Clean and unclean foods

[zoegirl]

Actually Oscar said something to the effect of them being suggestions. And Peter's vision tells us that the animals were still unclean after Christ's death. I realize the vision did not actually pertain to animals being unclean, but Peter did not understand this at first, and plainly stated that he had never eaten anything "common or unclean". Acts 10:9-14.

Do you think it is possible that the kosher laws served some additional purpose in the sense that they provided a means to the Jewish Nation to see themselves as different and set apart by God?

With the taking down of that wall of separation where Paul states that there is now neither Jew not Gentile would that have any impact upon those laws and explain why Paul goes to such pains to eliminate their elevation in view of Gentile believers coming into the Church?

What do you think? Is there any scripture that would support that view?

Very nice....

[jenna]

There is still a need to avoid these foods. As I have pointed out, there is a difference between unclean meats and bodily fluids. You cite them both as being equal, your choice. To use the health issue between the two is not nearly the same. Blood comes out of your body, the food you eat goes into it. The two are different in the way disease is introduced. My husband had the same line of thinking, and fortunately he listened when I told him there was a difference. When you eat pork, shrimp, crab, lobster, etc, you are eating everything that animal has eaten. Considering what it has been eating, that should be a warning sign, a BIG red flag. God made these animals to be part of a cleanup crew, if you will. He did not make them for consumption.

[zoegirl]

There is still a need to avoid these foods. As I have pointed out, there is a difference between unclean meats and bodily fluids. You cite them both as being equal, your choice. To use the health issue between the two is not nearly the same. Blood comes out of your body, the food you eat goes into it. The two are different in the way disease is introduced. My husband had the same line of thinking, and fortunately he listened when I told him there was a difference. When you eat pork, shrimp, crab, lobster, etc, you are eating everything that animal has eaten. Considering what it has been eating, that should be a warning sign, a BIG red flag. God made these animals to be part of a cleanup crew, if you will. He did not make them for consumption.

What I am saying is equal is the law given by God in Leviticus. What you must show me is why the laws for bodily fluids may be dispensed with and yet the laws for clean and unclean foods must be adhered to. There is no choice as to the choice of the law given in Leviticus. You are the one that seems to dismiss the Levitical laws easily, dispensing with the majority and yet capriciously keeping some of them. Either hold fast to them, or reject them all.

Our knowledge of these foods and our understanding leads to our knowledge of how to prepare and avoid these pathogens, just as our understanding of disease transmission and hygiene leads to our understanding of proper care for our body.

LOok at it this way. There are plenty of diseasees carried through bodily fluids. You say that modern hygiene and products such as soap and feminine hygiene products take care of the disease transmission and unclean fluids. Thus YOUR basis for rejecting the bodily fluids is that we understand how to clean the body and therefore have no need for the Levitical laws concerning body fluids.

Thus, YOU must find sources to show that these foods are unhealthy EVEN if prepared properly. Most of these foods are fine in and of themselves. Yes, shellfish can carry toxins, but careful understanding of the waters that they have been in ensures their healthy status.

Unless you can show me resources that reveal the unhealthy status of these foods even when prepared properly (for hygiene seems to be your fundmental reason to rejecting these foods), then these dietary laws may also be dispensed with.

We know that the foods themselves don't make us unclean, for we have CHrist's words from the scripture I quoted in another post....it is not the foods that we eat that make us clean or unclean but that which comes from our hearts.

Canuckster, I think, also provided another primary reason for these laws, to uphold the status of the Hebrew nation as being set apart be God.

[Canuckster1127]

There is still a need to avoid these foods. As I have pointed out, there is a difference between unclean meats and bodily fluids. You cite them both as being equal, your choice. To use the health issue between the two is not nearly the same. Blood comes out of your body, the food you eat goes into it. The two are different in the way disease is introduced. My husband had the same line of thinking, and fortunately he listened when I told him there was a difference. When you eat pork, shrimp, crab, lobster, etc, you are eating everything that animal has eaten. Considering what it has been eating, that should be a warning sign, a BIG red flag. God made these animals to be part of a cleanup crew, if you will. He did not make them for consumption.

