Eating unclean and/or kosher food

[Akjv]

Choosing Christ does not mean we neglect the law. Christ did not come to abolish it but to fulfill it so he could be our substitute. To accept Christ and to continue to live like our old self, having no regards for the law is a big no no. In fact Christ has raised the standard of the law so high that the old law seems to become a new one.

Rom 4 and Heb 8 see my post 41

 

[MForbes]

Thanks for the thread, folks. Please excuse me a moment while I put spread some sauce on my baby back ribs…..

 

[Akjv]

Rom 4 and Heb 8 see my post 41

The Gentiles were not under any Law at all. And yet they Attained righteousness without any old Law. It is called Faith in Jesus is enough to save without the old law. There are many many verses that say the old law is done away with. If you want I can post the verses than say the law was done away with, Jesus did not need the Law as a helper to save lives. But that is what many believe is He was not enough alone so they brought is part of the Law even though the Bible says one must follow ALL law or be judged under the law.

 

[lanceleo]

There are many many verses that say the old law is done away with

They are done away with as the method of salvation......

 

[Akjv]

They are done away with as the method of salvation......

Acts 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
The old law did not offer salvation it was only put in place till Jesus came to fulfill the old law and give us a way to fulfill the old law so we could move on past the old law to Faith which only came through Jesus Christ and offer life and salvation.

 

[Akjv]

Gal 5
2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
The above is talking about following the law ( circumcised)

3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
The above say one can not follow part of the law.

4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
The above will be judged under the law for not following all the law.

5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
The above is the only way to be one with Jesus.

6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
Faith in the one who was actually on the cross for us is what matters.

7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
Above he is speaking of those who want Jesus and the old law.

8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
The above is saying you were not taught to mix Faith and the law.

 

[Studyman]

Acts 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Yes, as Hebrews 10 says. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Acts-13-39/

The old law did not offer salvation

There was only ONE Law created by God which was a shadow of the Christ's Sacrifice, "ADDED" Till the Seed should come, for the remission of sins.

It is easy to find these "works of the Law" that the Pharisees were still promoting for the remission of sins, by simply asking the question. "In the Law and Prophets, what did Moses Command that a "Common man" do, for the remission of his sin that was made known to him?

You can find this answer in your own Bible, in Leviticus 4. There was no other "Law" commanded by God and given to Moses, that dealt with justification or forgiveness of sins.

Moses didn't say, "If a man sins, he shall love his neighbor as himself, and his sin is forgiven." It is important to understand this truth, in order to know that "Works of the Law" the Pharisees were promoting for remission of sins.

it was only put in place till Jesus came to fulfill the old law and give us a way to fulfill the old law so we could move on past the old law to Faith which only came through Jesus Christ and offer life and salvation.

This is true. The "Old Priesthood" which was put in place because of Transgressions, was only to be in place until the New Priesthood, with our Prophesied "Priest of God "After the Order of Melchizedek, and not after the Order of Aaron, should come.

After this Priest came, these sacrificial "works of the Law" for the removal of sin that God gave Israel through Moses, became obsolete.

Nor men's transgressions are forgiven by a new and better ministry. Only it is important to remember what the Jesus "of the Bible" teaches.

Luke 13: 3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

And the deceiver would also have us ignore what Paul, by the vision of the Christ Himself, taught both Jew and Gentile.

Acts 26: 19 Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision: 20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

What works would these be?

Paul also tells us this.

Eph. 2: 8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of (Man's) works, lest any man should boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Paul continues to preach both Jew and Gentile these truths regarding God's salvation.

Eph. 4: 22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; 23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; 24 And that "ye put on" the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

And where does Paul teach me God's Righteousness is found?

2 Tim. 3: 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Why? Why do Gentiles and Jews need to "Know God" and His definition of Righteousness? Because the One True God, "will render to every man according to his deeds:"

Rom. 2: 7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:

But 9: Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

 

[Akjv]

Acts 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
The old law did not offer salvation it was only put in place till Jesus came to fulfill the old law and give us a way to fulfill the old law so we could move on past the old law to Faith which only came through Jesus Christ and offer life and salvation.

Rom 7
4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

 

[Studyman]

Gal 5
2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
The above is talking about following the law ( circumcised)

Paul calls the religious Sect of the Pharisees, "The Circumcision". He is teaching the Galatians that to turn away from God, and adopt or become a member of their religion, and rely on their religious traditions for Justification, shall profit them nothing.

