Is Eating Pork Wrong?

[BobRyan]

It appears as though Bob will never answer the question. I can understand why he would avoid it.

I keep giving your answer. IGNORE Lev 19:19 while ADMITTING that Lev 19:18 is a valid part of God's Word for Christians.

You keep claiming that YOUR OWN argument is "no answer at all".

That speaks volumes!!

 

[BobRyan]

Simple question.... rat sandwich... in or out?

Cat and kitten burgers -- in or out?

Do we let God get by with telling us that as the Creator He has not made these animals as FOOD for us??

Rat sandwiches?? How in the world can a Christian get so married to such a thing that they would turn a blind eye to God's Word as it tells us NOT to eat rats????

:

The question is do you still obey this verse? (19:19) If not, then

THEN WE don't have to let God tell us not to eat rats!??

I see -- hmm what a great doctrinal basis for an argument.

It never occurred to me to use such tactics.

 

[BobRyan]

The obvious point is that your argument from Lev 19:19 and "planting seeds in the field" as a means of "picking and choosing which texts to read" is totally debunked.

The obvious piont is "it does not matter how much I endorse Lev 19:19 along with Lev 19:18" because your argument is flawed at the start. IF I endorse God's word in Lev 19:19 you will complain about that. IF I rebell against Lev 19:19 - IT IS STILL not a "biblical argument AGAINST Lev 11" because "rebellion" is not a "form of doctrinal PROOF".

I keep pointing out that "picking and choosing in Lev 19" WOULD NOT form a "doctrinal basis" for committing the same error in another text!!

Your argument is that "IF WE COULD FIND a good way to pick and choose between Lev 19:18 and Lev 19:19 THEN maybe we could imagine an equally good argument for ignoring the command against eating rats in Lev 11".

That is not exegesis - it is not even Bible study.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Claudia_T]

Simple question.... different kinds of seed... in or out?

cotton and polyester clothes -- in or out?

Do we let God get by with telling us that as the Creator He has not made these plants to be mixed??

Mixed fabrics ?? How in the world can a Christian get so married to such a thing that they would turn a blind eye to God's Word as it tells us NOT to mix fabrics????

Do we not keep sacrifices anymore?

THEN WE don't have to let God tell us not to mix fabrics!??

I see -- hmm what a great doctrinal basis for an argument.

It never occurred to me to use such tactics.
:BangHead:

Taking care of your body, just like the 10 commandments never stops being relevant. Old Testament or new

 

[Eric B]

Right! God knew that mixing different fabrics or eating different plants grown together would be harmful to us. (Leviticus, after all, is a health manual!) Now, you can't tell this by yourself, but it is slowly killing us, and God knows more than you. Some clothes even make people's skin break out, so see there, it's proven!

I keep giving your answer. IGNORE Lev 19:19 while ADMITTING that Lev 19:18 is a valid part of God's Word for Christians.

Is that your way of saying "no, I do not observe that verse". Well, for me; I wouldn't call it "ignoring" it; it was given to someone else,, and then rescinded by God Himself, yet is still in there for our reading of God's dealing with Israel, just like the sacrifices, circumcision and everything else.

The obvious point is that your argument from Lev 19:19 and "planting seeds in the field" as a means of "picking and choosing which texts to read" is totally debunked.

The obvious piont is "it does not matter how much I endorse Lev 19:19 along with Lev 19:18" because your argument is flawed at the start. IF I endorse God's word in Lev 19:19 you will complain about that. IF I rebell against Lev 19:19 - IT IS STILL not a "biblical argument AGAINST Lev 11" because "rebellion" is not a "form of doctrinal PROOF".

So then by your own words here, if you do not keep seeds separate, or if you wear mixed fabric--or if you do not observe saccrificews and circumcnsion, are you "rebelling" against Lev.19:19 and the other scriptures that command these things? Anything God once commanded that we no longer keep is "rebelling" against it? Then we should be keeping all 613!

