Christian Preacher tells Christians to stop eating PORK

[Supreme]

In the example of James the Just, Supreme said (in response to the Biblical quotes regarding the prohibition of pork) that, "To be a Christian, it was established by James the Just thousands of years ago that one does not have to become Jewish first, thus we do not have to follow Jewish law."

That is quite a major statement to make. So did James the Just say that and that his been followed even though Jesus (peace be upon him) never said it, or, did Jesus (peace be upon him) actually say it and it has just been paraphrased by James the Just?

OK. I understand that scholars command a great respect in Islam. They sometimes make things 'haram' or 'halal', such as music or clothing or technology that can't be found anywhere in the Hadith or Quran. Well, think of the early church leaders as a the Christian equivalent to these scholars.

Not suprising , considering the fact that its mostly the st highepork consumer countries that usually sell wives and daughters to the screen and enjoy watching it and proud of what their wives achieve

I'm not sure what such a comment has in relation to the discussion.

Yeah but you give r advice that abstaining from pork and honoring God is unnecessary when it infact is necessary.

Etc, etc. Stop repeating the same arguments. I've already justified my reasons for eating pork, so far you've only managed to post a wiki article illustrating some very rare diseases that pork may bring and a link to an Islamic website that tries to correlate, amongst all completely unrelated things, the sex lives and pork consumption in the West. I choose to eat pork. Get over it. You don't have to eat pork, you don't even have to understand my reasons for eating it. You merely have to respect it.

 

[Darth Ultor]

Question about the halal laws: do you also not mix dairy with meat?

And are shellfish also haraam?

 

[Grace Seeker]

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

And, in Jesus Christ, it has been fulfilled. So, no problem.

In other words there is no heaven for you unless you are better than the Jew and you cant be better than the jews by not keeping the Laws and the commandment the first of which is broken by the trinity

No, that is not what it means. You're simply spouting your own dogma and not actually interpreting what it is that Jesus said -- or for that matter any other person in the scriptures either.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Peace, Grace Seeker,

What I don't get (and this could be my own lack of knowledge) is that when Christians are asked about something that the Bible clearly states but Christians don't follow, the answer is sometimes that, "this doesn't need to be followed by Christians".

If people say "but it's in the Bible", the answer from Christians is normally:
"Ah...but James the Just said....", OR
"Ah...but Paul said...." , OR
"Ah...but so and so said..."

To an outsider it seems that Christians use other people's names to justify not following what's in the Bible. That then makes you wonder why the faith is called Christianity if other people's opinions other than Jesus (peace be upon him) are given so much weight, even if what they've said goes against what is clearly stated in the Bible.

In the example of James the Just, Supreme said (in response to the Biblical quotes regarding the prohibition of pork) that, "To be a Christian, it was established by James the Just thousands of years ago that one does not have to become Jewish first, thus we do not have to follow Jewish law."

That is quite a major statement to make. So did James the Just say that and that his been followed even though Jesus (peace be upon him) never said it, or, did Jesus (peace be upon him) actually say it and it has just been paraphrased by James the Just?

Peace.

Some good questions. What you have to understand is that the statement made by James is also a quote taken from the Bible. It was made as part of a larger discussion that was being held in the church with regard to the question of whether or not Gentiles had to become and practice the religious laws of the Jews in order to be accepted within the community of faith that would become known as "Christians". Today we call it the Council of Jerusalem and it is reported in Acts 15:

Acts 15

1Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers [i.e., those who were followers of Jesus]: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." 2This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders [i.e. the leaders of the Church] about this question. 3The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the brothers very glad. 4When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.

5Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses." [Thus is introduced the question that Paul and Barnabas have gone to Jerusalem to get answered.]

6The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are." [In other words, Peter sees no reason to ask of these new Gentile believers that they be required to conform to Jewish law.]

12The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them.

