Jews dont eat pork because of the following verse:

"And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase." Deuteronomy 14:8

Jesus said:
Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I didn't come to destroy them, but to fulfill them Matthew 5:17

From Matthew 5:17 it is clear that swine is not permissible for Jews or christians.

There is not even 1 clear, unambiguous, unequivocal statment by Jesus that pork is permissible - so why do christians say that pork is allowed?

I have had a few christian brothers quote me verses - but they are out of context and even for the sake of the discussion I agree with them then that implies that there is a contradiction and that Jesus lied...? please clarify?

The 613 Laws as found in Torah, which includes the kosher Laws, apply only to Jews, although some aspects of the Law, which we might call "civil law", was also applied to gentiles living in eretz Israel (the land of Israel). Therefore, the avoidance of pork doesn't apply to gentiles unless they wish to voluntarily observe such a prohibition. A close friend of mine, who is a Christian, refuses to eat pork, but does so even though he realizes he is not bound by the Law.

Did Jesus eat pork? Highly unlikely he did since pork products were largely unavailable in eretz Israel. But his attitude on such matters, if recorded accurately in the gospels, seem to be rather loosey-goosey in this area since the gospels have him saying that it's not what goes into one's mouth that make him "unclean", but what comes out of his mouth. From a normative Jewish perspective, it's both what goes in and comes out of one's mouth that may make a person "unclean".

For an example of the latter, halacha (Jewish Law) teaches us that publicly demeaning another person is tantamount to "murder" (although the potential penalties are quite different). Essentially, it is character assassination, which can do considerable damage to another.

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

Am I bound by the law as my grandmother was a jew? I'm guessing it depends on who you ask.

I'm not Jewish, so I dont think those laws apply to me, plus there is other stuff in the New Testament that make all food legal, but off the top of my head I could not tell you where.

Only if it's your maternal grandmother. Orthodox and Conservative Jews recognize matrilineal descent only. Reform Jews recognize both matrilineal and patrilineal descent, but only if the person identifies him/herself as a Jew.

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

It's found in Acts whereas Peter has a vision of a blanket with different animals on it and the voice in the vision tells him all is "clean". He then approaches the others, which then sets up a departure from the kosher Laws.

Why did Peter do this since he, Jesus, and the other apostles were Jewish? To me, it must revert back to something that Jesus said, and it might well be his statement about that it's not what one takes into one's mouth but what comes out of it that makes one "unclean". This, along with certain other changes that quickly took place, set up the abandonment of the Law including the Ten Commandments (a reminder that one of the Commandments is to keep the Sabbath holy, and the Sabbath is a day of the week that runs from Friday sundown to Saturday sundown).

What did Jesus and apostles replace the Law with? The clue is where he says that the "law" will become written on their heart. The emphasis then shifted from observation of the entire Law given to Moses, and replaced it with only the part of the Law that dealt with being kind and considerate to others and God. Other aspects of the Law gradually became ignored.

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

If you read the following verses of matthew 5:17 I quoted above it reads:

5:17 - "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I didn't come to destroy them, but to fulfill them,
5:18 - because I tell you with certainty that until heaven and earth disappear, not one letter or one stroke of a letter will disappear from the Law until everything has been accomplished.
5:19 - So whoever sets aside one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven
5:20 - because I tell you, unless your righteousness greatly exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven!"

So Jesus (pbuh) came to reinforce verses like Deuteronomy 14:8 quoted above. So if anyone breaks for example this law and eats pork then he will be called least in the kingdom of heaven and in no way can his righteousness exceed that of the scribes and pharisees and will not be of the people of heaven.

You say that the following passage is used by some in the argument that consuming pork is not forbidden:

What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.'" -Matthew 15:11 (NIV)

You know there is no compulsion in life - man has free will to do what they like. If some one wants to eat pork fair enough but people should not try justify it by changing the tradition of Jesus (pbuh) and twisting verses of the bible.

