>>181
>>182
>Unclean might sound like the Levitical prohibitions of certain animals for meat, but you need to look into both Acts in Greek and into the Septuagint. ἀκάθαρτος is the word for "unclean" in the Septuagint, while κοινός is used in Acts, in Koine Greek. It simply means "common". Thus, this cannot be referring to overturning the Levitical food prohibitions!
This is not a valid line of reasoning. The translation choice for the septuagint is not under inspiration by God just like any choice in English translation isn't.
The use of a different greek term in Acts 10 vs. Leviticus 11 or Deuteronomy 14 (LXX) is not necessarily indicative that they shouldn't be equated.

Besides, how do you even reconcile that view in context? The voice says "What God has cleansed no longer consider unholy". Why would it be saying "no longer" if not in reference to something that was previously verboten?

Furthermore, the testimony of Christian history is to view the dietary restrictions as tyoplogically related to the nations. At least one of the functions of restricting certain foods was a lesson regarding God's relation to ancient Israel in that age, then a change in the church age.

In any case, supposing your position was correct (which it isn't), you would have to argue that this is NOT judaising since judaising is explicitly forbidden by Paul.