Is Eating Pork Wrong?

[EdSutton]

Tastes like chicken Ed;

Glad to hear, since I'm not all that fond of chicken, either. Guess that's why I'm not a preacher! It's a requirement, I do believe! :smilewinkgrin: :tongue3: :laugh:

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

Sorry to bring up a Bible point now - but...

Actually - as Eph 6 and Romans 7 and James 2 and ... shows the NT authors RELIED upon the OT text as "The Word of God" instead of simply dumping it in the trash can.

That means - when God says He will "in the future at the end of time" judge all mankind and will at that future time pour out fire and brimstone on the wicked - even pointing out those who are "eating mice and detestable things" (Isaiah) it is HARD to imagine that Paul would ENCOURAGE them to face that future time of fire and brimstone by engaging in MORE of the acts that the Creator calls "detestable" in Isaiah 66.

In fact - Paul does no such thing. Even John is quick to argue FOR the "keeping of the Commandments of God" both in his Gospel of the pre-cross teaching of Christ AND in his post-cross texts.

In Christ,

Bob

There is one thing that definitely is correct, here. Namely, the argument for keeping the Commandments of God. Jesus spoke of "MY commandments", certainly. The point is these were not the Mosaic law, as the Mosaic precepts were ennumerated, and the NT tells us that we are not under these precepts- not one, for they were fulfilled en toto by the Lord Jesus Christ, who them "took them out of the way" and nailed them to the cross.

The principles that were the bases for the precepts are another matter - restated, when applicable, and in the terms and language of grace.

Absolutely, we are under these, as Christians. But let's not confuse the two 'systems', the two women (Sarah and Hagar) and/or the two sons (Isaac and Ishmael), as given in Galatians. The 'systems' are not the same, and are no more kin than a cat and a cow, save for the same creator, and one is not an 'improved' version of the other.

So as Bro.B might say, "Hold the skunk, and pass the pork!" :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

[BobRyan]

There is one thing that definitely is correct, here. Namely, the argument for keeping the Commandments of God. Jesus spoke of "MY commandments", certainly. The point is these were not the Mosaic law, as the Mosaic precepts were ennumerated, and the NT tells us that we are not under these precepts- not one, for they were fulfilled en toto by the Lord Jesus Christ, who them "took them out of the way" and nailed them to the cross.

So Jesus PRE-CROSS was saying "PLEASE do NOT READ my WORD" it is all abolished??? (Or do you suggest a "pick-and-choose" - each one taking out what is right in his own eyes?)

Or do you mean that Jesus Pre-CROSS WAS teaching and promoting (and QUOTING) HIS Word the OT -- but we should not listen to anything HE SAYS pre-cross?? (Gal 4 claims He was born and lived UNDER the LAW).

OR do you mean that MOSES (not GOD) is the real AUTHOR of God's Word - NOT GOD - and so Jesus simply pointed out in the Gospel that IGNORING MOSES was ok since that was not actually God who AUTHORED the Bible - but MOSES??

When JAMES and JESUS quote Lev 19:18 "LOVE your Neighbor as yourself" or Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your heart" -- should we IGNORE that OT teaching coming from them - and wait for something BETTER?

OR should we imagine to ourselves that Christ did NOT fulfill that command so now we STILL have to obey it??

When God says in Isaiah 66 that at the Rev 20 lake of fire and brimstone event at the end of the world He will burn those who eat mice and detestible things was He "misinformed" about the fact that the Messiah and the Cross would come 1000's of years before that event? Was He wrong to think that POST CROSS Judgment would forget your teaching that making-mice-clean-to-eat was one of the purposes of the cross? Was He wrong to think of PRE-CROSS Bible as "still valid" and authorotative and it's Morals upheld?

Seems like you already have eaten a few too many skunks on this one.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[LeBuick]

So Jesus PRE-CROSS was saying "PLEASE do NOT READ my WORD" it is all abolished??? (Or do you suggest a "pick-and-choose" - each one taking out what is right in his own eyes?)

