Cornelius calls for Peter - Food V.s. Gentiles

[LookingUp]

Also, as near as i can figure from what Brother Mark is saying, some people believe that the physical acts of the law are all spiritualized or also that some like the festivals are fulfilled in Christ. Which is fine and i guess i agree to a large degree. But some are obviously not. For example in Romans chapter 7 Paul begins to explain how we are dead to the law, but he does so by stating how if a woman's husband is dead she is free to marry. Which is a law. So he is using the law to explain and ultimately justify how we are dead to the law. And he does it by using a law that we are still required to keep?!? What? That is confusing. On the other hand if all the laws are spiritualized, but i have to keep them still, just this time keeping them in my spiritual side first and then in my physical life, how does that do away with dietary laws? Or to put it another way, now that i recognize not only that i shouldn't murder, but i shouldn't even hate, should i not also recognize that i should not only keep the dietary laws but also what they represented? (which i suppose is Holiness according to Brother Mark?) Or is it good to not hate but i can murder all i want? To be separated to God inwardly but not be separated outwardly (in dietary laws) ? Now do you see my confusion?

Oh my goodness…you have me aching for you. You’re making it so hard on yourself. I hope we can show you how Jesus revealed that the burden was on him and not us. Did you read my post to you above yet? Maybe this will help a little bit.

It’s not that the physical laws suddenly turn into spiritual laws so you don’t have to attempt to do the “physical” laws any longer; it’s that the physical laws have always had a deeper, spiritual purpose. Like I said, if you simply enjoy and embrace the heartfelt intent of God’s Law, you will love God and love others. That is simple to understand, yes?

Please remember that when the citizens of Israel obeyed and enjoyed taking part in the various customs of Moses and feasts of the LORD, many did so because they believed in the God of Abraham. Sure, some may have partaken even though they didn’t put their trust and faith in the God of Abraham, but parking in it or not doesn’t affect one’s eternal life. Partaking is a sign that you believe, but it’s an outward sign to those who can’t see into the heart. Only God knows the heart.

OK, Romans 7. The law has jurisdiction over you (i.e. can condemn you if you break it) if you are living. The law can’t condemn you (i.e. hold you responsible) if you’re dead.

You have died with Christ and are raised up with him. The law has no jurisdiction over you any longer (i.e. it can’t condemn you or hold you responsible for breaking it). Does that mean the law was bad? Does that mean you should stop obeying the good law?

If you live in a city where the speeding limit is 65 miles per hour on the highways and you come to believe that it’s a good law and move to a city where there is no speeding limit, should you break the law you’ve learned to realize is a good law just because you won’t be fined? The law from your home city has no jurisdiction over you in this new city (i.e. it can’t condemn you), but does that mean the law was a bad law?

[Butch5]

Hi I just joined. My question is about Acts chapters 10 and 11; but also how they relate to the rest of scripture. Please note i am not a 7th Day Adventists.

These chapters appear to me to be about a dream Peter has that convinces him to have social dealings with a gentile named Cornelius. Peter eventually gives the interpretation of his dream in verse 27 of chapter 10.

²⁷ While talking with him, Peter went inside and found a large gathering of people. ²⁸ He said to them: “You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with or visit a Gentile. But God has shown me that I should not call anyone impure or unclean. ²⁹ So when I was sent for, I came without raising any objection. May I ask why you sent for me?”

The vision also includes a blanket that both comes down from heaven and is taken up again. It is not left on earth.

I have two questions. Firstly, if this is what the chapters are about, and Peter himself gives the interpretation, why do people use it as pertaining to foods that are able to be eaten or not eaten. That seems forced. Secondly, why are we allowed to eat unclean animals? Where does that idea come from? Thanks for all answers in advance!

Hi Jesse,

Welcome! The vision is not about the animals. God used the clean and unclean animal illustration because the Jews understood the Gentiles to be unclean and as such would not go into visit with them. God was showing Peter that the Gentiles were not to be considered unclean anymore.

The reason we can eat unclean animals is because the Law about eating clean and unclean animals was the Mosaic Law and it was given to the Jews, however, it has come to an end.

[Butch5]

I guess i am asking that. But i also suppose the answer would then be no. But then are jews supposed to keep the law? Was the apostle peter hanging out eating hamburgers at his local McDonalds shortly after his vision? And how could there be jewish believers during the end times if you can't become a jew via physical circumcision and most don't know their heritage and are probably khazarians anyways? And then if you say "well God knows who are real jews and even who belong to the lost tribes of Isreal" that is fine and good but what if I myself am one? And if i am shouldn't i be keeping the law? I don't know. Like i said, i am confused. But two of the least understandable things in the bible for me are, what is going on with Isreal/gentiles and what is going on with the Law/Grace. But that is pretty much all the bible is about so it is kinda a pain.

