45

Why do most Christians eat pork? Initially, the prohibition against pork was part of the Law giving to Moses as Deuteronomy 14:7, 8 states. However, you must not eat the following animals that chew the cud or that have split hooves: the camel, the hare, and the rock badger, because they chew the cud but do not have split hooves. They are unclean for you. 8 ...


25

Dietary rules among Christians vary from sect to sect. The starting point for understanding the Christian views on food regulation is in the book of Acts, chapter 10, when Peter has a vision and is told that he may eat any kind of food, even unclean food that does not meet Jewish regulations, such as pork. This is symbolic: Peter was told that Gentiles who ...


19

This is part of a larger question about whether/how the Old Testament Law still applies to Christians of today. What does it mean that Jesus fulfilled the law but did not abolish it? When Christ came, he "fulfilled the Law". Referring specifically to food, Paul the Apostle explained to early Christians that it was their choice whether or not to eat ...


18

Part of the confusion as modern readers is that we miss what the Pharisees meant when they referenced "the Law." For the Pharisees, "the Law" had two parts. There was the "Written Law" (תורה שבכתב), and there was the "Oral Law" (תורה שבעל פה), which they claimed was also given to Moses at Mt. Sinai. You can read more about this in the Mishnah. The Old ...


17

There is much debate about this one but I think the Rabbis never understood it, which causes trouble to some Christian commentators as well. It reminds me of this: For it is written in the Law of Moses:“Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.” Is it about oxen that God is concerned? (1 Corinthians 9:9, NIV) The Apostle applies this to ...


16

Some possibilities why Daniel refused the King's choice of food. Unclean animals: According to this source, pork was the choice meat of Babylonians. If this is true, it is certain that Daniel was ready to die by not eating nor touching the food. Leviticus 11:7-8 (NIV) And the pig, though it has a divided hoof, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for ...


14

Having multiple wives was permitted (though not exactly endorsed) in the Law of Moses. Adultery is having (or desiring) an intimate relationship with someone who's already married (to someone else). As it was forbidden in the Mosaic law, it was referring to a man and someone else's wife. It was not really speaking of a married man and another woman. Even ...


13

Protestants typically argue that Jesus is explaining how one might be "saved by works," and not suggesting that it is actually possible for the man to accomplish it on his own – on the contrary, he implies that it is impossible. John Gill's analysis is helpful: Our Lord intimates by this, that, according to the tenor of the law, eternal life was not to ...


13

The answer which focuses on Acts 10 is excellent, but this statement from the Jerusalem Council, also recorded in the book of Acts, is also pertinent: It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual ...


11

Was there any promise of eternal life associated with any of the Mosaic Law. For instance, was animal sacrifice promised with eternal life? No. Eternal life is foretold in the Old Testament, but never as a promise associated to obedience to Mosaic Law. The following verses refer to life after death, hinting at the eternal nature of life. This ...


11

Pay close attention to the words and what they are referring to here: 1 Samuel 1:1 There was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim of the hill country of Ephraim whose name was Elkanah the son of Jeroham, son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of Zuph, an Ephrathite. Samuel, and even his father, were not Ephrathites, for Ephrathites were generally Judahites. Zuph ...


10

It is not about abortion, it's about Jealousy and the Lord acting as a witness in trials that otherwise had none. Note that the NIV is the only translation to use the word 'miscarriage' (see Numbers 5:22 in parallel to 18 other translations). The translators interpret 'Your thigh to rot' and 'to rot [your] thigh' as 'miscarriage'. Whereas the Hebrew for '...


10

Why do most Christians eat pork, in light of Deuteronomy 14:8? Is this a contradiction? Looking at Christianity from the outside, one could see that the eating of pork is a contradiction, but in reality it is not. First of all, the prohibition of abstaining from the flesh of pigs is not part of the Decalogue. The Ancient People of Israel, the Jews, were and ...


9

Moses, after speaking with God, had a shining face. When he came out from speaking with God he would give the people God's commands under the Law with the glory of a 'shining face' which they feared with trembling and fright. Before the glory faded, signifying the non lasting nature of the covenant under the law, Moses would put a veil over his face. He ...


