Seventh-Day Adventists/7 irrefutable points

Advertisement


Question
Although I agree with most of your IJ irrefutables.  (I do reserve judgment on the "celestial judgment" point, Daniel 7:26). We can discuss that another time. I cannot see that the New Testament supports your irrefutable point 7:

7.  The doctrine of the IJ is associated with long list of additional false, legalistic doctrines from the SDA’s, such as tithing, OC Sabbath keeping, Jewish food laws and perfectionism, just to name a few.  It is not a stand-alone error, but one of many that must be repudiated.

So allow me to ask a series of questions:

Q1. Can you let me know some more of the 'false' doctrines of SDAs?

Q2. Although the tithing system of the SDA church is unbiblical. According to Deut 14:29

And the Levite, (because he hath no part nor inheritance with thee,) and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, which are within thy gates, shall come, and shall eat and be satisfied; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hand which thou doest.

Don't we Christians still have an obligation to take care of the stranger, fatherless and widow as suggested in James 1:27?  Therefore isn't the concept of tithing still a good concept as opposed to a 'false' doctrine? Isn't it the basis for charitable work still practiced at heart by the true Christian?

Q3. How can Sabbath keeping be a false doctrine? Has the 4th commandment been abolished or changed? Where in the book of Acts do we see an example of your doctrine of effectively: worship on Sabbath and work if you want on Sabbath?  Sabbath is a day of rest isn't it? Not a day of worship. There seems to be no biblical evidence for your interpretation of what you call the NC Sabbath.  Please direct me to a biblical explanation or evidence for this so called NC Sabbath.

Q4. Wasn't it the case that the "Jewish food laws" were given in the context of health? Isn't this desire of God echoed in 3 John 2:

Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.

Has pork, for example, even though it provides energy for the body, become as healthy as lamb or beef?

Doesn't  2 Corinthians 6:17:

Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

include unclean meat?

Is Leviticus 3:17 prohibiting the eating of fat or blood no longer advisable?

In Acts 15 isn't the prohibition of "meats offered to idols" another way of identifying unclean meats, given that Noah only sacrificed 'clean' animals to God?  Isn't that also the reason why Paul would eat [clean] meats sacrificed to idols (1 Corinthians 10)?

Before you lambast me for misrepresenting Paul's teaching of 1 Corinthians 10.  It indeed does not say, only eat 'clean' animals offered to idols, but the implication, I believe, is, clean animals are sanctioned by God, therefore if a Gentile offers lamb to an idol it doesn't affect the constituency of the meat making it unclean, it is therefore, with a clear conscience, suitable to eat. If however, your brother might take offence, don't eat it to cause him to stumble at what he might perceive to be hypocrisy.

So to get back to the point.   Clean meats are sacrificed to God, that is the food for the priests.  That is the point you made regarding working on Sabbath.  Priests work on Sabbath, priests ate meats sacrificed to God! Christians should eat priestly food.  Eating pork is not a sin, nevertheless isn't it the case that it is not as healthy as biblically designated clean meat? Even science tells us that it is 'dangerous':

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/12/12/eating-pork.aspx

I look forward to your response.

Answer
Subject: 7 Irrefutable Points Prove the IJ FALSE!

Question from Carlton:  Although I agree with most of your IJ “irrefutables,” -  (I do reserve judgment on the "celestial judgment" point, Daniel 7:26). We can discuss that another time.) I cannot see that the New Testament supports your irrefutable point 7:

Tom Norris Answered:  First off, let’s understand the context and background of these 7 Points.  

This list was used in a short debate with an SDA Evangelist, Herb Kersten, who claimed he could defend and rehabilitate the IJ.  Of course, he could do no such thing.  He ran away for all to see, refusing to address any of these 7 Points.

Here are the links below:

IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=1173

Tom Norris vs Herb Kersten
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2013/2/tom-norris-vs-herb

For Tom Norris
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2013/2/tom-norris-1.htm

Second, these 7 Points can each STAND ALONE.  In other words, it does not take a combination to prove the IJ false.  No.  It only takes the first point to prove this theological fact.  And thus the debate is over before it begins, even if there were no other points.

All 6 points, disprove the IJ, with the exception of #7.  This last point is really guilt by association, and does not in and of itself, disprove the IJ.  But it makes a necessary point.   Moreover, it is irrefutable that there is a long list of false doctrines associated with the IJ.  

But even so, I admit #7 does not prove the IJ wrong, just that it keeps bad company.  So the IJ is proven wrong 6 X’s and not 7.  Either way, it is dead and disproven many times over.

I repeat: the IJ is disproven by the 1st point alone, without needing additional help.  And so too all the other points, except #7, which is also true, but it does not really disprove the IJ.  It only proves what bad company it keeps.

Here are the 7 Points:

** 7 Irrefutable Points Proving the IJ False **

1. Jesus does not support the SDA interpretation of Dan 8:14; He embraces another view, which all that follow Christ must also embrace.

