|
Forums118
Topics9,199
Posts195,671
Members1,324
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: What Is The Truth About The Eating Today Of Unclean Meat Such As Pork?
#46621
07/10/03 12:22 PM
07/10/03 12:22 PM
|
Active Member 2013
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,102
Halstad, MN
|
|
I thought of an alternate approach you could take to support your position regarding Acts 15. You could substantiate that one of those four necessary things was Jewish only, and didn't apply to Gentiles in OT times.
If that were the case, then your point that only certain exclusively Jewish laws were placed on Gentiles would be valid.
My point is that nothing exclusively Jewish, like circumcision, has been laid upon Gentile believers.
|
|
|
Re: What Is The Truth About The Eating Today Of Unclean Meat Such As Pork?
#46622
07/10/03 04:26 PM
07/10/03 04:26 PM
|
|
|
quote:
If Isaiah could be very bold on the grafting in of the gentiles, then I would think that the later prophet Jeremiah could know something of that topic as well.
That was nothing new, but you seem to be confusing the two. Gentiles by birth could always become Israel if the converted to Judaism, that is what you are calling “grafted” in. However, gentiles becoming God’s people as Christians does not mean they are Jews or are ever thought of as Israel. This was clearly understood by all the bible writers:
Gentiles:
“"I will call them 'my people' who are not my people; and I will call her 'my loved one' who is not my loved one," 26and, "It will happen that in the very place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,' they will be called 'sons of the living God.'” Hosea 1:10
Israel:
“"Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea, only the remnant will be saved. 28For the Lord will carry out his sentence on earth with speed and finality.” Isaiah 10:22,23
quote:
Are you willing to say this about all Scripture? Jesus said that we must hate our parents. He didn't explicitly qualify that. Does that mean it shouldn't be qualified?
Bob, you need to read more carefully. Jesus never stated we should hate our parents. He stated we should love and honor our parents and if they go against God we should love God more than them.
quote:
My point remains this: That Gentiles in OT times were required to abstain from blood and unclean animals, and that whatever they were required to do in OT times they are still required to do, except for sacrifices.
If you want to prove my position wrong, you need to either demonstrate that there is an OT law for Gentiles that they don't have to keep in NT times, or demonstrate that they could eat pork in OT times. Can you do so?
Bob, the only gentiles in the OT that were allowed to follow the torah law became Jews (Isaiah 56; Acts 2:11; 13:43). However, in the NT gentile believers in JESUS did not become Jews, they were Christians. So you cannot apply Jewish laws to Christians unless you have some text that requires Christians to keep all the torah laws, and there isn’t any.
So you can’t start from a position that implies that gentiles (non-Jewish converts to Judaism) were required to or given the torah law in the OT, because they weren’t. However, if you want to prove that gentiles, who did not convert to Judaism, were required to keep the torah law, go ahead. But I think we both know that wasn’t the case.
So if no gentiles, who had not converted to Judaism, kept the torah in the OT there is no assumption that they would keep any of it in the NT. So only those thing given to them in the NT apply.
So if we look at the NT we see many moral laws and the four torah laws given to gentile Christians, but strangely enough only the three in Acts 15 relate to the kosher laws.
So if you can prove from the OT that gentiles, who did not convert to Judaism, were given and required to follow the torah law as a people, I will then need to prove that they were then not required to follow the kosher laws in the NT. However, unless you can prove they had the law in the OT, there is no precedence in the OT to base your assumption that gentiles should follow the kosher laws unless told not to do so in the NT
Note- God tried very hard to keep Israel from following the pagan practices of the gentiles around Israel. That is why God required the INDIVIDUAL gentiles living in and among Israel to follow the torah practices, so they wouldn’t corrupt Israel by their pagan practices. So using individual cases will not support your case in that God gave Israel the law as a people, not individuals. So you need to show the kosher laws being given to gentiles AS A PEOPLE.
|
|
|
Re: What Is The Truth About The Eating Today Of Unclean Meat Such As Pork?
#46623
07/11/03 12:15 PM
07/11/03 12:15 PM
|
Active Member 2013
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,102
Halstad, MN
|
|
quote:
Gentiles by birth could always become Israel if the converted to Judaism, that is what you are calling "grafted" in.
No it isn't. I'm using the terminology of Paul from Rom. 11:17, 19, 23, 24. Paul there refers to believing Gentiles who have not converted to Judaism as those who have been "graffed" in. quote:
However, gentiles becoming God's people as Christians does not mean they are Jews or are ever thought of as Israel.