It would be the same as a modern religion, who taught for doctrines the commandments of men, and "Full well they reject the commandment of God, that they may keep their own tradition.", telling others that unless they get baptized by their own ordained pastor, and follow the religious doctrines and traditions they promoted, they could not be saved.

3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
The above say one can not follow part of the law.

No, Paul is telling the Galatians that if they rely on Circumcision for the remission of my sins, they would then be obligated to "Never Sin" because by the "Works of the Law" no flesh is justified.

4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Yes, if I rely on Circumcision, or Baptism, or animal sacrifice or any other "law" for the remission of my sins, then Christ's sacrifice is of no use for me. There was NO LAW designed or created to "Take away Sins". There was a Shadow of the Sacrifice Jesus would make, a Priesthood "After the Order of Aaron". But this Law was only ADDED, because of Transgressions, "Till the Seed should come". Men still need to repent and "Yield Themselves" servants to obey God though. At least, that is what Jesus and Paul taught.

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Galatians-5-4/

The above will be judged under the law for not following all the law.

Yes, this is true. As Paul also teaches. "(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

Heb. 10: 26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

This is why Repentance is essential to God's Salvation.

5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
The above is the only way to be one with Jesus.

Yes, we believe Jesus takes our sins away, not cutting flesh off the penis, or slitting the throat of a goat, or having a man in a fish hat sprinkle water on us.

I "wait for the hope of righteousness" by belief in the One True God, "AND" His Son who this Same God sent. (AKA "Faith)

6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision (Jew) availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; (Gentile) but faith which worketh by love.
Faith in the one who was actually on the cross for us is what matters.

Yes. 1 Cor. 7:19 Circumcision (Jew) is nothing, and uncircumcision (Gentile) is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

Why? "(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified."

7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
Above he is speaking of those who want Jesus and the old law.

8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
The above is saying you were not taught to mix Faith and the law.

Gal. 5: 18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things "shall not inherit the kingdom of God". 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

It's important to consider ALL Scriptures. The deceiver uses scripture to deceive folks, just as it quoted some of God's Word to Eve.

Jesus warned about Christians in Matt. 24. There are "many" who call Jesus Lord, Lord that Jesus Himself says HE doesn't even know.

The Pharisees were children of the devil. They didn't promote the Circumcision of God. This undeniable Biblical Truth is extremely important to understand. Those who promote that the Pharisees were trying to get the Galatians for follow God's Laws, are promoting falsehoods about God and His Word.

 

[Akjv]

Paul calls the religious Sect of the Pharisees, "The Circumcision".

I don't recall seeing this any where. Where did you find this info? I was under the impression there were Pharisees, Sadducees and the rest of the Jews but all were circumcised from the time of Abraham. All Jews were cut on day 8 by law and any/all sects that did not accept new covenant were referred to as circumsion. not just one sect.

 

[Studyman]

I don't recall seeing this any where. Where did you find this info?

I found this in a Book called "The Holy Scriptures".

Gal. 2: 12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were "of the circumcision."

Eph. 2: 11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who "are called Uncircumcision" by that which is called "the Circumcision" in the flesh made by hands;

Titus 1: 10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they "of the circumcision": 11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.

"They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

I was under the impression there were Pharisees, Sadducees and the rest of the Jews but all were circumcised from the time of Abraham.

Paul referred to the religious Jews and their religion, as "the Circumcision" in many of his letters. And he referred to the Body of Christ as "the circumcision" as well. Obviously, the Galatians were not being "Bewitched" by the Body of Christ.

All Jews were cut on day 8 by law and any/all sects that did not accept new covenant were referred to as circumsion. not just one sect.

I prefer to let the Scriptutres create Doctrine for me.

Col. 4:11 And Jesus, which is called Justus, who are "of the circumcision". These only are my fellowworkers unto the kingdom of God, which have been a comfort unto me.

Phil. 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.

Obviously, Paul and the Body of Christ accepted God's version of His New Covenant but were still called by Paul "The Circumcision".

Paul tries to explain this to folks, but they don't believe him.

Rom. 2: 25 For circumcision "verily profiteth", if thou keep the law: but if thou be "a breaker of the law", thy circumcision "is made uncircumcision". 26 Therefore "if the uncircumcision" keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?

