DO YOU BELIEVE ITS OKAY TO EAT PORK, AS A BELIEVER IN GOD ?

[seabrook]

On ‎11‎/‎5‎/‎2015 at 6:47 PM, SINNERSAVED said:

HELLO EVERYONE, I was roaming around in the old testament and in Leviticus I came arcoss that we, if we are believers and follow God ,we are not to eat swines flesh  in chapter 11, now I did not know this ,but I heard it on the radio the calvary chapel question and answer show, saying that this was in the past, and it does not affect us today,as gentile christians or that it was a custom of the past , and now we are under grace and not under the law, so we can eat all the bacon we want, is this biblical ?

So are we under grace that we do not follow what God commanded us as it pertains to pork,?

is the saying that we as gentiles are not under the same customs to carry out  per God ?

does it make  a differents of how we acknowledge this ,compared to the people of Israel?

I know the scripture verse do not let anyone judge you of what you eat  etc, and that we are under a new covenant of grace, so please help me understand ,

why we do not have to follow this and if God states its a abomination, how do we get away with this rebellious act?

I am sincere about getting a valid and logical correct answer, that is proven by scripture ,that we do not have to follow this!

for God is the same yesterday ,today and tomorrow, is this another way that satan has deceived the gentiles?

I really appreciate your opinions and advise on this, thank you brothers and sisters.

 

Good question.    Always good to take the verses in the context for which they were written and be careful of how we apply them.   Obviously to abstain from pork was a good idea back then because of the danger in eating it...if it was not cooked thoroughly.  Now we know how to cook pork and ham so that there is no danger involved as long as we do that.   To me, that answers the question.   Mainly Jesus and Paul were telling us not to be legalistic.  There was and is..a new rule and that is of love.  Not to throw all out, as Paul says, (like the ten commandments) but stress the commandments of Jesus.  All scripture must be read in the context in which it is written otherwise we might even justify taking an eye for an eye..and revenge. 

[SINNERSAVED]

42 minutes ago, Shar said:

I think this could be an interesting discussion, however, I do not believe it belongs here where we are discussing if it is OK to eat unclean food.  This is best served by starting a new thread.  It would take forever to answer each one and determine whether these apply today.  Just off the bat, I see a lot are civil laws that were unique to people living in the land Israel (like that stated to destroy all places of idolatry in the Land.  "The Land" was Israel only).  In our land, we would not hang a man for blasphemy or not take testimony from a woman in court.  Please start a new thread if you are really interested in all these.  Thanks

I have to leave for the day , but I will come back to this topic later and give it all I got , blessings everyone, and keep up the good debate this is awesome.

[thereselittleflower]

59 minutes ago, Shar said:

Peter was a Jew.  He could not, nor did he ever become a Gentile.  In this passage, Paul rebukes Peter for his hypocrisy when the men came from James.  He withdrew himself from association with the Gentiles.  Paul rebukes him for Peter lived and associated with the Gentiles, as other Gentiles did, and no longer as a Jew who would not associate or come near a Gentile.  Remember, in his vision, he clearly did not ever eat or get near that which was unclean and Gentiles were unclean.  G-d showed Peter that Gentiles are now welcomed into His family.  Henceforth, his visit to Cornelius and entering the house of a Gentile for the first time.

These men from James are referenced in Acts as they insisted that the Gentiles must be circumcised in order to be saved.  This was not the case.  Here in Galatians, Paul further rebukes this for these men that came from James were seen by Peter.  Peter became fearful and separated himself.  Paul further rebukes this circumcision mandate from these men by stating that no one can be justified or saved by observing the law, but only through faith in Messiah.  We died to these requirements of the Law in order to live by faith.  This rebuke is not an mandate that all of G-d's law (teachings, guidelines) are to be thrown out.  Paul still observed these, practiced them.  He took Nazarite vows and performed them.  The apostles and early believers kept the Sabbath, festivals and kept kosher.

I think you might be missing the point of using this verse.   This is about not mere association with gentiles.  This is saying Peter LIVED LIKE a gentile, and NOT AS a Jew.

• Gal 2:14

  But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew,livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

Peter lived like a Gentile, not as a Jew, including eating with the Gentile believers.  If he was not living like a Jew among the Gentiles, then he wasn't living like a Jew when it came to eating with them either.   