2.  The Pre-Advent Judgment of the Church cannot be in the OT or the book of Daniel.  If the PAJ exists at all, which it does, it must be found in the NT.  Only the NT can define Gospel doctrine for the church, not the OT.

3.  The PAJ of the last church is found in Rev 3: 14.  It is not found in the OT book of Daniel as the SDA’s claim.  Here is the true doctrine of the Pre-Advent Judgment, which applies to every church and denomination today, including the SDA’s!

4.  Neither the OT nor the NT supports a “Celestial Judgment” (IJ) to examine the believer’s sanctification.  There is no such Judgment in the Bible.  The IJ is an error, and no amount of double-talk from the SDA’s can change the theological or historical facts.

5.  No serious scholars or historians support the IJ, nor has any church or denomination ever embraced this teaching, except for the SDA’s, and most of them now repudiate this doctrine, including their best scholars, like Dr. Ford and Raymond Cottrell.  The SDA’s are being very dishonest to pretend otherwise.

6.  While Traditional, Takoma Park Adventism defines the IJ as a fundamental “pillar” of the Advent Movement, anchored in Rev 14: 7.  This was never true.  Not one Pioneer, including Ellen White or Uriah Smith ever made such a claim.  In fact, there is no such “pillar” in any of the Three Angels Messages, nor is this doctrine the reason why Adventists exist, as many have been indoctrinated.

The doctrine of the 2nd Coming as the Day of Judgment is the reason why the Advent Movement came into existence.  Rev 14: 7 was only interpreted as being the Judgment of the 2nd Coming.  The later developing IJ, (1857) had zero to do with the doctrinal development of any the Three Angels Messages, which pillars had already been erected by 1847.

7.  The doctrine of the IJ is associated with long list of additional false, legalistic doctrines from the SDA’s, such as tithing, OC Sabbath keeping, Jewish food laws and perfectionism, just to name a few.  

The IJ is not a stand-alone error, but one of many that must also be repudiated.

The IJ repudiates the Gospel and marginalizes the 2nd Coming, which is the real Judgment pillar in the 1st Angels Message.   It refutes the Gospel and the Foundational pillars of Historic Adventism, which means it must be repudiated by anyone who claims to embrace the Three Angels Messages.

Q1. Can you let me know some more of the 'false' doctrines of SDAs?

Tom replied:  The SDA’s are full of error about the Law and the Gospel.  Which is why their view of the Sabbath is also false, and so too their views on eschatology.  Sunday laws do not start the Time of Trouble as they teach.

While they are correct to claim there must be a “pre-Advent Judgment,” they are wrong to think it is the IJ.  The real PAJ has eluded them.

Moreover, the SDA’s are wrong about the Lord’s Supper.  They use grape juice, which is not the same as wine, which is the only drink authorized for the Eucharist by Christ.  The Adventist doctrine of abstinence, which controls their practice of the Lord’s Supper, is not only very wrong, it is Muslim doctrine and they do not even know it.

This is a rather long list, but it keeps growing because the modern SDA’s have also embraced an OC, tithe based, hierarchical, Roman Catholic organizational system, which is against the Gospel.  They are very wrong to practice tithe, as if it was a NC doctrine.  Such error further proves they don’t understand the New Covenant.

Then to underscore how OC they think, they also teach that it is wrong for a woman to be ordained.  In other words, they think only a man can be a genuine Pastor (or Priest) and only a man can be the head of the SDA church.  Such outdated, Old Covenant views are outrageous, sexist, and against the Gospel.

Women's Ordination
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=880

About the only doctrine the modern SDA’s have correct is the State of the Dead.  But even so, they have no idea that this teaching was a Reformation doctrine, promoted by Luther.  

The SDA’s also have many false and confused views about church history and the Reformation, including their own church history, which they have failed to fully or honestly disclose.  Thus the SDA’s are very dishonest and manipulative, full of corruption, fraud, and false doctrine.

No doubt there are more errors and false doctrines that could be named, but this long list is sufficient to make the point.

No wonder the SDA’s are confused, divided, and self-destructing; they need to REPENT before it is too late.  

Too bad they are acting like the Jews, who also pretended that they had no false doctrine and also refused to embrace the Gospel.

The Top 10 Reforms the SDA Church Needs Per Tom Norris
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=982

Q2. Although the tithing system of the SDA church is unbiblical. According to Deut 14:29 And the Levite, (because he hath no part nor inheritance with thee,) and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, which are within thy gates, shall come, and shall eat and be satisfied; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hand which thou doest.

Don't we Christians still have an obligation to take care of the stranger, fatherless and widow as suggested in James 1:27?  

Therefore isn't the concept of tithing still a good concept as opposed to a 'false' doctrine? Isn't it the basis for charitable work still practiced at heart by the true Christian?

Answer:  First off, the Old Testament does not instruct the New Testament.  Just because the Jews practiced circumcision and Temple sacrifices, that does make it doctrine for the New Covenant Church.

Moreover, many Old Covenant teachings, like tithe and the Levitical Priesthood, were banished and not permitted to be part of Church doctrine.  

