Posted on 02/06/2008 9:11:20 PM PST by neverdem
AUSTIN, Minn. If you have to come down with a strange disease, this town of 23,000 on the wide-open prairie in southeastern Minnesota is a pretty good place to be. The Mayo Clinic, famous for diagnosing exotic ailments, owns the local medical center and shares some staff with it. Mayo itself is just 40 miles east in Rochester. And when it comes to investigating mysterious outbreaks, Minnesota has one of the strongest health departments and best-equipped laboratories in the country.
And the disease that confronted doctors at the Austin Medical Center here last fall was strange indeed. Three patients had the same highly unusual set of symptoms: fatigue, pain, weakness, numbness and tingling in the legs and feet.
The patients had something else in common, too: all worked at Quality Pork Processors, a local meatpacking plant.
The disorder seemed to involve nerve damage, but doctors had no idea what was causing it.
At the plant, nurses in the medical department had also begun to notice the same ominous pattern. The three workers had complained to them of heavy legs, and the nurses had urged them to see doctors. The nurses knew of a fourth case, too, and they feared that more workers would get sick, that a serious disease might be spreading through the plant.
We put our heads together and said, Something is out of sorts, said Carole Bower, the department head.
Austins biggest employer is Hormel Foods, maker of Spam, bacon and other processed meats (Austin even has a Spam museum). Quality Pork Processors, which backs onto the Hormel property, kills and butchers 19,000 hogs a day and sends most of them to Hormel. The complex, emitting clouds of steam and a distinctive scent, is easy to find from just about anywhere in town...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Carolyn
Here’s a tip for health, bert. When you travel, keep plenty of frozen peas on hand (or canned if you don’t have a fridge in your camper) and add them to all casseroles and as an addition to omletes. This adds much needed folate to the diet of we older types AND it is a great ‘regulator’ for bowels when on the road extensively. I use lots of canned Allen green beans in casseroles and crockpot recipes, but the frozen peas are the best way to go.
I'd stay clear of you for a few days after you eat that...
Bean-O ... or an antacid with simethicone. I keep Bean-O handy ... and I’m not even an Irish Catholic!
The pancreas is also a sweetbread.
I’m not pushing keeping Old Testament law, but I do think there were practical reasons why certain hygienic laws were given to the people. My husband gets bad attacks of gout when he eats much pork, and I think all in all he and I both have more arthritic problems when we eat pork. I don’t eat shrimp or shellfish because the theobromine content of it gives me headaches, ditto for very much chocolate - didn’t eat it for about six years at all. I really like bacon, but don’t eat it very often. Interesting.
I prefer ketchup to get a tangy taste.
I ate brains and eggs almost every Saturday night the whole time I was in college. It never hurt me none.
Bump
I read a book called “What Would Jesus Eat?” a few years ago, and I’m inclined to agree with you. I avoid pork myself, especially after a friend of mine bought a pork burrito from a street seller and got a parasite in his brain!
But doesn’t the apostle Paul say somewhere (don’t have a Bible with me; can’t look up the exact verse,) that every man should follow his own conscience as far as what foods to eat or avoid, and not judge each other? I always took that to mean that it’s okay now to eat previously forbidden foods, (though they might not be as healthy as other choices.) Respectfully, what do you think?
I think Paul said the Judaizers are jealous of Christians' freedom, so you're right on the money with what you sought to quote. Paul never forbade wine or any food except that sacrificed to idols, and that because it would be a stumbling block to others of weaker faith. Those wishing to hold office in the Church are told certain things to avoid and ways to live, but that is about the extent of his admonitions ... what amazed so many pagans in the early days of the Chruch was the restraint Christians exhibited.
Thank you for your response.
The verses you're referring to might be:
1Co 10:27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.
However as the next verse makes clear this is referring specifically to meat that had once been sacrificed in idol worship:
1Co 10:28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that showed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof:
In Paul's time an issue for early Christians was whether or not they should eat meat that was once used in idol worship. As I understand it, an animal would be sacrificed and then later it's meat sold in the meat market. Paul's take was that it's okay to eat this meat with a clear conscience, but don't dig too deep into where it came from. However if another Christian would be offended by it you shouldn't eat it.
Nowhere though does it tell Christians to eat meat that God prohibited them to eat...i.e. pork. The meat sacrificed to idols was most likely bulls.
Another chapter that is often misinterpreted is Romans 14. But again this chapter is either referring to meat devoted to idols, days devoted to fasting or perhaps both.
Please understand though that this isn't my idea, or what I think. What I choose to believe is God's original injunction against eating pork.
Certainly. God designed animals and people. He knows the reasons why we shouldn't eat certain animals and so put it down in writing. I think people get confused between what God actually prohibited in scripture and what the Jewish religion teaches about kosher. God's law is actually very general in that pretty much it's to avoid the flesh of certain animals.
Haven't had one of those in years ... sounds like it's time to try it again. As an aside, a few years back I visited the Hawaiian Islands, for some reason SPAM is very popular in that part of the world.
Its something no one would have anticipated or thought about,
Amazing that a doctor would make that statement. Guts of animals being sprayed in a person’s face is disturbing on many levels. How could it not be a problem?
Pork is a major staple there. During the world war, Islanders learned to enjoy the convenience of SPAM. This was covered on a ‘How It’s Made’ program recently, on SPAM! The history of canned meat is indeed interesting, going back to Napoleonic military campaigns.
Certainly the ceremonial laws of the Levitical priesthood have been altered because of the sacrifice of Christ. This is a completely biblical argument:
Heb 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
Heb 7:13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar
This means that nearly all duties of the Levitical priesthood under the old covenant are altered under the new covenant.
However, a careful reading of Leviticus chapter 11 and Deuteronomy chapter 14 will show that the injunction against eating certain animals was not a function of the priesthood, but a pronouncement of God. The priesthood had no hand in determining what animals to eat or not to eat.
Contrast this with (for example) this verse:
Lev 14:14 And the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and the priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot:
Here it was the duty of the priest to perform these actions. But since Christ is our high priest, and all Christians ARE a royal priesthood, then this aspect of the law is ceremonial and altered under the new covenant.
A bible search on "priest" (in the KJV) can be illuminating. Some areas that the priesthood weren't involved in are:
1. Clean and unclean animals (Leviticus 11, Deut 14)
2. Sexual relations between family members (Leviticus 18)
3. The ten commandments. (Exodus 20, Duet 5)
These are some of the things that were carried over from the old covenant to the new covenant.
3. Any functions that had to be performed by the Levitical priesthood.
So again, Peter's vision in Acts wasn't a statement on the validity of God's law of clean and unclean animals, but was exactly what he said: God showing him that he shouldn't call any MAN common or unlean.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.