|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 9/19/2008 9:10:51 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3143
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
There is nothing in Ha Torah regarding abstaining from such meat. I'll take your word for it presently. Thanks for the lesson in rabbinic tradition.
quote:
I don't follow. The passage in this thread is the portion of Lev. 19 related to items presumably related to hybridization. Which specific verses are you refering to and how do you come toyour interpretation? Sorry, I thought your last post was referring to the passage in Numbers 20. It seems to me that both passages are generally encouraging obedience when God demands it.
quote:
Then why are you posting on this thread? I am sincerely trying to understand why some Messianic Jews (or Jewish Christians) feel obligated to follow OT laws when the "Jerusalem Council" in Acts 15 specifically found only four requirements worth codifying. Perhaps I am posting in the wrong thread so I will take my discussion elsewhere. Thanks for your patience with me, Bluethread.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 9/20/2008 12:24:41 PM
|
|
|
ae10u
Posts: 162
Joined: 8/24/2007
Status: offline
|
The Acts 15 jerusalem counsel forbad things strangled - an OT law. We know that many diseases are carried in the blood, and that blood causes the meat to go off much quicker.
Most OT laws have an immediately obvious reason for being. Thou shalt not kill clearly is a necessary law.
When it comes to mixing fibres - they are not going to be eaten, and they are not going to reproduce and produce a hybrid. God always seems logical - so there probably is a logical reason for banning blends of wool and linen. The reason's may not be obvious to our present level of science - but the only thing which suggests itself is a health benefit. The laws are given to reduce human suffering. It could be as simple a reason as that given in (Ezek 44:17-18) - viz. to prevent sweating. Or it could be a much different reason.
Here is a site which proposes that static is produced by the two fibres together which drains the energy from the body. I don't necessarily swallow that - and I would like to see the scientific evidence for their findings.
http://opentheword.org/content/view/213/56/
To quote them...
"It has been proven scientifically that "wool, when combined with linen, increases its power of passing off the electricity from the body. In hot climates, it brings on malignant fevers and exhausts the strength; and when passing off from the body, it meets with the heated air, the skin inflames and excoriates like a blister." (1)
This is because wool readily sheds electrons. Anyone who has ever walked across a carpet with wool socks and touched a door knob has experienced this phenomenon. However, linen will not accept the electrons that are handed to it by the wool, its molecules push the electrons away. The wool then tries to hand them back and the cycle continues and begins to amplify itself.
As this cycle continues it draws electricity out of your body in order to feed itself. The more electricity it draws, the weaker your body becomes. Our bodies are delicate precision creations that run on electricity. If you upset that balance you are in trouble.
If you were to wear a garment mixed with linen and wool in a hot climate, the first thing you would notice is an increasing tiredness as your energy gets zapped, then your internal organs would begin to fail as the electricity needed to run their various functions is depleted. As the energy passes from your body and meets with the hot air your skin will start to excoriate like a blister, causing rapid fluid loss and dehydration. The pain and discomfort would become unbearable and you would long for death to quickly come. Your wish is eventually granted. "
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 9/20/2008 12:28:01 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3143
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
God always seems logical You are giving human logic far more credit than it deserves, ae10u!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 9/20/2008 8:35:51 PM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 4073
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
|
The logic of the bible is often at odds with our pagan Greek based logic system of deduction and induction.
_____________________________
Avatar is Saphira 5 months and Louvena at 23 months!
We are now grandparents TWICE!!
====================================
Our CD is now available here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dswaggoner
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 9/28/2008 5:18:47 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker
The point of the the other poster is that there might be some health reasons for the command to not mix wool and linen. I suppose that might lead one to conclude that any health benefits which were applicable then are still applicable now. That's where I think his argument might lead.
The fact that there is virtual silence on potential health benefits makes kosher laws of the OT irrelevant.
Thank you for making your point. It is difficult to determine where one thinks an argument may go, if one does not make the connection.
Your point highlights a serious draw back to the scientific or health benefit arguements. They subject our interpretation of Scripture to the scientific/health theories of the day. These theories may add some credence, but they are not best evidence when interpreting Scripture.
By the same token, saying that certain things in the Scriptures are irrelavant because they can't be proven scientifically beneficial or healthy also subjects ones interpretation to the same scientific/health theories.
