Subject: Hank - Diet ??? |
Bible Note: Hey Tim: I looked at your profile - you must have a very busy life ! I appreciate to taking time to respond. I think we both can grow closer through scriptural investigation. I see your concern regarding God's direct statement to eat the unclean animals. But given the fact it does not record Peter eating them after three requests by God, I think that supports my position. Another support, as you noted, is Peter makes no reference after the vision to any blanket cleansing of all foods. Neither at Cornelius's house or at Jersalem in Acts 11 does Peter mention a dual meaning of the vision. With that great a revelation to food I would think that it would have been documented right away - but I see no evidence. Regarding God's command to eat and then His command to not call them unclean - I believe God used this abrupt contradictory statements to wake Peter up to the reality that the gospel would be spread to the gentiles. Remember, if it was as simple as declaring all food clean - why was Peter so confused over the vision. I think his confusion came from not understanding why God would tell him things against what he believed. I think once the Spirit worked on Peter the "light bulb" went off and then he was fully convinced it had not to do with changing God's diet but changing how man looked upon gentiles. Anyway - you can give me your thoughts. To add a little more to the mix - what do you think of Math.15 and Mark 7. Alot of Christians who say we have liberty to eat anything use the statements by Jesus as changing the food laws. But if this is correct then Peter (since he asked in Math. 15 for Jesus to explain the parable) would have already know by the time the vision happened that God had changed the food laws and would not have disobeyed God. Look forward to hearing from you, Merv |