Not so. Look at the last two verses of Romans 2, for example. Non-Jewish Christians are there called Jews if they are circumcised in their hearts, even though they are uncircumcised in their flesh. quote:
Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Romans 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
quote:
Bob, you need to read more carefully. Jesus never stated we should hate our parents.
Not so. quote:
Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
quote:
Bob, the only gentiles in the OT that were allowed to follow the torah law became Jews (Isaiah 56; Acts 2:11; 13:43).
We're not talking about the Torah law. We're talking about not eating blood and unclean animals. Gentiles have always been forbidden to eat such things, as Lev. 17:13 tells us. quote:
So you cannot apply Jewish laws to Christians unless you have some text that requires Christians to keep all the torah laws, and there isn't any.
You have to first demonstrate that we're talking about "Jewish" laws. You haven't done so. quote:
God tried very hard to keep Israel from following the pagan practices of the gentiles around Israel. That is why God required the INDIVIDUAL gentiles living in and among Israel to follow the torah practices, so they wouldn't corrupt Israel by their pagan practices.
Where does it say in the Bible that this was the case?
Does that mean that individual Gentiles were required to be circumcised if they lived in Israel? In other words, were all Gentiles living in Israel required to become Jews? Was it therefore illegal for any Gentile to live in Israel?
Outside of Israel, does that mean that it was permissible for Gentiles to bow to images, eat blood, murder, steal and fornicate?
Some laws were universal. Some just applied to the Jews. Not eating blood was universal. Always has been, always will be. Circumcision never was universal.
Our position is that the restrictions against eating unclean animals have always been universal, just like the Sabbath. quote:
2 Corinthians 6:17, 18 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
- Paul here says that if we want God to be our Father, we need to not touch the unclean thing.
- Is. 66 says that if you're eating pork when Christ returns, you'll be consumed. The text doesn't say that it's only talking about literal Jews.
- Rev. 18:2 refers to certain birds still being "unclean" at the very end of time.
- Lev. 17 indicates that abstaining from eating unclean animals is part of universal law, not Jewish law.
- Noah wasn't told to bring enough unclean animals on board to have any to eat after the flood.
|
|
|
Re: What Is The Truth About The Eating Today Of Unclean Meat Such As Pork?
#46624
07/11/03 02:40 PM
07/11/03 02:40 PM
|
Most Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,332
BC, Canada
|
|
In order to provide good info on this topic I think a comparison should be made here.
When God instructed the Isrealites what foods were clean and unclean He did so for a reason, and this reason has to do with health. The pig which is one of God's creations is not an abominable creature, but its just not the healthiest meat to consume. When preparing pork whether it be pork roast, pork chops,bacon, ribs or whatever you need to serioiusly make sure that the meat is cooked so well because if not you run a risk of getting trychina (spelling is not accurate) and this is a worm that forms a cyst into the muscle found in pork. Even though today the meat industry will tell you that the pigs are fed grain etc etc.. which is not correct eithre since we are talking about big business and the ppigs, and cattle today are fed a combination of grain and bone meal which is basically animal parts that are mixed into the feed for more protein which is hwy there is an unusual amount of bacteria and viruses found in meat today..Soryr if I went off track there but that had to be covered. Anyhow pork is not healthy to eat.. you can find the information about trychina in your high school science book hopefully..It was there when I was in high school. Anyways I wanted to share that info because we can get off track saying "The gentiles this" or "Thats only for the Isrealites"..remember trychina is for anyone and is not prejudice, and God has always knows what kind of animals can be considered healthy to consume and which ones should basically handle eating garbage etc etc..
God Bless,
Will
|
|
|
Re: What Is The Truth About The Eating Today Of Unclean Meat Such As Pork?
#46625
07/11/03 05:20 PM
07/11/03 05:20 PM
|
|
|
quote:
No it isn't. I'm using the terminology of Paul from Rom. 11:17, 19, 23, 24. Paul there refers to believing Gentiles who have not converted to Judaism as those who have been "graffed" in.
Ok, that makes more sense. However, you really should read more of Romans 11, because then you would see that gentiles are the “wild olive branch” and Israel is the “cultivated olive tree”. Paul specifically used this analogy because it demonstrates how Jews fit with Gentiles in the kingdom. The fact is that you can physically graft almost any type of branch from one tree to another, however, that never changes the tree it’s grafted to or the branch.
