Paul says to not eat what is sacrificed to idols for the unbeliever's sake.

Let's read a bit before 1 Cor.10:27 to find just what is the topic Paul is speaking about....

[14] Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.

So here we know what Paul is speaking about. Let's continue....

[16] The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
[17] For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

Paul ask, what we do, do we not do it in the body of Christ? Of course. Though we are many we all take part in the same feast.

[18] Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the alter?
[19] What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?

Those that are natural Israel, are not those that eat of sacrifices also one?
So what is an idol, or meat offered to an idol? Nothing!

[20] But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

Now let me ask....you are suggesting that, although ALL of these verses deal with idols, Paul decided to change course for ONE verse?

Let's continue....understanding that up to this point Paul is STILL talking about foods sacrificed to idols...


[25] Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:
[26] For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof.

Paul is YET speaking about things offered to idols. Here he is saying, don't worry about whether ot not the meat bought in the shambles are left over from idol sacrifice. Why? Because it ALL belongs to the Lord.


[27] If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

Now you think the above verse does NOT deal with things offered to idols? Why does Paul mention "...of them that believe not..."? Because he is talking about the same Gentiles he mentioned in verse 20 above...

"...that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice..."

And it is these Gentiles and the meat they serve you, not to worry about as far as if the meat was leftovers from their sacrifices. If they do not say anything, then eat! But this does NOT say anything about unclean foods.

Let's read the next verse...

[28] But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

Now if someone TELLS you the food was offered to idols, Paul say do not eat. But are we not to eat because it is wrong? NO!!! Paul already told us everything in the earth is the Lord's. We do not eat so that the Gentiles cannot go back and say, "These believers eat just anything!", them being unlearned or 'babes' in the word of God. Let's read it...

[29] Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience?

Let's read what Paul says next....

[30] For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?

Paul knows that all in the earth in the Lord's, but why let what he know to be good, be evil spoken of. He then goes on to say.

[31] Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

From the 14th verse to the 31st verse Paul speaks ONLY about idol worship and things sacrificed to idols. At NO point does he EVER speak about 'clean' or 'unclean' foods.

And concerning your other post.....

I too was in the USAF in many countries, and in some situations I HAD to eat what was put before me.

As I said before, God ALWAYS made a way for me to survive WITHOUT having to break His laws. I am not saying it was easy. Just as one must prepare for God's sabbath, so did I in my travels to different places.

As the scriptures say

1 Cor.10
[13] There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.


.

 

[jiggyfly]

Jiggfly I have been reading through out this thread and I don't see any misconception with
"This lesson is for those that may have been told that Peter's dream was about doing away with God's dietary laws, but as one can clearly see, God's words proves otherwise.

The message God wanted Peter to know is very clearly spelled out.....

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

At NO point was Peter's dream EVER about doing away with God's dietary laws!"
He isn't propagating anything. If anyone tries to use Acts to do away with God's dietary law, WELL THAT IS PROPAGATION!!!!!
and as for 2 Cor. 3:7 WHAT POINT EXACTLY ARE YOU TRYING TO MAKE?????

First of all Xander my post was not directed towards you, secondly there is no need for using caps (shouting), it doesn't get any more attention from me and it reveals something of yourself.

Now learn to respond maturely and I will respond back

Eccl.12:13, I have answered your question so now I will wait for you to answer me on why you are avoiding 2Cor.3.

 

[bud02]

Jiggfly I have been reading through out this thread and I don't see any misconception with
"This lesson is for those that may have been told that Peter's dream was about doing away with God's dietary laws, but as one can clearly see, God's words proves otherwise.

The message God wanted Peter to know is very clearly spelled out.....

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

At NO point was Peter's dream EVER about doing away with God's dietary laws!"
He isn't propagating anything. If anyone tries to use Acts to do away with God's dietary law, WELL THAT IS PROPAGATION!!!!!
and as for 2 Cor. 3:7 WHAT POINT EXACTLY ARE YOU TRYING TO MAKE?????

So lets ask what it was that made them unclean to the Jews, before this vision.
Could it be they did not follow the law of Moses, the Levitical law?
Unclean generally meant or implied the Levitical law.
A sinner or sin in the same manner is a violation of the 10 commands.
but God hath shewed me that I should not call "any man" common or unclean.
Why now should every man now, be looked upon as clean not saved or forgiven but clean.. To say it quit simply because the Levitical law is dead.

