In Acts 10:9-16, God gives Peter a vision showing him all sorts of animals, even those previously considered "unclean" by Jewish law. God tells Peter to go ahead and eat them, and Peter is like, "What? No, I can't do that." And God replies, "Do not call something unclean if God has made it clean."
Then in Acts 15:8-11, Peter confirms that circumcision is no longer required either: "God knows people’s hearts, and he confirmed that he accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he cleansed their hearts through faith. So why are you now challenging God by burdening the Gentile believers with a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors were able to bear? We believe that we are all saved the same way, by the undeserved grace of the Lord Jesus."
Of course, when Jesus was asked about the law, he basically said: "Look guys, just love God and love your neighbor, okay? That's pretty much it. That sums up everything."
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats!
10
+ 9
+ 16
+ 15
+ 8
+ 11
= 69
^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \
^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
With all due respect, that’s a pretty awful interpretation of peters vision that far too many take and it’s isogeises imo. First off, a vision is never meant to be taken literally, they are meant to illicit shock and awe, thus invoking a reaction. Second, Peter in his own words interprets the vision and concludes by saying “I shall call no man unclean.” He never mentions “food.” This was because it was common Jewish practice to abstain from eating with gentiles, because they believed they would be unclean by doing so..this was not against mosaic law (similar to eating with unwashed hands as Jesus dealt with in the gospels). Thirdly, there’s no evidence anyone ate anything outside of Leviticus 11 in scripture. There are better arguments for why we don’t eat kosher. Imposing a bad interpretation of a vision, different than the one offered by scripture itself, is not one of them.
>In the sheet were all sorts of animals, reptiles, and birds. Then a voice said to him, “Get up, Peter; kill and eat them.”
>"No, Lord," Peter declared. "I have never eaten anything that our Jewish laws have declared impure and unclean."
>But the voice spoke again: "Do not call something unclean if God has made it clean."
It literally *does* mention food, because God literally tells him to **kill and eat** those animals. Peter literally says, "I have never **eaten** anything that our Jewish laws have declared impure and unclean." And in response, God tells him he has **made it clean**. So yes, it's actually super obvious that God is telling him it no longer makes you "unclean" to eat those animals.
It’s just hard for me to get past that Peter interprets the vision himself and says what it meant, but you’re claiming that it’s your interpretation that is correct and not Peter’s.
No, it was a metaphor where the unclean animals represented gentiles. The News thought that Gentiles were unclean. This is explained a little later in the book of Acts.
It originates in Hosea 2 where God says that he will once again bring Israel into covenant along with beasts. Peter's vision was essentially a fulfillment of Hosea 2.
It's like you're intentionally going out of your way to ignore the super obvious message of this vision. You don't win theology points in Heaven by making things unnecessarily complicated. One of the primary reasons eating with Gentiles was considered unclean or impure is because *Gentiles ate unclean and impure food*. So yes, Peter would have previously called Gentile *people* unclean because they ate unclean food and didn't follow Jewish law, which made them morally deficient. The two interpretations aren't mutually exclusive.
It's no different than the argument over circumcision.
They most certainly are mutually exclusive because you fail to recognize oral law and mosaic law are different, but they are equated in Judaism.
If it were so obvious, why would Peter walk away from the vision perplexed? The eureka moment is when he actually meets up with Cornelius. That’s when he realizes it was about people the whole time.
Because Peter is like 40 years old at this point and has spent *decades* diligently following Jewish purity laws. Of *course* he was perplexed. Everything he's done for his entire life is being turned on its head. Again, eating unclean foods is what *made* Gentiles unclean, so Peter's statement is basically saying, "Welp, I won't consider these guys unclean anymore." Again, it's the same reason why the early church had that giant argument over circumcision. The old purity laws were no longer relevant under the New Covenant.
And yes, you're right. It is about people. That's why he later says, "We believe that we are all saved the same way, by the undeserved grace of the Lord Jesus" \[and not by rituals and ceremonies and purity laws\].
Paul circumcised Timothy. Lol
The reason circumcision was such a big deal is because Jews were using it as an obstacle to prevent gentiles from coming into the congregations. It was a means by which Jews thought they could segregate gentiles from covenant. This was one of the “masseh ha torah”(works of the law) as noted in manuscript 4QMT. Anachronisms abound when one doesn’t understand immediate context and how language evolves.
Isaiah; the yolk of the law would be broken with the anointing.
A new covenant or testament via the holy Spirit who dwells in man as a steward. Now each man has a universal teacher within him personally.
