6th SEGMENT.TO EAT OR NOT TO EAT.THE FINAL DISAMBIGUATION.CHALLENGING BIBLE TWISTERS!! We close our discussion by correcting Christians who place no dinctinction between clean and unclean animals.We will visit the most abused and misrepresented scriptures. Does the New Testament Abolish Meat Distinctions? Some people believe that certain New Testament scriptures remove all distinctions between clean and unclean meats. But what do these passages really say? Most theologians assume that Gods laws regarding clean and unclean meats ended at Christs crucifixion. They suppose that the New Covenant removes the need for Christians to keep such laws. But is that what the Bible says? The administrative change from the Levitical priesthood to the ministry of Jesus Christ did not void Gods expectations that His people obey His law of clean and unclean meats (or any other law) as part of their sanctification, or separation, as people of God (see Leviticus:11:44-47 ; 19:2; 20:7, 22-26; 21:8). Peter and Paul both speak of the continuing need for Gods people to be holy (Ephesians:1:4; 1 Peter:1:14-16) Some Bible scholars acknowledge that members of the early Church continued to observe the distinctions between clean and unclean meats. However, because of the common misconception that the New Covenant abolishes much of Gods law, many assume these food requirements were simply Jewish cultural practices that continued until the Church became more gentile in composition and outlook. Such preconceived ideas have influenced inter-pretations of many New Testament passages. In theological circles this is known as (EISEGESIS) eisegesis, or reading ones own ideas into Scripture. Lets examine the New Testament passages dealing with food. As we do that lets practice exegesis— drawing meaning out of Scripture by seeking a thorough understanding of the background of a passage as we seek to apply it. Peters vision: Did God cleanse all meats? One often-misunderstood section of the Bible concerns Peters vision in which he saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to the earth. In this sheet were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. Peter heard a voice tell him, Rise, Peter; kill and eat (Acts:10:11-13) Assuming the vision meant he should eat unclean animals, Peter spontaneously responded: Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean (verse 14). The same vision came to Peter three times (verse 16). At this point many readers, without finishing the account, assume they know the meaning of the vision—that God told Peter we are now free to eat any kind of animal flesh we desire. In context, however, these scriptures show that this is not at all what Peter understood. On the contrary, even after seeing the vision three times he still wondered within himself what this vision which he had seen meant (verse 17). Later Peter realized the significance of the revelation. It was that God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean (verse 28). Recognizing the real intent of the vision, Peter baptized the first gentiles (non-Israelites) God called into the Church who were not initially Jewish proselytes (verses 45-48). This divine disclosure, we see from reading further in the account, did not concern food at all. Rather, it concerned people. Nor do we find any evidence that he ate unclean meats after this experience. He obviously continued to obey Gods laws delineating meats that could and could not be eaten and saw no reason to change his practice. He realized that the puzzling vision could not be annulling Gods instructions, which is why he thought about the vision until he understood its meaning (verses 17-19, 28)—that gentiles could become members of the Church upon repentance and faith, too (verses 34-35, 45-48). In 1 Corinthians 8 the apostle Paul discussed the eating of things offered to idols (verse 4). Why was this an issue? Meat was often sacrificed on pagan altars and dedicated to pagan gods in Pauls day. Later this meat was offered for sale in the public meat markets. Some Christians wondered if it were morally right for Christians to eat such meat that had previously been sacrificed to pagan gods ( Nelsons New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 1995, Meat). It is interesting, though not conclusive, to note that in Acts:14:13, the only passage in which the type of animal sacrificed to idols is mentioned, it was oxen—clean animals—that were about to be offered. This controversy was not over the kinds of meat that should be eaten. Obedient Jews of the day, in accordance with Gods instruction, did not consider unclean meat even to be a possible source of food. Instead, the controversy dealt with the conscience of each believer when it came to eating meat— clean meat—that may have been sacrificed to idols. Paul explained that an idol is nothing (1 Corinthians:8:4), clarifying that it was not intrinsically harmful to eat meats that had been sacrificed to an idol. That an animal had been sacrificed to a pagan god had no bearing on whether the meat was suitable for food. Paul continued: However, there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. But food does not commend us to God; for neither if we eat are we the better, nor if we do not eat are we the worse (verses 7-8). When a believer bought meat in the market or was invited to a meal at which meat was served, it was not necessary to determine whether anyone had offered it to an