Who is anyone to change What Christ and his apostles teach?

Second, the “concept” of tithe is against the Gospel.  Period.  Which is why the apostolic church never practiced it as the dishonest SDA’s teach.  

The SDA’s are making fools of themselves with this nonsense and doctrinal fraud.  But the Adventists, like most others, love money, and they make $$ BILLIONS on the false doctrine of NC tithe.  So they have chosen money over the Gospel.  Just like the Jews.  

No Eternal Life for anyone who is so foolish to embrace the OC doctrine of tithe.  They are only proving that they do not understand the Gospel.

Let me also point out that the SDA tithe does not go to help anyone but those in leadership position.  Tithe is for church pastors and leaders, not for the poor.  

Thus while the SDA’s have brought in $$ BILLIONS and BILLIONS from tithe, they only help themselves.  They have no record of helping the poor or anyone but themselves.  They are perhaps the most unhelpful denomination.  Very selfish and self-serving.

Tithe Unequal

Tithe is for a two-class system: The higher class, the Levites, received financial support and honor from the lower class.  This was the way the OC worked.

Thus tithe supports a separate priesthood, a class of elites that are empowered to speak for God and control religion.  This class ended up oppressing the people, rejecting the Gospel, and killing the Messiah.  This is the end result of tithe.  

The SDA’s have also ended up doing the same thing.  Tithe in the church is evil and wrong.  It empowers a handful of men to control everyone and all doctrine.  It is a recipe for disaster.  Just look around and see what has happened to the SDA’s. There is no free speech or free press within Adventism.  Everything is controlled, censored, and manipulated by those in charge so that they stay in charge.

The SDA’s are wretched and ruined, rebels against the Gospel of Christ.

The Fraud of Church Tithing
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=239

The church cannot have two classes, or even two theological factions.  All are Priests in the NC.  Both men and women.  All are equal in Christ and Priests of God.  With such full equality, there can be no tithe, which is designed to support an unequal, two –class religious system.

It is not worthwhile to pretend tithe in the church is a good thing.  Tithe is very false and very bad.  Those who practice it, are proving that they do not understand nor embrace the Gospel.  They are only supporting rebellion against the Gospel.

Tithe is dangerous anti-Christ doctrine that supports an anti-Gospel system.  The Jews and now the SDA’s have proven this for all to see.

Furthermore, this idea that tithe is needed to fund the church is absurd.  Why?  Because the Church was started, and prospered, WITHOUT TITHE.   So church history sets the precedent and proves that tithe is not needed, even as it was never promoted or practiced by the apostolic church.

Contrary to the false teaching of the SDA’s, the church never practiced tithe or in any way promoted this Old Covenant doctrine.  The Adventists have been lying to people for generations with this utter nonsense that claims Jesus and the Church embraced tithe.  

The love of money creates great liars.   Congratulation SDA’s, you are one of the most dishonest, anti-Gospel denominations in the world.

Tithe in the NC, - IS UTTERLY FALSE.  It never happened.  The NT is clear on this point and thus the SDA’s need to tell the truth and repent for their false and outrageous doctrine of tithe.  A doctrine that proves they are following the OC and not the NC.

Those who teach such myth and error about the Gospel, whether about tithe or anything else, will not enter the kingdom of God.  

At this point, the SDA’s are locked out of the Kingdom of God.  And so they shall remain unless and until they confess their many errors, including tithe, and repent, embracing Gospel Reform.

Q3. How can Sabbath keeping be a false doctrine?

Tom replied:  Old Covenant Sabbath Keeping, while true doctrine for the Jews, is not correct doctrine for anyone living under the New Covenant.

Those who try to keep the Sabbath Law today, like the SDA’s, have fallen from grace.  They are Judaizers, Legalists, and anti-Christ.  Let no one think otherwise.

How does the Church know that OC Sabbath keeping is wrong?  Because this is what Jesus teaches in the Gospels.  Over and over he teaches a very different Sabbath from the Law of Moses and the 4th Commandment.

In fact, Jesus refutes the OC Sabbath and gives an exemption from the rules against work in the 4th Commandment to those that follow him.  In addition, he teaches an active and working 7th day Sabbath.  Not a resting Sabbath like in the OC.

See:  The Reformed Sabbath
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=228

While the SDA’s teach that all in the church must obey the Moral law and “keep” the Sabbath holy by refraining from work, this is NOT what Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath teaches.  This is what the enemies of
Christ taught, NOT CHRIST.

The SDA’s are following Moses and the Law, when they should be following Christ and his Gospel.  These are two very different paradigms.

Carlton asked:  Has the 4th commandment been abolished or changed?

Tom replied:  Yes.  Yes.  Yes.  Jesus, as the self-proclaimed Lord and Protector of the Sabbath, changed and reformed the doctrine of the 7th day for all to see in the Gospels.  HE DID NOT REMOVE THE DOCTRINE OF THE SABBATH.  But he did REFORM IT.

Why do you think the Jews were so outraged with his reformed Gospel Sabbath?  Why do you think there are so many detailed debates about the Sabbath in the Gospels?