So grafting a wild olive branch into a cultivated olive tree never makes the wild olive branch produce cultivated olives and never makes the cultivated tree produce wild olives on the other (non-grafted) branches.
So what Paul is telling us with his analogy is that Jews and gentiles can and are together in the kingdom. They both draw spiritual nourishment from the roots (Jesus), but the Jews never become gentiles and the Gentiles never become Jews.
quote:
Not so. Look at the last two verses of Romans 2, for example. Non-Jewish Christians are there called Jews if they are circumcised in their hearts, even though they are uncircumcised in their flesh.
Bob, I’m starting to worry about your reading skills. Is this how you read scripture; proof-texting all the way? Please look at the context of Romans 2 starting with verse 17 and you will see that this entire passage is directed to literal Jews. Paul was not addressing gentiles. So please, lets stop with the out of context quotes, ok?
As far as Luke 14, please stop proof-texting. It is a very inaccurate and uneducated method of exegesis. Anyone reading Luke 14 in context would know and understand that Jesus was referring to what believers would have to give up to follow Him. In other words, the cost of being a follower of Jesus, see verse 33.
quote:
We're not talking about the Torah law. We're talking about not eating blood and unclean animals. Gentiles have always been forbidden to eat such things, as Lev. 17:13 tells us.
So because God required gentiles living AMONG the Jews to follow the Jewish kosher laws, you then apply that to all gentiles, even those not living among Israel? Wow! What liberties you take with scripture.
Sorry, I don’t buy it. Since Israel was given the kosher laws AS A PEOLPLE, for you to prove that it also applied to ALL GENTILES you need to show where the kosher laws were given to ALL gentiles JUST LIKE ISRAEL.
“ 'Any Israelite or any alien living among you who hunts any animal or bird that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth,” Lev 17:13
Ok, were waiting?
quote:
You have to first demonstrate that we're talking about "Jewish" laws. You haven't done so.
Really? My contextually challenged friend, the context of the text you just quoted (Lev 17:13) was to Israel as a law for Israel. A law to or for Israel means it is a Jewish law. Get it?
“1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Speak to Aaron and his sons and to all the Israelites and say to them: 'This is what the LORD has commanded…….” Lev 17
Guess what, when the Lord “commands” something to the “Israelites” IT’S A JEWISH LAW!
quote:
Where does it say in the Bible that this was the case?
Does that mean that individual Gentiles were required to be circumcised if they lived in Israel? In other words, were all Gentiles living in Israel required to become Jews? Was it therefore illegal for any Gentile to live in Israel?
Outside of Israel, does that mean that it was permissible for Gentiles to bow to images, eat blood, murder, steal and fornicate?
Some laws were universal. Some just applied to the Jews. Not eating blood was universal. Always has been, always will be. Circumcision never was universal.
Our position is that the restrictions against eating unclean animals have always been universal, just like the Sabbath.
Ok, let me take each one of these questions individually:
“Where does it say in the Bible that this was the case?” (referring to God requiring gentiles in the Jewish community to keep Jewish laws)
Gentiles living with Jews required to keep circumcision: Gen 17:9-12
Gentiles living with Jews required to keep the Sabbath: Ex 23:12
Gentiles living with Jews required to keep the day of atonement: Lev 16:29
Gentiles living with Jews required to give burnt offerings a sacrifices: Lev 17:8
Gentiles living with Jews required to keep all the sexual relations laws: Lev 18:1-26(26)
Gentiles living with Jews required to not sacrifice to idols: Lev 20:2
Gentiles living with Jews required to not blaspheme the name of the Lord: Lev 24:16
Etc. etc. etc….
Gentiles living with Jews required to keep ALL the same laws as the Jews: Lev 24:22; Number 15:15-16, 29, etc..
So we see that God required ALL gentiles or non-Jews living among them to keep ALL the Jewish civil and sacred laws. Not just the kosher laws and the Sabbath.
So why did God require this?
“9 When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there. 10 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. 12 Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD , and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you. 13 You must be blameless before the LORD your God.” Deut 18
Why? Because He didn’t want Israel to follow the gentile pagan practices. So God required gentiles living among Israel to keep all the Jewish laws and those gentile nations not living in the Jewish community were driven away from Israel so Israel would not be influenced by them.
