Jesus vs Paul (eating idol meat)

[Simplelogic]

Jesus on idol meat:

Jesus completely condemned the practice of eating idol meat in Johns Revelation. He actually mentions it THREE TIMES: (Rev. 2:6, 14 (Ephesus); Rev. 2:14-15 (Pergamum); Revelation 2:20 (Thyatira)

"This absolute prescription also was set forth in James' ruling at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:20. Then it is repeated when it was put in a letter. (Acts 15:29.) Finally, James reiterates this for a third and final time in Acts chapter 21. James tells Paul that many claim Paul is teaching lawless doctrine. So James reminds Paul what was the ruling at the Jerusalem Council. He tells Paul that previously "we wrote giving judgment that they [i.e., the Gentiles] should keep themselves from things sacrificed to idols...." (Acts 21:25.)" Paul's Contradictions of Jesus

Paul on Idol meat:

However, Paul clearly teaches three times that there is nothing wrong in itself eating meat sacrificed to idols. (Romans 14:21;1 Corinthians 8:4-13, and 1 Corinthians 10:19-29.) The first time Paul addresses the question of "eating meat sacrificed to idols," Paul answers: "But food will not commend us to God; neither if we eat not...." (1 Cor. 8:8.) Paul then explained it is only necessary to abstain from eating such meat if you are around a "weaker" brother who thinks an idol is something. (1 Cor. 8:7, 8:10, 9:22.) Then, and only then, must you abstain. The reason is that then a brother might be emboldened to do something he thinks is sinful. The brother is weak for believing eating meat sacrificed to an idol is wrong. This is thus a sin for him to eat, even though you know it is not sinful to eat meat sacrificed to idols. Thus, even though you know better than your weaker brother that it is no sin to do so, it is better to abstain in his presence than cause him to sin against his weak conscience and be "destroyed." (1 Cor. 8:11.)

 

[sincerly]

Jesus on idol meat:

Jesus completely condemned the practice of eating idol meat in Johns Revelation. He actually mentions it THREE TIMES: (Rev. 2:6, 14 (Ephesus); Rev. 2:14-15 (Pergamum); Revelation 2:20 (Thyatira)

"This absolute prescription also was set forth in James' ruling at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:20. Then it is repeated when it was put in a letter. (Acts 15:29.) Finally, James reiterates this for a third and final time in Acts chapter 21. James tells Paul that many claim Paul is teaching lawless doctrine. So James reminds Paul what was the ruling at the Jerusalem Council. He tells Paul that previously "we wrote giving judgment that they [i.e., the Gentiles] should keep themselves from things sacrificed to idols...." (Acts 21:25.)" Paul's Contradictions of Jesus

Paul on Idol meat:

However, Paul clearly teaches three times that there is nothing wrong in itself eating meat sacrificed to idols. (Romans 14:21;1 Corinthians 8:4-13, and 1 Corinthians 10:19-29.) The first time Paul addresses the question of "eating meat sacrificed to idols," Paul answers: "But food will not commend us to God; neither if we eat not...." (1 Cor. 8:8.) Paul then explained it is only necessary to abstain from eating such meat if you are around a "weaker" brother who thinks an idol is something. (1 Cor. 8:7, 8:10, 9:22.) Then, and only then, must you abstain. The reason is that then a brother might be emboldened to do something he thinks is sinful. The brother is weak for believing eating meat sacrificed to an idol is wrong. This is thus a sin for him to eat, even though you know it is not sinful to eat meat sacrificed to idols. Thus, even though you know better than your weaker brother that it is no sin to do so, it is better to abstain in his presence than cause him to sin against his weak conscience and be "destroyed." (1 Cor. 8:11.)

SL, that site is not portraying Paul's belief correctly, nor is the wikipedia. The NIV is placing the opinions of its compilers in the verses.
Here is the KJV of 1 Cor.10:14-33."
Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.
The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?
What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.
Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.
Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?
All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth.
Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:
For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof.
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.
But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:
Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another [man's] conscience?
For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?
Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.
Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the [profit] of many, that they may be saved."

