| Author | Message | ||
| Abundantrest Registered user Username: Abundantrest Post Number: 11 Registered: 8-2005 |
OK, we all know the verses where Paul proclaims that our bodies are the temple of the holy spirit, and we belong to God. The one in 1 Corinthians chapter 6 is clearly in reference to sexual impurity, as both foods and the body will pass away (as he states). These texts are often used by SDA teachers so that we "understand" our obligation to the health message ,clean vs. unclean meats, etc. Now, I don't beleive this is true. Yes, our bodies are the temple, but this doesn't preclude us from eating bacon if you so choose. Obviously, as Paul states, not all things are beneficial for us to do, but all things are lawful. Hm.... However, yesterday in Sabbath school our lesson mentions this passage, and makes a giant leap, stating this is the main reason for us to avoid tobacco, alcohol, unclean foods, etc. I have a problem with this! Obviously they have stock answers for the passages referring to eating meat from idols, and praying over your food ... that this is only inclusive of "meats" that God intended for us to eat in the first place, which would not include the unclean meats, etc. Can anyone help me with some scriptures showing plainly that food issues, while perhaps being a healthy lifestyle choice, are not required of the temple of the holy spirit? | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1014 Registered: 7-2003  |
Are Some Foods Unclean? by Christopher A. Lee To the majority of Christians, the question asked in the title of this article no doubt seems like an irrelevant exercise in ìweak and worthless elemental thingsî.1 However, to thousands of believers, who are in legalistic traditions, the issue of food has taken on a stature that determines oneís readiness for baptism and is nearly considered a salvation issue by some. I was born and raised as a Seventh-day Adventist (SDA). At age ten, I signed SDA baptismal vows stating that I would abstain ìfrom unclean foodsî.2 This was not a hard vow for me to make at that time because my family adhered to the ìhealth messageî taught by the Adventist prophetess, Ellen G. White. I had been so indoctrinated with this message that even the thought of meat nauseated me although I had never tasted it. Even when I started eating a little beef during a rebellious teenage phase, I found that I still had serious hang ups about ìunclean meatsî. I later resolved to improve my spiritual life and naturally believed that this must include a return to vegetarian diet. For me, the issues of diet, holiness, and even salvation were always intrinsically linked. After all, if one could not be baptized into Christ without abstaining from pork and could not be translated to Heaven without abstaining from all meat as I had been taught3, how could it not be a salvation issue? In my late twenties, I began to study the Bible in earnest. I was shaken to the core to discover that food is not a salvation issue or a holiness issue. In fact, the scripture seemed to be telling me that food was not an issue at all for new covenant Christians! But how does one raised in a works oriented tradition transition to a grace based mind set in regards to food? The first step in returning the issue of food to the status it deserves is to gain a basic understanding of the differences between the covenant that Christians live under today and the covenant that the Israelites lived under during the Old Testament dispensation. A full study of the covenants is outside the scope of this article4, but some valuable insights may be drawn from a book of the Bible written to Jewish Christians, the book of Hebrews. Jewish believers were struggling with many issues related to prophetic rituals that had been fulfilled in Christ. The writer of Hebrews outlines many of the temple sacrificial rituals. Take special note of Hebrews chapter 9 verses 9 and 10. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot, make the worshiper perfect in conscience, since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation. Heb 9:9b-10 (NASB) It is clear that many of the ceremonial rites given to Israel centered on the ritualistic cleansing of the body and the avoidance of ceremonially unclean things including certain foods. But note that these rituals were only imposed for a time. Notice also that chapter 8 presents Christ as the fulfillment of the rituals that were part of the old covenant and the mediator of a new and better covenant, not like the old covenant. But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second. For finding fault with them, He says, "BEHOLD, DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL EFFECT A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH; NOT LIKE THE COVENANT WHICH I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS ON THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT; FOR THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT, AND I DID NOT CARE FOR THEM, SAYS THE LORD. When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. Heb 8:6-9, 13 (NASB) Hebrewsí author makes it clear that the old covenant and the rituals embodied in it had become obsolete and were ready to disappear, but early Jewish Christians debated how Gentile believers should be instructed in these matters. Some Jewish believers insisted that Gentiles should also become circumcised and submit to all the customs and rituals