 

 

[Spock]

57 minutes ago, SINNERSAVED said:

I have to leave for the day , but I will come back to this topic later and give it all I got , blessings everyone, and keep up the good debate this is awesome.

Sinner,

i can't wait.  In fact, I'm going out to buy some popcorn while I'm waiting for your reply.  I didn't think you were going to respond by saying......"wow Spock, you got me on this one.....I have no response, you win this debate....."

lay it on me brother! 

Spock eating popcorn

[Spock]

1 hour ago, Shar said:

I think this could be an interesting discussion, however, I do not believe it belongs here where we are discussing if it is OK to eat unclean food.  This is best served by starting a new thread.  It would take forever to answer each one and determine whether these apply today.  Just off the bat, I see a lot are civil laws that were unique to people living in the land Israel (like that stated to destroy all places of idolatry in the Land.  "The Land" was Israel only).  In our land, we would not hang a man for blasphemy or not take testimony from a woman in court.  Please start a new thread if you are really interested in all these.  Thanks

Shar,

thanks for your prompt response. I do believe all 613 (270 applicable now) mitzvahs come under the same umbrella. If you say you should follow one (no pig)  you should follow them all (no two fabrics blended)  and thus all should be treated equally. 

As for starting a new thread, that may not be a bad idea, but I have a feeling someone has already started it at some point in time here: Are the 613 mitzvahs pursuant to the Sinai Covenant applicable for Gentile Christians today?  I will scope this out later and let you know if one is already opened. 

Thanks, and for the record, I have enjoyed this discussion with you and sinner.  You both are very knowledgeable, passionate for God, and gracious people (even though I personally feel you both are a wee bit misguided on this topic. (Said while ducking!) ) ?

Love and blessings going out your way. Shabbat Shalom dear sister,

spock

[Ezra]

4 hours ago, Shar said:

Paul's reference to everything good and to be received with thanksgiving is better understood as to what G-d defined as good food.

Now you are trying to change what the Holy Spirit has clearly stated in 1 Timothy, which also corresponds to what He stated in Genesis chapter 9.

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

Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. (Genesis 9:3,4).

Please note again, that "every creature" means every creature, and that is also what Peter saw in his vision -- every creature. This corresponds to "every moving thing that liveth" so you are REFUSING TO ACCEPT what God says here, and insisting that the Law of Moses still applies.  That is false doctrine, my friend. If some Christians want to eat Kosher, they have the liberty to do so.  If other Christians do not eat Kosher, they have been given the liberty by God Himself, and by Christ, who said that it is not foods which defile the man, but what comes out of his heart. Neither group may judge the other regarding food, since the Kingdom of God is not meat and drink.

[Ezra]

Does anyone recall the slogan "Put PORK on your fork"? Nothing wrong with that. Here are some recipes. http://putporkonyourfork.com/

[other one]

7 hours ago, Spock said:

Other one,

i don't think I could defend the position any better. Your words gave the balance that I believe is necessary in a discussion like this.

if some people really believe God still demands that kind of behavior, let them believe. Now I don't believe that and am willing to face God at judgment day ready to defend my belief if necessary, But I like the balance that Romans 14 provides- don't do anything to cause a brother in the lord to stumble. 

I would apply Romans 14 even deeper than what I believe it says: if I went out to dinner at Chili's with a couple who I know don't believe god wants you to eat porky and probably feel I shouldn't eat it as well, chance are, I won't be ordering baby back ribs for my entre. Not that I believe me eating may make them violate their consciences and also eat porky, but merely because I don't want them to have hard feelings toward me and perhaps judge me harshly in their spirit  (which may be sin). 

Spock

we are definitely that way with alcohol too.

[Shar]

17 hours ago, post said:

why would you speak as though the new testament isn't scripture? 
trying to duck Mark 7:19? 

if you teach that we are under Moses' law with regard to dietary law (and why not every part of the law, not just the parts you may like?) then you're going to have to deal with that verse. 

 

Did not say it is not.  Simply indicated that there reference was not to it, but to the scriptures of the OT

[Shar]

17 hours ago, post said:

why would you speak as though the new testament isn't scripture? 
trying to duck Mark 7:19? 

if you teach that we are under Moses' law with regard to dietary law (and why not every part of the law, not just the parts you may like?) then you're going to have to deal with that verse. 

 

I already dealt with Mark 7:19 in my previous post.  Please read..