13When they finished, James [aka, James the Just, James the brother of Jesus] spoke up: "Brothers, listen to me. 14Simon [aka, Peter] has described to us how God at first showed his concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for himself. 15The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
16" 'After this I will return
and rebuild David's fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17that the remnant of men may seek the Lord,
and all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things'
18that have been known for ages.

19"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."

22Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers. 23With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders, your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia: Greetings. 24We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28It seemed good to the Holy Spirit [notice, this is not just the opinion of James or the apostles, but of the Holy Spirit, which Christians believe to be the directing force of God in our lives] and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.

30The men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. 31The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. 32Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the brothers. 33After spending some time there, they were sent off by the brothers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. 35But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.

More of Peter's own experiences are found previous to this in Acts 10:

Acts 10

1At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian Regiment. 2He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly. 3One day at about three in the afternoon he had a vision. He distinctly saw an angel of God, who came to him and said, "Cornelius!"
4Cornelius stared at him in fear. "What is it, Lord?" he asked.

The angel answered, "Your prayers and gifts to the poor have come up as a memorial offering before God. 5Now send men to Joppa to bring back a man named Simon who is called Peter. 6He is staying with Simon the tanner, whose house is by the sea."

7When the angel who spoke to him had gone, Cornelius called two of his servants and a devout soldier who was one of his attendants. 8He told them everything that had happened and sent them to Joppa.

9About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. 13Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."
14"Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean."

15The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."

16This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

17While Peter was wondering about the meaning of the vision, the men sent by Cornelius found out where Simon's house was and stopped at the gate. 18They called out, asking if Simon who was known as Peter was staying there.

19While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit said to him, "Simon, three men are looking for you. 20So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them."

21Peter went down and said to the men, "I'm the one you're looking for. Why have you come?"

22The men replied, "We have come from Cornelius the centurion. He is a righteous and God-fearing man, who is respected by all the Jewish people. A holy angel told him to have you come to his house so that he could hear what you have to say." 23Then Peter invited the men into the house to be his guests.

The next day Peter started out with them, and some of the brothers from Joppa went along. 24The following day he arrived in Caesarea. Cornelius was expecting them and had called together his relatives and close friends. 25As Peter entered the house, Cornelius met him and fell at his feet in reverence. 26But Peter made him get up. "Stand up," he said, "I am only a man myself."
27Talking with him, Peter went inside and found a large gathering of people. 28He said to them: "You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. 29So when I was sent for, I came without raising any objection. May I ask why you sent for me?"

30Cornelius answered: "Four days ago I was in my house praying at this hour, at three in the afternoon. Suddenly a man in shining clothes stood before me 31and said, 'Cornelius, God has heard your prayer and remembered your gifts to the poor. 32Send to Joppa for Simon who is called Peter. He is a guest in the home of Simon the tanner, who lives by the sea.' 33So I sent for you immediately, and it was good of you to come. Now we are all here in the presence of God to listen to everything the Lord has commanded you to tell us."

34Then Peter began to speak: "I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism 35but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right. 36You know the message God sent to the people of Israel, telling the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all. 37You know what has happened throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached— 38how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him.

39"We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed him by hanging him on a tree, 40but God raised him from the dead on the third day and caused him to be seen. 41He was not seen by all the people, but by witnesses whom God had already chosen—by us who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. 42He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. 43All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name."

44While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.

Then Peter said, 47"Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have." 48So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

This story has many elements to it:
First, Peter is given a vision in which God tells him to eat (in the vision at least) that which he has always understood to be unclean.
Second, Peter understands this to mean that he is to no longer be concerned about (at least some of) the ceremonial laws the governed Jewish behavior, especially their relationships with non-Jews. And so, though it was against Jewish law, Peter invites Gentiles into his house and goes into theirs and they treat each other as guests -- meaning they would have had to have eaten together, another thing against Jewish law. So, on God's expressed order, Peter is doing things that would be considered in violation of Jewish law.

