Re: More from alt.messianic....

 The following contains more from alt.messianic on the clean/unclean 
issue in the New Testament.  I thought our list members might find it 
interesting and worthy of comment.

>X-News: dragon alt.messianic:2203
>From: Malachi.Robertson@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Malachi Robertson)
>Subject:clean and unclean under the new covenant
>Date: 21 Jul 92 18:40:40 GMT
>My religious organization has supported the continuing validity for all
>believers of the Old Testament dietary laws. These along with verses
>concerning the primitive diet of humanity before and after the fall are
>some general guidelines used to obey what is brought out in I Corinthians
>6:19, 20:  "Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy
>Spirit within you, which you have from G_d, and that you are not your own?
>For you were bought with a price; therefore glorify G_d in your body."
>Unfortunately, I have been unable most of the time to see why those
>dietary laws were still applicable to me.  Recently upon reading some
>scholarly work concerning a different issue in our church, I was given a
>glimpse of some reasons for the continued validity of those laws.
>1)  The scriptures make plain that animals were separated as clean and
>unclean at the time of the deluge.  Although not directly tied into diet,
>the literary structure (somehow) suggests a connection.  Also, in Gen. 9
>not all animal are allowed to be eaten, but every remes (a subset of the
>animals).  This may suggest a reference to keeeping things clean.
>2)  The distinction is clearly not based upon ritual.
>3)  Unlike other types of uncleanness mentioned in Leviticus, the food
>laws lack a way for making them clean.  This may suggest perpetual
>4)  Indications exist that the dietary laws applied to non-Israelites as
>well as Israelites.  Leviticus 20:25 mentions the animal distinctions in
>the context of practices that defile the land in general.  Leviticus 18
>mentions some of the same practices in Leviticus 20 and mentions that they
>led to the defilement of the land and the expulsion of its people.  It
>should also be noted that the word for abomination in Lev. 18 appears
>directly in connection with the food distinctions in Deuteronomy 14:3. 
>Another text under this consideration is Lev. 17:13 concerning the statute
>against eating blood:  "And anyone of the people of Israel, or of the
>aliens who reside among them, who hunts down an animal or bird THAT MAY BE
>EATEN shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth."  Here in
>reference to the Isrealite and foreigner is a suggestion of distinction
>between animals that may be eaten and those that may not be.
>5)  The distinction continues in the New Testament as it is not abolished.
>This consideration is based on the notion that the texts that many bring
>up as somehow making all animals clean are in reality dealing with a
>condemnation of a pracitce of defilement by association; that is, if a
>clean object touched an unclean object it would then be defiled or common.
>In Mark 7 all different foods are not defiled by the unwashed hands.  If a
>person touches a piece of kosher and clean meat with unwashed hands, then
>they do not make it defiled.  In Acts 10 Peter can not eat anything that
>is presented to him as by association anything clean would by association
>be common to him.  G_d's answer is not to tell Peter don't call any animal
>unclean (in the typical distinction sense), but rather "What G_d has
>declared clean, you must not call common" (v. 14).  There has been some
>confusion over the Greek word kionos.  It does not mean unclean
>(akathartos), but it has been translated as that sometimes.  In Romans
>14:14 Paul is discussing kionos not akathartos.  He also appears to be
>deriding the defilement by association practice.
>6)  Also, the reasoning for the dietary laws is tied to holiness.  This is
>seen in Lev. 11 and Lev. 20.  And as I have posted in the end of my
>introduction the people of the new covenant are also called to holiness. 
>What better way to look for what holiness means than to the Old Testament.
>These are in general the consideration presented to me.  I would
>appreciate comments or criticisms for I view myself as a seeker of the
>truth who is ready to reevaluate my current position if the Scriptures
>warrant it.  Thanks for your time.
>"You shall therefore make a distinction between the clean animal and the
>unclean, and between the unclean bird and the clean; you shall not bring
>abomination on yourselves by animal or by bird or by anything with which
>the ground teems, which I have set apart for you to hold unclean.  You
>shall be holy to me; for I the LORD am holy, and I have separated you from
>the other peoples to be mine."  Lev. 20:25,26
>"Therefore prepare your minds for action; discipline yourselves; set all
>your hope on the grace that Jesus Christ will bring you when he is
>revealed.  Like obedient children, do not be conformed to the desires that
>you formerly had in ignorance.  Instead, as he who called you holy, be
>holy yourselves in all your conduct; for it is written, "You shall be
>holy, for I am holy." I Peter 1:13-16
>  The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
>    North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
>       Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
>          internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or

Cindy Smith              --  Spawn of a Jewish Carpenter
cms@dragon.com           ||  A Real Live Catholic in Georgia
emory!dragon!cms         ||  
><>                      /\  Woe to craven hearts and drooping hands,
Delay not your       .--/--\--.  to the sinner who treads a double path!
conversion       |----\/-||-\/----| Woe to the faint of heart who trust not,
to the Lord,     |----/\-||-/\----|   who therefore will have no shelter!
put it not off       `--\--/--'     Woe to you who have lost hope!
from day to day          \/   what will you do at the visitation of the Lord?
     -- Ecclesiasticus   ||           -- Ecclesiasticus/Ben Sira 2:12-14  
        /Ben Sira 5:8    --