Violation of the Biblical Dietary Laws the Foundation of the Coronavirus?

C McC Mc Posts: 3,891
edited March 2020 in Biblical Studies

CD Family,

Please read the source articles below. Is there a real connection between animals in general and the unclean animals in particular? Speak from enlightenment and be heard. Animals (zoonotic) disease is a disease spread between animals and people. Zoonotic diseases can be caused by viruses, bacteria, parasites, and fungi. Some of these diseases are very common. Foods can be the source for some zoonotic infection when animals such as cows and pigs are infected with parasites such as Cryptosporidium or Trichinella.

The Pentateuch divides all animals into two groups: Clean which can be eaten, and Unclean which are not to be eaten. This law has been followed by many Jews for thousands of years. It has also been accepted as a rule to follow by some Christians. Other Christians, view them as outdated laws of the Jews. Many don't believe that these laws are binding upon Christians. Should these dietary laws in the Bible be taken seriously? If yes, failure to do so, could this be the basis of Coronavirus, if it were not cooked up in a lab?

One may raise a number of questions about the matter o f clean and unclean meats in the Bible. It's fair to ask:

  1. Revolve around the origin, nature, and authority of these biblical dietary laws.
  2. Are they of divine or human origin?
  3. At what time did they originate?
  4. Why were they given?
  5. What was the motivation and purpose of these laws?
  6. Are they moral, ceremonial, or hygienic laws?
  7. Are they an outgrowth of some primitive religious customs which the Hebrews borrowed from some other culture?
  8. Were these laws only for Jews, or should Christians also observe them?
  9. Did either Jesus or his apostles abolish these laws for the Christian Church?
  10. What do the biblical texts on animal meats really means?
  11. Is the failure to follow the biblical dietary laws the foundation of the Coronavirus that plagues the world today?

We just can't dismiss the questions above because "the illegal trade in wild-animal meat could cause the next global pandemic". See especially, the article: https://qz.com/795294/will-illegal-bushmeat-bring-the-next-global-outbreak/

Brethren, let's put our collective heads and knowledge together to contribute to the pandemic that plagues the land. What say ye? CM

SOURCES:

Comments

  • reformedreformed Posts: 3,120

    Dietary laws are not for today. No point in even investigating this.

  • C McC Mc Posts: 3,891

    Animals that the Bible deemed as "unclean" (especially, the unclean ones) are highly suspect in the Coronavirus.

    "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works" ( 2 Tim. 3:16-17).

    It's clear, the things that appear in the cannon are for us.

    "For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide, we might have hope" (ROM15:4 NIV).

    Therefore, in view, it is worthy and worth studying and investigating to its core. "...holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost". God didn't reveal anything worthless (holy trash) or unimportant. Those that are not "NT Only People", the Dietary laws encompass value, merits, and a treasure-trove of practices and relevant principles for all men everywhere.

    For anyone who feels "no point in even investigating" the Dietary laws, he should seek to know the origin of them and why were they given in the first place? No right-minded Christian shouldn't or dismiss these laws without a thorough investigation before relegating them, even if one thinks there's no current value. All truth can withstand close examinations. CM

  • reformedreformed Posts: 3,120

    They were given to set Israel apart. If they were meant to be followed they would not have been revoked in the New Testament. Maybe you forgot that part....

  • C McC Mc Posts: 3,891

    Please provide biblical proof of your conclusions:

    1. The "Dietary Laws" and the distinguishing of "clean" and "unclean" animals were given to set Israel apart.
    2. Please cite biblical books, chapters, verses, or passages in the NT that states clearly that the distinguishing of "clean" and "unclean" animals "have been revoked."

    Reformed, I am" hoping against hope" that we can have a mature discussion of the facts and principles on the distinction of "clean" and "unclean" animals in the Bible. Too often, you go down rabbit holes and abort a good topic/thread with childish name-calling and gross obstinacy to accept biblical teachings that don't match your preconceived conclusions. Please signal your willingness to adhere to the forum guidelines and general Christian standards. They will contribute to the enlightenment and the benefit of all. CM

  • reformedreformed Posts: 3,120

    Read Acts 10. And I don't appreciate the unprovoked personal attack that you all so want me to not do but then go and do yourselves. Hypocrite.

