All Foods Clean?

[JoeMo]

I was casually enjoying my perusal through the book of Mark; and I cam upon a verse in the NIV that I had never noticed before:

"For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)" (Mark 7:19)

I was SHOCKED by the parenthetical statement!! So I looked it up in the KJV and the NKVG:

"Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?"

I was comforted.

Just for kicks, I went to Bible Gateway to look at this verse in all English translations. My shock returned when I saw that out of 54 English translations listed, 41 of them contained the parenthetical statement.

So I looked through some commentaries.  Some said that the parenthetical statement was likely inserted as the author's opinion rather than the words or opinion of Christ.  Others lean on this statement to show that those who abstain from pork, shellfish, and the like are legalists.

What thinkest thou?

 

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I thinkest I still could never eat shrimp.  They look like big worms.

[Samie]

22 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

(In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)" (Mark 7:19)

For me, it would depend on who or what defines "FOOD".

If the Bible is to be relied upon, then "FOOD" are those which God allowed in the Bible for consumption. And for one, pork is not allowed, hence, NOT food, biblically.

Quote

Leviticus 11:7-8   7 And the pig, because it parts the hoof and is cloven-footed but does not chew the cud, is unclean to you.  8 You shall not eat any of their flesh . . .

Did Jesus declare all foods clean? Yes, the Bible says so.

So, is pork among those declared clean? No. Why? Because, biblically, it is not food.

[JoeMo]

If things like pork and shellfish are not "food", what food was Jesus declaring clean?  It is of no consequence to declare something clean that had previously been declared clean.

[Gerr]

Been having a hankering for pork chops extra rare!

Seriously, look at the context.  It has nothing to do with the Levitical clean and unclean foods.  It was about ceremonial clean and uncleanness of food according to human tradition.

[Gail]

Interesting! The first 2 versions I picked up did not have the parenthetical note. They were both Eastern translations, Lamsa's and the Orthodox bible. I thank you for this because I am interested in the differences between the Western and Byzantyne branches of Scripture and this is a help to me.

The notes in the NET bible say that that part was a note added by the author.

The note in the ESV study Bible says basically that with the cleansing that Jesus gives there is no more need for the ceremonial law.

It does not appear in the Interlinear at all.

 

[Gail]

But in the context, what is this section saying to you? To me it looks again like Jesus is talking about the spirit of the law vs the letter.

[8thdaypriest]

19 hours ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

I thinkest I still could never eat shrimp.  They look like big worms.

Shrimp are the cockroaches of the ocean.  God made them to CLEAN dirty water.  Would you eat something from a sewage treatment plant?

[8thdaypriest]

9 hours ago, JoeMo said:

If things like pork and shellfish are not "food", what food was Jesus declaring clean?  It is of no consequence to declare something clean that had previously been declared clean.

The Pharisees would ceremonially "wash" their hands and their food before eating.  Any meats were "clean" meats - according to Leviticus, but they subscribed to EXTRA ceremonial cleansing.  This was part of the "heavy burdens" of the "Oral Torah" - Pharisaic code.  They also strained liquids - just to make sure there were no unclean bugs in it. 

Remember the Pharisees complaining that the disciples did not "wash their hands" before eating.  Pharisaic Law commanded it - NOT the Torah. 

Matthew 15:2 "Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread." (NKJ)

Mark 7:3 "For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands in a special way, holding the tradition of the elders." (NKJ)

This is NOT about doing away with the Torah.   This is about the extra, added, commands of the Pharisees - the "tradition of the elders". 

[Robert]

21 hours ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

I thinkest I still could never eat shrimp.  They look like big worms.

Sea cockroaches 

[Aliensanctuary]

I think that the ceremonial law, in general, especially in regards to food, points us to what will be allowed in the Kingdom. Since the Laws of the Kingdom will be programmed into our minds, it would be impossible to see ourselves as legalists and impossible to for us to violate our mental programming and transgress those laws.

Maybe there is a race of intelligent beings who look like pigs, so pork chops or ham would not be permissible to eat. Maybe vegetarian Hamlets and PorkChoplets will be available for some to enjoy the good taste of pork without sinning.

[Ron Amnsn]

In the Greek text, there isn't a word that means "declared".  The translators have taken liberties to insert their own beliefs into the text.

[JoeMo]

14 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

The translators have taken liberties to insert their own beliefs into the text.

The translators or the original authors?  More translations of the Bible have the parenthetical statement than don't.

