RE: SPIRITUAL FOOD 4 THOUGHT - WHAT ABOMINATIONS ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH?
In reference to Leviticus 11:44 "For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the the earth.
Jesus said in Matthew 15:10 "And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: Not that which goeth into the mouth that defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
He goes onto to clarify to his disciples a few verses later, vs 17-20.
17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?
18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.
The symbolism of the pig being unclean represented a spiritual truth. That we all have unclean hearts. You referenced a talk with a Christian leader that said the references to clean unclean should be spiritually taken. You disagreed with his interpretation. However, as quoted by others, in Acts 10, Peter is given a vision from Jesus with unclean animals being let down in a sheet and Jesus commands for Peter to "Rise, kill and eat" Peter argued with Jesus that he never has eaten anything common or unclean. Jesus then told Peter "What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common." The vision happened three more times.
Now, I've heard others explain that this wasn't Jesus declaring what was previously declared unclean, now clean, but that Jesus was speaking spiritually of Gentiles. My question is, if you don't think the commands in Leviticus aren't speaking of a deeper spiritual truth and are meant to be taken literally and not spiritually, then what grounds do you have to spiritualize Jesus' own command to Peter "What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common."
Also, there are other examples of the Apostles and writers of the New Testament Scriptures "spiritualizing" Old Testament Scriptures.
One example is found in 1 Corinthians 9:7-10
1 Corinthians 9:7-10 King James Version (KJV)
7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
Paul asks a rhetorical question "does God care about oxen? or does he say this altogether for our sakes?" His answer immediately is "for oursakes no doubt." He very clearly, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, interprets the true meaning of the Law recorded in Deuteronomy 25:4. No doubt it was written for our sakes! A commandment regarding an animal clearly is interpreted in the New Testament as being spiritual.
Another example, is in the prophecied coming of Elijah. Jesus very clearly teaches that John the Baptist was the Elijah who was to come, if you can accept it.
Matthew 11:10-14 King James Version (KJV)
10 For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.
13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
Here Jesus himself quotes Malachi 3:1 to prove his point. John wasn't a reincarnated Elijah, but he did come in the spirit and power of Elijah (Luke 1:17). This prophesy was spiritualized by Jesus Himself.
Now, how can one determine what is to be spiritualized and what is not? Well, that takes being indwelt by the Holy Spirit Himself. He will help you to discern spiritual truths.
1 Corinthians 2:7-16 King James Version (KJV)
7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.
Also, more spiritual food for thought:
Mark 7:19 King James Version (KJV)
19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
That Greek word for "purging" is Katharizo (G2511). It literally means to make clean. It doesn't mean to use the toilet and deposit the contents of your bowels. Every time that word is used in the New Testament it is always in reference to cleansing that which was previously ceremonially unclean. To say otherwise puts your understanding into the text and not reading the Greek words for what they actually say. The Greek literally says, "making clean all meats."
Furthermore:
Romans 14:14-17 King James Version (KJV)
14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:
17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit declares that he is persuaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself. This Greek word is "Koinos", meaning common. It's the same word used in Acts 10 in reference to the food Peter saw in the vision from Jesus. It is a derivative of the Greek word "Koinoo" that Jesus used in 10:15 and it meaning to make common.
Also,
1 Timothy 4:1-5 King James Version (KJV)
4 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;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
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 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
Now, the only people that were teaching to "abstain from meats" were those who had "departed from the faith" and were teaching "doctrines of devils." Isn't that what you are teaching? Correct me if I am wrong, but what makes you think that this isn't describing a person like you?
I would really love to hear you do a teaching on who Paul was constantly referring to in his epistles as the "concision" the "mutilators of the flesh" "false brethren" "false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works."
Galatians 1:6-9 King James Version (KJV)
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Acts 15:24 " Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:"
I can go on with further quotes, but you get the point. Who were these false teachers? What were the characteristics and hallmarks of their teachings? I can tell you this, they all taught that gentiles needed to be circumcised and obey the law in order to be righteous in God's eyes.
Is that not the very thing you are teaching?
And certain men came down from Yehuḏah and were teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised, according to the practice of Mosheh, you are unable to be saved.”
Ma`asei (Acts) 15:1 TS2009
https://bible.com/bible/316/act.15.1.TS2009
These false teachers taught that in order to receive salvation you must first be circumcised and keep the law. That was their error. There is nothing anybody can do of their own works to receive salvation. the more and more I read Paul I find out that everywhere he went he was having to contend with the circumcision party those that taught that in order to receive salvation you had to first be circumcised and keep the law of God. That was their error, that is what Paul preached against.
Where in the Bible are creatures sanctified, that means set apart, by the word of God? It is Leviticus 11 where God says these animals you are to eat and these animals you are not to eat.
You have made it very clear that you stand opposed to the law of God that you yourself preach disobedience to the law of God and admit that you freely and willingly live a life in disobedience to the law of God therefore according to Titus 3 I am to not waste any more of my time with you.