I keep pointing out that "picking and choosing in Lev 19" WOULD NOT form a "doctrinal basis" for committing the same error in another text!!

Your argument is that "IF WE COULD FIND a good way to pick and choose between Lev 19:18 and Lev 19:19 THEN maybe we could imagine an equally good argument for ignoring the command against eating rats in Lev 11".

If we could find a good way to pick and choose between Lev. 18 and Lev.19, THEN maybe we could imagine an equally good argument against sacrifices and circumcision.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Twenty one pages.

About PORK.

Come on, people. Get outside some. Yeeeeeeeesh.

That being said, I'll contribute my own .02 to this train wreck in progress:

Whatever got dropped down to Peter in that vision, tis' a fact that the gentiles didn't eat rats or bats or dogs or cats. Koreans eat dog, and I'm told it's a delicacy. But I digress.

Shellfish and seafood of all kinds, pork, eels, and so on were on the menu for Romans. Some of the barbarian tribes might have eaten their horses out of necessity.

If I recall my hearsay history correctly, in fact, beef was not popular at all in Rome.


But fellas, the bottom line is that pork isn't good for ya. Probably a vegetarian diet is most healthy, but as far as pork being a sin? Come oooooooooon...

 

[Claudia_T]

Tragic,

Well what is sin?

1Jn:3:4: Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Thou shalt not kill.


The whole thing is love your neighbor "as yourself".

If you love yourself you wont do things to kill your own self.

Any time you are being careless about how you treat your body that God gave to you, you are taking years off of your life and thus committing sin.

3John 2:
2: Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.

Deut. 6:
24: And the LORD commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear the LORD our God, for our good always, that he might preserve us alive, as it is at this day.

Isaiah 55:2:
...eat ye that which is good

1 Peter 2:11:
...abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul



Luke 21:34 Jesus warns against "surfeiting" which means gluttony or overeating. Because its not healthy for your body.

1 Cor. 9:25:
And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things.

Gal. 6:7:
Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

If you keep on putting harmful things into your body eventually you will end up in the hospital. Cigarette smoking sometimes cuts off a third of one's life.

2Cor. 7:1:
...let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.



Claudia

 

[BobRyan]

In Isaiah 66 we find out that EVEN the people of Isaiah's day were "eating mice and destible things" Is 66:17 just as pagan do today.

Is 66
16 For the LORD will execute judgment by fire And by His sword on all flesh, And those slain by the LORD will be many.
17 ""Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go to the gardens, Following one in the center, Who eat swine's flesh, detestable things and mice[/b], will come to an end altogether,'' declares the LORD.


But then we learn from TP - that God is wrong about that.

, tis' a fact that the gentiles didn't eat rats or bats or dogs or cats. Koreans eat dog, and I'm told it's a delicacy. But I digress.

Please note the "inconvenient details"

Is 66
16 For the LORD will execute judgment by fire And by His sword on all flesh, And those slain by the LORD will be many.
17 ""Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go to the gardens, Following one in the center, Who eat swine's flesh, detestable things and mice[/b], will come to an end altogether,'' declares the LORD.
18 ""For I know their works and their thoughts; the time is coming to gather all nations and tongues. And they shall come and see My glory.

The Lord comes "in fire" as we see in Rev 19-20 (as we see in 2Thess 1, 2 Peter 3). And “His Sword” destroys all flesh – all humans.

Rev 19
17 Then I saw an angel standing in the sun, and he cried out with a loud voice, [b]saying to all the birds which fly in midheaven, "" Come, assemble for the great supper of God,
18 so that you may eat the flesh of kings and the flesh of commanders and the flesh of mighty men and the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them and the flesh of all men, both free men and slaves, and small and great.''
19 And I saw [b]the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies[/b] assembled to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army.[/b]
20 And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone.
21 And the rest were killed with the sword which came from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse, and all the birds were filled with their flesh


So Isaiah points at BOTH the Sword of Christ that kills “all the rest” of humanity at His coming as well as the flaming fire Paul says is associated with it.

