See Acts 15. After Paul's first missonary journey, some men from Judea came down to Antioch and told the new Gentile converts that they had to be circumsized. Paul and Barnabas went to Jerusalem to take counsel with the apostles there. The judgement rendered is given in Acts 15:23-29, specifically

Acts 15:28-29 " 'For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden then these essentials: that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell.' " (NASB)

Here's my half-a**ed understanding of it.

In Christian tradition, Christ is viewed as the Ark of a New Covenant between God and his people. The Old Covenant was wiped away by the sacrifice on the cross. Therefore, the various ritual strictures and so on that went along with the Old Covenant (like the prohibition against eating of pork) were also wiped away. But objective truth hasn't changed. The Ten Commandments aren't a matter of ritual, discipline or anything of that nature; they're fundamental moral tenets. So, too, probably, for some of the other ideas expressed in the Old Testament.

Of course the problem that this view raises is who determines what parts of the Old Testament weren't obviated by the New Covenant. Catholicism has a simple answer to that: The Church. Protestants . . . well, ask a Protestant.

Oh yeah, and one other thing, Acts 10:10-15, regarding Simon Peter:

"And he became hungry, and was desiring to eat; but while they were making preparations, he fell into a trance; and he beheld the sky opened up, and a certain object like a great sheet coming down, lowered by four corners to the ground, and there were in it all kinds of four-footed animals and crawling creatures of the earth and birds of the air. And a voice came to him, "Arise Peter, kill and eat!" But Peter said, "By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything unholy and unclean." And again a voice came to him a second time, "What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy."

This is sometimes cited as specific to allowing non-kosher foods. I personally think Acts 15 is a little more persuasive on that point.

Help! I can't stop myself! Galatians 4 and 5, specifically:

Galatians 5:18 "But if you are led by the Spirit you are not under the Law." (NASB)

(and one extra (NASB) for the one I forgot above).

D you have it right. I just looked up the scripture and came back on to post and lo and behold, you've already used my verse. Way to go :)

My understanding of the Bible is that Matt is essentially dead on. I haven't been able to find it by skimming through the Gospels, but at one point someone asks Jesus if it's right or neccessary to keep a strict Pentatauchal (word?) diet, to which Jesus responds
"It is not what enters a man's mouth that makes him unClean, but what comes out of it."
This was taken, by Christians, to mean that -- so long as a meat is cooked to a safe temperature -- all nutritious and yummy foods are "clean".

Tuning Spork,

Good catch! That's from Matthew 15 (verse 11 spec.) and Mark 7:18-19, which has the addendum "(Thus He declared all foods clean.)" Considering that the Gospel of Mark is essentially Peter's account, this was probably a later addition/commentary from Peter, considering his reaction from Acts 10.

BTW, thank you annika. I've been slack in my reading, and finding this for you has helped me to see how much I miss it.

That's nice D. You're welcome.

The following is a very thorough look at that subject - follow along in your Bible and decide for yourself.

To Eat or Not To Eat

The academic answer to why we pick and choose:

Hermeneutics. We all engage in it.

Kevin

The historical answer (as opposed to the Biblical answer) is that Jesus basically made no hard or fast fules breaking with Jewish law and he'd be surprised to find a bunch of people running around using his name AND eating pork. There are volumes written about the battles that took place between the original Jewish followers of Jesus and Paul and his followers. Paul and his followers won that battle and got to write the rules (i.e. the Biblical answers).

And while we're on the subject (and since you don't have comments working on the Passion post) I'll say what's annoying me a great deal are people like Sullivan and others complaining about the violence, that it's obscene, that it's extra-Biblical, that we have no way of knowing. Well, the Romans did keep pretty good records of just what it was they did to people before and during executions. They didn't invent crucifixion, but they sure as hell enhanced it.

I'm an atheist, but a big fan of Jesus books and am looking forward to the movie. By the way, in case you didn't notice the writing credit on the movie Jesus of Nazareth, you should go back and check. There's a novelized version, "Man of Nazareth" as well, which I highly recommend.

Because bacon just tastes too good?

Let's put aside the ham sandwich for a moment, and take a look at a more incendiary concept.

