Sunday Worship

[Peter]

Discussion of video on Sunday worship:

Subject video that I downloaded with videographer's permission:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_nKSUwvf6g

And uploaded it in response to, and after having been sent the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH8520YG-gI
But the nicolaitian didn't post it.

Site:
http://www.biblehistory.com/The%20Origin%20of%20Sunday%20Worship.html

http://www.ukapologetics.net/sundayworship.htm

http://christianity.about.com/od/whatdoesthebiblesay/f/sundayworship.htm

Though I have not spent much time on this subject, and am wide open to it. Important passage:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Mat&c=12&v=9&t=KJV#1

Though I believe there is broad flexibility in this area as I don't believe one is saved by the doctrine one holds but rather by the condition of one's heart. Perhaps the greater danger lies in dictating to another as to whether he is right or wrong.

Rom 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. 5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. 6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. 7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. 8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.

Archaeological evidence suggests that the ecclesia met in homes and "communion" was a shared meal.

Act 20:7 And upon the first [day] of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

Apostles met with and taught Jews in synagogues on Saturday and fellowshipped and broke bread with brethren on Sunday?

In any event we are to ...

Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.

[Peter]

In response to the video in the original post I received the following PM. I had been merely attempting to introduce another point of view on a YouTuber's video regarding the Sabbath, but my responses were censored from his videos, channel comments, and video responses. Yesterday I spent a little time on the subject so I could better respond to the person that PM'd me. I edited a little further for this post:

[[[Hi you commented a while back on a post where I said to check out some forerunner777 videos.
Also you sent a video about sunday worship.
Watching the video now.
Here are some things I have problems with.

1. The video says they worshiped on the Lord's Day and calls this Sunday.
But the Bible says....
Luke 6:4
Then Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.]]]

This PM isn't about what is, or isn't. It's about a few things you might consider. Read the verses you proof-texted in context.
In what context is this first one said?

Luk 6:2 And certain of the Pharisees said unto them, Why do ye that which is not lawful to do on the sabbath days?

It is said in a chapter when Jesus and His disciples are working on the Sabbath. He is demonstrating exception for his breaking of the law. Seems to me He is pointing out the very opposite of what you used the verse to prove.
That is why Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath.

Luk 6:9 Then said Jesus unto them, I will ask you one thing; Is it lawful on the sabbath days to do good, or to do evil? to save life, or to destroy [it]?

[[[2. Hard to trust in many of the extra biblical resources shown. But I do believe many did move towareds Sunday because that was the Pegan Holiday .......]]]

So you see what you just said? That if there was a reason that Christians met on Sunday that it was because it was the pagan holiday. Do you think that was THEIR reason?

[[[[.....that many kept to begin with plus it was more a big feast/party day ..........]]]

To my knowledge there was no "party day" of the week until into the 20th century. Folks worked 6 days a week before then.

[[[........while the sabbath was about not working.Still many kept the sabbath.
Acts 15:21 "For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day."]]]

What's the context? Was Moses under the new covenant or old?
The verse you proof text is within the context of a rebuke when someone was trying to reintroduce the law back into the ecclesia. Acting not very dissimilar to the fashion in which you are.

Act 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, [and said], Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.

[[[Acts 18:4 "And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks."]]]

So you can see that he went to the synagogue to REASON WITH the Jews and Gentiles. Does this indicate they were all Christians meeting? No.
Do you think he engaged in Christian worship there? Did he break bread and sup with wine in communion with his brethren? Or did he go there to PERSUADE those who still didn't recognize Jesus was their Messiah?

[[[3. The nine points.
1. Does it matter what day he rode the donkey? Do we change the whole system of what day to worship because of this?

2. Jesus rose from the dead on Sunday because the law was to rest on the Sabbath. Jesus is simply going back to work on Sunday. If Sunday is now our day of rest Jesus should have rested that day.]]]

To make a claim as to whether the resurrection qualified as work or rest, or any of what you wrote here, is nothing more than speculation, unsupported by scripture.

[[[3-4 Yes Jesus is again going back to work by appearing to the disciples, still there is nothing about changing the day of worship from saturday to sunday.]]]

Ditto for this claim.
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

Perhaps if we see that Jesus is Lord OVER the Sabbath it will help introduce a new light. You seem to be trying to prove a doctrine more than get down to the truth - if indeed there is any definitive conclusion that can be drawn to begin with.

