Unclean?

This item continues to be a point of contention in how it is applied within scripture:

Acts 10:10-16
10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. [Animals forbidden to ancient Israel ONLY!]
13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. [What was once unclean only to ancient Israel!]
14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
15 And the voice [spake] unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common.
16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

The "trance" spoken of in verse 10 is this, according to Thayer's Greek Lexicon:

"2. a throwing of the mind out of its normal state, alienation of mind, whether such as makes a lunatic (διανοίας, Deuteronomy 28:28; τῶν λογισμῶν, Plutarch, Sol. 8), or that of the man who by some sudden emotion is transported as it were out of himself, so that in this rapt condition, although he is awake, his mind is so drawn off from all surrounding objects and wholly fixed on things divine that he sees nothing but the forms and images lying within, and thinks that he perceives with his bodily eyes and ears realities shown him by God, (Philo, quis rerum divin. heres § 53 [cf. 51; B. D. under the word Trance; Delitzsch, Psychol. 5:5]): ἐπέπεσεν [Rec., others ἐγένετο] ἐπ’ αὐτὸν ἔκστασις, Acts 10:10"

We see here that the Lord clearly, in a vision (trance), speaks to the fact that the Mosaic Law's disallowances for the animals on that sheet are to no longer be considered common or unclean. The narrative in chapter ten then moves on to Gentiles being welcomed by Peter, and for him to accompany them rather than to shun them as was the custom of the Jews, although never commanded by the Law. It's one thing to be defiled by the sins of the pagan Gentiles in ancient times under the Law, but after the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law by Christ, both foods and people are not to be shunned on the basis of the uncleanness formerly laid down in that Law.

The point is this: There are those out there in certain movements who cast this section of scripture aside as being a clear declaration by God that all animals for food the Lord has provided are no longer unclean to Israel, especially to those who see Christ as Messiah. They either allegorize this section into saying something that it is not, or they try to constrain its meaning as applying only to Jews interacting with Gentiles who are in Christ.

Had the Lord desired that food be excluded from being understood as the initial object of change, then the vision could easily have encapsulated images of people who were not of Israel, and Peter being commanded to eat with them.

In theological studies, this is understood to be something akin to killing two birds with one stone, so to speak. Both animals for food AND Gentiles as unclean and therefore avoided, both are relevant. Look at what the Lord commanded Peter concerning what were once unclean animals ONLY for Israeli's to consume:

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

The Lord did not compartmentalize that statement only to sentiments toward Gentiles, even though Gentiles are part of the context. The actual imagery is animals the Mosaic Law had declared as unclean ONLY to Israel, historically and biblically for the purpose of them being set apart from all other nations. Believers in Christ, both Jews and Gentiles, are no longer under the Mosaic Law requirement for being set apart by way of such practices and restrictions! THAT is what those groupings are missing. The Lord Himself is the ONLY distinction He wanted for us to show the world as our being set apart, and called out from! Nothing else will ever have the impact for that separation, and going back to such mundane and impractical exhibitions, which only add what will only cloud the Christ-distinction we should live in this world, and you end up with an attempted mixture of Christ with things in the world. That is NOT what the Lord wants!

Thoughts?

MM
 
Hello Musicmaster;

Hey brother, I want to stimulate discussion here with the members who have studied Acts, especially 10:10-16.

Where do you feel the potential contention comes from?

The only difficulty I have experienced in the study of Acts 10:10-16 by other Bible study students and myself is the challenge. You can't read this like a magazine. It's the Word of God. I will argue my understanding with God, but make it a point not to challenge or debate Him. Either you believe His teaching of Acts or you don't.

You wrote or quoted, "but after the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law by Christ, both foods and people are not to be shunned on the basis of the uncleanness formerly laid down in that Law."

I agree with you.

Years ago an elder co-worker, a Christian, told me that I couldn't eat lobster referring to the Old Testament. I have a lot of respect for her and her faith. That was 40 years ago.


Hazel and I have studied the book of Acts and continue to study it today. We enjoy lobster but I prefer crabs. How we apply it is more important. Our love to all peoples, eating with them and being * respectful to what they eat opens the door for us to witness Christ to them as Peter did with Cornelius.

* Years ago Hazel and I resided next door to an Indian couple, I got upset with them about something so I cooked steak on purpose leaving the kitchen and patio windows open. When they got home they were upset because they don't eat meat and the smell insulted them. I was wrong for doing that so the next time I made sure the windows were closed.
lol!

God bless you, MM, and thank you for sharing Unclean.
 
* Years ago Hazel and I resided next door to an Indian couple, I got upset with them about something so I cooked steak on purpose leaving the kitchen and patio windows open. When they got home they were upset because they don't eat meat and the smell insulted them. I was wrong for doing that so the next time I made sure the windows were closed. lol!
You made me spit my tea..... THIS was FUNNY.... I think you were supposed to say.... I repented for cooking "shove it in your nostrils STEAK".... HAHAHAHA.
 
Hey brother, I want to stimulate discussion here with the members who have studied Acts, especially 10:10-16.

Where do you feel the potential contention comes from?


Good question, Bob.

The contention of which I referred, albeit in a very generalized fashion, is between what we biblicists understand and believe, and with what many in the Hebrew Roots grouping hold; who are firm believers in the continuance of the Mosaic Law, even the blood sacrifices (which I will hit upon shortly).

They continue to call unclean those things outlined as such ONLY for Israel in the Mosaic Law. It's their belief that, based upon one obscure verse in Acts, that the new Gentile converts attended synagogues in their provinces to learn the Mosaic Law, and to grow according to their learning and becoming aware of those mandates:

Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

Isn't it amazing the vast array of assumptions that can be eisegetically crammed into such obscure verses? Spurious groupings, although they have no other verse and context foundation into which the one obscure verse can be joined together with for greater understanding and backing, can arbitrarily solidify into doctrine what that one obscure verse allegedly says after having been coupled together with all the injections they squeeze into it? Doctrinal foundations have become the playground of all manner of damnably deceptive teachings that clearly are additives to what's written in the text of the Bible.

So, they exclude the animals as being any part of a change from the Mosaic Law, focusing only on the Gentiles. Talk about selective blinders!

As to blood sacrifices, many of that grouping are poised to go running over to Jerusalem and become partakers and supporters of the blood sacrifices if and when the third temple is built. It may be just a tent tabernacle, but likely a third temple. Their thinking is that the renewed blood sacrifices will be a good thing because it will allegedly point BACK to Christ and the cross.

Now, I'm not here to take from them their freedom to believe whatever they wish, but I personally refuse to couple salvation with the Mosaic Law. That's a damnable heresy Paul clearly destroyed in his epistles for anyone who dares to read his writings for what they say. Many in that grouping even go so far as to say that Paul was not a legitimate apostle...never minding, of course, that the counsel of apostles in Jerusalem endorsed him.

MM
 
The unclean topic is not something I know a lot about... however in simple terms... I believe that we as Christians are FREE from all laws around the consumption of ANYTHING that goes in our bodies. With that said... If I know that someone has an addiction problem and is abstaining... out of respect for that person... I will abstain.... If I am at a dinner that is vegetarian... I will NOT complain there is NO meat... HA. If I am with NON CHRISTIAN who cannot eat something due to religious beliefs... I will BREAK BREAD with that person and honour their way.
HOWEVER.... in all honesty... If I am with a CHRISTIAN who is legalistic on this matter and believes they must follow the food laws.... I am not able to respect or oblige.
 
What's tragic are those who use "offense" as a way of applying a ram rod against others from living out their freedoms in Christ.
I think Bob hit the nail on the head when he said our LOVE to people... How we exercise our freedoms. I have dear friends who are from Afghanistan... I don't know what religion they are but my love for them allows me to BREAK BREAD with them AS they are while remaining true to who I AM. They are most liberal since moving to Canada many years ago... however... I am always mindful to act in such a way as is comfortable and pleasing to them.

I actually have more patience and tolerance for non-believers than I do for Christians. That is the honest truth. I think this comes from all the harm I have seen come from my legalistic relatives.
 
I think Bob hit the nail on the head when he said our LOVE to people... How we exercise our freedoms. I have dear friends who are from Afghanistan... I don't know what religion they are but my love for them allows me to BREAK BREAD with them AS they are while remaining true to who I AM. They are most liberal since moving to Canada many years ago... however... I am always mindful to act in such a way as is comfortable and pleasing to them.