2Thess 1

7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire,
8 dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel[/b] of our Lord Jesus.
9 These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,

TP said --

Shellfish and seafood of all kinds, pork, eels, and so on were on the menu for Romans. Some of the barbarian tribes might have eaten their horses out of necessity.

TP you are truly on a roll in terms of just "making stuff up".

The Lewis and Clarke expedition provides an interesting point of historic reference for those who don't trust God in Isaiah 66 telling us that yes indeed the pagans ARE eating mice and destible things.

Whe the L&C expecition reached the tribes of the west coast they received a warm welcome and the Indians decided to toss a party for them - serving up Pacific Salmon in the feast.

The people of the Lewis and Clarke expedition said they were tired of eating fish so often as they crossed the American content. They asked if they could please have some horse and dog while the "savages" ate Salmon.

If only they could have trusted their Creator who in Lev 11 told them that dogs, cats, rats and bats - and even horsies -- are "NOT food for humans".

But the traditions of man have sooooo often been dedicated to the purpose of abolishing scripture that few know when to delete God's Word and when to simply read and accept it.

How tragic -- Pizza.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

TP argues that nobody eats rats, cats dogs and bats so no need for God to make laws against it in Lev 11.

If only TP could get a turn in His chair -- I am sure the book would look different -- certainly no Lev 11!!!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Right! God knew that mixing different fabrics or eating different plants grown together would be harmful to us. (Leviticus, after all, is a health manual!) Now, you can't tell this by yourself, but it is slowly killing us, and God knows more than you. Some clothes even make people's skin break out, so see there, it's proven!

Is that your way of saying "no, I do not observe that verse". Well, for me; I wouldn't call it "ignoring" it; it was given to someone else,, and then rescinded by God Himself,

#1. Where did God "recind it"??

#2. Did Jesus die on the cross so farmers could plant two kinds of seeds at once??

#3. In Acts Paul argues that he taught that nothing is recinded for the Jews -- is it your argument that Lev 19:19 used to apply to Gentiles but now just the Jews have to follow it??


The point I was making in my responses is that this line of argument based on Lev 19:19 (a NOT LEV 11 topic) does NOTHING to support your turning a blind eye to Lev 11 No matter WHICH view you take of Lev 19:19 after claiming Lev 19:18 is VALID for us to read and obey!!

THE POINT is that you have NO biblical argument at all here - you just appeal to "people's desires to ignore texts of scripture".

AS IF your ignoring Lev 19:19 justifies someone else ignoring God's commands against taking God's name in vain.

AT BEST you have a kind of jelly doughnut argument of the form "he did it so we all can do it" which is NOT a form of exegesis - is NOT a form of Bible PROOF.

AT WORST you simply appeal to Lev 19:19 and I show you WHY God's idea was "CORRECT AFTER ALL".

But in NEITHER case does your argument stand!!

COULD the Jews say "My neighbors ignored Jesus of Nazareth so it must have been right for me to do it too" - as a valid BIBLE argument?????

Yet you pursue it as if you have found a "Biblical proof".

BTW - you seem to scoff at the idea that Christ our Creator might have known a thing or two about biology and health when He told us what IS food and what is NOT food for humans in Lev 11 - saying that humans should not be eating rats, cats, dogs and bats.

Why do you find that so hard to accept?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Eric B]

#1. Where did God "recind it"??

#2. Did Jesus die on the cross so farmers could plant two kinds of seeds at once??

#3. In Acts Paul argues that he taught that nothing is recinded for the Jews -- is it your argument that Lev 19:19 used to apply to Gentiles but now just the Jews have to follow it??

So keeping different kinds of seed separate IS still in effect. Why didn't you just say that the first time, instead of beating around the bush?

Now what about mixed fabrics?
And if NOTHING is rescinded, then what about every single other law, including circumcision and sacrifices?