Next question: “Outside of Israel, does that mean that it was permissible for Gentiles to bow to images, eat blood, murder, steal and fornicate?”
While God did not like what gentiles outside Israel did, He did not require anything of them: “In the past, he [God] let all nations go their own way.” Acts 14:16
God also never gave the gentiles living outside the Jewish communities any of the Jewish laws: “19 He has revealed his word to Jacob, his laws and decrees to Israel. 20 He has done this for no other nation; they do not know his laws.” Ps 147 (Also Deut 4:5-8)
So we see these facts from scripture:
1. God required gentiles living in the Jewish communities to keep all the Jewish laws
2. God allowed the gentiles outside the Jewish communities to “go their own way” and they were not given nor did they know the Jewish laws.
So your idea of “universal laws” is contrary to scripture. That may be your belief, but I don’t see that supported by scripture. So the facts seem to be that since gentiles (as a people) did not know about and were not given any of the Jewish laws, there is no way they would be following the kosher laws in the NT. As such, you still have to prove that the kosher laws were given to gentiles as a people to support your view.
quote:
When God instructed the Isrealites what foods were clean and unclean He did so for a reason, and this reason has to do with health.
Will, perhaps you have not been following this discussion very closely, but we have already established that God gave the clean/unclean distinction related to sacrifices long before the distinction was used for eating.
Here let me lay this out for you quickly; God gave the clean/unclean distinction in Gen 7 and probably much earler than that for Cain/Able, then in Gen 9:1-5 (after the flood) He stated that man could eat “Everything that lives and moves”. So even after the flood all meat/animals were ok to eat. It wasn’t until Moses that God actually extended the clean/unclean distinction to food.
So since the clean/unclean distinction was originally given for sacrifices, and not food, the distinction is purely ceremonial. As sacrifices were ceremonial in nature, so is the clean/unclean distinction that was originally given with sacrifices. So there is no scriptural basis to believe that when the clean/unclean laws were extended to food that it was for health reasons.
Now understand this is from a purely religious or moral perspective. I fully agree that today there are valid health reasons to limit one’s diet to certain foods. However, trying to support that limited diet for religious reasons is really not accurate.
|
|
|
Re: What Is The Truth About The Eating Today Of Unclean Meat Such As Pork?
#46626
07/12/03 03:14 AM
07/12/03 03:14 AM
|
Active Member 2013
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,102
Halstad, MN
|
|
quote:
So please, lets stop with the out of context quotes, ok?
Rom. 2 still calls Gentile believers "Jews," regardless of what sort of context one claims is there. This is a standard passage used by all who believe that the church is the Israel of today.
But if you don't like that one, here are a couple more: quote:
Romans 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
Galatians 3:29 And if ye be Christ?s, then are ye Abraham?s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
quote:
As far as Luke 14, please stop proof-texting.
You stated previously that 1 Cor. 11:25 doesn't need to be qualified by vss. 19 and 28. I said, What about where Jesus said we should hate our parents? Shouldn't we qualify that? You said he never said that. I showed you where He did in Luke 14:26. Now, besides asking me not to quote Scripture, you have proceeded to qualify that verse, which lends support to the idea that we must qualify 1 Cor. 11:25 by vss. 19 and 28.
As far as proof-texting goes, Christ repeatedly quoted Scripture when answering the devil and men. I request the liberty to do the same. Of course, context is important, just like the fact that the context of 1 Cor. 11:19, 28 sheds light on vs. 25.
Were you proof texting by quoting 1 Cor. 11:25 out of context? quote:
So because God required gentiles living AMONG the Jews to follow the Jewish kosher laws, ...
But you have yet to demonstrate that the laws against eating unclean animals is "Jewish." Your statement begs the question. You must first prove your point.
In other words, I deny that Scripture anywhere calls these laws Jewish. I maintain that they are universal laws, that have always applied to everyone, for the reasons stated, just like the Sabbath and tithing.
Have you not noticed that there is a total absence of controversy in the NT over eating pork? The judaizers made a fuss over circumcision, and Peter got into trouble for merely visiting and eating in a Gentile's house, but not once did any judaizer ever accuse Paul or Peter of eating pork.
Just like the absence of a controversy over the Sabbath, this stark silence in the NT is evidence that these things were never an issue. Gentile believers kept these universal precepts, giving judaizers nothing to complain about. quote:
A law to or for Israel means it is a Jewish law. Get it?
