“Therefore let no one judge you...”

[Nikephoros II Phokas]

IF that was His mission of His Father’s Will then He could be blunt and just say “DO think I have come to destroy the Law...so you can finally eat pig now” then this later “clarifying” commentary “by Mark” would not have even been necessary...nor this English lexicon to study it out…it would also have been supported in other teachings and even exemplified by His disciples later...I mean Bacon tastes GOOD right? Imagine how happy joos would be to finally be able to partake of BBQ’d pork...or stuffed Ham...or Rat shish kebab...or stewed Bat...

As it stands the Greek originals do NOT have that parenthetical editorial in Mark 7...and because He was NOT abrogating or purging Levitical purity categories...but since your tradition insists He did we must resort to lexicons to help have Scripture translate Scripture...and not rely on “muh pig” translator/interpreters...

You also miss we are NOT using a lexicon for comparing the Greek to the Greek or the Latin to the Latin (as the phrase “with this saying Jesus ritually cleansed all flesh” was NOT present in either of these languages) but how Mark 7:19 was later translated in other languages for more modern ears...in more cosmopolitan and contemporary cultures...you know...in dis globohomo ya dig? The great common good equalizer of “men and woman are the same…...all days holy...all food is clean” fame...but getting ahead of myself here...sorry

Now you're back to your original claim that this parenthetical phrase was not in the original manuscripts but offer no proof. Origen who was writing about it in A.D. 210 certainly found it right there. Do you have an older manuscript than that where it's not? You're like Thomas Jefferson who took a pair of scissors to the Holy Scriptures and just cut out anything he didn't agree with.

 

[clefty]

Now you're back to your original claim that this parenthetical phrase was not in the original manuscripts but offer no proof. Origen who was writing about it in A.D. 210 certainly found it right there.

Odd Matt in his reading of Mark for use in his gospel didn’t find what you attest “right there”...(maybe he purged it thus making all scripture clean?)...nor did Peter hear Him this alleged teaching and he was “right there” when He taught it...nor did Paul “certainly NOT!”...or myriads of joos that first century who believed and were STILL zealous for the Law...

Do you have an older manuscript than that where it's not?

Mark 7:

19

Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus oti ouk eisporeuetai autou eiV thn kardian all eiV thn koilian kai eiV ton afedrwna ekporeuetai kaqarizon panta ta brwmata Scrivener 1894 Textus Receptus oti ouk eisporeuetai autou eiV thn kardian all eiV thn koilian kai eiV ton afedrwna ekporeuetai kaqarizon panta ta brwmata Byzantine Majority oti ouk eisporeuetai autou eiV thn kardian all eiV thn koilian kai eiV ton afedrwna ekporeuetai kaqarizon panta ta brwmata Alexandrian oti ouk eisporeuetai autou eiV thn kardian all eiV thn koilian kai eiV ton afedrwna ekporeuetai kaqarizwn panta ta brwmata Hort and Westcott oti ouk eisporeuetai autou eiV thn kardian all eiV thn koilian kai eiV ton afedrwna ekporeuetai kaqarizwn panta ta brwmata Latin Vulgate 7:19 quia non introit in cor eius sed in ventrem et in secessum exit purgans omnes escas

Just this so far...none of them having “...(in saying this Iesous destroys Moses and so we can eat pig now)” or some similar iteration...

Prolly why so many in that first century knew that a dude shitting out his food did not then purge unclean pig from the list of meats prohibited.

I mean they were shitting all over the wilderness and purging the contents of their stomachs into the draught for centuries and that biological action of cleaning all food never made swine clean...

Fecaloma can be quite painful and even life threatening...you don’t think sufferers would feel PURIFIED being able to finally cleanse out their systems? Like a religious experience...

https://www.livescience.com/59473-what-is-hirschsprung-disease.html

China china china right?...renown for it’s clean diet of cat...rat...and bat...

So you wish He cleansed ALL flesh for the eating? How about flesh from a living animal...that cool too?

Is it Mark or Origen who would have Him forget that it can be more than just the type of animal to be unclean? And that even the clean animal can be made unclean?

Merely touching a dead clean animal can make one unclean Lev 11:39If an animal that you may eat dies, anyone who touches the carcass will be unclean until evening.40Whoever eats from the carcass must wash his clothes and will be unclean until evening, and anyone who picks up the carcass must wash his clothes and will be unclean until evening.

But Mark would have the Master Teacher...Creator of all life...Provider of all food...the Lawgiver Himself forgetting His own Law? Even destroy it...

