Acts 10:28 (ESV)
"And he said to them, “You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation, but God has shown me that I should not call any person common or unclean."
SDA Argument:
"In Peter’s vision these dietary restrictions had symbolic reference to Jewish distinctions between men—themselves and the Gentiles—and the abrogation of these distinctions was the point at issue. . . In interpreting the vision one should recognize that, although it was given in the setting of physical hunger (v. 10), it did not concern food, it concerned men."[1]
Answer:
The Seventh-day Adventists (SDAs) make a distinction between the food laws of Israel and how they affect the relationship between Jews and Gentiles. Mosaic Law holds that interactions between people and eating customs are related. In Near Eastern culture, fellowship and community are significantly strengthened by sharing food and drink (Luke 11:5-8).
We refer to this cultural custom as commensality. The Anthropology Review claims that eating meals together is a basic component of human social interactions that have existed throughout history in all cultures:
"Commensality, the act of sharing a meal with others, is a fundamental aspect of human social interaction. Across cultures and throughout history, communal eating has played an important role in building relationships and creating community. Food and eating practices are integral parts of cultural identity. What we eat, how we eat, and with whom we eat are all influenced by our cultural backgrounds. Food not only sustains us physically, but it also plays a significant role in shaping our identities. Commensality, or the act of sharing a meal with others, is not only a physical activity but also a social one. Eating together helps build relationships and create community by providing an opportunity for people to connect and share their experiences."[2]
The Anthropology Review explains further how connections and social bonds are fostered by feasts and celebrations.
"Feasts are another example of how communal eating can foster social bonds. In many cultures, feasting is associated with celebrations and special events. By coming together to share food and drink, people are able to strengthen existing relationships and form new ones."[3]
Israel was protected and prevented by its food laws from being tempted to partake in the unlawful feasts of the Gentiles, have an illicit relationship with them, and forget their covenant with God.
Deuteronomy 7:3-6 (ESV) "You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons, for they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods. Then the anger of the LORD would be kindled against you, and he would destroy you quickly. But thus shall you deal with them: you shall break down their altars and dash in pieces their pillars and chop down their Asherim and burn their carved images with fire. “For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth.
Unfortunately, Seventh-day Adventists are ignorant of the commensality cultures that were prevalent during biblical times. This could explain why they treat food-related matters and interactions between Jews and Gentiles as distinct and unrelated issues.
SDAs tend to divide the teachings of the Bible to defend their beliefs and make the Bible support their views. This is also what they did by splitting God's single Law into two, designating one as ceremonial and the other as moral, just to argue that the Sabbath is eternal and unchanging. Now, they need to separate the issue of food and its impact on social interaction between Jews and Gentiles just to align with their man-made belief that what God cleansed in Acts 10 refers to people and not unclean animals.
The truth is that Peter's vision in Acts 10 has an application for both food and people.
Here is the conclusion of a common reference work, New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, that Seventh-day Adventist theologians and Bible scholars have used for years:
"Peter’s vision of the sheet coming down from heaven in Acts 10:9–16 illustrates the fact that this national separatistic effect of the clean and unclean animal laws was felt through the ages."[4]
Either the SDAs are completely ignorant of this reality, or they are aware of it but chose to hide the facts to keep their faces from embarrament.
Reason Behind What is "Clean" and "Unclean"
Bible students have always been confused by the logic behind the labeling of some creatures as “clean” and others as “unclean” for food purposes (Lev 11; see also Dt 14:3–21). Some reasons include:
- Hygienic reasons - sanitary considerations such as the possibility of disease transmission and unhealthiness associated with pork, particularly if it is not cooked enough.
- Allegorical explanations - the idea that an animal's nature dictated whether or not it was clean; for example, pigs were considered filthy since they were considered to represent indolent, gluttonous, and impolite behavior.
- Random testing - the notion that God marked certain animals as unclean at random to test the faithfulness of his people.
- Pagan association - the idea that animals classified as "unclean" were those used in non-Israelite ceremonies; for example, pig sacrifice was a part of several pagan rites.
- Conformity to an ideal - the belief that an animal was only considered “clean” if it fit the definition of “normal” for its species; for example, sea creatures without fins or scales were abnormal and hence unclean.
- Heavenly analogy - the idea that God's "diet" consisted of "clean" animals.
The idea that the Israelite diet was based on God's "diet"—that is, that whatever was unfit for human sustenance was also unfit for sacrifice—has evolved as a promising new theory. Based on an evaluation of the approaches mentioned above, it is probably safe to claim that none of them can offer a justification that works for all the species in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. In simple terms, they were to assist Israel in differentiating between ritual purity and ritual impurity as the Lord's holy people.
