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

[Rose of Shushan]

Quote:The Jewish sages do not teach this; many 'messianics/HR', however, try to teach this, because of their selective acceptance/rejection of the Jewish sages.
The sages have always taught, based on the distinctions of people mentioned in the Torah, that Israel is to keep 613 commandments [the Torah], and non-Israel is to keep 7 commandments [laws of the children of Noah]. The acquired slave/servant of an Israelite is an exception to this, in that they are circumcised and must keep the negative commandments of Torah, and certain positive commandments.

Ben the jewish sages may teach this but that is rabbinic Judaism, a religion that arose and developed after the destruction of the Second Temple.It is not really based on the Biblical Torah but the Oral Torah, which as you know is separate from the Bible.I am not sure what it has to do with us.Similiarly with the ben noach thing.That is also a rabbinic concept.


I

Quote:f we look at the entire context of the story, it begins with cornelius, who it seems is not Jewish, but, perhaps, a ben noach [son of noah, one who keeps the 7 mitsvot: abstain from idolatry, no cursing G-d, no murder, no sexual immorality, no theft, no eating a limb from a living animal, setting up courts of law] based on what it says of him in Acts 10.1-2. He is sent to Peter to be told what he is to do.

Peter and Cornelius would have had no knowledge of noahidism and other inventions that came long long after they were dead.

Quote:Likewise, that Peter ultimately understood his vision in the context of people, not food, is made clear, by his recounting of the story:
look at verse 28 and 34...'You know how unlawful it is for a man, a Jew, to unite with or to come near one of another race. Yet, G-d showed me not to call a man common or unclean.' Compare his comment, with the words of the vision...10.15, 11.9 'what things G-d made clean do not call common' So the issue here is not the food, but people.

The two things being compared are different.The first which involves

Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
There it is to do with people because it involved going to meet with Cornelius a non jew.

Act 10:22 And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee.


So Peter, a jew, by law could not associate with or go into the house of a gentile.Although he wouldn’t have been able to eat there either,he still wouldn’t have been able to go unless the Holy Spirit hadn’t told him to.

Act 10:19 While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.
Act 10:20 Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them

In the other verses the issue is indeed food.

Act 10:13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
Act 10:14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
Act 10:15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

The words kill,eat and eaten show it is not to do with people but food.
And the fact that the voice says What God has cleansed shows that whatever it was was previously unclean but now God cleansed it.
Thus all foods are now ritually clean since the vision had all sorts of food.

---

Quote:I hope this isn't blasphemous to ask, but was God saying every animal is food for humans? There are several animals with flesh that will poison people, e.g. fugu (pufferfish) and many carnivores (people have died from eating polar bear liver because of the amount of vitamin A in it).

I dont think its blasphemous, its a great point question.
The thing is food wasnt given its kosher status because of how healthy it is or how good it may be for us. I once believed that kosher food was in fact healthier but then I thought about it some more and reasoned that a chicken can actually be more deadly than pork or seafood.Salmonella can kill the young and elderly.Campylobacter in cchickens can also cause nasty long lasting disease.E-Coli in beef can harm kidneys and also be fatal.There are many variables on how food is stored etc.But akosher rating isnt a health rating.What it denotes is ritual purity.When someone ate unclean food they were unclean until evening ,I think it was.So all it meant was that you couldnt go to Temple.Sex also made one unclean but that doesnt mean that they all had to avoid it.Being unclean wasnt such a big issue as some people make it out to be in many cases.