[Ron Amnsn]

I think it's the translators.  The original Greek is literally translated like the KJV.

After Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for setting aside the commands of God in verses 8-13, do you think Jesus would have set aside a command of God in verse 18.  I don't think so.

[Ron Amnsn]

Presumably Peter and the other disciples would have been present while Jesus was doing this teaching, yet we know from Peter's reaction in Acts 10:14 that Peter had not learned from what Jesus said in Mark 7:19 that unclean animals had somehow become clean food.

[Ron Amnsn]

If Jesus had actually declared that pork, lobster, etc. were clean foods, contrary to what is written in God's Law of Moses, his enemies would have easily convinced the public that Jesus was a false teacher.

[JoeMo]

18 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

If Jesus had actually declared that pork, lobster, etc. were clean foods, contrary to what is written in God's Law of Moses, his enemies would have easily convinced the public that Jesus was a false teacher.

Paul declared that circumcision was no longer required (contrary to God's OT Law); indeed - that if Gentile Christians submitted to circumcision for religious reasons, they were cutting themselves off from grace (Gal. 3:1 and 5:2).  Does this mean that Paul was a false teacher?

[Ron Amnsn]

2 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Paul declared that circumcision was no longer required (contrary to God's OT Law); indeed - that if Gentile Christians submitted to circumcision for religious reasons, they were cutting themselves off from grace (Gal. 3:1 and 5:2).  Does this mean that Paul was a false teacher?

If Paul had actually taught as you say he taught, then yes, he would have been a false teacher.  The Bereans would never have been able to confirm such teachings by searching the Old Testament Scriptures to see whether Paul's teachings were true.
 

[LifeHiscost]

7 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

If Paul had actually taught as you say he taught, then yes, he would have been a false teacher.  The Bereans would never have been able to confirm such teachings by searching the Old Testament Scriptures to see whether Paul's teachings were true.
 

2 hours ago, JoeMo said:

LHC quoting:

 

Paul declared that circumcision was no longer required (contrary to God's OT Law); indeed - that if Gentile Christians submitted to circumcision for religious reasons, they were cutting themselves off from grace (Gal. 3:1 and 5:2).  Does this mean that Paul was a false teacher?

There is a law known as the Law of Moses, given by God. This is the law (OT) that was done away with at the time of Jesus sacrifice. The Law of God is from eternity through eternity.

17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. ...Rev 17

19Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God’s commandments is what matters. 20Each one should remain in the situation he was in when he was called.…1 Cor 7

12Here is a call for the endurance of the saints who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. 13And I heard a voice from heaven telling me to write, “Blessed are the dead—those who die in the Lord from this moment on.” “Yes,” says the Spirit, “they will rest from their labors, for their deeds will follow them.”…Revelation 14

21Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel. 22Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers;) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man. 23If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day? 24Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.....John 7

God is Love!~Jesus saves! 

[Ron Amnsn]

2 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Paul declared that circumcision was no longer required (contrary to God's OT Law); indeed - that if Gentile Christians submitted to circumcision for religious reasons, they were cutting themselves off from grace (Gal. 3:1 and 5:2).  Does this mean that Paul was a false teacher?

Deuteronomy 13:4-5
You shall walk after the LORD your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him. But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of slavery, to make you leave the way in which the LORD your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.

[Ron Amnsn]

5 minutes ago, LifeHiscost said:

There is a law known as the Law of Moses, given by God. This is the law (OT) that was done away with at the time of Jesus sacrifice. The Law of God is from eternity through eternity.

Where do we find this Law of God of which you speak that was not part of God's Law of Moses?

[LifeHiscost]

3 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Where do we find this Law of God of which you speak that was not part of God's Law of Moses?

…14For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has torn down the dividing wall of hostility 15by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace 16and reconciling both of them to God in one body through the cross, by which He extinguished their hostility.… Ephesians 2

Further study may be needed.

God is Love!~Jesus saves!  

[Ron Amnsn]

38 minutes ago, LifeHiscost said:

Ephesians 2

That doesn't tell us where to find the Law of God of which you speak that was not part of God's Law of Moses.

The passage you quoted from Ephesians 2:14-16 is telling us that Jesus broke down the man-made "fence laws" (the wall of hostility) that created enmity between Jews and Gentiles.  God's Law of Moses didn't create enmity between Gentiles and Israelites -- the mixed multitude of Gentiles that left Egypt with Moses took part in the covenant at Sinai and were welcomed into Israel, just as God-fearing Gentiles have always been grafted into Israel.  It was the traditional man-made rules of Jewish oral law that caused enmity between Jews and Gentiles.