Really, you ought to be nicer.
That text from Lev. 17 concerns primarily not eating blood, a prohibition that was a universal law, not a Jewish law, as you admit. But the immediate context gives no hint of that in the manner that you require.
Another important point is the rationale behind abstaining: quote:
Leviticus 11:44 For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Leviticus 11:45 For I am the LORD that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.
Deuteronomy 14:2 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.
Deuteronomy 14:21 Ye shall not eat of any thing that dieth of itself: thou shalt give it unto the stranger that is in thy gates, that he may eat it; or thou mayest sell it unto an alien: for thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother?s milk.
It's part of holy living, which is still important for both Jewish and Gentile believers today: quote:
Hebrews 12:14 Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:
1 Peter 1:15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;
1 Peter 1:16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.
quote:
Gentiles living with Jews required to keep circumcision: Gen 17:9-12
Abraham was not a Jew.
Since Ex. 12:48 indicates that sojourners did not have to be circumcised. a difference must therefore be made between slaves or servants, and independently living sojourners.
Further, if all sojourners were circumcised, they would all then be Jews. There would never be a true Gentile sojourner if your suggestion were correct. quote:
Gentiles living with Jews required to keep the day of atonement: Lev 16:29
Or rather, they were not permitted to work on that day. Since they were prohibited from observing the Passover, I'm not sure we can say that they were required to keep the Day of Atonement. But maybe they were. quote:
Gentiles living with Jews required to give burnt offerings a sacrifices: Lev 17:8
Or rather, if they did offer a sacrifice, they had to do it in a certain place. But that Gentiles were required to offer blood sacrifices can be demonstrated from Gen. 4. Sacrifices were part of the universal law, not the Jewish. quote:
Gentiles living with Jews required to keep all the sexual relations laws: Lev 18:1-26(26)
And so are Gentile believers today, according to Acts 15. Which is why I said that the council of Acts 15 based its decision on the universal precepts of Lev. 17 and 18.
The last two examples and the second example you gave are dealt with in the universal code known as the 10 Commandments. quote:
Why? Because He didn?t want Israel to follow the gentile pagan practices. So God required gentiles living among Israel to keep all the Jewish laws and those gentile nations not living in the Jewish community were driven away from Israel so Israel would not be influenced by them.
But you missed a very important point: quote:
Leviticus 18:25 And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.
Because the Canaanites, before the Israelites ever got there, had violated these UNIVERSAL precepts, that's why God ordered their destruction. So says Scripture. quote:
While God did not like what gentiles outside Israel did, He did not require anything of them: "In the past, he [God] let all nations go their own way." Acts 14:16
That's rather radical. quote:
Romans 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
Thus, following your statement to its logical conclusion, Gentiles living outside of Israel never committed any sin, and thus need no Savior to save them from transgressions they never committed.
The fact that Paul says that all have sinned, and that by the law is the knowledge of sin, proves that there was a universal law that even Gentiles living outside of Israel were required to obey.
And you forgot what you already admitted, that not eating blood was a universal law dating back to Noah, required of all Gentiles.
God still lets all nations walk in their own ways. Not that they won't get into trouble if they do so.
An ineresting concept in Judaism is that there is more than one kind of proselyte.
You have the full proselyte, the Gentile who became a Jew. He did this by being circumcised, and baptized, and by offering sacrifice.
Then you have a proselyte of the gate, one who remained a Gentile, but who kept the precepts of Noah. He was not circumcised, but he didn't eat blood and abstained from idolatry and polytheism.
Thus Judaism way way back recognized the fact that there were universal laws, including the universal prohibition against blood given to Noah.
|
|
|
Re: What Is The Truth About The Eating Today Of Unclean Meat Such As Pork?
#46627
07/14/03 04:21 PM
07/14/03 04:21 PM
|
|
|
quote:
Rom. 2 still calls Gentile believers "Jews," regardless of what sort of context one claims is there. This is a standard passage used by all who believe that the church is the Israel of today.
No so:
“17Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and brag about your relationship to God; 18if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; 19if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, 20an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of infants, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth-- 21you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? 22You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23You who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24As it is written: "God's name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.25Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised. 26If those who are not circumcised keep the law's requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? 27The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker. 28A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God.” Romans 2:17-29
Facts: Paul’s intended audience “call themselves Jews”, “blaspheme God among the gentiles”, “have the written code and circumcision”, are “Jews outwardly”.