This is the same thing Moses instructed.

Duet. 10: 16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. 17 For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:

Paul confirms this in another place. 1 Cor. 7: 19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

Here is what you replied to.

Paul calls the religious Sect of the Pharisees, "The Circumcision". He is teaching the Galatians that to turn away from God, and adopt or become a member of their religion, and rely on their religious traditions for Justification, shall profit them nothing.

It would be the same as a modern religion, who taught for doctrines the commandments of men, and "Full well they reject the commandment of God, that they may keep their own tradition.", telling others that unless they get baptized by their own ordained pastor, and follow the religious doctrines and traditions they promoted, they could not be saved.

 

[Akjv]

I found this in a Book called "The Holy Scriptures".

Gal. 2: 12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were "of the circumcision."

Eph. 2: 11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who "are called Uncircumcision" by that which is called "the Circumcision" in the flesh made by hands;

Titus 1: 10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they "of the circumcision": 11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.

"They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.



Paul referred to the religious Jews and their religion, as "the Circumcision" in many of his letters. And he referred to the Body of Christ as "the circumcision" as well. Obviously, the Galatians were not being "Bewitched" by the Body of Christ.



I prefer to let the Scriptutres create Doctrine for me.

Col. 4:11 And Jesus, which is called Justus, who are "of the circumcision". These only are my fellowworkers unto the kingdom of God, which have been a comfort unto me.

Phil. 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.

Obviously, Paul and the Body of Christ accepted God's version of His New Covenant but were still called by Paul "The Circumcision".

Paul tries to explain this to folks, but they don't believe him.

Rom. 2: 25 For circumcision "verily profiteth", if thou keep the law: but if thou be "a breaker of the law", thy circumcision "is made uncircumcision". 26 Therefore "if the uncircumcision" keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?

This is the same thing Moses instructed.

Duet. 10: 16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. 17 For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:

Paul confirms this in another place. 1 Cor. 7: 19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

Here is what you replied to.

From what I read there were 4 main sects of Jews in Jesus day. The Sadducees and Pharisees would imo be about half if not more of Jews and these two groups were trying to stop Jesus teaching. imo "the circumcision" are both of these sects ( Sadducees and Pharisees) Their circumcision is by hands on day 8.
Later when Paul called the followers of Jesus "the circumcision "it was meant the circumcision of the Heart not made with Hands. So the first part we may not agree but seems we are close on the other.

 

[JacobSonOfJohn]

Yeshua told us what is food in His book of Leviticus and what is not. Just because we can put something in our mouth and digest it, doesn't mean we should. Even Acts make clear blood is off limits.

Unclean meats are unclean for a reason. Parasites and disease, when handling these things. Look at the heathens who eat these abominations of rats and mice. They even sink into cannibalism. They physically degerenate as a people towards death, the wage of sin, and are kept in bondage by demons.

Everything Elohim instructs us is for our longterm benefit. Elohim is absolutely minimal with His Laws.
But people are hard of heart, stiffnecked and rebellious. And as a result we are now in exile under a foreign power that has over a 100000 laws we are subjected to.

But Yehovah only gave about 613 laws for society and this can be summed up into 10 and these into 2.
If all were circumcised in the heart with the baptism of the holy Ghost, we wouldn't need all this bureaucracy, police and violence to keep the carnal man in check against his neighbour. There would not be war and thefts, or toxic pollution and industries.

 

[linux.poet]

I honestly feel that this question was decided long ago when Paul wrote that the Galatians were "bewitched" for thinking that they had to follow the law, including the Jewish dietary practices. Also, Christ declared all foods clean, God told Noah that he gave him "everything" to eat, and Peter was given an entire vision in which he was told it was okay to eat unclean things in Acts. Not to mention the church's decision not to impose the dietary laws upon Gentile Christians in the same book.

As for me, I feel no guilt for the conspicuous amount of ham and pork sausage I have eaten over the years.

 

[Soyeong]

I honestly feel that this question was decided long ago when Paul wrote that the Galatians were "bewitched" for thinking that they had to follow the law, including the Jewish dietary practices.

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Mosaic Law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message. Furthermore, Christ set a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to the Mosaic Law and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked. So Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example and Galatians should not be interpreted as speaking against following Christ.

