Posts
I am very interested in trying to understand this question that keeps burning in my heart and mind. "What is the place of YAHWEH's Torah/instructions in my life today?" Christianity starting emphatically teaching in the second century that the Torah is no longer relevant to the Christian life. I have no conclusion yet but I have started to go back and look at passages very closely and intentionally with no prior assumptions to what they mean. Today I want to look at a part of that large question. "What does the Bible teach concerning YAHWEH's dietary instructions."
I am going to examine Acts 10 and 11. Those passages illustrate what I think happens with a lot of scriptures - I have assumptions before I come to a passage and I make the scriptures fit my assumptions rather than just reading the passage. I use to think that Peter's vision meant that YAHWEH's dietary instructions have been done away with. I now hear Jesus' voice in my head when He was speaking to the Pharisee's
Mark 7:9,13
And Jesus said, "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!
Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that."
I remind myself that at the time of Acts 10 there was no New Testament, only what I call the Old Testament Scriptures. So I would think a massive change to God’s word would not be a slight adjustment that would be assumed in the background without even addressing it. But a quick look at this biblical passage shows that the issue of "eating unclean food" or the issue of "a massive change has happened to the OT scriptures" is not actually part of the story.
Peter has a vision but he himself does not know what it means,
Acts 10:17
Now while Peter was greatly perplexed in mind as to what the vision which he had seen might be...
Very directly the bible gives the interpretation of this vision.
Acts 10:28 … But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean.
Peter did not know the meaning and waits on God to show him but Christianity assumes a different interpretation than God gives to Peter. Food is never actually mentioned as a part of the interpretation of what God was showing him. There are lots of visions in the Bible, they have all kinds of metaphors and analogies. We only know what they mean when God tells us what they mean. Peter has still not eaten any of these unclean animals since Jesus. If the vision included the cleansing of unclean animals for food Peter never mentions it. In fact twice it is recorded that he does not eat unclean food?
Acts 10:14
“"Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean
Acts 11:8
“But I said, ‘By no means, Lord, for nothing unholy or unclean has ever entered my mouth.’
In the interpretation, not one thing is mentioned about unclean animals now being food - not one. We are given the interpretation of this vision by the scriptures, not once, but twice. Why would I inject my own interpretation of the vision and ignore the interpretation given to me? Twice. Not only this, the implication through it all is that Peter and the disciples continued in the dietary instructions from YAHWEH.
I am going to examine Acts 10 and 11. Those passages illustrate what I think happens with a lot of scriptures - I have assumptions before I come to a passage and I make the scriptures fit my assumptions rather than just reading the passage. I use to think that Peter's vision meant that YAHWEH's dietary instructions have been done away with. I now hear Jesus' voice in my head when He was speaking to the Pharisee's
Mark 7:9,13
And Jesus said, "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!
Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that."
I remind myself that at the time of Acts 10 there was no New Testament, only what I call the Old Testament Scriptures. So I would think a massive change to God’s word would not be a slight adjustment that would be assumed in the background without even addressing it. But a quick look at this biblical passage shows that the issue of "eating unclean food" or the issue of "a massive change has happened to the OT scriptures" is not actually part of the story.
Peter has a vision but he himself does not know what it means,
Acts 10:17
Now while Peter was greatly perplexed in mind as to what the vision which he had seen might be...
Very directly the bible gives the interpretation of this vision.
Acts 10:28 … But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean.
Peter did not know the meaning and waits on God to show him but Christianity assumes a different interpretation than God gives to Peter. Food is never actually mentioned as a part of the interpretation of what God was showing him. There are lots of visions in the Bible, they have all kinds of metaphors and analogies. We only know what they mean when God tells us what they mean. Peter has still not eaten any of these unclean animals since Jesus. If the vision included the cleansing of unclean animals for food Peter never mentions it. In fact twice it is recorded that he does not eat unclean food?
Acts 10:14
“"Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean
Acts 11:8
“But I said, ‘By no means, Lord, for nothing unholy or unclean has ever entered my mouth.’
In the interpretation, not one thing is mentioned about unclean animals now being food - not one. We are given the interpretation of this vision by the scriptures, not once, but twice. Why would I inject my own interpretation of the vision and ignore the interpretation given to me? Twice. Not only this, the implication through it all is that Peter and the disciples continued in the dietary instructions from YAHWEH.
It would have been huge news to the Jews to hear that unclean animals were now considered "food." So, why is it not made mention of? Because that wasn't the purpose of the vision. The whole purpose of the vision was to get the Jews out from under the influence of the Pharisees and the teachers of the Oral law. This is what Peter said when he arrived at the house of Cornelius.
Acts 10:28
He said to them: “You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean.
Nowhere in the OT is this rule found. This was not part of YAHWEH's instruction. It was man's law. This was an Oral Law passed down from the Pharisees, also known today as the Talmud.
In the Talmud, it says
Abhodah Zarah, 22b
“Why are the Goyim/Gentiles unclean? Because they were not present at Mount Sinai. For when the serpent entered into Eve, he infused her with uncleanliness. But the Jews were cleansed from this when they stood on Mount Sinai; the Goyim, however, who were not on Mount Sinai, were not cleansed.”
Schabbath, (145b)
Why are the Gentiles unclean? Because they eat abominable things and animals that crawl on their belly.
It was the Pharisees Oral law that commanded the Gentiles were to be considered unclean, not YAHWEH’s Law.
And so, our Father brought this vision to bring His people back to the true meaning of who Israel is to be, as stated in the book of Numbers.
Numbers 15:15-16
The community is to have the same rules for you and for the alien living among you; this is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come. You and the alien shall be the same before YAHWEH The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and the alien living among you.
Peter’s understanding of this vision corrects this false Oral Law deception about Gentiles being unclean. If I want to know the true interpretation of the vision of Acts 10, I should allow Scripture to directly tell me. Peter and the other disciples had to be corrected of the error of the Oral Law teaching about Gentiles. This is very similar to times it is recorded that Jesus also corrected Oral law teachings.
To make sure I get it, the Bible repeats the correct interpretation of Acts 10 again in Acts chapter 11.
Acts 11:18
When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, “So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life.”
I am told the correct interpretation. Not just once, but twice. Despite that, many today teach that the interpretation of Peter’s vision is about food. The reality is that the Father was simply teaching Peter that it’s okay to associate with Gentiles and they can be saved despite what the Pharisees might think and teach.
I must be careful with visions, only God can give the interpretation. It reminds me of Nebuchadnezzar , he was given a vision and then Daniel clearly told him what it meant but Nebuchadnezzar changed its clearly revealed interpretation to suit his own desires.
I still find it strange that even though God says He never does anything without revealing it to His prophets Amos 3:7, there is not one single prophecy that YAHWEH’s instruction will be done away with after the Messiah comes. Nor is there a single mention of that in any Gospel which were written decades after Paul’s writings. This has me scouring the Bible because it is not what I have been taught my entire life.
YAHWEH's dietary instructions do not give me reasons why God said some things are food and some things are not but I think the Creator probably knows what's best for His creation to eat. There may or may not be health reasons, the Bible does not tell me. In Hebrew the word for appetite is also related to all forms of longing , joy, love and also negative longings - greed, lust, revenge. Since appetite is so closely related to our emotions these instructions could be for me to learn self restraint. One of the criticism the Psalmist lays against the Israelites in the desert is that they rebelled at what YAHWEH gave them to eat and instead they demanded food they craved Psa 78:19
Also, could simply be that God did not design dogs, cats, horses pigs etc. to be eaten.
I know pig is a big one for people. I was surprised to learn that Pigs are able to outperform three-year-old human children on cognition tests. This age was determined based upon the shared abilities of pigs and children of the age. At three years old a child is all about learning and exploring, enjoys playing, and shows self-awareness. This is also the case for pigs which demonstrate distinct likes and dislikes, enjoy playing creatively, and display a range of emotions similar to those of a child.
There are many interesting behaviors and preferences of pigs that highlight the species’ high intelligence. Below is just a sampling of facts that might surprise you about pigs.
better at video games than chimpanzees.
Piglets will play fight with one another.
Pigs are empathetic.
With training, piglets can learn their names at just two weeks old.
are capable swimmers and will choose it over wallowing in mud.
raised in a barren environment, as is the case in factory farms, suffer from impaired long-term memory.
Pigs are likely able to assume what other pigs can and can’t see and will avoid spots with hidden food if they think another pig may be watching.
can use mirrors to find hidden objects.
brains are large and share many similarities with human brains.
Pigs are dedicated mothers and will sleep snout to snout with their young.
Pigs wag their tails when they’re happy and content.
When studying pigs, many researchers use chocolate to train them, as pigs love it.
Pigs have distinct personalities.
Pigs enjoy the friendship of other pigs.
Mother pigs will sing to their babies.
Pigs likely dream.
They can sense and feel terror when danger is close by and produce an actual scream.
Maybe because God made them so intelligent that He does not want us to eat them? What are your thoughts? I look forward to any input you have on this passage.
There are other NT passages about food and I will be looking at them in Part 2
God Bless you and may our Father give you completeness, soundness, welfare, peace, safety, health, prosperity, tranquility, contentment and friendship in the fellowship of Y'shua Messiah in this life and in the world to come. (The complete meaning of the Hebrew word "Shalom")