Now, before someone accuses God of abrogating his own law, I don't believe he did. God called the nation of Israel to be a light to the Gentiles. The whole purpose from the time of Abraham onward, was to get God's message to the whole world. The Jews, by not being faithful to God were not the light that they were called to be and God had to complete this work (i.e., bring it to fulfillment) in the person of Jesus Christ. Because of what Jesus did, all people, Jew and Gentile, men and women, adult and child, slave and free, now have equal access to God. And further, they have this access quite apart from the law, but on the basis that Abraham was granted it, namely faith in God.

So, you see, we are not using other people's names to NOT follow what is in the Bible, rather we are indeed observing what God's purposes are and seeing that they are fulfilled in Jesus and that God has accomplished in Jesus his great purpose of reconciling the world to himself, understand that the other regulations that were designed for one small subset of God's people, the Jews, are not applicable across the board to all whom God has called to himself. For, these that God has called to himself come by the same token that Abraham did, by faith, before the law was given.

To put the burden of the Jewish law on a person now would be a step backwards and to ask an individual to make himself "righteous" in God's sight. But that is an impossible task. None of us can make ourselves righteous in God's sight. God, himself, however, can declare righteous whoever he so chooses to so declare. And God has indeed done this with regard to all who, like Abraham, believe in God's mercy and grace and his great promises. Just as God promised to Abraham that he would make him the father of many nations, so he has now done so through the son of Abraham, the son of Israel, Jesus, in whom now all peoples of every nation can be made right with God not through their own works, but his work on the cross and their individual faith in him.

And this is why it is called Christianity. Because it is not about what we do, but what Christ has done. The mistake so many people make I think is that they focus on Jesus' teaching ministry. It was important, but the work of Christ that is the essential Gospel is not what he said, but what he did, and now I mean specifically the two-fold (but theologically singular) event of Jesus' death and resurrection.

It is also a mistake to suppose that believing all the things that Jesus said or copying all the things that Jesus did in his earthly ministry would make a person a Christian. At best, such Jewish behavior would make a person a Jew, perhaps a most excellent Jew, but still a Jews and under the old covenant. We are Christians because we have been baptized into a unique relationship with Christ, just as Christ himself command of us. And this new covenant is one based on faith and trust in Christ being able to reconcile us to God the Father. We see in Jesus' resurrection God's promise for all his people --i.e., those who believe (not those who mimick) Jesus.

So, our identity as belonging to God is not marked by the Torah or works of the law (even that law which we know Jesus himself kept inviolate), but by faith in the God who makes promise to redeem us in and through the work (not words) of Jesus Christ. We follow him in submitting our lives to him as Lord. Thus, were he to ever tell us to eat this and not that, we would do exactly that. But the fact is that rather than telling us to join with those who were doing so, he told us the opposite, that it is no longer necessary, for that covenant of which those practices and rules were a sign has been fulfilled and the practice of the rules associated with it are no longer a necessary sign. And those pastors like Joel Osteen who still preach the rules are just like the Judaizers that Peter, James, Paul, and Barnabas said were in the wrong back in Acts 15. That law has been rescinded by God himself, not because he abrogated it, but because Jesus fulfilled all its demands and it thus makes no more demands on anyone.

For us it isn't then about a single sentence spoken by James or Paul, or even a single line by Jesus. We read scripture and see in it a massive and powerful story whose climax is the coming into the world of the unique Son of the one true Creator God, and, above all, his death for sins and bodily resurrection from the dead. All Christian believing, hoping, praying, and living take place in that light. But the story of which Jesus Christ is the focal point is the story of God's whole creation, focused then on Abraham and his family and their story as the strange promise-bearing people; and it is also the story, as yet unfinished, of what Jesus Christ continues to do and teach by the gift of his Holy Spirit, in advance of the day when what God did for Jesus at Easter he will do not only for all his people but for the whole creation.*



*credit for the last paragraph goes to N.T. Wright, Justification, p. 250

 

[aadil77]

Question about the halal laws: do you also not mix dairy with meat?

you can if you want as long as its halal meat lol

 

[aadil77]

And are shellfish also haraam?

all sea creatures are halal

"To hunt and to eat the fish of the sea is made lawful for you." In surah 16, verse 14, "And He it is who has constrained the sea to be of service that you eat fresh meat from thence."

 

[Italianguy]

all sea creatures are halal

"To hunt and to eat the fish of the sea is made lawful for you." In surah 16, verse 14, "And He it is who has constrained the sea to be of service that you eat fresh meat from thence."

I love seafood:statisfie...sometimes...too much+o(

 

[Darth Ultor]

Seafood is the best. Expensive as hell though.

 

[Italianguy]

Seafood is the best. Expensive as hell though.

Dude, thats the truth! It's like $30 for a seafood platter now:heated:

And all you get is Cod fish(resturaunts LIE for flounder) and tiny shrimp and some other stuff....such a rip off! I told one resturaunt that it wasn't a seafood platter, it was a Krill platter!;D and their version of lobster is more like Crayfish(crawdads).

 

[Uthman]

Fascinating! But let's get back on topic.

 

[Italianguy]

Fascinating! But let's get back on topic.

ok, sorryimsad

 

[Predator]

ok, sorryimsad

DON"T EAT PORK CHRISTIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Plus.....it just tastes bad+o(

Nah its not like that, Its more like :

Do what Lord tells you , dont eat pork or touch pigs and do as your Savior Jesus did as he set an example for you to follow , by not eating pork and by even killing 2000 pigs which were being reared by the people who disobeyed the Lord
Thus Safeguard yourself from deadly diseases such as swineflu etc and most importantly Honor thy Lord .

 

[Supreme]

Some good questions. What you have to understand is that the statement made by James is also a quote taken from the Bible. It was made as part of a larger discussion that was being held in the church with regard to the question of whether or not Gentiles had to become and practice the religious laws of the Jews in order to be accepted within the community of faith that would become known as "Christians". Today we call it the Council of Jerusalem and it is reported in Acts 15:


More of Peter's own experiences are found previous to this in Acts 10:

This story has many elements to it:
First, Peter is given a vision in which God tells him to eat (in the vision at least) that which he has always understood to be unclean.
Second, Peter understands this to mean that he is to no longer be concerned about (at least some of) the ceremonial laws the governed Jewish behavior, especially their relationships with non-Jews. And so, though it was against Jewish law, Peter invites Gentiles into his house and goes into theirs and they treat each other as guests -- meaning they would have had to have eaten together, another thing against Jewish law. So, on God's expressed order, Peter is doing things that would be considered in violation of Jewish law.

Now, before someone accuses God of abrogating his own law, I don't believe he did. God called the nation of Israel to be a light to the Gentiles. The whole purpose from the time of Abraham onward, was to get God's message to the whole world. The Jews, by not being faithful to God were not the light that they were called to be and God had to complete this work (i.e., bring it to fulfillment) in the person of Jesus Christ. Because of what Jesus did, all people, Jew and Gentile, men and women, adult and child, slave and free, now have equal access to God. And further, they have this access quite apart from the law, but on the basis that Abraham was granted it, namely faith in God.

So, you see, we are not using other people's names to NOT follow what is in the Bible, rather we are indeed observing what God's purposes are and seeing that they are fulfilled in Jesus and that God has accomplished in Jesus his great purpose of reconciling the world to himself, understand that the other regulations that were designed for one small subset of God's people, the Jews, are not applicable across the board to all whom God has called to himself. For, these that God has called to himself come by the same token that Abraham did, by faith, before the law was given.

To put the burden of the Jewish law on a person now would be a step backwards and to ask an individual to make himself "righteous" in God's sight. But that is an impossible task. None of us can make ourselves righteous in God's sight. God, himself, however, can declare righteous whoever he so chooses to so declare. And God has indeed done this with regard to all who, like Abraham, believe in God's mercy and grace and his great promises. Just as God promised to Abraham that he would make him the father of many nations, so he has now done so through the son of Abraham, the son of Israel, Jesus, in whom now all peoples of every nation can be made right with God not through their own works, but his work on the cross and their individual faith in him.

