Religiously/Spiritually Based Diet

[Thief]

It was matzah. Also, as you're not Jewish, there is no reason for you to keep kosher. And seriously, do you really want to give up bacon cheeseburgers?

I have.....but that's because the franchise makes a lousy burger

STEAK!....oh yeah!

 

[Thief]

I believe so also.

Your quote comes from John as Jesus first miracle. He didn't heal, he merely amazed. The remark of the governor is to glorify that the works of Christ surpassed of those before him (OT). It is symbolic. The wine is unimportant.
John:
3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.
4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.
11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.

Jesus is represented as the good wine. The wine he said was his blood that we must drink.

Perspective. There is nothing wrong with drinking wine (in material). When Jesus knew his time was at hand, he fed the disciples wine to crush the blow of the event, and they even fell asleep, possibly from over consumption. Wine is use both materially and spiritually in the gospel. But Jesus spoke and taught spirit. It is through the Spirit we understand.

My perspective after seeking the answers.

thank you.....

as I read it...the wine is important

the ability to alter the nature of a thing is god-like
anyone can make grape juice at a moments notice

fermentation takes time

the governor must have been looking the other way when the event happened
he became the 'control'.....the affirmation .....a miracle had taken place
his pronouncement affirmed the water had become wine

imagine you were there....
would you again ever look at Him.....as you did before

 

[Phantasman]

thank you.....

as I read it...the wine is important

the ability to alter the nature of a thing is god-like
anyone can make grape juice at a moments notice

fermentation takes time

the governor must have been looking the other way when the event happened
he became the 'control'.....the affirmation .....a miracle had taken place
his pronouncement affirmed the water had become wine

imagine you were there....
would you again ever look at Him.....as you did before

The miracles wasn't a big thing for me. The knowledge he taught was everything. It's why I follow the non canon gospels. They are pure spiritual knowledge, and not acts of the flesh. Similar to what Paul wrote.

 

[Akivah]

Not sure what free will has to do with why God would create perfectly eatable plants/animals and then tell people that they aren't supposed to eat them. No clue whatsoever what you'ere trying to say in your second sentence.

You said

If I were a creator god that didn't want his creations to eat certain foods then I would have made those foods poisonous to eat.

Our decision to forbear from certain foods is done because we CHOOSE to forbear. And we forbear because G-d asked us to, not because going against G-d's rules would result in our deaths. Making the foods poisonous that G-d asked us to forbear is silly. It removes the choice of freewill. Almost no one would choose to eat poisonous food. Freewill only makes sense if we can freely choose without a result of certain death awaiting us if we choose incorrectly.

My second sentence concerning the cliff is illustrating my point. G-d didn't need to issue a commandment not to jump off of high cliffs, because doing that action would result in our death. Almost no one would choose to jump off a high cliff, rendering the commandment superfluous.

 

[Thief]

The miracles wasn't a big thing for me. The knowledge he taught was everything. It's why I follow the non canon gospels. They are pure spiritual knowledge, and not acts of the flesh. Similar to what Paul wrote.

not a Pauline, myself.....
(I hear Paul never met Jesus)

but I've had discussion with Christians that abstain from ALL alcohol

and I cannot agree

 

[Phantasman]

not a Pauline, myself.....
(I hear Paul never met Jesus)

but I've had discussion with Christians that abstain from ALL alcohol

and I cannot agree

I see Paul as one who didn't meet Jesus in the flesh, but knew him through the Spirit (capital S) the same as we do. Paul takes nothing away from the canon or non canon gospels, but shows (through the Spirit) their message as a combination of spiritual clarity. Remember, he wrote of the Spirit decades before the presbyters wrote the "acts of Jesus" gospels. There's a good chance, that out of the gospels we can read, that Thomas came first.

 

[QuestioningMind]

You said

Our decision to forbear from certain foods is done because we CHOOSE to forbear. And we forbear because G-d asked us to, not because going against G-d's rules would result in our deaths. Making the foods poisonous that G-d asked us to forbear is silly. It removes the choice of freewill. Almost no one would choose to eat poisonous food. Freewill only makes sense if we can freely choose without a result of certain death awaiting us if we choose incorrectly.

My second sentence concerning the cliff is illustrating my point. G-d didn't need to issue a commandment not to jump off of high cliffs, because doing that action would result in our death. Almost no one would choose to jump off a high cliff, rendering the commandment superfluous.

Doesn't sound like anything that a reasonable all-powerful god would do. Why created certain animals that are eatable and then prohibit your creations from eating them? That's not something a god would do. It's what human beings attempting to control other people would do.

For instance, it's my understanding that the reason Hindus are prohibited from eating beef is because at one point there was a terrible famine and the people were all eating their cattle. However, aside from meat cattle also provided milk and dung which was a major source of fuel. By eating all of the cattle the people were actually making matters worse, so human beings started claiming that cows were sacred and the gods no longer wanted people to use them as food. I read similar explanations for why pork and shellfish were prohibited in other cultures as well, but don't recall the specifics.