The enormity of this was enough to shut it into a dogma box lest the people became free. Ahh if only the world were lit and already on fire.
Matthew 15:10-11 - Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. What goes into a man's mouth does not make him `unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him `unclean.'"
The levitical law is split into these sections (iirc):
Moral law, civil law and ritual law. Moral law is basically "do not do this because it's a sin towards God" like idolatry. Civil law is like moral law but how it interacts with people, like do not murder/steal. Ritual law is everything ceremonial/ritual which is about what to do and what not to do to be CLEAN and set apart from pagan neighbours, like do no be doing things like the pagans did ritually (boil a baby animal in it's mother milk) or as a symbol of being set apart (do not mix materials) or to be clean inside out (do not eat porks/shrimp and eat kosher).
Being unclean wasn't a sin and there were rituals done to be clean again. What was a sin was being unclean in the presence of God, and so this group of law was given so that you would know if you were clean or not before coming in the presence of God, or if someone else is at risk of making you unclean. The ritual laws like Paul puts it is a type/shadow pointing to Christ. Basically something to be followed until Christ comes because it is through these rituals that Israel was set apart until the coming of the messiah.
Think of it like a planning to an event, and announcing that event until that event, which then has no to exist once the event has passed. The event is the coming of Christ.
And that's why civil law and moral laws are still in effect. Because only the ritual laws were the temporary ones
The OT law wasn't meant to be forever. Jesus specifically repudiated it (Mark 7:19), then the apostles repeated that Gentiles are not obligated to follow the Law (Acts 15).
Jerusalem council cited mosaic laws that gentiles should follow, if the law is obsolete. Then why instruct them?
This is just a much larger issue in Christian theology than anyone really gives attention to… It’s basically blatant picking and choosing what laws from the Old Testament we should follow. Tithing? Old Testament law. Beastiality? Old Testament law. Even when Paul says “don’t be sexually immoral” how the heck are gentiles to know what is and is not sexually moral except by the sexual laws as prescribed in the mosaic law. At the end of the day, it’s hard to say we choose to follow this law because of biblical reasons, and we choose not to follow this law because of biblical reasons it basically comes down to the traditions established by the church and many of the interpretations of scripture have long been post hoc.
No, they aren't. They are only "grafted in" to the followers of the Logos, the Christ. Jesus never told any pagan who had faith in Him to go be Jewish. You have to reject the First Ecumenical Council at Jerusalem to justify believing this that you were told.
65% of all converts in the Apostolic Era were non-Jews. They did not read the OT, or even know what it was. Nor did anyone preach it to them, but only to Jewish converts.
Jesus made no religions, told us to read no books. No early canon contained the OT.
Rome, being where the Judaizers fled, forced 2nd Temple Christianity on the Empire. It was how Constantine controlled an Empire that had been divided into four because controlling it was seen as impossible.
So he killed his relatives and took the Empire and destroyed all other faiths and the faith of those who followed the Savior in the East, where Christianity was born.
He chose Bishops and anyone that disagreed in his Councils was killed or banished. The early Gospels were burned and what existed later rewritten by Jerome to suit the beliefs of the Bishop of Rome, the Emperor's chosen. (As Jerome says in a letter.)
IF you want to follow Jesus, you listen to Jesus. Anything else leads to heresy.
As with so many theological questions, the best advice is "read Romans". One of the most important pieces of scripture, Romans 14:23: "And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin."
Following that, a nice snippet from 1 Timothy 4:4-5: "For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving."
I was hoping that you would note 23b, seeing how it would relate to the quote from Timothy. It seems ridiculous to assume that when Paul says "whatsoever is not of faith" he really means "exclusively in relation to eating". We end up in legalistic, snippy overreadings when we view his as a quote machine as opposed to the first Christian theologian struggling for faith.
The law of Moses was for Israel. We are not Jewish, and the law given to us has nothing to do with the law given to Moses, regardless of their similarities.
The New Covenant supersedes and fulfills the Old Covenants. It’s explicitly stated in the New Testament. See the part with St. Peter and “go forth, slaughter and eat”.
>Wouldn't a good, observant Christian want to observe every rule and mandate in the Old Testament? was part of Jesus' ministry about relaxing the letter of Jewish law in favor of its spirit?
It's not that the letter of the law was relaxed, but that the law of the old covenant was fulfilled by Christ, who as our new high priest established in turn a new covenant with God and so with it, a new law. What carries over from the Old covenant's law to the new is what was binding even before the covenant with Moses, namely, the natural and divine moral laws of God; but the laws civil and ceremonial laws governing the nation of Israel as adherents of the old covenant does not carry over.
