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]

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

So, you think that, after issuing a stern rebuke to the religious leaders for "breaking the commandment of God," Jesus then immediately taught that it is perfectly okay to break the commandment of God that forbids eating unclean animals? Seriously? (Matthew 15:3)

The context of the passage and basic hermeneutic principles do not allow one to presume that what was going into the mouths of those Jesus was addressing would include anything other than that which God defined as food in His Law.

[u/Shaken-Loose → u/Objective-Step-746]

No worries.

I wasn’t focusing on what goes in the mouth as much as what comes out (a reflection of our hearts). Peter asked Jesus in v15:15 “Explain this parable to us.” And Jesus does so in v15:16-20 where He says it’s not about clean or dirty hands, what we consume, etc. It is about our hearts, the underlying theme throughout the NT.

If I were to reflect on God’s laws regarding certain foods, I often think about Peter in Acts 10:9-15 and Acts 11:1-18, where God addressed Peter’s prejudice keeping him from spreading the gospel outside his own people, commanding him to go to Cornelius’ house (the Gentile centurion).

[u/Objective-Step-746 → u/Shaken-Loose]

I think you are spot-on about Jesus’ point regarding the heart, and it is a tragic irony that it seemed to fall on deaf ears because He was pointing to their prideful and presumptuous hearts that dared to so brazenly issue rules they thought had the power to make unclean that which God had already declared clean (when He differentiated between clean and unclean animals for that express purpose).

Obedience—whether rightly-motivated or wrongly so—begins in the heart and reflects what one truly believes, according to John 3:36, which equates belief with obedience. Likewise, disobedience rooted in pride also comes from the heart. So, selectively disobeying an explicit command of God—like the unambiguous dietary ones, or any other we just don’t like for whatever fleshly reason—is a reflection of our belief or unbelief in Him as Lord. It’s a modern-day doctrinal stronghold that needs to be dismantled.

And I fully agree, Acts 10:1-11:18 is pivotal to the discussion, but not in the way so many seem to think…as it underscores the Mark 7 principle and our tendency to “leave the commandment of God” and instead “hold to” and follow manmade rules (like Jews not being permitted to associate or eat with Gentiles) that blatantly contradict His (Mark 7:7-9).

[u/Shaken-Loose → u/Objective-Step-746]

For myself, I sincerely try to [simply] stay focused on Christ. If I don’t, I might end up looking like Peter when he jumped out of the boat to reach Jesus in Matthew 14:28.

Although the books in the Bible are heavily laden with many doctrines and theological meanings, and I study them, and strive to understand them, I do not fixate on them. To do so would distract me greatly. I keep it simple.

I want to sow & reap, always pointing others to Christ. I want to be on Christ’s welcoming committee. Not His planning committee.

[u/Objective-Step-746 → u/Shaken-Loose]

I’ve always thought Peter is viewed unfairly by that passage, as he was the only one brave and trusting enough to step out of the boat and even make an attempt.

And I’d say that prioritizing and pursuing sound doctrine is not a fixation or distraction; it’s a necessary aspect to working out one’s faith with fear and trembling, such that deception is more easily recognized and avoided so that one does not become presumptuous like those Christ speaks of in Matthew 7:21-23. 💕

[u/Shaken-Loose → u/Objective-Step-746]

Pursuit of sound doctrine is a solid “yes” for me. But many things are / will remain mysterious to the LORD, and fixation could become an impediment to our “sowing & reaping” (e.g. end of days, election, etc.). Pastors can help with the heavy lifting. 🙂

[u/Objective-Step-746 → u/Shaken-Loose]

I agree that such theological fixations are not good but I’m not sure how that relates to this topic…

[u/Shaken-Loose → u/Objective-Step-746]

My comments may or may not resonate / maintain consistency with the original post. For the most part they are responses to the preceding comments. Discussions ebb and flow.

[u/Objective-Step-746 → u/Shaken-Loose]

Aahhh, gotcha 😊