PDA

View Full Version : Are Rats and Mices clean to eat?



Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 02:12 AM
I have heard people say that you can eat any meat or that all food is good/clean, So are horses, tarantulas, snakes, frogs, pigs, possums clean to eat? The Old testament tells us to avoid those type of animals, so are rats and mices clean to eat now?

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 02:13 AM
Let me answer that question with this question:

Do you still sacrifice animals to atone for your sins?

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 02:16 AM
Let me answer that question with this question:

Do you still sacrifice animals to atone for your sins?

No,Thanks God, Jesus died for my sins.

And can you answer this question, are rats and mices and pigs are now clean to eat?

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 02:31 AM
No,Thanks God, Jesus died for my sins.

And can you answer this question, are rats and mices and pigs are now clean to eat?


You just answered your own question. :)

Christ died for our sins. There is no need to hold to ceremonial laws (the dietary laws fall under this category). We are separated not by what we eat, but by what has been written on our hearts.

For a more direct reply - let no man call what God has made unclean.

Rats aren't for my palate and they may not be the most sanitary thing to eat, but there's no spiritual problem with eating them (and if cooked correctly, no physical one either).

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 02:38 AM
You just answered your own question. :)

Christ died for our sins. There is no need to hold to ceremonial laws (the dietary laws fall under this category). We are separated not by what we eat, but by what has been written on our hearts.

For a more direct reply - let no man call what God has made unclean.

Rats aren't for my palate and they may not be the most sanitary thing to eat, but there's no spiritual problem with eating them (and if cooked correctly, no physical one either).

This does not make sense, Right now i can understand Jesus died for sins, But that does not mean i can run wild and eat anything i want, some animals are just clearly not created to eat. Would you eat a bowl of ''correctly'' cooked cockroaches?

*Hope*
Apr 8th 2009, 02:41 AM
This does not make sense, Right now i can understand Jesus died for sins, But that does not mean i can run wild and eat anything i want, some animals are just clearly not created to eat. Would you eat a bowl of ''correctly'' cooked cockroaches?

We aren't talking about preferences are we? What one person considers tasteful will differ from another.

But you put this in the "Bible Chat" forum, therefore AK gave you a biblical answer. Biblically, all things are permissable - not everything is beneficial.

What is your point?

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 02:43 AM
We aren't talking about preferences are we? What one person considers tasteful will differ from another.

But you put this in the "Bible Chat" forum, therefore AK gave you a biblical answer. Biblically, all things are permissable - not everything is beneficial.

What is your point?

Are you sure biblically all things are permissable?

show me the verse

Paul was talking about meat being sacrified to Idols or not.
And Jesus responded when the people were mad cause they did not wash their hands.

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 02:44 AM
This does not make sense, Right now i can understand Jesus died for sins, But that does not mean i can run wild and eat anything i want, some animals are just clearly not created to eat. Would you eat a bowl of ''correctly'' cooked cockroaches?
Personally, I wouldn't want to eat a bowl of cooked cockroaches (or live ones for that matter), but it's not "unclean" (in the Biblical sense) to do so.

If God made it, then it's not unclean.

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 02:47 AM
Personally, I wouldn't want to eat a bowl of cooked cockroaches (or live ones for that matter), but it's not "unclean" (in the Biblical sense) to do so.

If God made it, then it's not unclean.

Why would God say its unclean?

God made it, But not to be eaten, Remember we were not even supposed to be eating any kind of meat, in levicitcus God made exceptions to what we can eat or not

The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, 2 "Say to the Israelites: 'Of all the animals that live on land, these are the ones you may eat: 3 You may eat any animal that has a split hoof completely divided and that chews the cud

'Of all the creatures living in the water of the seas and the streams, you may eat any that have fins and scales

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 02:48 AM
Are you sure biblically all things are permissable?

show me the verse

Paul was talking about meat being sacrified to Idols or not.
And Jesus responded when the people were mad cause they did not wash their hands.
1 Corinthians 10:23

*Hope*
Apr 8th 2009, 02:50 AM
Why would God say its unclean?

God made it, But not to be eaten, Remember we were not even supposed to be eating any kind of meat, in levicitcus God made exceptions to what we can eat or not

The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, 2 "Say to the Israelites: 'Of all the animals that live on land, these are the ones you may eat: 3 You may eat any animal that has a split hoof completely divided and that chews the cud

Are you a Levite priest?

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 02:50 AM
Why would God say its unclean?

God made it, But not to be eaten, Remember we were not even supposed to be eating any kind of meat, in levicitcus God made exceptions to what we can eat or not
That was part of ceremonial law, which no longer has hold over us...

Keep in mind that it was God who said that He didn't make anything clean and that we are free to eat anything as well. Acts 10:15

Do men still need to be circumcised in order to be identified as God's people? Or do you wear clothing of two different garments?

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 02:53 AM
1 Corinthians 10:23


18Consider the people of Israel: Do not those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar? 19Do I mean then that a sacrifice offered to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. 21You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord's table and the table of demons. 22Are we trying to arouse the Lord's jealousy? Are we stronger than he?
The Believer's Freedom

23"Everything is permissible"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"—but not everything is constructive. 24Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others.

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 02:55 AM
That was part of ceremonial law, which no longer has hold over us...

Keep in mind that it was God who said that He didn't make anything clean and that we are free to eat anything as well. Acts 10:15

Do men still need to be circumcised in order to be identified as God's people? Or do you wear clothing of two different garments?

