Is there lard in the beans?

[GayatfootofCross]

26 minutes ago, Gail said:

When the Bible says:

Romans 14:17

For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. 

 

Why do we go on so about meat and drink? Especially when it is contrasted with righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. Which are you most desiring? 

Amen!

 

 

Amen.

THIS is where our Sanctification is.

There is peace in this.

[Gail]

I ask this because so many times the subject is not about giving glory to God, but about focusing on something that the kingdom of God isn't. It becomes a matter for the food police and I suppose that it does because rules are something that humans can grasp easily. Telling people what to do is more natural than I'd like to admit myself.

[Gail]

16 minutes ago, bonnie said:

If that text can stand alone as the answer it probably would be best and more accurate to dispense any prohibition on any unclean food,alcohol,tobacco,etc. Most I think would say that they desire to be in the kingdom . Some would be greatly relieved it says biblically  that we can continue to eat,drink,smoke what we wish and indulge in whatever relational lifestyle we choose. and still be part of God's kingdom

Yes, it's like when Jesus told the Pharisees who tithed their mint and cumin. It's not that either is bad. It's just that they missed focusing on the weightier matters.

[GayatfootofCross]

2 hours ago, Gail said:

I ask this because so many times the subject is not about giving glory to God, but about focusing on something that the kingdom of God isn't. It becomes a matter for the food police and I suppose that it does because rules are something that humans can grasp easily. Telling people what to do is more natural than I'd like to admit myself.

My non Christian family moved next door to a SDA Lay Minister and his family when I was 12.

I wanted to know God and these wonderful people took me to church for the first time in my life.

I went every Sabbath after and absorbed to my very thirsty core what it is to be a Christian.

Food seemed to be the number one topic esp. surrounded by self supporting and independent health ministries.

And of course Sabbath keeping. And what to wear and not what to wear!

What to eat and what not to eat

When to eat.

and

How much to eat.

I thought this was Christianity.

This is how one gets to heaven.

This is how you and me become HOLY.

These kind of threads interest me cause since then .. I have learned better.and it's taken decades to unravel all these things and put back together.

The Weightier Matters.

My parents can tell you the cray cray I was serving them every time I came home from church on what sinners they were.

I also thought that was Christianity as well.

 

Every worldly thing that SDAs were against my parents were into and celebrated .

Unclean meats, sex and violence in television and movies. Gambling and alcohol and smoking and a monthly subscription to Playboy and other more offensive material and objects.

We had the satanic bible and ESP magazines and Magic Books and games. My mother read new murder mysteries from the library every week and the latest Celebrity tabloids from the grocery stores as often.

 

They were so patient with me.

 

 

[bonnie]

3 hours ago, Gail said:

Yes, it's like when Jesus told the Pharisees who tithed their mint and cumin. It's not that either is bad. It's just that they missed focusing on the weightier matters.

 A few years ago we had a new church start up. One was really needed in that area and everyone was really excited. Especially with the rapid growth. Actually explosive growth is more accurate. Before the "SDA Church has attempted to be a "large tent" in which the denominational boundaries were quite broad, in contract to those who attempt today to draw them in a very narrow manner".     

this was the manner in which this church began it's outreach to be attractive to those that found church as practised stifling and cold.   They focused on the weightier matters. Potluck was interesting in what was brought in. Not by unbelievers but those that were or had been SDA. There were several meat casseroles, a large roast and a crab salad. To put all at ease there were a few plaques quoting scripture as Romans 14:17 and a couple of others. After all nothing on the table was important in the scheme of things. Your salvation does not come thru what is on your table. Sabbath School class was quite an eye opener. Many statements were concluded by expressing how great it was to be SDA and not bound by a bunch of meaningless rules. The church service was a great place for children as it did not require them to sit quietly. Let children be children. If a child wanted to visit with a friend on the other side of the aisle just get up and walk over,even as one did during prayer. 

