Promises and Secrets

A website for those not afraid to examine their beliefs, compare them to the real world, and make sure they fit.

Clean and Unclean Foods?

VIEWPOINT

Many claim that the New Testament releases people from the requirement of avoiding foods that God called "unclean" and are not to be eaten by His people. They even have some Bible passages that they claim release them from this command. If you believe the whole Bible, you cannot believe this at the same time. This is a larger issue than just what we should eat.

FACT

The Bible specifies that some foods are considered "clean" or approved for God's people to eat. It also specifies that some creatures are not considered food and are not to be eaten by His people. Most Christians think that any restrictions are only for the Jews and do not apply to Gentiles.

VIEWPOINT

Jesus told us in Mark 7:18-19
¹⁸"Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? ¹⁹For it doesn't go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

that all foods are clean. We don't have to worry about "unclean" foods.

BLUE VIEWPOINT

Most Christians today eat any type of creature they want, assuming that God does not care what they eat.

Honestly, after looking into this for some time, I can see reasonable statements on both sides of the discussion. However, the justification for the "We can eat anything we want." view is missing from the Bible. Sure, there was a time when God gave us every living thing to eat (Genesis 9:3
Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.

). Then, later He changed His instructions (Leviticus 11, see box below).

Please note that many people claim that God has changed nearly everything that pertains to law, but can't point to one justification in the Bible. Here is an example of a change He really made, and notice that He told us about it. Since this change in the book of Genesis happened before there even were Israelites, it pertained to everyone. However, the Leviticus change happened when God had a people He cared about. He told them how He wanted His people to act.

People even have their favorite verses to justify refusing to do what God wants "His people" to do. Unfortunately, it seems that most people are accepting this so-called "freedom" in order to do what they want and to ignore what God actually said that He wants of them.

Think this is too harsh? Restricting? Limiting? Narrow-minded? That depends on how you look at it. Let's take a look at the basic verses for what God says you can eat. I broke Leviticus 11 into two sections so it would fit on the popup page:

Now, many say that God told only the Israelites to abstain from eating some filthy items, clarifying them at Mt. Sinai as "unclean" for them, while not making the same restriction for Gentiles. In general, this is probably true, because the pagans were not paying attention to God at the time. However, the distinction was not for Gentiles vs Jews, any more than the Ten Commandments were only for the Jews. It was for distinguishing between those who would follow God's instructions and those who would not, much like the instructions given in Exodus 16:4
⁴Then the Lord said to Moses, "I will rain down bread from heaven for you. The people are to go out each day and gather enough for that day. In this way I will test them and see whether they will follow my instructions."

regarding keeping the Sabbath day and His other commmands.

"God didn't tell us to do that!"

The designations for "clean" and "unclean" creatures was established long before Mt. Sinai and Jesus was there each time. His last designation in Leviticus for clean and unclean was very direct and clear. So, why would He say one thing then and contradict Himself later in Mark 7:18-19
¹⁸"Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? ¹⁹For it doesn't go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

? If you look closer at the passage in Mark, He was speaking of the practice of washing hands, not the types of meat (Mark 7:1-4
¹The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus ²and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. ³(The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. ⁴When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.)

). Jesus was saying that it was the eating with unwashed hands, a Jewish tradition, not a rule of God, that did not defile the person. He was not talking about eating of meat specifically forbidden by God. In fact, the parenthetical statement in Mark 7:19, ("In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean."), is not in the original Greek text. This was added later by someone with a personal opinion, but everyone now uses that as a Biblical approval to disobey God.

Before Sinai

As far as we know, at the time of the flood, people were still only eating plant foods (Genesis 1:30
³⁰And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground - everything that has the breath of life in it - I give every green plant for food." And it was so.

). Then, in Genesis 9:3
³Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.

, He gave His O.K. to eat "everything that lives and moves".

In reading the story of the flood in Genesis 6:21
²⁰Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. ²¹You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them.

and Genesis 7:3
²Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, ³and also seven pairs of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth.

, we see a distinction which evidently Noah, long before the Israelites, had been expected by God to know about. If God had made the designations about clean and unclean before Sinai, before Israelites even existed, then Sinai must have been a reminder of how things were supposed to be even for the Gentiles. They had lost that concept, as well as the Sabbath, through 430 years with the Egyptians as slaves.

Why would He do that?

