| Author | Message | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
SDA Myth Exploded: OT FOOD LAWS BASED ON HOLINESS, NOT HEALTH Dear Adventist friend, Just when you thought it was healthier to start eating that Worthington phony-baloney again, along comes some spoilsport to ruin your whole meal! This time in the person of no-nonsense Jewish Rabbi Joseph Telushkin who says, ìDespite the common misconception that the Torah* laws governing kashrut [kosher] are largely determined by considerations of health and/or taboo, the Torah provides a rationale for its dietary laws, repeatedly associating them with holiness (see, for example, Leviticus 11:44-45, and Deuteronomy 14:21).î ^^^^^^^^^^^ *Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy ^^^^^^^^^^^ All right, letís look at the good rabbi's myth-spiking ìdata pointî texts: Leviticus 11:44-45 NIV: I am the Lord our God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy. Do not make yourselves unclean by any creature that moves about on the ground. I am the LORD [Yahweh] who brought you up out of Egypt to be your God; therefore be holy, because I am holy. Deuteronomy 14:21 NIV: Do not eat anything you find already dead. You may give it to an alien living in any of your towns, and he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner. But you are a people holy to the LORD your God. Any questions? Peace, Jude | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
JEWISH AUTHORITIES: ìUNCLEAN MEATî LAWS OF OLD TESTAMENT NOT BASED ON HEALTH Two of the highest Jewish organizations: 1. The Union of American Hebrew Congregations (UAHC): The Synagogue Arm of the Reform Movement, and 2. The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America (UOJCA) Have recently refuted the SDA claim that the ìuncleanî meats mentioned Leviticus 11 and elsewhere are less healthful than the ìcleanî! Says the UAHC: Some people believe that the laws of kashrut [kosher, meaning ìfitî or ìproperî] were originally created to protect people from illness. Since ways to preserve meat and refrigeration have existed for many years and since there are government regulations pertaining to the slaughter of animals, THESE LAWS WOULD NOT NEED TO BE FOLLOWED ANYMORE IF THEY WERE ONLY TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM BECOMING SICK. Yet many Jews continue to observe the laws of kashrut. Actually, KASHRUT IS NOT BASED ON SANITARY, MEDICAL OR SCIENTIFIC REASONS. THIS PRACTICE FALLS INTO THE CATEGORY OF CHUKIM, LAWS FOR WHICH THERE ARE NO APPARENT RATIONAL EXPLANATIONS. The laws of kashrut have a spiritual essence. They are given to us so that by observing them, we become holy before God.î Source: Gunther Plaut, editor, ìFamily Shabbat Table Talk,î UAHC, http://www.uahc.org/shabbat/shemini.html, accessed Thursday 1 June 2000. And the UOJCA agrees: ìThough an ancillary hygiene benefit has been attributed to the observance of kashruth, THEIR ULTIMATE PURPOSE AND RATIONALE IS SIMPLY TO CONFORM TO THE DIVINE WILL as expressed in the Torah.î Source: ìHow Do I Know itís Kosher? An OU Kosher Primer,î UOJCA, http://www.ou.org/primer.html, accessed Thursday 1 June 2000. A third source, Jewish researcher Tracey Rich adds this: ìMany of the laws of kashrut have NO KNOWN CONNECTION WITH HEALTH. To the best of our modern scientific knowledge, THERE IS NO KNOWN SCIENTIFIC REASON WHY CAMEL OR RABBIT MEAT (both ìtreyf,î meaning ìtornî) IS ANY LESS HEALTHY THAN COW OR GOAT MEAT.... "The short answer to why we observe these laws is: because THE TORAH [Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy] SAYS SO. THE TORAH DOES NOT SPECIFY ANY REASON FOR THESE LAWS, and for a Torah-observant, traditional Jew, there is no need for any other reason. Some have suggested that the laws of kashrut fall into the category of ìchukkim,î LAWS FOR WHICH THERE IS NO REASON. We show out obedience to G-d BY FOLLOWING THSE LAWS EVEN THOUGH WE DO NOT KNOW THE REASON .... ìIn his book 'To Be a Jew' (an excellent resource on traditional Judaism), Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin suggests that THE DIETARY LAWS ARE DESIGNED AS A CALL TO HOLINESS. The ABILITY TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG, GOOD AND EVIL, PURE AND DEFILED, THE SACRED AND THE PROFANE, IS VERY IMPORTANT in Judaism. Imposing rules on what you can and cannot eat ingrains that kind of self control. In addition, it elevates the simple act of eating into a religious ritual. The Jewish dinner table is often compared to the Temple altar in rabbinic literature.î Source: Tracey Rich, ìKashrut: Jewish Dietary Laws,î JUDAISM 101, http://www.jewfaq.org/kashrut.htm#Animals, accessed Thursday 1 June 2000. Well, there you have the facts, friends. Iíll pull one example from Leviticus 11, the primary scriptural source for clean and unclean meats: the pig: ìThe pig, though it has a split hoof completely divided, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You must no eat [its] meat or touch [its carcass; it is] unclean for you.