But yeah sure ok...MAYBE in the heat of the moment He was distracted by the triggered pharisees protesting the disciples eating pig He secretly told them “is Ok now”...oh wait “Certainly NOT!”... it was the eating bread without washing their hands that provoked their wrath...Imagine if He or His disciples ever did eat pig and teach others “is ok now”

Mark only has Him describe the digestive process of whatever enters a man from outside (oh and being a jooish audience that “whatever” entering from outside would NOT include pig... ya dig? As He had NOT YET allegedly made swine clean food for this audience) does NOT defile a man...as whatever from the outside going into the stomach to THEN be cleansed...goes into the shitter...not the heart mind or soul...

So whatever (like eating bread with unwashed hands which triggered the pharisees this discussion ) enters the dude’s stomach (not the heart which determines what enters) is purged from the dude’s stomach...into the shitter...the stomach having now cleansed all the food entering it...

Sorry it seems I am belaboring this point but all these stiff necks and scaled eyed readings are really disconcerting...

So yup the Creator of ALL life merely discussing His biological process known as digestion...nothing there about purging eliminating cleaning in the Levitical sense...as there is NO defilement from outside...but that the already defiled heart chooses further defilement...

Again...an obedient circumcised heart would FORBID swine as food but an uncircumcised heart being ALREADY DEFILED would ACCEPT swine as food thus NOT be defiled by whatever enters from outside because it is defiled ALREADY...permitting entrance from the outside is by choice...whether it is pig...tattoos...man on man sex...

So even if dude cleaning his stomach into the shitter was actually circumcised his disobedience for eating delicious Ham has him regarded as UNcircumcised. And if a goyim who is UNcircumcised refrains from pig...well then his obedience to the Law He gave His followers is regarded as circumcision. Romans 2:25-26 As true circumcision is NOT external or physical but of the heart...See what else Paul said to the Romans in 4:9-12 about faith (demonstrated by obedience) imputing righteousness to those uncircumcised...just like it was to Abraham.

Ok so where were we? Ahh yes...Mark’s account of His telling of a circumcised heart eating clean food and then dude shits it out into the shitter thus purging/cleaning out/eliminating (as Matt relates it) all this food from his stomach.

So did Mark have Him forget that even clean food can indeed become UNCLEAN if not slaughtered correctly, or bled out completely...or offered to idols...I mean He purified ALL food yes?

Oh wait NO...I mean “certainly NOT!” as Paul exclaimed when answering “does faith make void the Law” Romans 3:31

And as confirmed by the Acts 15 council which finally ruled believing goyim were NOT to bring clean meat made unclean...I mean these believing Greeks were a cultured cosmopolitan well mannered people...they would NOT be rude enough to bring pig to a Sabbath potluck...I mean goyim are not known for such chutzpah...

or would after having heard Moses preached every Sabbath these synagogue crowding goyim would STILL bring pig and insist “but but Moishe I chopped dis here Pork chop all proper like...and I drained it clean...and I didn’t buy it at Apollo’s temple”...would that meat be clean?

Why oh why all this concern and debate and need for council if He INDEED had declared ALL meats clean...all the letters of Paul struggling to just say “we can eat pig now” yes?

But your brave Origen wishes Mark to infer His jooish audience even considered swine food to enter from the outside into the stomach to be shat into the shitter purging out wut? The food from the heart?...and so now ALL meat was made clean by Him...even meat offered to idols?

Origen says:

“But as for us who know that some things are used by demons, or if we do not know, but suspect, and are in doubt about it, if we use such things, we have used them not to the glory of God, nor in the name of Christ; [edit: not a name buddy] for not only does the suspicion that things have been sacrificed to idols condemn him who eats, but even the doubt concerning this; for “he that doubteth,” according to the Apostle, “is condemned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith; and whatsoever is not of faith is sin.”

Hmmm...but Origen you just said Mark said He said ALL meat was made clean for having been ingested...and shit into the shitter...

And well...as per tradition Origen goes and cuts himself off...HA...see what I did there? “Origen cut himself off...as per tradition”

Again poor Origen:

“even in those things which are thought to be good, it is possible for a man to sin who has taken them up in an evil way and under the impulse of passion, and that these things called impure may be considered pure, if used by us in accordance with reason...” wow...just wow...so if in accordance with reason I may consider being pure dishonoring my parents?

History would reveal that sentiment I guess...since even “thou shalt not kill” WAS NOT applied as this another gospel was spread by the sword which WAS…used “by us in accordance with reason”

After all that’s NOT even listed as prohibited in the council of Acts 15 nor is coveting, or stealing, or LYING....obviously...lol

Only four things are required in Acts 15 yes...the rest is done away with? Purged are the rest of His Laws as according to reason those things called impure (by Him the Lawgiver) if used by us according to reason may be considered pure.

Origen then adds insult to injury:

“But as for the things which are called impure, “All things become pure to the pure,” for, “To them that are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure, since both their minds and their conscience are defiled. And when these are defiled, they make all things whatsoever they touch defiled; as again on the contrary the pure mind and the pure conscience make all things pure, even though they may seem to be impure;“...

And just what or who determines the pure mind the pure conscience which makes the impure pure?

not surprising Origen would insist Mark has Him abrogate the Law He gave His people at Sinai and given NOT just to da joos...1/12 of Israel...but even those NOT of Abraham “strangers within thy gate” as the Sabbath commandment includes...the ONLY commandment to specifically adopt them goyim… graft them in...the irony

Origen would teach to eat what was NOT given man to eat (and not to just joos) but would also teach the rejection of Sabbath which WAS made for all mankind…

Sabbath and woman were made for man but some reject both claiming all that was done away with…and yet demand to have what was NOT created for mankind to eat…

Is MARRIAGE too considered jooish or only for da joo as it was instituted the same week Sabbath was...merely a day prior His cessation of work after six days of labor...

But yeah...I can hear Origen insist “COME ON MAN...I learned a lot...I learned SO MUCH...I learned...Mark said He said ALL meat is to eat now...you sayin’ His Law is immutable and still binding? COME ON MAN!...meat is meat...I LEARNED...clean unclean...lamb rat...beef bat...black white...ALL colors...from ALL backgrounds...every one deserves a POT...You know wut I mean?”



Sure Origen...but do you know wut He meant?

You're like Thomas Jefferson who took a pair of scissors to the Holy Scriptures and just cut out anything he didn't agree with.

ha...still yet another BRILLIANT ad Hom you resort to in your popular mockery...

but I know of secret vaults and libraries which still censor public eyes from viewing and the history of multiple councils where and when wise and learned men (some with scissors) met to vote what went in and what was purged of all the literature around...

But yes keep da clever zingers coming...has them runnin’ here for more...gives ‘em something to upvote about...

 

[Nikephoros II Phokas]

I take that as a no. None of the publications you site are of any import being Textus Receptus editions or children of Textus Receptus not actual manuscripts. TR was based on a very small selection of manuscripts in existence at that time that were available to Erasmus. The Latin equivalent phrase in the Vulgate can be read either way.

My reading is certainly older than yours and you cannot offer any manuscripts, quotes or exegesis from anyone older than Origen or St. John Chrysostom. Your fallacious appeal to Matthew's silence on matter is quite a dull argument. Most likely Matthew didn't feel the need for the same parenthetical comment because the Judaizing disease had already been dealt with decisively at the Council of Jerusalem. You're also Janus-faced in this endeavor - using Higher Criticism to essentially claim that Matthew was plagiarizing Mark (Q Theory) and therefore isn't a independent witness but then railing against Higher Criticism for "changing the Gospel".

And it's not like Paul doesn't rail against judaizing for the entirety of Galatians and much of Romans.

14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. -Romans 14:14

 

[clefty]

I take that as a no. None of the publications you site are of any import being Textus Receptus editions or children of Textus Receptus not
actual manuscripts. TR was based on a very small selection of manuscripts in existence at that time that were available to Erasmus.

It’s surprising we even have what’s left of the bible at all right? Wut with all the loss, constant censure and revisions...good advise that against any additions...as the making of books never ends Eccl 12:12...

HalleluYah He preserved enough for us to work with...and even aided our retrieval of that...semper reformanda back to the Way...the old time religion...to a restoration of obedience to Him His ways and not man his traditions.

Both Moses and John of Revelations fame are quite clear not to add or subtract from the Word and yet...

The Latin equivalent phrase in the Vulgate can be read either way.

oh yeah? Well some of us dividing the Word would allow for it to interpret itself using texts from elsewhere within it...line upon line...precept built ON precept and NOT precept abrogating precept…

as to establish a matter...it is usually two or three witnesses

so far you might barely have one twisted here in Mark and into later translations …whereas anyone can readily read His lifestyle He exemplified for us...aside of any alleged “either way” teaching…

Add to that the lives of the apostles to confirm what He intended for His to follow Him having saved them from the wages of sin its forever death...

Such as Peter a good witness to His faith lifestyle…his “no I won’t eat unclean” even unclean meat which was heaven sent...and he was a witness to His ACTUAL TEACHING there in Mark...

Paul another witness his “copy me as I copy Christ” so you JUST need at least ONE instance of Christ actually consuming it and not just humoring demons with swine…

Won’t find it in Greek no matter how old or Latin...is why Paul exclaimed “Certainly NOT!” answering if our faith makes void the law...

My reading is certainly older than yours and you cannot offer any manuscripts, quotes or exegesis from anyone older than Origen or St. John Chrysostom.

well show your work...but if this is a contest of “mine’s longer…in existence than yours” might I then offer this ancient list of witnesses which determines how a BELIEVING goyim is to live to represent Yah:

Leviticus 19:34
The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt; I am the Lord your God.