[[[5. Pentacost was a yearly holyday not a weekly one. you can't change a weekly holyday because of what happened one day on a yearly one.

6. So the Holy Spirity came down on a yearly holyday and that means we now keep sunday?]]]

But it seems the evidence may be more in favor of Sunday worship for the Ecclesia. You, yourself, quoted the purpose of the Apostles for going into the synagogues. They weren't always met warmly, were they? Take a look at this search for "synagogue" and read each verse in the context of the chapter:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/search/translationResults.cfm?Criteria=synagogue&t=KJV
(I love doing word and term searches like that!)

So where did the Ecclesia meet to worship God through Jesus Christ? To break bread and sup in communion with each other? Archaeological evidence suggests that they met in homes. I think you would agree that a synagogue would have been a disruptive place for followers of Jesus to meet with each other.

Act 20:7 And upon the first [day] of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

It would seem this is a regular first day of the week time for the disciples to COME TOGETHER to break bread. How could Paul have met with his brethren on Saturdays if that was his day to "persuade" the Jews in the synagogue. Additionally, in the synagogues in which he was received well, he could stay for months, as evidenced in the "synagogue" chapters search above.

[[[7-8. I think your talking about the sermon that was at night that could have easily started earlier when there was still daylight being the end of the sabbath, or maybe it was dark already and it was the first day, either way by meeting on a day does not all of a sudden change a commandment. Plus they were still meeting on sabbath days.]]]

See what you did? You took perhaps the best scriptural evidence regarding either day, and subjected it to your speculation, and then discarded it out of hand. WHO was meeting on sabbath days? Certainly those in the synagogues were. But what about the brethren?

WHAT are the commandments you are suggesting were changed?

Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

WHERE are the commandments? As you quoted in your second PM they are in our inward parts.

[[[9. Number nine is completly false!! Read Luke 6:4. Jesus is Lord of the SABBATH!!!]]]

Context.

Try thinking Lord OVER the Sabbath. (it doesn't exactly say this but it is undeniable)

[[[That is enough of that video.
Anyone who says the Lords Day is sunday needs to go back and read the Bible.]]]

But you are making your case by proof-texting verses, that don't make a very good case for you to begin with. And the best scriptural evidence, you put your effort into speculating away, and discarded out of hand.
Again I highly recommend "Pagan Christianity" by Frank Viola is you want to read a good study on the paganization of the ecclesia by Constantine and others.

[[[ That is the Catholics Church Lords Day and that is all it is.
Here is theyre own quote.... "Sunday is our MARK of authority"]]]

What the RCC does or does not say it is, is irrelevant. Are we to try to do everything opposite the Roman Catholics? Deny that Jesus is the Son of God? Deny the cross? My sympathies don't lie with the Roman Church, but this isn't an argument.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?board=7.0

What you mean is that is what you have deduced by your understanding of scripture. Yet you brushed aside the first day of the week breaking of bread - the body of Christ - for what you have been taught. If you had really studied those verses in context, and the other evidence regarding the first century ecclesia, I think you might not be quite so sure of yourself.

The reason you like forerunner777's videos is that he confirms what you already want to believe. That's what self-indoctrination is all about.
Anyone who does not allow constructive criticism of his point of view is a nicolaitian. It is usurping authority that belongs to Jesus Christ. Just like his "school" even more disastrously will accomplish.
One of the things God expresses a personal hatred of.

1Pe 5:3 Neither as being lords over [God's] heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.

The first century ecclesia was an every-member-function meeting.

[[[Your folling the tradition of man not the bible by keeping Sunday.]]]

But that is your - extremely minor - opinion, yet you state it as a matter of fact, in the form of a rebuke.

[[[Remember Jesus says in Jn 14:15
If you love Me, you will keep My commandments]]]

And I copy and pasted those commandments above.
Once we have a circumcision of the heart the Holy Spirit guides our actions. You yourself don't believe that whether we meet on Saturday or Sunday is a matter of salvation, yet you are spending your time going around spanking your brethren based on your own personal understanding, dividing the body of Christ.
Meanwhile there are 1.5 billion - 1/4 of mankind - who follow THE false prophet Mohammed, in which the most important fundamental of his stand-alone 7th century religion requires denying that Jesus is the Son of God ("shirk").

Is your time being well spent that way? Is arguing over Saturday or Sunday among brethren what's important?
Besides all of the rebukes in scripture for those trying to reintroduce the law back into the ecclesia you may well be skating on far thinner ice than that:

Rom 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. 5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Do you really think it's your job to go around telling brethren, what is and isn't, based on your personal understanding of scripture? Particularly since the overwhelming majority of those brethren choose to worship on Sunday? Let alone by the thin evidence you produced above?

Mat 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

May God bless you sis,
Pete

[resistingrexmundi]

Your refutation is very explanatory or this man's own beliefs. I think the verse that best describes his own personal problem is this.

Mat 23:24 [Ye] blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. 

[Peter]

Her next PM was quite surprising:

[[Jesus work on the Sabbath?
Give me a break]]]

But that's exactly what He did:

Mat 12:1 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat. 2 But when the Pharisees saw [it], they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.

Yet you can't seem to see it.

Mat 12:10 And, behold, there was a man which had [his] hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.

Aren't you, yourself, accusing Jesus, just like they did?

[[[It was jewish added laws of how to not work and traditions that Jesus was not keeping.
If Jesus did not keep the Sabbath none of us are saved cause he had to keep the whole law not just parts of it.]]]

I must say your persistence is a surprising reaction, considering those explicit warnings I pointed out in scripture. You don't seem to know where the law is.
Did Jesus approve of stoning adulterers?

Jhn 8:4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
________________________

(For those read-only participants in this forum who may not know the answer to that question:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=8&v=7&t=KJV#3 )

John 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.    8  And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.    9 And they which heard [it], being convicted by [their own] conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, [even] unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.    10  When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?    11  She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

[Peter]

This debate is nothing new, and certainly didn't originate with Constantine, as is made apparent by Romans 14:4.
Interesting observations by Matthew Henry on the subject:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/commentaries/comm_view.cfm?AuthorID=4&contentID=1731&commInfo=5&topic=Romans&ar=Rom_14_5

The apostle having, in the former chapter, directed our conduct one towards another in civil things, and prescribed the sacred laws of justice, peaceableness, and order, to be observed by us as members of the commonwealth, comes in this and part of the following chapter in like manner to direct our demeanour one towards another in sacred things, which pertain more immediately to conscience and religion, and which we observe as members of the church. Particularly, he gives rules how to manage our different apprehensions about indifferent things, in the management of which, it seems, there was something amiss among the Roman Christians, to whom he wrote, which he here labours to redress. But the rules are general, and of standing use in the church, for the preservation of that Christian love which he had so earnestly pressed in the foregoing chapter as the fulfilling of the law. It is certain that nothing is more threatening, nor more often fatal, to Christian societies, than the contentions and divisions of their members. By these wounds the life and soul of religion expire. Now in this chapter we are furnished with the sovereign balm of Gilead; the blessed apostle prescribes like a wise physician. "Why then is not the hurt of the daughter of my people recovered, but because his directions are not followed? This chapter, rightly understood, made use of, and lived up to, would set things to rights, and heal us all.

We have in this chapter,

I. An account of the unhappy contention which had broken out in the Christian church. Our Master had foretold that offences would come; and, it seems, so they did, for want of that wisdom and love which would have prevented discord, and kept up union among them.

