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

[Ariel16]

1 hour ago, coheir said:

 

It is plainly written in Scripture the only problem here is over thinking things. It is simple at first God only gave every thing but animals. later he said we could eat any thing we desire. Christians are not and never were under the law which gave only clean animals for food.

This issue was how it could be an abomination then but not now.

I personally find that passage in Genesis not strong. Not everything is intended for food. The expression means that "whereas before I gave you only plants, now I give you meat, I give you all for food." It was the combination of the two that the "all" was intended to be used. It was not literally every type of meat just as it was not every green plant that was for food. He says to Noah regarding green plants 

21 "As for you, take for yourself some of all food which is edible, and gather it to yourself; and it shall be for food for you and for them."

There were certain plants not for food though he said He gave "every" green plant for food at Creation. It was hyperbolic. 

Its the same for meat. Some things are just not edible.

Leviticus 11

46 This is the law regarding the animal and the bird, and every living thing that moves in the waters and everything that swarms on the earth,
47 to make a distinction between the unclean and the clean, and between the "edible" creature and the creature which is not to be eaten.
 

God did not make the creatures "not edible" from edible in Leviticus. He simply told them to avoid certain creatures. Just as clean and unclean animals were     already around in Noah's time in Genesis. 

See we just have to learn how to resolve this issue of it being an abomination other than an ambiguous " we are under grace" superficiality " Remember, love your neighbor is also law and laws on family incest. Are we to say those are not sins now? What is continual and dis continual. It must be reasoned theologically. How would the disciples justify their claims before their audience?

or did they even truly make that claim?

Edited August 18, 2016 by Ariel16

[PatrolMan]

Yes it is okay to eat pork. We as gentiles have never been under the law. We are under grace. If it offends someone, then pass it by, other wise there is no harm in eating it.

[Ariel16]

3 hours ago, PatrolMan said:

Yes it is okay to eat pork. We as gentiles have never been under the law. We are under grace. If it offends someone, then pass it by, other wise there is no harm in eating it.

Love your neighbor is part of the law. "Do not muzzle an ox," which Paul quoted was part of the law. What does it mean to be under grace if these things are still binding? I am not saying that all of the law is binding. There is certainly things that have continuity but, in general, we just appear as cherry pickers when it comes down to it. You easily believe its okay because theology of this matter is of no importance to you. I mean, if it's not an issue with you, well that is fine for you. However, merely replying "Yes its okay to eat pork...We are under grace" is the most unhelpful response. Of course we are under grace! I am pretty certain he understands that too. But, that does no explain why or how somethings that were at one point, sin, are now not sin. He is being noble and is not convinced for Gods' sake. That is very pleasing if anything to God. It is like when Ezekiel would not do as God had said because of his conviction of something God said previously,

 

[Eze 4:12-14 ESV] 12 And you shall eat it as a barley cake, baking it in their sight on human dung." 13 And the LORD said, "Thus shall the people of Israel eat their bread unclean, among the nations where I will drive them." 14 Then I said, "Ah, Lord GOD! Behold, I have never defiled myself. From my youth up till now I have never eaten what died of itself or was torn by beasts, nor has tainted meat come into my mouth."

This is kind of what the OP is struggling with. He knows what is in the NT but cannot understand it.

Edited August 24, 2016 by Ariel16

[Ariel16]

Now in my opinion, there is and always will be unclean creatures and will remain inedible. The only reason its even somewhat safe to eat pork is because of all the antibiotics and other chemicals they put it in to make it okay. Otherwise, you would be a fool to eat a pig. When you see a pigs lifestyle, it is sickening. But you will never see that at the grocery store. Now I am not saying its sin, but its not intended for consumption naturally. I sure would never eat a bat, but I suppose some think its okay. Again, its not sin but scripture never said all things were clean which were previously unclean. John in Rev. still acknowledged clean and unclean creatures way after Jesus so we must keep note of that. It may appear that Jesus said what you think but in light of Revelation, you have to question the common interpretation because its not consistent with John.

