Does the New Testament Abolish Meat Distinctions? 13 comments article by David Treybig Some people believe that certain New Testament scriptures remove all distinctions between clean and unclean meats. But what do these passages really say? Most theologians assume that Gods laws regarding clean and unclean meats ended at Christs crucifixion. They suppose that the New Covenant removes any need for Christians to keep such laws. But is that what the Bible really says? The administrative change from the Levitical priesthood to the ministry of Jesus Christ did not void Gods expectations that His people obey His law of clean and unclean meats (or any other law) as part of their sanctification or separation as people of God (see Leviticus:11:44-47 ; 19:2; 20:7, 22-26; 21:8). Peter and Paul both spoke of the continuing need for Gods people to be holy (Ephesians:1:4; 1 Peter:1:14-16 ). Scholars acknowledge that members of the early Church continued to observe the distinctions between clean and unclean meats. Because of the common misconception that the New Covenant abolishes much of Gods law, many assume these food requirements were simply Jewish cultural practices that continued until the Church became more gentile in composition and outlook. Preconceived ideas have also influenced interpretations of many New Testament passages. This is known as the process of eisegesis , or reading ones own ideas into Scripture. Lets examine the New Testament passages dealing with food. As we do so, lets practice exegesis: drawing meaning out of Scripture by thoroughly understanding the background of a passage as we seek to apply it. Peters vision: Have all meats been cleaned? One often-misunderstood section of the Bible concerns Peters vision in which he saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to the earth. In this sheet were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. Peter heard a voice tell him, Rise, Peter; kill and eat (Acts:10:11-14 ). Assuming the vision meant that he should eat unclean animals, Peters spontaneous response was, Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean (verse 14, emphasis added throughout). This same vision came to him three times (verse 16). At this point many readers, without finishing the account, assume they know the meaning of the vision: that all kinds of flesh can now be eaten. These scriptures, however, show that that is not at all what Peter understood. On the contrary, he wondered within himself what this vision which he had seen meant (verse 17). Later Peter realized the significance of the revelation, that God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean (verse 28). Recognizing the true intent of the vision, Peter baptized the first gentiles (non-Israelites) called into the Church (verses 45-48). This divine disclosure, we see from reading further in the account, did not concern food at all. Rather, it concerned people. Because the Jewish religious leaders at the time of Christ had considered gentiles to be unclean, this dramatic vision righted this common misperception that had come to affect Peter and other members of the Church. It demonstrated that God was opening salvation up to members of any race; gentiles whom God called were now welcomed into the Church. Far from abolishing Gods instructions against eating unclean meats, these verses clearly show that Peter, almost two decades after Christs death, had never eaten anything common or unclean. Nor is there evidence that he ate unclean meats after this experience. He obviously continued to obey Gods laws about meats that could and could not be eaten and saw no reason to change. He realized that the vision could not be annulling Gods instructions, thus he thought about the vision until he understood its true meaning (verses 17-19, 28). Food controversy in the Church When reading through the New Testament, one does find references to a controversy in the early Church involving food. A careful examination of the scriptures, however, reveals the issue to be different from what many assume. In 1 Corinthians 8 the apostle Paul discussed the eating of things offered to idols (verse 4). Why was this an issue? Meat was often sacrificed on pagan altars and dedicated to pagan gods in Pauls day. Later this meat was offered for sale in the public meat markets. Some Christians wondered if it were morally right for Christians to eat such meat that had previously been sacrificed to pagan gods ( Nelsons Illustrated Bible Dictionary , Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1986, Meat). It is interesting, though not conclusive, to note that in Acts:14:13, the only passage in which the type of animal sacrificed to idols is mentioned, it was oxen-clean animals-that were about to be offered. This controversy was not over the kinds of meat that should be eaten. Obedient Jews of the day, in accordance with Gods instruction, did not consider unclean meat even to be a possible source of food. Instead, the controversy dealt with the conscience of each believer. Paul explained that an idol is nothing (1 Corinthians:8:4) in clarifying that it was permissible to eat meats that had been sacrificed to an idol. That an animal had been sacrificed to a pagan god had no bearing on whether the meat was suitable to be eaten. Paul continued: However, there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. But food does not commend us to God; for neither if we eat are we the better, nor if we do not eat are we the worse (verses 7-8). When a believer bought meat in the market or was invited to a dinner at which meat was served, it was not necessary to determine whether it had been offered to an idol, said Paul (1 Corinthians:10:25-27 ). His concern was that the brethren be considerate of others who believed differently. He taught that in such cases it was better not to eat meat than to risk causing offense (1 Corinthians:8:13; 10:28). This question of meat sacrificed to idols was a major controversy in New Testament times. It is the foundation for many of Pauls discussions of Christian liberty. Unlike Gods law of clean and unclean animals, which was clearly recorded in the Old Testament, the Hebrew Scriptures do not discuss the matter of food offered to idols. But in the first-century world of the New Testament this issue varied in significance and importance to members according to their conscience and understanding. The timing of Pauls letters The chronological relationship between Pauls letters to the Corinthians and Romans is another important piece of background information often overlooked. Many believe that Romans 14 supports the idea that Christians are free from all former restrictions regarding meats. Verse 14, in which Paul wrote, I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean, is often cited as a proof text (see Understanding Unclean in Romans 14, p. E11). This approach, however, fails to consider the authors perspective and the context of his letter to the Roman church. Many Bible resources agree that the book of 1 Corinthians was written about 55, although Romans was probably written from Corinth in 56 or 57. As demonstrated above, the food controversy in Corinth was over meat sacrificed to idols. Since Paul was writing to the Romans from Corinth, where this had been a significant issue, this subject was fresh on Pauls mind and is the logical, biblically supported basis for Romans 14. Understanding Pauls intent Those who assume the subject of Romans 14 is a retraction of Gods law regarding clean and unclean animals must force this interpretation into the text because it has no biblical foundation. The historical basis for the discussion appears, from evidence in the chapter itself, to have been meat sacrificed to idols. Verse 2 contrasts the one who eats only vegetables with the one who believes he may eat all things: meat as well as vegetables. Verse 6 discusses eating or not eating and is variously interpreted as referring to fasting (no eating or drinking), vegetarianism (eating only vegetables) or eating or not eating meat sacrificed to idols. Verse 21 shows that meat offered to idols was the dominant issue of this chapter: It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak. Both meat and wine were commonly offered to idols in the Roman world, with portions of those offerings then sold in the marketplace. The Life Application Bible comments on verse 2: The ancient system of sacrifice was at the center of the religious, social, and domestic life of the Roman world. After a sacrifice was presented to a god in a pagan temple, only part of it was burned. The remainder was often sent to the market to be sold. Thus a Christian might easily-even unknowingly-buy such meat in the marketplace or eat it at the home of a friend. Should a Christian question the source of his meat? Some thought there was nothing wrong with eating meat that had been offered to idols because idols were worthless and phony. Others carefully checked the source of their meat or gave up meat altogether, in order to avoid a guilty conscience. The problem was especially acute for Christians who had once been idol worshipers. For them, such a strong reminder of their pagan days might weaken their newfound faith. Paul also deals with this problem in 1 Corinthians 8. What is the point of Pauls instruction in Romans 14? Depending upon their consciences, early believers had several choices they could make while traveling or living in their communities.
Posted on: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:40:07 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015