PDA

View Full Version : Is shrimp a clean food according to the OT?



ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 05:13 AM
I believe shrimp IS according to the rules in the OT. I have evidence but want to see what others says first. I will assume most will disagree, but let's have a discussion!

I already know that many Christians believe all foods are clean according to the NT, but I hope to discuss what the OT allows.

-SEEKING-
Aug 31st 2011, 10:25 AM
Not sure. But at this point it doesn't really matter. I'm neither a Levite nor Jewish. Are you a follower of the OT laws?

mikebr
Aug 31st 2011, 11:28 AM
http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/
Funny!

Of course shrimp IS according to the OT but so is wearing cotton blend underwear.

AND......................................

(Leviticus 25:44) Cancel Changes (http://bibleforums.org/)

The code requires:


http://www.religioustolerance.org/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
A child to be killed if he/she curses their parent (Leviticus 20:9)


http://www.religioustolerance.org/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
All persons guilty of adultery to be killed (20:10)


http://www.religioustolerance.org/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
The daughter of a priest who engages in prostitution to be burned alive until dead (21:9)


http://www.religioustolerance.org/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
The bride of a priest to be a virgin (21:13)


http://www.religioustolerance.org/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
Ritual killing of animals, using cattle, sheep and goats (22:19)


http://www.religioustolerance.org/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
Observation of 7 feasts: Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Feast of Firstfruits, Feast of Pentecost, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles (23)


http://www.religioustolerance.org/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
A person who takes the Lord's name in vain is to be killed (24:16)

mikebr
Aug 31st 2011, 11:42 AM
The code prohibits:
Heterosexual intercourse when a woman has her period (Leviticus 18:19),
Harvesting the corners of a field (19:9),
Eating fruit from a young tree (19:23),
Cross-breeding livestock (19:19),
Sowing a field with mixed seed (19:19),
Shaving or getting a hair cut (19:27),
Tattoos (19:28),
Even a mildly disabled person from becoming a priest (21:18),
Charging of interest on a loan (25:37),
Collecting firewood on Saturday to prevent your family from freezing,
Wearing of clothes made from a blend of textile materials; today this might be cotton and polyester, and
Eating of non-kosher foods (e.g. shrimp).

Fenris
Aug 31st 2011, 12:14 PM
I believe shrimp IS according to the rules in the OT.Shrimp is not permitted according to the bible.

Leviticus 11:9. Among all that are in the water, you may eat these: Any in the water that has fins and scales, those you may eat, whether in the waters, in the seas or in the rivers. 10. But any that do not have fins and scales, whether in the seas or in the rivers, among all the creeping creatures in the water and among all living creatures that in the water, are an abomination for you.11. And they shall be an abomination for you. You shall not eat of their flesh, and their dead bodies you shall hold in abomination. 12. Any that does not have fins and scales in the water is an abomination for you.

Shrimp do not have "fins and scales", so they may not be eaten. Seems pretty straightforward.

Adstars
Aug 31st 2011, 03:27 PM
Shrimp is not permitted according to the bible.

Leviticus 11:9. Among all that are in the water, you may eat these: Any in the water that has fins and scales, those you may eat, whether in the waters, in the seas or in the rivers. 10. But any that do not have fins and scales, whether in the seas or in the rivers, among all the creeping creatures in the water and among all living creatures that in the water, are an abomination for you.11. And they shall be an abomination for you. You shall not eat of their flesh, and their dead bodies you shall hold in abomination. 12. Any that does not have fins and scales in the water is an abomination for you.


Shrimp do not have "fins and scales", so they may not be eaten. Seems pretty straightforward.


Yep seems pretty clear doesn't it. I would like to see ewg1938's reasionings behind his/her? belief that it is clean?



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Desperaux
Aug 31st 2011, 06:16 PM
All foods are considered clean.

John 8:32
Aug 31st 2011, 06:26 PM
Under the Old Covenant, Israel was not to associate with Gentile nations. They were considered unclean and would defile Israel. Acts 10 is not about food or what you eat. It uses food to teach a far more important lesson: the Gentiles are to also called to salvation. In fact Paul says...

Act 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

keck553
Aug 31st 2011, 06:28 PM
i don't like shrimp. It tastes like the muck at the bottom of the sea. But I don't like eggplant either....

keck553
Aug 31st 2011, 06:29 PM
All foods are considered clean.

Since Jesus was talking to Jews, you need to consider the context of what 'food' is to a Jew. Also, Jesus is talking in the context of ritual cleanliness being applied by man-made application, not in the context of His Law.

Fenris
Aug 31st 2011, 06:33 PM
Under the Old Covenant, Israel was not to associate with Gentile nations. They were considered unclean and would defile Israel. I suppose I should be leaving, then...

Fenris
Aug 31st 2011, 06:34 PM
But I don't like eggplant either....+1.

My wife even breaded and fried some in an attempt to make it tasty. Failed.

Noonzie
Aug 31st 2011, 06:46 PM
i don't think shrimp is clean unless you scoop all the poop off the back.

keck553
Aug 31st 2011, 07:10 PM
+1.

My wife even breaded and fried some in an attempt to make it tasty. Failed.

Does your wife have a good hummis receipe?

keck553
Aug 31st 2011, 07:11 PM
i don't think shrimp is clean unless you scoop all the poop off the back.

LOL. Food processors do something like that with beavers and add it to vanilla ice creme.

Fenris
Aug 31st 2011, 07:21 PM
Does your wife have a good hummis receipe?Nah, although she's been pretty creative in the kitchen lately.

ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 11:59 PM
Not sure. But at this point it doesn't really matter. I'm neither a Levite nor Jewish. Are you a follower of the OT laws?

No

.................

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 12:00 AM
Eating of non-kosher foods (e.g. shrimp).

And why do you say its non-kosher?

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 12:01 AM
Shrimp do not have "fins and scales", so they may not be eaten. Seems pretty straightforward.

They do have fins and scales. I've peeled them when I was a cook in a restaurant, and I've seen videos of them swimming. Crabs dont have fins or scales but Shrimp have both.

mikebr
Sep 1st 2011, 12:02 AM
And why do you say its non-kosher?

Is it? ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,My bad!

Bandit
Sep 1st 2011, 12:17 AM
I believe shrimp IS according to the rules in the OT. I have evidence but want to see what others says first. I will assume most will disagree, but let's have a discussion!

I already know that many Christians believe all foods are clean according to the NT, but I hope to discuss what the OT allows.

I think shrimp is gross! I don't think it is clean no matter how many times you wash it!