idol, said Paul (1 Corinthians:10:25-27 ). His concern was that the brethren be considerate of others who believed differently. He taught that in such cases it was better for them not to eat meat than to risk causing offense (1 Corinthians:8:13; 10:28). The question of meat sacrificed to idols was a considerable controversy in New Testament times. It is the foundation of many of Pauls discussions of Christian liberty and conscience. Unlike Gods law of clean and unclean animals, which was straightforwardly recorded in the Old Testament, the Hebrew Scriptures are not explicit about the matter of food offered to idols. But, in the first-century world of the New Testament, this issue varied in significance and importance to members according to their conscience and understanding. THE TIMING OF PAULS LETTERS: The chronological relationship between Pauls letters to the members in Corinth and his correspondence with those in Rome is another important piece of background information people often overlook. Many believe Romans 14 supports the idea that Christians are free from all former restrictions regarding the meats they may eat. Verse 14, in which Paul wrote, I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean, is often cited as a proof text for this view. This approach, however, fails to consider Pauls perspective and the context of his letter to the Roman church. Many Bible resources agree that Paul wrote the book of 1 Corinthians around A.D. 55 and that he wrote his epistle to the Romans from Corinth in 56 or 57. As demonstrated above, the food controversy in Corinth was over meat sacrificed to idols. Since Paul was writing to the Romans from Corinth, where this had been a significant issue, the subject was fresh on Pauls mind and is the logical, biblically supported basis for his comments in Romans 14. UNDERSTANDING PAULs INTENT: Those who assume the subject of Romans 14 is a retraction of Gods law regarding clean and unclean animals must force this interpretation into the text because it has no biblical foundation. The historical basis for the discussion appears, from evidence in the chapter itself, to have been meat sacrificed to idols. Verse 2 contrasts the one who eats only vegetables with the one who believes he may eat all things—meat as well as vegetables. Verse 6 discusses eating vs. not eating and is variously interpreted as referring to fasting (not eating or drinking), vegetarianism (consuming only vegetables) or eating or not eating meat sacrificed to idols. Verse 21 shows that meat offered to idols was the dominant issue of this chapter: It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak. Romans of the day commonly offered both meat and wine to idols, with portions of the offerings later sold in the marketplace. The Life Application Bible comments on verse 2: The ancient system of sacrifice was at the center of the religious, social, and domestic life of the Roman world. After a sacrifice was presented to a god in a pagan temple, only part of it was burned. The remainder was often sent to the market to be sold. What is the point of Pauls instruction in Romans 14? Depending upon their consciences, early believers had several choices they could make while traveling or residing in their communities. If they did not want to eat meat that possibly had been sacrificed to idols, they could choose to fast or eat only vegetables to make sure they did not consume any meat of suspicious background that might offend their consciences. If their consciences were not bothered by eating meat that might have been sacrificed to idols, they could choose that option too. Within this context, said Paul, Let each be fully convinced in his own mind (verse 5) because whatever is not from faith is sin (verse 23). Romans 14 is, in part, a chapter on Christian liberty—acting according to ones conscience within the framework of Gods laws as they pertained to meat sacrificed to idols. Understood in its context, Romans 14 does not convey permission to eat pork or any other unclean meat. When one understands that the food controversy of the New Testament era dealt with meat sacrificed to idols and not which meats were clean, other scriptures become clear. MARK 7:18-19.: Another often-misunderstood passage is Mark:7:18-19 . Here Jesus said, Do you not perceive that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods? The subject here—made obvious from verses 2-5—was unwashed hands, not which meats could be eaten. The purification of food referred to the way the bodys digestive process eliminates minor impurities such as those that might be present from eating with unwashed hands. The Pharisees, like Jesus and His disciples, ate only meat the Scriptures specified as clean. They objected, however, when Jesus and His disciples did not go through the Pharisees customary ritual of meticulously washing their hands before eating. Jesus, whose hands were sufficiently clean for eating, even if not clean enough to meet the Pharisees humanly devised standards—explained that the human body was designed to handle any small particles of dust or dirt that might enter it due to handling food with hands that hadnt been ritually washed. He further suggested that, if the Pharisees were serious about wanting to obey God, they needed to revise their priorities. Cleansing ones thoughts, He said, is eminently more spiritually important than washing ones hands (verses 20-23). QUESTIONABLE