The point I was making in my responses is that this line of argument based on Lev 19:19 (a NOT LEV 11 topic) does NOTHING to support your turning a blind eye to Lev 11 No matter WHICH view you take of Lev 19:19 after claiming Lev 19:18 is VALID for us to read and obey!!

THE POINT is that you have NO biblical argument at all here - you just appeal to "people's desires to ignore texts of scripture".

AS IF your ignoring Lev 19:19 justifies someone else ignoring God's commands against taking God's name in vain.

AT BEST you have a kind of jelly doughnut argument of the form "he did it so we all can do it" which is NOT a form of exegesis - is NOT a form of Bible PROOF.

AT WORST you simply appeal to Lev 19:19 and I show you WHY God's idea was "CORRECT AFTER ALL".

But in NEITHER case does your argument stand!!

COULD the Jews say "My neighbors ignored Jesus of Nazareth so it must have been right for me to do it too" - as a valid BIBLE argument?????

Yet you pursue it as if you have found a "Biblical proof".

The only point is that we do not keep every single commandment in Leviticus or the rest of the OT.
I see no other Christian keeping sacrifices. Should I still keep them because I shouldn't "ignore" them just because others are?
You have never once given a biblical criterion for which laws we still keep. You pick and choose whichever ones you reason are still valid, and often make up your own criteria as we see next.

BTW - you seem to scoff at the idea that Christ our Creator might have known a thing or two about biology and health when He told us what IS food and what is NOT food for humans in Lev 11 - saying that humans should not be eating rats, cats, dogs and bats.

Why do you find that so hard to accept?

In Christ,

Bob

You have never given a SINGLE scripture teachng they were HEALTH laws. You use your own reasoning only. Unclean meats were said to "DEFILE" or make "UNHOLY". Those are SPIRITUAL states, not PHYSICAL "health" matters. If you eat something else infected wth worms, bacteria, etc. Unknowingly, you will become unhealthy, but NOT "defiled" or "unholy", not guilty of "sin". Now stop makng up your own ideas and fudging the issue, already!

 

[BobRyan]

So keeping different kinds of seed separate IS still in effect. Why didn't you just say that the first time, instead of beating around the bush?

What I said is that EITHER ANSWER would not solve your problem in Lev 11 because NEITHER is an exegetical review of Lev 11!

Obviously.

Christ did not die on the cross to change the nature of seeds or plants.

Obviously.

Christ did not die on the cross to change the nature of cloth --

Obviously.

The only point is that we do not keep every single commandment in Leviticus or the rest of the OT

Obviously - I keep going to that point and you keep saying I am beating around the bush.

Your argument is "WE DON't Keep every single commandment and WE MUST be right in some way ... so whenever we discover why that is really valid -- then maybe it will be valid to pick and choose our way through Lev 11"

Your argument is nether exegesis NOR Bible study - it is wishful thinking regarding a pick-and-choose approach to scripture.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Just so the reader does not lose context in all this "hey what about fabric and seeds" sidetrack

Lev 11 says all humans are "not food" -- so no chewing on your neighbor my friend - EVEN if your neighbor is Jewish!!.

(That part seems to come as a big surprise to some on this thread)

Lev 11 says all rats are "not food" for humans - so no chewing on the mice you catch in your yard.

Lev 11 says all cats are "not food" for humans - so on eating your cat...

all this seems obvious to most of us - but for some "it restricts their liberty" and Christ needs to die on the cross to release them from such restrictions -- something never stated in all of scripture.


In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Now what about mixed fabrics?
And if NOTHING is rescinded, then what about every single other law, including circumcision and sacrifices?

Your are listing "what you don't want to keep" but you are not listing a single exegetical argument NOR a Bible study of anything to defend "your wants".

Let me help you.

In Lev and in Exodus we have Moral law, civil law, ceremonial law and health laws.

An example of Moral law is obviously the Ten Commandments that "define sin" -- As long as sin is DEFINED it exists and we need salvation from it according to Romans 4 and 5 "Where there is no law there is no sin".

