Meat MEAT!!!!!!!! What is the "New Covenant"?

[Bartato]

PeteR,
Good point. You are right about that.

Still,

"Get up, Peter, kill and eat!"

This seems like a clear change of dietary Law, similar to God declaring meat to now be food back in Genesis 10.

I know you have studied all this stuff far more than I have, so I really do want to be open to correction by Scripture.

By the way, I'm continue to listen to your audiobooks, and appreciate the way you hold to the spirit of the protestant reformation, which is to be continually reformed by Scripture.

To hold to the five solas, we must have Scripture as our final ultimate authority rather than the traditions of man.

Off topic, but I noticed from your website that you graduated from Columbia seminary back in 2002. I wonder if you might know some acquaintances of mine who graduated from there sometime around 2000-2001. His name is Jay, and his wife (who he met there) is named Karen (she is from Trinidad). Some friends of mine went to a church Jay pastored. Jay is very nice, and Karen is a ton of fun, and very funny (as most of the people I've met from Trinidad tend to be).

 

[steve]

"Get up, Peter, kill and eat!"

True story:
The man refuses, tells Yah no three times.
Yah shrugs His shoulders and says, Ok, go and take the Good News to the Gentiles, there is a representative of the first ones downstairs.
Evidently it’s quite an honor to tell Him no.

 

[steve]

Hyperbole
It’s called hyperbole, not sarcasm.

 

[Joleneakamama]

Still,

"Get up, Peter, kill and eat!"

This seems like a clear change of dietary Law, similar to God declaring meat to now be food back in Genesis 10.

As I recall there was all manner of animals which would include clean ones in Peter's vision. Peter's objection was that the clean ones had been made "common" by their close association with the other unclean animals. Jews treated the samaritans or others living among the gentiles this way.

 

[steve]

As I recall there was all manner of animals which would include clean ones in Peter's vision. Peter's objection was that the clean ones had been made "common" by their close association with the other unclean animals. Jews treated the samaritans or others living among the gentiles this way.

If that were the case, it would seem to me that he could have picked out a clean one and proceeded as instructed. Killing and eating all of them seems kinda far fetched.

 

[PeteR]

@Bartato , God always defines visions for us. See Acts 10:28-29. Otherwise we should be terrified of barley loaves while camping (Judge. 7:13-14) and careful not to put fat cows with skinny cows (Gen. 41:2-4).

 

[Joleneakamama]

11And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: 12Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. 13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

v14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

15And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

He never told Peter to eat unclean animals, he just corrected that tradition of erring on the side of caution and "teaching as doctrine the commandments of men."

 

[Asforme&myhouse]

11And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: 12Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. 13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

v14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

15And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

He never told Peter to eat unclean animals, he just corrected that tradition of erring on the side of caution and "teaching as doctrine the commandments of men."

I don’t know if that’s the case. Kjv uses “common” but it might not be the exact usage of the word that we use today. You may want to check some other translations, and look at those words in the Greek.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I'm not at all trying to be insulting.

Some of those descriptors no matter what names the places are called by can never fit that land. All of the descriptors fit a land minus names.
We go by the description, you go by the names. Both sides have to try and explain the why of the choice.....or just ignore what doesn't fit.
I say that Hosea's children were given names that had meanings, the scripture interprets those for us telling us what they mean. Without understanding the meaning of the names in a language I go with what I do understand.
Yeshua's name was not Shiloh, yet He is Shiloh. Prophetic speech communicates ideas. Jerusalem did not have Amorite and Hitite parents.

I guess the debate will be settled when the invasion happens.

What do you do with these descriptors?

1. brought back from the sword
(Recovered from war)
2. mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations
3.they shall dwell safely all of them
4. the land of unwalled villages
5. all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates
6. To take a prey and a spoil in the desolate places that are now inhabited,

I have seen people like Chuck Misler get excited about changes that they pretend will get the State of Israel into this prophesied condition, I say pretend because that land has never been uninhabited "always waste." In contrast, this land was a wilderness (He said He would lead her/Israel into the wilderness and speak comfortable to her)
Arizona, the last state to join the union has only been a state since 1912!

Oh yes, and there is still those other matters in conflict with the modern state of Israel being the latter day land. Jeremiah 7, and that prophesy to David about Him appointing a place where they would move no more.

And I’m going to make a liar of myself rather quickly it seems. I don’t have to explain my choice when the text literally says “the land of Israel”. It literally says it. It says the phrase “the land of Israel”. And you read that “America”. And yet you talk so confidently about these “ideas”. You literally contradict the text because you don’t think there’s mountains or large bodies of water around Israel. Apparently there aren’t any anywhere else either. America is the only place in the world with mountains and large bodies of water so clearly God was just mistaken when He said “the land of Israel” and then laid out it’s boundaries with specific features BY NAME! BY NAME!?!?!?

And by the by maybe you’ve heard of the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea. Or Mt. Moriah or Mt. Zion. I am apoplectic over this. How dare you act so self assured when you are quoting scripture you are accusing of being a lie? Why would you quote a passage a scripture as proof of something that would make that passage of scripture (and by extension the book of Ezekiel) a damned dirty lie?

You can not with a straight face say that Ezekiel 47 is proof that America is the prophesied renewal of Israel when Ezekiel 47 clearly states the prophesied renewal of Israel will be in the land of Israel, south of Damascus and situated around the Jordan River. And then it cites a half dozen other places nearby. If Ezekiel 47 isn’t talking about physical Israel it’s a corrupt writing and not scripture and so can’t be used to prove anything!

How in the Hahira, GA do you ignore a legal description of the land of Israel that could be put in a deed and drawn out by surveyors and fixate on mountains and large bodies of water; and then make the giant leap of logic to assume that only America could fit that description? Russia, England, Japan, Indonesia, South America, hell Antarctica could all fit that description and many more I’m sure. I’m just flabbergasted that otherwise intelligent people could fall for this malarkey. And now you know why I don’t want to talk about this with you.

This is insanity Jolene . The incredible detailed description in Ezekiel 47 is prefaced in verse 13 with the phrase “Thus saith the Lord,” how dare you contradict that?

 

[PeteR]

@The Revolting Man , simmer down, bro.
Seriously.

 

[Joleneakamama]

I don’t have to explain my choice when the text literally says “the land of Israel

Well, what about that appointed place where they would move no more?

Wouldn't that land that He was going to appoint them also be a "Land of Israel"?

Was Israel the man named after the land, or was the land named after the man/people?

Israel was told that a nation and company of Nations would come from him. The people went into captivity as two houses, then those believers of Judah were reunited with those of the gentiles (which would have included the ten tribes) and now 2000 years later Ezekiel is describing the latter day land of Israel's descendants gathered out of the nations.

We started from 13 colonies, we were born in a day when we declared our independence, we were blessed with victory in an armed conflict with the ruling superpower of the day. As a nation we were tremendously blessed until we made an idol (the man made constitution) and allowed a government whose immorality has Baal (humanism) all over it. Now we are reaping the curses of Deut 28 that are to be a sign and wonder on Israel forever.

If you ever look at the heraldry of Israel our national seal, as well as those of most European nations are covered with it.

Jews from Europe are accepted as such without accepting Christ, but people from Europe that do accept Christ cannot be Israel??

You never commented on those descriptors, so I guess you are going to ignore them? Same with the other passages that disqualify that land?

@PeteR is sure it is that land too, and has no answer to the prophesy to David or Jer. 7? (Yet)

My father in law before he died had something like 75 descendants. Yet a land with an estimated capacity of 300 to 500 million is going to hold the restored multiplied posterity of a people that went from less then one hundred to millions in 400 years in Egypt, that were promised to be uncountable, that have been reproducing in the nations for over 2000 years since Christ?

Russia, England, Japan, Indonesia, South America, hell Antarctica

You mean to tell me all those places have all those descriptors? Antarctica has cows?

But you already said.

I could go on but there’s no point. You will never waver in this belief and I will never find it to have a shred of credibility.

It looks like you are going to fulfill your own prophesy.

I would be interested in examining the evidences for the other position, IF those believing it will address those apparent conflicts in scripture.

I am not at all opposed to changing my views, but if I was the type that just believed because I was told I'd still be mormon....listening to their "prophet."

On my grandpa's wall was a plaque that said

"There is a principle, proof against all argument, a ban against all progress and which if persisted in cannot but keep the mind in everlasting ignorance, and that is contempt prior to examination."

Again... the messenger gets attacked. Please deal with the substance.

 

[Asforme&myhouse]

And I’m going to make a liar of myself rather quickly it seems. I don’t have to explain my choice when the text literally says “the land of Israel”. It literally says it. It says the phrase “the land of Israel”. And you read that “America”. And yet you talk so confidently about these “ideas”. You literally contradict the text because you don’t think there’s mountains or large bodies of water around Israel.

Mark 14:24 KJV
[24] And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.


2 Corinthians 3:6-8 KJV
[6] Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. [7] But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: [8] How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?


Hebrews 9:15 KJV
[15] And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

 

[PeteR]

@PeteR is sure it is that land too, and has no answer to the prophesy to David or Jer. 7? (Yet)

Point me again to the David reference.

Jeremiah 7 is specifically to Judah and it was fulfilled in the Babylonian exile. Nowhere does it say that the 'casting out' is forever. In fact, Jeremiah clearly prophesies Judah's return in several other chapters.

 

[Joleneakamama]

Point me again to the David reference.

Jeremiah 7 is specifically to Judah and it was fulfilled in the Babylonian exile. Nowhere does it say that the 'casting out' is forever. In fact, Jeremiah clearly prophesies Judah's return in several other chapters.

Yeshua spoke the judgement over Jerusalem, so I don't believe the Babylonian exile was the fulfillment.
The word of YHWH from Nathan is in
2 Sam. 7:10 Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more;

Ezekiel has many "own land" references and he describes a different land.

In Jer.7 though stated that He will do to Jerusalem and the land what He did to Shiloh. Was Shiloh ever restored? Because at the time of Jeremiah He tells them "Go look at what I did to it for the wickedness of the people." Did he ever prophesy restoration for Shiloh? Because the judgment is the same.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Well, what about that appointed place where they would move no more?