Edited August 24, 2016 by Ariel16

[PatrolMan]

9 hours ago, Ariel16 said:

Love your neighbor is part of the law. "Do not muzzle an ox," which Paul quoted was part of the law. What does it mean to be under grace if these things are still binding? I am not saying that all of the law is binding. There is certainly things that have continuity but, in general, we just appear as cherry pickers when it comes down to it. You easily believe its okay because theology of this matter is of no importance to you. I mean, if it's not an issue with you, well that is fine for you. However, merely replying "Yes its okay to eat pork...We are under grace" is the most unhelpful response. Of course we are under grace! I am pretty certain he understands that too. But, that does no explain why or how somethings that were at one point, sin, are now not sin. He is being noble and is not convinced for Gods' sake. That is very pleasing if anything to God. It is like when Ezekiel would not do as God had said because of his conviction of something God said previously,

 

[Eze 4:12-14 ESV] 12 And you shall eat it as a barley cake, baking it in their sight on human dung." 13 And the LORD said, "Thus shall the people of Israel eat their bread unclean, among the nations where I will drive them." 14 Then I said, "Ah, Lord GOD! Behold, I have never defiled myself. From my youth up till now I have never eaten what died of itself or was torn by beasts, nor has tainted meat come into my mouth."

This is kind of what the OP is struggling with. He knows what is in the NT but cannot understand it.

If you want to obey the old contract rather than the new contract that's your right. Can you find the ten commandments in the new testament that says that we have to worship on Saturday?  No. Most of if not all of the old testament was to and for the Jews. Have a nice day.

[Guest shiloh357]

"Under the law" and "under grace"  are very misunderstood concepts.  They do not refer to living within the framework of either law or grace.   Rather, they denote your spiritual standing before God.    "Under the law" is the status of an unbeliever.  If one is without Jesus, without salvation, he stands before God under the law, or more directly, under the curse of the law.   The Christian who has accepted Christ and been born again, stands before
 God "under grace."

Grace does not negate God's commandments, if it did, we would have a very incoherent understanding of redemption and holiness.   Grace is the spiritual stamina that enables us to keep God's commandments.   

The fact that we in the Church are not required to observe the dietary laws does not stem from an abrogation of them, nor does it have anything to do with grace,  but is based on the fact that they were only given to Israel, not to the Church.

[Riccardo]

The Health laws stand we shouldn't eat pork. 

I know I'm not going to change anyones mind so I won't go the usual route, in quoting scripture that has been miss quoted & out of context.

Lets say its judgment day every body is lined up plus Satin who's there stating his case against God after all he convinced 1/3 of the angles at that time.

 He's still bellowing out Gods laws are unfair. That was his case.

If god says "ok all you people that ate pork prior to the cross are condemned to death but you guys after the cross are pardoned".

My question is, does Satin have a case.

Was Revelation the last book written because I think it still talks about the abomination of eating pork & thats well after the cross.

 

 

 

 

[coheir]

4 hours ago, Riccardo said:

The Health laws stand we shouldn't eat pork. 

I know I'm not going to change anyones mind so I won't go the usual route, in quoting scripture that has been miss quoted & out of context.

Lets say its judgment day every body is lined up plus Satin who's there stating his case against God after all he convinced 1/3 of the angles at that time.

 He's still bellowing out Gods laws are unfair. That was his case.

If god says "ok all you people that ate pork prior to the cross are condemned to death but you guys after the cross are pardoned".

My question is, does Satin have a case.

Was Revelation the last book written because I think it still talks about the abomination of eating pork & thats well after the cross.

thats not what Gen 9:3 says

 

 

 

 

[Riccardo]

So we can now eat poisonous creatures thats interesting & ridiculous 

 

[coheir]

1 hour ago, Riccardo said:

So we can now eat poisonous creatures thats interesting & ridiculous 

 

why don't you turn to Gen 9:3 and see what it says