INTERPRETATIONS The New International Version of the Bible renders the latter part of verse 19 this way: (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean). The New American Standard Bible similarly offers: (Thus He declared all foods clean.) These translations stand in stark contrast to the King James and New King James versions, which indicate that the bodily digestive process purifies food as opposed to Jesus making a pronouncement reversing Gods laws on which meats to eat. Which interpretation is correct? The King James and New King James renditions best fit the context, which concerns eating with ceremonially unwashed hands rather than deciding which kind of flesh is suitable to be eaten. They also best fit the New Testament culture wherein Jews and Christians ate only clean meats. Notice that in both the NIV and NASB the latter part of verse 19 is in parentheses, as though Mark is explaining Christs words. This is obviously an interpretation of the original wording of Marks Gospel. In the original Greek the words In saying this, Jesus declared (NIV) and Thus He declared (NASB) are not present; translators have added them to explain what they think Mark intended, thereby placing their own preconceived and mistaken interpretations on Jesus words.So we have another. Problematic dimesion rearing its ugly head:Bible Versions.Moving ,twisting ,supplanting the word of God! Putting together all the scriptures on the subject helps us properly understand the biblical perspective. When we see from passages such as Acts 10, discussed earlier, that Peter states he had eaten no unclean meat about a decade after Christs death, it becomes obvious that the apostles did not believe He had abolished the commands against eating unclean meats. Such a view simply cannot be sustained in the light of plain scriptures to the contrary. No New Testament passages describe Christians eating meats that had been considered unclean; such a view is glaringly absent in the Bible. On the contrary, we find many scriptures in which the apostle Paul vigorously and repeatedly upholds adherence to Gods laws (Acts:24:14; 25:8; Romans:3:31; 7:12, 22), as did James, the half brother of Christ (James:2:8-12 ; 4:11), and John (1 John:3:4). Violating Gods laws regarding clean and unclean meat would have been unthinkable to them. COLOSIANS CNTROVERSY CLARIFIED.: When Paul wrote that Christians should let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths (Colossians:2:16), some assume the believers he was addressing were eating pork and other meats previously considered unclean. Again, the Bible nowhere supports this assumption. In reality, the issue of clean and unclean meats is nowhere addressed in this passage. Paul doesnt discuss which foods the Colossians were consuming; the Greek word brosis, translated food, refers not to food itself but rather to the act of eating ( Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, 1985, p. 245, emphasis added). Some other translations make this clear. The Twentieth Century New Testament, for example, translates this as Do not, then, allow any one to take you to task on questions of eating and drinking ... Although many assume that Pauls criticism is directed at teachers who advocated Old Testament practices (such as following the law and practicing circumcision), no biblical evidence supports this view. However, we should recognize that perversions of proper biblical practice abounded at the time, both in Judaism and the emerging early Church. As The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia explains: There is more than Judaism in this false teaching. Its teachers look to intermediary spirits, angels whom they worship; and insist on a very strict asceticism (1939 edition, Epistle to the Colossians). The false teaching Paul condemned contained many elements of asceticism—avoidance of anything enjoyable—which was intended to make its followers more spiritual. Notice his instructions to the Colossians: Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations—Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle, which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men? These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh (Colossians:2:20-23 From this we see the ascetic nature of the error Paul was combating. The false teachers deluded attempt to attain greater spirituality included neglect of the body (verse 23). Paul characterized their misguided rules as Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle (verse 21). Their efforts created only a false humility (verse 23) and were destined to fail because they were based on the commandments and doctrines of men (verse 22) rather than Gods instruction. Paul admonished the church at Colosse not to listen to the ascetics. Rather than abrogating Gods laws concerning unclean meats—which some people incorrectly read into this passage—Paul is instructing the Colossian members not to concern themselves with ascetic teachers who criticized the manner in which the Colossians enjoyed Gods festivals and Sabbaths in pleasant fellowship with eating and drinking. Such enjoyment, although condemned by these false teachers, is perfectly acceptable to God. The Promise of Hope for All Mankind and Sunset to Sunset: Gods Sabbath Rest . In this section of Colossians Paul encourages the Church to hold fast to its teachings and proper understanding; it is not a treatise on which foods to eat or on which