The Nature of Clean and Unclean Meat Today

THOSE WHO OBSERVE the dietary laws of the Old Testament do so from a strong desire to please God.  In fact, the same is true of those who intentionally refrain from observing those laws.  It’s the conviction we hold to remain faithful to the heart of God that stands behind our actions.  Those of us who hold strong opinions on this subject matter would rather please God rather than dismiss the significance of His instructions as quickly as some of our peers.

Nevertheless, I have noted that in most discussions about meat, there is more presumption at work than actual knowledge.  Many who advocate the observance of clean and unclean meats often presume that God’s purpose in this distinction was given for health reasons, and impute this notion into every verse they find.  And many who feel the laws governing clean and unclean meats no longer apply under the New Covenant often do so because they categorically dismiss all laws from the Old Covenant.  While this is not true of everyone, it is true of enough people for us to realize that we need to do more than observe or dismiss the law of God based on presumption.  We need to discover the Spirit behind the law, and stand on the spiritual truth that God’s laws stand upon.

God defines every symbol He uses in scripture.  While men may postulate and speculate on the meaning of words, their true meaning is defined by how they are used.  Thus, the significance behind the symbol is found in how God uses the symbol in His word.  There is a spiritual truth behind God’s introduction of meat, and the laws pertaining to it.  So whether we are speaking of the flesh of animals or the flesh of Christ in communion, we must define their significance as God defines it.

STUDY SYNOPSIS:

Meat was just one of many items that served as a token or sign of the distinctiveness of God’s people as a people set apart and distinct from the world.  Meat was usually at the forefront of public attention due to it’s role in covenant sacrifice.

In the days before meat was permissible to eat, clean meat represented the Messiah and His distinction from other men.  Clean meat was later expanded to represent the Messiah’s covenant people.  Likewise, unclean meat pictured the Gentiles who were outside of covenant and unholy in the sight of God.

Therefore “uncleanness” is a spiritual designation, and not a physical one.  As such, there is no such thing as something that is “unclean” in and of itself.  In fact, the apostle Paul explained to the church in Rome that he was persuaded of this fact by the Lord Jesus Christ who had taught that “uncleanness” was unrelated to physical properties, being connected instead to spiritual realities.  The healthiness of meat neither made a meat clean or unclean.  Proof of this fact can be seen in the law itself.  However, before one becomes consumed with the laws governing clean and unclean meat, we must remember one incredibly important fact – the law changed.

We must not forget that these symbolic distinctions pictured the spiritual economy under the Levitical priesthood.  When the levitical priesthood was legally replaced by the Melchizedek Priesthood of Christ, the laws legally changed as well.  This is truly the crux of the matter.  There was a change in both the priesthood and the law that occurred with the Advent of Christ.  When you understand the significance of this change in the law, you will understand God’s will concerning clean and unclean meats today.  What was once a command set forth for men to observe is now an insult and offense to God when we ignore the change of Christ’s priesthood and how it affected the symbol of meat.  We are bound by covenant to honor these changes today!

So now that the law has changed, and ceremonial symbolism has been replaced with the truth it represented, how are we to understand the nature of terms like “clean” and “unclean” as they exist today?  The distinction between things that are clean and unclean is now to be understood by the cleansing power of Christ’s atonement, and its application to both men and material through the blessing of prayer and thanksgiving.  We understand that this cleansing is applied through faith.

Nevertheless, we also note that if something can be cleansed, it can also be left unclean.  In other words, if a man’s conscience refuses to embrace the truth, and clings to a past reality, then what that man calls unclean remains unclean to him by reason of conscience.  Therefore, if your conscience will not permit you to either marry or eat on account of uncleanness, then that becomes a law unto you of your own creation.  It is not a law to you because God made it to be, but because you have made it to be.

Let our consciences be conformed to the truth, and not ignorance, so that we may honor God in all things.

Want to learn more?  Not convinced?  Continue reading for an in-depth study on this subject.

What you can expect to find in this study:

[mouse over for reference]

• How clean and unclean meat was understood before men were even allowed to eat meat.
• What is the significance of meat?
• Why was meat governed by law?
• Why was there a change in the priesthood?
• How can an immutable law of God change?  Or does it change?
• What about health?  What the law says regarding the physical properties of meat.
• How the Melchizedek priesthood of Christ governs meat under the NT.
• What you are preaching by eating or abstaining from certain meats.

CLEAN AND UNCLEAN MEATS

When we speak of clean and unclean meat, it is natural for our minds to instantly jump to the laws found in the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy.  However, the first mention of this distinction is actually found in Genesis.

“And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation. {2} Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.” (Genesis 7:1-2, KJV)

There are two important points to consider from this verse.

First, when the distinction between clean and unclean animals was made known to men, it was revealed in a day when covenant law limited men’s diet to that of vegetation.  Under the Edenic Covenant, “…God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat” (Genesis 1:29, KJV).  God did not add meat to men’s diet until after the global flood of Noah’s day.  This passage in Genesis, however, takes place prior to that flood.  Thus, we must seek to understand what the primary significance of this law was to mankind in a day when men did not eat meat.  What did this law mean to Noah?

Second, God did not explain what he meant by “clean” and “unclean” when He gave His commandment to Noah because Noah already understood the purpose behind the distinction.  But many generations later, in the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, God gave extremely detailed explanations to the people concerning how to properly distinguish between that which is clean, and that which is unclean.  It was not assumed that they understood the difference apart from the explanation.  What did Noah know that was forgotten so many generations later?

The first question is answered by what Noah did with some of the clean animals he gathered for the Lord.

“Then Noah built an altar to the LORD, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.”  (Genesis 8:20, NKJV)

Noah’s actions reveal that the primary purpose for this distinction was to teach men about sanctification and holiness as it related to God’s purposes in atonement.  For example, something that is sanctified is designated as pure and set apart for the purposes of God.  And something that is holy is consecrated or dedicated to the Lord.  Noah understood that clean animals were assigned this designation for the purposes of atonement and its sacrifice.

This knowledge had been passed on for ten generations, from Adam to Noah.  Clearly, God’s instructions to Adam and Eve contained more revelation than what was recorded in scripture. After all, we are told that Able offered an animal sacrifice by faith, revealing that he had been given revelation not previously recorded in scripture.  And so this information was passed from generation to generation between Adam and Noah without interruption.

However, when God’s people became enslaved in Egypt, this knowledge was forgotten and replaced with the customs of those they were forced to serve.  This answers our second question concerning why Noah did not need the explanation that God later gave through Moses, as recorded in the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy.   Moses was addressing a people who were born under the laws of Egypt.  And so when God delivered them from slavery under the leadership of Moses, God’s sacrificial distinctions between that which was clean and unclean had to be reintroduced, and the ways of Egypt purged from the people.

It’s important, therefore, to pursue the spiritual significance of sanctification and holiness as taught by the sacrificial system, and understand how it made the transition from animal sacrifice to the cross of Christ.

BE YE HOLY AND SEPARATE

We know from the revelation of the New Testament that God instituted animal sacrifice to symbolically prefigure the sacrifice of Christ.  The sacrificial system, and its ceremonial laws, were intended to “foreshadow” the holiness and sanctification of Christ as a Lamb; a Lamb who was pure and set apart for the purposes of atonement (Colossians 2:17; Hebrews 8:5, 10:1).  In the beginning, this foreshadow of Christ’s sanctification and holiness applied only to meat.  But under Moses, God expanded this principal of distinction and separation (between the clean and unclean) to be applicable to the nations that had formed after the days of Noah.

God covenanted with Abraham to form a nation from his descendants.  They would be a unique people, separated from other nations, and sanctified for the Lord’s purposes.  And so when they were delivered from Egypt, this spiritual distinction between things “clean” and “unclean” was reintroduced through ceremonial law.

“For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. {45} For I am the LORD that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy. {46} This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living creature that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon the earth: {47} To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten.”  (Leviticus 11:44-47, KJV)

This distinction was not a natural one, but was a difference that had to be made by law.  It’s purpose was memorial.  It reminded the people that God wanted them separated, which is to say, sanctified and set apart from the unholy nations around them.

“But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to possess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey: I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people. {25} Ye shall therefore put difference between clean beasts and unclean, and between unclean fowls and clean: and ye shall not make your souls abominable by beast, or by fowl, or by any manner of living thing that creepeth on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean. {26} And ye shall be holy unto me: for I the LORD am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be mine.” (Leviticus 20:24-26, KJV, emphasis mine)

In this passage God clearly establishes His motive for “making a difference” in the law between the flesh of animals.  The flesh of the beasts symbolized men and women before God.  The clean beasts represented God’s people, whereas the unclean represented the Gentiles.  So God decreed that because He had separated the Jews from the Gentiles, this separation was to be symbolized in the animal kingdom for the purpose of remembrance.

However, this holy distinction was not limited to flesh of beasts, but extended into all areas of daily life as an ever-present reminder of sanctification.  While we may wax eloquent on the virtues of abstaining from meats today on the basis of health concerns, we must remember that this law was in no way limited to meat.  For example, if we believe that we must hold to this distinction as it applies to meat today, we must also decry the planting of two different kinds of seeds in a field, we must not breed two different types of cattle, or mix two types of thread in a cloth (Leviticus 19:19).  After all, these laws were all introduced by the same principle of separation that governed meats.

Meat was just one of many items that served as a token or sign of the Jew’s distinctiveness as a Covenant people.  And yet, meat was at the forefront of public attention due to it’s role in covenant sacrifice.

In the days before meat was permissible to eat, clean meat represented the Messiah and His distinction from other men.  Clean meat was later expanded to represent the Messiah’s covenant people.  Likewise, unclean meat pictured the Gentiles who were outside of covenant and unholy in the sight of God.

That being true, we must not forget that these symbolic distinctions pictured the spiritual economy under the Levitical priesthood, not under the Melchizedek Priesthood of Christ.  There was a change in both the priesthood and the law that occurred with the Advent of Christ.  We are bound by covenant to honor these changes today!

COVENANT LAW:

The Laws of Moses can be generally divided into two categories: the Moral Law and the Ceremonial Law.  Together, these two areas of the law stood as the Old Testament version of the Gospel message before the Advent of Christ.

MORAL LAW:

The moral law was, and is today, the embodiment of two great principles: 1) our love towards God, and 2) our love towards one another.  When a lawyer asked,

“Teacher, what is the most important commandment in the Law?” {37} Jesus answered: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind. {38} This is the first and most important commandment. {39} The second most important commandment is like this one. And it is, “Love others as much as you love yourself.” {40} All the Law of Moses and the Books of the Prophets are based on these two commandments.”  (Matthew 22:36-40, CEV)

The moral law of Moses helped God’s people to understand, at least in part, how they were to love God and their neighbors.  It revealed God’s moral standards to which men were held accountable.

CEREMONIAL LAW:

The Ceremonial or Provisional Law was added because of the transgression of the Moral Law.  Its laws illustrated the principles of atonement and redemption.  They consisted of ordinances, ceremonies, and sacrifices, all of which typified the mysteries contained in the plan of redemption.

For reasons we will examine shortly, the power and authority of the ceremonial law was canceled when Christ became High Priest and made an atonement for sin on the cross.  Thus, the apostle Paul explained this canceling of the law to the Gentile believers, saying:

“When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, {14} having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; He took it away, nailing it to the cross. {15} And having disarmed the powers and authorities, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross. {16} Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. {17} These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.”  (Colossians 2:13-17, NIV)

Under Moses, the law stood against the Gentiles.  The law opposed them through its circumcision, meats, and other such observances.  But then the Old Covenant under Moses met the New Covenant under Christ.  The Law met The Holy Spirit.  The type met its antitype; the shadow was transcended by the substance, the example was replaced by the reality, and the ministry of Jesus in the heavenly sanctuary redefined the ministry of priests in the earthly sanctuary.

“This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. {10} They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order. {11} When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, He went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation.”  (Hebrews 9:8-11, NIV)

The moral and ceremonial law are now understood in the Spirit, apart from the letter of the law.  Their exercise and application under Christ no longer conforms to the examples of the Old Covenant, but are now experienced as the realities of the Holy Spirit.

LAW OF THE SPIRIT:

So what does this mean?  Does it mean that the moral law of the Ten Commandments has been set aside with all the ceremonial laws of the Levitical priesthood?  Yes and no.  The letter of the law was limited in its ability to convey the holy nature of God.  Thus it only gave glimpses of God’s nature to those who observed it.  But the time came when the very nature of God was to be given to men so that they would no longer look to the letter of law, but to the Spirit of the law, for instruction on how to walk and live in the eternal life of God.

“His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. {4} Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.”  (2 Peter 1:3-4, KJV)

“For no one can ever be made right with God by doing what the law commands. The law simply shows us how sinful we are. {21} But now God has shown us a way to be made right with Him without keeping the requirements of the law, as was promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets long ago.”  (Romans 3:20-21, NLT)

“Don’t misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose. {18} I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.”  (Matthew 5:17-18, NLT)

“However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.”  (John 16:13, NKJV)

Jesus came to set us free from the letter of the law, by giving us the Spirit of the Law.  “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death” (Romans 8:2, NASB).  Tragically, many believers are carnal, and do not have ears to hear what Christ is teaching.  And so they interpret His words by the letter of the Old Law instead of by the revelation of the Spirit of the Law.

This has been the error of religious men since Christ’s First Advent.  There, at the beginning of God’s New Covenant with man, the rabbinical teachers of God’s word could not comprehend Christ’s illumination of the law. His revelation of the law’s full meaning transcended what the letter seemed to allow.  They did not realize that the paradigm, or pattern, of canonical interpretation was being replaced, and that the Messiah alone held the key to its interpretation.

By Divine edict, Jesus withheld this key from most people, until their flesh had been fully revealed as the enemy of the Messiah.  Only then would the transgression of the flesh reveal its true nature; only when the flesh of men had reached out and struck God in brutality could men see the depth of its depravity.  “Woe to the world because of offenses!  For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offense comes!” (Matthew 18:7, NKJV).  Only after the Messiah was glorified would the key to understanding the law be poured out upon men.  The Holy Spirit is that key.

Before that day of outpouring came, Jesus regularly confounded even the wisest of men as He lived by the full intent of the law, yet free from the condemnation of law.  Though the masses did not yet have ears capable of hearing, Jesus taught them that there was more to the law than what the letter revealed.  Nowhere is this more clearly seen than in a sermon recorded in Matthew chapter 5, verses 18-48.

There, on a mountainside, Jesus taught that the Mosaic Law must be interpreted according to the intent of the Spirit, and not only by the common understanding of the letter.

“For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. {19} Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. {20} For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”  (Matthew 5:18-20, ESV)

When we lean on our own wisdom, the logic of our flesh will relax the spiritual implications of the law to satisfy our carnal desires.  If this is done, our righteousness will not exceed that of the Scribes and Pharisees.  And if we insist upon interpreting scripture in this manner, we, like the Pharisees, will be denied access to the Kingdom of Heaven.  Approaching the law in the righteousness of the Spirit, as Christ did, is a pursuit of eternal importance.

To illustrate the difference between the letter and the Spirit, Jesus revealed the full nature of several commonly “understood” laws.  This sermon was recorded in Matthew 5:21-48.  What does a completed law look like in contrast to an incomplete law?  Jesus provided several examples:

• “You have heard it said” under the Mosaic Law that you are guilty of murder when you physically kill someone apart from self-defense and the authority of judicial government.  “But I say unto you” that if you do nothing more than harbor hatred toward someone in your heart, you become guilty of murder.

• “You have heard it said” under the Mosaic Law that a married man or woman is guilty of adultery when they have sex with someone other than their spouse.  “But I say unto you” that any spouse who lusts in their heart after one to whom they are not married is guilty of adultery.

• “You have heard it said” under the Mosaic Law that we are not to break our oaths (commit perjury).  “But I say unto you” that if your word is true, as it must be, there is no need to swear by anything in order to indicate one’s genuineness in word.  Your “yes” must mean yes, and your “no” must mean no.  Your every word is your oath.

• “You have heard it said” under the Mosaic Law that all crimes against your person must be punished in kind – an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. “But I say unto you” that a man must endure the wrongs done against him without retribution. “Say not, I will do so to him as he hath done to me: I will render to the man according to his work” (Proverbs 24:29, KJV).  This commandment in no way nullifies the judgment of law, but instead forbids men from using the law to seek personal revenge.  For there is a fine line between the righteous judgment of law, and personal revenge.  Even the Mosaic Law made this distinction: “Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself.  I am the LORD” (Leviticus 19:18, NIV).

• “You have heard it said” under the Mosaic Law that we are to love our neighbor as our self (Leviticus 19:18).  “But I say unto you” that we are not only to love our neighbor, but our enemies as well.

In no way did Jesus change the law.  Instead, He revealed its full intent. He revealed that the law was far deeper in its application than what men had assumed from the letter of the law.  “And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at His doctrine: {29} For He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes” (Matthew 7:28-29, KJV).

Jesus’ authority came from the Holy Spirit.  Jesus never reasoned from the limitations of His human nature.  This set Him apart from the Scribes and teachers of the law.  While they reasoned from their own wisdom, Jesus preached authoritatively according to what the Holy Spirit revealed to Him.  In this way, Jesus was able to obey the full intent of the law without error. Thus, by the leading of the Spirit, Jesus was perfect in His tenure on earth, just as God the Father is perfect.  His example would be the model after which all men would be required to follow.  That is why Jesus concluded His sermon with the summary command:

“You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”  (Matthew 5:48, ESV)

It is not our adherence to the letter of the law that can make us perfect.

“For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.” (Hebrews 7:19, KJV)

The letter of the law is, quite literally, the character of God in written form, because the written word was fashioned after the Living Word who is our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ (John 1:1-2, 14).  Because God is the Word after which the written letter was fashioned, the law must not be approached carelessly.  We must look at it carefully in our study, and apply what we learn in obedience.

“But he who looks carefully into the faultless law, the [law] of liberty, and is faithful to it and perseveres in looking into it, being not a heedless listener who forgets but an active doer [who obeys], he shall be blessed in his doing (his life of obedience).”  (James 1:25, italicized content added by AMP Bible)

“For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure.”  (Philippians 2:13, KJV)

The “liberty” mentioned by James, is not found in the law itself, but in the Spirit of the Law after which the letter was fashioned.  Thus, we can only truly obey the spirit of the law when the Spirit of that law is interpreting the word for us.  And because it is the Holy Spirit who leads us into liberty, human wisdom cannot know the law as it must be known.

“The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.”  (1 Corinthians 2:14, NIV)

WHY DID THE LAW CHANGE?

The moral and ceremonial laws of God, as expressed under Moses, changed (not in purpose, but only in their expression) because the Levitical priesthood to which they were bound and dependant was only a temporary institution.  As such, the whole economy of laws and ordinances connected with this priesthood were, by necessity, replaced by the economy of Christ’s “Melchizedek” Priesthood.

“For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.”  (Hebrews 7:12, KJV)

God had introduced the laws governing Israel’s ceremonial separation from unclean things through the Levitical priesthood, conducted by men from the tribe of Levi.  It was the priesthood which gave power to the law.  As long as God recognized the Levitical priesthood their laws would remain in effect.

However, the Levitical priesthood was imperfect, which is to say, incomplete.  It still looked forward to the final priesthood that would come with the Messiah.

“If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come—one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?”  (Hebrews 7:11, NIV)

There are many things made by God that serve a temporary purpose and then become useless when a more perfect stage of development is reached, such as a chrysalis for the butterfly.  The book of Hebrews provides many ways in which the Levitical priesthood, under Aaron, was merely an incomplete stage of revelation, and therefore unable with the blood of bulls and goats to address the problem of sin eternally.  So with the advent of Christ the Levitical priesthood and its laws were changed forever.

In this change, God was not merely finalizing the Levitical priesthood by introducing Christ as the last in a long line of priests under Aaron, but was moving to replace it entirely with a new, and perfect, Priesthood.

“For the priest we are talking about belongs to a different tribe, whose members have never served at the altar as priests. {14} What I mean is, our Lord came from the tribe of Judah, and Moses never mentioned priests coming from that tribe. {15} This change has been made very clear since a different priest, who is like Melchizedek, has appeared. {16} Jesus became a priest, not by meeting the physical requirement of belonging to the tribe of Levi, but by the power of a life that cannot be destroyed. {17} And the psalmist pointed this out when he prophesied, “You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.” {18} Yes, the old requirement about the priesthood was set aside because it was weak and useless. {19} For the law never made anything perfect. But now we have confidence in a better hope, through which we draw near to God. {20} This new system was established with a solemn oath. Aaron’s descendants became priests without such an oath, {21} but there was an oath regarding Jesus. For God said to him, “The Lord has taken an oath and will not break his vow: ‘You are a priest forever.’” {22} Because of this oath, Jesus is the one who guarantees this better covenant with God.” (Hebrews 7:13-22, NLT)

When the scriptures says that the Priesthood of Christ is “like Melchizedek” (Hebrews 7:15) it does not employ the Greek word “allos” which means another of the same kind, but “heteros,” which means another of a totally different kind.  Specifically, it refers to a High Priest who was a stranger to the house of Aaron.  This is significant because, under the Law of Moses, it was impossible for anyone but a Levite to enter the priesthood (Exodus 29:33, Leviticus 22:10, Numbers 16:40).  By law, a man had to be a legal descendant of the tribe of Levi to qualify.  The only way this could change would be if the Levitical priesthood was legally superceded by a higher order.

And so the author of Hebrews points out that Abraham, from whom the tribe of Levi was descended, paid tithes to a priest named Melchizedek, which legally acknowledged that the  priesthood of Melchizedek was superior to any that would come from Abraham.

“This Melchizedek was king of the city of Salem and also a priest of God Most High. When Abraham was returning home after winning a great battle against the kings, Melchizedek met him and blessed him. {2} Then Abraham took a tenth of all he had captured in battle and gave it to Melchizedek. The name Melchizedek means “king of justice,” and king of Salem means “king of peace.” {3} There is no record of his father or mother or any of his ancestors—no beginning or end to his life. He remains a priest forever, resembling the Son of God.  {4} Consider then how great this Melchizedek was. Even Abraham, the great patriarch of Israel, recognized this by giving him a tenth of what he had taken in battle. {5} Now the law of Moses required that the priests, who are descendants of Levi, must collect a tithe from the rest of the people of Israel, who are also descendants of Abraham. {6} But Melchizedek, who was not a descendant of Levi, collected a tenth from Abraham. And Melchizedek placed a blessing upon Abraham, the one who had already received the promises of God. {7} And without question, the person who has the power to give a blessing is greater than the one who is blessed.  {8} The priests who collect tithes are men who die, so Melchizedek is greater than they are, because we are told that he lives on. {9} In addition, we might even say that these Levites—the ones who collect the tithe—paid a tithe to Melchizedek when their ancestor Abraham paid a tithe to him. {10} For although Levi wasn’t born yet, the seed from which he came was in Abraham’s body when Melchizedek collected the tithe from him.”  (Hebrews 7:1-10, NLT)

The priest king Melchizedek typified the Priest King Jesus Christ, and in Israel’s history, placed the Levitical priesthood in a temporary position of service before the Lord.  This had tremendous legal ramifications, because the sacrificial and ceremonial laws of the Levitical priesthood were dependant upon the existence of the office from which they were issued, “for on the basis of it the law was given to the people” (Hebrews 7:11, NIV).  With the Levitical priesthood superceded by a greater priesthood, the power of the Law of Moses was removed.  In other words, when Christ was established as High Priest after an order other than Aaron’s Levitical priesthood, it put a legal end to the Levitical laws just as surely as it put an end our looking to anything or anyone else but Christ for salvation.

WHAT OF THE PERPETUITY OF THE LAW?

If the letter of the law was replaced by the Spirit of the law, and was always destined to come to an end, or better yet, to an advanced administration through Christ, why, then, does scripture speak of the Levitical laws of Moses as being perpetual and never-ending?

“It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood.”  (Leviticus 3:17, KJV)

PERPETUAL: 5769. ‘owlam, o-lawm’; or  ‘olam, o-lawm’  From H5956; properly concealed, that is, the vanishing point; generally time out of mind (past or future), that is, (practically) eternity; frequentative adverbially (especially with prepositional prefix) always: – always (-s), ancient (time), any more, continuance, eternal, (for, [n-]) ever (-lasting, -more, of old), lasting, long (time), (of) old (time), perpetual, at any time, (beginning of the) world (+ without end). Compare H5331, H5703.

There are two important things that we must understand when attempting to interpret verses such as this.  The first is that scripture’s usage of words like “forever” or “everlasting” are not limited to the definition of the words themselves, but are further defined by context.  For example, consider this passage in the book of Exodus.

“Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.”  (Exodus 21:6, KJV)

The words “for ever” are translated from the Hebrew word ‘owlam.  This is the same word that was translated as “perpetual” in Leviticus 3:17, noted above.  If we assume that ‘owlam means “all eternity” in Leviticus 3:17 when speaking of the law of Moses, how are we to understand its usage in Exodus 21:6 when speaking of a man’s bond-servant?

When it comes time to set a servant free, but that servant wishes to remain indentured to their master and become a bond-servant “for ever,” are we to understand that they will be a man’s servant for all eternity?  Certainly not.  The servant will remain bound to their master for the duration of their life.  The context and nature of the subject matter is what ultimately denotes the actual length or duration of words like ‘owlam.  This is because it’s possible for a greater law or authority to break the understood duration of words like ‘owlam.

So when we speak of examples of perpetuity, such as found in this case with the bond-servant, we must understand that the servant’s service is subject to the higher law of death and judgment (Hebrews 9:27).  So when the servant dies, the higher law of judgment breaks the law by which he was indentured.  And after death, if he is judged worthy to enter heaven in Christ forever, or damned to hell forever, the ‘owlam of his time in either place will continue forever, since there will be no greater judgment or issue of authority that will break the length of his time there.

This brings us to the second point of consideration when interpreting scripture and its usage of time.  Double meanings can be implied, that are not necessarily understood by the strict translation of words.  These meanings can even be hidden from the contexts of surrounding verses.  For example, consider the context of Hosea 1:10-11.  There we read:

“Yet the Israelites will be like the sand on the seashore, which cannot be measured or counted. In the place where it was said to them, ‘You are not my people,’ they will be called ‘sons of the living God.‘ {11} The people of Judah and the people of Israel will be reunited, and they will appoint one leader and will come up out of the land, for great will be the day of Jezreel.”  (Hosea 1:10-11, NIV)

In context, who does this verse refer to as those who are not God’s people?  It refers to Israel, because just a few verses earlier, we were told:

“…I will no longer show love to the house of Israel, that I should at all forgive them. {7} Yet I will show love to the house of Judah; and I will save them—not by bow, sword or battle, or by horses and horsemen, but by the LORD their God.”  (Hosea 1:6-7, NIV)

If we were restricted solely to the Old Testament, we might argue rather conclusively that this is a reference to Israel alone.  However, there is a secondary truth hidden within this statement that was not revealed to men until the priesthood of Christ had come into effect.  For in the book of Romans, the apostle Paul explains that Christ’s work as High Priest expanded this passage to include the Gentiles:

“And we are among those whom He selected, both from the Jews and from the Gentiles. {25} Concerning the Gentiles, God says in the prophecy of Hosea, “Those who were not my people, I will now call my people.  And I will love those whom I did not love before.” {26} And, “Then, at the place where they were told, ‘You are not my people,’ there they will be called ‘children of the living God.’”  (Romans 9:23-26, NLT)

Who could have known that Hosea was speaking prophetically of the Gentiles as well as the Jews of Israel?  Not even Hosea himself could have deduced this.