I think acts was about the Gentiles

And Paul clearly stated that there were no more need for circumcision

*Hope*
Apr 8th 2009, 02:59 AM
[1] As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. [2] One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. [3] Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. [4] Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master* that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. [5] One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. [6] The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. [7] For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. [8] If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. [9] For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. [10] Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; [11] for it is written, "As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess* to God." [12] So then each of us will give an account of himself to God. [13] Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. [14] I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean. [15] For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died. [16] So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. [17] For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. [18] Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. [19] So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding. [20] Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. [21] It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.* [22] The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. [23] But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.* (Rom 14:1-23 ESV)

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 03:03 AM
[1] As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. [2] One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. [3] Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. [4] Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master* that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. [5] One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. [6] The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. [7] For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. [8] If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. [9] For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. [10] Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; [11] for it is written, "As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess* to God." [12] So then each of us will give an account of himself to God. [13] Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. [14] I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean. [15] For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died. [16] So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. [17] For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. [18] Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. [19] So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding. [20] Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. [21] It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.* [22] The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. [23] But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.* (Rom 14:1-23 ESV)


This is about meat being sacrificed to idols, and paul trying to explain.
But thanks trying to explain, But this chapter is being used in a diffrent context.

And also, Its best to listen to God:)

*Hope*
Apr 8th 2009, 03:06 AM
This is about meat being sacrificed to idols, and paul trying to explain.

Are you sure? How/why are you so sure? What does he mean by "there is NOTHING unclean"? And that EVERYTHING is clean?


But thanks trying to explain, But this chapter is being used in a diffrent context.Says who? Do you read or speak Koine Greek?


And also, Its best to listen to God:)Paul's words are not inspired by God?

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 03:13 AM
Are you sure? How/why are you so sure? What does he mean by "there is NOTHING unclean"? And that EVERYTHING is clean?

Says who? Do you read or speak Koine Greek?

Paul's words are not inspired by God?


I'm pretty sure diffrent translations are diffrent, Its just a way to explain things.

And also when you look at the previous chapters its talking about meat being sacrificed to idols.

No thats not what I'm saying, What i mean is that God's words are pure and true, If God says keep the sabbath keep it, Dont eat this or that, do it.

I wonder why would it change

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 03:15 AM
I think acts was about the Gentiles

And Paul clearly stated that there were no more need for circumcision

Do you really not get it, or are you trying to make a point? :confused

CEREMONIAL law is dead according to the new Testament. To say that the Law is fulfilled in Christ means it has been completed, there is no need for it. Eat what you will.

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 03:16 AM
I'm pretty sure diffrent translations are diffrent, Its just a way to explain things.

And also when you look at the previous chapters its talking about meat being sacrificed to idols.

No thats not what I'm saying, What i mean is that God's words are pure and true, If God says keep the sabbath keep it, Dont eat this or that, do it.

I wonder why would it change


Because Christ died, He fulfilled the law. The purpose of the ceremonial law was to show that the jews were a separate people, that they were called by God. Under grace, we do this by our deeds of helping others and displaying Christ's love. The idea remains the same, but the mode has changed.

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 03:18 AM
Because Christ died, He fulfilled the law. The purpose of the ceremonial law was to show that the jews were a separate people, that they were called by God. Under grace, we do this by our deeds of helping others and displaying Christ's love. The idea remains the same, but the mode has changed.


Can i ask you a couple questions?

1. Why did God give the dietary laws?
2. Why did God say keep the sabbath?

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 03:21 AM
Can i ask you a couple questions?

1. Why did God give the dietary laws?
2. Why did God say keep the sabbath?


(1) As I've stated - to display that the Jews were wholly separate from other nations. They had to dress differently, get circumcised, eat differently, etc.

(2) To give us a rest. The Sabbath is not a ceremonial law though whereas the dietary laws fall under the customary/ceremonial aspects of the law - not the eternal decrees or moral law.

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 03:26 AM
(1) As I've stated - to display that the Jews were wholly separate from other nations. They had to dress differently, get circumcised, eat differently, etc.

(2) To give us a rest. The Sabbath is not a ceremonial law though whereas the dietary laws fall under the customary/ceremonial aspects of the law - not the eternal decrees or moral law.

1. These laws were only given to the Jews?

2. So do you agree that the Sabbath should still be kept?

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 03:30 AM
(1) Yes. The ceremonial laws were only given to the Jews and were fulfilled by Christ. This was actually the problem Paul was having in early church. After he set up a church in a city, some Jewish converts were telling the Gentile converts to live like Jews by holding onto the ceremonial law - that this made them better Christians (and in some cases saved them). Paul argues adamantly against this and says we no longer need the ceremonies - the dietary law falls under that category.

(2) Yes, but not in a legalistic sense. I think it's vitally important for us to take a 24 hour period of rest, to recollect our thoughts and just relax. When that 24 hour day happens to occur is quite irrelevant - after all, the Sabbath was made for us. To me - and I'll never understand it - this is the one commandment that says, "Hey, take some time off," but also the one that EVERYONE seems to be opposed to.

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 03:34 AM
(1) Yes. The ceremonial laws were only given to the Jews and were fulfilled by Christ. This was actually the problem Paul was having in early church. After he set up a church in a city, some Jewish converts were telling the Gentile converts to live like Jews by holding onto the ceremonial law - that this made them better Christians (and in some cases saved them). Paul argues adamantly against this and says we no longer need the ceremonies - the dietary law falls under that category.

(2) Yes, but not in a legalistic sense. I think it's vitally important for us to take a 24 hour period of rest, to recollect our thoughts and just relax. When that 24 hour day happens to occur is quite irrelevant - after all, the Sabbath was made for us. To me - and I'll never understand it - this is the one commandment that says, "Hey, take some time off," but also the one that EVERYONE seems to be opposed to.