Paul is saying that all believers should flee from idolatry or the appearance thereof. He likened eating at the table with idolaters as eating the communion meal---shouldn't be done.

Also, all lawful animal flesh was given by GOD to be eaten without condemnation. He is not saying to eat of any "unclean flesh foods" or to actively sit and eat with those who sacrificed even "clean animals to devils.
Also, Since "clean animals" are not "unclean of themselves," when one goes to the meat market don't inquire as to the source of the "clean meats" one is buying.

Should one dine with an unbeliever, eat of the "clean animals" with thanksgiving. However, should a believer inform one that the animal was offered to an idol---for his sake/conscience don't eat.(That informer has not yet understood that clean animals are not unclean of themselves . It is one's beliefs in the "false god" that corrupts/makes it unclean.

 

[Desert Snake]

Once again the wisdom of the Apostle Paul. Good stuff.

 

[Desert Snake]

How can a 'false' idol "taint" meat?

 

[nazz]

Jesus on idol meat:

Jesus completely condemned the practice of eating idol meat in Johns Revelation. He actually mentions it THREE TIMES: (Rev. 2:6, 14 (Ephesus); Rev. 2:14-15 (Pergamum); Revelation 2:20 (Thyatira)

"This absolute prescription also was set forth in James' ruling at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:20. Then it is repeated when it was put in a letter. (Acts 15:29.) Finally, James reiterates this for a third and final time in Acts chapter 21. James tells Paul that many claim Paul is teaching lawless doctrine. So James reminds Paul what was the ruling at the Jerusalem Council. He tells Paul that previously "we wrote giving judgment that they [i.e., the Gentiles] should keep themselves from things sacrificed to idols...." (Acts 21:25.)" Paul's Contradictions of Jesus

Paul on Idol meat:

However, Paul clearly teaches three times that there is nothing wrong in itself eating meat sacrificed to idols. (Romans 14:21;1 Corinthians 8:4-13, and 1 Corinthians 10:19-29.) The first time Paul addresses the question of "eating meat sacrificed to idols," Paul answers: "But food will not commend us to God; neither if we eat not...." (1 Cor. 8:8.) Paul then explained it is only necessary to abstain from eating such meat if you are around a "weaker" brother who thinks an idol is something. (1 Cor. 8:7, 8:10, 9:22.) Then, and only then, must you abstain. The reason is that then a brother might be emboldened to do something he thinks is sinful. The brother is weak for believing eating meat sacrificed to an idol is wrong. This is thus a sin for him to eat, even though you know it is not sinful to eat meat sacrificed to idols. Thus, even though you know better than your weaker brother that it is no sin to do so, it is better to abstain in his presence than cause him to sin against his weak conscience and be "destroyed." (1 Cor. 8:11.)

Yes, there is a contradiction definitely. Not necessarily between Jesus and Paul but between the Jerusalem Council, the writer of Revelation, and Paul. However Paul did say that Christians should not attend pagan feasts.

 

[sincerly]

How can a 'false' idol "taint" meat?

That was Paul's point. GOD made a distinction of what was to be eaten and what animals were not to be eaten(as seen in Lev.11 and Deut.14).

The "tainting" came by the one who gave worship to the false god that the sacrificed animal was killed to appease.

God's sacrifices were to be symbolic of GOD'S Son who HE gave for the propitiation of mankind's sin penalty.(John 3:16).

 

[sincerly]

Yes, there is a contradiction definitely. Not necessarily between Jesus and Paul but between the Jerusalem Council, the writer of Revelation, and Paul. However Paul did say that Christians should not attend pagan feasts.

Nazz, that may be your belief, but it isn't the message of those verses.

 

[Simplelogic]

SL, that site is not portraying Paul's belief correctly, nor is the wikipedia. The NIV is placing the opinions of its compilers in the verses.
Here is the KJV of 1 Cor.10:14-33."
Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.
The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?
What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.
Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.
Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?
All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth.
Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:
For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof.
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.
But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:
Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another [man's] conscience?
For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?
Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.
Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the [profit] of many, that they may be saved."

Paul has trivialized a direct commandment which was "to abstain from meat offered to idols". Please note that neither James nor Jesus make the distinction between idol meat from pagan temples and idol meat which was sold in the market places. The command was an all encompassing command to simply not eat the meat period. Paul is suggesting that it is ONLY wrong if you offend a "weaker" brother. Lets look at some of this text that you quoted:

"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not."

Paul is making it clear that it is perfectly "lawful" for him to eat idol meat. According to the Torah, James and Jesus it was not. Paul's point that it was simply not "expedient" when in fact it was more than that. It was a direct violation of the Torah and Jesus.

"Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:"

"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."

Once again, Paul is upstaging Jesus and James' command by providing a loophole where Jesus and James provide none.

:But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake:

Paul's point is starting to become more clear now. He is obviously stating that THE REASON for abstaining from idol meat is not because it is simply wrong, but because of the "weak" person's conscience. Paul is not talking about his own conscience, the next verse will prove this.

" for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:
Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another [man's] conscience?"

It is all coming together nicely now. Paul is clearly saying that he has the freedom to eat idol meat!! Notice that Paul mentions "his freedom", which is obviously referring to his ability to eat idol meat! He just didn't want his followers doing it in front of other believers who thought it was wrong…very clever imho. He knew that he was laying down something different from what James and Jesus taught.

"For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?"

Why?? Because grace has nothing to do with it! It is flat out rebellion.

"Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the [profit] of many, that they may be saved."

Paul is obviously doing a little damage control here. He was probably getting flack from other followers of Jesus who actually took James seriously and abstained from idol meat. His decision was a clever way of continuing teaching his law abolishing doctrines while teaching his followers to NOT do it in front of other believers "for their sake". Very smart. Paul was great at disguising his beliefs in order to fit in with different societies. He had the chameleon approach to witnessing and he admits it himself:

20And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; 21To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. 1 Cor 9:10-21

Can you imagine Jesus saying anything like this?? Ughhh.
Keep in mind that the "law of Christ" has nothing to do with God's law. It was Paul's own made up concept of righteousness that he created after destroying the relevance of the law's of God.

You said: "It is one's beliefs in the "false god" that corrupts/makes it unclean."

Only in Paul's backwards world! The Torah, James and Jesus all state that idol meat is wrong…period! Anyways this makes no sense because Paul claimed he had "freedom" to eat idol meat…even though he knew it was wrong!! He only taught not to because of the "other mans conscience" who apparently didn't have Paul's "freedom" to eat it.

 

[Simplelogic]

Revelation 2:14: “But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there some that hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit fornication.”

Hmmmm. I wonder who this could have been?

 

[Simplelogic]

http://jesuswordsonly.com/images/stories/JWO_Online/ch7.pdf

 

[Pegg]

Jesus on idol meat:

Jesus completely condemned the practice of eating idol meat in Johns Revelation. He actually mentions it THREE TIMES: (Rev. 2:6, 14 (Ephesus); Rev. 2:14-15 (Pergamum); Revelation 2:20 (Thyatira)

"This absolute prescription also was set forth in James' ruling at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:20. Then it is repeated when it was put in a letter. (Acts 15:29.) Finally, James reiterates this for a third and final time in Acts chapter 21. James tells Paul that many claim Paul is teaching lawless doctrine. So James reminds Paul what was the ruling at the Jerusalem Council. He tells Paul that previously "we wrote giving judgment that they [i.e., the Gentiles] should keep themselves from things sacrificed to idols...." (Acts 21:25.)" Paul's Contradictions of Jesus

Revelation 2:6 Still, you do have this in your favor: that you hate the deeds of the sect of Nic·o·la′us,+ which I also hate.
Vs 14 “‘Nevertheless, I have a few things against you, that you have there those adhering to the teaching of Ba′laam,+ who taught Ba′lak+ to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit sexual immorality

What is the teaching of Balaam? It is the worship of false gods according to the account about Balaam. The isrealites were induced to celebrate to the god Peor through sexual orgies and joining in the worship of Peor by feasting on the meat offered in sacrifice at the festivals to the false god. The Isrealites were actually eating the meat as an act of worship to the false god.

