What's For Dinner - Part 5 of 7

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF THE DIETARY LAWS

“The dietary laws concern themselves with what animals, birds, and fish may be eaten, the way in which they must be prepared for consumption, and the fact that meat must not be consumed or cooked together with milk or other dairy products.” (Encyclopaedia Judaica, Dietary Laws)

 

The Encyclopedia Judaica provides a good summary of the dietary laws, which I will try to further summarize below. As a general principle, animals/birds that eat other animals, i.e., living off the dead, are prohibited, while animals/birds that are herbivorous are generally permitted. Although pigs are generally considered herbivorous, I heard a recent story from the Civil War of wild hogs eating the battlefield dead, which in some areas remained unburied until several years after the war. Not surprisingly, the people in these areas refused to eat wild pig for years. Philo, the Alexandrian Jewish philosopher, suggested that creatures with evil instincts were forbidden lest men might also develop these instincts, (Spec. 4:118).

 

Animals: The major distinction is clean (tahor) and unclean (tame). Clean animals chew the cud and have wholly cloven hoofs, (Deut 14:6). Generally, these animals are herbivorous enumerated in the Law as: the ox, the sheep, the goat, the hart, the gazelle, the roebuck, the wild goat, the pygarg, the antelope, and the mountain-sheep, (Deut 14:4-5).

 

Birds: Leviticus 11:13-19 lists 20 “unclean” birds, while Deuteronomy 14:12-18 lists 21. The rabbis combined these lists to arrive at 24 “unclean” birds (Hul. 63a-b). In addition, the eggs of forbidden birds are also forbidden (Hul 64b). Even the eggs of permitted bids are forbidden if they have been ferilized (Hul. 64a-b). The Bible does not list “clean” birds, but according to the Mishnah “clean” birds must have a crop, a gizzard which can easily be peeled off, and an extra talon.

 

Fish: Only acquatic creatures that have at least one fin and one easily removable scale are “clean” (Lev 11:9-12).

 

Insects: The short answer is that no insects are permitted because the four kinds of locust permitted (Lev 11:21-22), cannot be easily identified. One seeming exception to the general principles, honey is regarded as “transferred nectar” and may be eaten even though the bee is a forbidden insect, (Bek. 7b)

 

Ritual Slaughter (Shehitah): With the emphasis on clean and unclean animals, it is easy to overlook the importance placed on preparing the animal.

 

“So complex and minute are the regulations that the slaughter must be carried out by a carefully trained and licensed shohet…Should a defect be found in some of the organs, such as the brain, the windpipe, the esophagus, the heart, the lungs, or the intestines, the animal is terefah, and forbidden for consumption.”

 

There are eight categories for defects that would render an animal as unacceptable: (1) perforated organ walls, (2) split pipes, (3) missing limbs, (4) missing or defective organs, (5) torn walls or membrane covers or organs, (6) a poisonous substance introduced into the body (such as mauled by another animal), (7) shattering by a fall, or (8) broken bones. It is assumed in the Talmud (Hul 3:1), that these defects would lead to death within one year and eating a dead animal is prohibited. The same laws apply to poultry, but there are no specific rules concerning the method by which permitted fish are to be killed.

 

Because there is a strong financial incentive to process every animal, I have read about cattle with broken or injured limbs being forced through the traditional meat packing process. In addition, it has been a practice to grind up the bones of processed animals for cattle feed. “Mad cow” disease can be propagated in this manner and I do not expect that this practice would be kashrut. I also wonder if the introduction of “growth hormones” in animals would be considered an unacceptable substance introduced into the body.

 

Preparation of Meat (Koshering): The prohibition against the consumption of blood (Lev 7:26-27, 17:10-14), is the basis for the process of koshering, the drawing out and draining of blood from meat before cooking. The process begins by suspending the animal head down to drain as much blood as possible. The remaining blood can be removed by either salting the meat, or roasting the meat over an open flame. Poultry must be opened and salted inside and out.