Romans 3 and Gal 3 BOTH make the point that the Law STILL binds all mankind under sin showing that ALL ARE sinners and ALL NEED salvation.

So trying to obliterate "Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5 or the Ten Commandments referenced in Eph 6 and James 2 or... is simply wishful thinking - not exegesis.

2. Civil laws include rules about civil penalties for breaking law. This can only apply while there is a theocracy - a nation based on God as king.

But some of those laws also lend themselves to any national system and in fact those civil penalties exist outside a theocracy.

An example of a moral concept not acceptable in civil law is that you are to turn the other cheek when struck. The law that you must forgive.

3. Ceremonial law - In Lev 23 we see the annual Sabbaths based on animal sacrifices. These sacrifices point to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. They point to our need for a sacrifice in our place a substitionary atoning sacrifice --

The is incredibly obvious as Col 2 and Heb 10 point it out EXPLICITLY saying that all animal sacrifices and offerings END with the "once for all" sacrifice of Christ.

God explicitly ends what God explicitly instituted.

4. Health laws seen in Lev 11 AND in Gen 6-8 regarding unclean animals (and yes HUMANS are not "food for humans" - nor cats nor dogs etc) remain. Christ did not die on the cross so you could chew on rats or your neighbor.

This comes as a great surprise to some on this thread.

That is pretty facinating!!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Unclean meats were said to "DEFILE" or make "UNHOLY". Those are SPIRITUAL states, not PHYSICAL "health" matters.

Dead wrong.

In Lev 11 even CLEAN animals that die of disease or of themselves are UNCLEAN in that dead decaying rotting form -- you say 'this is not a health issue because they are unclean".

How ridiculous!!

In Lev 11 RATS are UNCLEAN -- they were the key to spreading the plague in Europe and you claim "that is not a health issue because see -- they are UNCLEAN".

Your argument is neither exegesis nor Bible study of any kind. It is story telling.

In Lev 11 - HUMANS (all humans both Jews and Gentiles no matter how obedient to God's Laws) are UNCLEAN and "NOT FOOD FOR HUMANS".

How in the world you can seek to bend that around to a non-food topic is a wrench and twist of scripture far beyond all reason.

THE SIN in the case is in violating the Word of God.

HENCE God Himself makes is argument in Isaiah 66 for the fire and brimstone judgment at the end of time upon those who "eat mice and destible things".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Eric B]

What I said is that EITHER ANSWER would not solve your problem in Lev 11 because NEITHER is an exegetical review of Lev 11!

Obviously.

Christ did not die on the cross to change the nature of seeds or plants.

Obviously.

Christ did not die on the cross to change the nature of cloth --

Obviously.

Obviously - I keep going to that point and you keep saying I am beating around the bush.

Your argument is "WE DON't Keep every single commandment and WE MUST be right in some way ... so whenever we discover why that is really valid -- then maybe it will be valid to pick and choose our way through Lev 11"

Now, you've totally lost me.
We asked you for a SIMPLE YES or NO; not "going to that point". All you're doing is obfuscating the whole question so you can throw back some charge that we are "ignoring" parts of the Bible.

Your argument is nether exegesis NOR Bible study - it is wishful thinking regarding a pick-and-choose approach to scripture.

In Christ,

Bob

No YOUR argument is not exegesis nor study, but dodging simple questions. You still have not given one single scripture teaching your ideas. You just take proof-texts and assume they imply them.

all this seems obvious to most of us - but for some "it restricts their liberty" and Christ needs to die on the cross to release them from such restrictions -- something never stated in all of scripture.

Again, I don't eat pork. Nor rats, bats and cats; so there is no "liberty" I am trying to keep from being restricted.

Quote:
Now what about mixed fabrics?
And if NOTHING is rescinded, then what about every single other law, including circumcision and sacrifices?

Your are listing "what you don't want to keep" but you are not listing a single exegetical argument NOR a Bible study of anything to defend "your wants".