of the Mosaic Law, including the avoidance of ìunclean foodsî. To settle the matter, a council of church leaders was held in Jerusalem. James, inspired by the Holy Spirit, pronounced the definitive word on the issue as recorded in Acts chapter 15. "Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. "For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath." "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell." Acts 15:19-21, 28, 29 (NASB) James does not attempt to burden the gentiles with laws related to clean and unclean foods, but since he knows there are Jews in every city who still teach and live under the Mosaic Law, James identifies the three practices that would be most offensive to these Jews. It is Jamesí intent that gentile believers live in freedom, but that they also live in a way that will allow them to reach the Jews in their area with the Gospel message. James advocates a standard of love that would later be echoed by the apostle Paul. Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions. One, person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One, person regards one day above another, another, regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God. Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather determine thisónot to put an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother's way. I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. For if because of food your brother is hurt, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not destroy with your food him for whom Christ died. Therefore do not let what is for you a good thing be spoken of as evil; for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. For he who in this way serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. So then we pursue the things which make for peace and the building up of one another. Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are clean, but they are evil for the man who eats and gives offense. Romans 14:1-6, 13-20 (NASB) However, Paul was careful to warn that no person should act as anotherís judge based on things that were only in place to prophetically point to Christ. Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath dayó things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. Col 2:16-17 (NASB) By the time Paul wrote his pastoral letters to Timothy he had evidently battled with enough Judaizers that he felt compelled to warn Timothy, in no uncertain terms, that he should be weary of such false doctrines. But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully, shared in by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude; for it is sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer. In pointing out these things to the brethren, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, constantly nourished on the words of the faith and of the sound doctrine which you have been following. 1 Tim 4:1-6 (NASB) It is also instructive for us to carefully study the vision the Lord gave Peter before sending him to Corneliusí house. On the next day, as they were on their way and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the sixth hour to pray. But he became hungry and was desiring to eat; but while they were making preparations, he fell into a trance; and he saw* the sky opened up, and an object like a great sheet coming down, lowered by four corners to the ground, and there were in it all kinds of four-footed animals and crawling creatures of the earth and birds of the air. A voice came to him, "Get up, Peter, kill and eat!" But Peter said, "By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything unholy and unclean." Again a voice came to him a second time, "What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy." Acts 10:9-15 (NASB)5 Some have pointed out that the focus of this vision was not on food, but was related to extending the gospel to the gentiles. This is true, but using that argument to summarily dismiss this passage begs a question. When did Christ ever use an untruth to illustrate a truth? In all the parables and allegories He told during His ministry Christ always used a basic truth from everyday life to illustrate a larger spiritual truth. It is inconceivable that Christ is really saying, ìPeter, itís true that there is no longer any ceremonially difference between Jews and Gentiles. I have declared both Jew and Gentile clean. However, you should completely forget what I said earlier about there being no ceremonial differences between foods. I know I said I cleansed them and they are no longer unholy, but I didnít really mean that. The ceremonial distinctions between foods still stand. So the point I was making is true, but the way I illustrated My point was untrueî. If you cringed while reading these facetious words, keep in mind that this is essentially what those who dismiss this text are claiming the Lord meant. It does indeed seem blasphemous to suggest this was the Lordís intent. It is especially inconceivable when compared to what Christ taught during His earthly ministry. After Jesus called the crowd to Him, He said to them, "Hear and understand. "It is not what enters into the mouth that defiles the man, but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man." Then the disciples came* and said* to Him, "Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this statement?" But He answered and said, "Every plant which My heavenly