î Leviticus 11:7-8 NIV. This was what Jesus was talking about when he ìdeclared all foods ëclean.íî Mark 7:19 NIV. This is what Luke was talking about when in Acts 10 he reports Peterís vision: In a dream the hungry apostle ìsaw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. Then a voice told him, ëGet up, Peter. Kill and eat.í ìëSurely not, Lord! Peter replied. ëI have never eaten anything impure or unclean.í ìThe voice spoke to him a second time, ëDo not call anything impure that God has made clean.íî Acts 1012-15 NIV. Later, ìThe apostles and the brothers throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. So when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcised believers* criticized him and said, ëYou went into the house of uncircumcised men** and ate with them.íî Acts 11:1-3 NIV. *Jewish Christians ** ìGentiles who would not observe the laws of clean and unclean food and would violate Jewish regulations concerning food preparation.î NIV text note for Acts 11:3. Peter explained his vision and the situation to them. ìWhen they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, ëSo then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life.î Acts 11:18 NIV. Adventist have long held that Peterís vision and its acceptance by the Jewish Christians referred ONLY TO ACCEPTING Gentiles into ìthe foldî where they would have to give up the ìuncleanî meats Jesus Christ had declared clean. But this explanation cannot be true for the following reasons: Reason #1. When Paul, Barnabas and Peter went to church council at Jerusalem (Acts 15) and asked that the Gentiles entering the church not have to give up ìuncleanî meats, the leaders there, even though they were ìobservant Jewsî (Jews who still kept the Old Testament dietary laws), they nevertheless ruled that GENTILES DID NOT HAVE TO KEEP THE DIETARY RESTRICTIONS. Hereís the relevant ruling: James, the leader, ruled: ìIt is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.î Since one of the most important issues was eating ìuncleanî meat, this ruling obviously allowed Gentile Christians to eat pork, ham, lobster, clam chowder, scallops, oysters, or any other "unclean" meat, as long as the animal was not strangled and the blood was drained after slaughter. Acts 15:1-21 NIV. Reason #2. Another part of Jamesí ruling said that Gentile Christians still had ìto abstain from food polluted by idols.î However, in practice, Paul found that that restriction didnít work. For he says (Romans 14:2 NIV) that the ìman, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables.î Since vegetables were ñ contrary to SDA teaching ñ not being offered to idols, the man of ìweak faithî could think to ìprotectî himself from eating pork or clams, for example, offered to an idol, by the strategy of eating only vegetables, which werenít offered to idols. Paul comes down very strongly on the Gentile Christians of ìstrong faithî who were ìpassing judgmentî on such a fellow Christian of such ìweak faith.î Hear him (Romans 14:14-23 NIV: ìAs one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. If your brother is distressed because of what you eat [eating ham or lobster, for example, in front of a man who, for religious reasons, eats only vegetables], you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. [Donít let the man of ìweak faith,î for instance, who eats only vegetables speak of pork as evil!] For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men. ìLet us therefore make every effort to do what leads top peace and to mutual edification. Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. ALL FOOD IS CLEAN, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat MEAT or drink WINE [sorry, but this ISNíT unfermented grape juice, friends] or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall. ìSo whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. BLESSED IS THE MAN WHO DOES NOT CONDEMN HIMSELF BY WHAT [for instance, pork] HE APROVES. But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats [pork, e.g.], because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.î Further instruction from Paul: 1 Corinthians 10:2323-27 NIV: ìíEVERYTHING IS PERMISSIBLEí ñ but not everything is constructive [i.e. for the good of others]. ìEAT ANYTHING SOLD IN THE MEAT MARKET WITHOUT RAISING QUESTIONS OF CONSCIENCE, for, ëThe earth is the Lordís, and everything in it.í ìIf some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, EAT WHATEVER [pork chops, honey-baked ham, clam chowder, oysters, scallops, lobster, etc.] IS PUT BEFORE YOU WITHOUT RAISING QUESTIONS OF CONSCIENCE.