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 12:23 AM
Leviticus 11:9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.


scales


7193

07193 qasqeseth {kas-keh'-seth}

by reduplication from an unused root meaning to shale off as
bark; TWOT - 2082a; n f

AV - scale 7, mail 1; 8

1) scale (of fish, water animals)



Note that Thayer is clear that not only fish may have scales. We have to remove the traditional blinders concerning only fish being what is clean in the waters because God didn't limit clean food in the waters to only fish. God did not give scales and fins only to fish!




OT:7193
qasqeseth (kas-keh'-seth); by reduplication from an unused root meaning to shale off as bark; a scale (of a fish); hence a coat of mail (as composed of or covered with jointed plates of metal):


KJV - mail, scale.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright (c) 1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)


Strong goes into more detail comparing scales to a coat of mail which is metal plates bound together to make an outer (exoskeleton) layer of protection.



A fishes scales are an outer or exo protection albeit not as strong as the outer scales of a Prawn or shrimp but the function is the same.


A scale is something covering the animal that "flakes" off in pieces as bark does a tree when agitated or intentionally disturbed, also similar to a "coat of mail" with overlapping pieces of metal that act like scales. That describes the scales of a Prawn perfectly. Bark is the "exoskeleton" of a tree! It is essentially a solid mass of bark but when you break the bark off the tree it comes off in pieces of varying sizes. Scales of fish and shrimp like creatures are also bound together in a solid outer piece helping to protect the animal but these individual scales can also be removed and broken off. Fish tend to have more of smaller scales and the shrimp variety have less of larger scales.

The scales of water animals do not "look" like bark nor like chain mail but they have similar functions which is a light "armor" of protection made up of a bunch of smaller items. Bark comes off in pieces and that is why it was used in comparison. Chain mail is small pieces of steel that are put together to form a light exo-armor. Both of these are similar to what scales are for. The scales of fish are very similar to the scales on the exterior of shrimp only differing in size.



Based on that I submit that Prawns and Shrimp etc are clean foods because they do have scales (large thick ones) and they do have fins. I have cleaned enough of them to know.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NCI_steamed_shrimp.jpg


You can see the fins in the tail in this picture.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pabV_3absFE

Here you can see the tail fins as well.


Leviticus 11:9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.


There is a very good reason why this verse says "whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters" are clean to eat rather than "only fish that hath fins and scales in the waters" are clean to eat. It's simply that there are other creatures in the waters that are clean to eat besides certain fish. Fish aren't the only things we can eat from the water!



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama_cave_shrimp



"Characteristics that tell the Alabama cave shrimp from the Kentucky cave shrimp are that it usually lacks abdominal scales, with fewer scales on the back."



All shrimp have scales on their bodies. Some have more and some have less but scales and tail fins are common to all forms of shrimp and prawn.



And, while all fish have fins not all have scales. Therefore some fish are clean and some are unclean, and some non fish are clean such as shrimp while many non fish are unclean such as clams.

IMINXTC
Sep 1st 2011, 12:27 AM
I think shrimp is gross! I don't think it is clean no matter how many times you wash it!

My first job as a teen was cleaning huge pots of shrimp at a resturant. Nasty little buggers.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 12:30 AM
I caught and gutted two Trout last weekend. I Don't like the taste of them so i give away, and it's a very messy job. I find the shrimp have less of a "fishy" taste and are generally better. But, I only wish to establish that shrimp do have scales which protect their inner bodies, and that they have fins on their tails. Those two things qualify them as clean to eat by the OT, despite man's long history of believing they aren't clean.

IMINXTC
Sep 1st 2011, 12:31 AM
Shrimp have exo-skeletons, as opposed to scales. The skeleton can be completely shed, keeping its original shape.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 12:37 AM
Shrimp have exo-skeletons, as opposed to scales. The skeleton can be completely shed, keeping its original shape.

Its still scales, overlapped hardened things that protect the animal. The scripture doesnt define "scales" as only fish type of scales. Fish dont have the same kind of scales anyways. And you can remove the skin and scales from a fish and leave just the "meat" same with a shrimp.

Bandit
Sep 1st 2011, 01:04 AM
I admit to having caught, cleaned, and eaten catfish in my day. (But perch were always my favorites!)

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 01:15 AM
I admit to having caught, cleaned, and eaten catfish in my day. (But perch were always my favorites!)

I believe all foods are clean as per the NT, but I believe catfish have no scales.

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 12:32 PM
Its still scales, overlapped hardened things that protect the animal. Not technically scales. As pointed out above, it is actually an exoskeleton.

Adstars
Sep 1st 2011, 12:56 PM
All foods are considered clean.

I think the topic of the thread is shrimp is unclean food according to the OT covenant. It's asking the question if Shrimp was Kosher during OT times or Not.

Of course today Christians are no longer under such laws.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Adstars
Sep 1st 2011, 01:08 PM
I still cannot see the exoskeleton as scales. Yes they may have fins. But i still don't think that their exoskeleton is scale.

Scales to me are overlapping armour plates that grow out of a sin... scales are not the actual skin. But for these exoskeleton creatures the armour is their skin.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 03:16 PM
I still cannot see the exoskeleton as scales. Yes they may have fins. But i still don't think that their exoskeleton is scale.

Scales to me are overlapping armour plates that grow out of a sin... scales are not the actual skin. But for these exoskeleton creatures the armour is their skin.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

The characteristics of an animal is determined by experts, not one lone person. Shrimp, like all 'unclean' animals live off garbage.

As the old adage, goes, you are what you eat.

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 03:41 PM
To the OP, if you're going to make a pitch for some traditionally non-kosher food to become kosher, please do bacon.

K thx bye

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 03:55 PM
To the OP, if you're going to make a pitch for some traditionally non-kosher food to become kosher, please do bacon.

K thx bye

It may be possible to surgically alter a pig, thus making it kosher? You know, put lipstick on it or something

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 04:09 PM
It may be possible to surgically alter a pig, thus making it kosher? Maybe through genetic engineering?

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 04:15 PM
Maybe through genetic engineering?

I thought that was turkey-bacon....

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 04:16 PM
I thought that was turkey-bacon....Wait. There's turkey bacon?

John 8:32
Sep 1st 2011, 04:18 PM
Don't even mention the turkey ham.

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 04:21 PM
Don't even mention the turkey ham.There's turkey ham too?

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 04:48 PM
Wait. There's turkey bacon?

Oscar-Meyer is the best. 6 strips on a paper towel, microwave for 2:20

No pareve on it though.

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 04:49 PM
There's turkey ham too?

Odd how many nouns we have for 'pig'....ham, bacon, pork, the 'iother white meat', etc.... Why not just call a pig a pig?

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 04:50 PM
Don't even mention the turkey ham.

Don't forget beef-ham....

hamburger

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 04:52 PM
Oscar-Meyer is the best.Hmm Oscar Meyer is not kosher but it seems there does exist kosher "Turkey bacon". Although they call it "Turkey fry strips" or something. never seen it for sale by me though.

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 04:53 PM
Don't forget beef-ham....

hamburgerYeah and my wife is awesome with the grill :thumbsup:

RollTide21
Sep 1st 2011, 04:58 PM
Shrimp is not permitted according to the bible.

Leviticus 11:9. Among all that are in the water, you may eat these: Any in the water that has fins and scales, those you may eat, whether in the waters, in the seas or in the rivers. 10. But any that do not have fins and scales, whether in the seas or in the rivers, among all the creeping creatures in the water and among all living creatures that in the water, are an abomination for you.11. And they shall be an abomination for you. You shall not eat of their flesh, and their dead bodies you shall hold in abomination. 12. Any that does not have fins and scales in the water is an abomination for you.

Shrimp do not have "fins and scales", so they may not be eaten. Seems pretty straightforward.What was the reason for this, do you think? Could shrimp make us sick?

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 05:00 PM
Hmm Oscar Meyer is not kosher but it seems there does exist kosher "Turkey bacon". Although they call it "Turkey fry strips" or something. never seen it for sale by me though.

hehe....I think the word 'bacon' is not kosher by association.

We used to serve Hebrew National sausage in our deli. It was pretty good too.

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 05:05 PM
What was the reason for this, do you think? Could shrimp make us sick?It's been pointed out by greater minds than mine that the kosher laws are a subset of the fact that man used to be vegetarian. So God allowed man to eat meat, but He also expects us to respect the fact that an animal had to give up it's life for us to have that meal.

So first of all, one can't eat just any animal, but only those on the approved list.

And it has to be killed in the proper manner.

And one can eat the meat of the animal but one is not entitled to it's blood, i.e. it's life.

Now, as to why some animals are approved and not others, one can speculate based on the animals permitted and not permitted. Carnivores are not kosher, for example. Neither are scavengers. Shellfish that eat whatever garbage falls to the ocean floor are also prohibited. So perhaps it is a matter of "you are what you eat".

Of course, some aspects of the law defy explanation, so perhaps they have metaphysical aspects that our beyond our comprehension...

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 05:07 PM
We used to serve Hebrew National sausage in our deli. It was pretty good too.They answer to a "higher authority" :lol:

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 05:07 PM
Of course, some aspects of the law defy explanation, so perhaps they have metaphysical aspects that our beyond our comprehension...

You mean like trusting God?

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 05:09 PM
You mean like trusting God?Trusting God that He gave us the laws for our benefit, even if we can't see how...

Deuteronomy 4:6 Observe them carefully, for this will show your wisdom and understanding to the nations, who will hear about all these decrees and say, "Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people."

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 05:11 PM
They answer to a "higher authority" :lol:

Oddly, so do I .

John 8:32
Sep 1st 2011, 06:16 PM
We used to serve Hebrew National sausage in our deli. It was pretty good too.

I prefer Hebrew National, but not because they are pareve. I like the flavor and the fact they are made from better cuts of meat. I know this to be true because they say so on TV. LOL.

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 06:24 PM
I prefer Hebrew National, but not because they are pareve. I like the flavor and the fact they are made from better cuts of meat. I know this to be true because they say so on TV. LOL.

I just like to know what I stick in my child's mouth is actually nutricious.

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 06:33 PM
I just like to know what I stick in my child's mouth is actually nutricious.I don't know if you're allowed to is the words "nutritious" and "hot dogs" in the same sentence.

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 06:37 PM
I don't know if you're allowed to is the words "nutritious" and "hot dogs" in the same sentence.

Semantically, it is an oxymoron....

VerticalReality
Sep 1st 2011, 06:45 PM
Since Jesus was talking to Jews, you need to consider the context of what 'food' is to a Jew.

Okay, so if Jesus was only speaking of items that Jews would consider food, what sort of food did the Jews formerly think was unclean before Jesus declared it wasn't?

Ta-An
Sep 1st 2011, 06:47 PM
I don't know if you're allowed to is the words "nutritious" and "hot dogs" in the same sentence. :lol:
Vienna sausages (In SA) used for Hot-dogs are full of PORK!!

John 8:32
Sep 1st 2011, 06:59 PM
Okay, so if Jesus was only speaking of items that Jews would consider food, what sort of food did the Jews formerly think was unclean before Jesus declared it wasn't?

Try Lev 11 for a starter

VerticalReality
Sep 1st 2011, 07:22 PM
Try Lev 11 for a starter

I'm familiar with the OT food laws. However, the point keck was making is that Jewish people wouldn't have considered any of that stuff food, so these things couldn't have been what Jesus was referring to. So, by saying this he would also have to be saying that there WERE some things that Jewish people believed to be food yet still unclean for some particular reason.

I'm simply pointing out that using the ole "the Jews wouldn't have considered that food" argument just won't work in this instance.

For example, if I make the statement, "I declare that from this point forward all foods are clean," I'm also giving the impression that prior to my declaration there were certain foods there weren't clean. So, by saying, "Jews wouldn't have considered that stuff food," a person would still at the same time be declaring that there WERE other things that Jews considered to be food that Jesus was cleansing.

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 07:46 PM
Okay, so if Jesus was only speaking of items that Jews would consider food, what sort of food did the Jews formerly think was unclean before Jesus declared it wasn't?

Apparently some Pharisees applied Levitical Temple cleanliness laws to themselves and they felt they had to be ritually clean all the time. The problem is that being ritually unclean is not a sin, only coming into the temple ritually unclean was. But these yehooos decided that it was a sin to be ritually unclean at anytime. Note the context of the story. It wasn't about food, it was about hand-washing (problably with uttering a Brakah). This formula was given in the Law for priests before they ate the sacrifice (thus making it ritually clean) not to ordinary Israeli's. The Pharisees added the ritual to their daily lives, possibly because they believed all of Israel was a priest to the nations. In any case, it wasn't about the food, it was about the ritual.

read the passsages without preconceptions and you'll see the subject is not about the food, but about the ritual of preparing to eat.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 09:40 PM
Not technically scales. As pointed out above, it is actually an exoskeleton.