 

The salting process involves fully immersing the meat and bones in clean cold water for 30 minutes to open pores enabling the salt to draw blood from the surface and softened fibers of the meat. The meat is then laid out on specially grooved or perforated boards placed at an angle to allow drainage. The meat is then sprinkled with salt. The meat is left to stand for one hour, then washed 2-3 times in cold water. The process must be completed within 72 hours after the animal was slaughtered, otherwise, the animal can only be koshered by roasting over an open flame.

 

There are various interpretations on the prohibition against consuming blood. The best understanding may come from the words of Ezekiel who equated the eating of blood with the sins of idolatry and murder, “You eat meat with the blood, lift up your eyes to your idols as you shed blood,” (Ezek 33:25). Some interpret the words of Ezekiel as connecting man’s violent nature to the consumption of blood.

 

Forbidden Mixtures: Even clean animals have portions that are forbidden to eat. The sciatic nerve must be removed, as a prohibition traced back to the blow inflicted by Jacob, (Gen 32:33). Also prohibited are the fat portions attached to the stomach, abdomen, and intestines since these were apportioned to God in the Temple offerings, (Lev 3:17, 7:23-25). In regards to eating liver, “Salting is not considered effective enough to kosher the liver, which is full of blood. It is therefore sprinkled with salt, cut across or pierced several times, and placed on or under an open flame, until it changes color, or a crust forms.”

 

Permissible foods can be rendered “unclean” when they are mixed with prohibited foods since any amount of a prohibited food is forbidden, (Yoma 74a). In the case of accidental mixing, permitted foods are considered contaminated,

 

“if the food inserted is large enough to effect the taste. For practical purposes, it was decided that only if the quantity of forbidden food was less than 1/60 of the permitted food…is it considered not to have affected the taste…If the forbidden admixture is a type intended to affect the taste, then the mixture is forbidden even if the admixture is less than 1/60.”

 

In the latter case, even an amount less than 1/60 of leaven would make unleavened bread leavened.

 

Milk and Meat: In the case of milk and meat (Ex 23:19, 34:26, Deut 14:21), three distinct prohibitions are given: (1) cooking meat and milk together, (2) eating such a mixture, and (3) deriving any benefit from such a mixture (Hul. 115b). “Milk” includes all dairy products, such as cheese, butter, sour cream, and cream. The separation includes using separate utensils, dishes, and cutlery for meat and dairy products. In addition, separate sinks for washing and separate dishcloths for drying.

 

A person may not eat milk after meat in the same meal (Hul. 105a). Most West European Jews wait three hours, while some wait only one hour. Meat can be eaten immediately after milk dishes, provided that the mouth is rinsed and some bread eaten. Milk derived from soybeans, coconuts, etc., may be used with meat. Fruit, vegetables, and eggs can be eaten together with either meat or milk dishes. However, the rabbis prohibited the eating of fish and meat together for health reasons, but this provision is not given in scripture. Strictly observant Jews drink only halav Yisrael, milk bottled under the supervision of a Jew, i.e, Tevye.

 

Two theories are prominent in the prohibition against cooking a kid in its mother’s milk. Maimonides believed that the activity was “somehow connected with idolatry,” possibly a fertility rite. Abraham Heschel provides a contemporary explanation, “Milk, which is the only food that can sustain the body by itself. It would, therefore, be an act of ingratitude to take the offspring of such an animal and cook it in the very milk which sustains us.”

 

(to be continued - Scott)

What's For Dinner - Part 4 of 7

MEAT FROM THE MARKET PLACE

“Eat anything that is sold in the meat market without asking questions for conscience' sake; 26 FOR THE EARTH IS THE LORD'S, AND ALL IT CONTAINS.” (1 Cor 10:25-26)

 

In biblical times, meat was available to the general public, but it was expensive and the diet of most people consisted of vegetables and fish. The Talmud records that only the very wealthy ate meat on a regular basis.