î Paul gives further reasons for this release from the dietary restrictions in: Ephesians 2:14-15 NIV: ìFor he [Christ] himself is our peace, who has made the two [Jew and Gentile] one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by ABOLISHING IN HIS FLESH THE LAW WITH ITS COMMANDMENTS AND REGULATIONS.î Colossians 2:13-14 NIV: ìWhen you [the Colossians, Gentile Christians] were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, HAVING CANCELED THE WRITTEN CODE, WITH ITS REGULATIONS, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; HE TOOK IT AWAY, NAILING IT TO THE CROSS.î Paul also instructed the young Timothy (half Jew, half Gentile) in 1 Timothy 4:1-5 NIV: ìThe Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and ORDER THEM TO ABSTAIN FROM CERTAIN FOODS, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. FOR EVERYTHING GOD CREATED IS GOOD, AND NOTHING IS TO BE REJECTED if it is received with thanksgiving.î Summary: 1. The Jewish dietary restrictions regarding ìclean and uncleanî meats had nothing to do with health, but had everything to do with Jewish holiness in keeping the laws recorded in the Torah. 2. Jesus declared all foods clean, including all ìuncleanî meats forbidden in Leviticus 11 and elsewhere in the Old Testament. 3. Peter received instruction from God in a vision that all previously ìuncleanî meats were now ìcleanî as Jesus had declared them to be in Mark 7. 4. The council at Jerusalem endorsed the idea that Gentile Christians could eat any meat and that they only had to avoid ìthings strangledî and blood. 5. Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, eloquently defended the idea that Christians could eat anything. He only cautioned that you not do so if you would cause a weaker brother, -- one who, for example, would eat ìonly vegetablesî to protect himself ñ to stumble. 6. Paul, again under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, told Timothy, who was half Jewish, that ìeverything God has created is goodî and that the Judaizers who said he had to abstain from certain flesh foods were ìthrough hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.î Conclusion: Jesus declared all foods clean. In grace alone, faith alone, and Christ alone, Jude | ||
| Bill Twisse |
Great observations, Jude! You have really done your homework on this one. God commanded Peter to eat 'unclean' meat. Many do not see the connection between the command to 'arise, kill and eat' and the interpretation of Peter that 'God has shown me not to call any man common or unclean.' However, understanding the culture and critical issues of that time in history will clear up the mystery. Entering the house of a Gentile and proclaiming the gospel meant eating with the same household. In other words, no questions were to be asked about whether the bread contained lard or where the chunks of meat came from in the soup. One of the great 'walls of partition' between Jew and Gentile was food. In God's plan this wall was to be forever abolished. Why do people try and erect this wall anew today? Paul himself says, 'don't ask what it is, just eat it.' --Twisse | ||
| Ernie |
Jude: Thanks for such an excellent argument. I think you have done a wonderful job. I wish you would be my student to give you a solid A. May God continue blessing you as you keep our minds sharp. in Christ, Erni | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Jude, Yes, that was a very well thought out couple of post's. I have REALLY been having a "concentraton" problem! These drugs have given me Attention Deficit Disorder in my old age (hope it's temporary) and I just CAN'T read for more that a few minutes at a time. I'm EXTREMELY frustrated by this NEW thing as I'm one that can normally read all day long. I haven't even been able to listen to tapes!! :-(((( This too, will pass. Anyway, let me add an understanding I have that wasn't in your post or maybe I just missed it. You said: "5. Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, eloquently defended the idea that Christians could eat anything. He only cautioned that you not do so if you would cause a weaker brother, -- one who, for example, would eat ìonly vegetablesî to protect himself ñ to stumble." One thing that I learned some time ago that was interesting was that the same was true of the Gentile Christians. You said: "Reason #2. Another part of Jamesí ruling said that Gentile Christians still had ìto abstain from food polluted by idols.