9

In answer to your related question "How did people know right from wrong before the law?", I included the following: There was always a 'law' before it was written on tablets of stone and given to Moses: God sets the standard of righteousness by what remains in accord to His nature and unrighteousness by what constitutes rebellion against His nature. (...


9

As someone else stated in an answer to a similar question of yours, "The Catholic Church does stand behind the verse, but insists that it be read in context, and in the context of the literary genre of the passage." In fact, that would be the answer to any question about whether the Catholic Church "stands behind" a particular verse. There's a similar law ...


9

Jeremiah 31:31-34 English Standard Version (ESV) The New Covenant 31 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my ...


8

The Jewish priests expected the Messiah to come in like a Lion with great fanfare and overwhelming military might for subduing the enemies of Israel. They did not expect the Messiah to be born in humble circumstances or to grow up as a common craftsman. Jesus threatened the authority and the lifestyle that the priests had grown accustomed to, as they grew ...


8

tl;dr> Why was it recorded like that? because the story is making a theological point, not a legal one Is this the norm or the exception? the exact particulars of Boaz are exception, but it is based on a normal practice Is there any other recorded incident in the Scriptures where this was done and the lineage was accorded to the deceased person? Yes, ...


7

Division of the law in the early church The law has been "divided" since the early church, but at first only into two parts. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Augustine, and others described a distinction between what we know as the moral law and the ceremonial/civil law, and connected the moral law with the ten commandments. For example, Irenaeus argues ...


7

Opinions abound. One is that the practice was cruel and inhumane, but given the animal sacrifices for sin, that just doesn't make sense to me. Another is that the Jews were lactose intolerant, but if that were true, only common sense would be required, not a law. Perhaps the practice did not fully or properly cook the meat, so the prohibition was actually ...


7

From a Baptistic perspective, there is very little difference between the 10 commandments and the other 603 rules and regulations of the Torah. Note: I'm specifically not addressing the extent to which the law of Moses still applies, as it is well covered elsewhere While the 10 commandments are a succinct guide to right behavior, their popularity really ...


7

Having multiple wives was permitted in the Bible for the same reason disobeying God is. God honors man's free will. Had God intended that man should have multiple wives, why would he only create one for Adam. Most assuredly since God wanted man to multiply and fill the Land having multiple wives would enhance that program exponentially. Genesis 2:18 And ...


7

The strongest restriction is that the priests of the Israelite nation could only be from the tribe of Levi, and specifically on descendants of Aaron. Some verses showing this include Numbers 3:10, 3:38 and 16:40: ... This was to remind the Israelites that no one except a descendant of Aaron should come to burn incense before the Lord ... The kingship was ...


7

In the Hebrew Bible, Jubilee refers to a set of practices around forgiveness of debts and restoration of land. Basically, every 7 years the people were supposed to hold a "sabbath" for the land and rest from farming. Then in the 50th year (the year after the 7th Sabbath/Sabbatical Year), all land ownership was supposed to resort to it's original tribes/clans/...


7

Christianity is broad in its beliefs of what may be eaten and what may not be eaten (see Acts 15, 1Co 8, and Gal 2:11-14 for a peek at early church debates on what foods may or may not be eaten). Many Christians will point to Mark 7:19 or Acts 10:1-11:18 to indicate that God has declared all foods clean. Others recognize that Jesus did not abolish the law (...


7

In short, the argument you heard is sound. In John 18:31, the Jewish leaders make it clear they are unable to execute anyone by Roman law: So Pilate said to them, "Take Him yourselves, and judge Him according to your law." The Jews said to him, "We are not permitted to put anyone to death," —John 18:31 NASB The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopaedia ...


7

Because most Christians are Gentiles (non-Jews). A lot of people want to make the Mosaic Law an all-or-nothing proposition. That was the view of some of the early Jewish Christians, who demanded that Christians all become Jews first. This group is more commonly known as Judaizers Judaizers are Christians who teach it is necessary to adopt Jewish customs and ...


6

The part of the scripture you left out is pretty important to understanding this passage. Basically, she has to drink some dusty water that will cause her to miscarry if she's guilty, but she'll be fine if she's not guilty. I think it's simply making clear that the husband is not guilty for miscarriage and the harm that results from the actions of the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible