T
TMC
Guest
I think you are reading Paul backwards. Paul says that those that realize that there is only one God know that idols are not real - and therefore have no problem eating food sacrificed to idols. The idols are meaningless, therefore the sacrifice to them is really nothing and eating the food is fine. It is the less knowledgeable and superstitious that worry that eating food sacrificed to a non-existent idol god is a problem. Paul says that the more knowledgeable should respect their concerns and not be jerks to them about it, but that those in the know need not follow the same superstitious rules.Acts 15:28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.
If the apostles thought it necessary to command the gentiles who converted to abstain from these things, how can we generations later do away with them? I am not suggesting we be absolutely legalistic about it, to the point of absurdity like that of the Jehovah’s witnesses who view blood transfusions as evil, but I think we ought keep the commands of the apostles.
I do not think we should keep kosher however or anything like that. I like what Paul had to say concerning the eating of food given to idols, if we know about it, we do not eat it. If we are ignorant about it, we eat what is given to us. The same would apply to blood. At least this is how I understand it.
Obviously, Paul’s instructions directly contradict those reported in Acts. This shows us that these kinds of disciplinary rules were in flux at that time. Christians have generally settled on no dietary restrictions at all, which seems sensible and correct to me.