Ceremonial cleanliness has zero bearing

I was talking specifically for moral cleanliness here

That they weren't moraly clean

Ceremonial cleanliness was righteousness when it was the standing order from God, to continue presenting sacrifice. Moral cleanliness is a completely seperate concept altogether, and it's something nobody has

Nobody is morally clean, that's why Christ came to bestow grace

No according to Paul ceremonial cleanliness wasn't making you righteous even at the time of the law.

It was righteous because it was following God's commands, not because it had power in itself

According to Paul it wasn't.

He made the Abraham example many times to show that

That he was declared righteous before he circumcised

Abraham did what God told him to do, and that was counted as righteousness

the law is the same

Following the law was not righteousness, following it because it was what God commanded was

The way that Paul was talking about this, seemed that he wanted to imply that acts dont make you righteous

Acts don't make you righteous

Obeying God's commands does

Yes but Paul specifically was talking about commands of God there

No, he was speaking of blind obedience to the law, that from which the Pharisees derived their tradition

He was speaking of acts dont make you righteous, specifically the circumcision which was a commandment of God.

They had no interest in God, they rejected Him when He was made manifest because of their blind devotion to 'the law' and the idol they'd made of it

Wait wait

I just remembered something

Yes you are correct

He was speaking specifically that circumcision wasnt making you righteous

Not acts

Ok my bad

This is a good illustration of where you've been getting caught up here

Well then the holy spirit enters the body whatever the state of the body is?

If that is God's will

Ok sure then

Ok so back to the purpose of the food regulations

You said that it was for the temple

Back to what you're caught up in

But the common Israelites didn't need to be clean

Where does it say the opposite?

Yes they did

But they weren't in a holy place. They were outside the tabernacle and i believe outside the yard of the tabernacle too

Or the opening could mean the opening of the tent

Not the opening of the yard

Maybe before entering Canaan, but after the establishment of the Temple they had to enter the temple, which was all holy

Yes but we are talking about the covenant and that was with the tabernacle