I actually have more patience and tolerance for non-believers than I do for Christians. That is the honest truth. I think this comes from all the harm I have seen come from my legalistic relatives.

As long as your light isn't hidden under a basket. We gotta shine, and that Light from Him through us will offend, no matter what.

MM
 
Hello Musicmaster;

Hey brother, I want to stimulate discussion here with the members who have studied Acts, especially 10:10-16.

Where do you feel the potential contention comes from?

The only difficulty I have experienced in the study of Acts 10:10-16 by other Bible study students and myself is the challenge. You can't read this like a magazine. It's the Word of God. I will argue my understanding with God, but make it a point not to challenge or debate Him. Either you believe His teaching of Acts or you don't.

You wrote or quoted, "but after the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law by Christ, both foods and people are not to be shunned on the basis of the uncleanness formerly laid down in that Law."

I agree with you.

Years ago an elder co-worker, a Christian, told me that I couldn't eat lobster referring to the Old Testament. I have a lot of respect for her and her faith. That was 40 years ago.


Hazel and I have studied the book of Acts and continue to study it today. We enjoy lobster but I prefer crabs. How we apply it is more important. Our love to all peoples, eating with them and being * respectful to what they eat opens the door for us to witness Christ to them as Peter did with Cornelius.

* Years ago Hazel and I resided next door to an Indian couple, I got upset with them about something so I cooked steak on purpose leaving the kitchen and patio windows open. When they got home they were upset because they don't eat meat and the smell insulted them. I was wrong for doing that so the next time I made sure the windows were closed.
lol!

God bless you, MM, and thank you for sharing Unclean.
What is the "Potential Contention" of Acts 10:10-16??????

1st of all, IMHO.....Peter did not have the breadth that Paul had. He did not have the background or the training or education God used him but had to "Prepare" him.

We all are different and we all do not come out of the same mold for God to use us!

So....In verses 10-12 there are beasts, birds and bugs.

While Peter is in this "trance/Vision" wondering what it means, a voice speaks to him. Isn't it interesting that Peter calls that voice "Lord"?

But......he does not obey what the Lord tells him". He said...........NO Lord!. He corrects the one he called Lord!

Now don't miss this!.........Here is a man who is on this side of the Day of Pentecost. He is living in the Day of Grace where it makes NO difference whether we eat meat or we don't!

But Peter is still living by the Law of Moses! He just said that he has not eaten anything that is ceremonially unclean.
He is sincere and he is honest but he is also wrong! Some will same......He should have know better!!!!!

But you see, different than Paul, God is teaching Peter something which is that he is no longer under the Mosiac system and he is free to eat anything he blesses.

Today.......the problem is that some people decide they do not want to eat meat and then try to put everyone else under their same belief!

The point is actually real simple! We are under grace and we/you can eat meat or lobster or spiders if that is what you want to do!
Somethings will give you heartburn, and some will give you direaria and some a headache, but what you eat is your business and it will not change your relationship with the Lord in any way.
 
I think Bob hit the nail on the head when he said our LOVE to people... How we exercise our freedoms. I have dear friends who are from Afghanistan... I don't know what religion they are but my love for them allows me to BREAK BREAD with them AS they are while remaining true to who I AM. They are most liberal since moving to Canada many years ago... however... I am always mindful to act in such a way as is comfortable and pleasing to them.

I actually have more patience and tolerance for non-believers than I do for Christians. That is the honest truth. I think this comes from all the harm I have seen come from my legalistic relatives.
I agree!

Non-believers act out of ignorance but believers act out of judgment.
 
Here's a great teaching on this topic, although short:


Disclaimer: This video is not hosted on this forum site. This is only a link over to Youtube where it is actually stored and played from.
 
Non-believers act out of ignorance but believers act out of judgment.
Hi Major...
I have sat at a dinner table with this type of brood and it is the most choking and sufficating experience. Sadly... several years ago... I made the choice to walk away from my remaining family ( through marriage to my mother's brother ). I just cannot accept the hypocrisy and harshness that comes through so clearly when in their presence. Every occasion was a nightmare of sorts. Everyone pretending to be RIGHTEOUS.
 