But made of scales. They are merely larger than most fish scales. If God wanted only fish with scales and fins to be eaten he could have specified that but he said anything in the waters that have scales and fins are clean to eat, not limiting eating to only fish but non fish that meet the requirements.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 09:43 PM
I still cannot see the exoskeleton as scales. Yes they may have fins. But i still don't think that their exoskeleton is scale.

Scales to me are overlapping armour plates that grow out of a sin... scales are not the actual skin. But for these exoskeleton creatures the armour is their skin.


Yet God does not say the scales must grow on top of skin...a shrimps armor is their outer scales. To open them up you have to remove the scales, often one at a time. That they have no skeleton is also not a requirement by God.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 09:44 PM
The characteristics of an animal is determined by experts, not one lone person. Shrimp, like all 'unclean' animals live off garbage.

As the old adage, goes, you are what you eat.

Again, where does the bible state that water creatures are unclean if they "eat garbage"?

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 09:46 PM
But made of scales. Sharks also have "scales" but they are not the same as other fish scales. Sharks are also not kosher.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 09:46 PM
To the OP, if you're going to make a pitch for some traditionally non-kosher food to become kosher, please do bacon.

K thx bye

Shrimp have been categorized by man since IMO they meet the criteria. I do not care if most stick with tradition but I do hope to open up some eyes to this long held mistake. Pigs do not meet the proper criteria for being clean so nothing can be done for them.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 09:50 PM
Sharks also have "scales" but they are not the same as other fish scales. Sharks are also not kosher.

Sharks do not have scales.

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 09:50 PM
Shrimp have been categorized by man since IMO they meet the criteria.I can just see it now. It's the future and I meet the True Judge. He asks me why I ate all that shrimp when the bible says not to. I will tell Him, "Some guy on the internet name ewq1938 told me it was kosher".

Yeah.

Fenris
Sep 1st 2011, 09:51 PM
Sharks do not have scales.Sure they do. They have microscopic scales.

http://www.aquariumofpacific.org/images/shark_summer/shark-scales.jpg

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 10:00 PM
Sure they do. They have microscopic scales.

http://www.aquariumofpacific.org/images/shark_summer/shark-scales.jpg

Well, then since they (or at least that species) has scales and fins, then the bible declares it as clean. Unless you can quote a passage that excludes a predator like a shark.



Carnivores are not kosher, for example.

Again, biblical reference? I caught some Trout last weekend, as well as two other kind of smaller fish. They are all Carnivores and they have scales and fins.

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 10:46 PM
Again, where does the bible state that water creatures are unclean if they "eat garbage"?

Simple math .

garbage eater = unfit
carrion eater = unfit
predator = unfit

name one animal God declared unfit for human consumption that doesn't fit nto one of the above categories

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 10:46 PM
Sharks also have "scales" but they are not the same as other fish scales. Sharks are also not kosher.

sharks are carnivores.

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 10:48 PM
I can just see it now. It's the future and I meet the True Judge. He asks me why I ate all that shrimp when the bible says not to. I will tell Him, "Some guy on the internet name ewq1938 told me it was kosher".

Yeah.

hahahahahahaha....sorry that was hillarious!

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 10:48 PM
Simple math .

Proof please .

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 10:49 PM
sharks are carnivores.

Most fish are........and?

keck553
Sep 1st 2011, 10:54 PM
Proof please .

okay.

1 + 1 = 2

Look, why don't you just go have some shrimp? No one here's stopping ya.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 11:02 PM
okay.

1 + 1 = 2

Look, why don't you just go have some shrimp? No one here's stopping ya.

Good sir, I have asked you to prove your position biblically, not to make jokes. You have stated that Carnivores are unclean now it's time to prove your statement with scripture.

VerticalReality
Sep 2nd 2011, 04:09 AM
Apparently some Pharisees applied Levitical Temple cleanliness laws to themselves and they felt they had to be ritually clean all the time. The problem is that being ritually unclean is not a sin, only coming into the temple ritually unclean was. But these yehooos decided that it was a sin to be ritually unclean at anytime. Note the context of the story. It wasn't about food, it was about hand-washing (problably with uttering a Brakah). This formula was given in the Law for priests before they ate the sacrifice (thus making it ritually clean) not to ordinary Israeli's. The Pharisees added the ritual to their daily lives, possibly because they believed all of Israel was a priest to the nations. In any case, it wasn't about the food, it was about the ritual.

read the passsages without preconceptions and you'll see the subject is not about the food, but about the ritual of preparing to eat.

Yes, I'm aware of this argument as well; however, I'm pointing out that the argument that Jews wouldn't consider stuff like pork to be food is not one that can be accurately made in this case.

Fenris
Sep 2nd 2011, 09:52 AM
Well, then since they (or at least that species) has scales and fins, then the bible declares it as clean. They're not considered "scales" since they are microscopic. Just as the shrimp isn't considered to have "scales" since they are an exoskeleton.




Again, biblical reference?It's anecdotal, not biblical.

Fenris
Sep 2nd 2011, 11:18 AM
Now perhaps people will understand why the only person who can certify that a prepared dish is kosher is a Jewish person who actually keeps kosher.

It prevents people from making a dish and thinking "shrimp have fins and scales, they are kosher" or "sharks have scales, they are kosher".

mikebr
Sep 2nd 2011, 11:40 AM
Now perhaps people will understand why the only person who can certify that a prepared dish is kosher is a Jewish person who actually keeps kosher.

It prevents people from making a dish and thinking "shrimp have fins and scales, they are kosher" or "sharks have scales, they are kosher".

What exactly does Kosher mean, Fenris? For instance how does kosher salt become kosher?

Fenris
Sep 2nd 2011, 11:49 AM
What exactly does Kosher mean, Fenris? For instance how does kosher salt become kosher?"Kosher salt" should actually be called "koshering salt". Let me explain.

Reading the bible, the following rules determine what is kosher, "fit" for consumption.

All unprocessed fruits and vegetables are ok.

Fish must have fins and scales.

Birds must not be on the prohibited list. Since not all of the birds on the list are positively known, we only eat birds that have a tradition of being kosher.

Mammals must have fully split hooves and chew it's cud.

Birds and mammals must be slaughtered in the proper manner by a qualified rabbi.

Back to your question about the salt. Since blood is prohibited to be consumed, it must be removed from the meat before being eaten. One way to do so is to salt the meat with "kosher salt" for a certain amount of time. The salt draws the blood out of the meat, and the salt is then rinsed off.

keck553
Sep 2nd 2011, 03:04 PM
Yes, I'm aware of this argument as well; however, I'm pointing out that the argument that Jews wouldn't consider stuff like pork to be food is not one that can be accurately made in this case.