Hi Jesse,

Hey, it sounds like you are really confused. I think I can help you figure some of this out. click on my name in upper left part of this post and click on private message. It will be easier for me to discuss this with you as opposed to an open board.

[Brother Mark]

Also, as near as i can figure from what Brother Mark is saying, some people believe that the physical acts of the law are all spiritualized or also that some like the festivals are fulfilled in Christ. Which is fine and i guess i agree to a large degree. But some are obviously not. For example in Romans chapter 7 Paul begins to explain how we are dead to the law, but he does so by stating how if a woman's husband is dead she is free to marry. Which is a law. So he is using the law to explain and ultimately justify how we are dead to the law. And he does it by using a law that we are still required to keep?!? What? That is confusing. On the other hand if all the laws are spiritualized, but i have to keep them still, just this time keeping them in my spiritual side first and then in my physical life, how does that do away with dietary laws? Or to put it another way, now that i recognize not only that i shouldn't murder, but i shouldn't even hate, should i not also recognize that i should not only keep the dietary laws but also what they represented? (which i suppose is Holiness according to Brother Mark?) Or is it good to not hate but i can murder all i want? To be separated to God inwardly but not be separated outwardly (in dietary laws) ? Now do you see my confusion?

According to Paul, all the law is summed up in this...

Gal 5:14-15
14 For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."
NASU

I don't know if this will help or not, but I will try to explain a little more about the law. There was the Law of Moses. This law was given by God and God used it to foreshadow his Son. It was part of the covenant between God and Israel. It was used to govern the nation of Israel and also used for moral and ceremonial purposes. All three (national, moral, and ceremonial) parts were included in the law of Moses. However, that does not make those laws eternal laws!

The 10 commandments are eternal commandments, IMO. God had them placed inside the ark, while the Law of Moses was placed outside the ark. But Paul summed up the entire law of Moses and 10 commandments as one word, that was contained in the second most important law "love". That word is contained in the greatest command and second greatest command according to Christ. "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength" and the second is like unto it "love your neighbor as yourself".

So in the NT, we look back at the law of Moses and look for Christ in it. The laws are no longer needed for moral, ceremonial, or national purposes. Today, we have national laws to cover the nation portion. The moral laws are contained in "love God and love your neighbor" and spelled out in the NT, and the ceremonial laws are shadows of Christ. We keep them all in Spirit but not necessarily in the same way the Israelites kept them.

For instance, we still need a high priest, but our High Priest is Christ! And we can go into the Holy of Holies and into the presence of God!!!!

As to your question about divorce concerning law and Romans... look at this way, if I leave the US and move to England, I am not longer under the law of the US. I am under the law of England. Now, lets say it is against the law to steal in the US. Since I am no longer under the law of the US, am I now permitted to steal in England? No way! Because there is still a law but it's a different law. Jesus said "you have heard it said, and eye for an eye. But I say unto you, turn the other cheek." Jesus was quoting the law of Moses when he said "eye for an eye". He wants us to turn the other cheek. That is a greater law because it is the law of love.

Hope this helps some.

Grace to you.

Mark

[shepherdsword]

I believe the vision Peter received was definitely applicable to the food laws as well as staying separate form the gentiles. The law has been abolished for jewish believers as well. They do not have a different way to salvation. That being said,there is wisdom in the food laws and if they are kept for health reasons and not as an attempt to please God then there is nothing wrong with them.
This pretty much sums up for me the abolition of such laws:

1Ti 4:1 . Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 4:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

[Sojourner55]

34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matt 22:34-39 NIV)

According to Jesus, the law and prophets--the entire foundation on which the Jewish faith rests--is summed up in:
1. an unconditional love and reverence for God, with every fiber of your being.
2. loving your neighbor as yourself.

Jesus says this because the law centers around our relationship first with God, and then, demonstrating that love, by loving those around us. The law and the prophets includes the ten commandments, and if you look at them carefully, you'll see that each one addresses one of those two relationships: the first four pertain to God, and the other six concern our interaction with people. Therein, we find the true spirit of the law and the prophets.

As born again Christians, filled with the Spirit of God, and fully obeying and trusting in Jesus, we have the spirit of the law written in our hearts. This negates the meticulous keeping of every element of the law. As Paul taught, it is "the law of the Spirit" within a believer that fulfills the law, and free us from the law of sin and death, in a way not otherwise possible (Rom 8:1-4). Obey Jesus, and you obey the law. Hope that helps.