Regarding the arguments related to Adonai possibly revoking the laws regarding food, I believe their discussion here would be appropriate as long as they are made in the context of sowing two kinds of plants in the same field.
Bluethread,
A point of clarification. If anyone believes we are under the the dietary laws, they must make their argument from scripture. What is irrelevant to the discussion their need to be kosher is the alleged health benefits.
If one want to argue that there are health benefits, that is not a spiritual issue. It is that which is irrelevant.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 9/29/2008 4:40:57 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1424
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker
Bluethread,
A point of clarification. If anyone believes we are under the the dietary laws, they must make their argument from scripture. What is irrelevant to the discussion their need to be kosher is the alleged health benefits.
If one want to argue that there are health benefits, that is not a spiritual issue. It is that which is irrelevant.
Your final statement seems a bit unclear. However, I presume you are saying that what one believes regarding what the Scriptures say about what one may or may not eat is not relevant here because this passage does not literally speak of those things.
Your point is well taken, however, many things, including ones views on what commandments we are not "under" are not clearly stated either. Therefore, we all speak from our various prospectives.
In the case of this thread, I would think, the view of one who believes the passage has no practical application today would simply say so and leave it at that. If such an one wanted to present some symbolic interpretation, that might lead to some interesting prospective. However, apart from that there does not appear to be much that can be said by such an one.
That said, to require others to stop discussing the passage based on their viewpoint simply because one does not hold that viewpoint does not appear to be in line with the principle of each man being convinced in his own mind.
That said, how do you interpret this passage and why?
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 9/29/2008 5:16:47 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Your final statement seems a bit unclear. However, I presume you are saying that what one believes regarding what the Scriptures say about what one may or may not eat is not relevant here because this passage does not literally speak of those things.
Your point is well taken, however, many things, including ones views on what commandments we are not "under" are not clearly stated either. Therefore, we all speak from our various prospectives.
In the case of this thread, I would think, the view of one who believes the passage has no practical application today would simply say so and leave it at that. If such an one wanted to present some symbolic interpretation, that might lead to some interesting prospective. However, apart from that there does not appear to be much that can be said by such an one.
That said, to require others to stop discussing the passage based on their viewpoint simply because one does not hold that viewpoint does not appear to be in line with the principle of each man being convinced in his own mind.
That said, how do you interpret this passage and why?
I interpret the passage as saying that the dietary laws applied directly while the Jews were under them--and the end of that period is clearly past. For one to pick and to choose which ones we are under and which ones we are not under--we are not under any of them directly. That is not to say that there are no universal truths in the OT. There are.
I have heard it said that in the Bible there is only one right interpretation but many applications. Applications may be made broadly and there may be many applications to any given scripture.
To answer one of your points: No, I don't interpret it symbolically. As to whether or not one may apply it symbolically, one person's guess is as good as any as that of another.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 9/29/2008 6:08:07 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3143
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
For one to pick and to choose which ones we are under and which ones we are not under--we are not under any of them directly. Larry, when did the prohibitions from Acts 15 on eating blood, strangled meat and food sacrificed to idols end? Or are you suggesting those are restrictions we are "under indirectly".
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 9/30/2008 4:38:36 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
For one to pick and to choose which ones we are under and which ones we are not under--we are not under any of them directly. Larry, when did the prohibitions from Acts 15 on eating blood, strangled meat and food sacrificed to idols end? Or are you suggesting those are restrictions we are "under indirectly".
I'm not sure what you mean by "indirectly." I will explain what I mean and you can tell me if my answer get to the heart of your question.
I was going to say that I the prohibitions in Acts 15 against those things weren't absolute, but that the prohibitions were intended to cultivate an mutually edifying relationship between Jew and Gentile in the Church. However, in reviewing the text more carefully, there are some problems with that view which I'll have to reconsider.