And this is why it is called Christianity. Because it is not about what we do, but what Christ has done. The mistake so many people make I think is that they focus on Jesus' teaching ministry. It was important, but the work of Christ that is the essential Gospel is not what he said, but what he did, and now I mean specifically the two-fold (but theologically singular) event of Jesus' death and resurrection.

It is also a mistake to suppose that believing all the things that Jesus said or copying all the things that Jesus did in his earthly ministry would make a person a Christian. At best, such Jewish behavior would make a person a Jew, perhaps a most excellent Jew, but still a Jews and under the old covenant. We are Christians because we have been baptized into a unique relationship with Christ, just as Christ himself command of us. And this new covenant is one based on faith and trust in Christ being able to reconcile us to God the Father. We see in Jesus' resurrection God's promise for all his people --i.e., those who believe (not those who mimick) Jesus.

So, our identity as belonging to God is not marked by the Torah or works of the law (even that law which we know Jesus himself kept inviolate), but by faith in the God who makes promise to redeem us in and through the work (not words) of Jesus Christ. We follow him in submitting our lives to him as Lord. Thus, were he to ever tell us to eat this and not that, we would do exactly that. But the fact is that rather than telling us to join with those who were doing so, he told us the opposite, that it is no longer necessary, for that covenant of which those practices and rules were a sign has been fulfilled and the practice of the rules associated with it are no longer a necessary sign. And those pastors like Joel Osteen who still preach the rules are just like the Judaizers that Peter, James, Paul, and Barnabas said were in the wrong back in Acts 15. That law has been rescinded by God himself, not because he abrogated it, but because Jesus fulfilled all its demands and it thus makes no more demands on anyone.

For us it isn't then about a single sentence spoken by James or Paul, or even a single line by Jesus. We read scripture and see in it a massive and powerful story whose climax is the coming into the world of the unique Son of the one true Creator God, and, above all, his death for sins and bodily resurrection from the dead. All Christian believing, hoping, praying, and living take place in that light. But the story of which Jesus Christ is the focal point is the story of God's whole creation, focused then on Abraham and his family and their story as the strange promise-bearing people; and it is also the story, as yet unfinished, of what Jesus Christ continues to do and teach by the gift of his Holy Spirit, in advance of the day when what God did for Jesus at Easter he will do not only for all his people but for the whole creation.*



*credit for the last paragraph goes to N.T. Wright, Justification, p. 250

Fantastic post Grace Seeker, I think that should just about clear things up in this regard.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Fantastic post Grace Seeker, I think that should just about clear things up in this regard.

Not a chance. The argument for not eating pork in this thread is just a read herring for, "You Christians are sinners and going to hell because you don't practice Islam."

If Muslims really thought that we should not eat pork for the "supposed" reasons that:

1) Pigs carry diseases, then as you pointed out they would also be against us eating chicken and other animals that carry diseases. But they aren't.

2) It is against the Old Covenant, then as Boaz pointed out they would also queastion our eating of shrimp and shellfish which are also excluded along with pork. But they don't.

3) The Old Covenant is applicable for non-Jews, then they would hold that it is applicable not just to Christians, but also to Muslims. But they don't.

4) That Jesus didn't do it and we who follow Jesus should do all things as he did, then they would insist that Christians worship at the site of the temple in Jerusalem and that we not utilize modern conveniences. But they don't.

They only criticize us for not doing things that are also a part of their own faith. In other words, they want us to be Muslims. Which, if you think about it, is a very loving thing for them to do. But, even with that motivation behind them, their arguments with regard to the reasons that Christians shuold not eat pork are still disingenious for they don't follow them through consistently once they get beyond those aspects which are a part of their own religious value system.

