The Dietary Laws

[BobRyan]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#2. Try not repeatedly glossing over the obvious fact that this is "vegetables ONLY" vs "meat" AND NOT the "inserted" idea of yours regarding "adding rats to the table" and not "just beef". It is not a discusion BETWEEN MEATS of various kinds in Rom 14 (obviously) it is a discussion about "vegetables ONLY" vs meat! that is NOT a Lev 11 issue at all!! (obviously)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael said
Actually, I just went with the text when it says "all things."

What a GREAT way to gloss over and ignore the statement above that specifically asks about the "VEGETABLES only" argument in Romans 14!!

Rom 14:2 One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only.

You keep making the mindless argument of the form "ALL things means trucks, cars, rocks, dogs, kittens, rats NOT just beef and chicken Salmon and Sea bass"

While you ignore the inconvenient details POINTED OUT for you in the text of Rom 14!!

Why do you keep doing that?

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
I have not seen any reason at all to ignore the Romans 14 fact that the issue is about eating "only VEGETABLES" vs eating MEAT. I see no reason to ignore that EVEN though it is an "inconvenient detail" to those who want Romans 14 to be about "eating RATS in addtion to BEEF".

I see NO REASON to ignore the detail in Mark 7 about UNCLEAN BREAD where SIN is "getting on food" and is declared to be nothing but a "man made tradition". Those who want to spin Mark 7 around AS IF it is a debate about "eating RATS in addtion to BEEF" seem to fail to even begin to exegete the chapter.

Why "pretend" to be in the dark folks?? This just isn't that hard.

Rats, cats, dogs and bats -- are not the food that God recommends in Lev 11. Sorry.

Beef, chicken, lamb, salmon and sea bass will just have to do for those who care about God's word in Lev 11 and they will be doing without the "rats, cats, dogs and bats" as snacks.

Rom 14 says "ALL THINGS" but does not want us to wildly take off into rats, rocks, dogs, cars as "THINGS" when the context is VEGETABLES only vs MEATS just as we see in 1Cor 8!!

Obviously that "Vegetables only vs meats" discussion is NOT happening in Lev 11!

Oh well. This may not sit well with some people in Asia and a few souls on this board - but most people just don't "need to eat rats" so bad that they would abolish God's word to do it!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

BTW for those who "need" to go off on wild tangents for "All things in Rom 14 means any THING that is a THING" -- Humans are "things" as well as all living and nonliving THINGS.

 

[rbell]

Originally posted by gekko:
well if you're just going to go only by the new testament...

then you'd better rip the OT from your current bible - considering its obviously useless to you.

I'm going to try this one more time, gekko:

Are you wearing a poly/cotton shirt?

That's a levitical code violation. By your definition, a sin.

If the OT levitical code is going to be followed, you better follow it all. Good luck.

Leviticus 19:19 (ASV)--

"Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with two kinds of seed: neither shall there come upon thee a garment of two kinds of stuff mingled together. "


I ask once again, how do you respond to this?

 

[Claudia_T]

I look at it from a common sense point of view. If there are things in the Old Testament that God told His people to do and He DID say He gave them all the rules for their own good...

if a rule back then is just as beneficial to us today, then why in the world would you want to disregard it?


Like, dont commit incest for instance.

Just because that is an old testament rule and it isnt reiterated in the new testament... would any of you decie you may as well go commit incest today? "Because Jesus died for us on the cross"

OF COURSE NOT!!

Well if modern science has shown that eating certain types of foods are more beneficial to you then others, and some are harmful... why on earth would you want to disregard common sense?

God did give us common sense, you know?

and I think He expects us to use it.

Claudia

 

[Claudia_T]

If you just want to go by common sense, just look at this:

1Cor:6:12: All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient


Even looking at it from that point of view... why not go with whats beneficial to you?

specially since Paul said...

3Jn:1:2: Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.

I no longer look at things as "Okay now lets see... how much can I get away with and still get myself into heaven?" Lets see now, let me get out my old trusty Law book and see if I can manage to make my way around this law or at least make like it isnt unlawful to do it anymore.

Why be that way???

Dont you want to live longer and be in optimum health?

Dont you want to glorify God by being able to keep yourself in the best condition?

Think of Daniel and his friends, he was offered the King's food of meat and wine..

what did Daniel do?

Daniel and his friends refused to eat the King's meat and wine and chose a diet of "pulse" which is vegetarian. (see Daniel Chapter 1)

He and his friends proved to be stronger, in better physical health, able to understand visions... more sensitive to what God was trying to tell them...


