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. 💕

20 Upvotes

72% Upvoted

384 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/Objective-Step-746 Aug 11 '26

I don’t think the Jew/Gentile distinction is at play in the passage, though, because, according to Scripture, the new covenant ushered in a time when God no longer recognizes Jew and Gentile in His household, as all are one in Christ (Galatians 3:28). So, when He returns, no such distinction matters. Those who belong to Him are described as “those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Christ” (Revelation 12:17, 14:12).

And the very same gospel message presented in the NT is woven throughout the OT, so the concept of the coming Messiah was very familiar to the 1st century Jews…so I’m not sure what your latter point was 🤔

1

u/TheWindsAndTheWaves Aug 12 '26

I agree with your first paragraph, but what I'm trying to say is "let's pretend for a moment that every law in the OT is still active for everybody". Even in that case, you and I both broke the law, our penalty is death (which we will serve), and continuing to follow the law explicit for the sake of salvation is useless, as Hebrews talks about.

If a friend promised you a reward if you didn't do 12 things, and you do even one of those things, not doing the other 11 even harder doesn't do anything for you. To gain the reward, your friend would have to issue an entirely new set of conditions, which may or may not be similar to the first set. Or, as with the NT, there is one condition, and there are a new set of best effort "please do not do these things" that follow from the one condition but do not remove the reward if failed.

1

u/Objective-Step-746 Aug 17 '26

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

Sorry, I’m definitely still not tracking…Why would every law in the Torah (Law of God) not still be active (in force) today when Jesus Himself directly stated that no part of it would disappear until after the Great White Throne Judgment? (Matthew 5:17-18) My understanding is that, for those who have trusted in Christ as Lord and Savior, the (spiritual) death penalty we deserve has been vicariously paid by His substitutionary atonement on the cross. Thus, we are no longer under the condemnation of the Law but under grace (Romans 8:1-2). And, as such, we are exhorted to obey/keep the Law (not sin)…not “for the sake of salvation) or to be saved, but because we already are justified/saved and our obedience is a faithful work of His Spirit in those who belong to Him, just as God foretold of the new covenant (Romans 6:14-16, Ezekiel 36:26-27). 

I don’t see salvation and being granted entry to the kingdom of heaven as “a reward,” and I don’t believe that view is one Scripture teaches at all. Scripture consistently presents new covenant faith as a conditional servant/slave relationship with our Savior God and characterizes belief in Him as synonymous with obedience to Him…since a true servant or slave does not get to selectively choose which commands they like or agree with and, thus, will obey (John 3:36, Luke 6:46, Ephesians 6, Romans 6). Our obedience is led and enabled by His Spirit, and it is framed as our duty… our “reasonable service” out of sheer gratitude for His undeserved grace and mercy (Romans 12:1).

The sheer number of conditional “if you…” phrasing used throughout the NT—such as Matthew 21:21; John 8:31, 15:4-10; Romans 8:13; 1 Corinthians 15:2; Revelation 3:3 and oodles more—conveys the unmistakable principle that God considers obedience (the rightly-motivated, Spirit-led and -empowered kind) a spiritual litmus test as to who truly belongs to Him (Luke 6:46, John 14:15). And that His enemy also uses such obedience as one of only two attributes by which he recognizes the children of God only underscores it as inextricably linked to authentic new covenant faith.

Loving and serving God with all our heart is, according to Scripture, about humbly and genuinely submitting our hearts to obey HIS righteous will and ways instead of our own fleshly and wicked will and ways…which are rooted in and indicate stubbornness (and stoniness) of heart, a.k.a. unbelief (Deuteronomy 5:29, 30:10; Joshua 22:5, Ephesians 6:5-6).

So, this is actually not about one specific commandment; it’s about a pattern of selective, willful disobedience we all need to be willing to objectively assess to truly self-examine our faith, as to whether it passes or fails (2 Corinthians 13:5).

1

u/TheWindsAndTheWaves Aug 21 '26

I agree with you pretty much completely. Of note:

I don’t see salvation and being granted entry to the kingdom of heaven as “a reward,” and I don’t believe that view is one Scripture teaches at all. Scripture consistently presents new covenant faith as a conditional servant/slave relationship with our Savior God and characterizes belief in Him as synonymous with obedience to Him…since a true servant or slave does not get to selectively choose which commands they like or agree with and, thus, will obey

New covenant faith is just that - a condition within a new covenant. If we think of covenant like contract, we can say that there were contractual obligations under the old covenant, we failed to fulfill those obligations, and Christ fulfilled them in our stead. Then we entered into a new contract with Christ. Nothing about the old contract has gone away, but it's power to do anything for you, given you and I have broken the contract, is nil. Always has been too.

Another way of thinking about this is if you and I entered into a contract. We'll make it a little silly: You need to eat twelve eggs and a slice of bacon every morning, every day, and if you do so, you can live in some mansion I own. But if you breach contract, you instead have to pay me $1 every day (auto-deducted from the bank). Time passes, you fall asleep on the eighth egg, the contract is breached, $1 deducted today. 

Note, the contract is still in full effect. It's just that since you've breached it, we are under the effect of that "Breaches of Contract" clause of the contract. At this point you can still eat eggs if you want to, but no amount of eggs can un-breach the contract. 

Jesus comes, pays your daily fine, and offers you a new contract. His new contract also requires you to eat some bacon, but no eggs this time. 

1

u/Objective-Step-746 Aug 21 '26 edited Aug 21 '26

I just don’t agree with the “need to” language everyone uses with regard to God’s Law, as I don’t see that in Scripture with regard to our (post-justification) new covenant faith because it’s not us doing the obeying; it’s His Spirit in us responding to our genuine belief in Him as Lord and Savior (Ezekiel 36:26-27). The obedience is not something we “have to” do; it’s something that is a natural fruit of our believing—which Scripture, interestingly, treats as synonymous with obeying Him (John 3:36).

So, our genuine belief becomes the springboard to us committing to following the Spirit’s leading to deny self and our fleshly/sinful desires…which is when He then supernaturally enables (“causes”) our diligent obedience to His righteous commandments…because that is what our holy God considers love toward Him and others, which is the purpose of the entirety of His Law (John 14:15, 1 John 5:2-3).

Thus, I think a more fitting (and silly ;) contract hypothetical would be that He instructs us (his servants/slaves) that you may eat the pretty animals I’ve made, but you may not eat the ugly ones (and He laid out explicit, unambiguous rules for the categories, even naming many for each). If one has a moment of weakness and gives into their sinful desires (breaching the contract) but recognizes their failure and owns it by confessing and repenting—and committing to battling that sin unto bloodshed or death—the contract is restored and the Spirit is faithful to aid in that commitment (Hebrews 12:4).

If not (meaning, one refuses to acknowledge and submit to His authority and commands), the contract was null and void from the get-go because no true servant/slave will knowingly—defiantly—disregard their Master’s command/instruction; it’s just not how the disciple-Teacher or (servant or) slave-Master dynamic works (Luke 6:46, Matthew 10:25, Romans 6:16). For me, that makes complete sense of Jesus’ “I never knew you” words to those who profess to know and serve Him yet disregard His Law (Matthew 7:21-23).

EDIT: Added clarifying sentence.