re: #555 Aceofwhat?

Nah. The tradition of teaching through parables established quite well that a significant story should indeed be extrapolated.

After completing each parable, Jesus discussed the meaning thereof, and that part was written down as well.

In this kind of discussion, I much prefer the Torah scholarship methods of Midrash, which divide modes of interpretation into reasonable categories exactly to prevent this kind of confusion. Primarily the distinction between Halakha and Aggadic portions; i.e. between direct commands and stories. Each would have specific interpretation methods involving how much extrapolation is allowable, etc.

re: #555 Aceofwhat?

You didn’t read far enough in chapter 10.

27Talking with him, Peter went inside and found a large gathering of people. 28He said to them: “You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. 29So when I was sent for, I came without raising any objection. May I ask why you sent for me?”

If I’m going to take Peter at his word on this part, there seem to be three options:

1. Never call anyone impure or unclean. Sounds cool, but that not only lets gays off the hook, it kind of eliminates the entire notion of “sin.”

2. Don’t call someone impure or unclean just for being a Gentile. That makes sense in the context, and is well within Jesus’ similar references regarding hanging out with Samaratans and the like.

But I don’t make the connection with dietary laws only here.