So Paul is not contradicting this commandment for he too tells christians to abstain from idolatry.

Paul on Idol meat:

However, Paul clearly teaches three times that there is nothing wrong in itself eating meat sacrificed to idols. (Romans 14:21;1 Corinthians 8:4-13, and 1 Corinthians 10:19-29.) The first time Paul addresses the question of "eating meat sacrificed to idols," Paul answers: "But food will not commend us to God; neither if we eat not...." (1 Cor. 8:8.) Paul then explained it is only necessary to abstain from eating such meat if you are around a "weaker" brother who thinks an idol is something. (1 Cor. 8:7, 8:10, 9:22.) Then, and only then, must you abstain. The reason is that then a brother might be emboldened to do something he thinks is sinful. The brother is weak for believing eating meat sacrificed to an idol is wrong. This is thus a sin for him to eat, even though you know it is not sinful to eat meat sacrificed to idols. Thus, even though you know better than your weaker brother that it is no sin to do so, it is better to abstain in his presence than cause him to sin against his weak conscience and be "destroyed." (1 Cor. 8:11.)

Yes, thats right. The meat itself is not polluted unless the person eating is doing so for the purpose of worshiping the false god.

In the first century, when the sacrifices were offered in the pagan temples, the carcas would be sent to the 'meat market' to be sold.
It wasnt being sold for a religious purpose...the buyes of the meat were not participating in the worship of the false god. This is what Paul is saying, that eating the meat is not an act of idolatry.

Yet, he says if buying and eating the meat causes another brother to feel uncomfortable, then he wont buy and eat it.

Paul is most certainly not contradicting the command to abstain from idol worship.

 

[sincerly]

sincerly said: ↑
SL, that site is not portraying Paul's belief correctly, nor is the wikipedia. The NIV is placing the opinions of its compilers in the verses.
Here is the KJV of 1 Cor.10:14-33."
Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.
The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?
What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.
Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.
Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?
All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth.
Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:
For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof.
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.
But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:
Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another [man's] conscience?
For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?
Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.
Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the [profit] of many, that they may be saved."
Click to expand...

Paul has trivialized a direct commandment which was "to abstain from meat offered to idols". Please note that neither James nor Jesus make the distinction between idol meat from pagan temples and idol meat which was sold in the market places. The command was an all encompassing command to simply not eat the meat period. Paul is suggesting that it is ONLY wrong if you offend a "weaker" brother. Lets look at some of this text that you quoted:

"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not."

SL, quoting from sites that are claiming the same erroneous material doesn't make it right. The Holy Scriptures are true and condemn those argument you are supplying.
2Pet.3:15-16, has this to say concerning Paul's writings, "
And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

Let's look at the "All things" wording in the context of 1 Cor.10:1-+
Paul said to flee from Idolatry. That was GOD'S position as well.
Man made whatever to worship---it was his idol. Those who believed in such man made idols made offerings to them.
The material from which those idols were made was first made by the Creator GOD. Therefore, All things GOD made was "very good".
Man defiled/corrupted/ made abominable that which was "good" by transferring worship from the Creator GOD to a man-made god. Whatsoever was offered to that idol and the believer in that idol partook of the sacrifice in worship to it was condemned by the true GOD.

Paul is saying a believer in the Creator/savior cannot sit at both GOD'S Communion table and the table worshiping the devil.
Where did some of those Corinthians come from who were now converted from idol worship to following/believing in the Sacrifice Jesus Christ has made for their Salvation. Previously worshiping at the tables of idols. Some of them were still hanging to the belief that the idol had power and were struggling with that animal flesh question.

Paul, like the prophets and GOD before had pointed out, wrote very clearly that vs.18-20,
"Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?
What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils."
The sacrificed clean animals were eaten by the Levites who attended to the sanctuary services.
The difference was Who or what was being worshiped.
The animal's flesh was not rendered inedible.
That is the point Paul was making. The Idol is just whatever it was fashioned from---a nothing/not a god with power. Therefore, the animal offered could not be tainted---so, when you buy your flesh meats from the market don't question where it was killed or the purpose. Its the flesh from a clean animal.

