What about that ham sandwich ?

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by wopik, Nov 20, 2004.

  1. wopik

    wopik
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2002
    Messages:
    1,158
    Likes Received:
    0
    What about that ham sandwich ?

    Jesus’ disciples were being criticized for eating without first washing their hands (Mark 7:5). Jesus condemned the Pharisees for their arbitrary administration of the law. Drawing a sharp distinction between the tradition of the elders on the one hand, and the commandment of God on the other, Jesus accused them of invalidating the word of God by their tradition.


    Notice that Jesus firmly supports the law. Having made that point, He offers an answer to the question of eating with unwashed hands: “There is nothing without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man” (Mark 7:15).


    That is a mighty comprehensive statement. Plainly, dirt on your hands that gets on your food will not defile you. But what about those foods prohibited by the law? What about a ham sandwich? Jesus said nothing will defile you. What about cockroaches and snakes? Jesus said nothing will defile you. Well, what about a dish of poisonous mushrooms or tainted shellfish? Jesus said nothing from without a man entering into him can defile him. So even though you might be dead in a few hours, at least you would not be defiled. Jesus is not saying that you will not be harmed, only that you will not be defiled.

    http://www.cemnetwork.com/essay/essay.php?eid=44
     
  2. Gershom

    Gershom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    2,030
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unclean vs. Defile
     
  3. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Your wild poisnous mushrooms are now ok interpretation is what happens when you drop exegesis go off into the wild blue yonder.

    The context is the Jewish tradition that "sin" is a substance that touches food. In this case they are not talking about ham vs beef -- they are talking about barley or WHEAT!

    There is nothing in God's word that says wheat has sin on it. The jews were "making stuff UP!".

    Jesus did not jump wildly OFF TOPIC and start addressing things that had nothing to do with the error of the jews. Rather He was ON TOPIC. And His statement is that SIN is NOT a molecule like substance that clings to the outside of food so that when you eat food BLESSED by the Bible as "edible" - you "get sin in you" for failing to ceremonially "baptize" your fingers that touched the sin on the food.

    Stay with the context - stay with the point He is addressing. IN that context He says that ALL FOOD is "clean" in terms of "sin touching it" or "sin clinging to it". In other words the VERY thing that the Jewish leaders were promoting -- was false.

    Some people think that Christ was taking the Word of God and making it void here. In fact He is taking the word of MAN and making it void WHILE arguing that the Word of God should NOT be contradicted by the traditions of man.

    How easy can this be???

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  4. steaver

    steaver
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    9,005
    Likes Received:
    82
    Isn't it funny how we all think we got everything right and everyone else is way off? We are all guilty of this. I bet out of all the posters on these boards, only a few would change a position on anything. We shake our heads in amazement that someone could have such a wackey view about something. I have an idea. I am going to start a new thread and see just how many responses it gets. I bet it won't be many, at least not on topic anyways!

    God Bless! [​IMG]
     
  5. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Mosiac Covenant has no application to gentiles living outside of Israel. Never did.
     
  6. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pass the bacon!
     
  7. Bro Tony

    Bro Tony
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like mine with mayo, lettuce and tomato.

    ;) [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Bro Tony
     
  8. wopik

    wopik
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2002
    Messages:
    1,158
    Likes Received:
    0
    When Jesus encountered a man possessed with a “legion” of demons, the demons pleaded with Jesus to allow them to enter a herd of swine feeding nearby (Mark 5:1-13). If Jesus had declared pork fit to eat, why did He allow such wholesale destruction of valuable private property?

    There may also be some symbolism involved in the question.

    No animal more symbolizes filth than the swine. Demons are called unclean spirits, and are allowed to enter, possess, and destroy swine. Babylon is become the hold of every foul demonic spirit and every unclean and hateful bird (Revelation 18:2).

    The unknowing ingestion of unclean meat bears no symbolic meaning. The choice to eat swine’s flesh may be quite symbolic.
     
  9. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Will you have some figs with that ham sandwich?

    Mark 11:12 Now the next day, when they had come out from Bethany, He was hungry. 13 And seeing from afar a fig tree having leaves, He went to see if perhaps He would find something on it. When He came to it, He found nothing but leaves, for it was not the season for figs. 14 In response Jesus said to it, "Let no one eat fruit from you ever again."
     
  10. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Well - not from "that tree".

    The next day they passed by that tree and found it to be withered, dry and destroyed.

    Christ's words were literally true.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  11. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Did Christ die on the cross to "cleanse" the snake, pig, rat or cat?