There was a get acquainted party in the yard for the area following church service the day we attended. It was decided to hold it on Sabbath so as not to give the idea that SDA's consider sabbath observance a means to salvation. You could purchase tickets to take part in some of the games. The money raised was to be used for various things still needed by the church

Beautiful new church that started with a bang trying to be all things to all people under a big tent is slowly dying with a whimper. I wonder why. It isn't that dissatisfied members of traditional SDA suffer at the hands of those other people. There aren't any of "those people"

Another long established church here decided to go down the same path. Granted it was more slowly but when some expressed concern at the direction the church was taking in the ever expanding boundaries they were met with the same responses often given here. This once thriving church has lost over half it's membership,many of those that were solidly behind this exciting new approach have left. Those leaving have extended the capabilities of the church most transferred to and now that church is needing to build a new facility to handle the numbers. The similar comments from those that have transferred is interesting. "It is such a blessing to hear a sermon of substance,it has been so long"

 

 

 

 

 

 

Further, for many years the SDA Church has attempted to be a "large tent" in which the denominational boundaries were quite broad, in contract to those who attempt today to draw them in a very narrow manner.

[pierrepaul]

I like the "big tent" approach. This means that the tent ought to be large enough also to include those who would like a narrower tent. It's a bit of a paradox, but it should be done (IMO). Jesus also showed unconditional Christian love to the Pharisees of his day, and after His death and resurrection, selected one of them to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles.

[GayatfootofCross]

22 minutes ago, pierrepaul said:

I like the "big tent" approach. This means that the tent ought to be large enough also to include those who would like a narrower tent. It's a bit of a paradox, but it should be done (IMO). Jesus also showed unconditional Christian love to the Pharisees of his day, and after His death and resurrection, selected one of them to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles.

YES!

Conservatives and Liberals and Black n White Thinkers and the Every Shade of Gray People and all the Colours of the Rainbows all sitting side by side affirming Gods love for each other.

They will know We are Christians by our Love not anything else.

# A huge Tent! .. After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.
 

[bonnie]

46 minutes ago, pierrepaul said:

I like the "big tent" approach. This means that the tent ought to be large enough also to include those who would like a narrower tent. It's a bit of a paradox, but it should be done (IMO). Jesus also showed unconditional Christian love to the Pharisees of his day, and after His death and resurrection, selected one of them to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles.

Just a question about unconditional love. What does that mean. I would love my four sons no matter what they might do or what lifestyle they chose. Does that mean I accept any choice or behavior of theirs as just another choice among many that are right? 

A big tent approach is what we should have as far as all being welcome regardless of the choices they make.No one should be denied or ostrazied because their decisions are not ours. The big tent approach becomes a problem when the expectation by some is that beliefs need to change to make themselves feel more comfortable in their choices. "I want to join but you will have to change ABC for me to feel like I am accepted".

Often times when some complain of being judged it is as simple as someone telling me they eat pork and don't see it as an issue,while knowing I believe it to be wrong.  I don't feel the need to shun them as this has happened,or to condemn them. It has happened. While they do not want to be judged they in turn have judged me for what I believe. Telling me that I think I am better than they. Really what they want is for me to say I agree with them. For me, I simply believe it is wrong to eat pork. I certainly have eaten food that probably isn't any better for me. Because I have does that invalidate my belief that pork is wrong to eat? 

 

We have  had many members over the years that at best have a very relaxed attitude towards Sabbath observance. To make them feel better about their choice should the boundaries be expanded to accommodate them and make it a biblical choice? Or should we welcome them,treat them with consideration and respect? Letting them know we value them as much as the most respected member while still maintaining what we believe the bible says? Or as often is done here, condemning any that disagrees with how we choose to live as hypocritical and self righteous?

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Bonnie asked in the quote below:

Sabbath observance, dress, and many other standards differ, sometimes considerably among SDAs from differing countries.  while we may be shocked at some of what we witness as we travel on other countries, they are often just as shocked at us as we are at them.

Like it or not, many of our standards are based upon cultural norms and not explicit Biblical standards.  That may not be bad in itself as religion must exist in society.

It should be noted that when people migrate to the U.S. they will likely bring with them the standards that they experienced in the SDA congregations that they attended in their home country.  Should we expect them to change their lives and conform to our standards. 

I have  experienced this both as a student at the Seminary in the lives of the students from other countries and in the congregations in which I worshiped when I was living on other countries.

I can't help but think of an elected General Conference who traveled a lot.  In talking with us Seminary students he told us how when he visited certain countries he would be asked not to bring a specific musical instrument with him as in that country  that instrument was not allowed to be played in a SDA church.

Folks, whether we know it or not, some of what we consider to be foundational to Adventism, may not be so considered in other parts of the world.  And in turn in those parts they may consider some thing to be foundational to Adventism that we do not so consider here.

Quote

We have  had many members over the years that at best have a very relaxed attitude towards Sabbath observance. To make them feel better about their choice should the boundaries be expanded to accommodate them and make it a biblical choice?