Father did not plant shall be uprooted. "Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind. And if a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit." Peter said to Him, "Explain the parable to us." Jesus said, "Are you still lacking in understanding also? "Do you not understand that everything that goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and is eliminated,? "But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. Matt 15:10-18 (NASB) In case anyone is tempted to think Christís instruction only applies to the ceremonial washing of hands, Mark provides a very clear parenthetical statement6 that should dispel any doubt as to the magnitude of Christís declaration. After He called the crowd to Him again, He began saying to them, "Listen to Me, all of you, and understand: there is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile the man. ["If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear."] When he had left the crowd and entered the house, His disciples questioned Him about the parable. And He said* to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot, defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated,?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.) Mark 7:14-19 (NASB) These bold statements apparently gave great offense to the Pharisees who were unwilling to hear the message of the new covenant Christ was ushering in. Matthew records Jesusí reply to the disciples when they pointed out the offense He had caused. Then the disciples came* and said* to Him, "Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this statement?" But He answered and said, "Every plant which My heavenly Father did not plant shall be uprooted. "Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind. And if a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit." Matt 15:12-14 (NASB) Jesus calls these teachers of the law blind because they were unable to see the greater truths that the law foreshadowed. He warned that through their blindness they would lead others into the same pit. Is it possible, after a careful review of scripture, that there are still some modern day Pharisees who are offended by the teachings of Christ? Are there still some that would attempt to legalistically rationalize away the clear and repeated teachings of the New Testament? Are there those who would judge others based on ceremonial matters? If there are, perhaps they should consider the protest of James White, a SDA pioneer, who found himself facing nineteenth century Judaizers. Some of our good brethren have added "swine's flesh" to the catalogue of things forbidden by the Holy Ghost, and the apostles and elders assembled at Jerusalem. But we feel called upon to protest against such a course, as being contrary to the plain teaching of the Holy Scriptures. Shall we lay a greater "burden" on the disciples than seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and the holy apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ? God forbid. Their decision, being right, settled the question with them, and was a cause of rejoicing among the churches, and it should forever settle the question with us.7, 8 Indeed, as James White states, the question should be forever settled by the ruling of the Holy Spirit through the council of Jerusalem. And if this is not enough, then it should certainly be put to rest by the word of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teachings of His apostles. If some still choose to abstain from eating certain foods for their own reasons, let them follow their path without judgement of others. Let it never be said that making distinctions between foods is a requirement of new covenant believers, an indication of spiritual health, or especially a requirement for baptism into the body of Christ. Those who would burden new covenant Christians with old covenant ceremonial rights and who would bar those from fellowship who disagree, must either support their views from the scriptural instructions provided to the Church or reform their doctrines of bondage.9 Endnotes: 1 Gal. 4:9 ñ Paul is berating the Galatians for allowing themselves to be entrapped by the legalism of Judaizers. 2 Baptismal Vows, #7, Certificate of Baptism [1980] (Takoma Park, Washington D.C.: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventist). 3 ìTranslationî is SDA terminology for a post-tribulation rapture. ìIf ever there was a time when the diet should be of the most simple kind, it is now. Meat should not be placed before our children. Its influence is to excite and strengthen the lower passions, and has a tendency to deaden the moral powers. Grains and fruits prepared free from grease, and in as natural a condition as possible, should be the food for the tables of all who claim to be preparing for translation to heaven.î Ellen White, Testimonies, Vol. 2, p. 352 4 For a thorough, yet easy to read and understand, Biblically based study on the covenants see Dale Ratzlaff, Sabbath in Crisis, p. 27-87 (Glendale, AZ: Life Assurance Ministries). Also visit Pastor J. Mark Martinís Seventh-day Adventist Outreach web site at www.sdaoutreach.org. 5 The Greek word translated ìcleansedî in Acts 10:15 is katharizo. The same verb used in Mark 7:19. See note #6 below. 