Jump to content
IGNORED

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


SINNERSAVED

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  58
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  5,457
  • Content Per Day:  1.71
  • Reputation:   4,220
  • Days Won:  37
  • Joined:  07/01/2015
  • Status:  Offline

So looking at this verse we will look at each of these definitions in turn:
 
Hebrews 8:13 In that He says, 'A new covenant,' He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away."



If we look into the original Greek, we see several things:
 

  • "He has made the first "obsolete""

The word "obsolete" is in the Perfect Tense, Active Voice, Indicative Mood in the Greek.

The
 Perfect Tense means this:

5778 Tense - Perfect

The perfect tense in Greek corresponds to the perfect tense in English, and describes an action which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, .


The Active Voice indicates the doer of the action, which is God as the context of the previous verses show.

The 
Indicative Mood tells us that this is a statement of fact.

So what is this a statement of fact of? 

That the Old Covenant was made obsolete at the time of the Apostles. The Greek word Translated "obsolete" means this:

Lexicon Results for palaioō (Strong's G3822) Greek for G3822 παλαιόω Transliteration
palaioō
Pronunciation

pä-lī-o'-ō (Key)

Part of Speech
verb

Root Word (Etymology)

from G3820

TDNT Reference
5:720,769 
Vines
View Entry


Outline of Biblical Usage 
1) to make ancient or old

 
a) to become old, to be worn out

b) of things worn out by time and use

2) to declare a thing to be old and so about to be abrogated
 



The Old Covenant, "worn out" "about to be abrogated"!

According to Thayer's Lexicon, the meaning used here in Heb 8:13 is "to declare a thing to be old and about to be abrogated"

That word "abrogated" is a very important word here. It totally demolishes the dispenationalist claims that the Old Covenant was merely put on hold.

The word "abrogated" means:

Definitions of abrogated on the Web:

Repealed, annulled, cancelled, abolished by authority.
www.mindmagi.demon.co.uk/Bacon/reference/glossary.htm



Hebrews 8:13 tells us that God, the doer of the action, made the Old Covenant obsolete . . ie:

  • He REPEALED it
  • He ANNULLED it
  • He CANCELLED it
  • He ABOLISHED it BY HIS AUTHORITY


The Perfect tense of this word, as we saw above, means that this was a COMPLETED ACTION, with NOTHING remaining to do to make it so.


The OLD COVENANT PASSED AWAY . . it was repealed, annuled, cancelled, abolished by God's own authority, perfectly, completely, with nothing remaining to be added.


The verse goes on to emphasize that the Old Covenant is finished, done with . . .

It says:

.....Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away



Another translation says it this way, more forcefully:

.....Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.



"waxeth old":

Lexicon Results for gēraskō (Strong's G1095) Greek for G1095 γηράσκω Transliteration
gēraskō
Pronunciation

gā-rä'-skō (Key)

Part of Speech
verb

Root Word (Etymology)

from G1094

TDNT Reference
n/a 
Vines
View Entry


Outline of Biblical Usage 
1) to grow old

2) of things and institutions: 
to fail from age, be obsolescent



According to Thayer's Lexicon, this second definition applies to this word in Hebrews 8:13:

of things, institutions, etc., to fail from age, be obsolecent: Heb viii. 13 (to be deprived of force and authority....)


More powerful words, underscoring that the Old Covenant has indeed been 


ABROGATED, 
REPEALED, 
ANNULLED, 
CANCELLED, 
ABOLISHED, 
DEPRIVED OF FORCE AND AUTHORITY.


And we go on:

"ready to"


Printed from the Blue Letter Bible

Lexicon Results for eggys (Strong's G1451) Greek for G1451 ἐγγύς Transliteration
eggys
Pronunciation

en-gü's (Key)

Part of Speech
adverb

Root Word (Etymology)

from a primary verb agcho (to squeeze or throttle; akin to the base of G43)

TDNT Reference
2:330,194 
Vines
View Entry


Outline of Biblical Usage 
1) near, of place and position

 
a) near

b) those who are near access to God

 
1) Jews, as opposed to those who are alien from God and his blessings

2) The Rabbis used the term "to make nigh" as equivalent to "to make a proselyte"

2) of time
 
a) of times imminent and soon to come pass



Again, Thayer's Lexicon confirms that the meaning of this word here in Heb 8:13 is the 2nd meaning, "of times imminent and soon to come to pass".


"to vanish away":

Lexicon Results for aphanismos (Strong's G854) Greek for G854 ἀφανισμός Transliteration
aphanismos
Pronunciation

ä-fä-nē-smo's (Key)

Part of Speech
masculine noun

Root Word (Etymology)

from G853

TDNT Reference
n/a 
Vines
View Entry


Outline of Biblical Usage 

1) disappearance

2) destruction


Thayer's Lexicon again confirms the 2nd definition is used here . . DESTRUCTION.