[Gregory Matthews]

I know that as to the musical instrument that was not played in SDA churches in certain countries, some will say that such was not a Biblical restriction.

Well, directly across the street from where I live a congregational pastor (not SDA) from a large church in the District of Columbia are, who is retireing this month, is gong to be living.  He would not allow the musical instrument that I reference above to be played in his congregation.  And, his belief, he claims, is based upon the Bible. 

Folks, there is a wide area of belief as to what the Bible says.  Much of what conservative Christians believe is alleged to be based upon the Bible, to include the musical instruments that should be played in a church service.

 

[pierrepaul]

Love all; respect all; hold true to your principles and beliefs. Far easier said than done.

 

1 hour ago, bonnie said:

We have  had many members over the years that at best have a very relaxed attitude towards Sabbath observance. To make them feel better about their choice should the boundaries be expanded to accommodate them and make it a biblical choice? Or should we welcome them,treat them with consideration and respect? Letting them know we value them as much as the most respected member while still maintaining what we believe the bible says? Or as often is done here, condemning any that disagrees with how we choose to live as hypocritical and self righteous?

The church has to be welcoming and accommodating also to those with more traditional beliefs/standards. Welcoming the nonconformists while showing no love or tolerance to the more traditional or conservative brethren is no solution (in my opinion)>

It's not easy, but we try. In many ways my congregation is rather "liberal", and I'm probably on the liberal end of the liberals. But we do have more "conservative" members, including very good friends of ours. Our fellowship lunches are strictly vegetarian, even though the majority of the members are not. We do not serve/consume caffeinated beverages at church functions even though a sizeable minority do in private. Even though the vast majority of our members (including our pastor) have no issues with church business meetings (including the discussion of church financial affairs) on sabbath, out of respect for a handful of members with different views, we hold our business meeting Saturday after sunset.

On the other hand, our music is decidedly contemporary; but we have one traditional hymn each sabbath. Dress is rather casual for men, but we ask those leading out to wear jackets and ties; the speaker will almost always wear a suit.

We have no women elders; but a few times per year women do preach. It is announced well in advance so that those who are uncomfortable with women preachers can attend another congregation that sabbath.

We try to make a place for everyone; we don't always succeed.

[Dr. Shane]

On 5/9/2017 at 9:32 AM, Aubrey said:

Is that really the question you wanted to ask in this thread? If so, why did you ask if you should ask if there was lard in the beans?

You also asked "Which is the greater sin?" My stance on "greater and lesser" sins is that there isn't much of a difference in the long run. A sin is a sin is a sin. Jesus died on the cross because of sin. A tiny sin, a big sin...whichever. He still died.

The 2005 book "Seventh-day Adventists Believe" states that eating unclean meat "is less than God's ideal." (page 319).  Avoiding unclean meats is part of the Baptismal vows.  The Church Manual also states that part of the Health Ministries department is "promoting optimum health, free of tobacco, alcohol, other drugs, and unclean foods.  Where possible, members shall be encouraged to follow a primarily vegetarian diet." (page 93).  Under Fundamental Belief #22 it also states, "we are to adopt the most healthful diet possible and abstain from unclean foods identified in the Scriptures." (page 170)

Clearly the church teaches not to eat unclean meats and that is part of being a member as we agree to it when we take the baptismal vows.  However the issue in this thread is the application of 1 Corinthians 10:27.  We know that in the worship of Apollos, swine were offered as sacrifices along with cattle, sheep and goats.  We also know that on some occasions, horses and dogs were sacrificed.  So while the context of the passage is addressing sacrificed meats, these did include unclean meats at times.  One way of reading Paul's comments is in the context of Matthew 23:24 when Christ reprimanded the Pharisees for straining gnats out of water while they swallow a camel.

While there are less and less restaurants and factories using lard today, it is still out there.  Unclean bone marrow may be in many packages of Jell-O and marshmallows.  Medically we know that small amounts of these items is not going to harm our overall health.  In fact, some products that use vegetable oil instead of lard have a higher fat content and pose a greater health hazard.

The Old Testament laws can be classified in one of four ways.  1. moral laws  2. civil laws  3. ceremonial laws  4. health laws.  The clean and unclean distinction falls into the health laws category.  I do not find anywhere that this is a moral issue but rather a health issue.  As Adventists, the health message is our right hand in carrying the gospel to the world.  We are to avoid smoking, drinking, eating unclean meats and promote vegetarianism.  That is part of being a member.  It is part of our high calling to warn the world that the end is near.  However I think we go overboard and cross a line when we start making the health laws into a moral issue.  I quit asking restaurants if the beans have lard in them.  If I can taste it (and sometimes I can) I will avoid going back there or not order beans the next time I do.

