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

[BobRyan]

2 minutes ago, Running Gator said:

I have to say, I think it is very impressive we have a 71 page thread on eating pork!  

I myself am amazed by that as well. It is not my thread and I only joined it a few days ago - but it is quite active.

For my part I decided to focus on "the easy part" - which is "don't eat diseased meat, rats,cats, dogs bats" - I am amazed at the push back you can get on such obvious statements from scripture in Lev 11.

[simplejeff]

1 minute ago, Running Gator said:

I have to say, I think it is very impressive we have a 71 page thread on eating pork!  

Actually it is a very sad state of affairs.

If people rightly divided God's Word, 

or actually if people simply chose willingly to follow Jesus,

  little would have had to be said or repeated so often.

It is because the enemy has corrupted so much that the thread is even here.

[simplejeff]

2 minutes ago, Absolem said:

The law is good and holy but you can't tell people about the law without telling them about Jesus.

Please show where this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  is stated in Scripture.   

 

(btw, fwiw, I think you are entirely mistaken (just as the statement stands).)

[Absolem]

3 minutes ago, BobRyan said:

I myself am amazed by that as well. It is not my thread and I only joined it a few days ago - but it is quite active.

For my part I decided to focus on "the easy part" - which is "don't eat diseased meat, rats,cats, dogs bats" - I am amazed at the push back you can get on such obvious statements from scripture in Lev 11.

People arnt opposed to not eating bats. They're opposed to your emphasis of the law over Jesus.

[Absolem]

1 minute ago, simplejeff said:

Please show where this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  is stated in Scripture.   

 

(btw, fwiw, I think you are entirely mistaken (just as the statement stands).)

Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

Galatians 3:24

[simplejeff]

4 minutes ago, Absolem said:

People arnt opposed to not eating bats. They're opposed to your emphasis of the law over Jesus.

Sorry to note this:  your post appears to be blatantly bearing false witness against a child of YHWH.   I've read many many of his posts,  and never once saw him emphasize the law over Jesus, ever.

[simplejeff]

5 minutes ago, simplejeff said:

 

9 minutes ago, Absolem said:

The law is good and holy but you can't tell people about the law without telling them about Jesus.

Please show where this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  is stated in Scripture.   

 

Let's try again.

3 minutes ago, Absolem said:

Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

Galatians 3:24

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

doesn't answer the question at all.

For example,  many religious leaders (spoken of in the NT) taught and told the people about the law every day,  especially on every one of YHWH'S SABBATH DAYS,   without ever telling the people about Jesus.....

So , in other words,  it is entirely possible to tell people all about the law without ever telling them (consciously, wittingly)  about Jesus.

[enoob57]

1 minute ago, simplejeff said:

I think I agree.    I'm just not sure about everyone being "under a mandate by God to rightly divide His Word" ....

since there are almost no one anywhere who does.....  even amongst large groups of 'Christians' (at least in name)....

2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV)

[15] Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

since there are almost no one anywhere who does.....

God has never given us license to cease seeking His truth because there are fewer who do!

Since you agree the Law came and condemnation was upon all men it's purpose toward man was fulfilled as Paul wrote here

Romans 7:9 (KJV)

[9] For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

[10] And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

[11] For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

[12] Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

[13] Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

The Law provided sight of sin in ourselves and in that we could see that we were dead and separated from God with no hope of ever being acceptable to a Holy Righteous God... especially magnified by this verse

Hebrews 10:4 (KJV)

[4] For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

So now that we have the why the Law could not be salvic in nature... we must look elsewhere right? 

 

[Absolem]

6 minutes ago, simplejeff said:

Let's try again.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

doesn't answer the question at all.

For example,  many religious leaders (spoken of in the NT) taught and told the people about the law every day,  especially on every one of YHWH'S SABBATH DAYS,   without ever telling the people about Jesus.....

So , in other words,  it is entirely possible to tell people all about the law without ever telling them (consciously, wittingly)  about Jesus.

You can tell people about the law without Jesus but why? Jesus is it is he not?

[BobRyan]

19 minutes ago, Absolem said:

People arnt opposed to not eating bats. They're opposed to your emphasis of the law over Jesus.

Not in real life. In real life no one has quoted me claiming to argue for the "Law over Jesus". I prefer real life.

False accusation alone - is not the same thing as a substantive claim in fact. I am sure we would both agree to this.