Question about Peter’s Acts 10 vision

[Jaime]

Jim, I agree food does not defile us or make us common. That is the lesson in Acts 10. Of course God only considered clean animals as food to go in our mouths, not for reasons of defilement but for health reasons. The Mathew 15 passage was just like Mark 7 parallel passage addressing handwashing traditions, not food. What God considered food never could defile man.

 

[Jaime]

@Jamie

Well, my brother eat on, all is acceptable as long as we give thanks unto our God for his goodness in providing all things to eat.

1st. Timothy 4:4,5~ "For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”

Peter did not eat immediately, because he was thinking on the vision as to what it meant:

Acts 10:17~ “Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,”

Once the men came from Cornelius and he went with them, then he understood the purpose of the vision.

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

The dietary laws given to Israel and to Israel only, were given to them temporarily, to teach them a lesson that they were to distinguish between clean and unclean, as far as them separating themselves from the unclean Gentiles, but ONCE God's eternal purposes were being unfolded before their eyes of God visiting the Gentiles to take out of them a people for his name sake, those dietary laws given to Israel had serve their purposes and all creatures are good for God's elect to eat. Meat of themselves of all creatures are NOT unclean, or will defiled us spiritually speaking, yet God choose to use such animals as a means of teaching Israel to be NOT like the Gentiles nations.

Brother Jaime, have a BLT on me brother for breakfast~or a meat lovers pizza, while you watch Texas Tech beat Oregon today. I'm pulling for them because of you.

Red, the 1 Tim 4:4-5 passage I believe was addressing the soon coming Catholic doctrinal error of abstaining from meat on Friday and forbidding their priests to marry. Nothing to do with clean, unclean or common animals.

My comments on Acts 10 and Mark 7 stand.

Yes, I will be watching the Red Raiders today with much anticipation.

 

[Red Baker]

@Jaime

My comments on Acts 10 and Mark 7 stand.

I did not attempt to prove anything you said to be wrong, I just gave you my understanding. I'll go back
and address your understanding later. I have children coming over in a few minutes.

RB

 

[Jaime]

@Jaime

I did not attempt to prove anything you said to be wrong, I just gave you my understanding. I'll go back
and address your understanding later. I have children coming over in a few minutes.

RB

Thanks Red. Enjoy the holiday and your family! Keep your Red Raider Guns up!

 

[Jaime]

Jim, the Mathew 15 paaddsge is the parallel passage to Mark 7 talking about the handwashings tradition that the Pharisees adhered to eroneously per Jesus. Nothing to with clean, unclean or common animals. Jesus as a devout Jew would have known what animal was clean, unclean or common. The common designation was the problem. In all these passages especially in Acts 10 with the object lesson for Peter concerning the Gentiles who werr NOT unclean per the written Torah, only the Pharisee’s Takonot or traditions of man. God designated originally what was to be considered food (clean) and what was not food (unclean). The Takonot or trafitions of man concept of common animals OR defiled previously clean animals was an error, resolved in Acts 10, to go along with the erroneous concept of Gentile uncleanness.

 

[Jaime]

Brother Jaime, have a BLT on me brother for breakfast~or a meat lovers pizza, while you watch Texas Tech beat Oregon today. I'm pulling for them because of you.

The Red Raiders were definitely not ready to play offensively especially. As loyal Texas Tech fans we yearly fall back to our old reliable 4 word mantra:

“Wait Until Next Year!”

 

[Jim]

The Red Raiders were definitely not ready to play offensively especially. As loyal Texas Tech fans we yearly fall back to our old reliable 4 word mantra:

“Wait Until Next Year!”

That was not a fun time if you were rooting for Texas Tech.

 

[Studyman]

If some were clean then he would not have rejected them all so all kinds in this story only refers to one kind - unclean beasts.

It seems evident. The story is about "To make a difference between the unclean and the clean", not according to man's Judgment, but Gods.

 

[Studyman]

Exactly - his answer forces us to conclude all≠all....

Such things can be important in such verses where all = all but are read all≠all, like in Job 38:7 ... When the morning stars sang together, and ALL the sons of God shouted for joy.

And again:

Gen. 2: 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

It's important to consider the whole message of God, in order to understand His message, in my view.

Clearly Peter believed the whole offer was unclean. But isn't God the Judge of such things? Of course God didn't make maggots, slugs or swine's flesh clean, but HE does cleanse men in my understanding, which is what the vision was about in the first place, as it is written. "Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you."

Therefore "What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common".

It's pretty wonderful actually.