This parallels my main message in Danial that 70 weeks we determined for the Jewish people.
The 70 week was fulfilled and this is one marker of that event. Danial 9-27 is Jesus Christ not the Anti-Christ.
http://www.christian...dpost__p__89105
The Jews are not abandoned they were offered Christ first. But at the closing, the fulfilling of the promise to Abraham on to Judah the scepter, the seed of Abraham had been delivered. It also closes the 70th week of Danial 70 weeks are determined for you and your people. The mission of delivering the Seed / Jesus the Messiah was complete.

Galatians 3 - 6 Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And to your Seed, who is Christ. [sup]17[/sup] And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ,[sup][j][/sup] that it should make the promise of no effect. [sup]18[/sup] For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

the law beside the Ark of the Covenant inside lays the 10 commandments, this law of Moses was completed and the vision indicates that.
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;

It was not placed within the ark , with the ten commandments, but placed outside, that it may be there as a witness against you;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another. Romans 2:14, 15

I'm going to C/P someone elses comments that reflect my opinion about this verse, and the context surrounding it.
What I would like the reader to ask themselves, is this referring to the 10 commandment laws or the Levitical law. I find it hard to believe that by nature the Gentiles did what the Levitical law said, but rather by nature did what the commandments said. Jesus when asked what is the greatest law replied

MT 22 [sup]35[/sup] Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying, [sup]36[/sup] “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?”
[sup]37[/sup] Jesus said to him, “ ‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’[sup][d][/sup] [sup]38[/sup] This is the first and great commandment. [sup]39[/sup] And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’[sup][e][/sup] [sup]40[/sup] On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

John 13-so now I say to you. [sup]34[/sup] A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. [sup]35[/sup] By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”

http://www.opensourc...y.net/node/1812
Posted 30 April, 2009 - 18:10 by Andrew Peter’s review of Wright’s Justification has sparked some interesting discussion of Romans 2:13-16 and the question of Gentiles keeping the Law. Wright suggests that when Paul says that Gentiles may fulfil the Law, he means that Christian Gentiles because they have the Law written on their hearts by the Spirit. It’s an intriguing argument, but I’m not convinced. For clarity I have posted these comments as a new thread, but the conversation appended to Peter’s review should be kept in view.

In 2:5-11 Paul describes a coming day of wrath when God will be shown to be righteous and both Jews and Greeks will be rewarded ‘according to his works’. Those who do good work, whether Jew or Greek, will receive the ‘life of the age’, ‘glory and honour and peace’. Those who work evil will receive ‘wrath and fury’, ‘affliction and anguish upon every person who does evil, Jew first, then Greek’.

This argument carries on into verse 12: those who sin - that is, do evil - without the Law will perish without the Law; those who sin under the Law, will be judged by the Law. Verse 13 explains why Jews specifically who sin will be judged by the Law: it is not the hearers of the Law who will be declared righteous on the day of wrath but the doers of the Law. The point to note is that Paul only says here that Jews who keep the Law will be justified.

The situation with the Gentiles in this argument is slightly different. I would point out, first, that there is no reason to think that Paul has moved beyond a scenario in which Jews and Greeks as Jews and Greeks - and not as Jewish and Gentile believers - face a day of wrath or judgment. What Paul then says is that Gentiles who do not have the Law may still do the things of the Law and so show that the works of the Law are written on their hearts. He is not saying that the Law itself is written in the hearts of these Gentiles - for example, by the Spirit in the manner of 2 Cor. 3, as Wright argues (Justification, 166-167). There may be an echo of Jeremiah 31:33, but still, it is the works of the Law that are inscribed in their hearts, not the Law itself. Nor is he saying that ‘the law is active in their lives’, as Desert Reign suggests. These Gentiles do not need to have consciously or unconsciously acquired the Law in order to do the sort of good works that the Law prescribes: they behave in this way instinctively or, as Paul says, ‘by nature’.

For that reason I think that it is correct to associate ‘by nature’ with the doing rather than with the having, which in any case looks better grammatically to me. Paul does not say that they kept the Law or were under the Law ‘by nature’ but that ‘by nature’ they did the things (justice, mercy, compassion, etc.) that the Law requires. In any case, it makes no better sense to say that the Jews had the Law ‘by nature’.

