WHY ARE ALL FOODS CLEAN NOW?

[Open7]

I know because Jesus said so. But what is the practical aspect that comes with this? The law categorised all animals as either being clean or unclean, why was this, and why are they all clean now?

Thanks 

[other one]

They were all clean to eat from the flood to Mount Sini when God gave the law to the Israelites.      The law is no longer in effect to those of us who are born again Christians following the will of Jesus.   The Law has never promised spiritual things as the gospel has.

The law is still there, but has been made none affect to those of Christ.

[Anne2]

2 hours ago, Open7 said:

I know because Jesus said so. But what is the practical aspect that comes with this? The law categorised all animals as either being clean or unclean, why was this, and why are they all clean now?

Thanks 

A new covenant, new priesthood. Carnal commands disannulled

Heb 7:16  Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.
17  For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
18  For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
 

 

[BK1110]

https://www.gotquestions.org/eating-pork.html

[Deborah_]

The food laws were important for giving the Jews a very distinctive lifestyle, reminding them and witnessing to outsiders the fact that they were "different".

But in the age of the Gospel, our distinctiveness is expressed differently. Diet has quite simply ceased to be an issue.

[Open7]

Thanks for you help everyone. Im wondering, why were certain animals called clean and others not? I figured that the reason was that some were for eating while some were not, and if this was not followed, it would have repercussions on peoples health, is this correct?

If I am correct that some were for eating and some not, then should this still not apply today? I know the verses about food being clean, but what about animals like bats, or vultures, or skunks, animals that are notorious for carrying diseases

Thanks again

[Anne2]

 

7 hours ago, Open7 said:

Thanks for you help everyone. Im wondering, why were certain animals called clean and others not? I figured that the reason was that some were for eating while some were not

Yes, I agree, different ideas of unclean and clean.

Before the flood Animals were not given as food. Clean and unclean animals concerned their use as sacrifices to God. We see this concept continue in the law of Moses, with the imperfection of an animal in bringing it for an offering to God. Blind, lame, torn etc.

Mal 1:6 A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name?
7  Ye offer polluted bread upon mine altar; and ye say, Wherein have we polluted thee? In that ye say, The table of the LORD is contemptible. {offer … : or, bring unto, etc }
8  And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the LORD of hosts.

7 hours ago, Open7 said:

I figured that the reason was that some were for eating while some were not, and if this was not followed, it would have repercussions on peoples health, is this correct?

Kosher law of Moses was not about sacrifices, as in altar kosher. As said earlier animals were not given for man to eat in Noah's time. Moses did not restrict Israel to altar kosher, nor were most of the offerings, food for the people to eat. 

 

7 hours ago, Open7 said:

If I am correct that some were for eating and some not, then should this still not apply today? I know the verses about food being clean, but what about animals like bats, or vultures, or skunks, animals that are notorious for carrying diseases

Thanks again

No, Altar kosher and Moasic Kosher were two distinct things. Back to Noah. Clean and unclean animals were not food for man at that time. What was?

 The green herb was given for man to eat as well as animals to eat for food.

Ge 1:30  And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

Animals when given for food to Noah, was given just like the green herb.

Ge 9:3  Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

There are no clean and unclean green herbs spoken of either to Noah, nor Moses. It is not about healthy foods, it is about spiritual concepts. For there are no clean and unclean green herbs, despite some being poisonous.

Animals were continued to be offered in sacrifice to God From creation on. These I suspect were (husbandry, and shephered) domesticated animals, kept from the wilderness, so as to not become lame, or torn, diseased, from living in the wild. And their skins used for clothing, and sheltering tents, wineskins etc. Similar in concept to the temple flock, kept close in and seperate as the flock from which the temple offerings were taken. They were watched over carefully after being selected to be placed there.

Edited May 27, 2022 by Anne2

[Deborah_]

10 hours ago, Open7 said:

Thanks for you help everyone. Im wondering, why were certain animals called clean and others not? I figured that the reason was that some were for eating while some were not, and if this was not followed, it would have repercussions on peoples health, is this correct?

If I am correct that some were for eating and some not, then should this still not apply today? I know the verses about food being clean, but what about animals like bats, or vultures, or skunks, animals that are notorious for carrying diseases

Thanks again

The unclean animals were only 'unclean' when dead. So donkeys, horses and camels, though 'unclean', could be ridden on. The main restriction was on eating them.

A lot of people will say that it was for health reasons, but as a medical person I think that's overstated. You can get tapeworm from eating pork (which is unclean), but also from beef (which is clean). Shellfish (which are unclean) are a notorious source of food poisoning - but so is chicken (which is clean). 