Exodus 12:49
The same law shall apply to the native as to the stranger who sojourns among you.”

Leviticus 24:22
There shall be one standard for you; it shall be for the stranger as well as the native, for I am the Lord your God.’”

Numbers 9:14
If an alien sojourns among you and observes the Passover to the Lord, according to the statute of the Passover and according to its ordinance, so he shall do; you shall have one statute, both for the alien and for the native of the land.’”

Numbers 15:14
If an alien sojourns with you, or one who may be among you throughout your generations, and he wishes to make an offering by fire, as a soothing aroma to the Lord, just as you do so he shall do.

Numbers 15:15
As for the assembly, there shall be one statute for you and for the alien who sojourns with you, a perpetual statute throughout your generations; as you are, so shall the alien be before the Lord.

Numbers 15:16
There is to be one law and one ordinance for you and for the alien who sojourns with you.’”

Numbers 15:29
You shall have one law for him who does anything unintentionally, for him who is native among the sons of Israel and for the alien who sojourns among them.

Deuteronomy 1:16
“Then I charged your judges at that time, saying, ‘Hear the cases between your fellow countrymen, and judge righteously between a man and his fellow countryman, or the alien who is with him.

Deuteronomy 24:14
“You shall not oppress a hired servant who is poor and needy, whether he is one of your countrymen or one of your aliens who is in your land in your towns.

Leviticus 18:26
But as for you, you are to keep My statutes and My judgments and shall not do any of these abominations, neither the native, nor the alien who sojourns among you

Leviticus 22:18
“Speak to Aaron and to his sons and to all the sons of Israel and say to them, ‘Any man of the house of Israel or of the aliens in Israel who presents his offering, whether it is any of their votive or any of their freewill offerings, which they present to the Lord for a burnt offering—

Leviticus 17:13
So when any man from the sons of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, in hunting catches a beast or a bird which may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth.

Exodus 12:19
Seven days there shall be no leaven found in your houses; for whoever eats what is leavened, that person shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he is an alien or a native of the land.

Exodus 20:10
but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.

Deuteronomy 5:14
but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter or your male servant or your female servant or your ox or your donkey or any of your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you, so that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you.

Leviticus 24:16
Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.

Numbers 15:26
So all the congregation of the sons of Israel will be forgiven, with the alien who sojourns among them, for it happened to all the people.

Leviticus 16:29
“This shall be a permanent statute for you: in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall humble your souls and not do any work, whether the native, or the alien who sojourns among you;

Leviticus 17:8-9
Then you shall say to them, ‘Any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who offers a burnt offering or sacrifice,9 and does not bring it to the door of the tabernacle of meeting to offer it to the Lord that man shall be cut off from among the people.

Leviticus 17:10
‘And any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people.

I think all these are in the LXX...and there are others...hope that’s long enough...of a list of manuscripts, quotes or exegesis from anyone older than Origen or St. John Chrysostom.

I hope you took the time to read at least some of these texts as these lines upon lines precepts upon precepts ARE the VERY witnesses that even the Acts 15 council referenced. I mean I hope you don’t assume they pulled only 4 requirements out of the draught to give guidance to the believing goyim who were now again thousands of years later again crowding into da joo’s ekklesia...their synagogue gates to hear of One resurrected....

”oy vey! vut to do with the dirty goyim”...Paul writes that even this enmity of the joo towards He abolished destroying the wall seperating believing joo and believing greek...both obedient each to seperate laws? Making an apartheid state of the kingdom of Yah? “Certainly NOT! We establish the Law” notice WE and singular Law...even worldly parents know not to expect different rules of children...or be strict on the first and “whatever do what thou whilst” for the younger...

For by ONE SPIRIT we were all baptized into ONE BODY...joo or Greek...He made both one...through Him we both have access by ONE Spirit to the Father...even Paul echoes here what was ruled in Acts 15 and the OT prior

And from Sinai to Jame’s conclusion to the council in AD 50 a LOT of food was purged from the stomach and shit into the privy...elimanted and yet NOT ONE SWINE was declared clean for His people to consume...let alone “DO think the Law that defines us as His people has been destroyed.”

I already posted this here but you might have missed it too.

In Acts 15 James concludes that to ease the excited goyim’s learning curve of “now that we are saved by faith how do we follow Him?” You know faith AND works...given by Him and not traditions of the elders or founding fathers...

James thought it best not to trouble them believing goyim with ALL of what Moses was preached every Sabbath...but initially these 4 things will be expected of goyim crowding into the synagogues to hear more of One resurrected every Sabbath. 4 things 3 of which deal with diet...the 4th was “no sexual immorality” which was also expected in Greek society just now following Him the list was longer

James thought it necessary to help clarify the jots and tittles of keeping clean meat clean...as already mentioned the Greeks prided themselves of their sophisticated civilization and hospitality...they loved to pray ya dig?... and yet disciplined with good manners...everybody knew for centuries joos DON’T eat pig...what everybody didn’t know is that even clean meat can be defiled...as well...NOT ALL flesh was now declared clean to eat...for instance a lamb offered to Mars was NOT cool...lots of nuances and detail would take time to learn...EVERY SABBATH hearing Moses preached.

So actually 3 of the 4 things concluded at the council in AD 50 merely PROVE that what was to be attested much later in Mark’s future gospel was NOT that He made ALL food clean since meat with blood was defiled still...as was meat not properly killed...or offered to idols...ALL conditions to defile clean meat...

Serving pork with blood still in it is NOT defiling it as it ALREADY IS UNCLEAN...the irony...believing goyim would NOT insist pig without blood...killed properly and not offered to Mars WAS NOW CLEAN...

And NOBODY in AD 50 thought He made all meats clean because “Mark’s” little parenthetical comment had NOT been published yet...

So where was I?

Four things ALREADY LISTED in the OT were now again expected of the “strangers within thy gates” who lived amongst Israel eager to hear about One resurrected having defeated death forever...

1-abstain from food offered to idols Lev 17:8-9

2-abstain from sexual immorality Lev 18:6-26

3-abstain from blood Lev 17:10

4-abstain from meat strangled/carcass**

**The prohibition against meat having no knowledge of how it was killed...is interesting as it is ruled here at the council as NOT allowed for the believing goyim to eat...whereas in Deut 14:21 “meat died of itself/natural causes” IS to be given to the “alien” “strangers” that they might eat...or even sold to a “foreigner” as they were “second class citizen”...possibly temporary...

The Body of Christ here then in AD 50 is referencing what was established centuries earlier for just this situation...and it went on to forbid the believing goyim their eating of any meat strangled/without breath/unknown death...

This conclusion by James (hey...if IESOUS had made ALL meat clean surely JAMES HIS BROTHER would have been told)...is proof the Body of Christ judged these former unclean uncircumcised foreigners as NOW complete citizens of Israel...adopted into...grafted into the trunk and root...and by their FAITH...and now they WANTED to follow Him His way and walk AS He did when as He demonstrated and taught the New Covenant lifestyle...believing goyim did NOT despise the Law as so many now do...

Like devout Cornelius OBVIOUSLY it was revealed to Peter his vision that believing goyim are NOT “unclean”...and THAT is EXACTLY how Peter interpreted it multiple time...and is the ONLY interpretation...

is why his speech at the 50 AD council about receiving the Spirit by FAITH was that NO DISTINCTION was made between believing goyim and da joos who still followed Him...

Since it would have been long rumored that “WE GET TO EAT PIG NOW” seems ODD the ruling that not ALL meat was purified...but could still be defiled...

The rumors He changed the customs Moses delivered was the FALSE WITNESS of slandering joos Luke wrote in Acts 6:13-14...charges against Paul allegedly teaching the same they could NOT prove...Acts 25:7

it is not ironic centuries later this false witness “...in saying this that food purged from the stomach and shit into the shitter He changed the customs Moses delivered” is the very precept destroying prior precept which the traditions of the elders and fathers built up as a counterfeit...

so much does the world HATE Him...His ways...a lifestyle He gave to “whosoever believes shall not perish” already back at Sinai...even to the strangers within thy gates to those formerly dirty goyim crowding the synagogues eager for more of One resurrected and hearing Moses preached every Sabbath about what is clean and not clean...on earth as it is in heaven...

 

[Nikephoros II Phokas]

More irrelevant jibberish not germane to any readings or exegesis of Mark 7:18-20. I think this discussion is at an end. You just keep arguing in circles. Is this really the best that the finest minds at the Watchtower could tell you to think and say?

Christ has freed us from the yoke of the Law as proclaimed repeatedly in the Scriptures. Only those whose faith in Christ is weak still obstinately cling to it.

 

[clefty]

some good stuff here...

some

 

[clefty]

More irrelevant jibberish not germane to any readings or exegesis of Mark 7:18-20. I think this discussion is at an end. You just keep arguing in circles. Is this really the best that the finest minds at the Watchtower could tell you to think and say?

Christ has freed us from the yoke of the Law as proclaimed repeatedly in the Scriptures. Only those whose faith in Christ is weak still obstinately cling to it.

the Law is a yoke? That's far from David's "thy Law is my delight"...

first you have haven't shown the dietary Laws are a yoke...what? da joos could NOT bear the yoke of not eating pig? well then it would be more than a "parenthetical comment" allegedly by Mark...and written decades later...long after the acts of the book of Acts

but how CELEBRATED then would this release be to eat swine?...imagine the fanfare and multiple letters of CLEAR assurances that "YES YES we CAN eat pig...FINALLY!!!" and yet nothing...