 

“He who possesses a mana (100 shekels) should buy a measure of vegetables for his pot; if he possesses ten mana he should buy a quantity of fish for his pot; if he possesses fifty mana he may buy a quantity of meat for his pot; and if he posses a hundred mana he may have meat cooked for him every day. As for those who possess less than a hundred mana, when may they have their dish of vegetables or fish? Every Sabbath.”

 

From a practical standpoint, the local butcher shop and the pagan temple may have been closely related. Since refrigeration was not available in the Roman world, most individuals probably took their animal to a place where the balance of unused meat could be sold to the general public.

 

In the first century world, the local pagan temple provided the opportunity to offer the animal, receive a portion of the animal for food, and then sell the balance of the animal to the public or give to the temple. Paul gives us the impression that eating establishments were either contained in the pagan temples or in buildings adjacent to the temples.

 

“For if someone sees you, who have knowledge, dining in an idol's temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be strengthened to eat things sacrificed to idols?” (1 Cor 8:10)

It is unclear what conditions make it acceptable to dine in an idol’s temple. Although Paul seems to permit this act in chapter eight, he speaks strongly against this action in chapter ten, “You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons,” (1 Cor 10:20-21).

 

Offering animals for sacrifice prior to eating must have been the normal practice in the ancient world. Against this backdrop, the LORD specifically told Israel that they could eat meat that had not been offered at the temple in Jerusalem,

 

“When the LORD your God extends your border as He has promised you, and you say, 'I will eat meat,' because you desire to eat meat, then you may eat meat, whatever you desire. 21 If the place which the LORD your God chooses to put His name is too far from you, then you may slaughter of your herd and flock which the LORD has given you, as I have commanded you; and you may eat within your gates whatever you desire. 22 Just as a gazelle or a deer is eaten, so you will eat it; the unclean and the clean alike may eat of it.” (Deut 12:20-22).

The people living in Israel far away from the temple were permitted to slaughter an animal from their own herd or flock for food. Further, the LORD said that a person could eat of the meal whether the person was clean or unclean. Therefore, Jesus could eat with “sinners,” Peter could eat with Cornelius, and believers do not need to separate during eating when some are not clean.

 

Maybe daily, but certainly on bountiful days, meat from pagan temples ended up in the general market place. To address this concern, Paul writes,

 

“Eat anything that is sold in the meat market without asking questions for conscience' sake; 26 FOR THE EARTH IS THE LORD'S, AND ALL IT CONTAINS.” (1 Cor 10:25-26)

 

I have seen a tendency among some in the Messianic community to not partake of meals when members of the body come together. This caution originates from the uncertainty that the meat was prepared in accordance with rabbinical principles, “Is it kosher?” Paul does not appear to establish a higher standard based on how the meat was handled or prepared. For the Gentile believer, it is acceptable to, “Eat anything that is sold in the meat market without asking questions.” If that was the standard of Paul in the days of the pagan marketplace, how much more acceptable should it be to eat meals prepared by any believer who uses meat purchased from the store.

 

The broad permissive words of Paul should exclude the concerns about how acceptable “clean” meats were processed and prepared. Paul then goes further, it is acceptable to eat meat prepared for you by an unbeliever, who has no knowledge about the dietary laws, provided that thanksgiving is offered and the meat has not been sacrificed to an idol.

 

“If one of the unbelievers invites you and you want to go, eat anything that is set before you without asking questions for conscience' sake. 28 But if anyone says to you, "This is meat sacrificed to idols," do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for conscience' sake; 29 I mean not your own conscience, but the other man's; for why is my freedom judged by another's conscience? 30 If I partake with thankfulness, why am I slandered concerning that for which I give thanks?” (1 Cor 10:27-30)

The words of Paul have a previous precedent in scripture. The disciples of Jesus had the same concern when they were sent in pairs to every city and place where Jesus had gone. For this reason, Jesus instructed them saying, “Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you,” (Luke 10:8). Even Jesus did not want the disciples to lose the opportunity to fellowship because of their concern about the preparation of their food. In the words of Paul,

 

“Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food,” (Rom 14:20).