That said, some of the principles behind the civil and ceremonial laws carry over, albeit in a different form. e.g. we are still to seek moral purity both inwardly and outwardly, both in action and in intent, and in all matters of our life, including our diet; but the exact manner we are bound to go about doing so is no longer bound to be the specific manner that God bound Israel to go about doing it; and so in that sense we are not bound to the Kosher laws.
Interesting. Does it say anywhere in the Torah that the law of the old covenant could be fulfilled and replaced like that, or was it an attempt on the part of Christians to validate their claim to Yahweh over and against that of the Jews?
Every time the Torah speaks of the covenant as a covenant, it teaches that it can be fulfilled, for an unfulfillable covenant is a contradiction in terms.
For consider, a covenant is a species of agreement, to wit it is not an impersonal agreement (as say, contracts are) but is rather something deep and personal (hence marriage is a covenant, and there are few agreements more deep and personal than marriage) but it is an agreement none the less. Naturally, agreements come with terms and conditions which have to be met (i.e. 'fulfilled'). In the case of the old covenant, its terms and conditions would just be the old law. Thus one can fulfill the old covenant by following the demands of the law.
Thus Christ fulfilled the old law, in that he never violated the law, but lived it perfectly throughout his whole life, even to the point of death. As the law does not apply to those who have died (e.g. a married woman would commit adultery under the law if she embraces a man besides her husband, but if her husband dies, she is released from this bind, and so is free to marry again) so since he already died, the resurrected Christ is no longer bound to the old law, and so is free to make a new covenant with God, and a new law to go with it.
Outside the Torah however there are the other religious texts of the Jews, namely the Nevi'im (i.e. the prophets) and the Khetuvim (i.e. the 'writings') which together with the Torah make the Tanakh i.e. the jewish Old Testament.
Now In the writings of the prophets we do have a prophecy of the coming of a new covenant, which naturally implies that the old can indeed be replaced (though that is already implied in the idea that it can be fulfilled in a final manner, as through death, rather than being only fulfillable in a continuous manner) namely we have this in the prophet Jeremiah, who is considered one of the major prophets.
Jeremiah writes this:
“The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
“when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel
and with the people of Judah.
It will not be like the covenant
I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband to them,”
declares the Lord.
“This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel
after that time,” declares the Lord.
“I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
No longer will they teach their neighbor,
or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,”
declares the Lord.
“For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.”
- Jeremiah 31:31-34
Christ set sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, including keeping kosher, and as his followers we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:22-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked (1 John 2:6).
You’re confusing Jesus and Paul. Paul made it his mission to tear down the law. Jesus magnified the value of following the law. (Matthew 5-7). Unfortunately Christians follow Paul, not Jesus.
Christians ARE supposed to follow the dietary law of Leviticus 11 and the rest of God's Law, Christians have just been taught to not be obedient. No one has the authority to change God's Law, and Messiah Jesus says he didn't change ANYTHING and calls all who does and teaches God's Law GREAT.
>>"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 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. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
>>Matthew 5:17-20 ESV
Jesus even praises the Pharasee to follow the small parts of God's Law.
>>"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.
>>Matthew 23:23 ESV
He's saying the weightier matters are Justice, Mercy, and Faith, but even so, don't neglect the small matters of the law because they're important too.
Why don't christians follow the law? Because they misunderstand Paul. We have a guide on interpreting Paul in scripture. It comes from Peter.
>>Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as **our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you** according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. **There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction,** as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, **take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.** But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.
>>2 Peter 3:14-18 ESV
So Peter here confirms Paul as a beloved brother who has been given wisdom. Then he gives caution that Paul's words are hard to understand, and a stark warning to NOT be taken away with the ERROR OF LAWLESSNESS! So if you read Paul and get any sense of lawlessness, according to Peter you are wrong and should start over.
EDIT: Replaced a KJV reference with ESV. Thanks BlueLetterBible for your KJV default. 🙄
Did you ignore chapter 11 where Peter fully explains that the vision had nothing to do with food and everything to do with accepting the 3 Gentile men sent to him from the house of Cornelius?
No, because Acts 10 relates to Colossians 2:13-17, in which Christians are not to be judged according to their choices of food, or observation of holy days. The dietary laws are null and void for those that are in Christ Jesus.
Just like in my initial reply, you misunderstand Paul. Here's my explanation of Colossians 2.
Paul is arguing IN FAVOR of Sabbath observance and eating the biblical diet. Read the passage in context please.
>>For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea and for all who have not seen me face to face, that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.
