Does God forbid us to eat pork, rabbit, oysters, clams?...

 

This is an article I lifted from the Internet and expresses a balanced view that I share with the Writer, James McBride.  I have added a few of my own comments at the end of the article.  We are all looking for the truth and some see things sooner than others.  We are not all given the same truth at the very same time.  Still, there is an attitude seen among the Apostles of becoming impatient toward some in the Church that just never seem to get out of the sand box, continuing to suck on milk.  What is worth noting is the fact that in the remarks made by Paul, on this very subject of not moving on, leaving the "elementary doctrines of the word behind" and moving on to stronger things there is no mention of clean and unclean meats.  However, when we consider the first Church was made up almost entirely of Jewish brethren one would see clearly they would not need to be told about such thing and when it comes to food it would only seem reasonable that a Creator God would give man and operations manual.  Our freedom we have in the Christ is not to sin (sin by definition is to break the law, of which we are all guilty).  Our freedom in the Messiah is not so we can freely break the law even thought the Law has no more power over us or the Jew. 

 

Our Savior and the freedom we enjoy with Him is the knowledge that we are forgiven and have been granted an open door to our Heavenly Father.  The Blood of our Messiah has covered our sins, our breaking of the law knowingly and unknowingly. YaHshua said He did not come to destroy the law (Matthew 5:17).  He said not one title, not one jot would pass away until all is fulfilled (Matthew 5:18).  The law and the prophets have yet to be finished.

Read the following article, see if you can get something out of it, something of use.  You don't have to agree with it but I believe you should be able to find something here to further your search for truth and understanding.  Not everyone is called to the same calling just like not every car is alike, some for racing, some for hauling, some for family, but every car does run on the same oil.  Put sugar in the tank and see what happens, poor water into the crank case -- different cars -- same fuel and oil for proper operation.

Now, here is James McBride ----

 

Are Some Meats Unfit To Eat?

By James McBride

 

Are the Old Testament dietary laws of clean and unclean meats out-dated? Should Christians eat pork and shell-fish? Is eating them unhealthy? Is eating them sin? Here's what God's Word has to say.

James McBride: Served a delicious-looking pork roast, or a plate of mussels or oysters, or a tasty ham sandwich - has it ever crossed your mind that there could be anything wrong in eating them? A strange question, perhaps, in a world where anything that moves is eaten somewhere! But it's one that sometimes puzzles Christians.

Sooner or later a Christian will encounter the Bible's "dietary laws". These are a list of meats which God instructed Israel not to eat, found in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. Do these "Old Testament" restrictions on what may be eaten apply to Christians today? Are they merely 'ceremonial' - and "done away in Christ"? Or is it still wrong to eat them?

Let's examine the evidence from Scripture - both Old and New Testament - to find God's mind on these questions. Many Christian writers claim that certain New Testament texts annul the original food laws, making them obsolete. Others argue that these laws continue to this day. Later we will look at the opposing views.

The food laws, of course, are in Scripture linked to the so-called "laws of uncleanness". 'Clean' animals were suitable for both sacrifice, and for food. The 'unclean' were prohibited for both. But were these laws of uncleanness first introduced by Moses?

Before The Flood

It's important to realize that these laws of uncleanness did not originate with "the Law of Moses" around 1500 B.C. They are not 'Jewish' but an inheritance for all mankind. In fact, they were known to Noah eight hundred years before Moses! Read Genesis 7:1-5: "Take with you [into the ark]" God instructed Noah, "seven of every kind of clean animal ... and two of every kind of unclean animal". That is, before the Flood the notion of "clean and unclean" was already understood. From the early dawn of history a clear distinction is made. Some creatures were "clean". Some were not. Some were for eating and some were not. Some animals were defined by the Creator as suitable for sacrifice, and some were not.

Abel sacrificed "the firstlings of his flock and of their fat portions" (Gen 4:4) and - as with many of the types of sacrifice - it's likely that he would have eaten a portion of it as part of the "sacrificial fellowship" with God. These sacrifices were of the 'clean' animals only.