 

[Woodrow]

An error we keep making is we keep trying to come up with human reasons why pork is haram. In doing so we often cite things that are not true and by doing so we belittle what Allaah(swt) has ordained.

We do not need a human explanation as to why pork is haram. It makes no difference if it is the most unhealthy of foods or if it is the most healthy of foods. Either way we should not eat it. Remember the proofs we offer are based on "Science" not on love of Allaah(swt), The same science can be used to show pork is healthy and beneficial. Our arguments are not convincing to those who have extensive knowledge of farming, biology or nutrition.

We only need one reason for not eating it, and that is because we were told not to. We have no need to justify why he has ordained so and we have no need to attempt to explain Allaah(swt)'s reason. Allaah(swt) has forbidden us pork, that should be enough said, we need not know any more. It is a law and that should be end of discussion, enough said, fini, waloo.

Now to get back to the topic of Christians now giving up pork. Let us help encourage them to do so, not because we may think pork is harmful but because to do so, is to obey and love Allaah(swt). Explain to them we are pleased with their desire to obey Allaah(swt) and by obeying Allaah(swt) the closer they get to reaching Jannah.

 

[Grace Seeker]

An error we keep making is we keep trying to come up with human reasons why pork is haram. In doing so we often cite things that are not true and by doing so we belittle what Allaah(swt) has ordained.

We do not need a human explanation as to why pork is haram. It makes no difference if it is the most unhealthy of foods or if it is the most healthy of foods. Either way we should not eat it. Remember the proofs we offer are based on "Science" not on love of Allaah(swt), The same science can be used to show pork is healthy and beneficial. Our arguments are not convincing to those who have extensive knowledge of farming, biology or nutrition.

We only need one reason for not eating it, and that is because we were told not to. We have no need to justify why he has ordained so and we have no need to attempt to explain Allaah(swt)'s reason. Allaah(swt) has forbidden us pork, that should be enough said, we need not know any more. It is a law and that should be end of discussion, enough said, fini, waloo.

Now to get back to the topic of Christians now giving up pork. Let us help encourage them to do so, not because we may think pork is harmful but because to do so, is to obey and love Allaah(swt). Explain to them we are pleased with their desire to obey Allaah(swt) and by obeying Allaah(swt) the closer they get to reaching Jannah.

There you go. A much more genuine argument for why Muslims should say to Christians to give up pork. Of course, I don't recognize that it is indeed the command of God for Christians; but, if I did, then I would have had my last ham sandwich.

 

[Supreme]

Not a chance. The argument for not eating pork in this thread is just a read herring for, "You Christians are sinners and going to hell because you don't practice Islam."

If Muslims really thought that we should not eat pork for the "supposed" reasons that:

1) Pigs carry diseases, then as you pointed out they would also be against us eating chicken and other animals that carry diseases. But they aren't.

2) It is against the Old Covenant, then as Boaz pointed out they would also queastion our eating of shrimp and shellfish which are also excluded along with pork. But they don't.

3) The Old Covenant is applicable for non-Jews, then they would hold that it is applicable not just to Christians, but also to Muslims. But they don't.

4) That Jesus didn't do it and we who follow Jesus should do all things as he did, then they would insist that Christians worship at the site of the temple in Jerusalem and that we not utilize modern conveniences. But they don't.

They only criticize us for not doing things that are also a part of their own faith. In other words, they want us to be Muslims. Which, if you think about it, is a very loving thing for them to do. But, even with that motivation behind them, their arguments with regard to the reasons that Christians shuold not eat pork are still disingenious for they don't follow them through consistently once they get beyond those aspects which are a part of their own religious value system.

Indeed. I suppose those arguments are very hypocritical when you put them into context.

Of course, I don't recognize that it is indeed the command of God for Christians; but, if I did, then I would have had my last ham sandwich.