BTW, when I looked for your answer to my post on the other thread, I didn't find it. I suppose I was too lazy to look through it entirely.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 10/1/2008 12:56:02 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3143
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
I'm not sure what you mean by "indirectly." I will explain what I mean and you can tell me if my answer get to the heart of your question. I guess I should turn the question back over to you - what do you mean by your use of the word "directly" two times in post #57? Almost all of the early Christians were Jews so that laws such as found in Leviticus 19 should have direct application.
quote:
I was going to say that I the prohibitions in Acts 15 against those things weren't absolute, but that the prohibitions were intended to cultivate an mutually edifying relationship between Jew and Gentile in the Church. However, in reviewing the text more carefully, there are some problems with that view which I'll have to reconsider. I suspect we have the same "problems" with Acts 15, since we are Gentiles to whom the text seems directly applicable. I really am puzzled about equating sexual immorality with eating incorrectly butchered meat. I just do not find 19 centuries of church tradition upholding these "absolutes" of dietary restriction compared to the spiritual significance of sexual morality.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 10/1/2008 2:45:43 PM
|
|
|
Fledgling
Posts: 71
Joined: 8/11/2008
Status: offline
|
To me the quote below says that God made seeds with the
intention that they produce as they were originally designed
to produce. Their design was perfect and made to to please him.. if
humans are manipulating seed and making it something of
man would this not be dis-pleasing to God?
Would this be a case against interbreeding?
quote:
Corinthians 15:38 - 39(New International Version)
38.But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him , and to every seed his own body.
39.All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men , another flesh of beasts , another of fishes, and another of birds.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 10/1/2008 5:42:22 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
I guess I should turn the question back over to you - what do you mean by your use of the word "directly" two times in post #57? Almost all of the early Christians were Jews so that laws such as found in Leviticus 19 should have direct application.
drmark,
OK, fair enough. I guess I had forgotten that I used the term "directly." Let me explain. All scripture, even the Levitical laws have some meaning to us. But when I say "directly," I mean that I do not believe we are to adhere to the restrictions of the Law. That is to say that when the Law says "don't eat this or that," I don't believe we are obligated to obey them just because they are contained in it. Obviously, if one thinks hard enough we can come up with an application for any commandment found in the Law.
For example, Paul (1 Cor 9) applied to commandment "you shall not muzzle the ox that treads the grain" to be used as "pay the gospel minister." Paul and other NT writers tell us that the OT Law commandments were not given in vain. So I would say that even if we do not obey them specifically to avoid, say pork, they still mean something to us. I.e. we do not ignore them because they are the word of God. But that is not to say we are obligated to keep the dietary commandments of the Mosaic Law.quote:
I suspect we have the same "problems" with Acts 15, since we are Gentiles to whom the text seems directly applicable. I really am puzzled about equating sexual immorality with eating incorrectly butchered meat. I just do not find 19 centuries of church tradition upholding these "absolutes" of dietary restriction compared to the spiritual significance of sexual morality.
You cited the specific problem I was thinking of as I wrote it.
However, I remembered that Acts 21 cited the Apostolic letter written in Acts 15. See 21:25. Both Acts 15 and Acts 21 share a similar contextual point that may enlighten us as to how to interpret it. In Acts 21, Paul was fighting the accusation that he had told Jews to refrain from keeping the Mosaic Law. Then he continues to explain by citing the words of the letter in Acts 15. He goes on to explain that while he did not teach Jews to refrain from the Law, we may infer that he did not teach Gentiles to keep it either.
The real issue, IMHO, is the contrasting obligations of Jews and Gentiles.
But Gentiles should refrain from those things specifically. Obviously, such commandments were not exhaustive. It does not give permission to lie, cheat or steal just because those things are omitted. It is likely that those things are mentioned because Gentiles were known to do them.
Are we to continue to obey them? I don't know. No one I know practices eating blood saturated meat. It is not a difficulty with which I or anyone I know struggles with. Avoiding fornication should go without saying.
< Message edited by GrahamCracker -- 10/1/2008 9:22:07 PM >
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 10/2/2008 8:27:08 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3143
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Obviously, such commandments were not exhaustive. Actually, the English translation of Acts 15:28 makes the four requirements "exhaustive", IMO. Perhaps there are nuances of the original Greek text that are beyond my understanding, but the whole Jerusalem Council letter remains a great enigma to me. Thanks for your input, Larry.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 10/2/2008 11:39:32 AM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
Obviously, such commandments were not exhaustive. Actually, the English translation of Acts 15:28 makes the four requirements "exhaustive", IMO. Perhaps there are nuances of the original Greek text that are beyond my understanding, but the whole Jerusalem Council letter remains a great enigma to me. Thanks for your input, Larry.
drmark,
When I say "not exhaustive," I mean that our obligations are not confined only to those mentioned. For example, just because it does not mention stealing, it does not mean that stealing is permitted. That would make no sense. I would expect that it is referring to things that Gentiles were particularly susceptible to do by either the custom of the day or temptation. If Gentiles of that time typically ate foods not drained of blood, then the Apostles would specifically mention those things so that Gentile believers would cease doing those things. Sexual sins would probably be another thing that Gentiles customarily did.