From the Flood until Moses, then, the people of God are recorded as eating and sacrificing only the clean animals: of the 'flock' - sheep or goat - (Gen 4:4), or cattle (18:7f), or birds. Noah, after the Flood "took of every clean beast and of every clean fowl and offered burnt offerings" (8:20). it's logical that, as in later times, these sacrificial foods were also those designed to be eaten.

Within the dietary laws Noah was warned only that he should not eat flesh - with the blood still in it. A caution, this, with which any modern dietician would agree!

Moses later recorded for us what these clean and unclean animals, fish, birds and insects are. They have not changed since! However, in a few instances there may be some doubt as to which creature is referred to, though those foods normally used as food are clearly defined.

---

ABRIDGED LIST OF SCRIPTURALLY "CLEAN" FOODS: [see Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14]
MEAT: They chew the cud & have a divided hoof Beef Antelope Elk Buffalo Lamb Deer Goat	FISH: They must have both fins and scales Cod Haddock Mackerel Salmon Bream Tuna	FOWL: Chicken Turkey Quail Pheasant Goose Grouse Duck Dove (and related)
Insects: Those listed in Scripture are not easily identified with our familiar insects. But you could, with John the Baptist, try locusts. [see Leviticus 11:20-23.] Modern outdoorsmen warn, however, to carefully inspect the locusts for parasites before ingesting!

---

Merely Ceremonial?

It's well-known - even in our world of hi-tech refrigeration and high standards of hygienic food-handling - that certain foods are likely to cause illness. High on the list of meat with a medical health warning are the so-called "unclean" foods listed in Scripture! This does not mean that other meats are automatically safe. 'Mad Cow Disease', caused by forcing cows to be carnivores, is an example of how humans can turn the edible into the inedible. Humans, however, can never treat the inedible as edible without the risk of dire consequences. As I write, ninety people locally are seriously ill because of eating mussels - a kind of scavenger shell-fish that delightedly feeds on raw sewage! In 1990, and again several times since, shell-fish from the east coast of England were banned from the shops for several months because they were contaminated. Such incidents are not uncommon. Not infrequently they kill. And doctors, of course, frequently prescribe "no pork" to patients for health reasons. Another example is the hare which was, even among the ancient Britons, avoided because of its well-known loathsome disorders!

In the Middle Ages, Jews were accused of sorcery because they escaped many of the sicknesses that afflicted others. It is now known that this was because they observed the laws of "cleanness". The laws of uncleanness also include other (obvious to us) instructions such as avoiding contact with blood, contaminated water, skin diseases, rats and fleas, and not touching dead bodies.

So anyone who expresses respect for these Bible laws, is doing himself a favor! Isn't it logical that a God who created man, who loves mankind,,will also have given guidance on the best "fuel" for his body? And what to avoid?

In fact, an open-minded study of Scripture forces only one answer to our title question: Yes - some meats are unfit to eat! And Christians especially, in whom dwells the Spirit of God, who are His "Temple", who are Christ's Body, ought to give heed to the Bible's dietary laws!

The Penalty for Breaking the Laws of Clean and Unclean

Obviously somebody has to touch dead bodies, clean up blood after an traffic accident, and treat patients with skin diseases. Breaking the cleanness laws is not automatically a sin, but there are penalties. In ancient times, the usual penalty was that you became "unclean until sunset." This meant that you were not allowed to enter the Temple that day. This was not a severe penalty, unless you were a priest on duty. This is probably one of the rationalizations that the priest used in the parable of the Good Samaritan when he "passed by on the other side." So uncleanness was a short term inconvenience. However, we can now see that there are also long-term penalties not mentioned in the Bible. For instance touching HIV-infected blood is a major hazard for medical personal.