  • C McC Mc Posts: 3,891
    edited March 2020

    Reformed,

    Your last post affirmed for all the see that you're not serious about any meaningful exchanges on the subject matter above. It also indicates the you're obviously unable to or grossly unwilling to refrain from name-calling. This is not statement for anyone to pity you, but to "look beyond your faults and see your needs".

    Because of the important of the subject matter, discerning your needs is the only way forward. I pray you would find the need to see yourself in light of God's holiness. Your apparent contempt for the Word, fellow CD Users, and the silent readers are on display as a Vegas sign on a darken Nevada Street.

    However, your suggesting "Acts 10" as the abandonment for distinguishing between "clean" and "unclean" animals is not in the passage and is a misreading of the text on its face. I can point it out to one who has the respect for the Word and fellow users. I would say to you, please re-read the chapter and be will to readjust your thinkings. CM

  • C McC Mc Posts: 3,891

    Spiritual cleansing of the Gentile converts (Acts 10).

    Luke treats the issue of Gentile uncleanness in a special manner. one scholar believes that only the eighteen-edicts tradition placed ritual impurity on the Gentiles. According to rabbinical teaching, the Gentiles were ritually unclean, because they didn’t practice the laws of ritual purity, ate impure food, touched impure substances, committed idolatry and defiling sexual acts. Klawans notices that Antiquities 12:145 connects the exclusion of proselytes from the Temple to the purity law and that Gentiles were excluded from the Temple “just as the flesh of unclean beasts is excluded from Jerusalem.” Jonathan Klawans, “Notions of Gentile Impurity in Ancient Judaism,” AJS Review 20, no. 2 (1995): 289, 298, 309-311.

    The reasons behind the Lukan view of the ritual purification rites and the significance of the Cross appear in Acts 10 and 11.

    • Acts 10 describes the sequence of events.
    • -- Plays a key role in disputes about the issue of the ritual law, in light of the progress of the apostolic mission. The dispute reaches its culmination in Acts 15, when common agreement finally seems to be reached.
    • Acts 11 focuses predominantly on Peter’s apologetic arguments.
    • -- His arguments reflect the main points of a spiritual lesson which one can draw out from the events described in the preceding chapter.

    Acts 10:1-48 can be divided in six parts:

    • Part 1 (Acts 10:1-8) represents the prophetic vision of Cornelius. It was noted that Luke, beginning to describe the mission to the Gentiles, focuses on Cornelius’ piety. It was suggested that the angelophany at Cornelius’ home is paralleled by Luke to the same event experienced by Zechariah the priest in Luke 1:11-20. This view is supported by mentioning piety, according to the Jewish law, in both cases. Richard I. Pervo, Acts: A Commentary, ed. Harold W. Attridge (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2009), 267.
    • Part 2 (Acts 10:9-16) shifts the scene from the Gentile home in Caesarea to the Jewish home in Joppa, where Peter was staying.
    • Part 3 (10:17-29) -- provides in v. 19 a direct revelation from God concerning the vision just at the time of Peter’s perplexity.
    • Part 4 (10:30-33) records Cornelius’ story. The beginning. Its function is to synchronize two events, one in Caesarea and one in Joppa.
    • Part 5 (10:34-43) presents Peter’s sermon in Cornelius’ household. It contains abundant allusions to Acts 15. this sermon as “a brief and symmetrical speech of a catechetical rather than missionary type... The content is that of the creed.” Pervo, Acts, 276.
    • Part 6 (10:44-48) describes the miracle of speaking in tongues (λαλούντων γλώσσαις) by which the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was manifested.
    • ------ ---- The ‘’ is a second Pentecost now for the Gentiles (cf. 2:1-4), which gives Peter a right to state“ (10:44-48).” ” ” Daniel J. Scholz, “‘Rise, Peter, Kill and Eat’: Eating Unclean Food and Dining with Unclean People in Acts 10:1-11:18,” in Proceedings EGL & MWBS 22 (2002): 56.

    Acts 10:1-4 — God responded to both Cornelius’s prayers and his almsgiving, to the consistency of his whole life.

    Acts 10.9–16 -- Peter and Cornelius. This narrative is not only the story of the conversion of Cornelius, but also of the conversion of Peter and of the church -- [Newbigin,  pp. 59–60].

