Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food?

[Rose of Shushan]

Quote:At this point I'm loosing hope that you're even keeping up with yourself. Your story is slowly changing day-by-day. So now Jesus did not teach by the Law of Moses, nor did he give a new law in Mark 7? So what are you saying took place in Mark 7, a simple gesture of speech?

It sounds like we agree that you’re telling me he was teaching something different (using your understanding). So now my question becomes what did he teach, and who ever had a chance to follow it? He was teaching about the Kingdom of God,about the Law for that Kingdom.His teachings are to be found in the Gospels, you and I know that.
When he taught the people on Mark 7, His comment was in response to the Pharisees calling him out on not observing their tradition.
In His response Jesus taught on the principles of His Kingdom since according to Mosaic Law some things that go into the mouth do make people unclean.

Nearyah Jesus there wasn’t then teaching people to go and now eat all they liked since those people were Israelites and in the Mosaic Covenant.Jesus hadn't died yet to that Covenant was still in force.
It wasn’t til Jesus death that the New Covenant is ushered in.
Nearyah why are you asking me what Jesus taught? Are you not a believer?You said

Quote:And if he taught anything what would be the point if him teaching his students to follow it if they never had a chance to do it?

Are you referring to Mark 7 in this? Or the rest of His teaching? Jesus did not teach His disciples to break the Law of Moses since the Mosaic Law was binding until Jesus death. And we know that He certainly did not intend this by Mark 7 since Peter ,all the way forward in Acts was still eating clean food until the vision.
What Jesus did teach was about the Kingdom of God and the Laws, ( though these Laws are never formally addressed as Laws since they don’t come written in stone like the ten did)..just like Moses then taught the people more than the ten commandments and relayed to the people all that God commanded him so does Jesus with the New Covenant and His Kingdom.
What Jesus taught was intended to be written down to provide a witness and testimony for you, me and the people of the whole world.Check out these words from our King

Mat 26:13 Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her.

Quote:To cover-up the lack of union between these two passages you tell me the law changes again in Acts 15 to restrain from blood only. If I’m a gentile, I am starving at this point because I don’t know what to eat.

Is it so hard to understand that the laws of clean and unclean as per Mosaic Law are over and that new commands regarding food are recommended.
These commands are to abstain from animals which have been strangled,still have blood or offered to idols.
This time the commands are not because they make someone unclean.We do not know the exact reason for those commands but you certainly gave some valid reasons of why they could have been put in place.We know that they formed part of the Law of Moses and the avoid blood one before Moses so its just htings that happen to form part of God's comamnds that He wants to continue us to follow.

Quote:My story hasn’t changed one bit. Yet I can’t even pin the tail on the donkey with your because it’s too difficult to follow once we apply all the passages. One moment I’m told to eat every thing nothing defiles me. Next moment (literally) I’m told to eat everything with the exception of foods with blood. This is an all for nothing in the way you presented your logic in telling me mine was wrong. Either you can or can not eat anything according to your comments, not mine.

Thats cos food with blood does not make you unclean, what defiles you is what comes out of your mouth not what goes in.
Does that sound familiar?
So lets recap for the hundredth time.Eating food whatever food no longer makes you unclean.You may eat everything you like EXCEPT animals which have been strangled or still have blood.
Is that really so hard to understand?