Of course, it's almost impossible in today's world to avoid the intake of what are known as "unclean meats". Clearly, to unknowingly eat a portion of pork roast, or swallow a shrimp with the soup, or down a prawn won't exclude us from the Kingdom of God. We are not saved by our works! Nor need we sift every spoonful of soup for particles of pork fat, nor minutely inspect every lettuce leaf for a maggot, nor wonder what's in the toothpaste! Wrote Paul, "For the Kingdom of God does not consist in eating and drinking..." (Romans 14:17).

The questions is: "What if we deliberately decide to break the Cleanness laws as a rejection of Scripture?" Now we are not talking about accident or ignorance or necessity. We are talking about refusing to follow clear instructions in the Bible.

Consequences

Before God created man (the pinnacle and purpose of the material creation) He made His creation fitted to man's physical and psychic constitution. Man fits perfectly into the grand scheme of the fundamental laws of the Universe. That 'set-up' includes gravity, the laws of motion etc. Man to survive has to conform to these laws!

In Eden, man's diet - perhaps for environmental considerations - was largely vegetarian (Genesis 1:29-30). But because of sin, the ensuing disruption to the seasons and the curse on agriculture (ch. 3:17-19), certain plants were, or became, inedible. Hence there is today a wide range of plants which experience shows are unfit to eat - or even poisonous. Some mushrooms, for example are notoriously deadly. Since there is no doubt about these, there has been no need for God to give us special instructions. Similarly - and not quite so clear through our experience - certain animals are not fit to eat. To help us, God has identified these for us in His dietary laws.

To transgress the laws of gravity or inertia may land you in hospital - from a road accident, for example, or falling down stairs. But it doesn't deprive you of eternal life. It is not a sin that necessarily has spiritual consequences! This is, too, the case with the eating of 'unclean' meats. There are well-documented physical consequences (including heart disease, cancer, food poisoning, etc.). But their inadvertent ingestion doesn't lead to the second death. As the apostle Paul wrote to the Roman Christians "There is nothing unclean [common] of itself" (ch. 14:14).

In other words, to eat unclean foods has consequences for our health. But it is not - usually - sin!

On the other hand it's also emphasized in Scripture that God gives the Holy Spirit (without which we are not Christ's) to those who obey Him (Acts 5:32). To deliberately and knowingly flout any part of the Law of God instills and encourages an attitude of rebellion which could lead to the quenching from within us of the Spirit of God. That has real spiritual consequences! A true Christian constantly says to God "Your will be done"! Whether it hurts or not. God works with those who "tremble" at His Word!

Idolatry

Why, then, do so many who claim to be Christian get so angry about this part of God's revelation to man?

Desperately, they search for Bible texts to somehow "get round" God's instruction! For example, Paul's words within his short treatise on idolatry (in I Corinthians 10) are used to justify, eating unclean foods when eating out. He said "If some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising questions of conscience" (v.27). There you have it! You wouldn't want to embarrass your host (never mind yourself), would you? So with a clear conscience should you just tuck into the juicy pork chop - or the grilled octopus, or frogs legs, or barbecued rat, mouse, snake or dog? (All are relished somewhere in the world!). But, with his avowed attitude of deep respect for God's Law, would Paul sanction this major departure from it? He did say, you will recall, "the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good" (Romans 7:12).

What is Paul talking about? Look at the context. He nowhere implies that he is discussing health implications of unclean meat. He is discussing the religious implications of eating "clean" meats sacrificed to idols - idolatry - that is, any religion divorced from the Word of God. In Paul's times, the Temples were also the slaughterhouses, and it was difficult to find meat from animals not slaughtered in some religious ritual.

Notice his words: "Anything that is sold in the market eat, and ask no questions for conscience sake. If an unbeliever invites you [for dinner!] and you consent to go, eat whatever is put before you. and ask no questions for conscience sake [but, of course, you can ask questions for health sake, and many already do: low sodium diets, fat-free diets, allergies etc.]. But if anyone tells you, 'This food has been offered in sacrifice', abstain from eating it for the sake of him who warned you, and for conscience sake - I mean his conscience, not your own" (v. 25-28). Best to courteously warn your host ahead of time as to your food preferences - just as the Queen of England does!

Remember that the apostle Paul was writing to Christians whose sole "Scripture" was what we term the Old Testament! His teaching to the Corinthian Church was founded on the writings of the Old Testament. They were thoroughly familiar with the division of food into "clean and unclean"! As Paul wrote to Timothy: "Cling to the truths that you have learned and of which you are convinced, knowing who your teachers were, and that from infancy you have known the sacred writings which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith in Christ Jesus" (2 Timothy 3:14-17).

With their respect for the Old Testament they would take some convincing that Paul was telling them to flaunt God's Laws! Especially, too, in view of Jesus' attitude to God's Law - "I have not come to abolish [the Law and the Prophets]..." (Matthew 5:17). Anyway, in thirty-five odd years of keeping these food laws I have yet to meet anyone who told me the roast that we were about to eat - clean or unclean - was part of a sacrifice to idols. Nor, I bet, have you!

Peter's Dilemma

The apostle Peter once faced a dilemma on this matter of clean and unclean. Some ten years after the resurrection of Jesus he had a vision of "all kinds of quadrupeds. reptiles and birds" - dogs, cats, horses, frogs, alligators, snakes, spiders etc - being lowered before him in a huge sheet. A voice said "Rise, Peter, kill and eat". A shocking command. For as Peter makes clear:

"On no account, Lord, for I have never yet [this was, remember, ten years after the resurrection!] eaten anything unhallowed or unclean". (You can read the account in Acts 10.)

Peter knew the vision could not relate to food, so he was perplexed, but, as events unfolded, Peter came to understand the point of the vision: all men are equal in the eyes of God. Regarding salvation, there is neither Jew nor Gentile (vv.28-29). Peter was not to consider any man (Gk: anthropos) "unclean"! He did not say "any thing". In the vision God was telling him that salvation is open to all men. The vision had nothing to do with food!

To make these unclean foods suitable for mankind to eat, their - or man's - very anatomy and physiology would need restructuring. The digestive tracts of dogs and rats and pigs and oysters and crabs and vultures would have to be totally changed to properly process their flesh to be fit for human consumption. Yet all these unclean creatures are the same today as they were thousands years ago when the cleanness laws were written down! Where, in Scripture, has God 'cleansed' - indeed changed the very nature of - His long list of prohibited foods?

Holy Meat?

Indeed Paul told Timothy that in our day "some will fall away from the truth, giving heed to deceiving spirits and the teachings of demons" (I Timothy 4:1). That's a strong warning - and surely one we ought to investigate! What is he referring to? "They insist on abstinence from foods which God has created to be partaken of with thankfulness by those who believe and know the truth". Clearly some of the brethren were listening to a false teaching of avoiding certain foods which are acceptable in God's eyes for man to eat. But which? He explains: "for it is made holy by the Word of God [the 'truth'] and by prayer" (v.5).

Now, what foods are "made holy" - that is, separated for a particular use - by the Scriptures, the Word of God? There's basically only one place to look - and that is Leviticus 11, repeated in Deuteronomy 14! In other words, the "clean" foods. Paul specifically points out that certain substances, defined by God's Word, are set apart for use as food. Some are not. So around 60 A.D., almost 30 years after Christ's resurrection, the apostle Paul still hadn't got the message that Jesus had "made all meats clean"!

Note that Paul calls the false teaching demonic. It is today a well-known tenet of the Satan-inspired "New Age" teachings that "all animated life is sacred". The extension of this is that God dwells in all creatures - and we ought therefore, for this reason, to eat only vegetable foods. It is, of course, a Satanic lie! One result, for example, is the populous nation of India, where poverty and malnutrition is widespread largely due to the refusal to kill vermin such as rats and mice - which in consequence devour half the stored grain - or to use cattle for food. Any of those creatures, it is believed, might be re-incarnated people, or gods! This false concept is beginning to grip western society!

Did Jesus Change Animal Nature?

But didn't Jesus "make all foods clean"? This is "quoted" from Mark 7:19 and is often taken to mean that Jesus overturned the Bible dietary laws.

Recall that Jesus constantly upheld the Law of God! But he did, of course, have something to say about "uncleanness". He blasted Pharisees for their obsessive pre-occupation with ritually washing the objects they used daily. However, to use this text in Mark 7 to prove that at that precise moment Jesus took it on himself to a) change the nature of animals, or b) change the human digestive system, and to c) forever after do away with God's perfect Laws is a travesty of Scripture!

Let's read the passage: "And he said to them. Are you also still ignorant? Do you not perceive that what enters into the man from without cannot pollute him? Because it does not reach the intellect [KJV 'heart'] but passes into the bowels: which eliminate all foods [KJV: 'purging all meats']". Late glosses on the text interpreted these words as "This said Jesus, making all meats clean". But even this statement is only saying "making all food clean" - i.e., a bit of mud does not make clean meat unclean. The conversation with the Pharisees involved only their concern with the cleanliness of otherwise clean meats.

The logical meaning of Jesus's statement is in connection with the digestion of food in the human body. Notice the view of W. Walsham How in his Commentary: "'Purging all meats' - That is, cleansing the foods eaten from all that is not suitable for nourishment". It is a physiological statement as true today as two thousand years ago! The human digestive system eliminates all unwanted roughage, etc.

Jesus, in this passage, goes on to show that the true uncleanness or pollution is "from within, from man's intellect": from vile thoughts, adultery, fornication, murder, theft, avarice, wickedness, deceit, etc. (vv. 21-23). In other words, man is 'unclean' by breaking the Laws of God.

We have seen, then, that right from man's earliest days there is a God-inspired distinction between meats that are edible as food and those that aren't. Indeed in a prophecy for our time at the end of this age (v. 15) Isaiah relays God's message: "On the whole world the Eternal will pass sentence with his fire and sword. Any who ... eat the flesh of swine, of mice and crawling vermin, their rites and devices shall perish by the Eternal's order" (Isaiah 66:15-18 Moffatt).

Clearly God still holds the eating of unclean flesh as an abomination! Anciently God's Temple was desecrated by the sacrifice of an unclean animal on the altar. Very soon there will be a Temple (of some sort) again standing in Jerusalem. Again that Temple will be desecrated. Is it possible that the coming Antichrist will enforce the ritual eating of swine's flesh? That once again God's altar will be defiled by the sacrifice of a pig upon it? That a required part of the coming universal religion will be the eating of "the abomination"? If so, then it will surely be Sin to eat the unclean!

However, in the new Temple which the returned Jesus Christ will construct, all the sacrificial animals conform to the Laws of Clean and Unclean (Ezekiel 43 etc). An instruction to the Priests and Levites who will officiate in those days in the future is "They must teach the people the difference between what is sacred and what is unconsecrated [i.e., ritually], and show them how to distinguish what is unclean and what is clean" [i.e., inherently] (ch. 44:23). The former refers to sacrifices, the latter to food.

 

This is precisely what we in the Churches of God teach and practice now.

James McBride

                                                                          ***

James mentioned the act of sacrificing on the altar of the Temple. You do realize you are theTabernacle of the Living God, right? The living Temple of the Body of the Christ, our Savior and Messiah, living in us and we in Him.  Read again Isaiah 66:15-18 and ask, does God change?  Is the Laws and the Prophets finished? 

(Act 24:14) But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

(Act 28:23) And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning YaHshua, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

(Rom 2:12-14) For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.  For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: (NOTE: In other words, those not of Israel, non-Jews, observing the law of God, even without the written Law are then making a law unto themselves -- It does not say they are Law breakers but Law doers)

(Rom 2:15) Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

And before anyone one of us should find too much pride in the Law please read and take to heart what is found in the following verses.  Boasting in the Law can become a stumbling block even for the most learned among us.  Read the following carefully.