Mark should also have spoke up at the Acts 15 council when it was ruled that even clean meat could be made unclean offered to idols or full of blood or strangled...

as for "those whose faith in Christ is weak still clinging" to His ways...ironically even Paul teaches in Romans 14 you should give up the offending of a brother WEAKER in faith...not twisting scripture into satisfying your belly your god to cause him to stumble

(Paul of course was addressing those weak in faith eating only vegetables or fasting certain days of the weak...and NOT "we can eat pig now!")

 

[Lord Osmund de Ixabert]

Addressed not to you.

 

[clefty]

I'd like to add that

Maybe a good time to keep adding here?

 

[clefty]

And it's not like Paul doesn't rail against judaizing for the entirety of Galatians and much of Romans.

14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. -Romans 14:14

today from the Shout Box:

Nikephoros II Phokas:
https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1713871656999280.webm

Nikephoros II Phokas:
That webm blows my mind. Pajeets literally eating shit and they could not possibly be happier about it.

Petr:
A distasteful topic, in more than one manner...

clefty:
Wuts the big deal?…human taste is learned…developed…sometimes it takes traditions

clefty:
All food is made clean yo…just be thankful…lol
clefty:
I remember when beer smelled like pee did

clefty:
Pete cracked a joke…

• 

Reactions:Cole of Them Northwoods

clefty:

Autism symptoms reduced nearly 50% 2 years after fecal transplant | ASU News​

I included the last shout as showing some benefit coming from shit. Certainly not eaten but close. It's back in the digestion system but NOT the heart.

Reminds me that in Mark 7:19 He described that since food (even unclean food) goes into the mouth and into the stomach and NOT into the heart it does NOT make one unclean.

Apparently for centuries before this teaching the unclean food DID go into the heart to defile da joos. LOL

So what does the holy script say about shit itself and not just about things purged out of the stomach into the shitter as in Mark 7:19

It's filthy true...and to be buried. (However please notice there is NO instruction to bury animals poop. Or even not to eat it...)

Deuteronomy 23:15 ‘Since the LORD your God moves about in your camp to protect you and to deliver your enemies to you, let your camp be holy; let Him not find anything unseemly among you and turn away from you.

Oh wait maybe eaten?

2 Kings 6:25
There was a great famine in Samaria; and behold, they besieged it, until a donkey’s head was sold for eighty shekels of silver, and a fourth of a kab of dove’s dung for five shekels of silver.

2 Kings 18:27
But Rabshakeh said to them, “Has my master sent me only to your master and to you to speak these words, and not to the men who sit on the wall, doomed to eat their own dung and drink their own urine with you?”

Well anyways...obviously shit is clean because it is NOT strangled and shouldn't contain blood...if it does just drain it and you'll be fine...oh but don't offer it to any images in temples though...ALL per Acts 15 council.

And since when you eat shit it doesn't go into the heart (as in the OT defiling da joos) but into the stomach and out into the shitter He made all food clean...so receive and just say thanks...

 

[clefty]

Interesting that He has such revulsions to certain things humans make...from images to feces...even calling them abominable.

It does seem to lend itself that He really wants us to keep clean, be holy and set apart...living with intentionality, discernment and discipline.

For ourselves and others...love others as yourself He taught.

Mindful of all these things we should clean up after ourselves. Every parent is grateful once the child learns to do so. From poop to dirty laundry to dishes and what they watch or listen to.

Even my dog's poop is not to be eaten but easily picked up and yet picking up after another's dog is more disdainful.

Do angels eat?...poop?...Will we poop in heaven?

Some thought of others:

Deut 23:12You must have a place outside the camp to go and relieve yourself. 13And you must have a digging tool in your equipment so that when you relieve yourself you can dig a hole and cover up your excrement. 14For the LORD your God walks throughout your camp to protect you and deliver your enemies to you. Your camp must be holy, lest He see anything unclean among you and turn away from you

From the verse, at least on an initial reading, it seems as if there really is something objectively filthy about faeces. It's not merely that it's unhealthy. It's not merely that the stench can make it hard for human beings to concentrate on sublime matters; though all of this is true. It's as if God Himself doesn't want to look at this stuff. Of course, this is highly anthropomorphic, but this anthropomorphism is there in the plain meaning of the text. Eventually, we'll want to interpret such theological vulgarities away, but, before doing so, it's still worth noticing the plain meaning of the biblical text. God, apparently, doesn't want to see our faeces. No wonder we shouldn't think thoughts of Torah in such a place. Indeed, Jewish law prohibits us from bringing books of Torah into that space, unless they're covered up (Shulchan Aruch, Y.D. 282:6).