 

[robocop (actually)]

You can eat and drink what you want but we have a similar code to the Mormon Word of Wisdom (me and Raelians do). Water fast once a week no drugs. You don't need drugs. Raelians get high with thought. You don't need junk... you get fulfilled and then you want to live a good life.

 

[Thief]

I see Paul as one who didn't meet Jesus in the flesh, but knew him through the Spirit (capital S) the same as we do. Paul takes nothing away from the canon or non canon gospels, but shows (through the Spirit) their message as a combination of spiritual clarity. Remember, he wrote of the Spirit decades before the presbyters wrote the "acts of Jesus" gospels. There's a good chance, that out of the gospels we can read, that Thomas came first.

and bumping back to topic.....

Peter was upon a roof top when an angel appeared with a sheet filled with things to eat
Peter declined as many of the items were considered ....unclean

the angel gathered the sheet and left
and returned later with the same offering

Again, Peter refused
and the angel rebuked him saying....
Who are you?... to declined what has come down from heaven

any thought about this?

 

[Akivah]

Doesn't sound like anything that a reasonable all-powerful god would do. Why created certain animals that are eatable and then prohibit your creations from eating them? That's not something a god would do.

It's what our G-d did. What else did G-d do that you consider to be unreasonable? What are your improvements?

For instance, it's my understanding that the reason Hindus are prohibited from eating beef is because at one point there was a terrible famine and the people were all eating their cattle. However, aside from meat cattle also provided milk and dung which was a major source of fuel. By eating all of the cattle the people were actually making matters worse, so human beings started claiming that cows were sacred and the gods no longer wanted people to use them as food. I read similar explanations for why pork and shellfish were prohibited in other cultures as well, but don't recall the specifics.

We've had thousands of years to discuss this among ourselves. One can make all sorts of explanations, such as pork causes trichinosis. The only relevant point to us is that G-d asked us not to eat it. And we freely choose to obey.

It certainly helps out the archeologists. When they find ancient garbage pits with pig bones in them, they know it wasn't a Jewish settlement. Or when pig bones proliferate in the area, but one pit doesn't have pig bones, then they found the Jews!

 

[Phantasman]

and bumping back to topic.....

Peter was upon a roof top when an angel appeared with a sheet filled with things to eat
Peter declined as many of the items were considered ....unclean

the angel gathered the sheet and left
and returned later with the same offering

Again, Peter refused
and the angel rebuked him saying....
Who are you?... to declined what has come down from heaven

any thought about this?

You can eat anything you want as long as it is received in thanks (to God who provides it). God cleans it no matter what food it is.

Acts:
14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Goes with Jesus words:

Matthew:
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

And
Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

Clearly, get over the diets (fleshly) thing. An OT ignorance that even the orthodox taught for centuries.

 

[Astravalon]

Is your diet restricted by your religion or spirituality?

If so, what are you not permitted to eat? When are you not permitted to eat it? For what reason?

What are the implications of breaking this diet?

My spirituality doesn't restrict what I eat, although science has some
input. So I try to keep refined carbs to a minimum, for example.

I'm persuaded that when it comes to animals, God has ordained the
obvious, which is why creatures such as poison dart frogs are off the
menu. Nothing says "Thou shalt not eat that!" like a poison dart frog. •‿•

-

 

[QuestioningMind]

It's what our G-d did. What else did G-d do that you consider to be unreasonable? What are your improvements?



We've had thousands of years to discuss this among ourselves. One can make all sorts of explanations, such as pork causes trichinosis. The only relevant point to us is that G-d asked us not to eat it. And we freely choose to obey.

It certainly helps out the archeologists. When they find ancient garbage pits with pig bones in them, they know it wasn't a Jewish settlement. Or when pig bones proliferate in the area, but one pit doesn't have pig bones, then they found the Jews!

"It's what our G-d did. What else did G-d do that you consider to be unreasonable? What are your improvements?"

Wow, that would be a LONG list. But I can give you a few. First off, I would not have created Adam and Eve so incredibly naive and gullible that they would be deceived by the first talking serpent that they encountered. Second, if I went and created them completely naive and gullible I would NOT have allowed a deceptive lying serpent into Eden to begin with. I would NOT have endorsed slavery in Exodus. Instead of telling slave owners that they could beat their slaves, just as long as the slave didn't die within a couple days after the beating, I would have had THOU SHALT NOT OWN OTHERS AS PROPERTY as one if not the first of the 10 commandments. I would never have ordered my followers to slaughter children in the Old Testament. I would never have punished the poor parents who suffered under the oppressive rule of Pharaoh by murdering their first born sons for the sins committed by their oppressive leader.

And that's just what I can come up with off the top of my head.

 

[Thief]

You can eat anything you want as long as it is received in thanks (to God who provides it). God cleans it no matter what food it is.

Acts:
14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Goes with Jesus words:

Matthew:
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

And
Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

Clearly, get over the diets (fleshly) thing. An OT ignorance that even the orthodox taught for centuries.

I agree......the dogmatic belief that what we eat is simply that.....a superstition

I don't believe heaven is watching what we put into our mouths
be listens to what comes out

but that note about what God provides.....how would you know?
and would that be dogmatic?