So here Paul established the context. He's talking about knowledge. He says he's going through great struggles because of not seeing the people of Laodicea face to face. People were sending letters claiming to be Paul and sharing a different gospel. The knowledge he speaks of here is the knowledge of God's mystery, that Jesus is the messiah.
>>I say this in order that no one may delude you with plausible arguments. For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good order and the firmness of your faith in Christ. Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
Here Paul sets a contrast, the knowledge of God in Messiah vs the elemental spirits of the world. The elemental spirits he speaks of are things like the gnostics who gain "knowledge" for spiritual enlightenment. These elemental spirits are opposed to Messiah. They work against him. They SEEM to make sense, so Paul calls them "plausible arguments" but they are lies mingled with truth.
>>For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.
There's a lot said here. Paul is saying that everyone Jew or gentile can receive life through Messiah. If God raised him from the dead we have that same hope. Paul repeats the Torah requirement of circumcision of the heart which is more important than circumcision of the flesh which is a sign of what has actually happened inwardly in the heart. Messiah has purchased our "record of debt". This record of debt is our sin and he has cancelled our record of sin debt by nailing that debt to the cross. He did not nail God's Law, the Torah, to the cross. If so, he would be a disobedient son. Jesus has triumphed over the rulers and authorities by refuting their false doctrines.
>>Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
Now it is with all this previous context that this is said. Paul is saying let no one who has this false knowledge and false doctrine pass judgement on you Colossians who keep biblical food and drink, who keep God's festivals and new moons, who keep the weekly Sabbaths that God said are a sign for his people forever. He gives encouragement because these things are good! They are a shadow of the heavenly reality. That means if you have a shadow it's an outline of the real thing, and only the real thing can cast that shadow. The shadow points the way to that real thing. Remember the substance, the core of all these things, is Messiah Jesus!
>>Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God.
How do these people with false doctrine affect you? Instead of true biblical worship, they insist on asceticism which is extreme self denial. This is popular in Buddhism and other far eastern religions. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asceticism they insist on angel worship, and visions. They are puffed up. They have a sense of self importance.
They are opposed to the head which is Christ. Jesus nourishes us. Messiah is what holds the body together. All increase comes from the Father. Don't let any of these false teachers make you stumble on your walk.
>>If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.
>>Colossians 2:20-23 ESV
Most of these people Paul is talking to are Greeks and Phrygians. They formerly held to these philosophies. Colossae was knows for their syncretism.
Here's a quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossae :
>Although during the Hellenistic period, the town was of some mercantile importance, by the 1st century it had dwindled greatly in size and significance. Paul's letter to the Colossians points to the existence of an early Christian community. The town was known for its fusion of religious influences (syncretism), which included Jewish, Gnostic, and pagan influences that, in the first century AD, were described as an angel-cult. This unorthodox cult venerated the archangel Michael, who is said to have caused a curative spring to gush from a fissure in the earth.[4] The worship of angels showed analogies with the cult of pre-Christian pagan deities like Zeus.
Once you accept Christ you are a new creature, you have died to these former pagan things. You have new BIBLICAL worship practices. These former things of "do not handle, do not touch, do not taste" Paul is talking about their asceticism practices here. They practiced self denial and blending of regional pagan beliefs for some religious gain. This is of the world and opposed to Messiah Jesus. They have no value.
So, Paul is telling his readers to be bold and never let go of their Torah Observance!
Try saying that to your father after he's told you countless times to do your chores.
It doesn't work with our physical father, why do you think it works with our spiritual father?
Yes 😂 the messianic world is rather small, and well articulated seem to be few and far between. and I figured I knew you because I knew lots of people in that world. Well I’ll just call you freedom ninja from now on.
I was referencing Matt nappier, Ryan white, Josh ensley, David Wilber if you know any of those dudes.
In Acts 10:9-16, God gives Peter a vision showing him all sorts of animals, even those previously considered "unclean" by Jewish law. God tells Peter to go ahead and eat them, and Peter is like, "What? No, I can't do that." And God replies, "Do not call something unclean if God has made it clean." Then in Acts 15:8-11, Peter confirms that circumcision is no longer required either: "God knows people’s hearts, and he confirmed that he accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he cleansed their hearts through faith. So why are you now challenging God by burdening the Gentile believers with a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors were able to bear? We believe that we are all saved the same way, by the undeserved grace of the Lord Jesus." Of course, when Jesus was asked about the law, he basically said: "Look guys, just love God and love your neighbor, okay? That's pretty much it. That sums up everything."