It not right to pluck verses from here and there which by thenselves are ambiguous and generic and can be applied to anything.
Jesus never thought oh let me go for a walk to the Temple of Solomon say one ambiguous scenteces and walk back home. there is more to Matthew 15:11 it is one verse out of 39 verses in that chapter - so to understand the context you have to read the verses before and after also! not just that verse! Matthew 15:11 is no justification for eating pork and mentions nothing about pork and if it is used for justifying this point then it is used out of context.

The jews used to come repeatedly to Jesus (pbuh) with mokery on thier lips and mischief in thier hearts saying for example "Master, we caught a woman in the act of adultery, what must we do with her?" or "MAster, must we pay taxes to Cesar or not?"

And it is this mischief of the heart that Matthew 15:11 addresses - the Jew came to Jesus (pbuh) saying that the decisples transgressed the traditions by not washing thier hands before eating. All Jesus did was make the distinction between a disiesed and sinfull heart and a clean heart! the unclean is not dirt but sins. Just because they did not wash their hands before eating did not make them sinfull (unclean) what would make them sinfull (unclean) is the mishief they cause which comes from thier hearts.....just read the verses before and after 15:11 and you see this for yourself.....

Matthew 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

Matthew 20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

you see - 15:11 refers to filth from unwashed hands compared to filth coming out of ones mouth through thier disesed heart - it has nothing to do with pork or any other food.

Jesus would try and teach his deciples simple things and they would a lot of the time not understand or misunderstand - this is why when you read the bible Jesus when talking to his deciples often responds by saying "ye of little faith"... "Ye of no understanding" .... "I have many things to say but you cannot bear (understand) them now"......
Matthew 15:11 has been either misunderstood like the deciples used to misunderstand or it has been manipulated, twisted and interpolated to change the laws which no man has a right to do.

Thanks metis, for me it is the patrineal line, ie my fathers mother.
Regardless I do not eat pork, nor lamb nor most meats mostly because I don't like them much though I do eat alot of fish and sometimes chicken.

According to Torah, what goes into a man's mouth may make him "unclean". When Jesus said "it's NOT what goes into a man's mouth that makes him unclean", that's a clear misrepresentation of the Law.



Well let's see if I "plucked" the verses:

Matthew 5:31-32: “everyone who divorces his wife… forces her to commit adultery.”

5:38: “’an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth’… offer no resistance.”

8:22: “Jesus told him, ‘Follow me, and let the dead bury the dead.”

21:43: “The kingdom of God taken away from you and given to another.”


Luke 16:16: “The Law and the prophets were in force until John.”


John 8:44: “The father you spring from is the devil… The Jews answered… .”


Romans 6:14: “Sin will no longer have power over you; you are under grace, not under the Law.”

7:6: “Now we are released from the Law.”

10:4: “Christ is the end of the Law.”

11:20: They were cut off because of their unbelief and you are there because of faith.”

14:20: “All foods are clean.”


I Corinthians 7:19: “Circumcision counts for nothing.”


Galatians 3:10: “All who depend on the observance of the Law… are under a curse.”

5:2: “If you have yourself circumcised, Christ will be of no use to you.”

5:4 “Any of you who seek your justification in the Law have severed yourself from Christ and fallen from God’s favor.”

6:15: “It means nothing whether you are circumcised or not.”


Ephesians 2:15: “In his own flesh he abolished the Law with its commands and precepts.”


Hebrews 7:18: “The former Commandment (I.e. priests according to the order of Melchizedek) has been annulled because of its weakness and uselessness.”

8:7: “If that first Covenant had been faultless, there would have been no place for a second one.”

8:13: “When he says ‘a new covenant’, he declares the first one obsolete. And what has become obsolete and has grown old is close to disappearing.”

10:9: “In other words, he takes away the first Covenant to establish the second.”


Did you notice Romans 6:14? Why do you think Paul made such a statement if it was somehow set up by Jesus and the others?