On where God isn't: excrement and the philosophy of religion; two Jewish perspectives | Religious Studies | Cambridge Core

On where God isn't: excrement and the philosophy of religion; two Jewish perspectives - Volume 57 Issue 4

www.cambridge.org

 

[Nikephoros II Phokas]

Interesting that He has such revulsions to certain things humans make...from images to feces...even calling them abominable.

It does seem to lend itself that He really wants us to keep clean, be holy and set apart...living with intentionality, discernment and discipline.

For ourselves and others...love others as yourself He taught.

Mindful of all these things we should clean up after ourselves. Every parent is grateful once the child learns to do so. From poop to dirty laundry to dishes and what they watch or listen to.

Even my dog's poop is not to be eaten but easily picked up and yet picking up after another's dog is more disdainful.

Do angels eat?...poop?...Will we poop in heaven?

What's really interesting is that you continue to conflate ritual purity with physical cleanliness - an anachronism from the late 19th century common among SDAers. In the same spirit, SDA weido W.K. Kellogg invented sugar laden kosher breakfast cereals that are hardly healthful. St. Paul was talking about ritual purity because that ritual purity as a category has been abolished by Christ and irrelevant to Christian concerns. It's like you're still trying to make people conform to the Volstead Act today. Just because all foodstuffs is now neutral in regards to ritualistic purity does not mean that particular foods aren't objectionable on other grounds.

Some thought of others:

Deut 23:12You must have a place outside the camp to go and relieve yourself. 13And you must have a digging tool in your equipment so that when you relieve yourself you can dig a hole and cover up your excrement. 14For the LORD your God walks throughout your camp to protect you and deliver your enemies to you. Your camp must be holy, lest He see anything unclean among you and turn away from you

From the verse, at least on an initial reading, it seems as if there really is something objectively filthy about faeces. It's not merely that it's unhealthy. It's not merely that the stench can make it hard for human beings to concentrate on sublime matters; though all of this is true. It's as if God Himself doesn't want to look at this stuff. Of course, this is highly anthropomorphic, but this anthropomorphism is there in the plain meaning of the text. Eventually, we'll want to interpret such theological vulgarities away, but, before doing so, it's still worth noticing the plain meaning of the biblical text. God, apparently, doesn't want to see our faeces. No wonder we shouldn't think thoughts of Torah in such a place. Indeed, Jewish law prohibits us from bringing books of Torah into that space, unless they're covered up (Shulchan Aruch, Y.D. 282:6).

On where God isn't: excrement and the philosophy of religion; two Jewish perspectives | Religious Studies | Cambridge Core

On where God isn't: excrement and the philosophy of religion; two Jewish perspectives - Volume 57 Issue 4

www.cambridge.org

Of course, let kikes enlighten Christian thought. With you looking toward rabbis to settle all these disputes and inform spiritual decisions, I've been wrong for implying that you are a quasi-Zhid. You've now graduated to semi-Zhid. Congrats are in order.

 

[clefty]

What's really interesting is that you continue to conflate ritual purity with physical cleanliness

am I? Was merely responding to your disgust that people ate shit. So merely wondered what the OT had to say about that. Turns out there are instances people ate shit back then. And havent found dietary restrictions on it were it considered food...clean or unclean ritually. And even clean meat is dirty phsycially yes?

But if shit is considered food I did list 3 requirements that were listed at the Acts 15 council for things which were considered food namely 1) make sure it isn't strangled (not relevent to shit obviously) 2) no blood (relevent in cases there is blood in the stool which should be removed then) and 3) make sure the shit wasn't offered to an image in a temple (obviously relevant to all things food)

I also made note that if a person were to eat shit today it would pass into his stomach and then it would be purged/cleansed into the shitter...and NOT into his heart making him unclean (so even if it were ritually unclean for having blood in it or having been offered to an image it wouldnt defile)

I mean do the 3 requirement of Acts 15 STILL apply despite His teaching that ALL foods go into the stomach and then into the shitter thus NOT making a person unclean? Or since Mark wrote his editorial comment "thus He made all foods clean" much later than the Acts 15 council did he with that overide what was decided in Jerusalem by the disciples. Maybe he wasn't there to remind them of His making ALL clean?

I still can't believe the digestive tract of da joos who when eating it went into their hearts. Glad He fixed that.

St. Paul was talking about ritual purity because that ritual purity as a category has been abolished by Christ and irrelevant to Christian concerns.

You sure you wanna bring Paul into this. Nobody was talking about Paul here...yet

Abolished by Christ? Was that actually demonstrated by Him or just alleged to have been taught. You are making Him a typical hypocrite Pharisee having Him teach one thing but doing another. Unless you can provide and example of Him demonstrating His abolishing the ritual purity category.