If you are aware of the argument, then perhaps you should consider that you're reading a Hebraic writing with a Greek mindset and you've introduced bias in your interpretation. Asking a Jew to eat pork is like me asking you to drink gasoline.

A couple more thoughts. Matthew couldn't just trot down to the local Safeway and buy a package of pork chops in Israel, so the temptation would have been useless.

Also, conisder that Jesus and Matthew at the time of this teaching were definately under the old covenant, and God's definition of sin is transgression of His Law, and behold - The Bible says Jesus didn't sin - and I KNOW God doesn't tempt anyone into sin.

I think the interpretation that Jesus tempted Matthew to chew on a baby back pork rib on the next passover is silly.

Fenris
Sep 2nd 2011, 03:07 PM
The Bible says Jesus didn't sin - and I KNOW God doesn't tempt anyone into sin.
Yeah, but did he eat shrimp? C'mon man, we need to know!

keck553
Sep 2nd 2011, 03:09 PM
Yeah, but did he eat shrimp? C'mon man, we need to know!

Maybe He dyed His blue Tzitzit string with shrimp extracts?

Fenris
Sep 2nd 2011, 03:14 PM
Maybe He dyed His blue Tzitzit string with shrimp extracts?And then ate the shrimp?

keck553
Sep 2nd 2011, 03:38 PM
And then ate the shrimp?

nah, He gave it to the Centurion

Fenris
Sep 2nd 2011, 03:42 PM
nah, He gave it to the CenturionBeing a centurion is hard work I guess. Builds up the appetite.

keck553
Sep 2nd 2011, 03:49 PM
Being a centurion is hard work I guess. Builds up the appetite.

Well see? There's Jesus again, filling the needs and hopes of others.

VerticalReality
Sep 2nd 2011, 03:51 PM
If you are aware of the argument, then perhaps you should consider that you're reading a Hebraic writing with a Greek mindset and you've introduced bias in your interpretation. Asking a Jew to eat pork is like me asking you to drink gasoline.

A couple more thoughts. Matthew couldn't just trot down to the local Safeway and buy a package of pork chops in Israel, so the temptation would have been useless.

Also, conisder that Jesus and Matthew at the time of this teaching were definately under the old covenant, and God's definition of sin is transgression of His Law, and behold - The Bible says Jesus didn't sin - and I KNOW God doesn't tempt anyone into sin.

I think the interpretation that Jesus tempted Matthew to chew on a baby back pork rib on the next passover is silly.

I think you are jumping to a lot of conclusions about "my interpretation." I haven't given an interpretation in this thread. I'm simply pointing out that using the argument that Jews would't consider unclean meat to be food is not a sound argument to make here.

Fenris
Sep 2nd 2011, 03:53 PM
Well see? There's Jesus again, filling the needs and hopes of others.And being environmentally responsible as well! Rather than throwing out the shrimp after he's done with them, he feeds someone with them!

Bandit
Sep 2nd 2011, 06:16 PM
To the OP, if you're going to make a pitch for some traditionally non-kosher food to become kosher, please do bacon.

K thx bye

Would you settle for pork chops?

Bandit
Sep 2nd 2011, 06:22 PM
What was the reason for this, do you think? Could shrimp make us sick?

In part, shrimp are scavengers, which may mean that in certain instances, even if properly cooked, they may contain toxins or chemicals which are better avoided. Remember, God was not trying to keep Israel from anything good, but rather trying to protect her from harm.

Bandit
Sep 2nd 2011, 06:37 PM
Yeah, but did he eat shrimp? C'mon man, we need to know!

A Christian understanding of Jesus would be that He lived perfectly under the Old Testament law, fulfilling all things perfectly. So Jesus would have never ate shrimp.

Ta-An
Sep 2nd 2011, 06:48 PM
Simple math .

garbage eater = unfit
carrion eater = unfit
predator = unfit

name one animal God declared unfit for human consumption that doesn't fit nto one of the above categories
On a same yet different note....

Aphids found on vegetables eg. on Broccoli, also not fit for consumption.
Broccoli gets inspected, floret by floret.

keck553
Sep 2nd 2011, 06:57 PM
On a same yet different note....

Aphids found on vegetables eg. on Broccoli, also not fit for consumption.
Broccoli gets inspected, floret by floret.

ew...aphid salad....ew

keck553
Sep 2nd 2011, 07:01 PM
I think you are jumping to a lot of conclusions about "my interpretation." I haven't given an interpretation in this thread. I'm simply pointing out that using the argument that Jews would't consider unclean meat to be food is not a sound argument to make here.

ah...Okay..I'll re-phrase it to 'the mainstream Christian interpretation.' My bad for including you personally in that.

That said -

I think your point is based on Greek thought and not Hebraic thought; that is what I meant. Any Jew would understand my point. Again to a Jew, eating pig is like eating sand or the sole of a shoe. The Jews He was teaching knew he wasn't talking about pigs.

keck553
Sep 2nd 2011, 07:03 PM
And being environmentally responsible as well! Rather than throwing out the shrimp after he's done with them, he feeds someone with them!

Wow, an environmentally responsible person who doesn't spike trees. How refreshing.

HisWill
Sep 2nd 2011, 10:45 PM
Col 2:16 Therefore let no one sit in judgment on you in matters of food and drink, or with regard to a feast day or a New Moon or a Sabbath.
Col 2:17 Such [things] are only the shadow of things that are to come, and they have only a symbolic value. But the reality (the substance, the solid fact of what is foreshadowed, the body of it) belongs to Christ.

keck553
Sep 2nd 2011, 11:14 PM
Col 2:16 Therefore let no one sit in judgment on you in matters of food and drink, or with regard to a feast day or a New Moon or a Sabbath.
Col 2:17 Such [things] are only the shadow of things that are to come, and they have only a symbolic value. But the reality (the substance, the solid fact of what is foreshadowed, the body of it) belongs to Christ.

These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

Have you noticed the FUTURE TENSE in this verse?

ewq1938
Sep 4th 2011, 12:49 AM
Now perhaps people will understand why the only person who can certify that a prepared dish is kosher is a Jewish person who actually keeps kosher.

It prevents people from making a dish and thinking "shrimp have fins and scales, they are kosher" or "sharks have scales, they are kosher".

The bible states that if something lives in the waters and has scales and fins it is clean to eat. Each person can decide this for themselves. As for sharks and microscopic scales, man wouldn't have been able to detect these scales so scales must be determined by natural sight.