(to be continued - Scott)

What's For Dinner - Part 3 of 7

FROM THE BEGINNING

When the LORD God placed Adam in the Garden, He

"Commanded the man, saying, ‘From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat,’" (Gen 2:16-17).

In the beginning, Adam and Eve’s food was derived from the "tree(s) of the garden." In the world to come, the creation will return to this pattern, partaking of fruit from the "tree of life," (Rev 2:7, 22:14).  After Adam was driven from the Garden, the LORD God modified Adam’s diet saying,

"You will eat the plants of the field…You will eat bread," (Gen 3:18-19)

After the flood, God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them,

"Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you…as I give the green plant. Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood, (Gen 9:3-4)

The broad standard for acceptable food given to Noah remained in effect for all mankind until the LORD commanded the Israelites through Moses, "These are the creatures which you may eat from all the animals that are on the earth," (Lev 11:2). The LORD then proceeded to define clean animals, which can be eaten, and unclean animals, which the Israelites were prohibited from eating. Since these prohibitions were given only to the Hebrew people, acceptable Gentile food continued to be governed by the standard established in Genesis chapter nine.
 

Depending on the interpretation of Acts chapter 15, some additional restrictions may have been placed on Gentile believers,

"For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: 29 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." (Acts 15:28-29)

Abstaining from blood and things strangled may, or may not, be considered an addition to the original covenant given in Genesis. What is an addition, "Abstain from things sacrificed to idols." The prohibition against idols appears a number of times in Paul’s letters and in two of the seven letters to the churches in the Book of Revelations. Foods sacrificed to idols were a major concern among the early church believers, the apostles, and Jesus.

"But I have a few things against you, because you have there some who hold the teaching of Balaam, who kept teaching Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit acts of immorality." (Rev 2:14-15)

"But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols."  (Rev 2:20-21)

Paul’s references to food in his epistles are sometimes confusing. At times, Paul appears to discount the prohibition against sacrificing to idols saying,

"Concerning things sacrificed to idols, we know that there is no such thing as an idol in the world…we are neither the worse if we do not eat, nor the better if we do eat…For if someone sees you, who have a knowledge, dining in an idol’s temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be strengthened to eat things sacrificed to idols?," (1 Cor 8:4, 8 &10)

By the end of his Corinthian letter, Paul takes a strong stand prohibiting a believer from knowingly eating any foods sacrificed to idols,

"The things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers in demons," (1 Cor 10:20)

Paul’s overriding principle remains,

 

"Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind, " (Rom 14:5). To the person who thinks it is sin to violate the dietary laws, it is sin because he violates his own consciences, (Rom 14:23). 

 

However, to the one whose conscience does not condemn him for what he eats, his eating is acceptable. 

 

The one who is convicted toward greater compliance to the dietary laws is not to judge the one who is not, (Rom 14:3), because judging could lead to eating with a guilty conscience which might result in sin. 

 

Likewise, the one who eats in liberty, "is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat," (Rom 14:3).

 

(to be continued - Scott)

 

What's For Dinner - Part 2 of 7

CONTRASTING FIRST CENTURY BELIEVE

"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." (Rom 14:1-3)

 

From the previous discussion, we can understand that the person who "eats vegetables only" is the person who maintains the dietary laws. Although Paul refers to this individual as "weak in faith," his words are best understood as contrasting the different understandings of believers, not elevating or condemning one position relative to the other. Paul repeatedly cautions all believers against "passing judgment" and "regarding with contempt." "Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind," (Rom 14:4).

The entire 14^th chapter of Romans is devoted to contrasting the believer who is compelled to maintain the dietary laws in the commandments (Jew/Proselyte) and the believer who is not compelled to the same degree (Gentile). Devoting a significant portion of his letter to the subject of eating indicates that the discussion must have been a common point of contention in the early church.  Modern Messianic believers are blessed to have a unique perspective and appreciation of Paul's words.  Let us attemp to divide the chapter into the respective target audiences.