So lets see who fits these descriptions:
“call themselves Jews” – Jews think they are physical descendants of Abraham (John 8:31-33)
“blaspheme God among the gentiles” – Literal Jews have done this (Ez 36:22) descendants
“have the written code and circumcision” – Jews (Israel) Rom 9:4 physical
“Jews outwardly” – Jews actually physical descendants of Isaac (Gen 21:12)
So it is clear that Paul was not addressing gentiles in this passage. Frankly, I’m frustrated that you made me go to this length to prove you wrong.
‘1I speak the truth in Christ--I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit-- 2I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, 4the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen. 6It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children.” Romans 9
Facts: Paul is a Jew and is here addressing his people, vs 3. Paul also states that not all those who are literal descendants of Israel (vs 6) are considered Abraham’s seed (vs 7).
This means just because you are a literal Jew does not mean you are Abraham’s seed.
Abraham’s seed = All (Jew & Gentile) who believe in Jesus (Gal 3:16, 29)
Isaac’s seed = Literal Jews (Gen 21:12)
So as with the previous text you quoted, you are incorrect. Paul is clearly AGAIN addressing his own people, Israel. He is saying that just because they are Jews does not mean they are saved or counted as Abraham’s seed. Non-saved Jews are counted as Isaac’s seed, not Abraham’s seed.
Lastly, you quote of Gal 3:29 was actually correct, although you were incorrect about what you think it means. Please understand that ONLY Jews that believe in Jesus are counted as Abraham’s seed. It doesn’t matter what Jews think they are. What matters is what scripture and the prophets say they are. So since even Jews are not considered Abraham’s seed, why would you think Abraham’s seed was considered Israel, when Israel’s descendants are counted through Isaac? You are in error.
quote:
But you have yet to demonstrate that the laws against eating unclean animals is "Jewish." Your statement begs the question. You must first prove your point.
Gee Bob, are you serious?
“1 The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, 2 "Say to the Israelites: 'Of all the animals that live on land, these are the ones you may eat: 3 You may eat any animal that has a split hoof completely divided and that chews the cud………..” Lev 11:1-47
These kosher laws were given to whom? Israelites!
Consider it proven!
quote:
In other words, I deny that Scripture anywhere calls these laws Jewish. I maintain that they are universal laws, that have always applied to everyone, for the reasons stated, just like the Sabbath and tithing.
As can be seen, I just proved (above) that the kosher laws were given to the Jews as a people. So all you have to do to prove your point is show they are also given to Gentiles as a people. If you can do that then you can apply them to all people, or make them “universal”. If not, you are incorrect.
quote:
Have you not noticed that there is a total absence of controversy in the NT over eating pork? The judaizers made a fuss over circumcision, and Peter got into trouble for merely visiting and eating in a Gentile's house, but not once did any judaizer ever accuse Paul or Peter of eating pork.
Bob, you REALLY need to study your bible more and the church doctrines less. The Judaisers focused on circumcision because it was considered the entry point into Judaism. When a gentile became converted to Judaism the FIRST thing was circumcision (Gen 17:12). So the judaiser felt that the believers were becoming Jewish converts (as you seem to believe), but Paul help clear them of that idea.
Anyway, the fact is that the Jerusalem council considered all the law or Moses for gentile CHRISTIAN believers (Acts 15:5) and only required the four things.
quote:
Just like the absence of a controversy over the Sabbath, this stark silence in the NT is evidence that these things were never an issue. Gentile believers kept these universal precepts, giving judaizers nothing to complain about.
We are not talking about the Sabbath, but since you brought it up, it was not without controversy:
“16Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.” Col 2
“8Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. 9But now that you know God--or rather are known by God--how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? 10You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! 11I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.” Gal 4
“5 One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind.” Romans 14
Anyway, I guess we can see that Paul also had something to say about keeping special days like the Sabbath. But that is another issue.
quote:
Since Ex. 12:48 indicates that sojourners did not have to be circumcised. a difference must therefore be made between slaves or servants, and independently living sojourners.
Further, if all sojourners were circumcised, they would all then be Jews. There would never be a true Gentile sojourner if your suggestion were correct.
No, the difference is that one gentile is living there as a gentile, the other is a Jewish convert. As I mentioned, circumcision was the entry point to Judaism. So while gentiles living among Jews needed to keep most the Jewish laws, they only got circumcised if they were converting to Judaism.
quote:
Thus, following your statement to its logical conclusion, Gentiles living outside of Israel never committed any sin, and thus need no Savior to save them from transgressions they never committed.