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  12. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Why do you suppose that God placed horses, dogs, hamsters, frogs, snakes, pigs, cats and rats off limits in Lev 11 as he defined what food is "edible"?

    Do you think that the clean animals that went into the ark by 7's and the unclean that went into the ark by 2's were waiting for Jews?

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  13. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    I understand about 'that' tree, Bob. I was trying to make a point... God removed food restrictions in a vision. Remember?

    Acts 10:9 The next day, as they went on their journey and drew near the city, Peter went up on the housetop to pray, about the sixth hour. 10 Then he became very hungry and wanted to eat; but while they made ready, he fell into a trance 11 and saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to the earth. 12 In it were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. 13 And a voice came to him, "Rise, Peter; kill and eat." 14 But Peter said, "Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean." 15 And a voice spoke to him again the second time, "What God has cleansed you must not call common." 16 This was done three times. And the object was taken up into heaven again. 17 Now while Peter wondered within himself what this vision which he had seen meant, behold, the men who had been sent from Cornelius had made inquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate. 18 And they called and asked whether Simon, whose surname was Peter, was lodging there.

    Matthew 15:11 It's not what goes into the mouth that defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man."

    Romans 14:14 I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself. Still, to someone who considers a thing to be unclean, to that one it is unclean.

    1 Timothy 4:4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing should be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving,
     
  14. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Bob, I can't tell you about all the others, but I do know why cats are off limits. [​IMG]

    Right, Diane? ;)
     
  15. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    AMEN! LadyEagle. [​IMG]
     
  16. music4Him

    music4Him
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,333
    Likes Received:
    0
    I heard a doctor speaking about rats.....he said that they cause lukimia(sp?)......or was it the hot dogs and corny dogs with ground rat and pork in them? Rat on the stick anyone? [​IMG]

    All I know is that the diatary laws (or directions..which ever you want to call them) are suppost to be healthy.

    BTW, In referance to what Diane posted.... I thought that Acts 10:9-18 wasn't speaking of food, but of the Gentiles that Peter was going to visit. There was something with Gentiles and Jews being together in the same place or something? Also wasn't Gentiles called unclean somewhere? [​IMG]

    Music4Him
     
  17. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Back to Bob's question:

    Shellfish, as we know, are scavengers. Yuk. If I had any good sense, I would know they were unclean. (But I do love lobster and shrimp, LOL!) They also harbor bacteria, like Salmonella, harmful to humans.

    We all probably know about Trichinosis in undercooked pork, but here's also some info about it:

    http://health.yahoo.com/health/ency/adam/000631/overview

    So, God in His Knowledge, which man didn't have the scientific or medical knowledge about at the time of Leviticus Dietary Laws, forbade certain foods for health reasons.

    I'm sure there were probably other reasons, though. Perhaps to set the Israelites apart from the people and nations around them, who probably didn't have such dietary laws.

    Now that you've read all that medical information, do you still want that ham sandwich? [​IMG]

    Pass the mustard, please. [​IMG]
     
  18. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    Up above in general baptist forum theres a discussion about not tithing becasue it is O.T. and not repeated in the N.T. And here the discussion on following O.T. laws that are not repeated in the N.T.
    Jesus died so we would not have to try and live under law again, except for the ones He repeated in the N.T. Repeating a few was not endorsing them all for N.T. believers. Who the Son has set free is free in deed. We have been freed from the law and are under grace. Living by the law is living in bondage.
     
  19. music4Him

    music4Him
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,333
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why not just say...If the Lord convicts you or tells you... to not eat pork, tithe, and such... doesn't mean that everyone should do the same as you? Like in the old and the new testament here are two examples....

    Samson= no hair cuts

    John the Baptist= shall drink neither wine or strong drink

    Music4Him [​IMG]
     
  20. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    In Lev 11 we find "general instruction" about food that is edible. It never mentions the idea that "this is just for those that feel like obeying".

    In Genesis 6 and 7 we find the distinction between clean and unclean animals long before there is a Jew and God does not say "If you feel like bringing some clean animals in then do it".

    In Isaiah 66 when it talks about those that are burned with fire - it meantions among them - pagans, worshippers of false gods and then ... curiously, a mention of eating mice and detestable things (where it also adds a reference to ham sandwiches oddly enough).

    If this is just a "do what you feel like doing" idea - it was poorly stated in scripture, so much so that it looked like it was applicable and real.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     

Share This Page

Loading...