To the Gentile/Messianic..	To the Jew/Proselyte/Messianic…
2 One person has faith that he may eat all things,	2 but he who is weak eats vegetables only.
3 The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat,	3 and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. 4 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.
5 another regards every day alike.	5 One person regards one day above another,
APPLIES TO BOTH 5 Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind.
6 and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God;	6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord,… and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.
APPLIES TO BOTH 7 For not one of us lives for himself, and not one dies for himself; 8 for if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord; therefore whether we live or die, we are the Lord's. 9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
10 Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt?	10 But you, why do you judge your brother?
APPLIES TO BOTH 10 For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. 11 For it is written, "AS I LIVE, SAYS THE LORD,EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW TO ME,AND EVERY TONGUE SHALL GIVE PRAISE TO GOD." 12 So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God. 13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather determine this — not to put an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother's way.
	14 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.
15 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. 16 Therefore do not let what is for you a good thing be spoken of as evil;
APPLIES TO BOTH 17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 For he who in this way serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 So then we pursue the things which make for peace and the building up of one another.
20 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. 21 It is good not to eat meat or to drink wine, or to do anything by which your brother stumbles. 22 The faith which you have, have as your own conviction before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves.	23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin.

Paul writes that God has accepted both the believer compelled to follow the dietary laws as well as the believer who is not equally inclined, (Rom 14:3). Since salvation and position before God are not in doubt, the overriding principles of interaction for each type of believer are summarized by Paul in this manner:

To the Gentile who does not maintain the dietary laws Paul writes, "The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat."

 

To the Jew and Gentile who maintain the dietary laws Paul writes, "The one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats." 

Believers who desire to maintain a greater level of compliance to the commandments are not to judge their brother for his lack of compliance. For judging could impact the conscience of the person would eats all things.

In his letter to the Colossians, Paul will reverse the terms and warn the brother who does not maintain the dietary laws to not "act as your judge in regard to food or drink or is respect to a festival or new moon or a Sabbath day," (Col 2:16).

At the same time, believers who are not compelled to greater adherence should not regard with contempt those who do adhere. Contempt disheartens the believer compelled to greater compliance, discourages others from a similar calling, and builds a wall of contention between believers. As Paul writes,

"But you, why do you (Jew/Gentile) judge your brother? Or you again, why do you (Gentile) regard your brother with contempt? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God." (Rom 14:10).

Believers who consider themselves Messianic and those who worship with them have been given a unique 21^st century perspective to understand the words of Paul. Just as in the days of Paul, some Messianic believers are compelled to a greater compliance to the dietary commandments, while others Messianic believers have not become equally compelled. For this reason, the meals at Beit HaDerek often consist of breads and salads so that fellowship can be practiced, while protecting the conscience of all participants. This is acceptable and proper demonstrating the principle expressed by Paul,

"Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food…It is good not to eat meat or to drink wine, or to do anything by which your brother stumbles. The faith which you have, have as your own conviction before God," (Rom 14:21-22).

(to be continued - Scott)

 

What's For Dinner? - Part 1

  

"Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?" And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days." (Acts 10:47-48) 

Scripture indicates that Peter stayed with Cornelius "for a few days," during which time Peter, "ate with them," (Acts 11:3). From these passage and Peter’s previous vision, some in our CBS study suggest that Peter abandoned the dietary laws contained within the commandments. Scripture does not specifically state that fact, but many Christians like to draw this conclusion because it dovetails nicely into an overall belief that the commandments contained in the books of Moses no longer apply to any believers.
 

DIETARY OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO PETER

The primary argument for Peter abandoning the dietary laws is the belief that Cornelius would not have served kosher food to Peter during the few days they ate together.  As "a devout man and one who feared God with all his household" (Acts 10:2), Cornelius would have been aware of the dietary restrictions that Jews maintained.   As "one who feared God," Cornelius would not have imposed an action on Peter that made Peter violate the commandments or Peter’s conscious.  Cornelius had a number of available options. 