In the Greek of verse 15 Paul specifically states that it  was "the law of commands in dogmasin" that was abolished.  The Greek word dogmasin is one form of the Greek word dogma.  The Greek word dogma was never used in any form to refer to any of God's instructions, laws, or commands anywhere in the Greek Old Testament that was commonly used by Greek-speaking people in Paul's day (the Septuagint).  The Greek word dogma in all it's forms always refers to man-made rules, laws, and decrees in every place that it appears in the Old Testament (and in all the places it appears in the New Testament as well).

If Paul was intending to speak of God's Law of Moses in this passage, he could have used one of the several Greek words that the Greek Old Testament used to refer to God's laws, instructions, statutes and commands -- the same words Paul used in other passages.

[LifeHiscost]

1 hour ago, Ron Amnsn said:

That doesn't tell us where to find the Law of God of which you speak that was not part of God's Law of Moses.

The passage you quoted from Ephesians 2:14-16 is telling us that Jesus broke down the man-made "fence laws" (the wall of hostility) that created enmity between Jews and Gentiles.  God's Law of Moses didn't create enmity between Gentiles and Israelites -- the mixed multitude of Gentiles that left Egypt with Moses took part in the covenant at Sinai and were welcomed into Israel, just as God-fearing Gentiles have always been grafted into Israel.  It was the traditional man-made rules of Jewish oral law that caused enmity between Jews and Gentiles.

In the Greek of verse 15 Paul specifically states that it  was "the law of commands in dogmasin" that was abolished.  The Greek word dogmasin is one form of the Greek word dogma.  The Greek word dogma was never used in any form to refer to any of God's instructions, laws, or commands anywhere in the Greek Old Testament that was commonly used by Greek-speaking people in Paul's day (the Septuagint).  The Greek word dogma in all it's forms always refers to man-made rules, laws, and decrees in every place that it appears in the Old Testament (and in all the places it appears in the New Testament as well).

If Paul was intending to speak of God's Law of Moses in this passage, he could have used one of the several Greek words that the Greek Old Testament used to refer to God's laws, instructions, statutes and commands -- the same words Paul used in other passages.

Considering your thoroughness in explanation, I would never try to dissuade you from following the dictates of your convictions. After all, for the person who asks for the Holy Spirit to "guide into all Truth" it would be presumptuous of me to tell them anything they aren't already satisfied with. I'm fully satisfied to believe in the distinction between what Christians today are asked to follow from the ten commandments and His making a difference in that given to Moses for the benefit of those who were just delivered from 430 years of Egyptian slavery.

     Even Christians today find difficulty from one generation (40 years) determining what God permits or requires of them. I don't find it difficult to follow Jesus' requirements when He's made it plain in His last day commandments for His people.

 1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John, 2who testified to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. 3Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it; for the time is near....Revelation 1

…51Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52in an instant, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53For the perishable must be clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.… 1Corinthians 15

1And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. 2And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: 3And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 4These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. 5And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God....Revelation 14

Keep looking up!

God is Love!~Jesus saves!  

 

.

 

[Ron Amnsn]

Those are all good Bible texts that proclaim great truths.  But LHC, so often the texts you share seem so disconnected from what you've been saying, I can't tell how the texts might support your viewpoint.

It sounds like you think God gave just ten commandments.  God gave "Ten Words" or "Ten Utterances" (That's what the Hebrew and Greek call them).  Along with those God gave a multitude of commandments throughout the Law of Moses.  All those commandments support the "Ten Words".  Jesus picked two of those commandments from the Law of Moses as the "greatest" and "second greatest" commandments (Deut. 6:4-5 and Lev 19:18) and told us, "All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matt 22:40)  In those days, the Law and the Prophets were on scrolls and each scroll was wrapped around two rods from which the scrolls hung while being read and handled.  Jesus was using that imagery to tell us that those two rods that carried the scrolls represented the two greatest commandments.  Some people like to think that the rods replaced the scrolls, but that isn't what Jesus actually said.  The Law and the Prophets hang on those two commandments. Wherever you take the rods, the scrolls go too.

Some people have devised other schemes and theories to try set aside God's Law.  The "moral law" vs "ceremonial law" is one of those man-made theories that sounds convincing but is never taught in Scripture.