That makes sense because in 1 Cor. 5-6, Paul refers to things so abhorrent that "not even the Gentiles do those things."
Because Paul elsewhere says that "all things are clean" (Romans 14), I don't think that the apostles are saying that means containing blood is unclean. The context of Acts 15 tends to make me think that the apostles want the Gentile believers to avoid things that Jews would find particularly offensive.
< Message edited by GrahamCracker -- 10/3/2008 7:17:03 AM >
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 10/2/2008 1:58:09 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1424
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
Obviously, such commandments were not exhaustive. Actually, the English translation of Acts 15:28 makes the four requirements "exhaustive", IMO. Perhaps there are nuances of the original Greek text that are beyond my understanding, but the whole Jerusalem Council letter remains a great enigma to me. Thanks for your input, Larry.
drmark,
When I say "not exhaustive," I mean that our obligations are not confined only to those mentioned. For example, just because it does not mention stealing, it does not mean that stealing is permitted. That would make no sense. I would expect that it is referring to things that Gentiles were particularly susceptible to do by either the custom of the day or temptation. If Gentiles of that time typically ate foods not drained of blood, then the Apostles would specifically mention those things so that Gentile believers would cease doing those things. Sexual sins would probably be another thing that Gentiles customarily did.
That makes sense because in 1 Cor. 5-6, Paul refers to things so abhorrent that "not even the Gentiles do those things."
Because Paul elsewhere says that "all things are clean" (Romans 14), I don't think that the apostles are saying that mean containing blood is unclean. The context of Acts 15 tends to make me think that the apostles want the Gentile believers to avoid things that Jews would find particularly offensive.
Emphasis Mine
To return to the point of the thread. The Apistolic writings say nothing regarding, "'Do not mate different kinds of animals.", "'Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed." and the implication of hybridization, nor do they refer to "'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material." Therefore, according to the principle of interpretation used above, one can not say these things are not "directly" applicable today.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 10/2/2008 3:04:10 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
To return to the point of the thread. The Apistolic writings say nothing regarding, "'Do not mate different kinds of animals.", "'Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed." and the implication of hybridization, nor do they refer to "'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material." Therefore, according to the principle of interpretation used above, one can not say these things are not "directly" applicable today.
They aren't.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 10/2/2008 4:42:01 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1424
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
To return to the point of the thread. The Apistolic writings say nothing regarding, "'Do not mate different kinds of animals.", "'Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed." and the implication of hybridization, nor do they refer to "'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material." Therefore, according to the principle of interpretation used above, one can not say these things are not "directly" applicable today.
They aren't.
How is this consistent with your principle above? "I mean that our obligations are not confined only to those mentioned. For example, just because it does not mention stealing, it does not mean that stealing is permitted. That would make no sense."
On what basis do these not apply? They are not even mentioned in the Apistolic Writings.
My mistake, we are told not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers. This seems to build on the theme.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 10/3/2008 7:15:46 AM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
Things not mentioned in the Apostolic writings don't apply, IMHO. The issue of hybridization and mixing of differing threads are contained in the Law. Since the Law is now obsolete (Heb. 8:13), they aren't incumbent on Christian believers today.
My obligations stem from those mentioned in the New Covenant--that is what we are under--that is what Paul preached---2 Cor 3:6.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leviticus 19 : foods made from interbreeding - 10/3/2008 10:10:12 AM
|
|
|
ta_mosquito
Posts: 11460
Joined: 3/31/2005
From: from MN, now in Ontario :D
Status: offline
|
Since this is turning into a discussion on what laws Gentile Christians should follow, I'm closing it. Please continue in the Keeping the Law one-stop, located HERE.
Thanks!
Tricia
Forums Moderator
Please do not reply to this message within the forums or chat.
Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns.
Please do not send me PMs regarding this message.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