Now, there are more, but these three (OK, two and two halves), give us the idea that God started the human race out with one set of rules, changed them for everyone, then changed them again, but supposedly only for certain people. Here is where many get the idea, "But, that last one was for only the Israelites. We Gentiles don't have to follow those rules." Why do you suppose that would be, if it were true?

If God says something is unclean for people He cares about, those who are to represent Him to the world, why would you even want to eat it? In fact, if you read through Leviticus, you will see that He only uses the word "food" when speaking of something "you are allowed to eat" (Leviticus 11:34
³⁴Any food you are allowed to eat that has come into contact with water from any such pot is unclean, and any liquid that is drunk from such a pot is unclean.

). Is there some magic that makes it unclean for God's people, but clean for everyone else? But, many do just that - eat animals that God says are unclean because they say "that's only for the Israelites!". Why, then, do the same people strictly follow other rules given to "only the Israelites"?

Where did that idea come from?

Let's go to where this whole "only the Israelites" started. God chose the Israelites over all other nations (Genesis 12:2-3
I will make you into a great nation,
    and I will bless you;
I will make your name great,
    and you will be a blessing.
I will bless those who bless you,
    and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
    will be blessed through you.

). He did this with Abram (before he was Abraham), before there even were any Israelites. But, then He said they would be a blessing to the rest of the nations. Now, does that mean that us Gentiles will get blessed no matter what we do? Nope. There is a little caveat in these verses you don't hear in the sermons - "and whoever curses you, I will curse." Now, does that mean that you have to say "Israel, I curse thee!" in order to get cursed? How about not acting in the same manner that God told the Israelites to act? Far fetched? What about Isaiah 56:3
³Let no foreigner who is bound to the LORD say, "The LORD will surely exclude me from his people." And let no eunuch complain, "I am only a dry tree."

? Not that they should become Jewish, but respect His words and become one of God's people.

Let's look at it a different way. How is Israel to bless us? How about by acting in a manner that gives an example to the Gentiles of how God expects those who "belong to Him" to act? Many say that was done through Christ, born into this world as an Israelite. Now, how are we told we can be blessed by Jesus Christ? Act like Him, do as He does, be like Him. What happens if you suggest that we think in that way toward the Israelites? "Yeeccchhhh!", people would say. Every one would think you're a fanatic and run away from you. Yet, if you say to act like Jesus, they nod their heads solemnly and say, "Bless you my child..." But wait! Jesus was a Jew, acted as a Jew, and we are to act and be like Him. How can you do that if you refuse to act like a Jew? I didn't say become a Jew, just act like God told His "blessing to the nations" to act.

He only loves the Israelites?

Why would God give everyone the freedom to eat anything living (after killing it and draining its blood, of course, a Jewish requirement), and then take that freedom away by limiting it to only certain types of animals called "clean"? Why did He use the terms "clean" and "unclean"? Do we Gentiles have to worry about it at all, since He "only gave the instructions to the Israelites"? Why didn't He just leave things alone? This is what I hear when this topic comes up (Ok, when I bring it up).

Oh, that's right. God chose the Israelites above all other nations (Deuteronomy 7:6
For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.

). We Gentiles are not the ones that God cares about, so He only sets good rules for those He cares about, right? That, of course, means we don't have to obey some of God's rules, or maybe none of them, right? Are there any objections out there to that idea?

Which ones should we follow?

So, let's narrow down the difference between the ones we have to follow and those we don't. But, before we do that, let's see if there are any more changes that He made only for those He loves. If so, supposedly we can ignore them because He didn't tell us Gentiles to follow them. The first verses are in Genesis 1 and 2, so let's go back and see what was set up there. Let's see, plants to eat and, Oh, look at that, a day of rest for the entire human race - well, there were only two people, and some kids along the way - but it was for everyone on the earth. Also, sons could sleep with their sisters and have babies. "What?", you say... Hold on, now, how else would we be here? So, the whole world could have babies with family members, right?

Reproducing through close relatives was necessary to populate the earth (Genesis 1:28
28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

). We'll come back to this one.

Ok, let's look and see what He changed after He gave us plants for food. He gave us all animals for food in Genesis 9:3
3 Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.

. Most people stop here and say, "See? We can eat anything!" Then in Leviticus 11 He changed the list again, but some say only for the Israelites. Now, along with this change given in Leviticus 11, He told the Israelites to change something else in Leviticus 18. According to most churches, we don't have to follow that either because He only gave it to the Israelites. However, you might want to read Leviticus 18 before you say that. If you follow the same logic, then if you want to have a baby, it is still all right to have sex with your brother or sister, mom or uncle.