Whether or not all sin is equal is a topic for another thread.  I know that to look at a woman with lust is sinful.  To rape a woman is also sinful.  If asked, most women would rather have a man lust after them than to rape them.

[GayatfootofCross]

5 hours ago, Shane said:

The Old Testament laws can be classified in one of four ways.  1. moral laws  2. civil laws  3. ceremonial laws  4. health laws.  The clean and unclean distinction falls into the health laws category.  I do not find anywhere that this is a moral issue but rather a health issue.  As Adventists, the health message is our right hand in carrying the gospel to the world.  We are to avoid smoking, drinking, eating unclean meats and promote vegetarianism.  That is part of being a member.  It is part of our high calling to warn the world that the end is near.  However I think we go overboard and cross a line when we start making the health laws into a moral issue.

 

Thank you!

U said it better than i did.

it is treated as a HOLY LAW..bringing SANCTIFICATION!

I cant get people to understand this where I live.

It goes over peoples heads.

I cant bring it up any more in my circles. They think I'm being irreverent and a heretic.

It is the same look I get when I say God loves the Devil.

I'm so naughty!

 

 

 

 

[Outta Here]

On 5/8/2017 at 6:26 PM, Shane said:

Which is the greater sin?  Eating unclean meat and violating health rules?  Or, eating meat offered to idols and thus participating in idol worship?

Hopefully someone will start another thread with this off-topic question.

[Dr. Shane]

28 minutes ago, Aubrey said:

Hopefully someone will start another thread with this off-topic question.

Violating health laws is not a sin.  It is less than God's ideal.  God wants us to prosper and experience life abundantly.  Following the health laws are part of making that happen.  It is not part of the moral law like the Ten Commandments.  It is divine counsel given to us for our benefit in this life.  This is one of the things I love about Adventism.  It reflects the Bible unlike any other faith I know.  Many faiths draw hard lines of right and wrong.  Do this and don't do that.  Adventism tries to teach the love of God, His compassion and the sympathy He has for us.  Adventism frames the law of God as the law of love.

Jesus rebuked pointless rules and regulations set up by the religious leaders of His day.  The health laws are for our good and given to us out of love.  Although the issue at hand was ceremonial uncleanliness, the distinction Christ made in Mark 7:19 still holds true for diet in general.  What we eat does not contaminate our heart (mind) but passes right through us.  The exception to that is alcohol and drugs and drunkenness is forbidden in the Bible.  In the case of alcohol and drugs, it does go into the mind (heart) and change our behavior.  Prisons are filled with people that committed crimes while under the influence of drugs or alcohol that they would have never committed had they been sober.  However there are not any prisoners that committed crimes because they were under the influence of bacon.

Knowingly eating meat offered to idols is sinful because makes the person part of the religious practice of idol worship.  It is forbidden in Acts 15:29.  We might well note that gentile nations ate pork and the eating of unclean meat was not listed among the prohibitions in Acts 15:29.  Daniel and the Hebrew worthies refused to eat the king's meat because it had been offered to idols.  It most likely was also unclean, or some of it was.  However if it was just an issue of being unclean, Daniel and the Hebrew worthies could have asked to only eat the clean meats.  The major issue in the story of Daniel was participating in pagan worship by eating of the meat.  Knowingly eating meat offered to idols is a sin.  This is a violation of the Second Commandment to not worship idols.  It is a moral issue more than it is a health issue.

The subject for another thread is whether or not one sin is greater than another.  I would rather have a man hate me and be resentful than to murder me.  

[Outta Here]

23 hours ago, Shane said:

 What we eat does not contaminate our heart (mind) but passes right through us.  The exception to that is alcohol and drugs and drunkenness is forbidden in the Bible.  In the case of alcohol and drugs, it does go into the mind (heart) and change our behavior.  Prisons are filled with people that committed crimes while under the influence of drugs or alcohol that they would have never committed had they been sober.  However there are not any prisoners that committed crimes because they were under the influence of bacon.

Atherosclerosis contributes to Alzheimer's and other degeneration in general. Prisons are filled with people that eat bacon on a regular basis. Their degenerative state may have been caused by bacon. We have no proof that it wasn't. Bacon kills. Avoid bacon. Keep your mind bacon free.

[JoeMo]

48 minutes ago, Aubrey said:

Their degenerative state may have been caused by bacon. We have no proof that it wasn't.

There is no proof that it was, either.  In a practical sense, way may never prove that it wasn't.  It is much more difficult to prove a negative (that bacon didn't cause it) than a positive (that bacon did cause it).  I'll buy your bacon theory when they prove bacon DID indeed cause their degenerative state.

[Dr. Shane]

Of course the air we breath and the water we drink impacts our brains to some degree.  Getting more aerobic exercise allows the blood to carry more oxygen to the brain.  Our lifestyle choices impact our minds ability to function.  That is clear but it becomes a matter of degree.  When someone drinks alcohol and becomes intoxicated or snorts cocaine up their nose, there is a major change in the brain's functioning.  That change is so significant it cannot be compared to the change that occurs in the brain after doing an hour of aerobics or living in an air-polluted city for an extended period.  If we want to suggest someone is in prison because they ate bacon, then why not suggest they are there because they grew up in a polluted city or they lived next to rail road tracks and had disturbed sleep?  We really start to undermine our credibility with such suggestions.

The Ten Commandment moral law regulates behavior between the person and God and behavior between the person and other people.  The Ten Commandments tell us what we should and should not do in respect to interaction between us and God and other people.  Sin is a violation of God's moral law.

The health laws regulate behavior in how we treat ourselves.  When I violate the health laws, my poor choices are hurting me.  I am not hurting my neighbor and I am not hurting God - at least not in a direct sense as I am when I violate one of the the Ten Commandments.  God's plan for me is to have an abundant life.  So God gives me the health laws as a gift.  Those laws are for my benefit.  I do myself good when I eat the right foods, exercise, get enough sleep and breath clean air.  But that is not to say it is sinful for me to get by on six hours of sleep or to go a week without exercising.  It is less than God's ideal but that is not the same as sin.

[8thdaypriest]

1 hour ago, Shane said:

The health laws regulate behavior in how we treat ourselves.  When I violate the health laws, my poor choices are hurting me.  I am not hurting my neighbor and I am not hurting God - at least not in a direct sense as I am when I violate one of the the Ten Commandments.  God's plan for me is to have an abundant life.  So God gives me the health laws as a gift.  Those laws are for my benefit.  I do myself good when I eat the right foods, exercise, get enough sleep and breath clean air.  But that is not to say it is sinful for me to get by on six hours of sleep or to go a week without exercising.  It is less than God's ideal but that is not the same as sin.

IF God directly tells you to avoid some article of food, and you go out to eat it, is that NOT rebellion against God? 

Aren't you saying to God - "I don't CARE what you want" ??  You don't think God would be "hurt" by this attitude towards Him.  Wouldn't that hurt your relationship with God?

The ancient Israelites did not know those laws were about "health".  They thought they were about separation from the pagans around them.  We just came to understand the association with "health" recently - in the overall scheme of things. 

We can all point to incidents of "straining at gnats". 

I clearly remember, after 7 years of absence from ANY church, my first visit to the SDA church in Wichita Falls (back in 1981).  I had my ears pierced and had worn the same very small pair of pearl earings for years.  I no longer even thought about them.  Anyway - I ducked out early because I didn't want to visit with anyone.  On the steps, as I was leaving, I ran into the head elder (wearing a large honcho belt by the way).   He asked if I was Adventist.  I told him I was baptized Adventist.  He reached over and tweeked my earlobe.  "I guess you won't need those anymore."   Of all the things to bring up, and in such a disgusting way!!!  Satan PUT that man on the steps, hoping to turn me away forever, both from Adventistm and from Jesus.    It almost worked!

[Dr. Shane]

1 hour ago, 8thdaypriest said:

IF God directly tells you to avoid some article of food, and you go out to eat it, is that NOT rebellion against God? 

God explicitly told the ex-slaves being brought out of Egypt not to eat unclean meat.  Those health laws were for their own good.  If we do not follow them today, we suffer the consequences in this life.  This was a hot subject among the founders of Adventism.  If we are going to take the health laws as still binding, we also need to take all the laws of Moses as still binding - with the exception of the sacrificial system pointing to Christ's sacrifice.  Is it sinful for a man to trim the edges of his beard?  Can a woman dress like a man (better get rid of those jeans, ladies)?  There are all sorts of laws in the books of Moses that most all theologians agree no long apply to us today.  So why do we (Adventists) hang onto the clean and unclean meat distinction?  For health reasons.  We understand those laws were given for health reasons.  God desires for us to be healthy and prosper.  