1) I think this was all about meat being sacrificed to idols. It just does not make sense.

2)Thats nice, your on the right path, But whats wrong with the 7th day as God said so?

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 03:39 AM
(1) Why doesn't it make sense? God said not to call anything He made unclean. He told Peter to rise and kill. Why would God do this if such things were actually unclean? Is He just joking?

(2) Because, again, Paul said it didn't matter.

Reedan
Apr 8th 2009, 05:22 AM
(1) Why doesn't it make sense? God said not to call anything He made unclean. He told Peter to rise and kill. Why would God do this if such things were actually unclean? Is He just joking?

(2) Because, again, Paul said it didn't matter.

1) Diffrent context

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 05:25 AM
One thing you learn quickly when you begin to properly interpret Scripture, is that when you bring up MULTIPLE passages that all say the same thing in different contexts, but someone particularizes the passage and says, "It only applies in this context," the person particularizing the Scriptures is most often wrong. The fact remains - God said, "Don't call anything I've made unclean." This indicates that the ceremonial laws had passed (if they hadn't, then Peter wouldn't be able to go to the house of a Gentile or share the good news with him, as this would have violating the law of the time).

To cry out "context!" when the context actually leaves it open for a wide application only hurts your case.

Firstfruits
Apr 8th 2009, 07:40 AM
I have heard people say that you can eat any meat or that all food is good/clean, So are horses, tarantulas, snakes, frogs, pigs, possums clean to eat? The Old testament tells us to avoid those type of animals, so are rats and mices clean to eat now?

1 Tim 4:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

1 Tim 4:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 12:27 PM
why would anyone want to eat rats, mice, or a bowl of cockroaches?

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 12:30 PM
(1) Yes. The ceremonial laws were only given to the Jews and were fulfilled by Christ. This was actually the problem Paul was having in early church. After he set up a church in a city, some Jewish converts were telling the Gentile converts to live like Jews by holding onto the ceremonial law - that this made them better Christians (and in some cases saved them). Paul argues adamantly against this and says we no longer need the ceremonies - the dietary law falls under that category.


This is a misunderstanding. Saul taught against Gentiles adopting Jewish practice to be saved i.e. converting to Judaism.

These so called "ceremonial laws (which are not listed as so in scripture)" were given to all Israel, not Judah alone.

tt1106
Apr 8th 2009, 12:46 PM
Only when provided from the mouths of crows.

Firstfruits
Apr 8th 2009, 01:32 PM
why would anyone want to eat rats, mice, or a bowl of cockroaches?

It is not a case that you may want to eat them but it is that they are made clean by prayer and the word of God.

1 Tim 4:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

1 Tim 4:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Firstfruits

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 01:36 PM
It is not a case that you may want to eat them but it is that they are made clean by prayer and the word of God.

1 Tim 4:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

1 Tim 4:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Firstfruits


My dad used to tell me that you could eat poison berries if you prayed first. I did not buy it then, nor do I now.

Firstfruits
Apr 8th 2009, 01:49 PM
My dad used to tell me that you could eat poison berries if you prayed first. I did not buy it then, nor do I now.

What is it that you do not buy, what your Dad said or that it is sanctified by prayer and the word of God?

1 Tim 4:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Apr 8th 2009, 02:08 PM
Do we doubt the word of God?

Mk 16:18 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=41&CHAP=16&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=18) They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Is what Christ said not possible?

1 Tim 4:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

1 Tim 4:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Firstfruits

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 02:12 PM
This is a misunderstanding. Saul taught against Gentiles adopting Jewish practice to be saved i.e. converting to Judaism.

These so called "ceremonial laws (which are not listed as so in scripture)" were given to all Israel, not Judah alone.


It's not a misunderstanding at all. I'm absolutely correct in what I asserted. Paul is saying there's no need for the ceremony.

Also, where did I say the law was only given to Judah? I said it was given to Jews, that is, all of Israel. Now, if you want to be some grammar Nazi about that and say, "BUT 'JEWS' ONLY REFERS TO THOSE FROM JUDAH!" so be it. But that really doesn't do anything for me since I'm using the modern connotation of the word.

So if you want to be a stickler about that, be my guest, but it's a little absurd.

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 02:49 PM
so be it. But that really doesn't do anything for me since I'm using the modern connotation of the word.

So if you want to be a stickler about that, be my guest, but it's a little absurd.


I apologize for using the biblical connotation as opposed to the modern connotation. Please forgive my absurdity.

I do disagree that Saul taught against some "ceremonial" interpretation as he drew parralels from this 'ceremonial' aspect of the law many times. If the 'ceremonial' was done away with it would be quite absurd of Saul to use it to define Messiah.

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 02:51 PM
What is it that you do not buy, what your Dad said or that it is sanctified by prayer and the word of God?

1 Tim 4:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Firstfruits




I am saying that despite something being "sanctified by prayer" that is does not change the health aspect. A poisonous berry (or a poisonous frog) is still poisonous even if it is 'sanctified by prayer'.

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 02:57 PM
I apologize for using the biblical connotation as opposed to the modern connotation. Please forgive my absurdity.

I do disagree that Saul taught against some "ceremonial" interpretation as he drew parralels from this 'ceremonial' aspect of the law many times. If the 'ceremonial' was done away with it would be quite absurd of Saul to use it to define Messiah.


His name is Paul, not Saul. Let's not fall into the Judaizers camp (which is really what modern messianics are quickly becoming - and in most cases, there isn't a Jew among them) and try to "hebrew-up" everything we read in the New Testament. He changed his name to Paul, so we should call him Paul.

He drew the aspect because in some of his epistles he was writing to Jews who had converted to Christianity. He was explaining how such ceremonies had been fulfilled by Christ. They no longer have a purpose because their purpose has been fulfilled in Christ. Passover, Yom Kippur, all the high holy days mean nothing anymore, they have zero purpose. They have been fulfilled in Christ.

The same stands for the dietary laws. All the dietary and dress codes in Moses' law were meant to show that the Jews were a separate people, called out specifically by God. The moral laws weren't enough as other culture had similar laws. There had to be other laws as well that demonstrated the Jews separate nature.

This purpose was fulfilled in Christ. People now know us by how we interact with the world, by the love we have for another ("this new command I give unto you...") and by who's name we come in. The dietary law and ceremonial law have nothing to do with holiness. If they did, then God contradicted Himself by tempting Peter to eat an unclean animal if it truly would have made Peter unholy.

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 03:20 PM
His name is Paul, not Saul. Let's not fall into the Judaizers camp (which is really what modern messianics are quickly becoming - and in most cases, there isn't a Jew among them) and try to "hebrew-up" everything we read in the New Testament. He changed his name to Paul, so we should call him Paul.


This is another common misunderstanding. There is not one scripture that says Saul changed his name. There is not one scripture that says anyone changed Saul's name to Paul. I would say that there is no correct understanding of the term "judaizer" if the term means "using someone's given name if it was Hebrew".

Acts 13:9 Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him.

I am no linguistic expert, but I have never seen the term "also" used synonymously with "changed to."


They no longer have a purpose because their purpose has been fulfilled in Christ. Passover, Yom Kippur, all the high holy days mean nothing anymore, they have zero purpose. They have been fulfilled in Christ.

This is a glaring oxymoron. How can something that Messiah fulfilled have zero purpose. According to Saul, Messiah is our Passover. I highly doubt that Paul meant "Messiah is zero purpose".


The same stands for the dietary laws. All the dietary and dress codes in Moses' law were meant to show that the Jews were a separate people, called out specifically by God. The moral laws weren't enough as other culture had similar laws. There had to be other laws as well that demonstrated the Jews separate nature.

I suggest that the dietary laws were given for health reasons. I know it sounds crazy that YHWH would have any knowledge of health as it relates to diet, but I still believe it.


This purpose was fulfilled in Christ. People now know us by how we interact with the world, by the love we have for another ("this new command I give unto you...") and by who's name we come in.

I would challenge anyone to love his brother without keeping commands found in the law.


The dietary law and ceremonial law have nothing to do with holiness.

They obviously have something to do with holiness, but they do not provide holiness


If they did, then God contradicted Himself by tempting Peter to eat an unclean animal if it truly would have made Peter unholy.

Peter's interpretation was either right or wrong, depending on our view of the validity of scripture.

Watchmen
Apr 8th 2009, 03:23 PM
I have heard people say that you can eat any meat or that all food is good/clean, So are horses, tarantulas, snakes, frogs, pigs, possums clean to eat? The Old testament tells us to avoid those type of animals, so are rats and mices clean to eat now?Romans 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

Firstfruits
Apr 8th 2009, 03:37 PM
I am saying that despite something being "sanctified by prayer" that is does not change the health aspect. A poisonous berry (or a poisonous frog) is still poisonous even if it is 'sanctified by prayer'.

With the understanding that all that are in sin are saved/sanctified in the same way, are we who are saved by prayer and the word of God still unclean?

Acts 10:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

Acts 10:15 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=15) And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Firstfruits

David Taylor
Apr 8th 2009, 03:46 PM
why would anyone want to eat rats, mice, or a bowl of cockroaches?

There are alot of hungry people in the world that take what they can get. Not everyone is privileged to choose what diet they want; but rather, must take the opportunity to eat what is available to them.

In many poor and starving 3rd world countries, rodents are populous enough to be a viable food source.

In Africa, termites are delicacies....maybe adding a cockroach or two into the mix adds that extra "crunch" that some folks like.:eek:

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 03:58 PM
With the understanding that all that are in sin are saved/sanctified in the same way, are we who are saved by prayer and the word of God still unclean?

Acts 10:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

Acts 10:15 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=15) And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Firstfruits


What did Peter say God had cleansed?

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 03:59 PM
There are alot of hungry people in the world that take what they can get. Not everyone is privileged to choose what diet they want; but rather, must take the opportunity to eat what is available to them.

In many poor and starving 3rd world countries, rodents are populous enough to be a viable food source.

In Africa, termites are delicacies....maybe adding a cockroach or two into the mix adds that extra "crunch" that some folks like.:eek:



Everybody needs a good crunchy food from time to time.

keck553
Apr 8th 2009, 04:00 PM
I still don't know the verdict on mushrooms.

Vhayes
Apr 8th 2009, 04:04 PM
If someone feels a food is not to be eaten, then he should not eat it. For him it would be sin. If that same food for another is not sin, then no one should judge him. I will tell you straight up if I was in a position where it was either starve or watch my family starve and eat a mouse, there is no doubt in my mind I would thank God for said mouse and serve it up with some grass soup.

Folks, it ain't that hard.

keck553
Apr 8th 2009, 04:11 PM
In my current financial state, 'free ham' certainly would be a dilemma.....

Vhayes
Apr 8th 2009, 04:23 PM
In my current financial state, 'free ham' certainly would be a dilemma.....
That made me laugh! And yeah, I know about eating oatmeal till I thought i would never eat oatmeal again. It DID take 20 years for me to be able to face another bowl.

keck553
Apr 8th 2009, 04:27 PM
I only eat oatmeal raw. that has nothing to do with religion, just my pallet's aversion to lumps.

Bandit
Apr 8th 2009, 04:47 PM
Are Rats and Mices clean to eat?

Well, I guess that would depend upon how thoroughly you wash them and how thoroughly you cook them. I heard they make a mean stew! And I bet they’re good with ‘taters.

What’s ‘taters Precious?

Boil ‘em, mash ‘em, stick ‘em in a stew.
Boil ‘em, mash ‘em, stick ‘em in a stew.

If you don’t get it, ye ain’t got it!

Vhayes
Apr 8th 2009, 04:50 PM
Are Rats and Mices clean to eat?

Well, I guess that would depend upon how thoroughly you wash them and how thoroughly you cook them. I heard they make a mean stew! And I bet they’re good with ‘taters.

What’s ‘taters Precious?

Boil ‘em, mass ‘em, stick ‘em in a stew.
Boil ‘em, mass ‘em, stick ‘em in a stew.

If you don’t get it, ye ain’t got it!
Have you eaten any freshly caught raw fish lately, J.R.R.? ;)
V

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 06:42 PM
This is a glaring oxymoron. How can something that Messiah fulfilled have zero purpose. According to Saul, Messiah is our Passover. I highly doubt that Paul meant "Messiah is zero purpose".

Oh, so they point to the coming Messiah still? They point to our atonement? Everything they point to has already been fulfilled. To practice them is to ignore that Christ has already died and atoned us.


I suggest that the dietary laws were given for health reasons. I know it sounds crazy that YHWH would have any knowledge of health as it relates to diet, but I still believe it.

Mazel tov for believing that, but the fact is Scirpture makes it clear that the Law was handed down to make the Jews separate from everyone else.


I would challenge anyone to love his brother without keeping commands found in the law.

So if I eat shellfish I can't love someone? If I wear mixed threads then I can't love someone?


They obviously have something to do with holiness, but they do not provide holiness

Not anymore they don't. They have nothing to do with holiness. Only the pharisees believed it had something to do with holiness post-Christ - they were chastised for such a belief.


Peter's interpretation was either right or wrong, depending on our view of the validity of scripture.

It's plain as day. God says, "What I have made is not unclean." It simply doesn't get clearer than that.

Do you even have a Hebrew heritage? Did you convert from Judaism? If so, why in the world would you want to go back to it? If not, why are you pretending?

apothanein kerdos
Apr 8th 2009, 06:45 PM
If someone feels a food is not to be eaten, then he should not eat it. For him it would be sin. If that same food for another is not sin, then no one should judge him. I will tell you straight up if I was in a position where it was either starve or watch my family starve and eat a mouse, there is no doubt in my mind I would thank God for said mouse and serve it up with some grass soup.

Folks, it ain't that hard.

Unfortunately, there are modern day Judaizers, most of whom aren't even Jewish and who's heritage to being a Hebrew is spurious at best, coming in and saying we still have to keep the Law. Even though it's plain as day in Scripture that we don't, they are armament about keeping it. Even laws tied to the sacrificial system - which they believe has passed away - they keep. It makes absolutely no sense.

Firstfruits
Apr 8th 2009, 06:46 PM
What did Peter say God had cleansed?

It is not what was cleansed but how it is cleansed, which is by prayer and the word of God which as I said is how we that were in sin are also cleansed.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 07:19 PM
Oh, so they point to the coming Messiah still? They point to our atonement? Everything they point to has already been fulfilled. To practice them is to ignore that Christ has already died and atoned us.


No, they eternally point to the Messiah that came. Yes it has been fulfilled and it all points directly at Messiah that came, which is why (regarding Passover) Messiah said "do this in remembrance of me." How is practicing something that points directly at Messiah ignoring Messiah? I do not follow the logic.




Mazel tov for believing that, but the fact is Scirpture makes it clear that the Law was handed down to make the Jews separate from everyone else.

I would disagree that the only reason was so they would be different than everybody else. However, I do not think this is really a point worth division.


So if I eat shellfish I can't love someone? If I wear mixed threads then I can't love someone?

I was speaking of the law as a whole. It is impossible to love someone without following commands found therein. Loving God and denying "My appointed times" as He called them is an issue for each to decide themselves.


Not anymore they don't. They have nothing to do with holiness. Only the pharisees believed it had something to do with holiness post-Christ - they were chastised for such a belief.


The issue was not their keeping of the word of God, but their judging others by their own standard of obedience. Holiness was not provided by the law, it was defined by the law. We see the opposite extreme now. Judging others for their desire to live in the Instruction of God is no less grievous.


It's plain as day. God says, "What I have made is not unclean." It simply doesn't get clearer than that.



Is there is no record of God saying "I know make all unclean foods clean". We can, however, clearly see that the anti-law attitude that says Jews may not socialize with Gentiles who have joined themselves to the God of Israel, which by Peter's own admission was not correct thinking. Messiah did not die for shellfish or pigs, He died for us and made us all clean.



Do you even have a Hebrew heritage? Did you convert from Judaism? If so, why in the world would you want to go back to it? If not, why are you pretending?

You obviously have no idea what my beliefs are to make such a judgmental claim. I could care less for Judah-ism. I have already been labeled a heretic by more "orthodox" messianics for railing against the Rabbinic system. One does not have to be Jewish to live by the Word of YHWH. In Messiah I am no longer a stranger to the covenants of promise. The belief that living by the Instruction of YHWH makes one Jewish (or need to be Jewish) is exactly what Saul railed against time and again.

Tell me, what am I pretending?