Fenris
Sep 5th 2011, 11:38 AM
Would you settle for pork chops?No. I want those tasty-looking fried bacon strips. :spin:

Fenris
Sep 5th 2011, 11:40 AM
The bible states that if something lives in the waters and has scales and fins it is clean to eat. Each person can decide this for themselves.The bible seems to speak against this attitude.
"Every man did what was right in his own eyes"


As for sharks and microscopic scales, man wouldn't have been able to detect these scales so scales must be determined by natural sight.And you know this how exactly?

ewq1938
Sep 5th 2011, 10:19 PM
The bible seems to speak against this attitude.
"Every man did what was right in his own eyes"

That's actions not based on scripture obviously so it does not apply. As a Christian, all foods are clean for me anyways, but I've read God's description of what sea-creatures are clean to eat and I am more than satisfied that Shrimp fit His description. And like I said, we all can read the scripture and make our own minds up (as opposed to accept tradition itself, alone)

John 8:32
Sep 6th 2011, 10:58 AM
The bible states that if something lives in the waters and has scales and fins it is clean to eat. Each person can decide this for themselves. As for sharks and microscopic scales, man wouldn't have been able to detect these scales so scales must be determined by natural sight.

Jdg 21:25 In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

Fenris
Sep 6th 2011, 01:09 PM
That's actions not based on scripture obviously so it does not apply. Where does it say their actions were not based on scripture?

Aren't you actually doing the same exact thing?

keck553
Sep 6th 2011, 05:41 PM
That's actions not based on scripture obviously so it does not apply. As a Christian, all foods are clean for me anyways, but I've read God's description of what sea-creatures are clean to eat and I am more than satisfied that Shrimp fit His description. And like I said, we all can read the scripture and make our own minds up (as opposed to accept tradition itself, alone)

I take exception to that rule.

ewq1938
Sep 6th 2011, 10:40 PM
Where does it say their actions were not based on scripture?

Aren't you actually doing the same exact thing?

No, I am doing what the bible describes in identifying old covenant clean foods. I didn't write that animals with scales and fins are clean. It is different when a stance has no biblical position.

keck553
Sep 6th 2011, 10:43 PM
No, I am doing what the bible describes in identifying old covenant clean foods. I didn't write that animals with scales and fins are clean. It is different when a stance has no biblical position.

Interesting how God wrote His Word in a way that only ONE person truely understands it, and the rest of us are in the dark.

ewq1938
Sep 6th 2011, 10:52 PM
Interesting God wrote His Word in a way that only ONE person truely understands it.

So you know for certain no one else understood it the same as I have regarding Shrimp? That's moot anyways. I know Shrimp are clean because they fit the description God gave. If you or anyone disagrees, that's fine. This is a discussion and in discussions there are differing views.

Fenris
Sep 7th 2011, 12:09 PM
No, I am doing what the bible describes in identifying old covenant clean foods.And you, alone, come to this conclusion. Which is exactly what the bible rebukes in Judges.

keck553
Sep 7th 2011, 04:15 PM
So you know for certain no one else understood it the same as I have regarding Shrimp? That's moot anyways. I know Shrimp are clean because they fit the description God gave. If you or anyone disagrees, that's fine. This is a discussion and in discussions there are differing views.

of all the people I have ever known where this discussion came up, I've only heard three responses

1. it's tamei, don't eat it
2. I don't believe in God, so I eat what I please
3. God did away with food laws

I don't believe there is hypocrasy in any of the above statements. Once I heard someone try to argue mushrooms were not Biblically kosher.

As far as Rabbinically kosher - these folks inspect things way, way deeper than I could possibly understand as a layman. I'm not rabbinically kosher observant, but one thing I do trust is that food with a kosher stamp is safe to eat, and I appreciate the effort put into this. I'm not too keen of eating nerves and scrapings of backbones, beaver anal gland extracts, etc. And I do like kosher coke for Passover, the cane sugar is so much better tasting.

"all nations will be blessed through you" is a many-layered blessing.

ewq1938
Sep 7th 2011, 10:39 PM
of all the people I have ever known where this discussion came up, I've only heard three responses

1. it's tamei, don't eat it
2. I don't believe in God, so I eat what I please
3. God did away with food laws

Now you have a 4th one:

4. Shrimp meet God's requirement as being kosher.

:)

keck553
Sep 8th 2011, 04:17 AM
Now you have a 4th one:

4. Shrimp meet God's requirement as being kosher.

:)

As the old adage goes - Two wrongs don't make a right.

Fenris
Sep 9th 2011, 09:54 AM
Now you have a 4th one:

4. Shrimp meet God's requirement as being kosher.

Shrimp apparently meets ewq1938's requirement for being kosher. Whether it meets God's or not is another question.

Firstfruits
Sep 9th 2011, 10:13 AM
Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 9th 2011, 04:32 PM
Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Firstfruits

out of context.

Desperaux
Sep 9th 2011, 04:39 PM
Since Jesus was talking to Jews, you need to consider the context of what 'food' is to a Jew. Also, Jesus is talking in the context of ritual cleanliness being applied by man-made application, not in the context of His Law.

All foods are now clean for everyone since the Messiah has come. You need to consider this context.

Firstfruits
Sep 9th 2011, 07:13 PM
out of context.

Then can you please put it into context?

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 9th 2011, 07:15 PM
Then can you please put it into context?

Firstfruits

Why would I want to do that? The two are not related.

keck553
Sep 9th 2011, 07:16 PM
All foods are now clean for everyone since the Messiah has come. You need to consider this context.

Not exactly. I trust God's Word as true, but consider people's words. I know the context. It's about ritual cleanliness laws given to Levites before they eat the sacrifice, extended to Rabbi's and disciples by the doctrines of some Pharisees. That is the context. If the context was about pigs, then the disciples would be chewing on bacon, not grain.

Firstfruits
Sep 9th 2011, 07:23 PM
Why would I want to do that? The two are not related.

How are they not related, and why is what is written out of context?

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 9th 2011, 07:24 PM
How are they not related, and why is what is written out of context?

Firstfruits

I didn't say it was written out of context. I said you quoted Fenris out of context.

Firstfruits
Sep 9th 2011, 07:28 PM
I didn't say it was written out of context. I said you quoted Fenris out of context.

If you check my post you will notice that I did not qoute Fenris, I just posted the scripture.

#115

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 9th 2011, 08:35 PM
If you check my post you will notice that I did not qoute Fenris, I just posted the scripture.

#115

Firstfruits

You just randomly posted a line of Scripture right after Fenris....because.........you're randomly posting Scripture today?

Firstfruits
Sep 10th 2011, 02:12 PM
You just randomly posted a line of Scripture right after Fenris....because.........you're randomly posting Scripture today?

I was just pointing out what is written in the NT concerning food.

Firstfruits

ewq1938
Sep 11th 2011, 09:29 AM
Shrimp apparently meets ewq1938's requirement for being kosher. Whether it meets God's or not is another question.

Ewq1938 provided God's requirement for Kosher seafood. No one supplied a single verse in opposition. What we have is "those aren't scales" and "shrimp aren't fish" and "no one says Shrimp are Kosher but you" and "how dare you" and, well, everything but anything biblical that can disagree with my "theory".

ewq1938
Sep 11th 2011, 09:35 AM
Why would I want to do that? The two are not related.

Keck is sorta right as this wasn't about clean foods in the new covenant, which I know Keck disagrees with (you have that right Sir)

But the hope and/or point of my thread/post was to hopefully acquit Shrimp as an old covenant so called "unclean food".

Do I like Shrimp, yes.
So I eat it often, a few times a year.
My purpose? Trick people into eating dirty Shrimp? No lol....I just think they do meet the biblical requirements in the OT.

Fenris
Sep 12th 2011, 02:04 PM
Ewq1938 provided God's requirement for Kosher seafood. No one supplied a single verse in opposition. What we have is "those aren't scales" and "shrimp aren't fish" and "no one says Shrimp are Kosher but you" and "how dare you" and, well, everything but anything biblical that can disagree with my "theory".There is an established tradition that shrimp are not kosher because they do not posses fins and scales; it looks more like that have an exoskeleton and feet. If someone wishes to overturn such a tradition we really need more than one person's say so on the matter.

keck553
Sep 12th 2011, 05:11 PM
I was just pointing out what is written in the NT concerning food.

Firstfruits

By whose interpretation?

keck553
Sep 12th 2011, 05:13 PM
Keck is sorta right as this wasn't about clean foods in the new covenant, which I know Keck disagrees with (you have that right Sir)

But the hope and/or point of my thread/post was to hopefully acquit Shrimp as an old covenant so called "unclean food".

Do I like Shrimp, yes.
So I eat it often, a few times a year.
My purpose? Trick people into eating dirty Shrimp? No lol....I just think they do meet the biblical requirements in the OT.

well...when in Rome.......

ewq1938
Sep 12th 2011, 10:25 PM
There is an established tradition


Yes it's tradition but where you stand on tradition, I stand on the literal words God gave us.



that shrimp are not kosher because they do not posses fins and scales; it looks more like that have an exoskeleton and feet.

The exoskeleton is made of large scales, and yes they have feet but they also have fins.



If someone wishes to overturn such a tradition we really need more than one person's say so on the matter.

This isn't an attempt to overturn any "traditions". It's a discussion where differing opinions are discussed. I say they meet God's requirements to be clean, you disagree. So far, I haven't seen any new things brought up. What I would like to see is some real discussion on this alleged "tradition" that carnivores can't be eaten. I haven't seen anything in scripture that says this, and since most fish I know of that have scales and fins are also carnivores, what biblical basis is such a thing based on?

keck553
Sep 12th 2011, 10:49 PM
If I said 'carnivores' I mean carrion, things that normally feed on road kill.

ewq1938
Sep 12th 2011, 11:51 PM
If I said 'carnivores' I mean carrion, things that normally feed on road kill.

Ok...does scripture say an animal that eats carrion or is an omnivore (eats anything) is unclean? I've not read that in the bible.

There are lots of animals that eat things we cannot or should not but those same animals are clean for us to eat. Even cows. They have multiple stomachs so they can eat things like grass that we cannot.

Fenris
Sep 13th 2011, 12:44 PM
Yes it's tradition but where you stand on tradition, I stand on the literal words God gave us.

No, you're just being contrarian. Have fun.

Firstfruits
Sep 13th 2011, 01:41 PM
By whose interpretation?

Does this scripture need an interpretation?

1 Tim 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

Which is where the following would come in.

Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 13th 2011, 07:39 PM
Ok...does scripture say an animal that eats carrion or is an omnivore (eats anything) is unclean? I've not read that in the bible.

No, I use math. It's fairly reliable. But you have a point. I get chills up my spine every time someone says "ceremonial law" so I understand your angst.



There are lots of animals that eat things we cannot or should not but those same animals are clean for us to eat. Even cows. They have multiple stomachs so they can eat things like grass that we cannot.

This is irrelevent. Besides, Nebuchadnezzeer ate grass (hehe)

keck553
Sep 13th 2011, 07:48 PM
Does this scripture need an interpretation?

1 Tim 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

So then go ahead and eat a plate of blowfish livers and get back to me about how thankful you are.



Which is where the following would come in.

Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Firstfruits

I think you should concern yourself more with God's judgement than man's judgements. I know I do. :)

Firstfruits
Sep 13th 2011, 08:25 PM
So then go ahead and eat a plate of blowfish livers and get back to me about how thankful you are.



I think you should concern yourself more with God's judgement than man's judgements. I know I do. :)

Would that be according to the Mosaic law, or the Gospel of Christ?

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 13th 2011, 08:35 PM
Would that be according to the Mosaic law, or the Gospel of Christ?

Firstfruits

Um, that would be according to how long you would want to live actually.....blowfish organs are extremely toxic, but perhaps not as toxic as disregarding God's Word. The disciples would have seen it this way -

"Thus sayeth the LORD God of Israel, thou shalt not......"

disobeying the above is just as toxic to a God-fearing disciple of Jesus as us worshipping a false god. Do you understand?

ewq1938
Sep 13th 2011, 08:49 PM
So then go ahead and eat a plate of blowfish livers and get back to me about how thankful you are.

Mat 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

keck553
Sep 13th 2011, 09:10 PM
Would that be according to the Mosaic law, or the Gospel of Christ?

Firstfruits

Who gave the Law to Moses?

keck553
Sep 13th 2011, 09:11 PM
Mat 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

exactly. If God says 'don't eat this' then don't.

ewq1938
Sep 13th 2011, 09:30 PM
exactly. If God says 'don't eat this' then don't.

And when God says its ok to eat something then you can. God never said poisonous things such as those livers are clean. God made clean that which was unclean (not poisonous)

Act 10:11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
Act 10:12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
Act 10:13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

keck553
Sep 13th 2011, 11:20 PM
And when God says its ok to eat something then you can. God never said poisonous things such as those livers are clean. God made clean that which was unclean (not poisonous)

Act 10:11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
Act 10:12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
Act 10:13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

Oh no, not this one again..ever hear of a allegory?.....