    Acts 10:10-- is to show no difference between the Jews and the Gentiles in relation to the ritual law (Heb 10:1). It is seen from the point that the Israelites also failed to reach the standards of the law. [BDAG, ζυγός, 1, “in the case of humans, to expedite the bearing of burdens, yoke].

    Acts 10:15, 28 and 11:5-18 -- The church in called to remove this distinction between people.

    Acts 10:9-18 -- God communicates with His people in many different ways. One of the nine ways are Dreams and visions (Gen 15:1; 28:10-17; 37:1-11; 1 Sam 3; Dan 2, 4; Joel 2:28; Matt 1:20-21; 2:12-13; Acts 16:9-10; 2 Cor 12:1-6). 

    Acts 10:19-20 -- Peter was still trying to understand what the vision meant, when the Spirit said:

    "Listen! Three men are here looking for you. So get ready and go down, and do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them."

    Acts 10:24-48 -- Peter's christological message presented to Cornelius.

    Acts 10:23-24 -- -- personal relationships the most effective means of spreading the gospel. Friendship evangelism an especially a good strategy for new converts to use. 

    Acts 10:25 -- Saul and Barnabas had been involved in ministry in Jerusalem for a period of time.

    Acts 10:25, 26 -- The Apostle Peter made it clear to Cornelius that it is wrong to worship a man, even though he happens to be one of Christ's apostles.

    • Likewise the Apostle Paul refused to accept acts of worship directed to himself (Acts 14:11-18).
    • Jesus reminded Satan of the divine instruction in this regard: "Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him" (Matt. 4:10).

    Acts 10:28 -- The Bible make clear that Peter's vision of the sheet was not permission from God to eat unclean animals.

    Truth found truth shared. CM

  • MitchellMitchell Posts: 657

    @C Mc it is worthy and worth studying and investigating to its core. "...holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost". God didn't reveal anything worthless (holy trash) or unimportant. Those that are not "NT Only People", the Dietary laws encompass value, merits, and a treasure-trove of practices and relevant principles for all men everywhere.

    C Mc, I concur with the above as I think the above makes a salient point worth considering and pondering.

  • reformedreformed Posts: 3,120

    The dietary laws were for a specific people at a specific time and place and are no longer applicable today per the NT.

  • C McC Mc Posts: 3,891

    @C Mc said:

    However, you're suggesting [that] "Acts 10" as the abandonment for distinguishing between "clean" and "unclean" animals is not in the passage and is a misreading of the text on its face. I can point it out to one who has respect for the Word and fellow users. I would say to you, please re-read the chapter and be will[ing] to readjust your thinkings.  CM

    @reformed said, by way of response (April 2, 2020):

    "Oh get over yourself"

    Over a year, Reformed, your response remained. I hope your in a more serious mode that I may share with a clearer understanding of the distinguishing between "clean" and "unclean" animals in the Bible in general and the proper understanding of its reference in Act 10, in particuar.

    To those assembled, Peter spoke first of the custom of the Jews, saying that it was looked upon as unlawful for Jews to mingle socially with the Gentiles, that to do this involved ceremonial defilement.

    “Ye know,” he said, “how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean. Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?”

    Cornelius then related his experience and the words of the angel, saying in conclusion, “Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now, therefore, are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.”

    Peter said, “Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: but in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with Him.”

    Then to that company of attentive hearers the apostle preached Christ—His life, His miracles, His betrayal and crucifixion, His resurrection and ascension, and His work in heaven as man’s representative and advocate. As Peter pointed those present to Jesus as the sinner’s only hope, he himself understood more fully the meaning of the vision he had seen, and his heart glowed with the spirit of the truth that he was presenting.

    Acts 10:33 -- When Cornelius and his friends visited the apostle Peter he said:

    “Now, therefore, are we all here present before God, to _________ all things that are commanded thee of _________.”

    Acts 10:36 -- Jesus Christ is Lord of all (see also, 1 Corinthians 1:2). 

    Acts 10:38 (NKJV) -- Jesus’ baptism is recorded as the starting point of His ministry. This event is of great significance because it represented His “anointing” as the Messiah.