î However, in practice, Paul found that that restriction didnít work." Food "polluted by idols" had no meaning to the Christian Jews and they were free to go to the market and buy what ever meat was available with no guilt. Their "thing" for centuries was the OT "un-clean" meats. The "strong of faith" ate what ever they wanted and the "weak of faith" ate only veggies, as you pointed out so well. And the "strong were NOT to cause the "weak" to stumble by deliberately offending the "weak" by eating it in front of them. The Gentile Christians on the other hand came out of idiolatry. For centuries, the custom's were to sacrifice, lets say a bull, (OT clean animal). At times, the only part sacrificed might be the "eyelids", leaving a whole animal to either waste or more logically send to the market. The "weak of faith" Gentile Christians were as horrified to eat any part of that animal as the "weak of faith" Jewish Christians were of eating the OT un-clean animal. So the Jewish Christian's were ALSO admonished to NOT cause the Gentile Christian's to stumble by NOT eating that bull who's eyelids were sacrificed to the idols in front of them. I'm sorry, but my re-memory is not serving me real well, but I "think" that may have been the Corinthian Church. Please keep up your interesting post's :-) BTW, it took 2 hours to eek this post out, grrr:-( Maryann | ||
| Sherry |
Well this is true and good, but isn't it obvious from medical reports that being vegetarian has health advantages period? People see that today, and that's why so many people are becoming vegetarian? There isn't anything "legalistic" about wanting to eat in a healthier fashion is there? Yes, Adventists are wrong to use the levital laws to establish clean and unclean foods, and yes, there is an advantage to your whole body which belongs to Christ to eat in a fashion to honor Him because we love Him. Is this not true? | ||
| Plain Patti |
Hi, Sherry, You are right that there is nothing wrong with taking care of oneself. However, if you had ever been the only "carnivore" in the company of "vegans" and eat a hamburger in their presence, you just might find that vegetarians can be highly condescending and legalistic. Or being a fat person among health nuts. People who value their own bodies more than the people around them have their Christian priorities skewed. And I believe that this is exactly what Paul is addressing in Romans 14. | ||
| sherry |
well that may be, but I know as a sinner/saint, I've never met anyone who's 100% non-condescending about something. Arrogance and superiority is part of the human sinful nature. I just want more of Jesus. And if I chose vegetarianism, I don't want the condemnation of people who eat meat either. I guess my point is we all need to be more charitable to one another. | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Patti, good post. Sherry, I know of no medical reports or scientific studies that say that vegetarianism of any kind from veganism on is more healthful. In fact, having been a health-and-medical reporter for many years and having researched the scientific literature on this subject, I can tell you that the prevailing opinion of both medical-health research organizations say that some flesh food and other animal products in the diet is more healthful than none. There is, for one thing there is the problem of getting sufficient vitamin B-12, which is found in no plant or plant product at all and which is not synthesized by the human body. Vegetarianism is a religious-philosophical way of life popular right now with the New Age population. Adventists have taken advantage of this popularity to swing the age old "we told you so" double-edged sword. And yet less than one percent of the entire population of the United States is any kind of vegetarian at all. This statistic INCLUDES those who claim to be "vegetarian," but define the word to ALLOW for chicken, turkey, fish and other "white" meat, excluding only the red. These folk, for example, are perfectly happy to call themselves vegetarian while enjoying a $100 dinner of lobster tail with white wine in an expensive restaurant. After I finish posting this, I'm going to look for a medical source that convincingly refutes the "vegetarianism is healthier" myth that rages today. And if I find it, I'll post the source for you. Meanwhile, the kingdom of heaven is not meat or drink. In faith alone, grace alone, Scripture alone, Christ alone, Jude | ||
| Billtwisse |
I will second what Jude has said. The Loma Linda studies on the superiority of vegetarianism have always been grounded in a religious bias. Other major institutions of medicine (Johns Hopkins, Tufts, & Mayo for example) have continually emphasized that some animal food is beneficial. Plus we have the statistic that the average Mormon lives as long or longer than the average SDA, which upsets me only because Mormonism is a non-Christian cult. I guess this shows us how people can be happy and fulfilled in their deception. It is a medical fact that unhappy people do not live long lives. I personally do not think that Loma Linda, on its own, would ever have come up with the diet high in animal fat that puts to rest certain forms of grand-mal epilepsy. --Twisse | ||