"What!?!", you say - again. Well, how else would you interpret "He only gave that to the Israelites.", if it supposedly doesn't apply to Gentiles in the same way?

Leviticus 18, no intimacy with close relatives

Remember when mankind was first created, it was permissible for men to reproduce with their sisters and relatives. Otherwise, we would not be here. This was acceptable right up until Leviticus 18. So, God saw that things were becoming bad because of all the incest, which the Egyptians were also doing, and made it a rule for His people.

According to the logic of those who feel that "He only told the Israelites that!", incest is still approved for Gentiles. However, if you practice incest, you might not want to let the neighbors, police, or Child Services know what you are doing. The only way this makes sense is if God saw the same thing happening with food and made the same kind of changes. In both cases, He did not stop sex or eating meat altogether, but made changes that would allow His people to live healthier lives, separate from that of others in the world.

Yes, He told only the Israelites to follow these new rules - but who else was He even speaking to at the time? Was anyone else even listening to Him? If He thinks these changes were good for His people, then shouldn't that be good enough for the rest of us? Especially if we think of ourselves as "His people". If you don't think of yourself as one of His people, then be my guest. Please, just stand a little away from me on judgment day. I may get thrown into the Lake of Fire for something else I've done, but it won't be because I disobeyed this command after I learned the truth.

Exodus 16, taking us back to Genesis 1

Before the ten commandments were given, God spent some time getting the Israelites to learn to follow His instructions. What did He do? He said to keep one day apart from the others by not working on a particular day. He didn't say, "Pick a day." or "One day in seven.", as we are told by many of today's pastors. He set aside one day to be observed every week. Where did that day come from? Creation. It was the only day of the week that God decided to bless and give a name. The Sabbath. So that they would quickly learn which day that was, He set up a system with some very specific instructions. Now, these instructions weren't highly theological or complicated:

Notice the last part of verse 4 - "to see if they will follow my instructions" - Israelite or not. Anyone who followed His instructions would be blessed (see Isaiah 56:1-8 below). Many others would not.

Was this Sabbath a new invention that He made up only for the Israelites? Nope, it was something given to the whole human race before there even were Israelites. Look at the fourth commandment
⁸"Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy." (Exodus 20:8, emphasis added)

. The Sabbath was from creation week
²By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. (Genesis 2:2-3)³Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

, not something new for the Israelites. Still don't think it was for others? What about Isaiah 56:1-8:

And, look at verse 8. If you read what it says and not what your pastor thinks it means, you can't help but get the idea that God cares for everyone who follows Him (verses 1 and 2). No, keeping it alone won't save you, but add that obedience to your faith in His plan will keep you from being a goat instead of a sheep.

Up to the time at Mt. Sinai, before God's giving of the ten commandments and other rules, the Israelite's most recent exile into the hands of the Egyptians forced them into bad habits. He just wanted them to go back to what everyone was supposed to be doing since Adam and Eve. No? You don't think so? What about Ecclesiastes 12:13
¹³Now all has been heard;
        here is the conclusion of the matter:
    Fear God and keep his commandments,
        for this is the duty of all mankind.

? Unless you are not a member of mankind, you must keep God's commandments in order to receive His blessings.

While Leviticus 18, as well as the Sabbath discussion, has little to do with clean and unclean foods, it does show how today's "Christians" believe what they want rather than make sure that their beliefs actually match the word of God. Let's get back to the topic of this page - clean and unclean foods.

"But, what about Acts 10?"

Ok, you've all been chomping at the bit to nail me with some passages: Acts 10, Mark 7:19, Luke 10:8, and all of Romans 14. Fair enough, let's take a look. First, let me assure you, I am not just making up something in order to take the unpopular side. Do like the Bereans, check it out in the Bible, then ask your pastor. They checked what Paul said with the Scriptures, and agreed that Paul was in line with the Bible. Your pastor will likely give you his human boss's position, because he must keep his job. If he disagrees with this, please have him send his comments to us so we can put them on this page. Please have him include Biblical justifications, of course.

Peter and the vision of the sheet from Heaven

Starting in Acts 10:9-23
⁹About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. ¹⁰He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. ¹¹He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. ¹²It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. ¹³Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."

¹⁴"Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean."

¹⁵The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."

¹⁶This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

¹⁷While Peter was wondering about the meaning of the vision, the men sent by Cornelius found out where Simon's house was and stopped at the gate. ¹⁸They called out, asking if Simon who was known as Peter was staying there.

¹⁹While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit said to him, "Simon, three men are looking for you. ²⁰So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them."

²¹Peter went down and said to the men, "I'm the one you're looking for. Why have you come?"

²²The men replied, "We have come from Cornelius the centurion. He is a righteous and God-fearing man, who is respected by all the Jewish people. A holy angel told him to ask you to come to his house so that he could hear what you have to say." ²³Then Peter invited the men into the house to be his guests.

, one day at lunchtime, Peter got hungry. While the meal was being prepared, he went up on the roof to pray. After falling into some sort of trance, he saw a sheet lowered with all kinds of animals, including unclean animals. He was told to get up and eat. He refused to eat because he had never eaten anything "unkosher" before. He was instructed again, and again, with the same result, and was then told not to "call anything unclean that God has made clean."

Now, the actual words in Greek have a message in themselves that contradicts the commonly understood idea of what is "clean" and "unclean" for people to eat, but more on that later on this page. After the third time, the sheet was taken back to Heaven.

Did Peter start eating?

Note here that Peter did not immediately jump to the conclusion, as do most pastors today, that he should have eaten unclean foods as "instructed". He wondered just exactly what had happened and what it meant. You can read various versions of the Bible, but this is the gist of what happened. Let me know if you object.

Now, go to verse 23 in the same chapter (Acts 10). You will find an exchange of descriptions of disturbing events in both Cornelius' and Peter's lives. Now comes the part we are looking for. Beginning in verse 34, Peter tells Cornelius what he has learned:

Note verse 35. I realize it is buried deep in secret language, but you should be able to handle it.

He followed God's commands, but not those of the Jews (oral law, traditions)

Now, the story goes on, but you do not see one word about clean or unclean food. You see Peter saying that he learned something about how God sees all men. "Yeah, but...", you say. Well, go back to the episode beginning in verse 11 with the sheet. Here is the tricky part - tell me where God (or the angel, or the Holy Spirit) says that God has called any animal in the sheet "clean", much less all of them. If He did not call everything there clean, what was He talking about?

Here is the way it looks to me. God presented a sheet filled with clean and unclean animals, some of which Peter knew that he was forbidden to eat by God's law. Peter knew this because of his knowledge of the word of God to us. God had previously clearly defined what was clean and unclean with regard to animals. Then God summarized something that you never hear the pastors today speak about.

What God said to Peter

God has defined what is food and what is not food, but He has never defined any difference as to how we should distinguish between His people and those who are "not His people" other than identifying those who obey and those who do not (Acts 10:35
"but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right"

). He has never called Gentiles unclean, though that is the way the Jews saw them. Only the law as modified by the Jews prohibited Jews from associating with Gentiles. God essentially said to Peter, "You know how to follow My rules for food. Now, follow My rules for people, not those of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Don't be calling people unclean when I have made them clean."

Note the difference between the root of the words in Greek for the words translated "cleansed" and "unclean" - ekatharisen and koinou. We will refer to something similar later.

Peter got the actual message and, as a result, told the gospel to Cornelius, a Gentile. Up to that time, Jews thought that they were not to associate (or even eat) with Gentiles. God said not to act like that. That was the message. This passage does not approve the eating of "unclean" animals, no matter what your pastor says.

The Jews agree with Peter...

One more thing about this misused passage and the verses that follow. The very next chapter (11) describes how the non-Messianic Jews criticized Peter for associating with Gentiles. He explained to them precisely what happened, and then they agreed with him with no further objections. They understood him to say that God accepts the Gentiles as well as the Jews. Hopefully they were astute enough to modify their oral laws (later written as the Talmud, completed in about 350 A.D.), to incorporate this idea.

But, they still don't eat unclean food

Please note that the, even though they agreed with Peter, non-Messianic Jews have not changed their diet, but recognized the real meaning of the episode with the sheet. God was saying, "Do what I have told you, but don't exclude the Gentiles as do the Pharisees and Sadducees."

"But what about Mark 7:19?"

Here again, people don't read the passage, they just lock onto the parenthetical statement inserted by the author. This passage was speaking about something other than food, but the "statement" was added by another author after the original writing in order to convey the translator's opinion about food. The subject of the passage was the washing of hands and how not doing it supposedly defiles the person. The passages that started this whole conversation (Mark 7:1-5):

Of course it was kosher

How can we be sure that the food they were eating was kosher? The Jews said that His disciples were "eating food with hands that were defiled". Food for the Jews was only meat prepared according to the kosher process.