Deuteronomy 14:1-3 (ESV) You are the sons of the LORD your God. You shall not cut yourselves or make any baldness on your foreheads for the dead. For you are a people holy to the LORD your God, and the LORD has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. You shall not eat any abomination."
Based to what we just read, food laws in Israel acted as a social barrier; therefore, Mosaic Law maintains that there is a connection between social interactions and eating practices.
Additionally, Leviticus 11:45–47 attest to this ritual:
Leviticus 11:45-47 (ESV) "For I am the LORD who brought you up out of the land of Egypt to be your God. You shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.” This is the law about beast and bird and every living creature that moves through the waters and every creature that swarms on the ground, to make a distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten."
The Lord applies these rules about clean and unclean animals as well as the so-called holiness phrase, "Be holy, because I am holy," 11:45b to Israel's isolation from other nation's practices in Lev 20:22–26:
Leviticus 20:22-26 (ESV) “You shall therefore keep all my statutes and all my rules and do them, that the land where I am bringing you to live may not vomit you out. And you shall not walk in the customs of the nation that I am driving out before you, for they did all these things, and therefore I detested them. But I have said to you, ‘You shall inherit their land, and I will give it to you to possess, a land flowing with milk and honey.’ I am the LORD your God, who has separated you from the peoples. You shall therefore separate the clean beast from the unclean, and the unclean bird from the clean. You shall not make yourselves detestable by beast or by bird or by anything with which the ground crawls, which I have set apart for you to hold unclean. You shall be holy to me, for I the LORD am holy and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be mine."
It is important to remind Seventh-day Adventists (SDAs) that, considering the verses above, the dietary regulations found in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 were founded on the law of purification rather than necessarily being health laws. "You shall therefore be holy, for I am holy," is what God said rather than "You shall therefore be healthy, for I am healthy."
The Real Issue with Peter's Vision
If we read Peter's vision in Acts 10:9-16, it focuses solely on the unclean and clean animals he saw together on a single sheet coming down from heaven.
Acts 10:9-16 (ESV) "The next day, as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the sixth hour to pray. And he became hungry and wanted something to eat, but while they were preparing it, he fell into a trance and saw the heavens opened and something like a great sheet descending, being let down by its four corners upon the earth. In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air. And there came a voice to him: “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.” And the voice came to him again a second time, “What God has made clean, do not call common.” This happened three times, and the thing was taken up at once to heaven."
When did God purify the unclean animals? This transformation occurred through the teachings of Christ, which Peter heard approximately a decade ago, as documented in the Gospel of Mark, specifically in Mark 7:19:
Mark 7:18-23 (ESV) "And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?” (Thus he declared all foods clean.) And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”
Mark adds this parenthetical comment (Thus he declared all foods clean.) to help his readers see the significance of Jesus’ pronouncement for his Gentile audience. Written years after the founding of the church, Mark's remark that all foods were clean was meant as a correction to his Christian readers who might have misinterpreted these ceremonial regulations of Judaism.
However, Mark, writing in the 40s AD, had the advantage of reflecting on past events, drawing from Peter's testimony. Jesus' teachings on food were just one of the many lessons the disciples struggled to comprehend before his crucifixion and resurrection. Church fathers concur that Mark was an associate of Peter. When Mark wrote his gospel, Peter narrated to him the events he witnessed and the teachings he heard about Jesus.
"And this is what the elder used to say, 'When Mark was the interpreter [Or: translator] of Peter, he wrote down accurately everything that he re called of the Lord's words and deeds—but not in order. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied him; but later, as I indicated, he accompanied Peter, who used to adapt his teachings for the needs at hand, not arranging, as it were, an orderly composition of the Lord's sayings."[5]
Therefore, the statement, "Thus he declared all food clean" in Mark 7:19 essentially comes from Peter, who relayed it to Mark. This provides clear evidence that if questioned, Peter himself, drawing from his comprehension and vision as detailed in Acts 10:9-16, is addressing food and not people, which effectively refutes the argument of Seventh-day Adventists!
If the passage above refers only to clean and unclean animals, then, why does Peter interpret it as referring to people when he speaks to Cornelius in verse 28? In Peter's vision, God did not declare, "I made the Gentiles clean do not call them common"? Acts 10:28 states:
Acts 10:28 (ESV) "And he said to them, “You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation, but God has shown me that I should not call any person common or unclean."
The reason for this is that Peter is now aware of the consequences of doing away with the dietary law. It suggests that not only has God already abolished the ceremonial division between clean and unclean animals, but that they are also allowed to associate with Gentiles, especially the believers. The SDAs might not be aware that the Torah never states that the Gentile people are "unclean." This is a fact that the Mosaic law did not express anywhere in the Torah.
According to Word Studies in the New Testament:
"The Jews professed to ground this prohibition on the law of Moses, but there is no direct command in the Mosaic law forbidding Jews to associate with those of other nations. But Peter’s statement is general, referring to the general practice of the Jews to separate themselves in common life from uncircumcised persons." [6]
Peter's use of the word "unlawful" in Acts 10:28 is not from the Greek "nomos", referring to the Mosaic law but instead, he used the word "athemitos" a "violation of tradition or common recognition of what is seemly or proper."[7] Hence, the Old Testament does not contain any regulation that prohibits social contact with Gentiles; however, the rabbis introduced such rules, making them obligatory through custom.
If that's the case, Gentiles weren't actually considered unclean by God, so they shouldn't be regarded as such. It was the Jewish Rabbis who made this rule, which the SDAs then accepted and unfortunately, believed.
If Gentile people are not considered unclean by God, then what is the "unclean" that God refers to in Acts 10:15 when He says, "What God has made clean, do not call common"?
God is obvious in His words in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 when He uses the categories "clean" and "unclean" only for animals, not for Gentile human beings.
The New Testament Warning against the teachings of the Demons
The New Testament also demonstrates the change in how Christians, whether Jewish or Gentile, approach the laws on clean and unclean foods under the New Covenant. Under the Old Covenant Mosaic law, the Israelites' avoidance of unclean foods was seen as a way to receive God's blessing and approval. However, now under the New Testament, this perspective has changed; we can’t win God’s approval by what we eat.
1 Corinthians 8:8 (NLT) "It’s true that we can’t win God’s approval by what we eat. We don’t lose anything if we don’t eat it, and we don’t gain anything if we do."
Another change under the New Covenant is that Christians no longer make any distinction between clean and unclean foods. They understand that, unlike under the Old Mosaic law, no food is inherently unclean by itself.
Romans 14:14 (AMP) "I know and am convinced (persuaded) as one in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is [forbidden as] essentially unclean (defiled and unholy in itself). But [nonetheless] it is unclean (defiled and unholy) to anyone who thinks it is unclean."
Additionally, Christians under the New Covenant now understand that as citizens of God's Kingdom, what they eat is not as important as it was under the Old Testament law.
Romans 14:17, 20 (ERV) "In God’s kingdom, what we eat and drink is not important. Here is what is important: a right way of life, peace, and joy—all from the Holy Spirit. Don’t let the eating of food destroy the work of God. All food is right to eat, but it is wrong for anyone to eat something that hurts the faith of another person."
In fact, New Testament Christians were taught that anyone who insists certain foods must not be eaten should be regarded as a false teacher, spreading teachings of demons.
1 Timothy 4:1, 3-5 (Int'l English ERV) "The Spirit clearly says that in the last times, some will turn away from what we believe. They will obey spirits that tell lies. And they will follow the teachings of demons."They say that it is wrong to marry. And they say that there are some foods that people must not eat. But God made these foods, and those who believe and who understand the truth can eat them with thanks. Everything that God made is good. Nothing he made should be refused if it is accepted with thanks to him. 5 Everything he created is made holy by what he has said and by prayer."
I hope and pray that these teachings from the New Testament apostles will resonate with our friends, the Seventh-day Adventists, and that by God's grace, they will be led to humble prayer and repentance for promoting the doctrine of demons, which forbids certain foods to be eaten.
Conclusion:
Based on our studies in the context of Jewish dietary laws, it is becoming clear that the vision of Peter in Acts 10:9-16 refers to God abolishing the distinction between clean and unclean animals. This doesn't directly pertain to Gentile people, but by implication, it affects Jewish social interactions with the Gentile nations as a result. Jews and Gentiles cannot truly fellowship if Jews continue to adhere to the Jewish dietary laws. The vision reveals to Peter that the Torah's division between clean and unclean animals no longer holds. He is now permitted to kill and eat animals that were once considered ritually impure. Reflecting on this vision, he has come to understand that one of the implications of this new divine command is that people previously seen as ritually defiled by the Jewish Rabbis due to their failure to observe Jewish dietary laws should no longer be viewed as unclean.
Thus, the Seventh-day Adventists' claim that Peter's vision in Acts 10:9-16 doesn't pertain to food but rather to men is incorrect, lacking biblical, historical, and contextual support. It's merely a man-made doctrine designed to mislead people into believing their false gospel.
References:
[1] Francis D. Nichol, Ed., The Seventh-Day Adventist Bible Commentary, (Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1980), 6:250.
[2] https://anthropologyreview.org/anthropology-glossary-of-terms/commensality-the-social-practice-of-eating-together/
[3] ibid.
[4] Willem Van Gemeren Zondervan 1997(New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (NIDOTTE) (5 Vols.))
[6] Marvin Richardson Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament, (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1887), 1:501.
[7] (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd. ed. (BDAG))
No comments:
Post a Comment