Wouldn't that land that He was going to appoint them also be a "Land of Israel"?

Was Israel the man named after the land, or was the land named after the man/people?

Israel was told that a nation and company of Nations would come from him. The people went into captivity as two houses, then those believers of Judah were reunited with those of the gentiles (which would have included the ten tribes) and now 2000 years later Ezekiel is describing the latter day land of Israel's descendants gathered out of the nations.

We started from 13 colonies, we were born in a day when we declared our independence, we were blessed with victory in an armed conflict with the ruling superpower of the day. As a nation we were tremendously blessed until we made an idol (the man made constitution) and allowed a government whose immorality has Baal (humanism) all over it. Now we are reaping the curses of Deut 28 that are to be a sign and wonder on Israel forever.

If you ever look at the heraldry of Israel our national seal, as well as those of most European nations are covered with it.

Jews from Europe are accepted as such without accepting Christ, but people from Europe that do accept Christ cannot be Israel??

You never commented on those descriptors, so I guess you are going to ignore them? Same with the other passages that disqualify that land?

@PeteR is sure it is that land too, and has no answer to the prophesy to David or Jer. 7? (Yet)

My father in law before he died had something like 75 descendants. Yet a land with an estimated capacity of 300 to 500 million is going to hold the restored multiplied posterity of a people that went from less then one hundred to millions in 400 years in Egypt, that were promised to be uncountable, that have been reproducing in the nations for over 2000 years since Christ?



You mean to tell me all those places have all those descriptors? Antarctica has cows?

But you already said.


It looks like you are going to fulfill your own prophesy.

I would be interested in examining the evidences for the other position, IF those believing it will address those apparent conflicts in scripture.

I am not at all opposed to changing my views, but if I was the type that just believed because I was told I'd still be mormon....listening to their "prophet."

On my grandpa's wall was a plaque that said

"There is a principle, proof against all argument, a ban against all progress and which if persisted in cannot but keep the mind in everlasting ignorance, and that is contempt prior to examination."

Again... the messenger gets attacked. Please deal with the substance.

There is no substance Jolene. Every time I look at your evidence it always falls apart. Ezekiel 47 states the opposite of what you say it does. There’s no substance to deal with at all.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Mark 14:24 KJV
[24] And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.


2 Corinthians 3:6-8 KJV
[6] Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. [7] But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: [8] How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?


Hebrews 9:15 KJV
[15] And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

So you’re agreeing with me now?

 

[MeganC]

When I read "The Land of Israel" I read that as the land belonging to Israel and not as a location.

I remember when Osama bin Laden referred to 'the lands of the Arabs' he wasn't referring to one particular country or just one place.

If the Jews all moved to Cuba and took it over then Cuba would be the land of Israel because Cuba would be where the Israelis lived and the Israelis would own Cuba.

 

[Asforme&myhouse]

So you’re agreeing with me now?

Sure man, whatever you want to believe.

 

[PeteR]

When I read "The Land of Israel" I read that as the land belonging to Israel and not as a location.

I remember when Osama bin Laden referred to 'the lands of the Arabs' he wasn't referring to one particular country or just one place.

If the Jews all moved to Cuba and took it over then Cuba would be the land of Israel because Cuba would be where the Israelis lived and the Israelis would own Cuba.

Two problems with that:

1) All Jews are Israeiltes, but not all Israelites are Jews. (I.e., house of Israel + house of Judah = all/kol Israel). [Additional challenges to this is the current nation of Israel is not 'all Israel' so 'Israeli' is not an accurate descriptor, either... I'll save the longer explanation.]

2) Multiple times in Scripture the Land is described as 'the Land I gave to Jacob..' At least twice, God is very specific that the house of Israel will be gathered to 'live in their land which I gave to My servant Jacob.' Ezekiel 28:25 and 37:25 as examples. (These two verses alone specifically u.do @Joleneakamama 's idea of another land as a permanent dwelling.)

 

[MeganC]

Two problems with that:

1) All Jews are Israeiltes, but not all Israelites are Jews. (I.e., house of Israel + house of Judah = all/kol Israel). [Additional challenges to this is the current nation of Israel is not 'all Israel' so 'Israeli' is not an accurate descriptor, either... I'll save the longer explanation.]

2) Multiple times in Scripture the Land is described as 'the Land I gave to Jacob..' At least twice, God is very specific that the house of Israel will be gathered to 'live in their land which I gave to My servant Jacob.' Ezekiel 28:25 and 37:25 as examples. (These two verses alone specifically u.do @Joleneakamama 's idea of another land as a permanent dwelling.)

Israel is a nation of people. The land is important but they are still Israel regardless of where they live.

You make this point for me when you say, At least twice, God is very specific that the house of Israel will be gathered to 'live in their land which I gave to My servant Jacob.'

The Land of Israel is therefore the land which belongs to Israel, it is their land.

You're worried too much about the land and the geography when God cares about the people and because He loves them He provided them with a place to call home.

If those people someday claim a planet as their own it will also be The Land of Israel because that will be where Israel lives.