I agree!

Non-believers act out of ignorance but believers act out of judgment.

Ignorance? I'm not so willing to give them that kind of pass. They are pawns in the hands of the powers and principalities of the air (demon influences), and they are those pawns who willingly and intentionally, on the basis of the choices they have made up to this point, placed themselves subject to those entities. Given that the heart is desperately wicked and cannot be known, they are not worthy of such a pass. Perhaps your meaning was other than how it reads, I just needed to throw that out there.

Judgement? Darn toot'n! I'm one judgmental dude because Jesus commanded that we be such:

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

The Greek word translated into the underlined "judge" has this as its grammatical and lingual definition from Thayer's Greek Lexicon:

"to pronounce judgment; to subject to censure; of those who act the part of judges or arbiters in the matters of common life, or pass judgment on the deeds and words of others: universally, and without case, John 8:16, 26; κατά τί, John 8:15; κατ' ὄψιν, John 7:24;"

There's the key, along with the basis of our judgment of others being rooted in righteousness rather than our own sense of right and wrong originating from that one tree in the garden.

Major, I'm so glad you said what you did. What just came back to my remembrance that I had not thought of in a very long time about that tree is this: The problem with man knowing good and evil is our tendency to corrupt that knowledge by way of our inferiority. Adam and Eve, having been formed from the dust, were still interior, even in their pre-fallen state.

Now, I'm not saying this is absolutely true, but I heard William Lane Craig state in a video I had just seen yesterday that the Tree of Life was a sort of "fountain of youth" in that garden. Adam had to partake of that water in order to remain alive and young. I realize there are those who would disagree, but, then, I would have to point to their having been barred from access to that tree in their fallen state in the knowledge of good and evil.

I could say so much more on this topic, but will not belabor the point, except to say that most people assuming that they would have lived endlessly before the fall is an assumption that simply is not in the text so far as I recall at this moment. Most assume that they had never drank of the water flowing from that tree, but we can't say that for sure apart from reliance upon the inferiority of our English translations. Their uncleanness made them unworthy to remain in that state of knowledge of good and evil because they would ultimately corrupt that knowledge as has been going on since the fall.

Good stuff, brother.

MM
 
Ignorance? I'm not so willing to give them that kind of pass. They are pawns in the hands of the powers and principalities of the air (demon influences), and they are those pawns who willingly and intentionally, on the basis of the choices they have made up to this point, placed themselves subject to those entities. Given that the heart is desperately wicked and cannot be known, they are not worthy of such a pass. Perhaps your meaning was other than how it reads, I just needed to throw that out there.

Judgement? Darn toot'n! I'm one judgmental dude because Jesus commanded that we be such:

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

The Greek word translated into the underlined "judge" has this as its grammatical and lingual definition from Thayer's Greek Lexicon:

"to pronounce judgment; to subject to censure; of those who act the part of judges or arbiters in the matters of common life, or pass judgment on the deeds and words of others: universally, and without case, John 8:16, 26; κατά τί, John 8:15; κατ' ὄψιν, John 7:24;"

There's the key, along with the basis of our judgment of others being rooted in righteousness rather than our own sense of right and wrong originating from that one tree in the garden.

Major, I'm so glad you said what you did. What just came back to my remembrance that I had not thought of in a very long time about that tree is this: The problem with man knowing good and evil is our tendency to corrupt that knowledge by way of our inferiority. Adam and Eve, having been formed from the dust, were still interior, even in their pre-fallen state.

Now, I'm not saying this is absolutely true, but I heard William Lane Craig state in a video I had just seen yesterday that the Tree of Life was a sort of "fountain of youth" in that garden. Adam had to partake of that water in order to remain alive and young. I realize there are those who would disagree, but, then, I would have to point to their having been barred from access to that tree in their fallen state in the knowledge of good and evil.

I could say so much more on this topic, but will not belabor the point, except to say that most people assuming that they would have lived endlessly before the fall is an assumption that simply is not in the text so far as I recall at this moment. Most assume that they had never drank of the water flowing from that tree, but we can't say that for sure apart from reliance upon the inferiority of our English translations. Their uncleanness made them unworthy to remain in that state of knowledge of good and evil because they would ultimately corrupt that knowledge as has been going on since the fall.