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 07:24 PM
Unfortunately, there are modern day Judaizers, most of whom aren't even Jewish and who's heritage to being a Hebrew is spurious at best, coming in and saying we still have to keep the Law. Even though it's plain as day in Scripture that we don't, they are armament about keeping it. Even laws tied to the sacrificial system - which they believe has passed away - they keep. It makes absolutely no sense.


Why is it that when a person lays down their position as to why they keep the Law, some condemn them for "saying we still have to keep the law?" Is it animosity for things seen as "jewish", conscience, or something else? I can assure you I, nor anyone else I have seen on this board, has said that anyone "still have to keep the law".

Lacey
Apr 8th 2009, 07:31 PM
Everybody needs a good crunchy food from time to time.

Oh, eww. Im not going to be able to eat anything crunchy for a while.


If someone feels a food is not to be eaten, then he should not eat it. For him it would be sin. If that same food for another is not sin, then no one should judge him. I will tell you straight up if I was in a position where it was either starve or watch my family starve and eat a mouse, there is no doubt in my mind I would thank God for said mouse and serve it up with some grass soup.

Folks, it ain't that hard.
As for the first part, I sincerely hope you are right. I never feel bad about eating shellfish. I always assumed that that was one of the laws that Jesus fulfilled and that we were no longer bound by it.. However, the thought of eating some certain "split-hooved" animals makes my stomach turn.

For the 2nd part: Oh my.. that made me literally LOL.

Vhayes
Apr 8th 2009, 07:52 PM
Why is it that when a person lays down their position as to why they keep the Law, some condemn them for "saying we still have to keep the law?" Is it animosity for things seen as "jewish", conscience, or something else? I can assure you I, nor anyone else I have seen on this board, has said that anyone "still have to keep the law".
Ok - brutally honest here -

I simply do not care if you follow the law to the best of your ability. That is your walk, not mine. What I do mind is having law keepers tell me I am not being obedient to God when I eat pig meat or mice or what-not.

Do as you will. Allow me to do the same. And please don't treat me as "lesser" because I wear mixed fabric and go to church in Tuesday.

We are all at different places in our maturity. It does no good to tell a three year old to build a house and it's rather silly to tell a 35 year old finish carpenter to use the legos to build the house.

Just my opinion - and I DO value your input, Emanate.
V

Firstfruits
Apr 8th 2009, 08:01 PM
Why is it that when a person lays down their position as to why they keep the Law, some condemn them for "saying we still have to keep the law?" Is it animosity for things seen as "jewish", conscience, or something else? I can assure you I, nor anyone else I have seen on this board, has said that anyone "still have to keep the law".

According to the following to whom do the things of the law apply, knowing that we are not under it?

Rom 3:19 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=19) Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 8th 2009, 08:14 PM
Unfortunately, there are modern day Judaizers, most of whom aren't even Jewish and who's heritage to being a Hebrew is spurious at best, coming in and saying we still have to keep the Law. Even though it's plain as day in Scripture that we don't, they are armament about keeping it. Even laws tied to the sacrificial system - which they believe has passed away - they keep. It makes absolutely no sense.

I've held back, but I'm sorry, i must clear something up.

You are not our rabbi AP, and to be clear, I could care less about your Jewish roots calim regarding God's Word. God's Word is for all of us, and you have no right to be our filter or our interpreter. If I don't want to eat a pig because God said so, then that's my freedom bought and paid for by Messiah.

Just to be clear, I have no desire to be a Jew. I do have a desire to obey God, and being Jewish doesn't give you exclusivity to His Word.

God bless.

keck553
Apr 8th 2009, 08:18 PM
Ok - brutally honest here -

What I do mind is having law keepers tell me I am not being obedient to God when I eat pig meat or mice or what-not.

V

No one has the right to judge your heart. Your accountability to God is between Him and you, and I would hope no one would presume to judge you.

I do have an issue with the term 'law-keeper'. Certainly we all keep what God has put on our hearts through revelation of His will. I don't think thats a bad thing. A better definition would be 'treasure' in lieu of 'keep'. There's a literal world of difference between someone who keeps God's commands and someone who treasures and delights in God's commands.

Vhayes
Apr 8th 2009, 08:21 PM
No one has the right to judge your heart. Your accountability to God is between Him and you, and I would hope no one would presume to judge you.

I do have an issue with the term 'law-keeper'. Certainly we all keep what God has put on our hearts through revelation of His will. I don't think thats a bad thing. A better definition would be 'treasure' in lieu of 'keep'. There's a literal world of difference between someone who keeps God's commands and someone who treasures and delights in God's commands.
How 'bout Law Observant?

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 08:23 PM
Do as you will. Allow me to do the same. And please don't treat me as "lesser" because I wear mixed fabric and go to church in Tuesday.



I won't. I go to Church on sunday myself.

Have I treated you 'lesser'?

keck553
Apr 8th 2009, 08:28 PM
How 'bout Law Observant?

I am very uncomfortable with the word "law". It's not an accurate translation. It's a difficult concept, if not impossible to explain in one word but Torah really means "aim for the mark". Of course the mark is Christ.
I want to do an experiment. Tell me, do we believe in these "laws", and if so, why?

(i'll be nice and just list a few...)

- treat litigants equally / impartially
- hold that anyone aware of evidence is to testitfy in court
- the testimony of witnesses to be examined throroghly
- false witnesses should be punished
- make your property safe for visitors
- a robber should restore the stolen article
- give charity to the poor
- in paying a worker his wages on time
- in paying workers a livable wage
- assisting another in need of assistance
- restoring lost property to its owner
- love all converts
- accurate weights and measures
- honor the old (and wise)
- penalty for a person who inflicts injury
- saving the life of one being pursued by a killer/oppressor
- not practicing sorcery
- not practicing witchcraft
- not practiciing the ard of the charmer
- not seeking information from the dead
- don't cut your flesh over the dead

Vhayes
Apr 8th 2009, 08:34 PM
Of couse I do, Keck - but it has to do with me respecting and caring for my fellow man, not because I read Leviticus.