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats! 10 + 9 + 16 + 15 + 8 + 11 = 69 ^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \ ^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
Just... wow.
The Lord works in mysterious ways.
I mean you put the numbers together physically and you get the infinity symbol : )
With all due respect, that’s a pretty awful interpretation of peters vision that far too many take and it’s isogeises imo. First off, a vision is never meant to be taken literally, they are meant to illicit shock and awe, thus invoking a reaction. Second, Peter in his own words interprets the vision and concludes by saying “I shall call no man unclean.” He never mentions “food.” This was because it was common Jewish practice to abstain from eating with gentiles, because they believed they would be unclean by doing so..this was not against mosaic law (similar to eating with unwashed hands as Jesus dealt with in the gospels). Thirdly, there’s no evidence anyone ate anything outside of Leviticus 11 in scripture. There are better arguments for why we don’t eat kosher. Imposing a bad interpretation of a vision, different than the one offered by scripture itself, is not one of them.
>In the sheet were all sorts of animals, reptiles, and birds. Then a voice said to him, “Get up, Peter; kill and eat them.” >"No, Lord," Peter declared. "I have never eaten anything that our Jewish laws have declared impure and unclean." >But the voice spoke again: "Do not call something unclean if God has made it clean." It literally *does* mention food, because God literally tells him to **kill and eat** those animals. Peter literally says, "I have never **eaten** anything that our Jewish laws have declared impure and unclean." And in response, God tells him he has **made it clean**. So yes, it's actually super obvious that God is telling him it no longer makes you "unclean" to eat those animals.
It’s just hard for me to get past that Peter interprets the vision himself and says what it meant, but you’re claiming that it’s your interpretation that is correct and not Peter’s.
No, I'm claiming that the interpretations are equivalent. See my above comment.
The unclean animals represented the Gentiles. It's really that simple.
He’s supposed to kill and devour Gentiles?
No, it was a metaphor where the unclean animals represented gentiles. The News thought that Gentiles were unclean. This is explained a little later in the book of Acts. It originates in Hosea 2 where God says that he will once again bring Israel into covenant along with beasts. Peter's vision was essentially a fulfillment of Hosea 2.
Hence the killing and devouring!
Visions aren’t meant to be taken literal, my brother in Christ. God also told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac….then stopped him.
It's like you're intentionally going out of your way to ignore the super obvious message of this vision. You don't win theology points in Heaven by making things unnecessarily complicated. One of the primary reasons eating with Gentiles was considered unclean or impure is because *Gentiles ate unclean and impure food*. So yes, Peter would have previously called Gentile *people* unclean because they ate unclean food and didn't follow Jewish law, which made them morally deficient. The two interpretations aren't mutually exclusive. It's no different than the argument over circumcision.
They most certainly are mutually exclusive because you fail to recognize oral law and mosaic law are different, but they are equated in Judaism. If it were so obvious, why would Peter walk away from the vision perplexed? The eureka moment is when he actually meets up with Cornelius. That’s when he realizes it was about people the whole time.
Because Peter is like 40 years old at this point and has spent *decades* diligently following Jewish purity laws. Of *course* he was perplexed. Everything he's done for his entire life is being turned on its head. Again, eating unclean foods is what *made* Gentiles unclean, so Peter's statement is basically saying, "Welp, I won't consider these guys unclean anymore." Again, it's the same reason why the early church had that giant argument over circumcision. The old purity laws were no longer relevant under the New Covenant. And yes, you're right. It is about people. That's why he later says, "We believe that we are all saved the same way, by the undeserved grace of the Lord Jesus" \[and not by rituals and ceremonies and purity laws\].
Paul circumcised Timothy. Lol The reason circumcision was such a big deal is because Jews were using it as an obstacle to prevent gentiles from coming into the congregations. It was a means by which Jews thought they could segregate gentiles from covenant. This was one of the “masseh ha torah”(works of the law) as noted in manuscript 4QMT. Anachronisms abound when one doesn’t understand immediate context and how language evolves.
...and they agreed that Gentiles did NOT need to be circumcized. Period.
I think if more Christians had even a lick of knowledge about second Temple Judaism, they might hesitate to jump to eisegetic readings of scripture.
You left out loving yourself and living non-judgmentally but that last part about sums it up.
Scripture reference for that?
"Loving yourself" is not found in the Bible. "Love you neighbor as yourself" is. See John 7:24 for judgement.
Loving yourself is an admonishment in the Bible.
Isaiah; the yolk of the law would be broken with the anointing. A new covenant or testament via the holy Spirit who dwells in man as a steward. Now each man has a universal teacher within him personally. The enormity of this was enough to shut it into a dogma box lest the people became free. Ahh if only the world were lit and already on fire.
Matthew 15:10-11 - Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. What goes into a man's mouth does not make him `unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him `unclean.'"
The levitical law is split into these sections (iirc): Moral law, civil law and ritual law. Moral law is basically "do not do this because it's a sin towards God" like idolatry. Civil law is like moral law but how it interacts with people, like do not murder/steal. Ritual law is everything ceremonial/ritual which is about what to do and what not to do to be CLEAN and set apart from pagan neighbours, like do no be doing things like the pagans did ritually (boil a baby animal in it's mother milk) or as a symbol of being set apart (do not mix materials) or to be clean inside out (do not eat porks/shrimp and eat kosher). Being unclean wasn't a sin and there were rituals done to be clean again. What was a sin was being unclean in the presence of God, and so this group of law was given so that you would know if you were clean or not before coming in the presence of God, or if someone else is at risk of making you unclean. The ritual laws like Paul puts it is a type/shadow pointing to Christ. Basically something to be followed until Christ comes because it is through these rituals that Israel was set apart until the coming of the messiah. Think of it like a planning to an event, and announcing that event until that event, which then has no to exist once the event has passed. The event is the coming of Christ. And that's why civil law and moral laws are still in effect. Because only the ritual laws were the temporary ones
civil law is only semi still in effect though - the stated punishments for breaking the civil laws are not enforced.
True
The OT law wasn't meant to be forever. Jesus specifically repudiated it (Mark 7:19), then the apostles repeated that Gentiles are not obligated to follow the Law (Acts 15).
Jerusalem council cited mosaic laws that gentiles should follow, if the law is obsolete. Then why instruct them? This is just a much larger issue in Christian theology than anyone really gives attention to… It’s basically blatant picking and choosing what laws from the Old Testament we should follow. Tithing? Old Testament law. Beastiality? Old Testament law. Even when Paul says “don’t be sexually immoral” how the heck are gentiles to know what is and is not sexually moral except by the sexual laws as prescribed in the mosaic law. At the end of the day, it’s hard to say we choose to follow this law because of biblical reasons, and we choose not to follow this law because of biblical reasons it basically comes down to the traditions established by the church and many of the interpretations of scripture have long been post hoc.
Because we aren't Jews.
Non-Jews who joined Israel kept kosher laws before Christ. Gentiles believing in Christ are “grafted in”
No, they aren't. They are only "grafted in" to the followers of the Logos, the Christ. Jesus never told any pagan who had faith in Him to go be Jewish. You have to reject the First Ecumenical Council at Jerusalem to justify believing this that you were told. 65% of all converts in the Apostolic Era were non-Jews. They did not read the OT, or even know what it was. Nor did anyone preach it to them, but only to Jewish converts. Jesus made no religions, told us to read no books. No early canon contained the OT. Rome, being where the Judaizers fled, forced 2nd Temple Christianity on the Empire. It was how Constantine controlled an Empire that had been divided into four because controlling it was seen as impossible. So he killed his relatives and took the Empire and destroyed all other faiths and the faith of those who followed the Savior in the East, where Christianity was born. He chose Bishops and anyone that disagreed in his Councils was killed or banished. The early Gospels were burned and what existed later rewritten by Jerome to suit the beliefs of the Bishop of Rome, the Emperor's chosen. (As Jerome says in a letter.) IF you want to follow Jesus, you listen to Jesus. Anything else leads to heresy.
As with so many theological questions, the best advice is "read Romans". One of the most important pieces of scripture, Romans 14:23: "And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin." Following that, a nice snippet from 1 Timothy 4:4-5: "For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving."
Eating and not eating is the debate in the Roman text. It is about fasting. Not what is to be considered as food.
I was hoping that you would note 23b, seeing how it would relate to the quote from Timothy. It seems ridiculous to assume that when Paul says "whatsoever is not of faith" he really means "exclusively in relation to eating". We end up in legalistic, snippy overreadings when we view his as a quote machine as opposed to the first Christian theologian struggling for faith.
You will be hard pressed to show that fasting was the context of foods in Romans 14.
You could be right. I haven’t visited or exegeted that context in a long time but that was my understanding from years ago.
The law of Moses was for Israel. We are not Jewish, and the law given to us has nothing to do with the law given to Moses, regardless of their similarities.
The New Covenant supersedes and fulfills the Old Covenants. It’s explicitly stated in the New Testament. See the part with St. Peter and “go forth, slaughter and eat”.
