What I've gleaned

When I was first redeemed, I've often wondered: should a believer do everything that the Bible permits or everything that the Bible does not forbid? I've gradually gravitated closer toward doing only those that the Bible permits, with the ever applicable principle of "everything in moderation." But there is a verse to tell us beyond any doubts that a believer should do only what is permitted. I Kings 14:8: "... my servant David, who kept my commands and followed me with all his heart, doing only what was right in my eyes." Now, one can split hair and say, what was right in G-d's eyes could be all those things that are not forbidden. But then wouldn't the L-ord have said: "doing all that was not wrong in my eyes."

The second observation I've gleaned is regarding Biblically kosher diet. Everyone loves to quote Acts 10:10-16 as the abolition of the commands to observe a Biblically kosher diet. But why don't we examine it a little closer. First, let Peter speak for himself what is it that he was commanded to do. Second, let the Scripture explain Scripture. And third, let's examine things in context.

While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit said to him: "Simon, three men are looking for you. So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them." Acts 10:19. That did not say: "Simon, the pork, cat fish, and lobster have been cooked for you. So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to eat the pork, cat fish, and lobster, for I have sent them."

Next, Peter himself told Cornelius, "G-d has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean." Acts 10:28. That did not say that "G-d has shown me that I should not call any food impure or unclean."

Subsequently, "when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcised believers criticized him and said, 'You went into the house of uncircumcised men and ate with them.'" Acts 11:2-3. Shouldn't they criticized Peter for eating unclean food instead of going into the house of uncircumcised men and ate with them. Peter retold his dream, mentioning nothing about eating pork, cat fish or lobster, but instead defended himself by saying, "so if G-d gave them the same gift as he gave us, who believed in the L-rd Yeshua the Messiah, who was I to think that I could oppose G-d." Acts 11:17. That did not say that G-d told me to eat pork, cat fish and lobster, who was I to think that I could oppose G-d.

Scripture never once said that Peter ate unclean food. And if he did and somehow Scripture did not record it, we should expect the circumcised believers to criticize him next for violating dietary laws after they had criticized him for going into the house of uncircumcised men and ate with them. But the circumcised believers did not. "They had no further objections and praised G-d, saying, 'So then, G-d has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life.'" Acts 11:18. That did not say, "So then, G-d has granted even unclean food for us to eat."