1. There was a difference among them about the distinction of meats and days; these are the two things specified. There might be other similar occasions of difference, while these made the most noise, and were most taken notice of. The case was this: The members of the Christian church at Rome were some of them originally Gentiles, and others of them Jews. We find Jews at Rome believing, Acts 28:24. Now those that had been Jews were trained up in the observance of the ceremonial appointments touching meats and days. This, which had been bred in the bone with them, could hardly be got out of the flesh, even after they turned Christians; especially with some of them, who were not easily weaned from what they had long been wedded to. They were not well instructed touching the cancelling of the ceremonial law by the death of Christ, and therefore retained the ceremonial institutions, and practised accordingly; while other Christians that understood themselves better, and knew their Christian liberty, made no such difference. (1.) Concerning meats (v. 2): One believeth that he may eat all things-he is well satisfied that the ceremonial distinction of meats into clean and unclean is no longer in force, but that every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused; nothing unclean of itself, v. 14. This he was assured of, not only from the general tenour and scope of the gospel, but particularly from the revelation which Peter, the apostle of the circumcision (and therefore more immediately concerned in it), had to this purport, Acts 10:15, 28. This the strong Christian is clear in, and practises accordingly, eating what is set before him, and asking no question for conscience' sake, 1 Co. 10:27. On the other hand, another, who is weak, is dissatisfied in this point, is not clear in his Christian liberty, but rather inclines to think that the meats forbidden by the law remain still unclean; and therefore, to keep at a distance from them, he will eat no flesh at all, but eateth herbs, contenting himself with only the fruits of the earth. See to what degrees of mortification and self-denial a tender conscience will submit. None know but those that experience it how great both the restraining and the constraining power of conscience is. (2.) Concerning days, v. 5. Those who thought themselves still under some kind of obligation to the ceremonial law esteemed one day above another-kept up a respect to the times of the passover, pentecost, new moons, and feasts of tabernacles; thought those days better than other days, and solemnized them accordingly with particular observances, binding themselves to some religious rest and exercise on those days. Those who knew that all these things were abolished and done away by Christ's coming esteemed every day alike. We must understand it with an exception of the Lord's day, which all Christians unanimously observed; but they made no account, took no notice, of those antiquated festivals of the Jews. Here the apostle speaks of the distinction of meats and days as a thing indifferent, when it went no further than the opinion and practice of some particular persons, who had been trained up all their days to such observances, and therefore were the more excusable if they with difficulty parted with them. But in the epistle to the Galatians, where he deals with those that were originally Gentiles, but were influenced by some judaizing teachers, not only to believe such a distinction and to practise accordingly, but to lay a stress upon it as necessary to salvation, and to make the observance of the Jewish festivals public and congregational, here the case was altered, and it is charged upon them as the frustrating of the design of the gospel, falling from grace, Gal. 4:9 endash 11. The Romans did it out of weakness, the Galatians did it out of wilfulness and wickedness; and therefore the apostle handles them thus differently. This epistle is supposed to have been written some time before that to the Galatians. The apostle seems willing to let the ceremonial law wither by degrees, and to let it have an honourable burial; now these weak Romans seem to be only following it weeping to its grave, but those Galatians were raking it out of its ashes.

2. It was not so much the difference itself that did the mischief as the mismanagement of the difference, making it a bone of contention. (1.) Those who were strong, and knew their Christian liberty, and made use of it, despised the weak, who did not. Whereas they should have pitied them, and helped them, and afforded them meek and friendly instruction, they trampled upon them as silly, and humoursome, and superstitious, for scrupling those things which they knew to be lawful: so apt are those who have knowledge to be puffed up with it, and to look disdainfully and scornfully upon their brethren. (2.) Those who were weak, and durst not use their Christian liberty, judged and censured the strong, who did, as if they were loose Christians, carnal professors, that cared not what they did, but walked at all adventures, and stuck at nothing. They judged them as breakers of the law, contemners of God's ordinance, and the like. Such censures as these discovered a great deal of rashness and uncharitableness, and would doubtless tend much to the alienating of affection. Well, this was the disease, and we see it remaining in the church to this day; the like differences, in like manner mismanaged, are still the disturbers of the church's peace. But,

II. We have proper directions and suggestions laid down for allaying this contention, and preventing the ill consequences of it. The apostle, as a wise physician, prescribes proper remedies for the disease, which are made up of rules and reasons. Such gentle methods does he take, with such cords of a man does he draw them together; not by excommunicating, suspending, and silencing either side, but by persuading them both to a mutual forbearance: and as a faithful daysman he lays his hand upon them both, reasoning the case with the strong that they should not be so scornful, and with the weak that they should not be so censorious. If the contending parties will but submit to this fair arbitration, each abate of his rigour, and sacrifice their differences to their graces, all will be well quickly. Let us observe the rules he gives, some to the strong and some to the weak, and some to both, for they are interwoven; and reduce the reasons to their proper rules.

1. Those who are weak must be received, but not to doubtful disputations, v. 1. Take this for a general rule; spend your zeal in those things wherein you and all the people of God are agreed, and do not dispute about matters that are doubtful. Receive him, proslambavesthe-take him to you, bid him welcome, receive him with the greatest affection and tenderness; porrigite manum (so the Syriac): lend him your hand, to help him, to fetch him to you, to encourage him. Receive him into your company, and converse, and communion, entertain him with readiness and condescension, and treat him with all possible endearments. Receive him: not to quarrel with him, and to argue about uncertain points that are in controversy, which will but confound him, and fill his head with empty notions, perplex him, and shake his faith. Let not your Christian friendship and fellowship be disturbed with such vain janglings and strifes of words."Not to judge his doubtful thoughts (so the margin), "not to pump out his weak sentiments concerning those things which he is in doubt about, that you may censure and condemn him. Receive him, not to expose him, but to instruct and strengthen him. See 1 Co. 1:10; Phil. 3:15, 16.

More:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/commentaries/comm_view.cfm?AuthorID=4&contentID=1731&commInfo=5&topic=Romans&ar=Rom_14_5

Jhn 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

[Peter]

[[[Show me in the Bible where there is a law that one cannot heal or one cannot pick some food to eat?

Neither of those passages say anything about any law you find in the Bible.

1. Doing good on the sabbath is a good thing, Yes pray for people and heal them.
2. If your that hungry and food is there why not eat something, I pick pears from the tree outside our church on Sabbath Day, guess I'm breaking the law too.

Jesus did not break the Sabbath.
Those were mans laws.

Luke 4:16 - NKJV
So He (Jesus) came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read.]]]

That was his custom because that is where Jesus was "brought up" as a Jew.
You seem to be suggesting that the synagogue was where Jesus was in fellowship with those that accepted Him as the Messiah, but was that likely where brethren met?
Here's why the Apostles went to synagogues on the Sabbath:

Act 18:4 And he REASONED in the synagogue every sabbath, and PERSUADED the Jews and the Greeks. 5 And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews [that] Jesus [was] Christ. 6 And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook [his] raiment, and said unto them, Your blood [be] upon your own heads; I [am] clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.

Does the synagogue seem like it was a likely place for brethren to meet?
Or more likely a hostile place for brethren to fellowship? Is a hostile synagogue likely where the brethren partook of the body and blood in remembrance?

[[[Jesus kept the whole law

"If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love." John 15:10.]]]

Now reread the verse you pasted.

Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for YE ARE NOT UNDER THE LAW, but under grace.

Jhn 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

[[[I would not want to stand before Jesus with a record of telling others that it was ok to break his law. And even say that Jesus himself broke it so I can to.]]]

Indeed. It seems you would rather stand in judgment as a bickering sister that did what she could to divide the brethren, and cheered on the the decrees of the nicolaitians (and I don't use that term lightly), that put their effort into doing the same.
Perhaps next on your list will be encouraging the reintroducing circumcision as necessary for salvation.
I am not trying to persuade you one way or the other sis. I simply did what I could to show you the other side of the coin.

This debate did not start with Constantine as your nicolaitian YouTuber suggests. This debate is as old as the scriptures themselves, but you don't seem to have read the verses I copy and pasted, but preferred instead to repeat yourself rather then address them:

Rom 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Perhaps if they are not my words but those of a man forged in the reformation (Matthew Henry) it would help:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/commentaries/comm_view.cfm?AuthorID=4&contentID=1731&commInfo=5&topic=Romans&ar=Rom_14_5

But then maybe you won't be content to "let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind".
I did what I could.
But don't you think a Christian might have bigger fish to fry, with 1/4 of mankind following the false prophet, in whose religion the most important fundamental requires denying that Jesus is the Son of God, and whose religion requires denying that Jesus even died on the cross?

May God bless you sis.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dejfJNF2_s

[Peter]

[[[Show me in the Bible where there is a law that one cannot heal or one cannot pick some food to eat?]]]

Leviticus 11:1 Now the LORD spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying to them, 2 "Speak to the children of Israel, saying, 'These [are] the animals which you may eat among all the animals that [are] on the earth: 3 'Among the animals, whatever divides the hoof, having cloven hooves [and] chewing the cud -- that you may eat.

4 'Nevertheless these you shall not eat among those that chew the cud or those that have cloven hooves: the camel, because it chews the cud but does not have cloven hooves, is unclean to you; 5 'the rock hyrax, because it chews the cud but does not have cloven hooves, [is] unclean to you; 6 'the hare, because it chews the cud but does not have cloven hooves, [is] unclean to you; 7 'and the swine, though it divides the hoof, having cloven hooves, yet does not chew the cud, [is] unclean to you. 8 'Their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch. They [are] unclean to you. 9 ' These you may eat of all that [are] in the water: whatever in the water has fins and scales, whether in the seas or in the rivers -- that you may eat. 10 'But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which [is] in the water, they [are] an abomination to you. 11 'They shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination.