Ok, note the thread title. I'm not going any further down that vortex in this thread.

ewq1938
Sep 13th 2011, 11:54 PM
Oh no, not this one again..ever hear of a allegory?.....

Both sides of this Allegory are true. The example of the unclean food being clean is true, which was used to teach that "unclean" people can be clean.

John 8:32
Sep 14th 2011, 04:25 PM
Oh no, not this one again..ever hear of a allegory?.....

Ya mean like...

Gen 4:10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.

or...

Rev 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
Rev 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
Rev 6:11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

Dead saints talking?

Firstfruits
Sep 14th 2011, 05:55 PM
Um, that would be according to how long you would want to live actually.....blowfish organs are extremely toxic, but perhaps not as toxic as disregarding God's Word. The disciples would have seen it this way -

"Thus sayeth the LORD God of Israel, thou shalt not......"

disobeying the above is just as toxic to a God-fearing disciple of Jesus as us worshipping a false god. Do you understand?

And that was said or given to Israel by God.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Sep 14th 2011, 05:57 PM
Who gave the Law to Moses?

And to whom was the law given to........Israel.

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 15th 2011, 02:43 AM
And to whom was the law given to........Israel.

Firstfruits

Love God was given to Israel. Love your neighbor as yourself was given to Israel. What's your point?

John 8:32
Sep 15th 2011, 10:55 AM
And to whom was the law given to........Israel.

Firstfruits

In another thread, I showed all ten commandments to be in effect prior to Mt. Sinai. So, are you saying that the law was only given to Israel and only applies to Israel?

keck553
Sep 15th 2011, 01:05 PM
In another thread, I showed all ten commandments to be in effect prior to Mt. Sinai. So, are you saying that the law was only given to Israel and only applies to Israel?

In another thread there is a discussion about communion. That is related to Pesach, and Jesus gave the instruction only to Israeli's. So why do Gentiles observe communtion which is Passover?

John 8:32
Sep 15th 2011, 04:38 PM
In another thread there is a discussion about communion. That is related to Pesach, and Jesus gave the instruction only to Israeli's. So why do Gentiles observe communtion which is Passover?

Well, it was instituted by the apostate church which also gave them Sunday for the Sabbath in 325AD and Easter for the Passover. I am sure you already know what the quarto-deciman controversy was, but some others could benefit greatly by reading about it.

keck553
Sep 16th 2011, 06:56 PM
Well, it was instituted by the apostate church which also gave them Sunday for the Sabbath in 325AD and Easter for the Passover.
I am sure you already know what the quarto-deciman controversy was, but some others could benefit greatly by reading about it.

I think that's a rather harsh statement.

....do you really think God would allow an "apostate church" to grow as the mainstream Christian church has grown and allowed billions of people to be decieved into the abyss, leaving only a handful of "Torah-keeping Jesus believers" as His elect?

Come, give God's power and authority a bit more credit than that. Certainly the hand of God can change the course of events as to not allow billions of believers in YHVH though His Son to slip throught His Hands. I've seen as many or more false teachings in the Messianic Torah-keeping circle as in the mainstream. God doesn't save people with this minutia and detail, does He?

Firstfruits
Sep 17th 2011, 02:59 PM
Um, that would be according to how long you would want to live actually.....blowfish organs are extremely toxic, but perhaps not as toxic as disregarding God's Word. The disciples would have seen it this way -

"Thus sayeth the LORD God of Israel, thou shalt not......"

disobeying the above is just as toxic to a God-fearing disciple of Jesus as us worshipping a false god. Do you understand?

If as you will agree, thou shalt not...... was given to Israel, then Gentiles are not disobeying it and only need to love one another as Christ has commanded.

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 18th 2011, 04:39 PM
If as you will agree, thou shalt not...... was given to Israel, then Gentiles are not disobeying it and only need to love one another as Christ has commanded.

Firstfruits

Like Moses, Christ's commandments were given to Israel, not Gentiles. Why would you obey Christ if His ministry was to Jews (as Moses was)?

Firstfruits
Sep 18th 2011, 07:18 PM
Like Moses, Christ's commandments were given to Israel, not Gentiles. Why would you obey Christ if His ministry was to Jews (as Moses was)?

Mk 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.

Mt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost
Mt 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 19th 2011, 05:33 PM
Mk 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.

Mt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost
Mt 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Firstfruits

So all of God's Word IS for Gentiles afterall? Can you please make up your mind?

John 8:32
Sep 19th 2011, 05:39 PM
I think that's a rather harsh statement.

....do you really think God would allow an "apostate church" to grow as the mainstream Christian church has grown and allowed billions of people to be decieved into the abyss, leaving only a handful of "Torah-keeping Jesus believers" as His elect?

Come, give God's power and authority a bit more credit than that. Certainly the hand of God can change the course of events as to not allow billions of believers in YHVH though His Son to slip throught His Hands. I've seen as many or more false teachings in the Messianic Torah-keeping circle as in the mainstream. God doesn't save people with this minutia and detail, does He?

Depends on if you think this is the only day of salvation. I personally do not. If I really thought it was and this was God's best shot at saving the world, I would have to say He is doing a lousy job of it. He is losing and Satan is winning. But this is not the only day and His plan is to save most. There will be a very few, comparatively speaking, who go into the lake of fire. God wins.

keck553
Sep 19th 2011, 07:25 PM
Depends on if you think this is the only day of salvation. I personally do not. If I really thought it was and this was God's best shot at saving the world, I would have to say He is doing a lousy job of it. He is losing and Satan is winning. But this is not the only day and His plan is to save most. There will be a very few, comparatively speaking, who go into the lake of fire. God wins.

ah....appearances.......

Firstfruits
Sep 19th 2011, 08:27 PM
So all of God's Word IS for Gentiles afterall? Can you please make up your mind?

The Mosaic law was only for Israel, no confusion there.

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 19th 2011, 10:37 PM
The Mosaic law was only for Israel, no confusion there.

Firstfruits

So then Exodus 20 doesn't apply to me? Wow, that opens up a lot of possibilities.

Firstfruits
Sep 20th 2011, 08:02 AM
So then Exodus 20 doesn't apply to me? Wow, that opens up a lot of possibilities.

Yet that is what is written.

Deut 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 20th 2011, 10:50 PM
Yet that is what is written.

Deut 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

Firstfruits

and.....................so?? .