[JJsaint]

Hi I just joined. My question is about Acts chapters 10 and 11; but also how they relate to the rest of scripture. Please note i am not a 7th Day Adventists.

These chapters appear to me to be about a dream Peter has that convinces him to have social dealings with a gentile named Cornelius. Peter eventually gives the interpretation of his dream in verse 27 of chapter 10.

²⁷ While talking with him, Peter went inside and found a large gathering of people. ²⁸ He said to them: “You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with or visit a Gentile. But God has shown me that I should not call anyone impure or unclean. ²⁹ So when I was sent for, I came without raising any objection. May I ask why you sent for me?”

The vision also includes a blanket that both comes down from heaven and is taken up again. It is not left on earth.

I have two questions. Firstly, if this is what the chapters are about, and Peter himself gives the interpretation, why do people use it as pertaining to foods that are able to be eaten or not eaten. That seems forced. Secondly, why are we allowed to eat unclean animals? Where does that idea come from? Thanks for all answers in advance!

Acts 10 is about Peter Judging between clean and unclean MEN. (Acts 10:28)
It is not about Clean and Unclean food.

Acts 10:13-14:13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

14But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

A voice tells Peter to eat, but Peter refuses to eat unclean animals!

[jesse]

According to Paul, all the law is summed up in this...

Gal 5:14-15
14 For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."
NASU

I don't know if this will help or not, but I will try to explain a little more about the law. There was the Law of Moses. This law was given by God and God used it to foreshadow his Son. It was part of the covenant between God and Israel. It was used to govern the nation of Israel and also used for moral and ceremonial purposes. All three (national, moral, and ceremonial) parts were included in the law of Moses. However, that does not make those laws eternal laws!

The 10 commandments are eternal commandments, IMO. God had them placed inside the ark, while the Law of Moses was placed outside the ark. But Paul summed up the entire law of Moses and 10 commandments as one word, that was contained in the second most important law "love". That word is contained in the greatest command and second greatest command according to Christ. "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength" and the second is like unto it "love your neighbor as yourself".

So in the NT, we look back at the law of Moses and look for Christ in it. The laws are no longer needed for moral, ceremonial, or national purposes. Today, we have national laws to cover the nation portion. The moral laws are contained in "love God and love your neighbor" and spelled out in the NT, and the ceremonial laws are shadows of Christ. We keep them all in Spirit but not necessarily in the same way the Israelites kept them.

For instance, we still need a high priest, but our High Priest is Christ! And we can go into the Holy of Holies and into the presence of God!!!!

As to your question about divorce concerning law and Romans... look at this way, if I leave the US and move to England, I am not longer under the law of the US. I am under the law of England. Now, lets say it is against the law to steal in the US. Since I am no longer under the law of the US, am I now permitted to steal in England? No way! Because there is still a law but it's a different law. Jesus said "you have heard it said, and eye for an eye. But I say unto you, turn the other cheek." Jesus was quoting the law of Moses when he said "eye for an eye". He wants us to turn the other cheek. That is a greater law because it is the law of love.

Hope this helps some.

Grace to you.

Mark

Well as far as i can understand the whole law is summed up in a slightly broader sentence.

Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. Matthew 22:36-40

However, If all the other laws fulfill the first two, then how can some be done away with? Also, even if the law is only the ten commandments as you have put forth, that means many christians, myself included, break the laws regarding the Sabbath. I, of course, don't want to turn this into a discussion about the Sabbath, but even if only the ten commandments were eternal, then i am breaking the law on a weekly basis. No?

Similarly, I can't love God if i am not doing what he wants. No? So if he wants me to do something specific like keep dietary laws, or whatever he wants, i should do it. Not that i am saying what you are saying is wrong, but i am just thinking that because i need to love him does not mean i could love him while neglecting what he says. right? Not that he nessesarily says to keep dietary laws...

Other than that i guess i see what you are getting at but it still doesn't make perfect sense to me. Perhaps it is clearer than it was? I guess.

[jesse]

Oh my goodness…you have me aching for you. You’re making it so hard on yourself. I hope we can show you how Jesus revealed that the burden was on him and not us. Did you read my post to you above yet? Maybe this will help a little bit.

It’s not that the physical laws suddenly turn into spiritual laws so you don’t have to attempt to do the “physical” laws any longer; it’s that the physical laws have always had a deeper, spiritual purpose. Like I said, if you simply enjoy and embrace the heartfelt intent of God’s Law, you will love God and love others. That is simple to understand, yes?