12 'Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales -- that [shall be] an abomination to you. 13 ' And these you shall regard as an abomination among the birds; they shall not be eaten, they [are] an abomination: the eagle, the vulture, the buzzard, 14 'the kite, and the falcon after its kind; 15 'every raven after its kind, 16 'the ostrich, the short-eared owl, the sea gull, and the hawk after its kind; 17 'the little owl, the fisher owl, and the screech owl; 18 'the white owl, the jackdaw, and the carrion vulture; 19 'the stork, the heron after its kind, the hoopoe, and the bat. 20 ' All flying insects that creep on [all] fours [shall be] an abomination to you. 21 'Yet these you may eat of every flying insect that creeps on [all] fours: those which have jointed legs above their feet with which to leap on the earth. 22 'These you may eat: the locust after its kind, the destroying locust after its kind, the cricket after its kind, and the grasshopper after its kind. 23 'But all [other] flying insects which have four feet [shall be] an abomination to you. 24 ' By these you shall become unclean; whoever touches the carcass of any of them shall be unclean until evening; 25 'whoever carries part of the carcass of any of them shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening: 26 '[The carcass] of any animal which divides the foot, but is not cloven-hoofed or does not chew the cud, [is] unclean to you. Everyone who touches it shall be unclean. 27 'And whatever goes on its paws, among all kinds of animals that go on [all] fours, those [are] unclean to you. Whoever touches any such carcass shall be unclean until evening. 28 'Whoever carries [any such] carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. It [is] unclean to you. 29 ' These also [shall be] unclean to you among the creeping things that creep on the earth: the mole, the mouse, and the large lizard after its kind; 30 'the gecko, the monitor lizard, the sand reptile, the sand lizard, and the chameleon. 31 'These [are] unclean to you among all that creep. Whoever touches them when they are dead shall be unclean until evening. 32 'Anything on which [any] of them falls, when they are dead shall be unclean, whether [it is] any item of wood or clothing or skin or sack, whatever item [it is,] in which [any] work is done, it must be put in water. And it shall be unclean until evening; then it shall be clean. 33 'Any earthen vessel into which [any] of them falls you shall break; and whatever [is] in it shall be unclean: 34 'in such a vessel, any edible food upon which water falls becomes unclean, and any drink that may be drunk from it becomes unclean. 35 'And everything on which [a part] of [any such] carcass falls shall be unclean; [whether it is] an oven or cooking stove, it shall be broken down; [for] they [are] unclean, and shall be unclean to you. 36 'Nevertheless a spring or a cistern, [in which there is] plenty of water, shall be clean, but whatever touches any such carcass becomes unclean. 37 'And if a part of [any such] carcass falls on any planting seed which is to be sown, it [remains] clean. 38 'But if water is put on the seed, and if [a part] of [any such] carcass falls on it, it [becomes] unclean to you. 39 ' And if any animal which you may eat dies, he who touches its carcass shall be unclean until evening. 40 'He who eats of its carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. He also who carries its carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. 41 ' And every creeping thing that creeps on the earth [shall be] an abomination. It shall not be eaten. 42 'Whatever crawls on its belly, whatever goes on [all] fours, or whatever has many feet among all creeping things that creep on the earth -- these you shall not eat, for they [are] an abomination. 43 'You shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creeps; nor shall you make yourselves unclean with them, lest you be defiled by them. 44 'For I [am] the LORD your God. You shall therefore consecrate yourselves, and you shall be holy; for I [am] holy. Neither shall you defile yourselves with any creeping thing that creeps on the earth. 45 'For I [am] the LORD who brings you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God. You shall therefore be holy, for I [am] holy. 46 ' This [is] the law of the animals and the birds and every living creature that moves in the waters, and of every creature that creeps on the earth, 47 'to distinguish between the unclean and the clean, and between the animal that may be eaten and the animal that may not be eaten.' "
_______________________________

Acts 10:10 Then he became very hungry and wanted to eat; but while they made ready, he fell into a trance 11 and saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to the earth. 12 In it were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. 13 And a voice came to him, "Rise, Peter; kill and eat." 14 But Peter said, "Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean." 15 And a voice [spoke] to him again the second time, "What God has cleansed you must not call common." 16 This was done three times. And the object was taken up into heaven again.