This statement shows that you don’t understand the gospel.
“Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God.” Rom 3:19
I’m sure this quote from Paul is your point, right?
Well guess what: “All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law.” Rom 2:12
Notice that those under the law (Jews) and those apart from it still die. Remember, death comes from sin. So why or how can someone who is apart from or not under the Jewish law also die? There is in fact a universal law, but it is not the Jewish law. The Jewish law is based on the precepts of the universal moral law, but the two are not the same. That is how gentile pagans, who do not know the Jewish law, can by nature or instinctively follow the moral principles found in the Jewish law (Rom 2:14).
Your mistake is thinking that the ceremonial aspects of the OT law like the Sabbath, tithe, kosher laws, etc are “moral” and universal in nature. The universal laws are those that are moral in nature like, not killing, fornicating, adultery, etc.
So you are correct there is a universal law that all men are held to, it’s just not the ceremonial Jewish laws.
quote:
And you forgot what you already admitted, that not eating blood was a universal law dating back to Noah, required of all Gentiles.
I suppose you are correct here. If it was given after the flood it would be for all mankind. So not eating blood would be probably the only universal ceremonial law for all mankind.
quote:
Thus Judaism way way back recognized the fact that there were universal laws, including the universal prohibition against blood given to Noah.
And on what biblical basis do you include clean/unclean food, etc. to this list?
|
|
|
Re: What Is The Truth About The Eating Today Of Unclean Meat Such As Pork?
#46628
07/14/03 05:15 PM
07/14/03 05:15 PM
|
|
|
Dear Lobo,
With the Lord there is great patience, in fact when we are His the gift of fruits of the Spirit are given on us. Frustration is not the fruit of Jesus. So take caution that you not blame someone else for you taking temptation in on you because that is not well with Jesus either. Look within when there is sin and remove it first is what Christ said. (Matt 7:3,4,5)
The Gentiles were taught to accept by faith over the law, and what does faith do from the time of Adam till present truth? God writes His laws in the hearts of those that will accept Christ. All biblical.
If you make note of the two most important commandments that Christ spoke of, you will have to agree they are what the ten commandments are based on. You see the first four commandments that God wrote in stone teach HOW TO LOVE HIM. And the second set of six teach HOW TO LOVE OUR NEIGHBOR. So to think that the Jews and the Gentiles are taught different governments is not so.
God's government (law) is based on the foundation of love. God has not changed from the beginning.
You may continue making your argument, as I believe you will. But it does make it truthful.
I would like to have you consider that you may not have all the right answers, that perhaps your heart could be humbled to consider that your preception is flawed. But do this with the Holy Spirit, fast on it. Seek the humility of Christ in all things and all things will be revealed.
I will tell you from experience that we must resist the will of pride. Why? Because it will surely be the death of us.
Sr. Cheri
|
|
|
Re: What Is The Truth About The Eating Today Of Unclean Meat Such As Pork?
#46629
07/14/03 06:10 PM
07/14/03 06:10 PM
|
|
|
quote:
The Gentiles were taught to accept by faith over the law, and what does faith do from the time of Adam till present truth? God writes His laws in the hearts of those that will accept Christ. All biblical.
Very true Cheri. But what law?
quote:
If you make note of the two most important commandments that Christ spoke of, you will have to agree they are what the ten commandments are based on. You see the first four commandments that God wrote in stone teach HOW TO LOVE HIM. And the second set of six teach HOW TO LOVE OUR NEIGHBOR. So to think that the Jews and the Gentiles are taught different governments is not so.
Sorry Cheri, that is what you want to believe, but that is NOT what scripture states. Do you even know that “love your neighbor as yourself” is not in the ten commandments? In fact, this commandment is in the torah law (Lev 19:18), not the table of stone.
So if there was not a specific command like this in the OT I could agree that symbolically the ten c’s support what you have stated. However, since there is a specific command in the torah for “love your neighbor as yourself”, I cannot agree. This means that you cannot apply this to only the ten c’s.
In other words, the entire law given to Israel can support Love for God and love for man, but NOT just the tables of stone. So when Jesus stated this He meant the entire 613 laws, not just the ten.
quote:
God's government (law) is based on the foundation of love. God has not changed from the beginning.
