Mosaic Law

by seeking_truth 10 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • seeking_truth

    I am new to this forum and I am curious as to why certain foods was outlined under the Mosaic Law but do not apply now. Pork being the biggest example of all.

    Deuteronomy 14:8 "The pig also, because it is a splitter of the hoof but there is no cud. It is unclean for YOU. None of their flesh must YOU eat, and their carcasses YOU must not touch"

    Family tried to example this to me but I am not satisfied with the answer. If it was set as a rule then how come it changed. I don't see how a pig then differs from a pig now.


  • SixofNine

    The pig stayed the same; it's god who is a bit wishy-washy.

  • Warrigal

    Hi Seeking and welcome! The rationale I heard was that the Israelites wandering in the wilderness would not be able to cook pork to the extent necessary to kill the trichanosis parasite. I don't know if that was the rabbinical reason or not but its what I was told many years ago.

    Warrigal of the dearly loves roast pork class

  • seeking_truth

    Thank you for the information.

    It makes sense about the times of cooking then, compared to now. What doesn't make sense is how rules bend. I read somewhere that since Jesus died for our sins that it also meant the breaking free of Mosiac Law. Is this true? I always believed what the bible said was truth not a tale of rules for the past that don't effect us today.

  • A Paduan
    A Paduan

    Not a word of the law will pass away - but certainly the burdens placed on people might.

    From earliest man, the idea of eating something to take on it's energy is basic thought - a sense that you are what you eat - spiritually you become like what you eat (i.e. your behaviour).

    • don't eat pigs - don't be like those who quickly eat down the food, then go roll in the mud and come back only to squeal for more
    • don't eat birds of prey - earn your own living, don't just prey on those beneath you instead
    • eat those animals that chew the cud - i.e. eat the food, chew on it a while and you'll be satisfied
    • but not the rabbits - do I need explain that one ?

    Check out animal behaviours - "doesn't nature teach you?"

    That's why it was said of the pharisees, "their god is their belly" - they never got it about scripture - they thought it was rules about diet and social ritual that they had to obey - "burdens" - they also thought, like jws, that if they learned the rules and applied them (to the flesh), that they could earn and deserve their frequent flyer points to heaven - NOT.

    The apostles saw fit not to place other "burdens" on people except for a few which had the effect of promoting social communication - nevertheless, they didn't hide the fact that they were "burdens" - not spiritual learning, but burdens - eg. don't eat blood (another's soul - you have your own life - 'eat' no other, except Christ - require no other, but be as Christ who forgives).

    Like Paul said - " do you think God was being concerned for the oxen?"

    Edited by - a paduan on 3 February 2003 3:31:0

  • Yerusalyim

    In short, because we as gentiles are not subject to the Mosaic Law. The Law was given to the Jews, not to all mankind. We fulfill the requirements of the Law by fulfilling just two of the 613 commandments, Loving God, and Loving Neighbor.

  • peacefulpete

    One of the many similarities of the Phoenician/Syrian sun god Adonis has with Yahweh is the prohibition of pork for his woshipers. No doubt some of the dietary rules were arrived at through less interesting ways such as an outbreak of hepatitis from bad shellfish or something but such laws appear in other cults as well for purely religious reasons. I always liked the explanation as to why "Moses" said hares were chewers of cud. They like many animals will reeat their feces! No doubt in fact they were assumed to be chewing cud because they move their nose and upper lip when sniffing the air, which they do almost all day long. They do not chew cud any more than dogs who also enjoy a fresh pile of rabbit (horse,goat,etc) crap to munch on.

  • Yerusalyim


    I think most honest Jews would admit that many of the Laws especially the Kosher laws, had a lot to do with health and cultural issues. Nothing wrong with that.

  • peacefulpete

    Never said their was

    Edited by - peacefulpete on 5 February 2003 2:45:40

  • peacefulpete

    It was wrong however to stone people who ate pork. It is ridiclous to suggest this loving god would kill people to protect them from ringworm. It is a modern invention to try to find a legitamate justification for these arbitrary ritualistic laws. Suggesting a wise benevolence. My statement that no doubt at least some of these taboos developed from years of unexplained illness associated with certain foods. But it was still fear and superstition that made eating these foods criminal acts. It would better indicate divine wisdom if the rules had simply required proper cooking. Besides, the vast majority of these prohibited animals were fine to eat. Their uncleaness was strictly ceremonial.(superstition) The pig example is used because we all have heard of trichonosis. And so it is used to suggest that similar health risks were associated with all these "unclean" animals. Foolishness!

Share this