In Acts 5:32, the Spirit has been given to those who obey God, so obedience to God is part of the way to receive the Spirit, however, Galatians 3:1-2 Denis that "works of the law" are part of the way to receive the Spirit, therefore that phrase does not refer to obedience to God. In Romans 3:27-31, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, so works of the law are of works while he said that our faith upholds God's law, so it is of faith, and a law that our faith upholds can't be referring to the same thing as the works of the law that are not of faith in Galatians 3:10-12. To interpret Galatians 3:10-12 as saying that God's instructions are untrustworthy is to interpret it as saying that God is untrustworthy, but rather God is trustworthy and therefore so are His instructions (Psalms 19:7).

Also, Christ declared all foods clean,

In Mark 7:1-13, Jesus criticized the Pharisees as being hypocrites for setting aside the commands of God in order to establish their own traditions, so he should not be interpreted as turning around and even more hypocritically doing what he just finished criticizing the Pharisees as being hypocrites for doing. In Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from the law, so if Jesus had been speaking against obeying God's dietary laws as you suggest, then he would have sinned and therefore disqualified himself as being our Savior. Likewise, in Deuteronomy 13:1-5, the way that God instructed His people to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for Him is if they teaching against obeying the Mosaic Law, so if Jesus had done that, then according to God we should consider him to be a false prophet. His critics would have for once had a legitimate reason to want to kill him and they wouldn't have needed to find false witnesses at his trial, but this incident was not even brought up, and no one reacted as though Jesus had made a radical statement in rebellion against the Father. The topic that they were discussing was whether someone could become common by eating bread with unwashed hands, which had nothing to do with eating unclean animals.

God told Noah that he gave him "everything" to eat,

The word used in Genesis 9:3 refers to prey animals, which are clean animals, while unclean animals are predators and scavengers.

and Peter was given an entire vision in which he was told it was okay to eat unclean things in Acts.

Peter could have obeyed God's commands in the Mosaic Law and His command in his vision by simply killing and eating one of the clean animals, so understanding why he refused to do what the Mosaic Law permitted him to do is the key to correctly understanding his vision. It should be noted that Peter did not just object by saying that he had never eaten anything that was unclean, but also added that he had never eaten anything that was command and God did not rebuke Peter for his use of the word "unclean", but only rebuked him for referring to what He has made clean as being "common". In other words, Peter correctly identified the unclean animals as unclean and correctly knew that he was not permitted to eat them, but he incorrectly identified the clean animals as common and incorrectly declined to eat them in disobedience to God's command to kill and eat. Peter interpreted his vision three times as being in regard to incorrectly identifying Gentiles without saying a word about now being able to eat unclean animals, so his vision had nothing to do with a change in their status.

Not to mention the church's decision not to impose the dietary laws upon Gentile Christians in the same book.

Either Acts 15:19-21 contains an exhaustive list of everything that would ever be required of mature Gentile believers or it does not, so it is contradictory to treat it as being a non-exhaustive list by saying that there are obviously other laws that Gentiles should follow, such as the greatest two commandments, while also treating it as being an exhaustive list to limit which laws Gentiles should follow. Furthermore, in Matthew 22:36-40, Jesus summarized the Mosaic Law as being about how to love God and our neighbor and said that all of the other commandments hang on them, so the position that we should obey the greatest two commandments is the position that we should also obey all of the commandments that hang on them. In Acts 15:19-21, it was not given as an exhaustive list for mature believers, but rather as stated it was a list intended to avoid making things too difficult for new believers, which they excused by saying that they would continue to learn about how to obey Mosaic by hearing him taught every Sabbath in the synagogues.

As for me, I feel no guilt for the conspicuous amount of ham and pork sausage I have eaten over the years.

If you read a verse and interpret it as speaking against obeying what God has commanded, then I see three options:

1.) You can think that you must have misunderstood that verse.

2.) You can deny the truth of that verse.

3.) You can think that it makes perfect sense to interpret servants of God as speaking against obeying Him.

Option #3 is absurd and #2 is not acceptable for those who believe in the truth of the Bible, but the bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man, so #2 is better than #3, but #1 is still the best option if we are to uphold the truth of the Bible.

 

[HARK!]

MOD HAT ON

DUE TO MULTIPLE RULE VIOLATIONS

Members who do not truly share the core beliefs and teachings of a specific congregational forum may post in fellowship or ask questions, but they may not teach or debate within the forum.

MOD HAT OFF​