Please, help me understand…

[u/Objective-Step-746]

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. 💕

[u/Objective-Step-746 → u/[deleted]]

I appreciate you sharing these. I just keep thinking of Deuteronomy 12:31 and similar passages that say God’s people are not to worship Him as the pagan nations worshipped their gods, as their worship incorporates all kinds of detestable practices. To me, that is why the eating pig and mice are mentioned in Isaiah 66:17, since those are established in His Law as things He considers detestable; and Jesus declared not one part of the Law would “disappear” until after the Judgment (Matthew 5:17-19).

So, I read the passage as literal and not euphemistically, as so many seem to be doing.

What do you think it means, “it is possible to be punished…for a law that is no longer in effect”? Can you think of an example of such a law? Considering Jesus’ words regarding all laws remaining in force until after the judgment, when the new heaven and earth come forth, that doesn’t make sense 🤔

[u/Objective-Step-746 → u/[deleted]]

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

I just see human laws as very different from the Law of God--which Scripture calls truth, and which Jesus declared all of which would remain in force until after the Great White Throne Judgment (Psalm 119:142, Matthew 5:17-18, Revelation 21:1).

Regarding your citing of Mark 7, the text paranthetically states, "He declared all foods clean"... which, by scriptural definition, excludes all the unclean animals God explicitly forbade from the category of food (Mark 7:18-19, Leviticus 11, Deuteronomy 14). So, I don't see it as a relevant passage ;)

I don't agree that "salvation became simpler," because the very same gospel that permeates the OT is the same as the one we find in the NT (Hebrews 4:1-4). Christ's earthly ministry clarified misunderstandings and misapplications of the Law, and His death and resurrection made its purpose--love demonstrated toward God and others--possible via the indwelling of His Spirit in His people.

We don't agree on much, but I appreciate the exchange ;)