This clearly tells that the Old Covenant was about to be destroyed, at any time now from the perspective of the time of its writing.

This was written shortly before the destruction of the temple in 70AD. 

Christianity understood this was fulfilled in 70AD, that the Old Covenant had been 

ABROGATED
REPEALED, 
ANNULLED, 
CANCELLED, 
ABOLISHED,
DEPRIVED OF FORCE AND AUTHORITY

and finally 

DESTROYED


shortly after this was written - 70 AD, the time recognized by all of Christianity for 2000 years for this final action.

I hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  3
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  28
  • Content Per Day:  0.01
  • Reputation:   19
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/23/2015
  • Status:  Offline

When I married my wife she did not eat Pork as she was raised a Buddist in Taiwan. I myself, although not a heathen I am a hedonist so I'm gonna eat whatever I want... shellfish and all. Dietrary retrictions are OT stuff and I haven't given up booze or weed anyway (which were both in the Bible) so I'm taken the pork with me. (double chili-cheese hotdogs at the Padre game!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  23
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,045
  • Content Per Day:  0.34
  • Reputation:   615
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  12/09/2015
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/03/1976

4 hours ago, Shar said:

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

maybe i missed it, i don't see that you "dealt with" that verse at all, Shar -- 
in fact all that i see you do was misread that verse completely, and think that it was "my logic" that Jesus declared all food clean (on page 6).
it's not my interpretation; it's Mark's - and by extension, if his gospel is inspired, it's the Holy Spirit's. 
try reading that verse again. 
or maybe your beef (kosher, of course) is with the translators of the Bible? 
i certainly don't know enough Greek to debate over that. i'd be happy to read your dispute over the text itself though. 
does this forum have Greek scholars? from what i can see, the Greek literally says "(he is) purifying all the food" & the NIV, NLT, ESV, BSB, BLB, NASB, HCSB, NET, NAS, ASV, ERV, Wymouth, WEB and others all translate this as meaning that Jesus declared all foods clean with this statement. so take it up with those guys. 







 



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  23
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,045
  • Content Per Day:  0.34
  • Reputation:   615
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  12/09/2015
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/03/1976

if Moses' law was to distinguish the nation Israel from other peoples, what distinguished Noah from others, to whom God gave every kind of animal to eat? 

are we distinguished by obedience to the law of a covenant that was not made with us? 

but "
let everyone be convinced in their own mind" -- because "meat does not commend us to God

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  150
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  2,195
  • Content Per Day:  0.69
  • Reputation:   2,409
  • Days Won:  14
  • Joined:  07/30/2015
  • Status:  Offline

2 minutes ago, post said:

if Moses' law was to distinguish the nation Israel from other peoples, what distinguished Noah from others, to whom God gave every kind of animal to eat? 

are we distinguished by obedience to the law of a covenant that was not made with us? 

but "
let everyone be convinced in their own mind" -- because "meat does not commend us to God

you have a great question, and I admire your persistence,  I respect that, so let me try to help if I can with your question,

 the question is , did noah eat any meat for the 40 days and 40 nights ? can you show where it states what he ate, other then having all the animals to be carried through  Gods wrath ? to the people,

are we distinguished to a law that was not ours, ? that is a great question, but I have to say , is I believe and now that the unclean or common gentile is now allowed to enter in to Gods rest and take their place with the people of God, making us that was unclean now clean , in acts #10, we are to be in one word, in one belief , and in one God we are united,

it is by the grace of God that we are able to become the sons and daughters of the most high, we are grafted in , under the same instructions and words of God now , that we have surrendered our selves to Him, we cannot say that we follow the customs of the jews, but we can respect and honor by obedience to His word, in spirit , and in flesh , our bodies now the temple of God, would you place pig on the alter for God in His temple ?, no God forbid, so we are to treat our bodies as temples of God , keeping our temples clean and our convictions pure, to the God we now serve,

for by doing this, is not a matter of what saves you , I agree, for it is not the of work , but in holy spirit , peace and tranquility , of being in bodied by Christ, through the spirit , in our commitments to following and doing what we heard of the lord and what the lord has spoken, this is why I am here today , saying let us reason together, and do what God has said, I do not look at the covenant for them and for us, it is all about us that have been saved, by one God, and if He said something  why not follow Him

this is what now separates us from the rest of the world , if you want your pork chop and bacon sandwich, that is between you and your God, but as for me , my conviction tells me to follow what was said, as a child of God , not a gentile or jew, but a child of God listening to the father and taking His advise, this is respect and abiding in , as one,  so I can sacrifice pork, it is only one thing of many I feel is my part in being close to God, its not by works I am doing this , but in faith , only, I want to be pleasing in the eyes of God, knowing I did everything to bring out the love of Him for me and me for Him

 ithought of this as I answered another topic, lets say that the bible said , you cannot watch television, but you love football and detective shows, and cartoons also, if god had told the people I do not want anyone to watch television in the past, and now God says everything is good if you pray about it, would this , abolish everything even watching the television, when you already know He is against it, would you follow everyone else, to watch the television, or would you say , I know He did not include this , , God would not go back on His word, .. do you see what I mean ,