I believe the Holy Spirit would have placed those things on my heart whether I had a bible to read or not, whether I could even READ or not.

To me, it is the Holy Spirit working from the inside out and not the law working from the outside in. You may view it a different way, I just don't know. But an apple tree sprouts buds from the inside out and it's the sap or life of the tree that makes that happen. i can stand by the tree all day long and hang apples on it and they will just fall off after a day or two.

V

Firstfruits
Apr 8th 2009, 08:48 PM
1 Tim 4:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

1 Tim 4:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

This is not about the law but about the power of God through prayer.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 8th 2009, 09:03 PM
Of couse I do, Keck - but it has to do with me respecting and caring for my fellow man, not because I read Leviticus.

Be honest. Would we know these things without Leviticus? Do we give ourselves credit for these values or God?



I believe the Holy Spirit would have placed those things on my heart whether I had a bible to read or not, whether I could even READ or not.

I can't say whether that belief is right or not, because Scripture doesn't say that. But I do respect your opinion.


To me, it is the Holy Spirit working from the inside out and not the law working from the outside in. You may view it a different way, I just don't know. But an apple tree sprouts buds from the inside out and it's the sap or life of the tree that makes that happen. i can stand by the tree all day long and hang apples on it and they will just fall off after a day or two.

Ok, some of what I say here might come off as sarcasm, but please that is not my intent. I could be wrong, but as far as i know Scripture says the Holy Spirit teaches us through Scripture. I don't recall reading anything in the Bible that says the Holy Spirit msomehow sticks how to love God and how to love man on our hearts. If true, why wouldn't God's Spirit write the same laws on our hearts as He spoke? Did God change His mind? I've read Scripture that says God would put His Torah on our hearts. Do you think He did an incomplete job and left some of it out?

What if God put these things on my heart, and they are on the inside working out? Why do the things God put on my heart have to produce the same kind of response as the things He put on your heart? Certainly God put things on your heart that you respond to much more in His will than I do, and probably vice versa.

What if all of us who are reborn in the Spirit are responding inwardly with different outward actions? Must we all be the same? What if I say your obvious love for your neighbor is an outward display? That would be an offense. To me it is an offense for someone to say my actions are outward displays. Remember what Jesus said to the Pharisees in Mat 23? He was talking about the extreemes the Pharisees were going to obey the "law" by tithing even from their little herb gardens and straining gnats out of their drink. But then how they profaned the 'law' by ignoring the heavier matters - justice, mercy, compassion. But note what He said next - "but these are things you should have done without neglecting the others". Jesus isn't telling them their zeal to obey the 'law' was wrong. What was wrong was their attitude. Jesus could make that judgement because, as God, He knew thier hearts. Only God knows when someone's outward actions are not fruits of the heart. We don't get to make that judgement.

So let's not judge each other, but see what we can learn and increase our faith and trust.

djh22
Apr 8th 2009, 09:19 PM
Well, if anyone wants to try, here are some recipes I've found from around the world -
Stewed Cane Rat
Skin and eviscerate the rat and split it lengthwise. Fry until brown in a mixture of butter and peanut oil. Cover with water, add tomatoes or tomato purée, hot red peppers, and salt. Simmer the rat until tender and serve with rice.

Stuffed Dormice / Ancient Rome
Prepare a stuffing of dormouse meat or pork, pepper, pine nuts, broth, asafoetida, and some garum (substitute anchovy paste.) Stuff the mice and sew them up. Bake them in an oven on a tile.

Roasted Field Mice (Raton de campo asado) / Mexico
Skin and eviscerate field mice. Skewer them and roast over an open fire or coals. These are probably great as hors d'oeuvres with margaritas or "salty dogs."

Mice in Cream (Souris à la crème)
Skin, gut and wash some fat mice without removing their heads. Cover them in a pot with ethyl alcohol and marinate 2 hours. Cut a piece of salt pork or sowbelly into small dice and cook it slowly to extract the fat. Drain the mice, dredge them thoroughly in a mixture of flour, pepper, and salt, and fry slowly in the rendered fat for about 5 minutes. Add a cup of alcohol and 6 to 8 cloves, cover and simmer for 15 minutes. Prepare a cream sauce, transfer the sautéed mice to it, and warm them in it for about 10 minutes before serving.

Enjoy !!

djh22.

Emanate
Apr 8th 2009, 09:21 PM
Well, if anyone wants to try, here are some recipes I've found from around the world -
Stewed Cane Rat
Skin and eviscerate the rat and split it lengthwise. Fry until brown in a mixture of butter and peanut oil. Cover with water, add tomatoes or tomato purée, hot red peppers, and salt. Simmer the rat until tender and serve with rice.

Stuffed Dormice / Ancient Rome
Prepare a stuffing of dormouse meat or pork, pepper, pine nuts, broth, asafoetida, and some garum (substitute anchovy paste.) Stuff the mice and sew them up. Bake them in an oven on a tile.

Roasted Field Mice (Raton de campo asado) / Mexico
Skin and eviscerate field mice. Skewer them and roast over an open fire or coals. These are probably great as hors d'oeuvres with margaritas or "salty dogs."