days to worship God. We must be careful not to read preconceived notions into these or any other scriptures. Misunderstood instructions to Timothy TIMOTHY 4:3-5: Still another part of Pauls writings that is often misunderstood is Timothy 4:3-5, where he speaks of false teachers forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. What was the motivation of these false teachers? Did Paul warn Timothy against teachers who would advocate keeping the biblical laws concerning clean and unclean meats? Or was something else at work? We know Paul told Timothy that God inspired the Old Testament Scriptures to be profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness (2 Timothy:3:16), so the notion isnt credible that Paul would caution Timothy against adhering to instructions found in those same Scriptures. On the other hand, Pauls words show us the real problem: These teachers were demanding that people follow commands not found in the Bible. They were forbidding to marry, yet marriage is encouraged, not discouraged, in the Scriptures. They were also commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. The Life Application Bible commentary helps us understand the background of the problem Paul addressed here: The danger that Timothy faced in Ephesus seems to have come from certain people in the church who were following some Greek philosophers who taught that the body was evil and that only the soul mattered. The false teachers refused to believe that the God of creation was good, because his very contact with the physical world would have soiled him...[They] gave stringent rules (such as forbidding people to marry or to eat certain foods). This made them appear self-disciplined and righteous. Paul discusses the true source of these heretical teachings in 1 Timothy:4:1: Rather than being founded in the Bible, these teachings originated with deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons. Thus we see that the problem in 1 Timothy 4 was perverted worldly asceticism, not obedience to Gods laws that define clean and unclean meats. Pauls assumption was that those who believe and know the truth (verse 3) would be familiar with the scriptures that identify which meats were specifically sanctified [set apart] by the word of God (verse 5) for our enjoyment. He encouraged Timothy to remind them to let the Scriptures be their guide instead of these ascetic teachers. As in the situation Paul discussed in his letter to the Colossians, the problem he addressed with Timothy was asceticism, not adherence to Gods dietary laws.(Dont miss this saint) A broader view of history As we have seen, no scriptural evidence exists that indicates that members of the early Church ever changed their practice of following Gods instructions regarding clean and unclean meats. Instead, we see the unambiguous words of one of the apostles showing that, about a decade after Christs death and resurrection, he had never eaten anything common or unclean. Does the Bible give us any other indication regarding when and for how long these laws were to remain in effect? Lets set the present aside and move forward in the history of humanity to the coming time of Christs return to earth to establish the Kingdom of God. A sharply defined picture of His will for the future provides additional understanding to help guide us in the present. The book of Revelation, in describing the end-time events leading up to the return of Christ, uses the expression a haunt for every unclean and hated bird! (Revelation:18:2). If clean and unclean designations no longer exist, why did Jesus inspire this picture for John? God is consistent and unchanging (James:1:17; Malachi:3:6; 4:4; Hebrews:13:8; Matthew:5:17-19 ). Animals He categorized as unclean thousands of years ago remain unclean in the future. Revelation:18:2 may figuratively refer to demons—called unclean spirits in the New Testament. Even so, such a metaphor would not make sense if there were not still a distinction between actual clean and unclean birds.CONCLUSION:Diet reform is imperative but still remains a CHOICE.People need to be taught the right way.Jesus first.Diet last.To the Fanatics!Your zeal is good but go back to where you have fallen---Demonstrable Love.You serve a loving God there be loving and lovable.Meat will never take anyone to heaven.Vegetarinism does not make you holier!God does!To a Christian that eats everythingand uses the Bible for validation,I say be wear.God has stipulations of clean and unclean animals.Read Isaiah 65:1-8.To the true health reformers,continue your work.It is God ordained!Do not be discouraged when many sdas seem not welcome it!God is your strength!Pray those are believe differently from you.Brethren I salute you for following this thread!This Series!It is my prayer that we all come to the realisation of the magnitude of the responsibility that comes with being the remnant Church.The world is watching how we eat,how drink ,how we talk,how we teach,how we pray....We are witnesses but let us show love to a world that needs the 3 Angels message along with diet reform.Those who claim to believe the truth are to guard carefully the powers of the body and mind,so that God and his cause will not be in anyway dishonored by their words and actions.We are to give careful attention to OUR DIET LETTER 48,1902,(Counsels on Diet and Foods--1938)Amen!
Posted on: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 12:21:29 +0000