It may be wise to avoid these foods on the basis of what you state. The issue is whether it is legally or morally wrong to eat them on the basis of the Old Testament Law. Some make an argument, as you you imply above, that there are other good reasons that God was no doubt aware of in directing Israel to avoid them. Some go further and argue that while there may be no direct legal obligation in one sense, in the New Testament sense that the body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit there is a moral reason to eat wisely, exercise and care for the bodies God has given us. I respect that argument and those who do so. It's a matter of personal conscience however before God and not a binding law upon the Christian in a spiritual sense.

[Katabole]

I noticed this verse was quoted:

Rom 14:13, Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. 14 As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself.

As it says, no "FOOD" is unclean in itself. The animals listed as to not to be consumed in Lev 11, were never considered "food." God plainly says there are abomination. And Paul certainly knows the difference between food and abomination. Paul is speaking here of "clean" foods. The animals listed that were to be consumed in Lev 11, were considered "food". Mature Christians should know what foods to eat and not to eat. That's why we have Lev 11. God created these flesh bodies and He knows what foods are good for them and what shouldn't be consumed. Our bodies certainly didn't change when Christ died on the cross.

As for the logic behind why God wanted us not to eat these creatures, Him saying not to eat them is enough for me. But for example, on a closer look at the physiology of a pig, a pig does not have any sweat glands. It cools itself by rolling in mud. Similar to an elephant, another unclean animal. The pig's body is cooled today by sprinklers in modern day slaughter houses. Therefore, everything a pig eats is stored in it's fat, other than the extra it expells. A pig has no way of getting rid of the poisons it absorbs. Pigs are the equivalent of the natural vacuum cleaners of the earth. Once they are slaughtered humans eat their meat and then wonder why they get sick. The pig is a beautiful animal (you can't find much of a cuter animal than a baby pig). It was just never considered food by God or meant for consumption by humans. The birds of prey listed in Lev 11 are considered unclean, in my opinion, because they eat animals with blood in them and consuming an animal with blood in it was also considered unclean. Same as a bear. There is a story in the New Testament where the demons ask Christ if they can enter a herd of swine. Swine or the pig was considered the lowest form of carnal flesh. The pigs in the story run down the hill and drown themselves in the sea. LoL, moral of the story, not even a pig will put up with a demon inside it.

As for all the other laws listed, they are not done away with. To claim that the law is done away with is to say that Christ is not telling the truth in Matt 5:17-19. However, careful distinction has to be made between a law, ordinace, statute (commandment) and judgement. And the ordinances, according to Col 2:14, are done away with. We do not have to slaughter an animal to atone for sin now, for example because Christ became our atoning sacrifice. And commandments like, Thou shalt not steal, are certainly still in effect.

All those food laws were placed in the Word for us to follow as a sign of obedience to God and for our health. Only a few examples of the many creatures on Earth are given, for us to discern between clean and unclean. For example, if you have a tank of trout, try catching one, chopping it up and putting it back into the tank of trout. The trout in the tank will not touch it. Do the exact same with a catfish, chop it up and put it into a tank of catfish and see what happens. There won't be a morsel of that chopped up catfish left. This is an example of a creature that eats it's own kind and is "unclean" to eat. This is why verse 47 of Leviticus 11 is included for us:

Lev 11:47, To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten.


We live in a time where law is set by precedence; where laws are put in to affect by judges and not all of them are Christian judges. God's law is absolute law. We are also supposed to follow the law of the land or government. Over time, this has made many of God's laws void, when Jesus claims in Matt 5: 17-19, that they are clearly still binding.

We're just going to have to wait for Christ to return and clean house.

[B. W.]

No, not really, B.W. Tell me why God would specify exactly which animals are unclean and unfit for food, and then turn around and say all animals are able to be eaten? This makes no sense. God doesn't change, neither do His laws. It is man who decides to change what God has said. God says "do not eat swine's flesh", and pork is the #1 selling meat in the world. Not to mention shrimp, crab, lobster, catfish, rabbit, etc. So many think it is okay to eat these animals, when we are plainly told not to. And one wonders why we have so much disease and sickness in the world. There were reasons we were told not to eat certain kinds of animals, and those reasons remain the same, regardless of how they are cooked or the temperatures involved.

Hi Jenna,

As I see it, people are throwing around two different ideas....