Also, please note what is being said about the Law and the Covenant above, but which are contradicted by that which is found in the Torah and the Tanakh:

Deuteronomy 42): "your G-d…shall not add to what I have commanded you or subtract."

Dt. 13(1): "You shall be careful to observe, neither adding to it or subtracting."

Dt. 13(5): "His commandment you shall observe, holding fast to Him alone."

Dt. 29(28): "Concerns us and our descendents forever, that we may carry out all the words of this Law."

Joshua 1(5): "I will not leave or forsake you…(7) observe the entire Law … do not swerve from it."

Psalms 19(8): "The Law of the Lord is perfect… (10) the ordinances of the Lord are true; all of them are just."

Ps. 119(160): "permanence is Your words chief trait, each of Your just ordinances is everlasting."

Isaiah 42(21): "pleased the Lord in His justice to make His Law great and glorious."

Is. 66(17): "they who eat swine’s flesh … shall all perish."

Baruch 4(1): "the Law endures forever."




Notice your words above: "The jews used to come repeated with mokery on their lips...". Well isn't that just a nice little anti-Semitic little statement. Are you proud of yourself? I think our discussion is over.

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

A brief explanation of why there are contradictions:

Matthew 5:31-32: “everyone who divorces his wife… forces her to commit adultery.” (Torah allows for divorce, which is called a "get", so abolishing divorce is against what Torah allows.)


5:38: “’an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth’… offer no resistance.” (Torah requires us to defend the defenseless.)

8:22: “Jesus told him, ‘Follow me, and let the dead bury the dead.” (violate "honor they father and mother" since the man involved was going to bury his father).

21:43: “The kingdom of God taken away from you and given to another.” (violates the fact that Torah says the Covenant is forever.)


Luke 16:16: “The Law and the prophets were in force until John.” (the Law, according to Torah, is perfect and forever.)


John 8:44: “The father you spring from is the devil… The Jews answered… .” (this was a blanket statement that refers to Jews in general.)


Romans 6:14: “Sin will no longer have power over you; you are under grace, not under the Law.” (a Jew is under the Law, according to Torah, and Jesus and the apostles were all Jews).

7:6: “Now we are released from the Law.” (impossible, according to Torah)

10:4: “Christ is the end of the Law.” (see above)

11:20: They were cut off because of their unbelief and you are there because of faith.” (we may be penalized because of unbelief, but God promised that we would be His people forever)

14:20: “All foods are clean.” (sort of speaks for itself)


I Corinthians 7:19: “Circumcision counts for nothing.” (then why is it a requirement according to Torah?)


Galatians 3:10: “All who depend on the observance of the Law… are under a curse.” (not what Torah says)

5:2: “If you have yourself circumcised, Christ will be of no use to you.” (Why?)

5:4 “Any of you who seek your justification in the Law have severed yourself from Christ and fallen from God’s favor.” (Why?)

6:15: “It means nothing whether you are circumcised or not.” (Torah says otherwise)


Ephesians 2:15: “In his own flesh he abolished the Law with its commands and precepts.” (not if the Law is "forever".)


Hebrews 7:18: “The former Commandment (I.e. priests according to the order of Melchizedek) has been annulled because of its weakness and uselessness.” (so God created a Covenant that was weak and useless?)

8:7: “If that first Covenant had been faultless, there would have been no place for a second one.” (so God created a Covenant that had fault?)

8:13: “When he says ‘a new covenant’, he declares the first one obsolete. And what has become obsolete and has grown old is close to disappearing.” (still here)

10:9: “In other words, he takes away the first Covenant to establish the second.” (another violation of Torah)


As many of you know, I'm non-theistic (which shouldn't be confused with being atheistic. However, even with that being the case, hopefully one will read scripture as it is and not as they would like to see it. I honestly do not lose any sleep over whether the Law and the Covenant are "forever" and "perpetual", but I still must take the words seriously in the sense of that is what is written and, who knows, maybe it is on target. Omniscient I am not.

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein