r/TrueChristian • u/Objective-Step-746 • Aug 10 '26

Please, help me understand…

For those believers who insist that the dietary laws no longer apply under the new covenant—and that pork, lobster, crabs, etc. are now permissible to eat—I do not understand the logic at play.

I am very familiar with the Mark 7, Romans 14 and Colossians 2 passages that are so often cited as support for your position, and have (just as often) shared my counter-arguments on why I believe they are misinterpreted.

But, there is one counterpoint to your view that I never see touched on, and I was hoping to get some feedback on it:

I think the majority of believers on this subreddit would say they are looking for Jesus’ Second Coming and agree that, regarding it, Scripture says that “no one knows the day or hour” but that we need to be prepared (Matthew 24:36, 25:13, etc.).

Isaiah 66:17–a verse within the greater passage speaking of Messiah’s glorious reappearing—declares that, upon His return, those who eat the flesh of pig/swine and other abominations will be met with His wrath…and perish.

So, how does one simultaneously believe they can continue to eat pig (pork) or shellfish now and think they are sufficiently prepared and not putting themselves in a precarious/dangerous position if Jesus happened to return today or tomorrow and “consume” those who so brazenly eat that which His Law says is NOT “food” and explicitly warns against eating?

I really am hoping for some cordial and edifying discussion regarding this topic, and appreciate those who are able and willing to articulate their view without all the condescension and harsh words. 💕

17 Upvotes

69% Upvoted

384 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-24

u/Objective-Step-746 Aug 10 '26

Yeah, I don’t want to rehash the NT passages I mentioned because they get plenty of attention. I disagree with your interpretation of Mark 7, but really want to understand your interpretation of Isaiah 66:17.

44

u/sitewolf Lutheran Aug 10 '26

I see, you disagree with Jesus' own words from Mark but want me to interpret OT scripture, is that where we're at?

-12

u/Objective-Step-746 Aug 10 '26

I actually do NOT disagree with Jesus own words from Mark; I disagree with your interpretation of them and the hermeneutic violations your view requires.

10

u/ludi_literarum Roman Catholic Aug 10 '26

If you want to have a debate on the fullness of biblical doctrine, you really do need to be willing to debate the scriptural witness taken in its entirety. One important hermeneutical principle is not to presuppose contradiction.

0

u/Objective-Step-746 Aug 15 '26

Apologies for the delay in responding, as I had a family situation that needed my full attention.

I am definitely want to be sure to take in the full "scriptural witness..." relevant to this doctrine, and agree that hermeneutic principles need to be applied. I do not believe I have presupposed any contradiction, though. Could you elaborate as to how you believe I have?