(Rom 2:17-20) Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,  And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.  (The form of knowledge but not the true knowledge)

(Rom 2:21-23) Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? (No mention of the law being done away, or finished, as we know, YaHshua hung it on the Cross, but it is not finished, not until He returns.  The priestly order has changed, certainly, but the unchangeable dot, or title will not until earth and the heavens have past away)

(Rom 2:24) For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

(Rom 2:25-29) For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. (If a gentile does the things of the Law, like staying away form unclean things, it is counted as righteousness to him -- no mention of the Law being abolished)

(Rom 7:25) I thank God through YaHshua the Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

(2Co 6:17) Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,  (How do you interpret this verse?  Don't let anyone tell you the unclean foods have been changed to clean, there is apmple scripture to prove otherwise and to silence the false prophtes teachings such lies just so they can continue their pleasures of the flesh -- certainly we cannot escape this world and we are exposed to every situation and cannot avoid certain things, by accident or out of sincere love for a brother or sister in the Messiah, but deliberate disregard for the Word, the Word form which the Apsotles taught is foolishness on our part -- Yahshua is the ultimate answer to our deliverance from this body from this world of fleshly pleasures and abuse of ourselves and of others) 

We are in a hopless condition and without our Savior we are lost.  It is through Him the Law has no power over us.  In times past the Law had a penalty of death, and still does, the complete abandonment and disregard for the perfect Law of the Living Creator God is still death but because of Yahshua and His willing sacrifice for us we have be granted a pardon.  He is the way, the only way.  He is the door, the only door by which all must pass to gain eternal life and to enter the Kingdom where no unclean thing will be allowed to enter .  It is one thing to say you understand the penalty has been overcome but a completely different thing to say the Law has been abolish and or is evil and to not even be considered.  Without the Law no one would know what sin is or was.  Without Law everyone would do just what they think is right in their own eyes. 

(Pro 21:2) Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.

(Pro 16:2) All the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes; but the LORD weigheth the spirits.

(Pro 12:15) The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise.

(Pro 3:7) Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.

(Jdg 17:6) In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

I am afraid we have returned to days Israel found itself once upon a time, no King, no Prophet, no Word, just everyone doing what seems to be right in their own eyes.  Why consider the Word of the God when you are a word unto yourself.  Everyone satisfied in their own eyes, writing their own law, making their own judgments.  Making judgments not to make judgments when even our Creator tells us we will one day judge the angels.  And how then are we to judge?  By His Word, His WORDS, not ours so that we might at least try to do what is right in His Eye's not ours.  One of the first signs a brother gives when slipping into the world's way of thinking is to repeatedly say, "Well, I think ...". 

Final comment, Concerning Roman 14:

Yes, one last thing, Paul in speaking with the Romans (Romans 14) and seems to make a very strong case in favor of eating anything you want, except for when a weaker brother or sister is around. This seems to indicate anyone in support of sticking with what is written in the Word of God, the Bible, concerning clean and unclean meats.  Doesn't this seem twisted to you?   the brother following the word, is at fault, the brother doing as he pleases is doing good?  But notice the context, it is delivered in the first couple of verses, this is all about eating vegetables only, avoiding meats (animal flesh) altogether, nothing about "unclean" meats is mentioned.  From earlier writings we see the church envolved in a problem concerning meats sacrificed to pagan idols, as these meats found their way to the market place.  It was taught that the meat was not tainted, or made unclean because of its possible use at a pagan temple. 

Now, in Rome, we have another situation, the Roman Church had resorted to eating only vegetables and avoiding animal meat altogether, and it is possible this came about for the same reason as stated above.  Paul, in his usual method of teaching both the weak and the strong manages to remove the sitgma, the argument over being a vegetarian or a meat eater by silencing those that should know better and suggesting they, being the stronger brothers, should act as the weaker and not make food or drink an issue. 

I personally find this a perfect approach and when you find yourself in a situation where young believers, or new converts are not really approaching the word correctly and it is not a matter of SALVATION (which would be a denial of YaHshua as Savior) for the sake of the others feelings you should keep silent and go along not making an issue out of something not clearly given in the word, the Bible.  You see, the Bible has nothing to say about being, or not being a vegetarian directly.  The elder brother should know his or her own freedom from laws of men and traditions of others for it will be soon enough the Spirit will reveal more truth to the new arrival to the body of the Messiah, and it may be possible our Lord would use someone for His own purpose in reaching others, of the same attitude, of being repelled at the thought of eating animal flesh.  But, in turth, eating only vegetables is not covered in the word as a righteous thing or not, it is neither.  It is not wrong to avoid meats, as it is written, the context of Paul to the Gentile Romans is all about not eating meats altogether as some were doing as a holy act of cleanliness, a righteous thing to do.  Certainly, as Paul points out, the older, stronger brother should know this and see it for what it is, harmless.

Paul simply said not to make it an issue and he included "drink" also.  Why drink?  Because, as we see even today, some believers abstain from alcohol for various reasons, some as a drink of the devil, others as not having any wine until after Yahshua's return, based on a statement made by YaHshua when He said He would not drink until He sat with His disciples in the Kingdom -- not a bad reason to abstain.  There is not command from our Savior to do the same, no scriptural backing, but the argument, as it is, Biblically,  may do more harm than good.  Weaker brethern see this as the right thing to do, to abstains from drinking alcohol, and we should not tempt them to go against their own mind.  Some of the stronger brethern would do well to keep a lid on their own strong drink pratice as I have witnessed (myself included) a little too much freedom with the wine.  We need not get in a battle with those opposed to strong drink as it should not be an issue -- we have more important things to consider instead of arguing over no meats and a ban on the drinking of alcohol.  Again, however, keep it in the context of what is written, Romans 14 is all about eating vegetables only and avoiding all flesh as a food, as some in the Gentile church of Rome were doing as part of their religious life.  Paul simply said, it is okay, go along with it, don't make it an issue, move on.  He never once said, or made reference to the written word being abolished as that was not the subject of his urging the Roman Church to quit scabbling over the eating of animal flesh or not. 

The First Century Church were learning from the Holy Bible and from letters sent to them from the Apostles and from the Apostles themselves.  We need to remember the written word of that day consisted only of what we call the Old Testament.  The Jews attempt to live the word physically and failed just as we are apt to fail and seeing the record of what happened to them we should see ourselves in the mirror of scripture, whether Jew or Gentile, we are just as at fault in our sin.  YaHshua has made it possible, through His righteousness, for us to enter the Kingdom to come and we are instructed to follow in His steps, to be followers of Him.  He took the PENALTY of the Law to the cross for us (which is death) that we might live. Not once did He eat any unclean thing, nor did He touch any unclean thing. If we follow Him as brothers and sisters, and if we are the Tabernacle of the Living God do you suppose He ate unclean animals?  It is an insult to our Heavenly Father to suggest such a thing.  When our God considers the eating of swine and the mouse as an abomionations, just what makes anyone think these things are good food for the body of the Messiah on this earth?

There are books out on this subject and it seems to be coming into ever increasing knowledge that the eating of certain foods is eventually harmful to the body.  Colon cancer is on the rise, arthritis is linked, by some, to the eating of pork.  We have the seasonal Swine Flu going about its business.  I have made a personal observation that people adding shell fish as part of their regular diet seem to age more than those avoliding the easting of bottom feeders, that would be most shell fish such as oysters, clams, lobster, etc. 

I went to a Jewish wedding recently, it was really nice, we attended the reception afterward and at the buffet discovered grilled shrimp on a stick and pulled pork, all you can eat.  It isn't only the Christians that ignore the plain written word of the Holy Bible.  Sad, but true.

See Also -- Servants Corner

servant@yahshuaservant.com