I believe Jesus pre-Cross, we trying to get us to see that we were living for the law instead of letting the law be the means by which we could have a better life. He gave many examples where we must sometime go contrary to the law. Examples, the showbread that David ate, disciples eating the corn, lame man carrying his bed etc... We are trying to do this same thing today when salvation is freely giving yet we still place work, or obediance to the law as a requirement.

I still say we don't obey the law to be saved, we obey the law because we are saved...

 

[EdSutton]

So Jesus PRE-CROSS was saying "PLEASE do NOT READ my WORD" it is all abolished??? (Or do you suggest a "pick-and-choose" - each one taking out what is right in his own eyes?)

Or do you mean that Jesus Pre-CROSS WAS teaching and promoting (and QUOTING) HIS Word the OT -- but we should not listen to anything HE SAYS pre-cross?? (Gal 4 claims He was born and lived UNDER the LAW).

OR do you mean that MOSES (not GOD) is the real AUTHOR of God's Word - NOT GOD - and so Jesus simply pointed out in the Gospel that IGNORING MOSES was ok since that was not actually God who AUTHORED the Bible - but MOSES??

When JAMES and JESUS quote Lev 19:18 "LOVE your Neighbor as yourself" or Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your heart" -- should we IGNORE that OT teaching coming from them - and wait for something BETTER?

OR should we imagine to ourselves that Christ did NOT fulfill that command so now we STILL have to obey it??

When God says in Isaiah 66 that at the Rev 20 lake of fire and brimstone event at the end of the world He will burn those who eat mice and detestible things was He "misinformed" about the fact that the Messiah and the Cross would come 1000's of years before that event? Was He wrong to think that POST CROSS Judgment would forget your teaching that making-mice-clean-to-eat was one of the purposes of the cross? Was He wrong to think of PRE-CROSS Bible as "still valid" and authorotative and it's Morals upheld?

Seems like you already have eaten a few too many skunks on this one.

In Christ,

Bob

Bob, I was attempting to answer this, but I am not particularly adept on the computer (unlike my lovely bride, who is an expert) , and managed to erase it. So I will have to do it over, and I assure you, I will, complete with my displeasure at misrepresentation, but it will now have to wait till later, as I don't have the time, at this moment. As to the last sentence you wrote, do you actually know whether or not a skunk is an 'unclean' animal, based on the Torah? Or does it merely 'sound' unappetizing to you, for I know that it certainly does to me? I'll also add that I ain't eatin' any of them 'clean' locusts and grasshoppers, either!!!

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

John the Baptist came eating Locust and wild honey and though the honey would be certainly clean, the locust would be nothing but wings and guts. Also, that is what God will use to destroy some in the end but is good for us to eat. locusts with scorpion tails and human faces are to torment unbelievers.
It says to eat whatever is prepared and set before us. I guess we need to use our brain that the good Lord gave us as we don't jump off high building then we should not eat things that have rotted for instance. I think we have a lot more things to worry about than what we eat to survive. If someone was stranded on an island with a pig and this person didn't believe in eating pork. If I was the pig I wouldn't feel too safe, I don't know about you?

 

[EdSutton]

John the Baptist came eating Locust and wild honey and though the honey would be certainly clean, the locust would be nothing but wings and guts. Also, that is what God will use to destroy some in the end but is good for us to eat. locusts with scorpion tails and human faces are to torment unbelievers.
It says to eat whatever is prepared and set before us. I guess we need to use our brain that the good Lord gave us as we don't jump off high building then we should not eat things that have rotted for instance. I think we have a lot more things to worry about than what we eat to survive. If someone was stranded on an island with a pig and this person didn't believe in eating pork. If I was the pig I wouldn't feel too safe, I don't know about you?

Depending on how hungry and mean the pig was, I might not feel all that safe, either.

Ed

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

It now seems clear that regular consumption of up to 1-2 drinks a day (1 standard drink is approximately equal to 5 oz, or 125 ml, of 13% wine) does reduce mortality, due to a 10%–40% lower risk of coronary heart disease, especially for those over the age of 35 or so (see Alcohol consumption and health).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_consumption_and_health

Alcohol may or may not reduce mortality... I am not convinced it does. God is in control of life.

I do know this, God's Word tells us to abstain from alcohol. 'Look thou not'.

 

[Brother Bob]

And then there was one!