Indeed. If I thought for one second that by not eating pork would bring me benefits or for some reason bring me closer to God, then I would assuredly do it. However, I have not yet been convinced of any such prohibition that is applicable to Gentiles.

 

[Insaanah]

OK. I understand that scholars command a great respect in Islam. They sometimes make things 'haram' or 'halal', such as music or clothing or technology that can't be found anywhere in the Hadith or Quran. Well, think of the early church leaders as a the Christian equivalent to these scholars.

Any scholar that made something halaal that was clearly declared haraam in the Qur'an, or vice versa, would be considered outside of the fold of Islam. The scholars you are referring to above, have not done that.


Grace Seeker, thank you for your detailed response, and explanatory parts in red. They made very interesting reading for me. What I understand from it, in response to my query, is that what James the Just said is in the Bible, but it is not something that Jesus (peace be upon him) said.

These were the thoughts that occurred to me as I was reading:

In this passage human beings other than Jesus (peace be upon him - I assume he had departed this earth by that time) were making changes to how the faith was at that point e.g. where Peter sees no reason to ask of the Gentiles that they should obey Jewish law.

I presume the original statement in Leviticus was made by either God or Moses (peace be upon him)?

Is it known how long after Jesus's departure the Bible that we have today, continued to be written by human beings?

Also, it seems, a major change on a point of religion could be made on the basis of a vision. It seems as though a human being can have a vision, and this vision can overrule both God and Messenger of God, or it could at that time at least. Although it may be argued that the vision was from God because the Lord spoke in it, God only knows whether the vision really was from Him or not. And, were God to make such a decision, should He not have made that change through Christ (peace be upon him)?

rather we are indeed observing what God's purposes are and seeing that they are fulfilled in Jesus and that God has accomplished in Jesus his great purpose of reconciling the world to himself.

Does this then mean, that it was only once Jesus (peace be upon him) had departed from this world, that any changes that needed to be made to the faith, such as making pork no longer prohibited, could be made? Otherwise, it seems that (God forbid) God then took Christ (peace be upon him) prematurely, before finishing giving all His laws that He wanted put in place, and thus had to give them afterwards through people like Peter in visions.

he told us the opposite, that it is no longer necessary, for that covenant of which those practices and rules were a sign has been fulfilled and the practice of the rules associated with it are no longer a necessary sign.

Are there any quotes from Jesus (peace be upon him) in the Bible regarding this?

In the letter sent with Paul and Barnabas they said: "It seemed good to the Holy spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements...."

Firstly, how did they know it seemed good to the Holy Spirit? If I'm correct, in Christianity, the Holy Spirit is also part of God?

Secondly, the early Christians appeared to be very eager to make the new faith easy to follow, so much so that they even made changes so that a lot of the original requirements went, and hence the faith gradually changed from it's original form (meaning as it was at the time of Jesus (peace be upon him).

Following on from that, do you see Christianity as a continuously evolving and changing religion. Eg if society deems that to be homosexual is acceptable, do you think the teachings of Christianity should be changed to reflect this, and thus such "unions" should be blessed, and such a way of life should be accepted for priests etc? Or, is it the case that the changes that were going to be made have already been made, and the faith will now stay how it is? I have only mentioned homosexuality as an example, what I mean is will the rulings of Christianity change further for whatever reason, eg to fit in with the times?

I don't need answers to what I have merely stated as thoughts that occurred to me while I was reading, as I know we will disagree on them, looking at them from different religious perspectives. Any of the actual questions that you might be able to answer would be appreciated, however. I know I am asking a lot of questions, but I am really interested in this, and this is my first real chance to ask questions such as these.

Peace

 

[Predator]

You are what you eat" - Native American proverb

In folklore terms, eating the meat of the pig is said to contribute to lack of morality and shame, plus greed for wealth, laziness, indulgence, dirtiness and gluttony. We insult a person by calling him or her a "Pig" when they demonstrate these characteristics.