6 Some Christians who continue to adhere to old covenant food laws object to the inclusion of Markís parenthetical explanatory statement. Their objection is based primarily on the fact that the translators of the King James Bible (published in 1611) rendered the original Greek as, ìpurging all meatsî. The transliterated Greek verb translated as ìpurgingî in the KJV is katharizo. Strongís Greek and Hebrew Dictionary states that the definition of katharizo is ìto pronounce clean in a levitical senseî. As it is used in Mark 7:19, katharizo is in present tense, masculine participle, and active voice. It should be noted that Greek writers often used verbs in present tense to describe past actions as a way of conveying immediacy and to provide vividness to the story telling. The masculine participle and active voice would seem to indicate that Jesus is the one producing the action. Given the Strongís definition of katharizo, as well as tense, mood, and voice, a reasonably transparent rendering of the Greek phrase could be, ìHe is pronouncing kosher all meatsî. My rather awkward but literal translation is in agreement with the approach used by nearly all modern translations in rendering katharizo, as it appears in Mark 7:19, as ìHe declaredÖcleanî or other similar wording. This view of the Greek also makes it clear that these are the words of Mark describing the actions of Christ and therefore modern translators are correct to enclose this phrase in parenthesis as Markís parenthetical explanatory statement. 7 James White, The Present Truth Vol. I., Nov. 1850. - No. 11. "Swine's Flesh" Reproduced in Anderson, White Out, p. 93 (Glendale, AZ: Life Assurance Ministries 2001). 8 Although Ellen G. White later became one of those who ìadded ëswineís fleshí to the catalogue of things forbidden by the Holy Ghost,î she apparently at one time had agreed with her husbandís views on the permissibility of pork. Ms. White wrote a testimony to a Mrs. Curtis in the 1850s criticizing the Curtis family for suggesting that pork consumption was wrong. ìIf God requires His people to abstain from swine's flesh, He will convict them on the matter. He is just as willing to show His honest children their duty, as to show their duty to individuals upon whom He has not laid the burden of His work. If it is the duty of the church to abstain from swine's flesh, God will discover it to more than two or three. He will teach His church their duty.î Testimonies Vol. 1, p. 206. EGW reversed herself in later testimonies after visiting Dr. Jacksonís health institute in New York, ìNever should one morsel of swineís flesh be placed upon your table.î Testimonies, Vol. 2, p. 93. See also Dirk Anderson, White Out, p. 92-97 (Glendale, AZ: Life Assurance Ministries, 2001) and Andersonís Ellen G. White web site at www.ellenwhite.org. 9 ìNow I say, as long as the heir is a child, he does not differ at all from a slave although he is owner of everything, but he is under guardians and managers until the date set by the father. So also we, while we were children, were held in bondage under the elemental things of the world. But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. Because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!" Therefore you are no longer a slave, but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God. - Gal 4:1-7 (NASB) | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 637 Registered: 7-2004 |
We all know what is unhealthy for our own particular bodies. What is poison for me may be just the thing for you. I have a friend who is a recovered alcoholic, and for her anything with alcohol in it, even foods cooked with alcohol, must be avoided. She is good about asking about recipes when she goes out to eat because of this. I have never had much to drink, and enjoy certain foods that have been prepared with alcoholic substances (pickles, for one) and feel no obligation to question how dishes are prepared when I go out to eat. The "health message" originated from Dr. Kellogg, from his lips to Ellen's ear. It may or may not be a good idea, but it is not Bible based. Personally I view all of the added baggage in Adventist doctrine to be just a distraction. It is a way to keep certain individuals from really looking at what matters in their lives, and that is whether or not their relationship with Jesus is healthy. There is a wonderful little forward going around the internet that says in part, "I prayed that my handicapped child would be healed, and God said 'his soul is whole, and his body is temporary." It is so easy to become distracted when you have a huge long list of fundamental beliefs, plus thousands of pages of "lesser light" to keep you from really getting to know the real reason for all of this religion stuff in the first place. The reason for that is Jesus, Jesus, Jesus. Jesus only! Belva p.s. There is a quote from Jesus himself (he is my ultimate authority!) and it had to do with when the diciples were walking through a wheat field on the Sabbath. The Pharisees complained about two things. One, that the activity took place on the Sabbath, and Two, that they hadn't bothered to ceremoniously wash "before a meal." Jesus told them the story about David and his men when they had eaten the sacred bread in the temple, and then told them that everything is lawful to eat, that food merely enters the mouth and passes on through. Please forgive me for not being able to give you an exact quote at this time. My references are not accessible. | ||
| Heretic Registered user Username: Heretic Post Number: 181 Registered: 2-2005 |
Belva, That story about the hand washing is in Mark 7. Check out v. 14-19. One of my co-workers (an SDA) and I were discussing this very text the other day. He refused to concede that it meant anything more than applying to ritual handwashing despite the clarity of the pronouncement. I guess if you admit to seeing the truth of this statement it can open up a whole discussion into the legitimacy of Ellen White and don't think he wants to go there. Heretic | ||
| Velo1 Registered user Username: Velo1 Post Number: 10 Registered: 1-2005 |
chew on this, from this weeks Adventist Review...."Guidelines for interpreting Ellen White on the topic of health" http://www.adventistreview.org/2005-1538/story2.html quote: "Ellen White's absolute statements seem to insist on a strict vegetarian diet to be practiced by Adventist believers in every country of the world while awaiting the second coming of Christ. It may also imply that unless one becomes a vegetarian, Christian perfection would not be attained. Her variable statements, on the other hand, present the need to consider the practical realities of living in a sinful world. Hence, the responsibility of the interpreter is to find the general principle in the overall counsel of Ellen White on health reform, and to make appropriate application. To do otherwise is irresponsible interpretation." Does this article clarify the health message or obscure it? "Webster defines obscurantism as "depreciation of or positive opposition to enlightenment or the spread of knowledge, esp. a policy ... of deliberately making something obscure or withholding knowledge from the general public." (from Dr. Cottrell's paper: http://www.jesusinstituteforum.org/AssetOrLiability.html) | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 638 Registered: 7-2004 |
Yes, but that does not change the breadth of the statement made by Jesus. If this had been meant to just cover a simple cleanliness statement, Mark would not have added the comment "thus He declared all foods clean." Mark was written a number of years after the death and resurrection of Jesus, and there were many converts to Christianity by the time it was written. Mark was also written to the Gentiles, I believe, and they needed reassurance that they didn't have to adhere to the Jewish code. Remember, Mark partnered with Paul on his missionary journeys, and Mark would have heard Paul tell converts to Christianity just that. Those who wish to live under to law will find whatever thin excuses they can to do just that. Belva | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 368 Registered: 7-2000 |
Interesting article. The author really flip-flops around trying to justify the non-Biblical statements of saint Ellen. What is interesting is her use of the terms 'absolute' and 'variable' to refer to EGW's statements. I've never seen anyone try to categorize and integrate her statements using this approach. What's interesting is that the result of comparing the 'absolute' and 'variable' statements that she has labeled can only lead one to despair of ever solving the issue! The result of her integration is simply a weasel clause that allows one to do whatever they want---presumably without feeling guilty for ignoring EGW's counsel. Well, thank God for a New Covenant without dietary restrictions. Now, somebody pass that bowl of iced shrimp along with the cocktail sauce my way.............  | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 639 Registered: 7-2004 |
Google News is shouting the happy news that coffee is the greatest source of antioxidants in the American diet. This must be another blow to the SDA health message, coming hard on the heels of the news that red wine should be a staple of the diet of people with heart disease. Both of these substances should be used in moderation, mind you, but you are healthier if you use them than you would be if you don't. Here is a little news article to substantiate what I've been rambling on about. http://newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IE320050829053806&Page=3&Title=Features+-+Health+%26+Science&Topic=-162 The antioxidant value is quite apart from the caffiene content of coffee. That is the reason for moderation because you don't want to drink too much and get jumpy. However, it is good for the thinking processes, allowing coffee drinkers to be a bit sharper mentally than non-coffee drinkers. All this means that you can happily consume that lovely breakfast beverage without guilt. | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 415 Registered: 5-2002 |
To inculcated SDA minds, such facts are nothing more than lies intended to deceive and draw away from "the truth" | ||
| Jwd Registered user Username: Jwd Post Number: 85 Registered: 4-2005 |
Akin to this subject is the REMARKABLE scientific findings rearding the powerfully positive effects of moderate coffee drinking. You can find it on all the major news stations on the internet: ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC. It is a starteling discovery! No doubt Adventists will stick these scientific findings in the dirt along with the Ostrich head, and refrain, because of the Egg White covering that subject; while persisting in eating plates heaped high with deserts at the church pot lucks! Jess | ||
| Taybie Registered user Username: Taybie Post Number: 50 Registered: 4-2005 |
I am laughing at some of your statements guys! lol!!! "Pass the iced shrimp.." haaaaaa!! Man! I LOVE being free!!! WOO HOO!! I love my sabbath life in Jesus! Shontay | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 641 Registered: 7-2004 |
Loneviking, my favorite meal is king crab at Red Lobster (because of those wonderful cheddar bay biscuits). I have to make sure I don't do it too often because I'm already obese, but it doesn't keep me from craving those foods on my birthday, for instance. The first few times that I allowed myself to taste some of the forbidden items I was almost certain that I'd be struck by lightning. Now my reading of the epistles tells me that I should go ahead and enjoy, but that I should always remember to be thankful to God for the gifts he gives, including the tasty meals that I have been privileged to enjoy. I say all of that to say that I'll be glad to sit down to a seafood feast with you any time! Thank you, Jesus Belva | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 717 Registered: 3-2005 |
I love the lobster at the Red Lobster! And add a little Pinot Noir, and I have a little taste of heaven on earth, while at the same time thanking God that He has allowed us to enjoy these great gifts. Stan | ||
| Jwd Registered user Username: Jwd Post Number: 86 Registered: 4-2005 |
Class, here's your nickle quiz for today: 1) Who made coffee beans? 2) Who made grapes? Bonus question: Was it grape juice or alcoholic wine that Jesus created at the wedding reception? He made fermented wine. So stated in the original language: Greek: oinos, comes from Heb. yayin, which is wine as fermented. Triple bonus question: Answer this with a reasonaable, convincing answer and you won't have to attend class anymore this year! Adventists claim that only the Ceremonial law was nailed to the cross. Lev.11 with it's unclean meats prohibitions is in the heart of the Ceremonial law, yet Adventists claim THAT is still binding, yet the regulations pertaining to mildew is overlooked, as well as all the others. Why? :c)) Jess | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 1027 Registered: 7-2003  |
Because it existed outside the ceremonial law...eg...present at the flood, so animals must have been classified at that time....which means they weren't eaten at that time... so I've been told | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2480 Registered: 12-2003  |
Oh, yes, Melissa--I've heard those arguments! I remember understanding as a child that Noah took seven of the clean animals into the ark while merely two of the unclean because they could eat the clean ones (and offer sacrifices with them) but not the unclean. No one ever mentioned to meóI found it quite by accident a few years agoóthat Genesis 9 clearly gave the post-deluvian world permission to eat all animals! Yes, I pondered the implications for Ellen's inspiration when I heard the recent announcement re: coffee's health benefits. We were discussing this issue with our 18-yr-old last night (who rather likes the blended Mocha freeze's I send with him and his dad in the morning!), and he had never really understood why Ellen had condemned coffee. When we told him her condemnation was because it's "stimulant effect" wore down one's "vital force" (of which we have only a limited, pre-apportioned supply) and further excited the animal passions, that nearly unflappable young man registered shock. "Vital force??" he said with a strained look on his face. "Vital force?" he repeated--and we actually saw all of his front teeth in the grin of pure amusement that covered his face. A delightful moment! Colleen | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 642 Registered: 7-2004 |
As far as wine is concerned, there wasn't any "grape juice" in Isreal during the time of Christ. There was wine, and new wine. Why, because the climate in Isreal is similar to the climate in California. Good for growing the grapes, you know. As far as I know, they didn't have any refrigeration available, so once the grapes were squeezed, they were on their way to becoming wine. Where does the yeast for the fermentation process that produces the wine come from? The skins of the grapes themselves. Each variety has a slightly different natural yeast to help it to ferment naturally. Who designed this whole process? Our Creator. Who had a good time with this natural process when he performed his first public miracle? The very same Creator. Colleen, I like your son, sight unseen. I'm so glad that he is in touch with his "vital force." | ||
| Magpie Registered user Username: Magpie Post Number: 15 Registered: 7-2004 |
I heard from a tape by Walter Martin once that Jesus + anything = a cult. By that definition SDA would be classified as a cult because they are hooked on EG Whites teaching. I know they don't see it that way,----neverthless!! | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1823 Registered: 3-2004  |
I have yet to taste lobster. I will have it on my cruise with my sister, MLB. We leave on Sept 25 and return Oct 2. I have not tried Pinot Noir yet, as I drive myself where ever I go and I do not know how alcohol will affect my driving. But on the cruise, I will not be driving and I will try it. In the mean time, the cafeteria where I work makes a good crab cake. So, I am being introduced to food I have never tried and am so thankful for it. So to every one, Bon Appetit!!! Diana | ||
| Javagirl Registered user Username: Javagirl Post Number: 52 Registered: 6-2005 |
great news!!! |