1) the dietary laws were for us to keep us healthy

2) we need to still uphold these dietary laws because, well, they are laws (Considering that most here have agreed that it is Christ that saves and that we are not under the law and that the law does not save, I'm not going to stress this, since that last several posts focused on hygiene)

Addressing numner 1
PleASE, then, show me where these foods have been shown to be detrimental when cooked thoroughly and prepared properly.

If the issue was to avoid foods that are more prone to have parasites and other food-borne pathogens, proper food handling and cooking takes care of things AND the REASON for the laws would be negated (if, after all, if in God's wisdom He provided these laws to prevent disease transmission before the knowledge of disease transmission and proper food handling was underdtood, then that very understanding allows us to fulfill the REASON for the laws....good health)

If, on the other hand, there is something fundamental about these animals that are detrimental, then please show me the research (for surely there would have been some by now). Ia there somtething inherently unhealthy about pork meat as compared to beef?

Also, consoder these words from Christ, who addressed the issue of clean versus unclean. Yes, I know it does not directly address clean and unclean food, but it addresses the issue of food and what makes us unclean AND I think provides us with an importatn clue as to the [ahem] meat of the matter (sorry, could'nt resist)....the uncleaness of the human heart rather than the uncleaness of the food.

1Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2"Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash their hands before they eat!"
3Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, 'Honor your father and mother'[a] and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' 5But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,' 6he is not to 'honor his father[c]' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
8" 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.'[d]"
10Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "
12Then the disciples came to him and asked, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?" 13He replied, "Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. 14Leave them; they are blind guides.[e] If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit." 15Peter said, "Explain the parable to us."16"Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them. 17"Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? 18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' 19For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.' "

As to your plant examples....consider the standard by which we do not eat plants....those that are unhealthy or poisonous....did God provide a list? Or are to understand that those that are detrimental are to be avoided? IN other words our UNDERSTANDING of the nature of the plants iS WHat determines what to eat.

There were plenty of ceremonial laws that the new Christian church struggled with, for instance, circumcision. Now interestingly, there HAS been some, albeit, slight, evidence that circumcision helps prevent disease transmission. But circumcision was an outwaed sign and had no bearing on the inward change that takes place. The new Christian Church struggled with the issue of calling for new Christian gentiles to be required to be circumcised (which was surely part of the law)

Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses."

6The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."

Acts. 15:5-11

WHich again leads to Romans 14

13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. 14As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean.

Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

Excellent answers Zoegirl!

Hope you don't mind me saying - Go Girl! Preach It!!



What I am hearing is a few people declaring that the dietary Law justifies you - makes you better than others - superior because "We Keep the Dietary laws and you don't -Na Na na Na Na!"

Galatians 2:16, "yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified." ESV

No matter how many times you declare you believe that the Law does not save you, yet are you not using certain parts of the law to justify yourselves before others as well as God?

Look over:

Hebrews 7:11, "Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? 12 For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well." ESV

I think it is great people eat healthy and watch what they eat. However what Paul Wrote in Romans 14 remains true no matter your arguments:

Romans 14:20-22, "Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. 21 It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. 22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves...."

Rom 15:1-4, "We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves. 2 Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, to build him up. 3 For Christ did not please himself, but as it is written, "The reproaches of those who reproached you fell on me." 4 For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope." ESV

Romans 15:9, "and in order that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy. As it is written, "Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles, and sing to your name."

How can the unsaved world look upon us and 'glorify God for his mercy' when there is none shown amongst Christians concerning dietary law?

Next, Does mercy triumph over Judgment?

James 2:10-13, “For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. 11 For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. 13 For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.” ESV
-
-
-

[B. W.]

No, not really, B.W. Tell me why God would specify exactly which animals are unclean and unfit for food, and then turn around and say all animals are able to be eaten? This makes no sense. God doesn't change, neither do His laws. It is man who decides to change what God has said. God says "do not eat swine's flesh", and pork is the #1 selling meat in the world. Not to mention shrimp, crab, lobster, catfish, rabbit, etc. So many think it is okay to eat these animals, when we are plainly told not to. And one wonders why we have so much disease and sickness in the world. There were reasons we were told not to eat certain kinds of animals, and those reasons remain the same, regardless of how they are cooked or the temperatures involved.

Matthew 5:18, "For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

Jesus accomplished all the requirements of the Law and new Law written upon the heart — the Royal Law of Love.

Galatians3:13, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us--for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree"-- 14 so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.”

Therefore Hebrews 7:12 is true, "For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well."

People like to argue and quote that the Old Testament Law has not passed away but forget Jesus fulfilled this section of law. It was changed. God said in Jeremiah 31:31 what? A new Law I place in your heart…

God speaks to Peter:

Act 10:12, "In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air. 13 And there came a voice to him: "Rise, Peter; kill and eat." 14 But Peter said, "By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean." 15 And the voice came to him again a second time, "What God has made clean, do not call common." 16This happened three times, and the thing was taken up at once to heaven."

The Early Church declared that the Gospel be preached to Gentiles and food should not be a stumbling block to new gentile converts throughout the world as their diet was far different than theirs. Only certain foods were to be abstained from and these were foods sacrificed to idols [meats, fruits, vegetables], bloody meat, any animal strangled, and another subject of sexual immorality was to be abstained from.

Act 15:28, “For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell."

In other words varied ethnic food was good to eat under these conditions. Also the above quote from Acts, if you know ancient and modern pagan religious practices, these conditions laid down by the early Church attacked every type of pagan religious practice.

That is why Paul writes what he did in Romans 14 and 15 regarding this matter of food.

If you like to keep the dietary laws for health reasons — praise the Lord! Please Honor the Royal Law of Love and not place a stumbling block to a new covert of some deserted island in the Pacific Ocean who's only meat is swine. You impose strict legalism upon him and force him to sell or kill the only meat supply on the island — you have a problem. There is no Love in this. Now I hope you get the proper context of this.

Most of us in America do not eat Twinkies and deep fat fried Oreos — these foods are not mentioned in the bible as being bad. We worry about pork and broiled Raccoon. Let's get a life people.

If you enjoy a healthy diet based on the dietary laws — Amen to you and God Bless —just stop putting a stumbling block upon the new converts and stop crushing their faith in God with the weight of legalism.

Romans 14:20-23, “Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. 21 It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. 22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.”

All Bible quotes from ESV
-
-
-

[Katabole]

BW said:

What I am hearing is a few people declaring that the dietary Law justifies you - makes you better than others - superior because "We Keep the Dietary laws and you don't -Na Na na Na Na!"

I never said anything of the like. You don't have to resort to childish rhetoric.

Jesus said:

John 14:15, If ye love me, keep my commandments. (KJV)

John 14:21, He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

John 15:10, 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.

He also said:

Matt 5:17, Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Matt 5:18, 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.

Matt 5:19, 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.

Paul the Apostle never contradicted Christ's words. You cannot use what Paul says in the epistles to trump what Christ plainly says about the law to think it is somehow nullified, when Jesus says it is not and that includes the food laws.

If you want to believe in the traditions of men or follow the doctrine of a church that says the law is done away with, than go ahead. But it is not what Christ taught about the law as the above scriptures from Matthew attest to. You either believe what Jesus clearly says about the law or you do not.

Mark 7:8, For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men

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

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

[zoegirl]

Then, Katabole, I ask you the same question...

Do you uphold the bodily discharge laws? Do you abstain from sexual relations, following all ordained days to refrain from touching each other?

And if not, why not? Why follow some laws and not follow others. I have heard from Jenna and Jenna only. What about you?

Do you refrain from touching unclean people? For surely the law stipulated this very clearly....

[Canuckster1127]

BW said:

What I am hearing is a few people declaring that the dietary Law justifies you - makes you better than others - superior because "We Keep the Dietary laws and you don't -Na Na na Na Na!"

I never said anything of the like. You don't have to resort to childish rhetoric.

Jesus said:

John 14:15, If ye love me, keep my commandments. (KJV)

John 14:21, He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

John 15:10, 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.

He also said:

Matt 5:17, Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Matt 5:18, 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.

Matt 5:19, 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.

Paul the Apostle never contradicted Christ's words. You cannot use what Paul says in the epistles to trump what Christ plainly says about the law to think it is somehow nullified, when Jesus says it is not and that includes the food laws.

If you want to believe in the traditions of men or follow the doctrine of a church that says the law is done away with, than go ahead. But it is not what Christ taught about the law as the above scriptures from Matthew attest to. You either believe what Jesus clearly says about the law or you do not.