If you decide to be a barn cat and troll my comments I'm simply from this point on going to refer you back to Matthew 5 and Matthew 7 where the Messiah declares that not a single letter will pass from the law until Heaven and Earth pass away and tells those who practice lawlessness to depart from him.
Sorry, Dustin, your misinterpretation of Acts 15 doesn't fit the reality of the situation. Gentile believers were already believers. They had already been saved and given the Holy Spirit. You like to confuse people and subvert them with your false gospel, which is no gospel at all. What you teach is that you don't need to be circumcised and keep the law of Moses to be "saved" but you must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses to stay saved. You teach you must keep the law of Moses to be justified. You teach you must keep the law of Moses to be righteous. All of these are twisting and cleverly devised distortions of the truth. Jesus justifies you by faith in Him, apart from the works of the law. Jesus makes you Righteous, apart from the works of the law. A cursory glance at the teachings in Romans and Galatians makes this very clear.
As for misquoting Paul's admonition to Titus to and applying them to me, they actually speak to the kind of person you and your Torah Observant/ Hebrew Roots Movement "non-Christians" are. You may wish to have nothing to do with me, but if you post on public forums lies and doctrines of devils then it isn't "trolling" to politely point out, from scripture, where you are wrong, so that others can see and be warned. If you can not stand up to Biblical scrutiny then perhaps you shouldn't post heresies and lies on public forums.
It seems Jason that you have a problem with James because James says that faith and works go together to make someone righteous, that their faith alone in Jesus cant make them righteous.
Listen, my beloved brothers: Has Elohim not chosen the poor of this world, rich in belief and heirs of the reign which He promised to those who love Him? My brothers, what use is it for anyone to say he has belief but does not have works? This belief is unable to save him. So also belief, if it does not have works, is in itself dead. But someone might say, “You have belief, and I have works.” Show me your belief without your works, and I shall show you my belief by my works. You see, then, that a man is declared right by works, and not by belief alone.
Ya‛aqoḇ (James) 2:5, 14-14, 17-18, 24 TS2009
https://bible.com/bible/316/jas.2.5-24.TS2009
That is one of the most misunderstood passages of scripture. You quote it without regards to what Paul taught in Romans 4 that a man is indeed justified and declared Righteous apart from the works of the law. A student of God's written word needs to take it all into account and find the truth about how apparent contradictions are actually in harmony if one understands the relationship between works prompted from faith and works that are meant to justify oneself. There is a mountain of difference between the two in the eyes of God.
Furthermore, I am not opposed to the Law of God. I don't preach disobedience to the Law of God. Both of those are false accusations and slander. I disagree with you as to the role and purpose of the Mosiac Covenant, which contains the Torah. I believe that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." I just don't believe that the Mosiac Covenant is binding on children of God who are under the New covenant. That doesn't make me opposed to the Law found in the Old Covenant. It served and continues to serve its purpose. I am however, very much for the Laws of God as revealed in the New Convenant. The Law (of the Old Covenant, Mosaic Law) is good if one uses it lawfully. But to say that it is still binding on a child of God who has been made righteous by faith in Jesus Christ, is not using it lawfully.
1 Timothy 1:3-11 King James Version (KJV)
3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
the law of God says to not eat unclean meats yet you profess to eating unclean meats therefore you are opposed to the law of God. The law of God says to circumcise your male child on the 8th day and you have confessed me that you did not circumcise either one of your son's therefore you are opposed to the law of God.
if you want to shoot for being least in the Kingdom then so be it I'm going to shoot for being great. Let's hope you make it.
“Whoever, then, breaks one of the least of these commands, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the reign of the heavens; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the reign of the heavens.
Mattithyahu (Matthew) 5:19 TS2009
https://bible.com/bible/316/mat.5.19.TS2009
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Master, Master,’ shall enter into the reign of the heavens, but he who is doing the desire of My Father in the heavens. “Many shall say to Me in that day, ‘Master, Master, have we not prophesied in Your Name, and cast out demons in Your Name, and done many mighty works in Your Name?’ “And then I shall declare to them, ‘I never knew you, depart from Me, you who work lawlessness!’
Mattithyahu (Matthew) 7:21-23 TS2009
https://bible.com/bible/316/mat.7.21-23.TS2009
Once again, you are confusing the conditions of the first covenant "dietary and circumcision" with the conditions set forth in the second covenant. I am not under the first covenant, therefor I am under no obligation to keep the first covenant. I died to the law through the body of Christ so that I might live by the Spirit unto God. See Romans 6-7.
If you would like to start your own thread on the "covenants" I would be more than happy to teach you the differences between the old and new, the first and second, the one that is meant for slaves and the one that is meant for children.
Sorry, I would be a fool to "learn" from someone who proves by their life their goal is to be least.