Jesus, as the Son of God and the Creator of the original Sabbath, changed and reformed the OC Sabbath into a NC DOCTRINE for all to see in the Gospels.  Which is why you don’t see the church embracing the OC Sabbath of Moses and the Jews.  They embraced the 7th day Gospel Sabbath of Christ, which did not prevent any work on the 7th day.

Let all understand; The rules against working on the Sabbath have been REMOVED by Christ.  While the OC Sabbath was holy and forced all but the Levites to “rest” on the 7th day, not so with the NC Sabbath, which is not a holy day, and does not feature rest.

However, the Sabbath is still the 7th day.  And it is still a memorial to Creation and now, also to the Gospel.  It is still a day for the congregation to meet.  Sunday is a false Sabbath and so too what the SDA’s practice.  

In the NC, Jesus is holy, not the 7th day.  What he teaches about the Sabbath, is what the church must also believe.

It is time for the church to repent and embrace the Gospel Sabbath of Christ.

Question: Where in the book of Acts do we see an example of your doctrine of effectively: worshiping on Sabbath and work if you want on Sabbath?  

Tom replied:  Good question!  However there is no such thing as a Tom Norris doctrine.  We are discussing the Gospel Sabbath OF CHRIST, the self-proclaimed Lord and Defender of this weekly doctrine.

Here is the answer:

When Paul preached the Gospel to the Jews in Antioch, (on the Sabbath) both the Gentiles and Jews wanted to hear more.

Acts 13:14 But going on from Perga, they arrived at Pisidian Antioch, and on the Sabbath day they went into the synagogue and sat down.

Acts 13:15 After the reading of the Law and the Prophets the synagogue officials sent to them, saying, “Brethren, if you have any word of exhortation for the people, say it.”

Acts 13:40 “Therefore take heed, so that the thing spoken of in the Prophets may not come upon you:

Acts 13:41 ‘BEHOLD, YOU SCOFFERS, AND MARVEL, AND PERISH;
  FOR I AM ACCOMPLISHING A WORK IN YOUR DAYS,
  A WORK WHICH YOU WILL NEVER BELIEVE, THOUGH SOMEONE SHOULD DESCRIBE IT TO YOU.’”

Acts 13:42  As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.

Acts 13:43 Now when the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and of the God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were urging them to continue in the grace of God.

The next Sabbath, the whole town turned out to hear the Gospel on the 7th day Sabbath.  Proving that 1) the Sabbath still existed after the cross, contrary to what some claim.  And 2) that the Sabbath was part of the Gospel Story.

Paul could have easily said:  Come back next Sunday and learn more about the Gospel.  But he did not.  Paul linked the 7th day Sabbath of Christ with the Gospel.  Not the 7th day Sabbath doctrine of Moses and the Jews, but the NC Sabbath of
Christ.

Acts 13:44  The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord.

Acts 13:45 But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and began contradicting the things spoken by Paul, and were blaspheming.

Here is some context for Paul’s remark about letting no one “act as your judge” about the Sabbath.  This is exactly what the Jews were doing in front of the Gentiles.  They were judging how Paul viewed the 7th day as well as many other things.  They were cursing him for breaking the law and for teaching that Jesus was the Messiah.

Col. 2:16  Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day —

Acts 13:46 Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.

The “word of God” obviously included the Sabbath of Christ.  Not the OC doctrine, but the NC version, which was so Gospel friendly for the Gentiles.

What kind of Sabbath doctrine was Paul promoting?  Was it the OC Sabbath where it was wrong to light fires or travel, or do any work whatsoever?  Or was it the NC Sabbath of Christ, were none of those rules were in effect?  And where the whole town was free to go back to their homes and work on the 7th day?

If Paul had been preaching the OC Sabbath, the Jews would not have become so angry.  But he was not.  He was promoting the blood of the New Covenant (and a working Sabbath), which the Jews considered “unclean.”  Thus the insults and condemnations of the Gospel were very public.

Heb. 10:29 How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?

If Paul were supporting the OC Sabbath; he would have had to warn the town that it is wrong for them to work on the 7th day.  He would have to tell them to go home and put out their fires and stop cooking, and stop doing any and all work, because this is what the 4th Commandment teaches.  (This is what the SDA’s would say.)

But Paul says no such thing.  There is zero mention of resting or not working on the Sabbath.  There was no such OC instruction, even as the 7th day Sabbath was acknowledged as being part of the Gospel Story.

Acts 13:47 “For so the Lord has commanded us,
  ‘I HAVE PLACED YOU AS A LIGHT FOR THE GENTILES,
  THAT YOU MAY BRING SALVATION TO THE END OF THE EARTH.’”

Acts 13:48  When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

Acts 13:49 And the word of the Lord was being spread through the whole region.

The “word of the Lord” included hearing the Gospel on the 7th Day Sabbath.  It did not feature the OC Sabbath, with its many rules against work, but the active NC Sabbath of Christ.