| sherry |
My understanding from someone who lived in New Orleans is that there is toxicity in eating shellfish, and that there are signs posted to their harmfulness on the wall at the restaurant (and the person who said this had been a regular oyster eater)...is that untrue? Isn't there common sense we need to use in utilizing what is helpful to us? Yes, I agree, the kingdom isn't about food and drink, and yet, God gave me a brain, and for example, if eating an abundance of sugary stuff gets me sick all the time or affects my mood swings, should I just ignore those facts about how it affects my body, and just say well I can eat what I want because the kingdom isn't about food and drink? | ||
| George |
If we say that we can eat or drink anything we want, when, where, and how we want to, we are presuming that God will keep us safe. This, as far as I can see, is something that God will not overlook. Included in "anything" are things that we know to be harmfull under some conditions. Fat, salt, sugar, shell fish at certian times of the year etc. Also included in "anything" are things like tobaco and many of the herbs and other plants, as well as metal salts etc. that are poison, but at times and in amounts can save life. So, it would seem that common sense is indeed the order of the day. He gave it to us and I think that He EXPECTS us to use it. George | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Sherry, Great questions, as usual. Yes, I would agree that certain shellfish at certain times of the year in certain areas become toxic. One reason for this may be human-made toxic waste flushed into coastal areas by polluted rivers. All sealife would be expected to "take up" the toxins. Some, such as certain shellfish, may concentrate it in their flesh more than other sealife. About common sense, I think we need to make greater use of UNCOMMON sense. For example, we need to pay more attention to SCIENTIFIC studies and less attention to folklore in terms of our health. When Scripture says the kingdom of heaven isn't about food and drink, it is talking about spiritual reality. It is not giving us scientific health and medical direction. This is where UNCOMMON sense comes it and where your God-created brain can guide you in your personal health decisions in such matters as, for example, how much sugar one should ingest. Notice that COMMON sense would tell us to intake way way more sugar than we need. And my proof for making that statement is the American diet, which contains way too much sugar -- THAT is common sense. UNCOMMON sense says, go to the sources of good diet, such as the abundant information put out by the National Institutes of Health, the American Dietetic Association, the American Medical Association, the American College of Physicians, etc. almost without end. The correct information is certainly available and in abundance. COMMON sense just doesn't bother to look, and in most cases -- if our national health statistics are accurate -- COMMON sense just doesn't care. Until the pain hits! But by that time it's rather late, wouldn't you agree? Scripture is not a book of scientific health and medicine. But it does say, Your body is the temple of God. Now there's some UNCOMMON sense! Jude | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Hi George, I would certainly agree with you that Scripture does not say "we can eat or drink anything we want, when, where, and how we want." Scripture says the kingdom of heaven is not meat or drink. This is a statement of spiritual reality having to do with relationships among citizens living in the kingdom of heaven here and now. Blessings to you, Jude | ||
| Colleentinker |
I'm reminded of something a friend of mine, a former Adventist who grew up as a preacher's kid, told me a few years ago. Her mother gave her this bit of advice once: "Never trust anyone who won't eat cheese!" Obviously, that's a statement whose meaning is symbolic, not literal. But it still makes me laughóand nod my head. Even among people who are no longer Adventists there's a significant, subconcsious sense that a "healthy vegetarian diet" is somehow cleansing or superior. Of course, I agree that animal fat is just plain dangerous in great amounts in normal people's diets. On the other hand, I have a persistent sense that often, people who persistenlty make a case for vegetarianism find that their adherence to a clean, ascetic diet somehow cleanses them from other subtle dangers or indulgences they feel powerless to control. I have a wonderful, warm, former Adventist relative who falls into this category. I have a suspicion that people