Go to your average gentile church (of which I am a part), and mention that perhaps we ought to take another look into The Law as a viable way of life, and most will smack you in the head, figuratively speaking, about how we have been freed from the bondage of the Law, and that we have liberty through the atoning and sacrificial gift of Christ.

Until you mention the Tithe.

Then, for the most part, the liberty is not so liberating.

Personally? I remember Jesus saying something along the lines of, "Whoever keeps the law, and teaches others to do so, will have the greatest place in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever does not keep the law, and teaches others to do so, he will have the least place in the kingdom of heaven.

I don't have all the answers. I haven't even figured out why Jesus would be willing to die for me, though I accept it and I'm grateful for it. But if you can't ask without being branded a heretic, then how are the answers ever going to come? Besides, I get the impression that my Creator is big enough to handle my curiosity, and even my anger at times.

Nice place you have here, by the way.

Was browsing through blogspot when I stumbled here

IT DOESN'T MATTER, IT'S ALL MADE UP! WHY DOES GOD KILL OR CAUSE TO BE KILLED INNOCENT PEOPLE,CHILDREN, BABIES,ETC.? THE FLOOD,CHILDREN IN SODOM&GOMORA, 75,000 WHEN KING DAVID TOOK THE CENSUS THE WRONG WAY? MY FAVORITE IS WHEN MOSES RETURNED WITH THE 10 COMMANDMENTS AND ORDERED 3,000 OF HIS PEOPLE KILLED BECAUSE THEY GOT OUT OF LINE WHILE HE WAS GONE, HEY....WHAT ABOUT THO SHALT NOT KILL? CHRISTIANS BELIEVE OTHER RELIGIONS ARE MADE UP...GUESS WHAT,THEY'RE ALL MADE UP. MAN NEEDS TO WORSHIP A HIGHER BEING AND HE'S ARROGANT ENOUGH TO CREATE GODS AND CAN JUSTIFY KILLING IN THE NAME OF HIS MADE UP GOD. HOW FOOLISH! I AM A HUMBLE ATHEIST, ONLY A FOOL CLAIMS TO KNOW HIS CREATOR. TRY TO THINK LIKE ME AND QUIT ACTING LIKE A ARROGANT FOOL. WISE UP !!!

Interesting swaree (sp?). Anyway, the answer to the first question is simple. Christians believe in authority and absolute truths. However, Christians also believe that man in Adam, fell from the condition of being able to understand those things without special revealation (e.g. the Bible). Therefore, the Bible is the authority on all that must be believed and practiced inorder to please God and live happily. (see question 1 in WCF shorter catechism) The levitical rites where a type or a demonstration of what Christ would be for His people, so when the Christ came the service they provided seased to be needed - but it was not Christians that simply decided this to be the case, but rather scripture that instruced us that this is so. The whole book of Hebrews is very critical in this discussion.

Christians believe that they do not posses the authority in themselves to take bits and parts of the word of God and not the whole thing. As Christ said: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by "EVERY" word which proceeds from the Father" which is its self a quotation of scripture.

So if your curious why Christians eat pork, it's because the bible tells them so. =-) - and of course bacon is quite tasty too.

The formal answer is called canonicity, which means by what measure or rule. There maybe some groups of Christians that deny the authority of the whole word of God, but classically it was not so. Please don't get confussed by inconsistant Christians. After all we confess that we are all sinners. And if one might think that the Bible contradicts itself - do not eat/eat. Remember that not all things are static. We all wore diapers once, but thankfully no longer need to. this is an example of non-static. However, we have always needed food and drink, static. Just as the Ten Commandments will always be binding.

Hope this helps... and Mr E. I would love to hear more of your curiousities?

nike shox
shox shoes
nike shoes shox
nike shox running shoes
nike shoes
shox nz shoes
shox nz
shox torch
torch shoes
nike dream shoes
dream shoes
shox monster shoes
nike shox monster shoes
nike shox nz
nz shoes
shox oz
oz shoes
shox r3
nike shox r3
shox r4
nike shox r4
r4 torch
shox r4 torch
nike shox r5
shox r5
shox tl1
tl1 shox
tl3 nike shox
tl3 shox
nike shox turb
shox turb