Menu Monday 25 JUL 2011
- By: Hallee
- 6 Comments
Menu for the week of 25 July 2011
The “rules” of our household diet can be found in the tab above labeled Hallee’s Galley and further explained in Our Diet.
I usually serve leftovers for lunch the next day, or we’ll save them during the week to graze lunch on the weekends. One meal a week, we eat whatever we want. This is usually our “Dinner Out” meal.
Almost all of the breads are homemade using fresh milled flour. I’ll continue to link to my recipes as I post them. Our daily bread is Whole Wheat Honey Oatmeal Bread.
Here’s the menu for my family for the week of July 25th. As far as desserts go, I’m drowning in summer and winter squash. I’ll be making some of my Grandma Poe’s Zucchini Bread, Squash Squares, and will be coming at you with some pumpkin recipes!
Rosemary & Garlic Grilled Lamb Chops, Perfect Brown Rice, Sauteed Summer Vegetables, garden salad
Hallee’s White Chili, Old Fashioned Cornbread, garden salad
roast beef with potatoes and carrots, green beans, cottage cheese, garden salad
at my parents’ house
Chicken Noodle Soup with Spinach, grilled cheese sandwiches
I’m so grateful for your visit, today.
You would bless me if you added me to your feed reader or subscribed via email.
You can also become a fan on Facebook or follow me on Twitter. I would love to see more of you!
This post linked to…
Comments are closed.
im thinking of making eggs in a hole this week too! just have to find enough motivation to make it!
I am curious, I noticed on your diet link, there was a comment (the last one). This is the same question I have. I was reading the exact scriptures last night. So, I don’t think it a coincidence to read your diet and have the same question.
How do you explain the scriptures? Do you think this scripture drew a parallel between Jews and Gentiles only? What I mean is: Do you feel that God used “clean and unclean food” to create an image of what he wanted Peter to do? Peter was to bring the good news to ALL people. Do you feel this scripture only refers to that, not to actually eating those foods?
I ask because it is a great topic. No debates intended. Just curious. I actually like the idea of the diet you use.
The lamb chops sound very interesting! I love lamb! Yummy!!!
My (Newly)Wed Life
My husband replied to this in length, so I don’t want to clumsily try to address it when he did so eloquently and completely. His connectivity is making it hard to post comments (and send email – he’s quite frustrated with it). This comment spurred him to look at the Diet comments, he replied briefly there, and hasn’t been able to post a comment since. I don’t want you or anyone else to think I was ignoring you. The next time he has connection to instant message me, I’ll ask him to piece-meal it over the IM to me to post for him.
Sorry to leave you hanging with it!
Here is my complete response to that question in Our Diet:
I feel I must reiterate that this is OUR diet and it is what works for US. We are not interested in being legalistic in any way. Nor is it our motivation to sit in judgement of those who do not follow scripture in the way that we prayerfully strive to do.
We are interested in being healthy and in prayerfully considering that which we consume (this applies to more than just our food). It certainly does not mean that we consume or abstain in order to sit in judgement of anyone else’s choices. We consume or not to draw closer to our Father God.
If a food is not strictly prohibited, we probably will eat it. For example, for a long time we were kind of on the fence about mushrooms. They are not specifically prohibited, but they also are not a plant that is green or makes seeds. Yet we ate them and felt no conviction to eliminate mushrooms from our diet. Years later, we learned that mushrooms were considered an “herb” and scripture says that we are given every herb of the field that is good for food.
With respect to the question of fats, we prayerfully consider. The referenced scriptures speak only of not eating the fat on certain portions of even clean animals. Conversely, oil is very important and even symbolic throughout scripture, as is milk (cream).
Obviously, oil such as that burned in common lamps in ancient times (the light of the world) was rendered from animal fat such as cattle, sheep, or goat. It seems very likely that the discarded “unclean” fat was rendered into utilitarian oil. So, no objection there, although we would try our best never to consume lard.
Milk was certainly not pasteurized or homogenized in that day, and so certainly formed cream or butter that floated on top. Yet neither oil nor milk (or cream) is specifically prohibited. With respect to milk, about the only thing I found is that we are specifically prohibited from boiling a young goat in its mother’s milk. Really no danger of that happening.