I just hope I can show that its not the material thing, but the respect to honor and do the right thing, for if God was sitting next to me , I know in my heart and soul , he would not eat the bacon for breakfast, but that's me and my opinion, so no one gets offended, but

but what is the truth , and do we really want to deal with truth ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  8
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  7,777
  • Content Per Day:  2.42
  • Reputation:   2,729
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  06/05/2015
  • Status:  Offline

3 hours ago, SINNERSAVED said:

Hello everyone, I am back , I am trying to catch up where we left off, so give me a moment to get back into this, hello shar, and spock, Ezra and thereselittle flower

blessings and grace to you all from God almighty

Brother SS, My wife has follow your  invitation to abstained from eating anything that had pork products.

But when Adam follow Eva in her new way, he had no choice, because there was only one woman in the world. 

My self I don't face exactly the same Situation.

But take a carefull look to what my wife said.

From now on:

a) you are not allow to bring any pork, or pork byproducts in our home.

b) you can not consume any pork, in my presents, or enter any place that has in storage, or for sale any pork products.

c) not even thinking of touching her, or use anything in common use, till I am cleance and purified and sanctified first.

Our situation has become even more stressful, because we do not really know, how one is cleanced from the pork contamination, and we don't if that's possible. 

and by looking at the people behind the tree, they were just destroyed, there was not cure available to them. 

You may find this very strange, that  I was able to convince my wife who had lock me out of our home, and I thought that I am lucky, that she listen to me, when I said to her, that she is not cleansed and purified and sanctified from the pork defilement,  just by stoping eating pork. 

As a result, she is in a distressful state, waiting for the Lord to execute his vengeance on her, and me for the same reasons.

For some strange twist of all those sircumstanses there is a verse from the bible framed on the wall that says "The trouth sall set you free", 

That makes it even more perplex, because the Lord took his vengeance on the man behind the tree, that's how the Lord found his peace.

Can you correctly identified the man behind the tree, his ethnic background, the faith of his coulture, and his own faith in what? 

We have these facts:

a) the grove, and some tree.

b) the man doing some rituals, as  to purified, and sanctified himself.  

c) the eating of pork.

d) the "mouse".

e) the abomination.

The Lord taking offence. 

Did the Lord kill him? And destroyed the Grove?

When did that happen? 

Who was the King of Juda when that happen? 

Is this applicable to me and my wife, we don't have a grove and or a tree, and even if we had, we never went behind a tree to eat, is that the same as "pick-nicking", 

Because always we use to eat our P-k in our Kitchen, indoors. 

and never for purification or sanctification, and invide the mouse or the abomination to eat with us.

We did not even know that we have to perform rituals for Purification and Sanctification, before eating Pork. 

Can you also say something about the Mouse, because my wife has lost her sanity, over the mouse. She is looking for her pictures she took in disney land, her wearing a mickey mouse hat , posing with Mikey Mouse, and she wants to destroyed them, believing that's the same mouse as in the scripture, and also she is starting to believed that I am the Abomination. 

The " Truth sall set you free",

Really? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  327
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   232
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/01/2014
  • Status:  Offline

13 hours ago, thereselittleflower said:

 Shar, Peter lived as a Gentile, not as a Jew.    That means when he ate with the Gentiles, he ate as a Gentile, not as a Jew.  This is what Paul tells us.

The scriptures are very clear about this.

This one fact unravels your argument.

 

 

 

This one fact you quote does not go with the actual times.  Peter was a Jew and remained so.  The Jews did not adopt the pagan lifestyle.  The Gentiles were not the non-Jews of today.  They were an extremely idolatrous, sexually perverted, blood drinking, non-kosher, polytheist people group.  Remarkably unclean and to be avoided.  These people were now open up to being brought into the faith through the blood of Messiah.  The only faith was a biblical form of Judaism, that Paul often referred to as "The Way".  Acts 15 gave the first 4 basic requirements that these pagans must do to clean up their act in order to be able to be brought in and have the Jew teach them the faith.  These Gentiles were required to give up their lifestyle, NEVER did G-d instruct the Jew to adopt pagan lifestyle in ANY form. 

A clear example of how the Church has deviated from the original faith is our failure to practice, even as stated by Paul to keep, is The Passover (1 Cor. 5:8).  How could we ignore one of the G-d's greatest festivals, that marked the actual death, burial and resurrection of our L-rd, and justify switching it for the pagan feast of Ishtar?  Ishtar (Easter), the fertility goddess, and all it symbols of the eggs, the bunnies, etc.  We take the Passover, throw it away, and say our L-rd resurrected on this pagan feast?