Mark 7:8, For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men

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

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

Jesus came to fulfill the old law and give a new one. That's why he contrasted in the Sermon on the mount, by using the formula, "you have heard it said" .... "but I say unto you" ..... to name just one instance.

Legalism is sad affair. You can't pick and choose what you keep and what you don't in that regard. You don't eat the elephant a bite at a time, you swallow it whole. Christ fulfilled the law and freed us to follow under the law of love as heirs and not a slaves bound to the old covenants. There's a vast difference between recognizing that there may be good reasons to follow for instance, the dietary codes of the OT, and suggesting that those who don't follow them are somehow less holy or backslidden or fallen Christians.

For those here who wish to use their freedom to follow those old laws, you're free to do so and there's no benefit or value in following against your consciences in that regard. I'd simply exhort you to not fall into the trap of imagining that you are better Christians or more holy than others because you do so. The moment you look to your holiness or salvation outside of Christ's atonement, you've exchanged the good news for the old covenant. This is taking the new Garment Christ has given us and exchanging it for the old rags we had before that. They may feel more comfortable and familiar and meet some level of need we have to imagine that we're able to be good enough so that God will accept us on our own efforts, but in the end, it is pride and it is telling God He didn't get it right when He sent Christ to fulfill all of that on our behalf as the second Adam.

I think it's entirely possible to believe that there are good reasons to eat kosher for instance, and follow it without falling into that trap. I respect that. I don't choose in my own life to follow it, but I respect others that do and were I in a group that believed and practised as such, it would not be an issue for me while with them to respect that, eat with them and leave it at that. On my own, I follow my own conscience and rejoice in the freedom I have under Christ.

That's really all I have to say on this issue, and if it offends others, I'd simply suggest they examine what they think is being accomplished in their lives by following those rules. If it's more than simply good health for instance, then that perhaps should be a signal that there's some thinking that needs to be examined.

[jenna]

I don't think anyone here is calling themselves better Christians than others. I know I certainly am not. All I am trying to do is point out the reasons why I think eating unclean food is wrong. I know I definitely have other areas where I am sorely lacking in good judgement and obedience to God. B.W., I am not saying "na-na" to anyone. Please do not feel this way! I know and believe that works do not save anyone, and I will say it again. However, does this mean that we should not do the best we can to obey God and do what He would want us to do? I am not judging anyone on the basis of food or anything else, it is not my place to do that. I am simply pointing out why I feel the way I do. No more, no less.

[Canuckster1127]

I don't think anyone here is calling themselves better Christians than others. I know I certainly am not. All I am trying to do is point out the reasons why I think eating unclean food is wrong. I know I definitely have other areas where I am sorely lacking in good judgement and obedience to God. B.W., I am not saying "na-na" to anyone. Please do not feel this way! I know and believe that works do not save anyone, and I will say it again. However, does this mean that we should not do the best we can to obey God and do what He would want us to do? I am not judging anyone on the basis of food or anything else, it is not my place to do that. I am simply pointing out why I feel the way I do. No more, no less.

Jenna,

I'm with you right up to the point where you ask whether this means whether this means that we should do the best we can to obey God and do what He would want us to do? That's the point. If these laws are not in effect then it is not a matter of obedience. If these laws are in effect and following them is a matter of obedience then by definition the one obeying them is in fact serving God better and even if it is not seen as a matter of salvation, then to see it as a matter of daily Christian walk does indeed mean those following them are doing God's will and those not following them are in a state of rebellion or disobedience to God.

So in fact there's a possible disconnect between that statement and what you follow with by stating that you are not judging anyone on the basis of food or anything else.

If it's a matter of conscience and it's a fine point, but it is a very significant one.

I respect that that is the way you feel, or more to the point, it's a belief or a conviction. Perhaps I'm reading more into your words in that regard than you intended, but it does illustrate the concern others of us are expressing.

Bart

[Katabole]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4541849.stm

[Canuckster1127]

Interesting article. Again there's no doubt in my mind there are good reasons to follow some of the old Biblical dietary laws just from a perspective of good health.

[BavarianWheels]

Interesting article. Again there's no doubt in my mind there are good reasons to follow some of the old Biblical dietary laws just from a perspective of good health.

Just from a perspective of good health? (1 Cor. 6:19)
.
.