Why not take the attitude of Daniel? you know, if it were just a matter of not eating the King's meat because it had been sacrificed to idols, Daniel couldve asked for different meat that hadnt been sacrificed to idols. But he asked for pulse.

Vegetarian was the original diet given to man before the sin entered the world. (see Genesis 1:29) Before death. God never really intended that we subsist off of carcasses of dead animals. He only PERMITTED it after the flood.

I personally have not ever really studied into whether or not it is "okay" to eat unclean meats in new testament times..

That is because I am no longer simply trying to find out how little I can do for God and still get myelf saved... or how much I can get away with and still get myself saved.


I just think we ought to have grown out of that mentality.

Claudia

[ May 10, 2006, 01:05 PM: Message edited by: Claudia_T ]

 

[Claudia_T]

Just a reference for what I just said:

Daniel 1:

5: And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king's meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king.
6: Now among these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah:
7: Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names: for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abed-nego.
8: But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion of the king's meat, nor with the wine which he drank: therefore he requested of the prince of the eunuchs that he might not defile himself.
9: Now God had brought Daniel into favour and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs.
10: And the prince of the eunuchs said unto Daniel, I fear my lord the king, who hath appointed your meat and your drink: for why should he see your faces worse liking than the children which are of your sort? then shall ye make me endanger my head to the king.
11: Then said Daniel to Melzar, whom the prince of the eunuchs had set over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah,
12: Prove thy servants, I beseech thee, ten days; and let them give us pulse to eat, and water to drink.
13: Then let our countenances be looked upon before thee, and the countenance of the children that eat of the portion of the king's meat: and as thou seest, deal with thy servants.
14: So he consented to them in this matter, and proved them ten days.
15: And at the end of ten days their countenances appeared fairer and fatter in flesh than all the children which did eat the portion of the king's meat.
16: Thus Melzar took away the portion of their meat, and the wine that they should drink; and gave them pulse.
17: As for these four children, God gave them knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom: and Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams.

 

[Dustin]

If God permits it, isn't it OK then? God inteneded for it to happen because nothing ever happens out of His will. I think it's pretty presumptous to say thet God never really intended something to happen, seeing as how we're His creation, how can we KNOW that?

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

Claudia_T posted May 10, 2006 10:52 AM
If you just want to go by common sense, just look at this:

1 Corinthians:6:12: All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient

Even looking at it from that point of view... why not go with whats beneficial to you?

To answer your last question first...

Because we're human and make mistakes...

Expediency doesn't neccesarily mean sinful or hazardous...

Embarrassing could be non-expedient, too...

Especially if you do something 'Righteous', but, which inadvertently is done in a way that is taken out of context by the World...

Not, sin, per se, but definately not expedient...

Which brings us to another important issue...

None of us Walk Perfectly in The Spirit, else we would all do the most perfect things all the time in the most expeditious manner...

And, to assume that because we "like" such a verse that we are automatically going to try to get away with as much as we can...

This is a bit insulting to my (our) Christian character and the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.

That verse tells me I can drink alchohol... But, because alcholism runs in my family, even drinking a small glass of wine with a spaghetti dinner would not be expedient for me...

Perfectly legal under the law... But, would place me at risk...

Yet, because it is wrong for me... That does not neccesarily make it wrong for you...

I can eat lots of sugar... But, if I am diabetic that would not be expedient for me, either...

But, a young healthy active person won't have a problem...

Then there is the issue of moderation...

Which we've tended to avoid because for one person moderation means a 2 oz steak and for the next a 10 oz steak...

Besides, somedays I am hungrier than others...

Somedays it's because I've been much more physically active...

Others simply because the food is so good...

SMM

 

[Claudia_T]

also, you can see by just reading in Daniel that it wasnt just a matter of that the kings meat would "defile" Daniel.

Daniels diet ended up making he and his friends "fairer and fatter in flesh than all the children which did eat the portion of the king's meat" ... meaning that that were HEALTHIER.

so you see, it isnt just a matter of "well lets see now... God made these ridiculous rules in the old testament just for the heck of it to arbitrarily push us around... but then Jesus dies for us and He doesnt expect us to keep these old ridiculous rules anymore.

If some of the rules are just as beneficial for us today as they were back then ... WHY NOT KEEP THEM???

I just do not get the logic.

Claudia

 

[Claudia_T]

oh Mike, Im insulted just about every day on here... but I have to put up with it...

stop being so sensitive.


for heaven's sake.

 

[Claudia_T]

I dont know, man, I wouldnt even want to invite him over for lunch, much less have him for lunch.