Mice in Cream (Souris à la crème)
Skin, gut and wash some fat mice without removing their heads. Cover them in a pot with ethyl alcohol and marinate 2 hours. Cut a piece of salt pork or sowbelly into small dice and cook it slowly to extract the fat. Drain the mice, dredge them thoroughly in a mixture of flour, pepper, and salt, and fry slowly in the rendered fat for about 5 minutes. Add a cup of alcohol and 6 to 8 cloves, cover and simmer for 15 minutes. Prepare a cream sauce, transfer the sautéed mice to it, and warm them in it for about 10 minutes before serving.

Enjoy !!

djh22.


No cockroach recipes? what gives?

keck553
Apr 8th 2009, 09:33 PM
Nice receipes but they don't hold a candle to haggis

Vhayes
Apr 8th 2009, 09:35 PM
Nice receipes but they don't hold a candle to haggis
Now THAT takes a strong will AND a strong stomach. Bbrrrrrr - shudder, shudder.

djh22
Apr 8th 2009, 09:35 PM
Cheating a bit I know but -

Cockroach cocktail
1 part kahlua (http://www.cocktailmaking.co.uk/displayingredient.php/79-kahlua)

1 1/2 part tequila (http://www.cocktailmaking.co.uk/displayingredient.php/116-tequila)
Mix the ingredients in a old fashion glass, set fire and drink fast.


djh22

djh22
Apr 8th 2009, 09:37 PM
Even better -
Tasty Stuffed Roaches


http://www.divinedinnerparty.com/image-files/stuffed-roaches-gross-halloween-food.jpgWhat collection of gross recipes for Halloween would be complete without a nice selection of cockroach-based fare? These nasty, crispy-skinned looking roaches are gross Halloween food at its best. They taste really great... if your guests dare to eat them. The little bit of crunch from the walnuts give them the perfect crisp- roach texture. Mmmm. http://www.divinedinnerparty.com/image-files/print-icon-small.gif (http://www.divinedinnerparty.com/print-halloween-stuffed-cockroach-recipe.html)
Ingredients:
1/3 C. cream cheese, softened
1/4 C. walnuts, chopped semi-fine
20-30 dates, pitted

Instructions: 1. In a small bowl, combine cream cheese and nuts til well mixed.
2. Gently fill each date with cream cheese/nut mixture (you may have to split the dates slightly).
3. Serve in a tray decorated with several rubber roaches (if desired). Label as "Stuffed Roaches," or "Fresh-caught Cockroaches," etc.

Lol,



djh22

djh22
Apr 8th 2009, 09:41 PM
Nice receipes but they don't hold a candle to haggis

Dried blood !! is that Kosher , Lol.

djh22.

Vhayes
Apr 8th 2009, 09:43 PM
I won't. I go to Church on sunday myself.

Have I treated you 'lesser'?
No, Emanate you have not, or at least not that I remember in recent memory. But there are others who have not to terribly long ago. They treat me like an uneducated moron who has been spoon fed by devious pastors who hate the Jewish people.

I have had (on another board a few years ago) someone tell me that even if I didn't hear, "Depart from me, I never knew you" i would be forced to sit at a different table than those who were "obedient" and Christ would not smile on me.

Whatever -
V

Emanate
Apr 9th 2009, 04:14 PM
No, Emanate you have not, or at least not that I remember in recent memory. But there are others who have not to terribly long ago. They treat me like an uneducated moron who has been spoon fed by devious pastors who hate the Jewish people.

I have had (on another board a few years ago) someone tell me that even if I didn't hear, "Depart from me, I never knew you" i would be forced to sit at a different table than those who were "obedient" and Christ would not smile on me.



I will admit, many folks that have decided to walk according to the law are very prideful even to the point of exclusivism as you mentioned. Almost as judgmental and exclusive as those that have made it their mission to point out the their supposed error in following the law. It touched me for a few years myself. The problem is many are excited in the 'newness' of it all and easily lose their/our sight on Messiah. This always leads to the Messiah/Judaism crossroad. Thank YHWH for his grace that I stood at that road and chose Messiah. I will say it was indeed a struggle, but His grace is sufficient. That experience knocked me off of my "high horse." It seems there were some things that I needed to relearn. That is why it is imperative that we learn from one another, as brothers and sisters in Messiah, as YHWH planned. V, I thank you for your loving spirit and attitude. You have shown me much that I desire for my own life and walk.

keck553
Apr 9th 2009, 04:32 PM
In all humility, I agree with Emanate.

But in all reality, all believers have to deal with this at some point in their walk. It is also legalism to beat on a believer for obeying God.

keck553
Apr 9th 2009, 04:43 PM
Dried blood !! is that Kosher , Lol.

djh22.

scab sandwich? hmmm'

Well, God says to pour / drain the blood onto the ground. Although the rabbis can come up with some rather ingeneous ways to disobey God and still appear to be obeying Him.

It's all about attitude.

Vhayes
Apr 9th 2009, 08:58 PM
I am humbled.
V

apothanein kerdos
Apr 9th 2009, 09:08 PM
How is it not exclusive or prideful to say, "We have liberty to follow what we will...but I choose to follow the law of God"?

That's rubbing someone's nose in it, intentional or not. It's like when we use the term "obviously" - if it's obvious, but the person you're saying it to disagree with the contention, you're pretty much calling that person an idiot.

To come out and say, "Oh, we have liberty," but turn around and say, "Well, it's the law of God and holiness...", that's pretty high and mighty.

Just like the people who say, "Well you don't have to go to church on Easter - but I love Jesus so I'll go anyway." That implies that if you don't go, you don't love Jesus. What you guys are implying is that those who don't follow the law are somehow denying the law of God.

So word choice matters because it can come across as high and mighty.

Your Advert here


Hosted by Webnet77