 

[Phantasman]

I agree......the dogmatic belief that what we eat is simply that.....a superstition

I don't believe heaven is watching what we put into our mouths
be listens to what comes out

but that note about what God provides.....how would you know?
and would that be dogmatic?

It's the difference in flesh and spirit. I released the teachings of flesh (OT) over the teachings of the Gospel (spirit).

John 6:
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

I don't waste time with the appeasers of the flesh.

 

[Thief]

It's the difference in flesh and spirit. I released the teachings of flesh (OT) over the teachings of the Gospel (spirit).

John 6:
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

I don't waste time with the appeasers of the flesh.

and so you suspect something spiritual in the Last Supper ritual? (catholic mass)

 

[Phantasman]

and so you suspect something spiritual in the Last Supper ritual? (catholic mass)

Catholic? Yes.

Was it his "last" supper? He ate with them after he arose.

Read these words:

Some are afraid lest they rise naked. Because of this they wish to rise in the flesh, and they do not know that it is those who wear the flesh who are naked. It is those who [...] to unclothe themselves who are not naked. "Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Co 15:50). What is this which will not inherit? This which is on us. But what is this, too, which will inherit? It is that which belongs to Jesus and his blood. Because of this he said "He who shall not eat my flesh and drink my blood has not life in him" (Jn 6:53). What is it? His flesh is the word, and his blood is the Holy Spirit. He who has received these has food and he has drink and clothing. I find fault with the others who say that it will not rise. Then both of them are at fault. You say that the flesh will not rise. But tell me what will rise, that we may honor you. You say the Spirit in the flesh, and it is also this light in the flesh. (But) this too is a matter which is in the flesh, for whatever you shall say, you say nothing outside the flesh. It is necessary to rise in this flesh, since everything exists in it. In this world, those who put on garments are better than the garments. In the Kingdom of Heaven, the garments are better than those that put them on.- Gospel of Philip

If wafers and wine did something, everyone can do that. Christ said his words are "spirit" and the flesh profits "nothing" John 6.

So what profits the Eucharist if it's a ritual of flesh? Jesus never taught flesh rituals. The water does nothing at a baptism. If it did, how can one become baptized in the desert? Wait for the water?

The RCC were "robbers and thieves". Just as the early fathers were. John 10:8

Fleshly rituals does nothing.

 

[Thief]

Catholic? Yes.

Was it his "last" supper? He ate with them after he arose.

Read these words:

Some are afraid lest they rise naked. Because of this they wish to rise in the flesh, and they do not know that it is those who wear the flesh who are naked. It is those who [...] to unclothe themselves who are not naked. "Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Co 15:50). What is this which will not inherit? This which is on us. But what is this, too, which will inherit? It is that which belongs to Jesus and his blood. Because of this he said "He who shall not eat my flesh and drink my blood has not life in him" (Jn 6:53). What is it? His flesh is the word, and his blood is the Holy Spirit. He who has received these has food and he has drink and clothing. I find fault with the others who say that it will not rise. Then both of them are at fault. You say that the flesh will not rise. But tell me what will rise, that we may honor you. You say the Spirit in the flesh, and it is also this light in the flesh. (But) this too is a matter which is in the flesh, for whatever you shall say, you say nothing outside the flesh. It is necessary to rise in this flesh, since everything exists in it. In this world, those who put on garments are better than the garments. In the Kingdom of Heaven, the garments are better than those that put them on.- Gospel of Philip

If wafers and wine did something, everyone can do that. Christ said his words are "spirit" and the flesh profits "nothing" John 6.

So what profits the Eucharist if it's a ritual of flesh? Jesus never taught flesh rituals. The water does nothing at a baptism. If it did, how can one become baptized in the desert? Wait for the water?

The RCC were "robbers and thieves". Just as the early fathers were. John 10:8

Fleshly rituals does nothing.

yeah I get it....
I have believed since my youth.....the ritual should not be taken literally

when He commanded ....Do this in remembrance of Me....
two things happened
He broke the Passover....a remembrance of Moses and the exodus
and gave a new practice....
eat and drink
and remember His parables over Supper

 

[Phantasman]

yeah I get it....
I have believed since my youth.....the ritual should not be taken literally

when He commanded ....Do this in remembrance of Me....
two things happened
He broke the Passover....a remembrance of Moses and the exodus
and gave a new practice....
eat and drink
and remember His parables over Supper

I am elated we see the same. It seems to be an uphill battle because the orthodox has gained such heavy control with the system of beliefs they have given to man. When you even dabble lightly in the books (non canon) that they reject, you see a perception that greatly reduces their "authority" and give the authority back to the Gospel message with greater understanding that gives a completion of thought. The Gospel message should have never been divided to appease the "old ways" of the fathers of the OT, which died without truth.

John 6:
Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

By his own words, Jesus wants us to seek what "he" says, not the teachings of Moses. You CAN go back and read the OT, but realize that those people didn't have knowledge of life.

John 6:
48 I am that bread of life.
49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

How on earth can anyone go back before Christ looking for truth?