If those Jews were watching close enough to see that the disciples had not washed their hands, they would have noticed if they were eating something not kosher. Can you imagine them complaining that the disciples did not wash their hands before they ate some shrimp or a big slab of roast pig? Yes, this is conjecture and logic rather than stated facts, but most will understand the point if they seek the truth. Why would they complain about washing hands (a Jewish tradition) if the apostles were obviously breaking a real law of God?

So, why the statement?

Now, for the parenthetical statement at the end of 7:19
For it doesn't go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

, did you know that this is in every Bible translation that I could find, but is not in the original Greek? This statement has been added by the translators. No, really, look it up. Here is what I found in the Interlinear at Bible Hub:

The image included verse 20 to show that I didn't try to pull a fast one on you. There is some confusion about the statement "purifying all the food". This is because the term also means "purging". Thus, it is saying that we eliminate the food by natural means:

not declaring that we can eat anything we want. Notice that the word being used was "food", as in something approved for eating. Unclean meats are not considered "food" by the Jews, who were the ones speaking.

It's not there

There is no confusing English-worded parenthetical phrase after the verse in question to mislead people into disobeying God. It was added later. The only thing that the Jews call "food" is anything they can legally eat. The author (a Jew) would never refer to pork, snake or vulture meat as "food".

By this discussion, Jesus declared all "foods" (i.e., clean, proper, acceptable meats) to be clean, whether or not you washed your hands as their tradition required. It had nothing to do with what God considers clean or unclean with regard to human consumption. This summary statement was added to "clarify" something that those translaters thought they understood, but that we Gentiles must somehow misconstrue because we don't want to "act Jewish".

Anyone who lived in their times, with their culture, would naturally understand this. The translators were trying to convey their own thoughts. This passage, before the addition, was not a secret signal to the Gentiles that they can eat things that God still considers unclean. Think about that. If God thinks it is unclean, do you still want to eat it?

Luke 10:8
⁸ When you enter a town and are welcomed, eat what is offered to you.



This passage, much like the one in Mark 7:19 above, is taken out of context by those who listen only to what the pastors say, or want to "prove" a point, and do not read the whole passage. If you start at verse 5 and read through verse 8, you get a more complete picture of what is happening:

Right off, the first thing these emmisaries were to do is to qualify the house by determining if the hosts were Godly people. If not, the emmisaries were to leave. Now, if the hosts were people of God, they would offer only "food" as described in the word of God. Remember, these emmisaries are mostly (if not all), Jewish.

If you look at verse 7 here in Luke, the reason they were to accept the food and not reimburse them for it was that they were doing God's work. They were entitled to the "payment" of a meal as wages (verse 7). That is why they should accept what they were offered. They were not being told they could eat any shrimp, lobster, crab, snake, pig hearts, or vulture meat.

As a reference, go to the site at Bible Hub for various commentaries to get the gist of the culture and intent of these verses. Anyone who uses this as a justification for disobedience to the word of God is like the ungodly town in the verses of Luke 10:8-12
⁸"When you enter a town and are welcomed, eat what is offered to you. ⁹Heal the sick who are there and tell them, 'The kingdom of God has come near to you.' ¹⁰But when you enter a town and are not welcomed, go into its streets and say, ¹¹'Even the dust of your town we wipe from our feet as a warning to you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God has come near'. ¹²I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.

.

Romans 14

OK. I can see you out there getting ready to jump up and shout "Yes!" while pumping your fists up and down. Well, let's see. Here are the verses from Romans 14 (using NIV here) so you don't have to get your Bible out, though that would probably be easier:

Paul's audience

This letter was written to the church in Rome - predominately Gentile, though there were probably some Messianic Jews in the congregation. The subject of this chapter is identified in the first several verses. Paul is speaking about people of weak faith and persons of stronger faith not arguing with them over disputable matters such as dietary and special day discussions that are not clearly stated in the Bible. It's very important to identify what Paul is speaking about and remember that all this chapter is about opinions - disputable matters about which God has made no stipulations one way or the other. This is made clear in the very first verse.