Shall it be the man or shall it be the pig.

 

[LeBuick]

Alcohol may or may not reduce mortality... I am not convinced it does. God is in control of life.

I do know this, God's Word tells us to abstain from alcohol. 'Look thou not'.

I don't drink but it has nothing to do with religious reasons, I was simply quoting what the medical community is saying. You have a right to believe them or not.

God is a God of truth. It is not Godly to mis represent something just to get others to abstain. If God didn't want man to drink wine he would simply say don't drink wine and would not have to have the medical community behind his command.

What medically is wrong with leaven, pork or shell fish? Yet God told Israel not to partake of any of them. He didn't have to say 9 out of 10 doctors say yeast is bad for you, he simply said don't eat it...

 

[TC]

In Genesis 6 we see that the "clean/unclean" distinction was in existence prior to the writing of the book of Leviticus -- so it is infact much simpler than you suppose.

But remember the "Goal" is not to find ways to ignore the Word of God -- right?

Also note that in Isaiah 66 you see a "future" where God is pouring out fire and brimstone on all mankind (something we see in Rev 20) and in that future - God punishes those who eat mice.

If you have some "future hell" for those who wear cotton - listed in scripture - feel free to show it.

Otherwise I am not going to equivocate between laws that were in existence before Israel and ARE enforced AFTER the NT age -- and those that are not.

In Christ,

Bob

So, you can pick and choose what you wish to obey? James says that if you break one point of the law, then you have broken all of it. James, John, Jesus, Peter, and Paul all considered the law to be one complete unit. If you are going to keep one part of it, you had better start keeping all of it.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

I will believe God's Word over the medical community any day of the week.

We ought to obey God rather than man.

Look not thou means, as has been pointed out before, do not experience.

To say it means to just not look upon as some would infer makes no sense whatsoever as it is speaking of alcoholic beverage. Why would God tell a person they could not look at alcoholic beverage but they could drink it. That is where the 'moderation' advocates are really absurd. __________________

 

[BobRyan]

So, you can pick and choose what you wish to obey? James says that if you break one point of the law, then you have broken all of it. James, John, Jesus, Peter, and Paul all considered the law to be one complete unit. If you are going to keep one part of it, you had better start keeping all of it.

Are you wanting me to say "OH reallyl - then lets break it and forget about it -- as much as we please! Why pay attention to James in James 2 IF we realy can IGNORE the Word of God in James 2 and get by without AND gain the benefit of not having to worry about God's pesky COMMANDS"?

If so you need a more thorough argument.

While we are waiting for that ...


Christ’s followers continue to keep the Sabbath commandment after His command that they should “Love Me and Keep My Commandments” John 14:15 (quoting from the 3rd commandment in Exodus 20)

Luke 23:56
Then they returned and prepared spices and perfumes. And on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment.

Why do the Gospel writers take such care to teach us what Christ commanded them?

Matt 28:
18Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

Notice that John does not try to “divide God” as if God’s commandments are not Christ’s

I Jn 5:2-3 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

Rev 12:17 17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev 14:12 12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rev 22:14 14[b] Blessed are they that do his commandments,[/b] that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

As for Law and Grace -- Pauls words in Romans 2:13-16 come to mind relative to "justification".

Romans 2

13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.
14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,
15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,
16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

Here the "New Covenant" promise of the "Law written on the heart" is clearly seen.

Is it any wonder that Paul writes

"Do we then make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we Establish the Law" Rom 3:31

And James 2 tells us to live and act as those "Who are to be judged by God's Law of Liberty".

God is not "calling for rebellion against His Law" as many Christians today "suppose".

Nor is He "abolishing His law" so that only the lost are guilty of breaking it - but the saved can freely transgress and in fact are commanded not to regard it at all. Rather God declares that the name of God is profaned among the wicked by the breaking of His law among the saints. (in Romans 2)

 

[BobRyan]

And just in case the words of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ pre-Cross have significance for you --

Matt 5:17-22
17 Think not that I am come to[b] destroy the law[/b], or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Instead of “less obedience” to each commandment of Christ the Creator – God calls for “more”.