    • Peter tells us that Christ went about doing good. It is evident, then, that if we are Christ’s servants, if we follow Christ, we must also go about doing good. We are not to wait for the opportunities to do good to come to us, but we must go about doing good, seeking opportunities to do good, to help the needy, the bless and comfort the sorrowful. We must search them out and not wait for them to hunt us up and move us to action by their appeals.

    Acts 10:42 -- Jesus is considered by Peter "as judge of the living and the dead". Theologically speaking, Jesus, the Messiah, is the eschatological "judge," "priest," "prophet," and "king" of Israel.

    Acts 10:43 -- The apostle Paul's preaching was rooted in the message of forgiveness. Believers were promised forgiveness "through his name".

    Acts 10:44-47 -- Cornelius receives the Holy Spirit at his house. He worshipped God with his mind and heart. In addition, he not only had the right theology but the right spirit.

    • The gift of the Holy Spirit and tongues were given to Cornelius and his household was identical to what was given on the Day of Pentecost.

    Acts 10:47 --- Early Christians Practiced baptism by Immersion Cornelius the Roman was baptized by Peter the Jew.

    Acts 10:48--  Peter went to the house of Cornelius, preached to this centurion of the Italian Regiment and his family, and his whole house was baptized the same day.

    • Peter confirmed—A Commanded Ordinance of baptism by Immersion.

    It is less likely that Peter in the vision of Acts 10 was given an order to declare all unclean food as clean. If so, then the prohibitions of the Decree seem to be a step back. Also, it would seem impossible to apply the few dietary prohibitions to non-kosher foods.

    The cancellation of the dietary laws in Acts 10 cannot explain the reason to keep practicing one part of dietary-system, while rejecting another. What kind of table fellowship could be possible between Jewish Christians and those from the Gentiles if the table is full of unclean meat, even though the blood had been drained out?

    Moreover, in Acts 10:19, 28; 11:10-12, Peter clarifies that his vision had a clear application to the issue of Gentile converts. He never mentioned any application of his vision to dietary law.

    Acts 10:28 -- The Bible make clear that Peter's vision of the sheet was not permission from God to eat unclean animals. 

    Reformed, I hope now you have a better understanfing of Acts 10 and Peter's vision of the sheet of uncleaned animals. Truth found truth shared. CM


    Sources:

  • MitchellMitchell Posts: 657

    @C Mc ...in Acts 10:19, 28; 11:10-12, Peter clarifies that his vision had a clear application to the issue of Gentile converts. He never mentioned any application of his vision to dietary law.

    Excellent post C Mc!

  • reformedreformed Posts: 3,120
  • C McC Mc Posts: 3,891

    @reformed said:

    "The dietary laws were for a specific people at a specific time and place and are no longer applicable today per the NT".

    The law on clean and unclean animals in the Pentateuch divides all animals into two groups:

    • Clean which can be eaten
    • Unclean which are not to be eaten.

    This law has been practiced by many Jews for thousands of years. Are these laws binding upon Christians today? Dietary laws are in the Bible and should be taken seriously. To do so, some questions revolving around the origin, nature, and authority of biblical dietary laws must be asked:

    1. Are they of divine or human origin?
    2. At what time did they originate?
    3. Why were they given?
    4. What was the motivation and purpose of these laws?
    5. Are they moral, ceremonial, or hygienic laws?
    6. Are they an outgrowth of some primitive religious customs which the Hebrews borrowed from some other culture?
    7. Were these laws only for Jews, or should Christians also observe them?
    8. Did either Jesus or his apostles abolish these laws for the Christian Church?

    A closer look at some of the relevant biblical texts in the OT/NT. Hopefully, they will give us a better understanding:

    OLD TESTAMENTS TEXTS

    • Genesis 7-9 --The Flood Story
    • Leviticus 11 -- The Major Law of the Clean and Unclean Animals
    • Leviticus 20:22-26
    • Deuteronomy 14. -- Repetition of the Food Laws 
    • Judges 13:14.
    • Isaiah 65:4; 66:3; and 66:17.
    • Hosea 9:3
    • Ezekiel 22:26; 44:23.

    NT TESTAMENTS TEXTS to be considered to determine whether or not "The dietary laws were for a specific people at a specific time and place and are no longer applicable today", as purported by @reformed:

     1). Mark 7. -- The specific issue in this passage is, it should carefully be noted, the ritual washing of hands before meals.    