who have suffered some forms of physical abuse that leave them feeling deep shame and or guilt find that adherence to a controlled diet helps to "cleanse" them. Obviously, this assesment will not apply to everyone, and it is definitely a generalization. But I have seen this phenomenon more often than I wish I had. I've had Adventist students who have suffered unspeakable things at the hands of family members who publicly promoted a strict adherence to "the health message." I totally agree that taking care of ourselves is part of honoring who God created us to be. On the other hand, I believe that part of what God wants to heal when we accept him is our emotions and fears. That kind of deep, personal healing amazingly melts away many of the tight, emotional reactions we have to thoughts of "letting down" our dietary standards. After all, when we discover that we are truly clean and righteous in God's eyes, we are free to enjoy all of life, including whatever food we may be served. Those standards, we discover, do not make us more clean, pure, or holy. In fact, the freedom of having our emotions and shame healed may enhance our health even more than our diet! All that being said, I don't like seafood, and I avoid red meat! Praising God for wholeness, Colleen | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Y'all, As far as the "to eat meat or not to eat meat". I have run across so many vegetarians that have never heard of a SDA that it's not funny. The problem with BOTH groups, as I see it, but particularly with the "veggie" people is that some have no idea how to eat a "balanced" diet. I personally think that either is fine if it is done with the proper balance. Some of these gals that are veggies that work in some of the health food stores, LOOK LIKE VEGGIES! I'll get to asking some questions about how they put meals together and they are totally CLUELESS! I just shake my head. I'll end up giving them a 5 minute lecture about the proper combinations to make a complete protein and can tell by the blank look that they never heard this before. It is acually dangerous to "go veggie" if you don't know how! Mom knew how to do the veggie thing right. Even though I'm NOT a veggie now, NO ONE could convince me that the I am stronger in the last 20 years as I was in the first 20 years. I also think that jumping back and forth between veggie and non-veggie is an adjustment to the system. Eating meat everyday seems to slow me down. Eating no meat rattles me after a week. Eating it about twice a week works best for me. And that can be just about any meat catagory as my systems seems to NEED it. Have any of you experienced that? What's the point? What ever you choose, use your head and try the common sense and moderation approach. Maryann | ||
| Bethany |
My in-laws are very strict vegetarians and Adventist. When they discovered that we eat chicken, turkey, and some seafoods, she informed us that my son wears glasses because of our "meat diet"! Eventhough, I do not eat red meat, I don't think it matters if someone does. food is food and God doesn't care which of it is eaten. that is not what salvation is all about! | ||
| Colleentinker |
Amen, Bethany! | ||
| Billtwisse |
ALL: In considering all of this, we need to acknowledge certain scriptural facts about the gifts of God: 1. In the garden of Eden, God gave man all fruits and nuts (I am stretching it with the 'nuts' but most of them grow on trees like fruit) as food. He may 'freely eat' all of these without invoking the displeasure of God. 2. After the sin of eating the one forbidden fruit, God gave man all grains and vegetables to eat freely (bread and the herb of the field). 3. After the flood, God gave man all creatures that move to eat freely. God does not go back on his word. Anyone who tries to impose restrictions on these foods today is not speaking in harmony with scripture. The doctors do not know everything. For instance, they don't know whether clogged arteries are the result of eating animal fat or an abundance of doughnuts, french fries, fried meats, etc. that are fried in plastic fat. Or whether it is pure genetics or stress-related. The only food I know of that God restricted its use in the Bible is honey. I think that we can add sugar, salt, free starches (white flour & rice), polyunsaturated oils, & plastic (hydrogenated) fats to that list--because having these things in abundance is a development of recent history. We don't yet know the consequences. This is not to defend gluttony, but to avoid restricting the use of what God has explicitly stated are his gifts to us. --Twisse | ||
| George |
Hay Everyone, As so long as we use the very smallest amount of common sense it seems to me if we ask God's blessing on what we eat, that should be good enough. George |