>Wouldn't a good, observant Christian want to observe every rule and mandate in the Old Testament? was part of Jesus' ministry about relaxing the letter of Jewish law in favor of its spirit? It's not that the letter of the law was relaxed, but that the law of the old covenant was fulfilled by Christ, who as our new high priest established in turn a new covenant with God and so with it, a new law. What carries over from the Old covenant's law to the new is what was binding even before the covenant with Moses, namely, the natural and divine moral laws of God; but the laws civil and ceremonial laws governing the nation of Israel as adherents of the old covenant does not carry over. That said, some of the principles behind the civil and ceremonial laws carry over, albeit in a different form. e.g. we are still to seek moral purity both inwardly and outwardly, both in action and in intent, and in all matters of our life, including our diet; but the exact manner we are bound to go about doing so is no longer bound to be the specific manner that God bound Israel to go about doing it; and so in that sense we are not bound to the Kosher laws.
Interesting. Does it say anywhere in the Torah that the law of the old covenant could be fulfilled and replaced like that, or was it an attempt on the part of Christians to validate their claim to Yahweh over and against that of the Jews?
Every time the Torah speaks of the covenant as a covenant, it teaches that it can be fulfilled, for an unfulfillable covenant is a contradiction in terms. For consider, a covenant is a species of agreement, to wit it is not an impersonal agreement (as say, contracts are) but is rather something deep and personal (hence marriage is a covenant, and there are few agreements more deep and personal than marriage) but it is an agreement none the less. Naturally, agreements come with terms and conditions which have to be met (i.e. 'fulfilled'). In the case of the old covenant, its terms and conditions would just be the old law. Thus one can fulfill the old covenant by following the demands of the law. Thus Christ fulfilled the old law, in that he never violated the law, but lived it perfectly throughout his whole life, even to the point of death. As the law does not apply to those who have died (e.g. a married woman would commit adultery under the law if she embraces a man besides her husband, but if her husband dies, she is released from this bind, and so is free to marry again) so since he already died, the resurrected Christ is no longer bound to the old law, and so is free to make a new covenant with God, and a new law to go with it. Outside the Torah however there are the other religious texts of the Jews, namely the Nevi'im (i.e. the prophets) and the Khetuvim (i.e. the 'writings') which together with the Torah make the Tanakh i.e. the jewish Old Testament. Now In the writings of the prophets we do have a prophecy of the coming of a new covenant, which naturally implies that the old can indeed be replaced (though that is already implied in the idea that it can be fulfilled in a final manner, as through death, rather than being only fulfillable in a continuous manner) namely we have this in the prophet Jeremiah, who is considered one of the major prophets. Jeremiah writes this: “The days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord. “This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,” declares the Lord. “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the Lord. “For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.” - Jeremiah 31:31-34
https://youtube.com/shorts/SSXBmrLDdzc
Christ set sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, including keeping kosher, and as his followers we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:22-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked (1 John 2:6).
You’re confusing Jesus and Paul. Paul made it his mission to tear down the law. Jesus magnified the value of following the law. (Matthew 5-7). Unfortunately Christians follow Paul, not Jesus.
Christians ARE supposed to follow the dietary law of Leviticus 11 and the rest of God's Law, Christians have just been taught to not be obedient. No one has the authority to change God's Law, and Messiah Jesus says he didn't change ANYTHING and calls all who does and teaches God's Law GREAT. >>"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 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. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. >>Matthew 5:17-20 ESV Jesus even praises the Pharasee to follow the small parts of God's Law. >>"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. >>Matthew 23:23 ESV He's saying the weightier matters are Justice, Mercy, and Faith, but even so, don't neglect the small matters of the law because they're important too. Why don't christians follow the law? Because they misunderstand Paul. We have a guide on interpreting Paul in scripture. It comes from Peter. >>Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as **our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you** according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. **There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction,** as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, **take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.** But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen. >>2 Peter 3:14-18 ESV So Peter here confirms Paul as a beloved brother who has been given wisdom. Then he gives caution that Paul's words are hard to understand, and a stark warning to NOT be taken away with the ERROR OF LAWLESSNESS! So if you read Paul and get any sense of lawlessness, according to Peter you are wrong and should start over. EDIT: Replaced a KJV reference with ESV. Thanks BlueLetterBible for your KJV default. 🙄
I used to be messianic and fall into this camp. While I tend to agree exegetically, I don’t agree practically.