Please remember that when the citizens of Israel obeyed and enjoyed taking part in the various customs of Moses and feasts of the LORD, many did so because they believed in the God of Abraham. Sure, some may have partaken even though they didn’t put their trust and faith in the God of Abraham, but parking in it or not doesn’t affect one’s eternal life. Partaking is a sign that you believe, but it’s an outward sign to those who can’t see into the heart. Only God knows the heart.

OK, Romans 7. The law has jurisdiction over you (i.e. can condemn you if you break it) if you are living. The law can’t condemn you (i.e. hold you responsible) if you’re dead.

You have died with Christ and are raised up with him. The law has no jurisdiction over you any longer (i.e. it can’t condemn you or hold you responsible for breaking it). Does that mean the law was bad? Does that mean you should stop obeying the good law?

If you live in a city where the speeding limit is 65 miles per hour on the highways and you come to believe that it’s a good law and move to a city where there is no speeding limit, should you break the law you’ve learned to realize is a good law just because you won’t be fined? The law from your home city has no jurisdiction over you in this new city (i.e. it can’t condemn you), but does that mean the law was a bad law?

I think i understand what you are saying but then i guess it doesn't change anything regarding dietary laws? If the law was good. Why should i not still obey it? It sort of leaves me with the same problem. Although, i guess it kind of strengthens the idea that it should still be obeyed. no?

[jesse]

"Again, try to be more specific here. The Law and Grace do not oppose each other. "

Sorry, it is late and i can only answer this question right now.

As for law v.s. Grace or Justice v.s Forgiveness. Well, lets say i have a wife and she commits adultery, the law says she should be stoned with stones until she is dead. But grace on the other hand says no, forgive her. So... Do i go with Justice offered by the law? Or do i go with forgiveness offered by Grace? They seem mutually exclusive because if i forgive her, there will be no justice. But if i demand justice, there will be no grace. So are they not at odds? P.S. i am not saying that Jesus death in anyway does not fulfill both justice and grace. Of course it does. Of course, it does seem unjust to allow an innocent and perfect man to die for the sins of the condemned. Not that i am not thankful. But the ideas themselves out side of Christ are at odds to say the least.

[Sojourner55]

Of course, it does seem unjust to allow an innocent and perfect man to die for the sins of the condemned. Not that i am not thankful. But the ideas themselves out side of Christ are at odds to say the least.

It is this very paradox of the Judge taking the place of the condemned--in order to give life to the condemned, and pronounce Him "not guilty" that makes God's plan of Salvation so unfathomable to the human mind:

Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory. (1 Tim 3:16)

[LookingUp]

I think i understand what you are saying but then i guess it doesn't change anything regarding dietary laws? If the law was good. Why should i not still obey it? It sort of leaves me with the same problem. Although, i guess it kind of strengthens the idea that it should still be obeyed. no?

"Again, try to be more specific here. The Law and Grace do not oppose each other. "

Sorry, it is late and i can only answer this question right now.

As for law v.s. Grace or Justice v.s Forgiveness. Well, lets say i have a wife and she commits adultery, the law says she should be stoned with stones until she is dead. But grace on the other hand says no, forgive her. So... Do i go with Justice offered by the law? Or do i go with forgiveness offered by Grace? They seem mutually exclusive because if i forgive her, there will be no justice. But if i demand justice, there will be no grace. So are they not at odds? P.S. i am not saying that Jesus death in anyway does not fulfill both justice and grace. Of course it does. Of course, it does seem unjust to allow an innocent and perfect man to die for the sins of the condemned. Not that i am not thankful. But the ideas themselves out side of Christ are at odds to say the least.

The laws were operative within a biblically functioning nation of Israel. The laws were, in essence, what made them a nation. The laws, as a whole, were the identifying factor of the nation of Israel. Even though these laws contained regulations that other nations weren’t required to keep (i.e. ceremonial, civil), of course, God would also have the nation Israel follow the moral laws. So, think of it this way, for the nation of Israel, God added onto what other nations were already expected to do.

Jesus already gave us the peace and wisdom in knowing that when we love God and each other, we fulfill the heartfelt intent of the entire law of God. So, the laws of Israel that you take with you as a believing Jew are those that have value and meaning for your life personally. Many of the laws would be impossible for one to keep and many of the laws would be meaningless outside of the nation for which they were specifically created. So, if you find the dietary laws possible to keep and meaningful to your life, keep them.