Dietary Laws

First, regarding diet, the question here is regarding being vegetarian or eating meat (Romans 14:21
²¹It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

above). This is not a discussion about "kosher laws" or whether pork or shrimp is acceptable - only whether one who feels that he should eat meat or be a vegetarian. Paul would never have approved, especially to a congregation that included Jews, the eating of "unclean" animals. However, if one desires to eat only vegetables, one who eats meat should not judge him. If you doubt this, remember what Paul said in Acts 24:14
¹⁴However, I admit that I worship the God of our ancestors as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect. I believe everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets,

before governor Felix, and in Acts 25:8
⁸ Then Paul made his defense: "I have done nothing wrong against the Jewish law or against the temple or against Caesar."

while on trial before Festus. Paul is still a good Jew and a believer in the Messiah. He keeps all the dietary laws and holy days considered important by God and would never recommend that anyone break them.

There is a verse in there that many use to try to prove that even Paul believes that "nothing is unclean" for food, as in "it's OK to eat pork and lobster". Romans 14:14
¹⁴ As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. (2002, Zondervan version)

but is worded differently in more recent versions:

¹⁴I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean.

says no food is unclean in itself, but the Greek word he used that was translated as "unclean" is not the word akathartos, which is used to identify unclean meats, but is koinos, the Greek word for "common", referring to the method of its death, manner of preparation, or even political value. This "common" definition is what Paul spoke about. See this at Bible Hub:

Otherwise, you are claiming that Paul, a devout Jew, is saying, "I know that God says some foods are unclean, but I don't think any are, so go right ahead and disobey Him."

is the Greek word koinon or koinos for "common". If you find a dead animal, normally considered clean, that died of natural causes, it is called common or koinos, and you are not to eat it. Common is also meat that has been "sacrificed to idols". Also, any clean animal that dies of strangulation is not acceptable. The only meat for Paul that you can properly eat is that which has been killed and bled properly. If anything, he is relaxing the definition of "common", referring to the method of death or "sacrificed to idols" part, not God's own reference to "unclean" meats.

Context matters

However, common beliefs of Gentiles do not fit with the concept of Paul as a Jew who has never broken any laws of the Jews, the temple, or Caesar (Acts 25:8
⁸ Then Paul made his defense: "I have done nothing wrong against the Jewish law or against the temple or against Caesar."

) and keeps the law of God (Acts 24:14
¹⁴However, I admit that I worship the God of our ancestors as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect. I believe everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets,

). Paul is speaking about the way people view meats that are not kosher, prepared by a process established by the Israelites from the word of God. The foods themselves are not unclean, it's the attitude and faith of the eater that is important. This fits right in with the statement of Jesus above when the topic of discussion was washing of hands. The Jews felt that you defiled yourself if you ate anything, even "kosher" foods, without washing your hands.

The word koinon can also mean "ordinary", "defiled", or "profane" (as opposed to holy or consecrated). To confirm that there is a difference between the two terms "common" and "unclean", look at Peter's comments in Acts 10:14
¹⁴ "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean." (NIV)

or, if you prefer the KJV


¹⁴ But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. (KJV)

And here is the Interlinear:


from the Interlinear text and you can see that Paul is talking about two different things. The KJV and other Bible interpreters have done us no favors by modifying the words to allow "disputable" discussions about concepts that are not disputable. If you keep things in context, they will make better sense and will be in keeping with the truth and the rest of the Bible.

Personal holidays, not God's special days

In that same vein, verse 5
⁵ One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.

addresses disputable decisions about days considered more important by some men than others. This is not a statement that you can take a day made holy (sacred) by God and treat it with contempt as though God did not convince you that it is sacred. These are not the standard feast days specified both in time and manner of observation by God, but those not clearly outlined in His word. Since Paul is speaking to a mixed congregation, what he says applies to both Jew and Gentile. He, being a completely lawful Jew, would never tell another Jew that he could do as he wished for the Feast of Unleavened Bread or the Feast of Tabernacles. In fact, based on Paul's statement to the Gentile church in Corinth (1 Corinthians 5:8
⁸Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

), I'm sure he would never have released even the Gentiles regarding anything that God made holy.

If you check Zechariah 14:16-19
¹⁶ Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. ¹⁷ If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, they will have no rain. ¹⁸ If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The Lord will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. ¹⁹ This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles.

, you will see an Old Testament passage referring to a New Testament event that demonstrates the importance of God's festivals. Anyone who does not recognize the requirement to observe the important ones, which include the Sabbath, will have to suffer the consequence of disobedience. So, there are some that are not disputable, and we should probably know which is which.