So, although I need to look at Wright’s argument more closely, I am not immediately persuaded that Romans 2:14 refers to Gentiles who have the Spirit. This section seems to me to be continuous with 2:1-13 and to switch to believing Gentiles in such an abrupt and unsignalled fashion seems unlikely. When the day of judgment comes, the hope that these Gentiles will have is not that they have been or will be justified - that is not said. It is that their consciences may be able to appeal to the fact that they have done the works that the Law demands of Israel. On this day Jews may find themselves put to shame by the practical righteousness of Gentiles who do not have the Law but nevertheless behave Lawfully.

 

[Eccl.12:13]

Let's stay on track here.

This lesson is to show that Peter's dream had NOTHING to do with doing away with God's dietary laws!

The dream was to let Peter and the rest of the Jews know that God's word was NOT for them alone, but it was to be spread to ALL of mankind. This is something that the apostles did not understand. They thought God's word was for them and them alone.

For those reading, and you think otherwise, please present scripture that supports your views of whether you think Peter's dream was about MAN or about FOOD!

The scriptures presented mentions nothing about God's dietary laws being abolished!



.

[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;

It was not placed within the ark , with the ten commandments, but placed outside, that it may be there as a witness against you;

Again with your argument about there being a difference between God's Laws and Commandments!

There is no difference! It was proven!

You agreed that Adam broke God's commandment!

Adam sinned thus bringing death to ALL mankind!

All mankind has sinned!

The definition of sin is to trangess God's laws.

Since Adam broke God's commandment, AND in doing so resulted in the sin that caused ALL mankind death, and to sin is to break God's laws, then breaking God's commandments AND laws are one in the same.

Please provide scripture proving otherwise!



.

 

[bud02]

Let's stay on track here.

This lesson is to show that Peter's dream had NOTHING to do with doing away with God's dietary laws!

The dream was to let Peter and the rest of the Jews know that God's word was NOT for them alone, but it was to be spread to ALL of mankind. This is something that the apostles did not understand. They thought God's word was for them and them alone.

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

I did stay on topic. What does unclean mean to you?

So lets ask what it was that made them unclean to the Jews, before this vision.
Could it be they did not follow the law of Moses, the Levitical law?
Unclean generally meant or implied the Levitical law.
A sinner or sin in the same manner is a violation of the 10 commands.
but God hath shewed me that I should not call "any man" common or unclean.
Why now should every man now, be looked upon as clean not saved or forgiven but clean.. To say it quit simply because the Levitical law is dead.


.

Again with your argument about there being a difference between God's Laws and Commandments!

There is no difference! It was proven!

You agreed that Adam broke God's commandment!

Adam sinned thus bringing death to ALL mankind!

All mankind has sinned!

The definition of sin is to trangess God's laws.

Since Adam broke God's commandment, AND in doing so resulted in the sin that caused ALL mankind death, and to sin is to break God's laws, then breaking God's commandments AND laws are one in the same.

Please provide scripture proving otherwise!

The whole mission from Gen to Jesus was to restore mans relationship to God.

We agree that God had one command in the garden.
The 10 commandments came to define sin and sin prevailed over all men.
Jesus came and issued one command similar to the one command in the garden. Similar as in one.

The 10 still stand even today, besides Jesus reducing the 10 to 2.


[size="+1"]Mark 12:30: [/size][size="+1"]And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.[/size][size="+1"]

Mark 12:31: [/size][size="+1"]And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.[/size][size="+1"] [/size]
The first goes IMO without needing to be said.
And the second is also found here.

John 13 - [sup]31[/sup] So, when he had gone out, Jesus said, “Now the Son of Man is glorified, and God is glorified in Him. [sup]32[/sup] If God is glorified in Him, God will also glorify Him in Himself, and glorify Him immediately. [sup]33[/sup] Little children, I shall be with you a little while longer. You will seek Me; and as I said to the Jews, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come,’ so now I say to you. [sup]34[/sup] A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. [sup]35[/sup] By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”

So you see as Adam had one command, Jesus also leaves us with one command.

The Fathers commands written by the finger of God still stand, Jesus condensed them.
If you look at the 10 commandments you will see the first 4 involve our relationship to God the last six deal with our relationship to each other.

.[size="+1"]Relationship to God-----And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.[/size][size="+1"] [/size]
[size="+1"] [/size][size="+1"]Relationship to each other------And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.[/size][size="+1"] [/size]

Let's stay on track here.