Do a thorough study of the Church's history and you will be astonished on how far we have deviated.  Constantine moved to make Christianity the religion during his reign for political reason.  They then took the worship of their Sun god on Sunday and switched out Sabbath and switch Passover for the pagan feast of Ishtar (Easter) and our L-rd's birth (Festival of Succoth) for Saturnalia, the birth of their Sun god, Saturn. 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  327
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   232
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/01/2014
  • Status:  Offline

13 hours ago, Shar said:
19 hours ago, Ezra said:

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.

 

 

We disagree that the Peter's vision was a dual purpose and made unclean foods clean.  I believe he was referencing Gentiles, henceforth Peter went to Cornelius, not to get a ham sandwich.  That is the point of the discussion.  You state why you think so.  I state why I think so.  I could accuse you of false doctrine too, but we should not act in such a manner.  I do not throw stones at those who want to eat everything.  Those who do, must make sure they do the same for those who believe they need to remain kosher.  Remember, the matter of the heart is our greatest concern.

Regarding your point on "every creature of God is good and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving".  If this be truly as you assume, then would you say it is OK to cook up a Blow Fish or one of the 16 varieties of extremely poisonous tree frogs?  You interpretation of this, would render these eatable, simply by giving thanks.  See, you cannot take a literal interpretation of this verse to justify we can eat anything.  Paul references "food" here.  And like I previously wrote, G-d has listed out what is and what is not food for His people.  So when they speak of food, they speak of truly eatable food as G-d has defined.  But like I also said, division should not be over this topic.  It is just "food for thought", (no pun intended), to get us truly searching out scripture without any pre-disposed bias that we may have grown up to believe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  29
  • Topic Count:  593
  • Topics Per Day:  0.08
  • Content Count:  55,875
  • Content Per Day:  7.56
  • Reputation:   27,623
  • Days Won:  271
  • Joined:  12/29/2003
  • Status:  Offline

that is so short sighted just to fit your agenda.

The Bible says very plainly that you are not supposed to tell me what to eat.....   simple as that.....   you are free to eat or not whatever you want, but don't drag me or others into your judaizing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  327
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   232
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/01/2014
  • Status:  Offline

14 hours ago, Shar said:
10 hours ago, thereselittleflower said:

The law is part of the Old Covenant.

The Old Covenant was made obsolete and passing away.

The scriptures say the Old Covenant was:

  • abrogated
    annulled
    cancelled
    deprived of its authority and power by God
    destroyed.

 

How do I get to that understanding?

By taking a hard look at what Paul said, looking at what words mean in the original as well as English I found this:

  • Hbr 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. 


    Hbr 8:7 ¶ For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second

    Hbr 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: 

    Hbr 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. 

    Hbr 8:10 For this [is] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: 

    Hbr 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. 

    Hbr 8:12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. 

    Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. 
    obsolete, 
    old and about to be abrogated, 
    repealed, 
    annulled, 
    cancelled, 
    abolished by authority


    Now that which decayeth
    obsolete, 
    old and about to be abrogated, 
    repealed, 
    annulled, 
    cancelled, 
    abolished by authority


    and waxeth old
    failing from age, 
    obselecent, 
    being deprived its of force and authority by God

    [is] ready to vanish away
    be destroyed

 

I'll explain how I get this in the next post.

We disagree that the Peter's vision was a dual purpose and made unclean foods clean.  I believe he was referencing Gentiles, henceforth Peter went to Cornelius, not to get a ham sandwich.  That is the point of the discussion.  You state why you think so.  I state why I think so.  I could accuse you of false doctrine too, but we should not act in such a manner.  I do not throw stones at those who want to eat everything.  Those who do, must make sure they do the same for those who believe they need to remain kosher.  Remember, the matter of the heart is our greatest concern.

This is in reference to the sacrificial system, since the Messiah's sacrifice made us righteous, "he died once for all".  This did not do away with all of G-d's law.  Remember the precious words of our L-rd in Matthew 5:17.  "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets (the O.T).  I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill (to make their meaning full)  them.  I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter or the least stroke of the pen will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."  Immediately after this He goes into giving the full meaning behind several parables the Jews were already familiar with and gives them their true meaning.  He starts with the teaching on Anger.

The reference "to fading" means that it is moving forward to the time when it is all completed, then it will be obsolete, but is not so yet.  Not all has been accomplished as our L-rd requires.

Also, English translations poorly use the word "Law" for both of the words meaning either legalism or for teaching/guidelines of G-d.  You need to drive down those meanings when confused by the meaning of "Law".  Most times in the negative sense it references legalistic in character, which Paul often spoke against, not the reference to G-d's teachings.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...