The Jews and Christians are also forbidden from eating pork. Here is a quote from the Old Testament to that effect: "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

Many Christians believe that this verse was directed only at the Jews. But Jesus himself says during the Sermon on the Mount; "Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." Some Christians say that, after a vision by St. Peter, God cleansed all animals and made them fit and lawful for human consumption. If ALL animals are cleansed by Peter's vision, this includes dogs, cats, vultures, and rats: but you just don't see people getting excited about a cat-meat sandwich like they do over barbecued pork or bacon. Others say that it was Paul who rescinded the law forbidding pork to humans, in order to appease the Romans, who enjoyed the taste of pig-meat. Many excuses have been given, but none are very sound

 

[Grace Seeker]

You are what you eat" - Native American proverb

In folklore terms, eating the meat of the pig is said to contribute to lack of morality and shame, plus greed for wealth, laziness, indulgence, dirtiness and gluttony. We insult a person by calling him or her a "Pig" when they demonstrate these characteristics.


The Jews and Christians are also forbidden from eating pork. Here is a quote from the Old Testament to that effect: "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

Many Christians believe that this verse was directed only at the Jews. But Jesus himself says during the Sermon on the Mount; "Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." Some Christians say that, after a vision by St. Peter, God cleansed all animals and made them fit and lawful for human consumption. If ALL animals are cleansed by Peter's vision, this includes dogs, cats, vultures, and rats: but you just don't see people getting excited about a cat-meat sandwich like they do over barbecued pork or bacon. Others say that it was Paul who rescinded the law forbidding pork to humans, in order to appease the Romans, who enjoyed the taste of pig-meat. Many excuses have been given, but none are very sound

Airforce, you should ask Woodrow about the bet he was smart enough not to make with me.

Beyond that, do you believe that this verse is the true word of God? If it is true, is it not also directed at Muslims? Consider what other food is also forbidden in that same passage:
"you may not eat the camel, the rabbit or the coney" (Deuteronomy 14:7)
"anything [living in the water] that does not have fins and scales you may not eat; for you it is unclean." (Deuteronomy 14:10) This would exclude shrimp, lobster, crab, crawfish, oysters, scallops, mussels, octopus, squid (i.e., calmari), eels, shark, sturgeon, swordfish, catfish,


Then you need to notice a couple of other things about the passage as to why it does not apply to most Christians. The command is written for a specific group of people, not all people. And those people are:

Deuteronomy 14

1 You are the children of the LORD your God. Do not cut yourselves or shave the front of your heads for the dead, 2 for you are a people holy to the LORD your God. Out of all the peoples on the face of the earth, the LORD has chosen you to be his treasured possession.

Now, out of all the peoples of the earth, do you believe that God chose Gentile Christians to be his treasured possession? That would be the only reason for this passage regarding eating pork (and all the rest) would apply to us. But if you think that this is the word of God for those who follow Islam, then it would apply to you. Not just the not eating of pork, but all of these other things as well.

So, if you believe that this passage is really applicable, I expect to see you arguing against the eating of crustaceans and shellfish as much as you do pork. If you don't, then you are being, as I already said, disingenious in your criticism. But, as for us non-Jews, here is what the passage also has to say:

You may give it to an alien living in any of your towns, and he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner. But you are a people holy to the LORD your God. (Deuteronomy 14:21)

As far as Jews are concerned, us gentile Christians are indeed aliens and foreigners. And by the same word that prohibits Jews from eating this food, we non-Jews may eat it.


But, Airforce, I don't expect you to listen, because you don't really care what the Bible says or how it is to be applied. You only want us to conform to the rules and regulations that you do as a Muslim. You'll argue your point against all hermenuetical rules of interpreation and even just plain common sense. As such, you have gone from one who once had something to say to just a small shrill voice that repeats the same nonsense over and over without any thought or meaning.

When Muslims consider the passage you cited authoritative enough to quit eating shrimp, I'll listen. Until then, Airforce, you are just making noise and continuing to prove you don't know a thing about biblical interpretation.