This lesson is to show that Peter's dream had NOTHING to do with doing away with God's dietary laws!

The dream was to let Peter and the rest of the Jews know that God's word was NOT for them alone, but it was to be spread to ALL of mankind. This is something that the apostles did not understand. They thought God's word was for them and them alone.

I did stay on topic. What does unclean mean to you?

So lets ask what it was that made them unclean to the Jews, before this vision.
Could it be they did not follow the law of Moses, the Levitical law?
Unclean generally meant or implied the Levitical law.
A sinner or sin in the same manner is a violation of the 10 commands.
but God hath shewed me that I should not call "any man" common or unclean.
Why now should every man now, be looked upon as clean not saved or forgiven but clean.. To say it quit simply because the Levitical law is dead.


.

Again with your argument about there being a difference between God's Laws and Commandments!

There is no difference! It was proven!

You agreed that Adam broke God's commandment!

Adam sinned thus bringing death to ALL mankind!

All mankind has sinned!

The definition of sin is to trangess God's laws.

Since Adam broke God's commandment, AND in doing so resulted in the sin that caused ALL mankind death, and to sin is to break God's laws, then breaking God's commandments AND laws are one in the same.

Please provide scripture proving otherwise!

The whole mission from Gen to Jesus was to restore mans relationship to God.

We agree that God had one command in the garden.
The 10 commandments came to define sin and sin prevailed over all men.
Jesus came and issued one command similar to the one command in the garden. Similar as in one.

The 10 still stand even today, besides Jesus reducing the 10 to 2.


[size="+1"]Mark 12:30: [/size][size="+1"]And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.[/size][size="+1"]

Mark 12:31: [/size][size="+1"]And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.[/size][size="+1"] [/size]
The first goes IMO without needing to be said.
And the second is also found here.

John 13 - [sup]31[/sup] So, when he had gone out, Jesus said, “Now the Son of Man is glorified, and God is glorified in Him. [sup]32[/sup] If God is glorified in Him, God will also glorify Him in Himself, and glorify Him immediately. [sup]33[/sup] Little children, I shall be with you a little while longer. You will seek Me; and as I said to the Jews, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come,’ so now I say to you. [sup]34[/sup] A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. [sup]35[/sup] By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”

So you see as Adam had one command, Jesus also leaves us with one command.

The Fathers commands written by the finger of God still stand, Jesus condensed them.
If you look at the 10 commandments you will see the first 4 involve our relationship to God the last six deal with our relationship to each other.

.[size="+1"]Relationship to God-----And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.[/size][size="+1"] [/size]
[size="+1"] [/size][size="+1"]Relationship to each other------And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

[/size] A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another;

We are restored from the fall of Adam that violated the one command, and given a new single command. Just the way it was, one commandment. We walk in the law of the Spirit like Paul says
[size="+1"] [/size]

 

[Eccl.12:13]

To say it quit simply because the Levitical law is dead.

Agreed! The Levitical IS dead!

But I don't believe you know just what the Levitical law is!

God's Dietary Laws are NOT part of the Levitical Priesthood laws!


.

 

[bud02]

Agreed! The Levitical IS dead!

But I don't believe you know just what the Levitical law is!

God's Dietary Laws are NOT part of the Levitical Priesthood laws!


.

Found in one of the five books of Moses called the Pentateuch meaning 5, Leviticus 19:28, is primarily a part of the instructions God gave to the priests to follow. They were also the God-appointed teachers of the nation. It was their responsibility to teach Israel the ways of God. The Levitical priests were cast into this role by default.

That would include what they taught then, yes? If their is no Levi law then there is no law taught and practiced.

Just go back and pretend I said law of Mosses or all the laws thar sat beside the Ark. What ever pleases you. You know very well what I mean by Levitical law the Levis taught Israel to adhere to.

It would appear that your word games has lead you to believe that we as Christians should follow the law of Mosses, or is it just the dietary ones your concerned with.

As Paul in the context speaks of the change from the Levitical priesthood to that of Melchizedek, he clearly makes the note that Christ is of a different tribe of which God gave no authority under the Law of Moses to officiate as a priest. “For He of who whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man has officiated at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning the priesthood.” (Heb. 7:13-14). Further God says that more evidence (as we pointed out above) exists for a new priesthood after the order of Melchizedek.

I have already shown you the command Jesus gave. Nothing there about eating ham and deviled eggs.

 

[Xanderoc]

I did stay on topic. What does unclean mean to you?
I did stay on topic. What does unclean mean to you?

[/size]So lets ask what it was that made them unclean to the Jews, before this vision.
Could it be they did not follow the law of Moses, the Levitical law?
Unclean generally meant or implied the Levitical law.

Clean and Uncleaned is what God says it is. Before the Levitical priest hood. God told Noah what was clean and unclean animals.

Gen 7: [sup]1[/sup]And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation. [sup]2[/sup]Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.


So even before Moses or Levi was born God called what animals were clean and unclean. God's law has always existed even before man was on this earth. So this quote "Could it be they did not follow the law of Moses, the Levitical law?
Unclean generally meant or implied the Levitical law." This is a spirit of error!!!! God told Peter to eat something He called unclean from the time of Noah, before Levi !!!!!! And Peter knew it wasn't about food otherwise Peter wouldn't doubted in what the vision meant!!!!! The Lord simply explained in Leviticus 11, the animals He told Noah about.

 

[bud02]

Clean and Uncleaned is what God says it is. Before the Levitical priest hood. God told Noah what was clean and unclean animals.

Gen 7: [sup]1[/sup]And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation. [sup]2[/sup]Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.


So even before Moses or Levi was born God called what animals were clean and unclean. God's law has always existed even before man was on this earth. So this quote "Could it be they did not follow the law of Moses, the Levitical law?
Unclean generally meant or implied the Levitical law." This is a spirit of error!!!! God told Peter to eat something He called unclean from the time of Noah, before Levi !!!!!! And Peter knew it wasn't about food otherwise Peter wouldn't doubted in what the vision meant!!!!! The Lord simply explained in Leviticus 11, the animals He told Noah about.

The same argument could be made with circumcision and Abraham before the 10 commandment or the law or the Levis.
And we all know what the out come of the need for circumcision was.

 

[veteran]

Let's read a bit before 1 Cor.10:27 to find just what is the topic Paul is speaking about....

[14] Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.

So here we know what Paul is speaking about. Let's continue....

[16] The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
[17] For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

Paul ask, what we do, do we not do it in the body of Christ? Of course. Though we are many we all take part in the same feast.

[18] Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the alter?
[19] What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?

Those that are natural Israel, are not those that eat of sacrifices also one?
So what is an idol, or meat offered to an idol? Nothing!

[20] But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

Now let me ask....you are suggesting that, although ALL of these verses deal with idols, Paul decided to change course for ONE verse?

Let's continue....understanding that up to this point Paul is STILL talking about foods sacrificed to idols...


[25] Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:
[26] For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof.

Paul is YET speaking about things offered to idols. Here he is saying, don't worry about whether ot not the meat bought in the shambles are left over from idol sacrifice. Why? Because it ALL belongs to the Lord.


[27] If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

In those two verses of 25 & 27, Paul IS saying TO EAT.

In verse 25, he is commanding us to eat whatever is sold in the shambles (butcher shop), asking no question.

In verse 27, he is commanding us to eat what is set before us when invited to dine with Gentiles, but under a CONDITION; that if they say the food has been sacrificed to an idol, under that condition we are NOT to eat it.

In verse 27 where Paul tells us to eat what is set before us by the unbeliever, what is unclean is INFERRED, simply because of the customs of the Gentiles.

Also, in Acts 15 the Apostles did NOT command the Gentiles to eat per God's health laws. They did NOT make that a requirement for Gentiles to be saved. Nor is it an act that can save any Jew, for only by Faith are we saved, and not of works of the law.

IT IS A GOOD THING TO DO SO THOUGH, FOR IT PROMOTES GOOD HEALTH. So I would NEVER be against eating per God's health laws. If you've always been able to, then consider yourself blessed.

And if you get invited to dine with unbelieving Gentiles, especially in a far country, as long as they don't say the food was sacrificed to an idol, Paul says to eat what is set before you, asking no question, for conscious sake. I guarantee you, if you refuse their hospitality in that case, it will insult them, and you will have reduced your chances to preach The Gospel of Jesus Christ to them.

 

[bud02]

The Great Apostasy
[sup]1[/sup] Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, [sup]2[/sup] speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, [sup]3[/sup] forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. [sup]4[/sup] For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; [sup]5[/sup] for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

 

[gregg]

if you understood the act that adam commited then you would know why God presented the animals.don't you think if it was just about man that God would of just put different people on that sheet? : God had 2 reasons for this not just 1 seek and you will find

 

[veteran]

I've got to support Eccl. on the idea of much of God's law still be in effect for us Christians also, but not the 'ordinances' which Christ nailed to His cross (Col.2; Eph.2).

Not every law given through Moses is dead. God's health laws in Deut.14 are still in effect, for all of us. But not the laws of ordinances which primarily dealt with sacrifices and various offerrings and rituals by the Levitical priesthood.

God's laws cover a wide range of our existence, even of what type of material for clothing we're to wear, to not mixing our crop seed when planting, and when to prune our fruit trees, how often to plant in the same soil before letting the soil regain its natural nutrients, not to have intercourse with woman with her time of the month because it is her cleansing cycle, etc. None of that has changed one iota today. God's law involves a lot of science. Even the idea of cleansing under 'running water' is from God's law.

And it is true, that we are eating some very bad foods today that are not healthy, pork being one of the worse foods. God fashioned hogs to be scavengers to clean the earth, likewise with shellfish, catfish, etc., to clean the waters. Scavengers are not on God's health list of foods created to be received. If we eat enough of those foods our flesh will not be healthy. It's simply a fact that all doctors can testify to.

Processed foods are just as bad, even if they say things on them like 'all beef'. If you take time to think about the clean meats on God's health list, they are from animals that eat grains, that graze, and not scavengers that eat other animals or trash upon the earth. A cause for 'mad cow' disease has been the mixing of animal meat products in with the grain for cows. Cows are not designed to process meat, but grain from the earth. That's why animals that eat grains are on the clean list for us to eat.

Today, God's enemies are messing with our food supply, tainting it, adding foreign chemicals to it and modifying it genetically, so that it's becoming best to raise our own gardens and dometic clean animals and grains for their food. I'm not a vegetarian, but that's not a gurantee of health today either unless you can find plant seed that man has not genetically modified in some way. Even a lot of vegetables sold at market today are not supplying the amount of natural vitamins which non-genetically modified versions use to. And it's getting to where just about every drink other than water has high fructose corn syrup or some form of sugar added to it, even a can of V8 juice.

I would very much welcome our Jewish brethren in Christ posting a thread just on ways to eat healthy, and prepare healthy foods and drink. It would help us all.

 

[Xanderoc]

The same argument could be made with circumcision and Abraham before the 10 commandment or the law or the Levis.
And we all know what the out come of the need for circumcision was.

So what are you saying people can eat what ever they want, So according to you God have had Moses write Leviticus 11 in vain. Because according to you Jesus nailed that law to the cross. THAT IS A SPIRIT OF ERROR!!!!! God sacrificial law was the only law nailed to the cross!!! I don't expect you to change. The bible clearly states that

1 Timothy 4
[sup]1[/sup]Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;


We are in the latter times, and all this false doctrine, about not having to keep God's law is not of Jesus faith, those are doctrines of devils.


[sup]2[/sup]Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

Some people will not see the truth no matter how much sound doctrine is placed in front of them!!! The mind of some of the people on this forum clearly is seared!!!


[sup]3[/sup]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.


We already know what church has there clergy forbidding to marry!!!! The so called mother church, The same doctrine has been taught by the daughter churches... The protesters kept the same SUNDAY worship, not keeping God's laws, Christ born on the winter solstice, going to heaven, people being sent to hell to be tortured by Satan. All these false doctrines are killing people spiritually.


[sup]4[/sup]For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

[sup]5[/sup]For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.


Sanctified means set apart by the word of God!!!! Clean and Unclean foods are set apart by God's word!!!!

God's law and commandments still stand til the heaven be no more. And by the way bud02 the law that was added 430 after was THE SACRIFICIAL LAW!!!!!!!

 

[bud02]

So what are you saying people can eat what ever they want, So according to you God have had Moses write Leviticus 11 in vain. Because according to you Jesus nailed that law to the cross. THAT IS A SPIRIT OF ERROR!!!!! God sacrificial law was the only law nailed to the cross!!! I don't expect you to change. The bible clearly states that

1 Timothy 4
[sup]1[/sup]Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;


We are in the latter times, and all this false doctrine, about not having to keep God's law is not of Jesus faith, those are doctrines of devils.


[sup]2[/sup]Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

Some people will not see the truth no matter how much sound doctrine is placed in front of them!!! The mind of some of the people on this forum clearly is seared!!!