Let me help you.

In Lev and in Exodus we have Moral law, civil law, ceremonial law and health laws.

An example of Moral law is obviously the Ten Commandments that "define sin" -- As long as sin is DEFINED it exists and we need salvation from it according to Romans 4 and 5 "Where there is no law there is no sin".

Romans 3 and Gal 3 BOTH make the point that the Law STILL binds all mankind under sin showing that ALL ARE sinners and ALL NEED salvation.

So trying to obliterate "Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5 or the Ten Commandments referenced in Eph 6 and James 2 or... is simply wishful thinking - not exegesis.

2. Civil laws include rules about civil penalties for breaking law. This can only apply while there is a theocracy - a nation based on God as king.

But some of those laws also lend themselves to any national system and in fact those civil penalties exist outside a theocracy.

An example of a moral concept not acceptable in civil law is that you are to turn the other cheek when struck. The law that you must forgive.

3. Ceremonial law - In Lev 23 we see the annual Sabbaths based on animal sacrifices. These sacrifices point to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. They point to our need for a sacrifice in our place a substitionary atoning sacrifice --

The is incredibly obvious as Col 2 and Heb 10 point it out EXPLICITLY saying that all animal sacrifices and offerings END with the "once for all" sacrifice of Christ.

God explicitly ends what God explicitly instituted.

4. Health laws seen in Lev 11 AND in Gen 6-8 regarding unclean animals (and yes HUMANS are not "food for humans" - nor cats nor dogs etc) remain. Christ did not die on the cross so you could chew on rats or your neighbor.

This comes as a great surprise to some on this thread.

That is pretty facinating!!

You've got the part about the ceremonial law right, but you have not given any scripture clearly highlighting those other categories, an which laws fit into them. What does mixing of fabrics fit into? What does circumcision fit into, because it was before the nation of Israel? So you list this so matter of factly, but still have not exegeted a single thing! You're only still fudging the issue.

Then it contradicts all of the accusations of "ignoring the Word of God". Lev.23 ceremonies are still "the Word of God", yet you do not keep them. Are you "ignoring the Word of God"? No, you believe they have been superseded by Christ. So if we believe other commands from Lev. have been superseded because they had spiritual intent met in Christ (such as "clean and unclesn", which is SPIRITUAL) just like the sacrifices. We are told not to judge over them, and while you have your oen esegetical answers for those scriptures, do not say I am only choosing what I want or do not want to keep. (I again, do not eat pork, or the other animals, and do not even practice gardening).

Dead wrong.

In Lev 11 even CLEAN animals that die of disease or of themselves are UNCLEAN in that dead decaying rotting form -- you say 'this is not a health issue because they are unclean".

How ridiculous!!

That is ONE example of something that is "unhealthy", but obviously not the only one. If everything "unhealthy" is "unclean", then why are there no restrictions on poisonous plants? Don't give me that "well, God didn't tell them every single thing", bit, because according to you, Leviticus is a health manual.

In Lev 11 RATS are UNCLEAN -- they were the key to spreading the plague in Europe and you claim "that is not a health issue because see -- they are UNCLEAN".

Your argument is neither exegesis nor Bible study of any kind. It is story telling.

And if a clean animal gets a plague and spreads it, does it become "unclean"? Another one example that does not make "u nclean" and "unhealthy" synonymous.

In Lev 11 - HUMANS (all humans both Jews and Gentiles no matter how obedient to God's Laws) are UNCLEAN and "NOT FOOD FOR HUMANS".

I thought humans weren't animals, and would not fit into that category. Are you embracing evolution now? :laugh:
Still, there is not ONE SINGLE SCRIPTURE that ever deals with humans being "unclean" FOR FOOD. Human "uncleaness" is always SPIRITUAL, involving "SIN". This shows you are the one making stuff up out of your own reasoning.

How in the world you can seek to bend that around to a non-food topic is a wrench and twist of scripture far beyond all reason.