With respect to Acts chapter 10, that is often and famously taken out of context and misinterpreted — a difference between exegesis and eisegesis. Some Christians extrapolate that after Peter’s dream, God cleansed ALL animals and made them fit and lawful for human consumption. In other words, God changed his mind from “this is my memorial (binding or abiding sign) unto all generations” and that transforms into “Except I changed my mind about pigs and such” which contradicts the notion that God is unchanging, eternal, and the same yesterday, today, and forever. So right away, the argument starts off on biblically weak footing with me.
A few further objections. First, in Peter’s dream, the animals descended from heaven on a kite and God Himself personally declared them clean. Speaking for myself, if God delivered a bunch of pigs on a kite from heaven and personally declared them clean and commanded me to kill and eat, I would get out the pistol and fire up the grill.
But a lot of things specifically did NOT happen. What did not happen, for example, is God did not bring together all of the animals ON THE EARTH that were declared unclean under the law and declare them now to be clean and personally instruct Peter to kill and eat FROM THE LAND. He brought a bunch down on a kite from heaven in a dream. God is very specific in many places that anything that comes from heaven is good. This proposition is even repeated by Peter in Acts 15 when testifying in Jerusalem.
Also what did not happen is that every unclean food, such as seaweed or algae, or any otherwise clean food that was contaminated by vermin, or animals which had died of disease — none of that was present on the kite — only living unclean animals. In other words, what did not happen is God did not say that all previously unclean food ON THE EARTH is now good for food.
Second, the story isn’t even about food. It’s about taking the Gospel to the Gentiles. It’s about God getting Peter to recognize that he is to go to the home of the centurion and share the Gospel with that uncircumcised Italian and his band. Remember that before this event, no one had been baptized into the Christian church except for Jews, Samaritans, and those converts who had been circumcised and already observed the ceremonial law. Now God is telling Peter to take the Gospel to every tribe and every nation just as Christ said on the day of Pentecost.
In Acts 10:28, Peter is clear on this “… You yourselves have knowledge that it is against the law for a MAN who is a Jew to be in the company of one who is of another nation; but God has made it clear to me that no MAN may be named common or unclean”
In other words, what does not happen is Peter does not declare that God has made it clear to him that it is now super cool to eat pork. He is very specific that this is all about MEN, not food. The real point of Acts Chapter 10 has little to do with Peter’s dream and more to do with the fact that God is no respecter of PERSONS (Acts 10:34).
Third, if all animals are cleansed by Peter’s vision, this includes pigs but also all kinds of insects, bats, spiders, cats, and even dogs. Yet, for whatever reason, you never hear Christians getting all spun up about a dog-meat sandwich, cat-head soup, and a side of boiled spiders like they do over pork chops and bacon. But going back to scripture, and Peter, in speaking of both dogs and pigs well after his dream that supposedly purified unclean foods, Peter said this:
For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them. But it has happened to them according to the true proverb: “A dog returns to his own vomit,” and, “a sow, having washed, to her wallowing in the mire.” 2 Peter 2:20-22
And of course, mire is sewage. So it doesn’t sound, based on this verse, like Peter hosted any pig-pickin’s after his dream. It sounds more like he continued to keep the law of Moses which is, instructively, something that Jesus Christ also managed to do every single day of his entire life on this earth. Jesus Christ kept the law of Moses perfectly and then exhorted us to be “perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect.”
All that said, this is what we have arrived at after we prayerfully considered the scriptures as the word of God relates to what WE consume.
Thank you for your lengthy response. I really do appreciate it. When talking with my daughter (prior to reading this) I told her the same thing (sort of). I find the Levitical diet very interesting. I completely understand it and think it is a great idea. I think you are right when you say we are to follow in Christ’s footsteps. He never strayed from the law. I won’t go into it. I just wanted to say you did well explaining it. I felt pretty much the same thing: This scripture refers more to God’s plan to spread the gospel to both Jews and Gentiles.