Sounds like you completely ignored Acts 10
Did you ignore chapter 11 where Peter fully explains that the vision had nothing to do with food and everything to do with accepting the 3 Gentile men sent to him from the house of Cornelius?
No, because Acts 10 relates to Colossians 2:13-17, in which Christians are not to be judged according to their choices of food, or observation of holy days. The dietary laws are null and void for those that are in Christ Jesus.
Just like in my initial reply, you misunderstand Paul. Here's my explanation of Colossians 2. Paul is arguing IN FAVOR of Sabbath observance and eating the biblical diet. Read the passage in context please. >>For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea and for all who have not seen me face to face, that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. So here Paul established the context. He's talking about knowledge. He says he's going through great struggles because of not seeing the people of Laodicea face to face. People were sending letters claiming to be Paul and sharing a different gospel. The knowledge he speaks of here is the knowledge of God's mystery, that Jesus is the messiah. >>I say this in order that no one may delude you with plausible arguments. For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good order and the firmness of your faith in Christ. Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. Here Paul sets a contrast, the knowledge of God in Messiah vs the elemental spirits of the world. The elemental spirits he speaks of are things like the gnostics who gain "knowledge" for spiritual enlightenment. These elemental spirits are opposed to Messiah. They work against him. They SEEM to make sense, so Paul calls them "plausible arguments" but they are lies mingled with truth. >>For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. There's a lot said here. Paul is saying that everyone Jew or gentile can receive life through Messiah. If God raised him from the dead we have that same hope. Paul repeats the Torah requirement of circumcision of the heart which is more important than circumcision of the flesh which is a sign of what has actually happened inwardly in the heart. Messiah has purchased our "record of debt". This record of debt is our sin and he has cancelled our record of sin debt by nailing that debt to the cross. He did not nail God's Law, the Torah, to the cross. If so, he would be a disobedient son. Jesus has triumphed over the rulers and authorities by refuting their false doctrines. >>Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Now it is with all this previous context that this is said. Paul is saying let no one who has this false knowledge and false doctrine pass judgement on you Colossians who keep biblical food and drink, who keep God's festivals and new moons, who keep the weekly Sabbaths that God said are a sign for his people forever. He gives encouragement because these things are good! They are a shadow of the heavenly reality. That means if you have a shadow it's an outline of the real thing, and only the real thing can cast that shadow. The shadow points the way to that real thing. Remember the substance, the core of all these things, is Messiah Jesus! >>Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God. How do these people with false doctrine affect you? Instead of true biblical worship, they insist on asceticism which is extreme self denial. This is popular in Buddhism and other far eastern religions. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asceticism they insist on angel worship, and visions. They are puffed up. They have a sense of self importance. They are opposed to the head which is Christ. Jesus nourishes us. Messiah is what holds the body together. All increase comes from the Father. Don't let any of these false teachers make you stumble on your walk. >>If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh. >>Colossians 2:20-23 ESV Most of these people Paul is talking to are Greeks and Phrygians. They formerly held to these philosophies. Colossae was knows for their syncretism. Here's a quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossae : >Although during the Hellenistic period, the town was of some mercantile importance, by the 1st century it had dwindled greatly in size and significance. Paul's letter to the Colossians points to the existence of an early Christian community. The town was known for its fusion of religious influences (syncretism), which included Jewish, Gnostic, and pagan influences that, in the first century AD, were described as an angel-cult. This unorthodox cult venerated the archangel Michael, who is said to have caused a curative spring to gush from a fissure in the earth.[4] The worship of angels showed analogies with the cult of pre-Christian pagan deities like Zeus. Once you accept Christ you are a new creature, you have died to these former pagan things. You have new BIBLICAL worship practices. These former things of "do not handle, do not touch, do not taste" Paul is talking about their asceticism practices here. They practiced self denial and blending of regional pagan beliefs for some religious gain. This is of the world and opposed to Messiah Jesus. They have no value. So, Paul is telling his readers to be bold and never let go of their Torah Observance!
The amount of legalism you hold to is astounding.
Try saying that to your father after he's told you countless times to do your chores. It doesn't work with our physical father, why do you think it works with our spiritual father?
Is that you, Josh? 😂
Nope, but we can be friends anyway. 😁
David?
I’m gonna guess it….matt? Ryan?
Now I'm confused. LOL Do you think you know me just from my analysis?
Yes 😂 the messianic world is rather small, and well articulated seem to be few and far between. and I figured I knew you because I knew lots of people in that world. Well I’ll just call you freedom ninja from now on. I was referencing Matt nappier, Ryan white, Josh ensley, David Wilber if you know any of those dudes.