 

[rbell]

Originally posted by Claudia_T:
I look at it from a common sense point of view. If there are things in the Old Testament that God told His people to do and He DID say He gave them all the rules for their own good...

if a rule back then is just as beneficial to us today, then why in the world would you want to disregard it?

Like, dont commit incest for instance.

Just because that is an old testament rule and it isnt reiterated in the new testament... would any of you decie you may as well go commit incest today? "Because Jesus died for us on the cross"

OF COURSE NOT!!

Well if modern science has shown that eating certain types of foods are more beneficial to you then others, and some are harmful... why on earth would you want to disregard common sense?

God did give us common sense, you know?

and I think He expects us to use it.

Claudia

Oh good grief, you didn't just compare eating pork to having sex with a family member, did you?

Give me a break.

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

Originally posted by Claudia_T:
oh Mike, Im insulted just about every day on here... but I have to put up with it...

stop being so sensitive.


for heaven's sake.

So, you zero in on one part and conviently disregard the main body of my post...

Hmmmm

What is it you're avoiding?

 

[Eric B]

so you see, it isnt just a matter of "well lets see now... God made these ridiculous rules in the old testament just for the heck of it to arbitrarily push us around... but then Jesus dies for us and He doesnt expect us to keep these old ridiculous rules anymore.

Of course it was not "just to push us around". The behavior of the types of animals that were labeled unclean typified the type of people and behavior God's people were to avoid. They were not health laws. This is why in 2 Cor.6:17 "Touch not the unclean thing", and lPet.l:15, "Be ye holy for I am holy", the apostles quote OT commands which referred to unclean meats, but now (as the contexts show) their spiritual intent is to avoid unclean behavior and people. If you do that, then you've fulfilled the spiritual intent of the laws of clean and unclean.

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

Originally posted by Eric B:
...
This is why in 2 Cor.6:17 "Touch not the unclean thing", and lPet.l:15, "Be ye holy for I am holy", the apostles quote OT commands which referred to unclean meats, but now (as the contexts show) their spiritual intent is to avoid unclean behavior and people. If you do that, then you've fulfilled the spiritual intent of the laws of clean and unclean. [/QB]

Nice!

One modifier...

1 Corinthians 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.

SMM

 

[Alcott]

Originally posted by Claudia_T:

I dont know, man, I wouldnt even want to invite him over for lunch, much less have him for lunch.

You didn't really HAVE to post your pic for us; our imaginations were good enough.

 

[Claudia_T]

I didnt read the rest of it Mike... because once I saw the part about how I offended you again, I just scrolled down...

I want to avoid trouble.

 

[Claudia_T]

Originally posted by rbell:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Claudia_T:
I look at it from a common sense point of view. If there are things in the Old Testament that God told His people to do and He DID say He gave them all the rules for their own good...

if a rule back then is just as beneficial to us today, then why in the world would you want to disregard it?

Like, dont commit incest for instance.

Just because that is an old testament rule and it isnt reiterated in the new testament... would any of you decie you may as well go commit incest today? "Because Jesus died for us on the cross"

OF COURSE NOT!!

Well if modern science has shown that eating certain types of foods are more beneficial to you then others, and some are harmful... why on earth would you want to disregard common sense?

God did give us common sense, you know?

and I think He expects us to use it.

Claudia

Oh good grief, you didn't just compare eating pork to having sex with a family member, did you?

Give me a break. </font>[/QUOTE]How did you get that out of what I said?

I said that some of the things in the old testament that were good or us back then are good for us now... PERIOD..

I dont know why you read that into it,,, its just the first thing I could think of off the top of my head that would still apply today..

geesh


Claudia

 

[Claudia_T]

Originally posted by Eric B:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> so you see, it isnt just a matter of "well lets see now... God made these ridiculous rules in the old testament just for the heck of it to arbitrarily push us around... but then Jesus dies for us and He doesnt expect us to keep these old ridiculous rules anymore.

Of course it was not "just to push us around". The behavior of the types of animals that were labeled unclean typified the type of people and behavior God's people were to avoid. They were not health laws. This is why in 2 Cor.6:17 "Touch not the unclean thing", and lPet.l:15, "Be ye holy for I am holy", the apostles quote OT commands which referred to unclean meats, but now (as the contexts show) their spiritual intent is to avoid unclean behavior and people. If you do that, then you've fulfilled the spiritual intent of the laws of clean and unclean. </font>[/QUOTE]You are kidding! Are you actually saying that the health laws in the old testament werent really made for our health? and that abstaining from the unclean meats wasnt a healthy thing to do... but that it just represented the unclean behavior and unclean people?

Just making sure I dont misunderstand you.

Claudia