What we do, we do in relation to the Lord

In Romans 14:14
¹⁴ As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean.

but is worded differently in more recent versions:

¹⁴I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean.

, we see in the NIV that the passage from Paul specifies "food" as the subject matter. This means that something considered by God to be "food" is all clean, but if someone wants to stay with vegetables, then it is not right for him to eat meat. However, when I went to the internet to grab a quick quote, I found that the NIV quote was not the same as the written one in my NIV.

Online, the quote was Online Romans 14:14
¹⁴ I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean.

, completely changing the wording from "food" to "nothing", more accurate to the Greek, and supposedly making the commands of God regarding "unclean" items of no consequence to Christians. So, this is supposed to convince us that God's commands have no bearing on our future, therefore we can ignore His commands. However, look at Romans 14 verse 20
²⁰ Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble.

- food, not unclean animal flesh, and the subject is vegetarianism vs meat-eating. Food is what God said it is - clean animal flesh, fruits and vegetables.

God's command no longer matters - if we are sincere?

But, if we go along with the liberal interpretation, then what of the passages in Romans 14:6-8
⁶ Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. ⁷ For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. ⁸ If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.

? According to verse 1, here Paul is speaking of disputable matters (verse 14:1
¹Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters.

). Does this mean that if we do what God clearly says not to do, but claim to do it for the Lord, that He will overlook our pagan habits? We must remember that the entire discussion in Chapter 14 is regarding matters not clearly defined in the word. It does not pertain to those clear instructions we have directly from God that have never been retracted.

Anything else? How about Holidays?

You never hear people talk about it, but God also set up times that were important to Him and told His people to follow them. Well, He set them up as a way to tell which people will follow His instructions (Exodus 16:14
¹⁴Then the LORD said to Moses, "I will rain down bread from heaven for you. The people are to go out each day and gather enough for that day. In this way I will test them and see whether they will follow my instructions."

). However, since we Gentiles are so much smarter than God, and hate the Jews and their practices so much, we change things around to suit ourselves. (see Early Christians and Sunday on this site)

"Well, not your way God, but we'll do this instead..."

We decided we didn't want to look into God's set times, so we made up our own. No, He didn't tell us to follow the Jewish ways, but He did tell us not to worship the way of the pagans. So what do we do? We grab some pagan holidays and blend them with our celebrations of things God never told us to celebrate.

You know, real pagan non-Holy days like Christmas and Easter. But, wait a minute... If we do those things, aren't we the pagans that He told His people not to copy?... I'm getting confused. Does that mean that we can go ahead and be Gentile pagans, but still expect to get the rewards He promised only the Jews and Gentile foreigners if they were obedient?

Well, he told the Jews that, so I guess it doesn't apply to Gentiles, right? However, read Isaiah 56:1-8
¹This is what the LORD says: "Maintain justice and do what is right, for my salvation is close at hand and my righteousness will soon be revealed.

²Blessed is the one who does this - the person who holds it fast, who keeps the Sabbath without desecrating it, and keeps their hands from doing any evil."

³Let no foreigner who is bound to the LORD say, "The LORD will surely exclude me from his people." And let no eunuch complain, "I am only a dry tree."

⁴For this is what the LORD says: "To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose what pleases me and hold fast to my covenant -

⁵to them I will give within my temple and its walls a memorial and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that will endure forever.

⁶And foreigners who bind themselves to the LORD, to minister to him, to love the name of the LORD, and to be his servants, all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it and who hold fast to my covenant -

⁷these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called a house of prayer for all nations."

⁸The Sovereign LORD declares - he who gathers the exiles of Israel: "I will gather still others to them besides those already gathered."

and let me know what you think. There are plenty of people who abuse Romans 14 to twist God's instructions into suggestions, allowing them to wander down a wide path instead of the narrow one described by the very Jesus whose instructions they are avoiding.

Eat what you want, but...

Taking that kind of misdirection to heart, we can make a few idols and set them up on the mantle next to our framed paintings of Christ on the "cross", and worship God with several images. We can even worship our Lord with eggs and bunnies on Easter, celebrate birthdays in the middle of winter, cook a big pork roast for dinner, and do it all on Sunday so we can build that shed on Sabbath - er, Saturday. No problem with that, right?