A lot of us restrict our food choices for one reason or another. We care enormously about our food: what goes into it, how it was grown, how animals are slaughtered (or whether we should eat animals at all). How many of us use moral criteria when compiling our shopping lists? We look for the labels that identify ‘free range’, ‘organic’, or ‘fair trade’ products… and we also have to bear in mind the many individuals with food allergies, and the vegetarians. But these are personal choices, freely made - and not binding on anyone else.

 

[DeighAnn]

On 5/27/2022 at 4:18 AM, Open7 said:

Thanks for you help everyone. Im wondering, why were certain animals called clean and others not? I figured that the reason was that some were for eating while some were not, and if this was not followed, it would have repercussions on peoples health, is this correct?

If I am correct that some were for eating and some not, then should this still not apply today? I know the verses about food being clean, but what about animals like bats, or vultures, or skunks, animals that are notorious for carrying diseases

Thanks again

God created some animals to eat.  Clean foods

God created some animals to clean THE EARTH.  Unclean foods

ALL are good FOR THE PURPOSE IN WHICH THEY WERE CREATED. 

The difference between the clean and unclean is the way they digest.  That is why it is ok to eat one thing and not the other. 

Think the food laws were changed?   With all this 'modern medicine' and knowledge how the body works,  is sickness and disease getting under control or is it running rampant. 

Eat a scavenger and eat the filth of the earth they were made to clean.   Healthy or unhealthy?  

I don't know how people LOOK AT WORDS and SKIP ALL TRUTH.  

My question is DID OUR BODIES CHANGE or did the SCAVENGERS digestive systems change?  If neither of those two things took place THEN WE ARE READING WHAT IS WRITTEN incorrectly and with an eye to give acceptance to what WE WANT, not what God tells us is GOOD and not.

What's the subject?

Mark 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

Mark 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Mark 7:10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:

Mark 7:11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.

Mark 7:12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Mark 7:14 And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you, and understand:

Mark 7:15 There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.

2840. koinoó ►
Strong's Concordance
koinoó: to make common
Original Word: κοινόω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: koinoó
Phonetic Spelling: (koy-no'-o)
Definition: to make common
Usage: I make unclean, pollute, desecrate, mid: I regard (treat) as unclean.
HELPS Word-studies
Cognate: 2840 koinóō – ceremonially defile, by treating what is sacred as common or ordinary (i.e. "not special"). See 2839 (koinos).


call common, defile, pollute
From koinos; to make (or consider) profane (ceremonially) -- call common, defile, pollute, unclean.
 

Mark 7:16 If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.

Mark 7:17 And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable.

Mark 7:18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;

Mark 7:19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?

Mark 7:20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.

Mark 7:21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,

Mark 7:22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:

Mark 7:23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

Mark 7:24 And from thence he arose, and went into the borders of Tyre and Sidon, and entered into an house, and would have no man know it: but he could not be hid.

 So the unclean foods wont DEFILE you but WE ARE THE SAME and the animals are the same as God created them.  SO we know some MEATS were created CLEAN and to eat and some foods were created UNCLEAN and not to eat.  

SO WHAT DO WE READ?
 

1Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

1Timothy 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

1Timothy 4:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

1Timothy 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

1Timothy 4:5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

 

EVERYTHING SHOULD BE RECEIVED WITH THANKSGIVING BUT GIVING THANKS DOES NOT CHANGE WHETHER IT WAS CREATED TO BE RECEIVED OR NOT, AND THAT IS THE PROBLEM.  

 

[Tzephanyahu]

On 5/25/2022 at 2:12 PM, Open7 said:

I know because Jesus said so.

Really? Where did He say this? 

If you are referring to Mark 7:19 and the line: (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods 'clean'), I suggest you dig deeper into this passage in the original text. Because this line was added in by translators and has no original Greek text under it.  I would recommend you research this passage if that's the one you mean.  A first page of search results will give you the proof. 

On 5/25/2022 at 2:12 PM, Open7 said:

why are they all clean now?

In short, they are not. Clean animals remain clean and unclean animals remain unclean. 

If you are referring to Peter's vision in Acts, be very careful you don't forge your own interpretation from it. Peter gives the interpretation himself twice in Acts after his vision and says nothing about food or unclean animals becoming okay to eat. It was an analogy of the gentile inclusion into Israel and relates to a prophecy. 

But even logically, think about it.  Would the Messiah dying and resurrecting suddenly mean it's now okay to eat crocodile, spiders and sea irchins? As some sort of added “perk“ to be saved?  

The Creator made all beasts. He knows which are clean and suitable for eating and which are unclean and unsuitable.  The literal genetics of mankind and the animal kingdom did not change after the Resurrection. Only certain Christian's interpretation changed, to help them accommodate their existing diets with clear consciences.

I hope that helps.