It would have to be PRIOR His christening the new covenant to a room full of joos and signing it with His blood and SEALING it with His death. Because Hebrew 9:16-17 makes it clear a testimony/covenant goes into effect at the death of the testator. Paul tells the Celtics he understands that even a secular covenant can NOT be changed after the death of the testator. Galations 3:15 certainly not decades or centuries after the death of the testator..."muh traditions" of new doctrines developed by councils and majorities...

Not even the "first pope" Peter had NOT practiced His teaching that ALL foods are NOW clean as he denied the unclean animals as food in his vision. Happily he translated his vision 3X as understanding it was the unclean Gentiles which had been made clean...NOT TO EAT but to teach His good news gospel. Nothing about Pete claiming "we can eat pork now" even less demonstrating that he did. In fact Paul asked "why do you compel Gentiles to live as the joos?"

You think His dietary laws irrelevant to Christian concerns? The disciples in the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 listed 4 requirements of the now clean Gentiles 3 of which were dietary related BECAUSE it was obviously still relevant and BECAUSE they didnt think Christ had abolished ritual purity categories.

These cosmopolitan Greeks who were now believers knew da joos didn't eat pork. Joos had been around Greeks for a long time. And now to hear about One resurrected these formerly unclean Greeks (remember Pete's vision) were clean enough to hear even more. What they didn't know was that even CLEAN meat can be made UNCLEAN by 1) improper killing 2) retaining blood 3) offered to an image. What's more these new converts had to learn that "Therefore to this day the Israelites do not eat the tendon which is at the socket of the hip, because the socket of Jacob’s hip was struck near that tendon." Genesis 32:32 The ISRAELITES do not...see? not just da joos...

But here you are claiming it's irrelevant to His followers because He made all food clean. Well seeing as the council in Acts 15 occured BEFORE Mark wrote his editorial comment maybe just Mark heard Him teach? Or maybe Matthew retelling the same lesson must have forgotten. I mean being able to FINALLY eat bacon is no big deal right?

Didn't He even serve Easter Ham leftover sandwhiches those 40 days He spent with them after His resurrection? To demonstrate what you claim?

It's like you're still trying to make people conform to the Volstead Act today.

Hey now...I was just responding to your being triggered by a video of people eating shit as food. Yours was the mind blown by that video which our Pete merely cracked a tasteful joke about. lol

Are you gonna make some laws against people eating shit? Force people to standards unlike yours? Like pro life or anti gay? Fill the ditches with the shit eaters...lol

Just because all foodstuffs is now neutral in regards to ritualistic purity

alleged but not demonstrated by Him or His followers or you...

does not mean that particular foods aren't objectionable on other grounds.

yes of course its true that foodstuff can be objectionable outside of food laws...and even roasting lamb or beef gets messy...gutting...the blood the shit

and eating shit as foodstuffs is gross to me too...a taste required by peer pressure and tradition as I already said

I even argue that when people twist 1 Timothy 4:4 "For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:" into anything/everyting is ok to eat. "Humans" I ask? "Rotten poisonous meat? Animals with toxins? Roadkill skunk with rabies? and now bowels of shit...Just say thanks right?

Turns out those that know Yah made foods to be received with thanksgiving (verse 3) don't receive with thanks food He did not make.

For every creature of God is good...some are good to clean up trash ...eat carcasses...but IF it is received with thanksgiving by someone who knows which foods He made to receive...of course it is not refused/unclean

Of course, let kikes enlighten Christian thought. With you looking toward rabbis to settle all these disputes and inform spiritual decisions, I've been wrong for implying that you are a quasi-Zhid. You've now graduated to semi-Zhid. Congrats are in order.

I am interested what others think yes...

But your claim that food laws are abolished by Christ has you sound like those in Acts 6:9-14 of the Synagogue of Freedman who attempted to slander poor Stephen claiming he taught "Jesus" had changed the customs Moses delivered to us. Luke was clear this was slander intended to defame and FALSE WITNESS as Stephen did not teach this as He did NOT do this. Else either of which would make it a TRUE WITNESS.

So yours let kikes enlighten Christian thought to this day...disbelieving ones...not living like the One demonstrated for us...

Happily your claim is FALSE WITNESS as at the Jerusalem council James concluded 3 dietary requirements STILL and no sexual immorality (TBD as Greeks had their own understanding) BECAUSE/FOR (causal conjunction) Moses is preached every Sabbath.

In fact these FOUR requirements which were given clarification on following Sabbaths (FIVE) were ALREADY in the OT for the "strangers within thy gates" of the Sabbath commandment (the only commandment to specifically include us) the foriegners not born of Jacob much less Judah...neat eh?

So this has the Jerusalem Council of Act 15 "let kikes enlighten Christian thought" LOL

Of course even clean food can be physically messy and yes of course unclean food can be too...messy as shit...ask my dog...

but not strangling a pig makes it clean to eat?...LOL

live as He lived...love as He loved includes His diet...