Posted on 03/06/2020 5:24:25 AM PST by major_gaff
I will certainly comment on them - neither have anything to do with drinking blood. They eliminate the distinction between “clean” and “unclean” animals for consumption. However Acts 16.20 deals directly and specifically with the subject. Care to try again?
>>However Acts 16.20 deals directly and specifically with the subject. Care to try again?<<
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+16&version=KJV
20 And brought them to the magistrates, saying, These men, being Jews, do exceedingly trouble our city,
Ok, please explain what that verse has to do with the subject?
Acts 15 is the chapter with the prohibition against eating blood.
Yeah, the monitor lizard my buddy and I caught was a pretty small one in comparison to some of the ones I saw down there that looked really big! No
My bad, its Acts 15.20.
Also Acts 15.29
In both verses, the prohibition appears to be morally based and tied to idolatry rather than a clean vs. unclean concern. Which is what the passage from Mark and the “kill and eat” passage with Peter in Acts were dealing with. Mark specifically says that Jesus declared all foods “clean.” In Acts 15 the prohibition from drinking comes along with a prohibition from eating things contaminated by idols, eating things strangled and from fornication.
And that good old San Miguel, aged from the time it was brewed in the morning till it was swilled down around noon.
Spent many a day ‘dying’ as my LST was bouncing in the surf on the way out after a night of HEAVY ‘preparation for getting underway’...
Nothing like sitting a CW circuit with ones mind full of SYTs and good cold ‘San Magoo’.....
Those were the days....
L
Mmmm, zoonotic viruses...
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.