    2). Acts 10. -- This passage contains the story of the vision which God gave to Peter in which he saw a great sheet let down from heaven with all kinds of animals, birds, and reptiles in it.  [See above, my last post on this text].

    3). Acts 15. -- The conclusion of the General Church Council in Jerusalem.

    4). Romans 14: 2, 3, 14. -- "One believes he may eat anything, while the weak man eats only vegetables. Let not him who eats despise him who abstains, and let not him who abstains pass judgment on him who eats; for God has welcomed him. . . . I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean."

    5). 1 Corinthians 10:25-28. -- "Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 'For the earth is the Lord's, and everything in it.' If one of the unbelievers invites you to a dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. (But if someone says to you, 'This has been offered in sacrifice,' then out of consideration for the man who informed you, and for conscience' sake-I mean his conscience, not yours-do not eat it.)

    6). 1 Timothy 4:1-5. -- "Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith . . . who forbid marriage and enjoin abstinence from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving 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 thanksgiving; for then it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer."

    7). Revelation 18:2, "And he called out with a mighty voice, 'Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! It has become a dwelling place of demons, a haunt of every foul [unclean] spirit, a haunt of every foul [unclean] and hateful bird."

    To all serious contributors, feel free to make your case for or against if "the dietary laws were for a specific people at a specific time and place and are no longer applicable today" for Christians? CM

  • reformedreformed Posts: 3,120

    Do you also complete sacrifices? If a woman is on her menstral cycle do you put her away? Do you follow the cleanliness laws? If not, why?

  • C McC Mc Posts: 3,891

    Reformed,

    You said: "Peter's vision is the only applicable passage?"

    To what? "Peter's vision" is confused by many, thinking it has something to do with "The dietary laws?

    As stated above:

    ...in Acts 10:192811:10-12, Peter clarifies that his vision had a clear application to the issue of Gentile converts. He never mentioned any application of his vision to dietary law. Would you acknowledge this as I prepare to respond to Romans 14? CM

  • C McC Mc Posts: 3,891

    Reformed,

    What "other arguments" am I "ignoring"? Do tell! Please list them in order of importance if you like. CM

  • C McC Mc Posts: 3,891

    Reformed,

    Once again,

    "Peter's vision" is confused by many, thinking it has something to do with "The dietary laws?

    As stated above:

    ...in Acts 10:192811:10-12, Peter clarifies that his vision had a clear application to the issue of Gentile converts. He never mentioned any application of his vision to dietary law. Would you acknowledge this as I prepare to respond to Romans 14? CM

  • MitchellMitchell Posts: 657

    @C Mc ...in Acts 10:192811:10-12, Peter clarifies that his vision had a clear application to the issue of Gentile converts. He never mentioned any application of his vision to dietary law.

    Agreed! Another thing it is interesting or at least something worth mentioning that even after the three years spent with Jesus/Yeshua it appears Peter has continued to observe the Torah (Acts 11:8) maybe for cultural heritage reasons, out of habit, or simply because in Christ/Messiah he has the freedom to do so just as vegetarian Christians have the freedom in Christ/Messiah to abstain from eating meat.

    Now, as for the importance of the OT/Hebrew Bible/ Tanakh, we know that when the NT writers spoke of the scriptures they were almost exclusively referring to the OT/Hebrew Bible/Tanakh because the NT had not been compiled during the first century. The OT/LXX was the Bible of the first century Church. If that wasn't enough to prove the case Romans 15:4, and 2 Timothy 3:14 - 17 emphatically clarify the importance of the OT.

    Can Christians today learn from the OT/Hebrew Bible? Yes, of course, they can! Are the Holy Scriptures known as the OT/Hebrew Bible still worth investigating and exegeting? Yes, absolutely!


    Grace and Peace

  • C McC Mc Posts: 3,891

    Reformed,

    What "arguments" I keep "ignoring"? For the third time, do you accept:

    As stated above, ...in Acts 10:192811:10-12, Peter clarifies that his vision had a clear application to the issue of Gentile converts. He never mentioned any application of his vision to dietary law. Would you acknowledge this as I prepare to respond to Romans 14? CM

  • reformedreformed Posts: 3,120

    How about you actually read my posts. Are you throwing all of the cleanliness laws out? Do you follow them? If not, why?

Sign In or Register to comment.