The "hidden" verses

While doing our Bible study the other day, my wife and I were reading 2 Corinthians 6 and came across a verse you don't hear very often in "Christian" discussions. Paul is writing to the ecclesia in Corinth, a group of mostly Gentile believers. The subject matter was "being yoked with unbelievers". The context is that if some people do not believe in the truth of the gospel of Christ, and persist in fellowship with darkness and idols, then the believers are not to associate with them. In order to show the Scriptural support for this, he quotes God's words from several different Old Testament passages and then Isaiah 52:11:

Now, if Paul is quoting the Old Testament to a Gentile church to show them what God wants from them, how is it that we think that nothing in the Old Testament applies to us?

Not exactly "hidden", but never discussed

I have included verse 18 from Corinthians, which appears as though it is also from Isaiah, but is actually from 2 Samuel 7:14 and other OT passages. For those of you who point out that this passage is only for those who "handle the articles of the Temple", why would Paul quote to the Gentiles some instruction given to "only the Israelites", and in that silly Old Testament as well?

Why would he warn them about associating with unclean people and things that would defile them? And, notice the wording associated with what is identified as unclean - "things", not just people. Of course, you might say that this is in reference to the pagans and idolaters and doesn't apply to foods, but then look at the very next verse in the beginning of chapter 7:

Remember, he is speaking to the Gentiles about contaminating our bodies, as well as our spirits!

Only one reason for not wanting to discuss this...

What would contaminate our bodies? Ideas can contaminate our minds and hearts, people can contaminate our thoughts and persuade our actions, but only things can contaminate our bodies. Especially things declared by God to be "unclean". Touching a dead body or eating anything called "junk" by God will contaminate our bodies.

"Don't bring up that can of worms..."

Not only do you not hear this discussed in "Christian" conversations, the NIV study Bible we use doesn't even comment on this passage in the notes for verses 17 or 18. Why would you not want to discuss a reference to unclean things that the Scriptures say will affect even Gentiles? Well, if your church teaches that you can eat anything you want, "because those rules are only for the Israelites", they wouldn't want to bring it up and be exposed for telling you something that is not true. When you claim to follow the Bible, yet do what it says not to do, that is called hypocrisy.

The stand you take means something

You don't think we should go that far? Why not? You say that God doesn't care about us doing it because that was only for the Israelites. You say by your actions, "We know a better way than what God said to do..." Since God didn't label the rules to tell us which ones are for them and which are for us, how in the world do we tell the difference?

You say we should not follow Leviticus 11, but we should follow Leviticus 18. How do we choose? What if someone says they are going to follow Leviticus 11, and not follow Leviticus 18? Who gets to say? Are these disputable matters? Are they right because the Holy Spirit didn't "prompt" them otherwise? Who gets to choose which is which? Oh, that's right, our pastors would never mislead us into anything that God would not approve, right?.

Either you're not on God's side...

So, if you think it's all right to eat what God said for the Jews not to eat, then you can have relations with close relatives in actions that He only prohibited for the Jews. You can ignore Sabbath that He gave to the whole human race at Creation. You can ignore the other commandments, which according to the word of God, are the duty of all mankind (Ecclesiastes 12:13
¹³Now all has been heard;
        here is the conclusion of the matter:
    Fear God and keep his commandments,
        for this is the duty of all mankind.

), but "Christians" say apply "only to the Israelites" because they are in the Old Testament. Evidently, you can also steal a sandwich if you are really hungry which He told only the Jews not to do. Most believe that those rules are just for the Jews, anyway - except for the ones that we declare are for us as well... regardless of what God has said.

...or you can join God

Or you can do what God told His people to do, not thinking of it as something Jewish, but including yourself in that group of people He considers His (Acts 10:34-38
³⁴Then Peter began to speak: "I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism ³⁵but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right. ³⁶You know the message God sent to the people of Israel, announcing the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all. ³⁷You know what has happened throughout the province of Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached - ³⁸how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him." (Acts 10:34-38 NIV, emphasis mine)

).

Otherwise, the Bible doesn't mean what it says

So, there are two ways of looking at Romans 14. According to the lax translation, everything God said is relative, so we can live however we want for the Lord, eat whatever we want for the Lord, steal anything we want if we do it for the Lord, and even murder as long as we do it for the Lord. But, wait a minute...that's not what the rest of the Bible says. Why would one or two rules God only gave them apply to us, and the rest not?

How do you tell? Are you sure?

Disagree? Find an error? Contact us at glenjjr@gmail.com and give us your view.

Contact Us | Back to Top

YELLOW VIEWPOINT

Tell us your side.