Quote

The ancient Israelites did not know those laws were about "health".  They thought they were about separation from the pagans around them.  We just came to understand the association with "health" recently - in the overall scheme of things. 

I don't know what the ancient Israelites knew or didn't know.  They may have known those laws were for health reasons.  I know that Jesus taught what was put in the mouth would pass through the body and that sin came from the heart.  We do not become sinful by what we put into our bodies.  Sin is a heart problem.  Perhaps the Israelites did know that but it was lost so Jesus had to give them a refresher course.

Quote

I had my ears pierced and had worn the same very small pair of pearl earings for years.  I no longer even thought about them.  Anyway - I ducked out early because I didn't want to visit with anyone.  On the steps, as I was leaving, I ran into the head elder (wearing a large honcho belt by the way).   He asked if I was Adventist.  I told him I was baptized Adventist.  He reached over and tweeked my earlobe.  "I guess you won't need those anymore." 

We need to be careful not to get hung up on issues like diet in the same way this elder became hung up on the issue of jewelry.  He needed to go back to his church manual and read what the reasons for disciplining a member are.  Wearing jewelry is not an offense the merits church discipline.  Too many times were are more worried about our neighbor sweeping off their doorstep than by the piles of dust accumulating on our own.  If you bought those earings from Avon or Wal-Mart, he probably paid more for his belt buckle than you did for the ear rings.

The health message is a fantastic message when it is presented right.  When we tell people God says you can't eat this, this and that.  They recoil and feel that God is some sort of killjoy.  Last evening I met a guy I am working with to help break his drug addiction.   We met at Starbucks.  I ordered a tomato and cheese sandwich.  That led to a discussion about vegetarianism and healthful living.  When asked if I was a vegetarian, I responded that I try to be a pescatarian but  on occasion, if the menu doesn't have enough options, I will eat meat.  "Wow!" he responded.  "So you are not like all those judgmental vegetarians looking down on meat-eaters."  I explained the health benefits of eating vegetarian and also eating whole grain foods instead of processed ones.  He got the feeling that the God I worshiped wasn't one looking down from heaven and looking to strike me down if a bacon bit found its way onto my garden salad.  He got the feeling that my God cared not only for my soul and where I would spend eternity but about my present life and if I was healthy.  

[Gail]

I think there is something more than just the health aspect. We like to think that it's for health reasons in our human reasoning, but not everything of God makes complete sense to us.

[Outta Here]

4 hours ago, JoeMo said:

There is no proof that it was, either.  In a practical sense, way may never prove that it wasn't.  It is much more difficult to prove a negative (that bacon didn't cause it) than a positive (that bacon did cause it).  I'll buy your bacon theory when they prove bacon DID indeed cause their degenerative state.

Eh. I don't care enough for you to buy my theory for me to go about trying to prove it. Eat your bacon if you want. 

[JoeMo]

7 minutes ago, Aubrey said:

Eat your bacon if you want. 

I  will!  But it will be turkey bacon ... 

[Stan]

 I repeat...

 

◄ Isaiah 66:17 ►

Parallel Verses

King James Version
They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD.

[Dr. Shane]

1 hour ago, Gail said:

I think there is something more than just the health aspect. We like to think that it's for health reasons in our human reasoning, but not everything of God makes complete sense to us.

That may be so but... the other issues, beyond a health issue, would have been done away with at the cross.  There were reasons for all the different rules and regulations we find in the books of Moses.  But all we hang on to in the Christian era are the Ten Commandments and the dietary restrictions.  I first got interested in this topic when I was writing a book and doing research on the formation of the Adventist church.  This was a widely discussed topic among the Adventist founders.  Reading some of the different letters and articles written on the topic really gave me a different perspective. 

There is no doubt that eating unclean meat is less than God's ideal.  However it is easy to see how the Ten Commandment law is divided into offenses against God and offenses again our fellow man.  The health laws are offenses against ourselves.  They are like a bonus that God gives us.  It is like an inside tip on a stock to buy.  God is trying to help us out.  As believers, we want to take God's advice and live the healthiest and most prosperous life.  However if we do find some bacon bits on our salad or lard in our beans, we don't need to fear that the fires of hell are waiting for us.