Matt 5:27-28 27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Instead of “less obedience” to each commandment of Christ the Creator – God calls for “more”. No wonder Paul says --

Romans 3:31 [b]“Do we then abolish the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we Establish the Law of God”[/b]

So lets see. The law will not change in even the minutest way, till heaven and earth pass. Anyone who breaks the law, and teaches others to do so, will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. Thinking about committing sin is now just like actually committing the sin. Ah, the law has been magnified. Christ came and fulfilled the law, observing all of it’s commands, even in thought, not just action.

Yes, lets let the scriptures speak for themselves.

John 15:10-11 10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
11 These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.

John 14:15 (quoting from the 10 commandments) “IF you love Me Keep My commandments”

Christ quotes from the 3rd commandment for the statement above.

Christ said that HIS commandment and the Father’s Commandment are one and the same

John 12:50
"I know that His commandment is eternal life; therefore the things I speak, I speak just as the Father has told Me."

Notice that John promotes this theme not only with his recording the pre-cross statements of Christ the hCreator – but also the post –cross teaching.

I Jn 2:3-4 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.


Matt 19:17 17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Christ condemns those who would break the Commandments of God for the sake of man-made tradition –

Matthew 15:3
And He answered and said to them, "Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?

 

[BobRyan]

John the Baptist came eating Locust and wild honey and though the honey would be certainly clean, the locust would be nothing but wings and guts. Also, that is what God will use to destroy some in the end but is good for us to eat. locusts with scorpion tails and human faces are to torment unbelievers.
It says to eat whatever is prepared and set before us. I guess we need to use our brain that the good Lord gave us as we don't jump off high building then we should not eat things that have rotted for instance. I think we have a lot more things to worry about than what we eat to survive. If someone was stranded on an island with a pig and this person didn't believe in eating pork. If I was the pig I wouldn't feel too safe, I don't know about you?

If I just read Isaiah 66 and then saw the fires of Rev 20 being ginned up for "The execution of those who eat mice and detestible things" I would think twice before having the rat sandwich. (Frankly I think I would think twice before eating the mice "anyway" but that is just me).

As for locusts - read Lev 11 then give me your answer.

As for mixing in the Locusts of Lev 11 with the 5th seal in Revelation -- ?? Why do that?

As for the "eat whatever is set before you" in 1Cor 8 and 10 meaning "any rat or poison on your plate is good to eat now" I don't think that fits exegesis of any form. Rather it is clear Paul is speaking of meat that had been offerred to idols.

Peter was very clear on this literal issue of eating rats and snake "Never Lord I have NEVER done this". Three times he emphasized this literal level of submission to God's Word on this point.

 

[TC]

Are you wanting me to say "OH reallyl - then lets break it and forget about it -- as much as we please! Why pay attention to James in James 2 IF we realy can IGNORE the Word of God in James 2 and get by without AND gain the benefit of not having to worry about God's pesky COMMANDS"?

If so you need a more thorough argument.

While we are waiting for that ...

You are the one who said that you were not going to worry about the command to not wear clothes made of mixed material. So, you are picking and choosing what commands you want to follow and those you want to ignore. If you are going to be so picky about dietary laws, then you need to look at all the labels on your clothes and throw out any that are made of more than one material.

I did not say to ignore the commands of Jesus. It is you that needs rethink what you follow and what you don't.

 

[Brother Bob]

Frankly, I don't eat mice, rats, dogs, cats, possum, ground hog, bear, turtle, deer meat, snakes or locusts either. I have eat honey and I guess some of it was wild honey but really don't care for it either. I do eat beef, pork, fish, seafood of almost all kind, lord knows what I eat in some of the prepared meats.

 

[LeBuick]

I do eat beef, pork, fish, seafood of almost all kind, lord knows what I eat in some of the prepared meats.

What, you don't eat no stinkin yard bird. What kind of preacher don't eat chicken? We may need to check your membership card, you may be an imposter.

 

[gekko]

ok - here's a thought.

why is it that we are warned not to eat pork and shellfish and what not?

 

[Brother Bob]

What, you don't eat no stinkin yard bird. What kind of preacher don't eat chicken? We may need to check your membership card, you may be an imposter.

Sorry, the Colonel knows me personally.