Good stuff, brother.

MM
Remember CONTEXT!

"In Awe of Him" said........
I actually have more patience and tolerance for non-believers than I do for Christians. That is the honest truth. I think this comes from all the harm I have seen come from my legalistic relatives.

That was what my comment was to.

I agree that non-believers are lead by the power of the air, Satan, but too many things are blamed on "The devil made me do it"!
At some point we need to grasp the fact that some people say and do mean and stupid things because that is the way that they are.

Yes, I agree that we are to be able to judge the actions of others. We all do it to one extent or another. However, believers ahould know better and that is what I think "In Awe of Him" was talking about.

As allways, good to talk with you!!!!
 
Hi Major...
I have sat at a dinner table with this type of brood and it is the most choking and sufficating experience. Sadly... several years ago... I made the choice to walk away from my remaining family ( through marriage to my mother's brother ). I just cannot accept the hypocrisy and harshness that comes through so clearly when in their presence. Every occasion was a nightmare of sorts. Everyone pretending to be RIGHTEOUS.

Believe me when I say I know exactly what you are talking about! Sometimes the only way to keep the peace is to remove your self from the temptation.
 
The unclean topic is not something I know a lot about... however in simple terms... I believe that we as Christians are FREE from all laws around the consumption of ANYTHING that goes in our bodies. With that said... If I know that someone has an addiction problem and is abstaining... out of respect for that person... I will abstain.... If I am at a dinner that is vegetarian... I will NOT complain there is NO meat... HA. If I am with NON CHRISTIAN who cannot eat something due to religious beliefs... I will BREAK BREAD with that person and honour their way.
HOWEVER.... in all honesty... If I am with a CHRISTIAN who is legalistic on this matter and believes they must follow the food laws.... I am not able to respect or oblige.
Agreed. The law does not make anyone righteous. It may "may" have some kind of realease of guilt but that kind of guilt is self manufactured and has nothing to do with the standing we have with God.
 
Hi Major...
I have sat at a dinner table with this type of brood and it is the most choking and sufficating experience. Sadly... several years ago... I made the choice to walk away from my remaining family ( through marriage to my mother's brother ). I just cannot accept the hypocrisy and harshness that comes through so clearly when in their presence. Every occasion was a nightmare of sorts. Everyone pretending to be RIGHTEOUS.
LOL..........go on a missionary trip to Africa or Hatie or Nicaragua and see what is sat down in front of you to eat.
 
LOL..........go on a missionary trip to Africa or Hatie or Nicaragua and see what is sat down in front of you to eat.
Thanks... I'm good.... HAHAHAHA...Mind you ... if I had a choice of sitting through a legalistic Christian dinner and a feast of roasted bugs and creatures... I would probably pick the latter and just watch others eat. HAHA.

I'm just going through the Anthony Bourdain series where he travels to different countries and boy oh boy he is brave to try strange foods.
My heart really goes out to him... I really can FEEL his suffering. He was such a great story teller. God bless those who suffer so deeply with mental illness... I have been there... and it's not fun.
 
Thanks... I'm good.... HAHAHAHA...Mind you ... if I had a choice of sitting through a legalistic Christian dinner and a feast of roasted bugs and creatures... I would probably pick the latter and just watch others eat. HAHA.

I'm just going through the Anthony Bourdain series where he travels to different countries and boy oh boy he is brave to try strange foods.
My heart really goes out to him... I really can FEEL his suffering. He was such a great story teller. God bless those who suffer so deeply with mental illness... I have been there... and it's not fun.
Now it has been many years since I was there, but what was the impressing thing was that the people in Africa fed us with what they had and they went hungry to make sure we were fed.
 
Now it has been many years since I was there, but what was the impressing thing was that the people in Africa fed us with what they had and they went hungry to make sure we were fed.
WOW.... that is beautiful... and in that case... I would eat whatever was put in front of me. I don't think I have ever heard of such a gracious gesture before. I have never travelled outside of Canada and once in US. Thank you for sharing this with me. I am deeply moved by this story.
 
Back
Top