No, how you can make it about food when "uncleanness" is CLEARLY about SIN is what is a wrench of scripture far beyond all reason.

THE SIN in the case is in violating the Word of God.

HENCE God Himself makes is argument in Isaiah 66 for the fire and brimstone judgment at the end of time upon those who "eat mice and destible things".

Yes, whatever God tells you to do or not do, if you don't follow it, it is sin. If He tells you you no longer have to follow it, it is NO LONGER sin, and NOT "ignoring/violating the Word of God". He has given you another word, and He has the right to supersede His own word just as He did with the ceremonies.

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:

THE SIN in the case is in violating the Word of God.

HENCE God Himself makes is argument in Isaiah 66 for the fire and brimstone judgment at the end of time upon those who "eat mice and destible things".

Yes, whatever God tells you to do or not do, if you don't follow it, it is sin. If He tells you you no longer have to follow it, it is NO LONGER sin, and NOT "ignoring/violating the Word of God". He has given you another word, and He has the right to supersede His own word just as He did with the ceremonies.

And so... the place where God tells us that we can now eat humans, rats and bats (you know - all that He said is "not food" in Lev 11) is....??

No place?

Hmmm.. that is what I thought.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
In Lev 11 - HUMANS (all humans both Jews and Gentiles no matter how obedient to God's Laws) are UNCLEAN and "NOT FOOD FOR HUMANS".

I thought humans weren't animals, and would not fit into that category. Are you embracing evolution now? :laugh:
Still, there is not ONE SINGLE SCRIPTURE that ever deals with humans being "unclean" FOR FOOD. Human "uncleaness" is always SPIRITUAL, involving "SIN". This shows you are the one making stuff up out of your own reasoning.

The rule states that whatever has a split hoof and chews cud is ok for food.

I am guessing that you must know some people have those features but you "guessed" that Lev 11 did not mean to include them as food "all by yourself" --

Well as much as you may want to avoid this additional inconvenient fact of scripture the same rule used in Lev 11 to say that bats and rats are "not food" also delcares all humans to be "not food" for humans.

My decision is to read and accept the Bible - instead of ignoring it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob Said -Dead wrong.

In Lev 11 even CLEAN animals that die of disease or of themselves are UNCLEAN in that dead decaying rotting form -- you say 'this is not a health issue because they are unclean".

How ridiculous!!

That is ONE example of something that is "unhealthy"

What? You will allow one tiny spot in Lev 11 to show some reason? You are admitting that Christ the Creator actually knew what He was talking about on this tiny spec of fact listed in Lev 11 by HIM?

I applaud your step forward on this discussion!

Nice going.

After telling us that the terms clean and unclean in Lev 11 do not show us that it is unhealthy to eat "what is not food for humans" you are forced to admit that you are wrong?

I am truly surprised.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Then it contradicts all of the accusations of "ignoring the Word of God". Lev.23 ceremonies are still "the Word of God", yet you do not keep them. Are you "ignoring the Word of God"? No, you believe they have been superseded by Christ

This is the heart and soul of your error. You believe we can "make stuff up" about what is not valid or ended or does not apply EVEN without having any scripture to STATE THAT explicitly.

As in your "two kinds of seed changed at the cross" mythology.

As in your "Ignore Lev 11 even though scripture does not tell you to" arguments.

The example I give from Lev 23 is EXPLICITLY addressed by Heb 10 - nothing left to the 'imagination'. You can fully exegete Heb 10 and SEE it.

I quoted this in my post --

3. Ceremonial law - In Lev 23 we see the annual Sabbaths based on animal sacrifices. These sacrifices point to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. They point to our need for a sacrifice in our place a substitionary atoning sacrifice --

The is incredibly obvious as Col 2 and Heb 10 point it out EXPLICITLY saying that all animal sacrifices and offerings END with the "once for all" sacrifice of Christ.

God explicitly ends what God explicitly instituted.

In Christ,

Bob