In Acts. 24:14 we find Paul's attestation of beliefs shortly before his death. "But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:"

Therefore, the "All things" are those written in the "Law and in the prophets"
Just because something is "lawful" doesn't mean that it is uplifting or edifying for another at that time.

The site you quoted is still wrong as is some of the NWT.

 

[Harikrish]

Paul is right. Jesus put a lot of restrictions on his believers and even ordered his disciples not to go to the Gentiles and Samaritans. Paul made Christianity available to tbe gentile converts without being tied to the old Mosaic laws which Jesus apparently as a Jew was bound to. Even Jesus said. He came not to change the laws of the prophets , but to fulfill them. Paul had no such obligations nor does he say who gave him that authority. But he changed Christianity forever.

Matthew 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.

 

[sincerly]

Paul is right. Jesus put a lot of restrictions on his believers and even ordered his disciples not to go to the Gentiles and Samaritans. Paul made Christianity available to tbe gentile converts without being tied to the old Mosaic laws which Jesus apparently as a Jew was bound to. Even Jesus said. He came not to change the laws of the prophets , but to fulfill them. Paul had no such obligations nor does he say who gave him that authority. But he changed Christianity forever.

Matthew 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.

HK, You should have stopped with saying Paul was right.
Jesus said to go to the lost sheep of Israel, because they had/were given the Oracles of GOD and had rebelled. After the crucifixion the Gentiles an Samaritans would better understand the Good News of Salvation.Jesus only taught that which the Father had given HIM to say/do. Paul stated that which he taught was revealed to him by Jesus. and Paul believed that which was in the law and in the prophets.
Paul told how those OT Prophecies were fulfilled.
Those OT sacrificial laws were fulfilled in the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ upon the cross.
Gal.1:11-12, Paul's authority, "But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ."

 

[fantome profane]

It is a very hard thing to ask of people who might only get the chance a handful of times in a year to forgo the opportunity to get some meat. I find Paul's stance on this issue to be both reasonable and compassionate.

 

[Pegg]

It is a very hard thing to ask of people who might only get the chance a handful of times in a year to forgo the opportunity to get some meat. I find Paul's stance on this issue to be both reasonable and compassionate.

And not to mention the waste of animal life at those sacrifices if the meat was not to be consumed afterward.

Just recently in India the hindus had their year sacrifice of animals to one of their goddesses.... estimates say 500,000 cows were slaughtered and thrown in a hole! What a waste of meat and life.

So the biblical stance on eating sacrificed meat is actually very sound.

 

[Harikrish]

Jesus through his reckless act maligned the pig. Pigs are not meat of idol worship. They were innocent bystanders.

Mark 5:15
He gave them permission, and the impure spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.

 

[Simplelogic]

Paul is right. Jesus put a lot of restrictions on his believers and even ordered his disciples not to go to the Gentiles and Samaritans. Paul made Christianity available to tbe gentile converts without being tied to the old Mosaic laws which Jesus apparently as a Jew was bound to. Even Jesus said. He came not to change the laws of the prophets , but to fulfill them. Paul had no such obligations nor does he say who gave him that authority. But he changed Christianity forever.

Matthew 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.

Are you seriously saying that Paul was right and Jesus was wrong??? Yet you still call this "Christianity"???

 

[Simplelogic]

Jesus through his reckless act maligned the pig. Pigs are not meat of idol worship. They were innocent bystanders.

Mark 5:15
He gave them permission, and the impure spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.

Actually, the pagan temple was found recently in this city and the pigs were used for ritual sacrifice to other god's. Your critiques of Jesus are silly and boring.

 

[Simplelogic]

It is a very hard thing to ask of people who might only get the chance a handful of times in a year to forgo the opportunity to get some meat. I find Paul's stance on this issue to be both reasonable and compassionate.

Thats fine if you see it that way. As long as its clear that Jesus had a completely different view.