[sup]3[/sup]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.


We already know what church has there clergy forbidding to marry!!!! The so called mother church, The same doctrine has been taught by the daughter churches... The protesters kept the same SUNDAY worship, not keeping God's laws, Christ born on the winter solstice, going to heaven, people being sent to hell to be tortured by Satan. All these false doctrines are killing people spiritually.


[sup]4[/sup]For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

[sup]5[/sup]For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.


Sanctified means set apart by the word of God!!!! Clean and Unclean foods are set apart by God's word!!!!

God's law and commandments still stand til the heaven be no more. And by the way bud02 the law that was added 430 after was THE SACRIFICIAL LAW!!!!!!!

You'll get your opportunity to take it up with Timothy all I'm doing is quoting him.

good job Greg
[sup]6[/sup] If you instruct the brethren in these things, you will be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished in the words of faith and of the good doctrine which you have carefully followed. [sup]7[/sup] But reject profane and old wives’ fables, and exercise yourself toward godliness.

 

[bud02]

God's law and commandments still stand til the heaven be no more. And by the way bud02 the law that was added 430 after was THE SACRIFICIAL LAW!!!!!!!

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:

 

[veteran]

The Great Apostasy
[sup]1[/sup] Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, [sup]2[/sup] speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, [sup]3[/sup] forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. [sup]4[/sup] For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; [sup]5[/sup] for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Uh,... note a condition Paul gave with that, "foods which God created to be received".

What are the foods God created for us to receive? The list is given in Deut.14.

Paul's message there is how some in the latter days would be saying that it is wrong to eat animal meats. It's not wrong. But it is wrong to eat outside God's list of meats He created to be received.

My father died when his pancreas burst. My mother died of colon cancer. Both of them were farm raised on pork. In the last years of my dad's llife, I spent a week with him, and every morning he had to have his two pork tenderloin and biscuits. He didn't eat much else the whole day, but he had... to have those pork tenderloins and biscuits, every morning. I tried to get him to change, but the old ways just stuck, as pork has been a major staple for many in the old south. My mother, the same thing. Every morning she had to have either bacon, sausage, or country ham and biscuit; every morning. She never smoked nor drank, and for the rest of her meals she ate healthy. But she was continually going to the doctor.

I was raised on sausage, bacon, and country ham. But after I got into God's Word and read about His health laws, and seriously got to thinking and looking at how we live, I began to understand the difference. I spent three and half years in Spain in the late 1970's, and noticed how different their food supply was compared ot ours in the U.S. In that era of Spain, the food was fresh daily, the people only buying daily what they could prepare and eat. The only kind of salads they had was leafy Romain lettuce with olive oil and vinegar, which is very healthy. Even their flour was still stone ground the old world way, with the chromium element not refined out of it like American flour is. That was the healthiest period in my life, and I haven't forgotten it. I come back to the States and I see all these over-processed foods and the only time when something is fresh is when it comes from our garden or from the local farmer's market, or local beef from a local butcher, or bass and crappie caught out of the lake.

In Spain, the Spaniards didn't eat at places like McDonalds, Burger King, etc. They treated those places like hang-outs, only as a place to meet and shoot the bull. And why should they see those places any differently when they could go next door to a one-fork restaurant and eat healthy fresh daily for half the price?

 

[bud02]

Uh,... note a condition Paul gave with that, "foods which God created to be received".

What are the foods God created for us to receive? The list is given in Deut.14.

Paul's message there is how some in the latter days would be saying that it is wrong to eat animal meats. It's not wrong. But it is wrong to eat outside God's list of meats He created to be received.

Why dont you just finish reading the whole message.

[sup]4[/sup] For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; [sup]5[/sup] for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

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."

Care to go back to Gen the creation account and show me the unclean or the imperfect?
I believe He said it was good.


Veteran can you tell me what side of the fence you are on?
Between the last two post about 10 min. you replied to another thread by the guy that started this one said something else.:blink:
http://www.christian...__fromsearch__1

 

[Eccl.12:13]

Why dont you just finish reading the whole message.

[sup]4[/sup] For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; [sup]5[/sup] for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

And what creatures are 'sanctified' by God? In other words, which creatures have been "set aside' by the creator to be received?

See Lev.11 & Deut.14

These are the creatures that are to be received with thanksgivings!


.