I agree. But the level of love God required of Israel was not the same as Jesus is requiring. That is why divorce was permitted before Jesus 1st advent (Deut 24:1-4; Matt 19:7-8). So the OT law is really not up to the moral level that Jesus came and required.
quote:
I would like to have you consider that you may not have all the right answers, that perhaps your heart could be humbled to consider that your preception is flawed. But do this with the Holy Spirit, fast on it. Seek the humility of Christ in all things and all things will be revealed.
I would like you to consider that that process is exactly how I came to the beliefs I know hold. So while my beliefs my not be the “right answers” for you, they are for the Holy Spirit and God. So if you don’t like my beliefs, perhaps you should take it up with the Lord.
|
|
|
Re: What Is The Truth About The Eating Today Of Unclean Meat Such As Pork?
#46630
07/15/03 01:11 PM
07/15/03 01:11 PM
|
Active Member 2013
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,102
Halstad, MN
|
|
Lobo, quote:
28A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly,
You really ought to use a more literal translation. The word "only" is not in the text. And thus you did not prove me wrong.
Paul is telling Jews that they aren't really Jews if they aren't converted. And he's telling them that Gentiles that are converted are Jews in God's sight.
Here is another one: quote:
Philippians 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
quote:
Non-saved Jews are counted as Isaac's seed, not Abraham?s seed.
How can a non-saved Jew be a son of Isaac and not a son of Abraham, when Isaac was Abraham's son? The other way around would make sense. Besides: quote:
Rom. 9:6-8 For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Isaac was the child of promise, and thus Paul here is denying that unconverted Jews are counted as children of promise, as children of Isaac. quote:
These kosher laws were given to whom? Israelites!
Consider it proven!
No, that doesn't prove it.
Another example is the Sabbath and the entire Decalogue. People use your argument to try to prove that the 10 are just for the Jews, even though Jesus explicitly said He made the Sabbath for Adam. (The Greek phrase for "man" in Mark 2:27 corresponds to the Hebrew phrase for Adam and mankind in the first 11 chapters of Genesis.)
Does Ex. 20:2 mean that Gentiles were not sinning when they murdered and stole and fornicated? Of course not. So just because we have Ex. 20:2 doesn't mean that the 10 aren't for Gentiles too. quote:
So all you have to do to prove your point is show they are also given to Gentiles as a people.
Which I did:- Only 2 of each unclean animal were taken on the ark, while 7 of the clean were taken aboard. If Noah had been allowed to eat pork, we wouldn't have any pigs today.
- Lev. 17 indicates that Gentiles could not eat unclean animals, even though other Kosher laws did not apply to them. For example, Deut. 14:21 says that Israelites could not eat animals that died of themselves, but strangers could. Yet strangers could not eat unclean animals according to Lev. 17.
- Is. 66 says those eating pork when Christ comes will be lost.
- 2 Cor. 6:17, 18, says that if we want God to be our Father, we must not touch the unclean thing.
- Abstaining from unclean animals is part of holy living, and holy living is a NT requirement.
You cannot produce one text from the NT that explicitly says that Gentiles can eat pork, or break the fourth commandment. The texts you quote neither explicitly mention unclean animals nor the seventh-day Sabbath.
Rom. 14 doesn't say what sort of days it's talking about. Neither does Galatians. Col. 2:14 excludes the 10 Commandments from consideration, since they weren't handwriting, can't be blotted out, and can't be nailed. Col. 2:16 is talking about sabbath days, plural, a fact your version ignores, sabbaths that were shadows, which ties them in with the 7 annual sabbaths of Lev. 23, not the 4th Commandment.
quote:
Anyway, the fact is that the Jerusalem council considered all the law or Moses for gentile CHRISTIAN believers (Acts 15:5) and only required the four things.
But I'm sure you don't mean from this that that council was telling Gentiles they could steal and murder and lie. And thus you would admit that those four things were not the only things required of Gentiles. Universal laws like the Sabbath and abstaining from unclean animals would be required too. quote:
Well guess what: "All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law." Rom 2:12
As I already quoted, where there is no law, there is no transgression. Now someone can be ignorant of the law, and not have it in their homes, reading it all the time, but that fact does not make the law non-existent. They are still sinning, because there is a law that says they are.
And as you admit, there is a universal law, and thus the Gentiles of the OT were sinning when they transgressed that universal law. The difference is what you and I think was part of that universal law.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