For example, Cornelius could have avoided all meats and served Peter seasonal vegetables, fruits, and nuts. Vegetables were not only a safe alternative to maintain the dietary laws, but vegetables were the staple of the average Jew. Everyone's Talmud tells us,  "The bulk of the people must accordingly have lived mainly on the vegetarian diet, and the wholesomeness of vegetables is dilated."  Further, it was stated in the Talmud, "A disciple of the Sages is not allowed to reside in a city where no vegetables are to be had. From this it is to be inferred that vegetables are wholesome."

When Daniel was carried off to Babylon, he did not lose his ability to maintain the dietary laws. Scripture tells us that,

"8 Daniel made up his mind that he would not defile himself with the king’s choice food…11 Daniel said to the overseer whom the commander of the officials had appointed…,

‘Please test your servants for ten days, and let us be given some vegetables to eat and water to drink. 13 Then let our appearance be observed in your presence and the appearance of the youths who are eating the king's choice food; and deal with your servants according to what you see.’"  (Dan 1:8-13) 

The Babylonian overseer did serve Daniel and his friends only vegetables and then observed that the appearance of Daniel and his friends, "seemed better and they were fatter than all the youths who had been eating the king’s choice food," (Dan 1:15). From the obedience of Daniel and his friends, "God gave them knowledge and intelligence in every branch of literature and wisdom; Daniel even understood all kinds of visions and dreams," (Dan 1:17).

Although not a detailed study by any stretch, I perceive that a common meal in first century Galilee was bread and fish, (Matt 14:17, 15:34). Fish was considered to be a very healthy option and bread was "literally the staff of life" with thirteen benefits attributed to eating bread. These options were readily available to Peter since Cornelius lived in Caesarea on the shore of the Mediterranean Sea. Peter could have gone to the market and bought fish and bread to eat. Apparently fish can be taken directly from the water and eaten. This understanding is given by the gospel story after the resurrection when Jesus appears on the shore of the Sea of Galilee and tells the disciples to "Bring some of the fish which you have now caught" (John 21:10), and "have breakfast." 

By definition, bread is a clean food and often equated to the word of God and to Jesus, "I am the bread of life," (John 6:33). It is unclear what, if anything, can make bread unclean such as contacting an unclean item. I expect that touching a dead body would make bread unclean, but not touching the hands of an unclean person such as those of Cornelius’ servants. When addressing the concern that unclean hands could make food unclean, Jesus told His disciples, "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," (Mark 7:15). This story teaches that uncleanness is defined by the commandments and reflected in the sin of men, but is not derived based on the Oral Traditions referred to as the "precepts of men," (Mark 7:7).

Finally, Peter often traveled throughout Israel, such as for the three annual feasts when Jews were commanded to appear before the LORD. Peter was accustomed to either carrying the food he needed for his journey or acquiring necessary provisions along the way. When the men from Cornelius came, Peter would have anticipated that the journey might take several days and would have planned accordingly to maintain the dietary laws.

The focus on Peter overlooks the knowledge that six men accompanied Peter to the home of Cornelius, (Acts 11:12). These men had not received the same vision as Peter and would have been reluctant to violate the commandments regarding clean and unclean foods. Neither in the original story, nor the subsequent retelling of the story to the men in Jerusalem, were Peter or his six companions accused of violating the dietary laws of the commandments. The accusation is that Peter "went to uncircumcised men and ate with them," (Acts 11:3). 

 

The accusation against Peter does not deal with unclean foods, but with the intimate fellowship that comes from eating together with unrighteous men, "for what partnerships have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness," (2 Cor 6:14). This same accusation had been leveled against Jesus, "This man receives sinners and eats with them," (Luke 15:2). Again notice that the accusation is not that Jesus ate unclean food, but that he had fellowship with sinners. Paul only warned against eating with Gentiles when they eat food that has been sacrificed to idols.

 

"I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers in demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons." (1 Cor 10:20-21)

 

(To be continued - Scott)