Of course the Jews were outraged at the Gospel, as well as this so called New Covenant that embraced so much error, even Sabbath Breaking.  They would not stand for this…

Acts 13:50 But the Jews incited the devout women of prominence and the leading men of the city, and instigated a persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and drove them out of their district.

Acts 13:51 But they shook off the dust of their feet in protest against them and went to Iconium.

Acts 13:52 And the disciples were continually filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit.

The Gospels are full of Jesus’ NC Sabbath teaching.  The rest of the NT also supports his active and reformed, 7th day Lord’s Day.

Question:  Sabbath is a day of rest isn't it? Not a day of worship.

Tom Replied:  In the OC, the Sabbath featured forced rest, under pain of death.  No fires, no cooking, not even gathering sticks for fire.  So harsh was the 4th Commandment, that at least one person was put to death by Moses for Sabbath breaking.  (The Levites had a working Sabbath).

But the day also featured congregational and temple services.  And of course, we see Jesus preaching the Gospel every 7th day, on the Sabbath.  He did this to show that the Sabbath is still a day for congregational meetings under the NC.

In the OC, there was an exception to these harsh OC rules.  The Levites were exempt from obeying the 4th Commandment.  Why?  Because they had to work on the Sabbath to keep the Temple services active, etc.  

Thus there were two very different doctrines of the 7th day for the OC Jews.  Misunderstand this point, and the NC Sabbath teachings of Christ will not be understood.

Question:  There seems to be no biblical evidence for your interpretation of what you call the NC Sabbath. Please direct me to a biblical explanation or evidence for this so called NC Sabbath.

Tom replied:  The Gospels contain numerous passages where Jesus defines, promotes, and defends his active and reformed 7th day doctrine of the Sabbath.  Here is all the “evidence” anyone needs to understand this Gospel doctrine.

In fact, the Gospels show Jesus often in debate with the Jews about his controversial view of the Sabbath.  His new view stunned and angered them.  Most of them rejected the NC Sabbath, and refused the Gospel.  

What Jesus teaches about the Sabbath is Gospel truth for the church.  Only a blind person could miss all this written evidence.

Q4. Wasn't it the case that the "Jewish food laws" were given in the context of health? Isn't this desire of God echoed in 3 John 2:

Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.

Tom replied:  The Jews had many dietary laws in addition to the prohibition against pork, shellfish, etc.  No doubt there is a health basis for all this instruction, but this is not explicitly stated.

Listen to how a Modern Jews views these OC laws.  

Why Do We Observe the Laws of Kashrut?

Many modern Jews think that the laws of kashrut are simply primitive health regulations that have become obsolete with modern methods of food preparation. There is no question that some of the dietary laws have some beneficial health effects. For example, the laws regarding kosher slaughter are so sanitary that kosher butchers and slaughterhouses have been exempted from many USDA regulations.

However, health is not the only reason for Jewish dietary laws. Many of the laws of kashrut have no known connection with health. To the best of our modern scientific knowledge, there is no reason why camel or rabbit meat (both treif) is any less healthy than cow or goat meat. In addition, some of the health benefits to be derived from kashrut were not made obsolete by the refrigerator. For example, there is some evidence that eating meat and dairy together interferes with digestion, and no modern food preparation technique reproduces the health benefit of the kosher law of eating them separately.

In recent years, several secular sources that have seriously looked into this matter have acknowledged that health does not explain these prohibitions. Some have suggested that the prohibitions are instead derived from environmental considerations.

For example, a camel (which is not kosher) is more useful as a beast of burden than as a source of food. In the Middle Eastern climate, the pig consumes a quantity of food that is disproportional to its value as a food source. But again, these are not reasons that come from Jewish tradition.

The short answer to why Jews observe these laws is: because the Torah says so. The Torah does not specify any reason for these laws, and for a Torah-observant, traditional Jew, there is no need for any other reason. Some have suggested that the laws of kashrut fall into the category of "chukkim," laws for which there is no reason. We show our obedience to G-d by following these laws even though we do not know the reason. Others, however, have tried to ascertain G-d's reason for imposing these laws.

In his book "To Be a Jew" (an excellent resource on traditional Judaism), Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin suggests that the dietary laws are designed as a call to holiness.

The ability to distinguish between right and wrong, good and evil, pure and defiled, the sacred and the profane, is very important in Judaism. Imposing rules on what you can and cannot eat ingrains that kind of self control, requiring us to learn to control even our most basic, primal instincts.

Donin also points out that the laws of kashrut elevate the simple act of eating into a religious ritual. The Jewish dinner table is often compared to the Temple altar in rabbinic literature. A Jew who observes the laws of kashrut cannot eat a meal without being reminded of the fact that he is a Jew.

Kashrut: Jewish Dietary Laws
http://www.jewfaq.org/kashrut.htm

Carlton asked:  Has pork, for example, even though it provides energy for the body, become as healthy as lamb or beef?

Tom replied:  The ancient world had many religions, and food laws played a part in them all.  The Jews had some of the most complex of these types of rules as part of their OC religion.

Religious Dietary Restrictions
http://eatocracy.cnn.com/2010/07/20/clarified-religious-dietary-restrictions/

However, regardless of any health issues, we have to understand how these laws were changed when the NC replaced and superseded the OC.  This is the real issue, not health.

Let all understand it was very “unhealthy” to accept the Gospel.  Many who did were persecuted and some even killed.  So good health is not to be considered above Gospel doctrine.  Nor is it the point of the Gospel here on earth.  Accepting the Gospel was a most unhealthy thing.

John 15:20 “Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they kept My word, they will keep yours also.

As for the health benefits of pork versus Lamb, Lamb has a higher fat content and will clog your arteries a little faster than pork.  

LAMB

Average per 100g: 156 calories, 8.3g fat. Health rating: **

Lamb is one of the fattiest meats, with the leanest cuts twice as fatty as their beef equivalent. However, there is a lot of variation, with lean leg steaks providing just 5.2 pc fat and lean breast 11 pc.

Lamb is one of the best absorbed sources of iron and a rich supply of zinc. An average serving has more than the Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) of vitamin B12, needed for healthy red blood cells.
PORK

Average per 100g: 123 calories, 4g fat. Health rating: ****

Technically a red meat, lean pork is almost as low in fat as chicken. Escalopes contain 1.7 pc fat compared with 1.1 pc in chicken breasts. However, streaky spare ribs are much fattier at 13.5 pc.

Pork has a lower proportion of artery-clogging saturates than lamb or beef but is not as high in the unsaturated type as chicken. Its zinc and iron content is intermediate between poultry and red meat.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3720/The-good-meat-guide.html#ixzz2g33

Lamb vs Pork
http://www.twofoods.com/compare/query/bGFtYg==/cG9yaw==

In fact, it is much more healthy to be a vegetarian, which was not promoted in either Judaism or the Christian Church.  Neither was Jesus a vegetarian.

I am a vegetarian, but not because of religion.  Only for health reasons.  There is no sin in eating pork, even though it is not the most healthy food.

While the OC is full of very complex and demanding food laws, the NC is not.  The Jew were constantly focused on their distinctive and rigid food laws and rituals, but not Christians.

In the NC, Food and Religion are no longer joined together.  And when they were connected, it became wrong and very divisive.

Gal. 2:11  But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.

Gal. 2:12 For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.

Gal. 2:13 The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.

Gal. 2:14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?

Food was at the center of the great Gospel debate that is featured in Galatians.  Those Jews who retreated back to the rules of the OC were not only wrong, they had betrayed the Gospel.

In the NC, food is no longer part of the religious rules.  Listen to Jesus and Paul make this Gospel point:

Matt. 6:25  “For this reason I say to you, do not be worried about your life, as to what you will eat or what you will drink; nor for your body, as to what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing?

John 6:27 “Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man
will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.”

John 6:55 “For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.

1Cor. 6:13 Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body.

1Cor. 8:8 But food will not commend us to God; we are neither the worse if we do not eat, nor the better if we do eat.

The OC food regulations were temporary.  They went away when the 1st century Gospel Reformation took place.

Heb. 9:9 which is a symbol for the present time. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience,

Heb. 9:10 since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.

In the NC, there are very little to no food laws.

Here is a profound way to understand why there is no longer any clean or unclean foods.  

In addition to food laws, the OC declared that blood was awful, and very unclean.  Even in spite of the fact it was used in the Temple Services.  Both animal and human blood were unclean and untouchable.

Thus, a women became “unclean” once a month, even as the drinking of animal blood or eating it in meat, was strictly forbidden as unclean.

Lev. 15:19  ‘When a woman has a discharge, if her discharge in her body is blood, she shall continue in her menstrual impurity for seven days; and whoever touches her shall be unclean until evening.

Lev. 12:2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, saying:  ‘When a woman gives birth and bears a male child, then she shall be unclean for seven days, as in the days of her menstruation she shall be unclean.

Lev. 3:17 ‘It is a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings: you shall not eat any fat or any blood.’”

Lev. 17:10  ‘And any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people.

Lev. 17:14  “For as for the life of all flesh, its blood is identified with its life. Therefore I said to the sons of Israel, ‘You are not to eat the blood of any flesh, for the life of all flesh is its blood; whoever eats it shall be cut off.’

While blood is unclean in the OC, it is not in the NC.  In fact, it is blood that saves, and gives Eternal Life in the NC.  So how can it be “unclean”?  

Thus, what was unclean in the OC is now clean and salvific in the NT.  

Those Jews who refused to go forward and embrace the NC, viewed the blood of Christ as ‘UNCLEAN.”  They were going to stick with the OC, which would also include all the food laws as well.

Heb. 10:29 How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?

But this is all wrong for any that want to follow the
Gospel.  The NC has no food laws, much less any distinction between clean and unclean.  It is not against blood.  Rather, those who embrace the Gospel drink red wine as the symbol of Christ’s blood.  A symbol that is CLEAN for them, but unclean for the OC Jews.

Luke 22:20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.

John 6:53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.

John 6:54 “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

John 6:55 “For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.

John 6:56 “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.

The OC Jews were outraged by such talk of Jesus blood, which they considered unclean, as all Jews were instructed.  But the NC is not like the OC, there are many major differences, and food laws are one of them.

Eph. 1:7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace

Eph. 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

The NC rejoices in the blood of Christ.  There is nothing “unclean” about it.  What was once viewed as very unclean, is now viewed in the opposite light.  Blood no longer means condemnation, rather it means Eternal Life in the NC.

Thus all food is clean in the NC.  It may not be healthy, but it is clean.  One can eat a pig every day, and no sin is being committed as the OC Jew and the SDA assumes.  

While all foods are clean, not all foods are healthy.  We must choose food that is healthy, as religion plays no part in diet under the NC.

Heb. 13:9 Do not be carried away by varied and strange teachings; for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, through which those who were so occupied were not benefited.

Here the author states that those in the OC, who followed the rules about food, “were not benefited ” anyway.  Which is why the OC was temporary, replaced by something much better.

Listen to Jesus:

Mark 7:14  After He called the crowd to Him again, He began saying to them, “Listen to Me, all of you, and understand:

Mark 7:15 there is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile the man.

Mark 7:16 [“If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”]

Mark 7:17  When he had left the crowd and entered the house, His disciples questioned Him about the parable.

Mark 7:18 And He *said to them, “Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him,

Mark 7:19 because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?” (Thus He declared all foods clean.)

Mark 7:20 And He was saying, “That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man.

Mark 7:21 “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries,

Mark 7:22 deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness.

Mark 7:23 “All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.”

Paul understands this teaching from Christ:

Rom. 14:14 I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

Rom. 14:15 For if because of food your brother is hurt, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not destroy with your food him for whom Christ died.

Rom. 14:16 Therefore do not let what is for you a good thing be spoken of as evil;

Rom. 14:17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

Here are two good posts from Sal:

Clean and unclean foods
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2013/1/clean-unclean-food

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2010/10/Clean-unclean-foo

Carlton asked:  Doesn't  2 Corinthians 6:17: Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,--include unclean meat?

Tom replied:  No.  Paul knows that 1) Jesus has made all foods clean. And 2) that Peter had also been instructed again on this point when the Gentiles came into the church.

The Gentiles would not have been able to join the church if they had to follow the OC food laws and endure the painful rite of circumcision.  Thus all these Jewish things, including OC Sabbath keeping, was banished from the NC on purpose.  

It was the secret plan of God to invite the Gentiles into the Church.   Part of that plan was to replace the OC with the NC, which is very different from the law based OC.

Carlton asked:  Is Leviticus 3:17 prohibiting the eating of fat or blood no longer advisable?

Tom replied:  Today, we live in the New Covenant.  We do not live in the ancient world, or under the Old Covenant.  Consequently, we are not to seek instruction and guidance from the OT about food or anything else.  No, no.  We are not OC Jews.  Rather, we are to follow what Christ teaches in the New Covenant.

What does Jesus teach about eating?  We must follow what he teaches.  Period.

The SDA’s have a made a great mistake to think that they are guided by, and must obey, the Old Covenant laws of the Jews.  Jesus does not teach such a point, and in fact condemns most of what the SDA’s teach, including their silly food laws.

Carlton asked:  In Acts 15 isn't the prohibition of "meats offered to idols" another way of identifying unclean meats, given that Noah only sacrificed 'clean' animals to God?  Isn't that also the reason why Paul would eat [clean] meats sacrificed to idols (1 Corinthians 10)?

Tom said:  The great Gospel debate that took place in the apostolic church is very interesting.  The first thing that stands out are how the leaders of the church, (James) were so wrong about the Gospel, and had to be condemned by Paul.

As far as Acts 15, I note that James (who was confused about the Gospel) tried to walk a fine line between letting the Gentiles not be circumcised, but yet, wanting them to adopt some Jewish distinctive.  Thus he gives his own personal judgment, which is not the same as inspired Gospel truth from Jesus.

Acts 15:19 “Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles,

Acts 15:20 but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.

James judgment is suspect and so too his theology.  Jesus does not teach what James promoted in Acts 15 as it relates to food.  But at least James repudiated circumcision, which was at the heart of the debate.  

The doctrine of circumcision would have prevented the spread of the church, stopping it dead in its tracks.  The Gentiles hated such a doctrine and few were interested in such a painful OC rite.

Gal. 2:11  But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.

Gal. 2:12 For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.

Gal. 2:13 The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.

To understand Galatians is to understand the Gospel.  The SDA’s have never understood this book, which took center stage in the great 1888 Gospel debate.  If they did, they would not promote OC food laws and other Jewish doctrines, like tithe or OC Sabbath keeping.

Carlton said:  Before you lambast me for misrepresenting Paul's teaching of 1 Corinthians 10.  It indeed does not say, only eat 'clean' animals offered to idols, but the implication, I believe, is, clean animals are sanctioned by God, therefore if a Gentile offers lamb to an idol it doesn't affect the constituency of the meat making it unclean, it is therefore, with a clear conscience, suitable to eat. If however, your brother might take offence, don't eat it to cause him to stumble at what he might perceive to be hypocrisy.

Tom said:  Any food offered to idols was considered “unclean.”  Because it was offered to idols.  Also, any meat that was not killed in a certain, Kosher, manner.  

Paul knew there was no such thing in the NC as clean and unclean food, nor were the many Gentile idols real.   He was trying to keep this issue from causing problems in the church between those who knew that there was no such thing as another gods, and the Gentiles who thought them real.

1Cor. 8:4  Therefore concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that there is no such thing as an idol in the world, and that there is no God but one.

1Cor. 8:5 For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords,

1Cor. 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

1Cor. 8:7  However not all men have this knowledge; but some, being accustomed to the idol until now, eat food as if it were sacrificed to an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.

1Cor. 8:8 But food will not commend us to God; we are neither the worse if we do not eat, nor the better if we do eat.

Carlton asked:  So to get back to the point.   Clean meats are sacrificed to God, that is the food for the priests.  That is the point you made regarding working on Sabbath.

Tom said:  First off, the OC Priests were Jews.  We live in the NC, and we are NC Priests.  Very different paradigms.  The NC does not follow or practice OC doctrines or rituals.

Second, the point being made about the Priests is that they had an EXEMPTION from the rules against working on the Sabbath.  This became the theological basis for Christ’s NC Sabbath doctrine, which was also based on a new doctrine, which the Protestants called the Priesthood of all believers.

Carlton said:  Priests work on Sabbath, priests ate meats sacrificed to God! Christians should eat priestly food.  

Tom said:  We in the NC are not to follow the OC, much less mimic what the Levites practiced.  (They also practiced ritual circumcision.)  We are to follow Jesus, our High Priest and apostle from God.  He teaches the NC, not the OC.

What is the definition of “priestly food” in the NC?

John 6:51 “I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”

John 6:54 “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

John 6:55 “For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.

Carlton said:  Eating pork is not a sin, nevertheless isn't it the case that it is not as healthy as biblically designated clean meat? Even science tells us that it is 'dangerous':

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/12/12/eating-pork.aspx

Tom said:  Like I said above, Pork is healthier then Lamb, which is very high in fat.  But neither one is very healthy.  But again, it is not wrong to eat any such food, including shellfish, etc.  

In the NC, food is not an issue like it was in the
OC.  If you want to be healthy, then being a Vegan is the best way to go.  But religion plays no role in our food selection today.

John 6:27 “Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man
will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.”

John 6:55 “For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.

I hope this helps.

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Seventh-Day Adventists

All Answers


Answers by Expert:


Ask Experts

Volunteer


Tom Norris

Expertise

I can answer most any question about church history and theology, starting from 1818 when William Miller articulated the 1st Angels Message that became the foundation of the Adventist Movement. While this first prophetic message terminated in the spring of 1844, it was followed by what Adventists refer to as the 2nd Angels Message, which dates from the spring of 1844 until the great disappointment of October 22, 1844. By 1847, the 3rd Angels Message had been developed and this Sabbatarian theology represents the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Moreover, I can explain the historical and theological development of the SDA denomination from its beginning and on through the great Battle Creek schism that forced the SDA's to retreat to Takoma Park. Here the 20th century church recovered from their internal battles that had erupted at the 1888 General Conference in Minneapolis over the definition of the law and the Gospel. Fearing another repeat of this disaster, President Daniels, determined to hide this debate. However, this policy led to more conflict, especially over the role and authority of Ellen White, a unique and accomplished religious writer that had remarkable spiritual gifts. However, by the decade of the 1970`s, the church once again erupted into debate. The hierarchy settled the turmoil in 1980 with the trial of Dr. Desmond Ford at Glacier View. Here Dr. Ford was exiled because he supposedly disagreed with Ellen White over the Fundamentals. But this controversial action resulted in another major schism that is still in progress today.

Experience

Tom Norris was raised as a Seventh-day Adventist in Takoma Park, Md. He attended SDA grade and High schools, moving on to study Adventist theology at Columbia Union College. He also spent significant time conducting independent research in the General Conference Archives and the Ellen G. White Estate. Over the years he has also interviewed a number of prominent Adventist scholars, theologians, and Pastors ranging from the late Arthur White to the exiled Dr. Desmond Ford. In addition, he has amassed a large private library, which includes numerous rare books and manuscripts about Adventist theology and history. He is presently the online editor of Adventist Reform, and can be found at Adventist for Tomorrow answering questions online about SDA theology and history as well as promoting Adventist Reform. http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/

Education/Credentials
Tom Norris attended SDA grade and High schools, moving on to study Adventist theology at Columbia Union College. He also spent significant time conducting independent research in the General Conference Archives and the Ellen G. White Estate.

©2016 About.com. All rights reserved.