Now consider also God’s command to Abraham:

“And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. {10} This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised.”  (Genesis 17:9-10, ESV)

In this passage, this command is perpetual.  It is to be observed as law indefinitely, from generation to generation.  However, this perpetual commandment was brought to a definite end when the Priesthood of Christ was established.  For under Christ, we are told:

“For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. (Galatians 5:6, ESV)

Did Christ abolish the law?  No.  The spiritual purpose behind the law was merely fulfilled in a better way.

“When you came to Christ, you were “circumcised,” but not by a physical procedure. Christ performed a spiritual circumcision—the cutting away of your sinful nature.” (Colossians 2:11, NLT)

This termination point for the law was not communicated at the time the commandment was given.  Thus, laws and commandments such as these can easily be construed to be applicable to us today when the revelations of the New Testament are not remembered.  For how can you argue against a “perpetual statute” (Leviticus 3:17, KJV) that prohibits the eating of fat or blood when you are unaware that the law was superceded by a greater Priesthood?

WHAT ABOUT HEALTH?

Clearly, the power of these Levitical laws are no longer in force.  But just as clearly, their purpose has not ceased to be relevant.  In light of this, are we really so sure that health had nothing to do with God’s distinction between meats?  There must have been a reason God chose certain animals over others when choosing what to call clean and unclean.

It doesn’t take much study to discover that all “clean” animals are ruminants.  A ruminant is an even-toed, hoofed quadruped that characteristically has a stomach that is divided into four compartments.  Ruminants generally chew a cud, consisting of regurgitated, partially digested food.  As disgusting as that may sound, this actually makes ruminants far more healthy to eat than other animals.  Why?  Because their four stomachs vigorously process the food they eat resulting in less pollutants being stored in the animal’s flesh.  Even “clean” birds have gizzards which process foods more efficiently.  Additionally, ruminants are not subject to flesh worms, adding an even greater reason to count them as clean.

Unclean animals, however, store significantly more pollutants in their bodies than clean animals do.  Take the pig for example.  A pig stores poisons in its body fat.  In fact, their body fat is so effective at storing poisons that venomous snakes cannot kill pigs, because their poison is just absorbed into the fat.  This has made pigs a valuable asset in the Australian Outback during those times of the year when the rains drive certain snake populations out of hiding.  The pigs are immune to their bites, and even bite back, as snakes are one of their favorite foods.

Unclean creatures of the sea also store more pollutants in their bodies than their clean counterparts.  Prawns, crabs, shell fish etc., are all filter feeders.  Their role in ecology is to clean up the pollution in the oceans and store it in their bodies.  For example, Oysters thrive when they are downstream from sewerage outlets.  And fish without scales, such as sharks and catfish, are scavengers like pigs, so their bodies will contain a higher level of pollutants than creatures further down the food chain.  This means that if we eat certain sea foods on a regular basis, these pollutants will build up in our own bodies.  Health issues such as calcium kidney stones are often the result of over indulgence in such foods.

It would be naive to assume that this was all a matter of coincidence.  I have no doubt that it is significant.  And yet, its significance must be understood according to the scriptures, and not assigned by our logic as we see fit.  If the scripture does not tell us that the term “unclean” is given according to health concerns, we should not impute this interpretation upon scripture.  Because by doing so, we will jump to conclusions and lifestyles that run contrary to God’s revelation of purpose.

The natural health of an animal and it’s meat is connected to type and symbol, but has absolutely no bearing on what makes an animal clean.  In fact, the healthiness of meat is comparable to gender because it plays a role in typology to be sure, but is unrelated to the definition of “clean.”

For example, read God’s list of unclean meats in Deuteronomy chapter 14.  At the end of this list, a final category of unclean meat is added.  Listen to what God permitted His people to do with this unclean meat:

“You shall not eat anything that has died naturally. You may give it to the sojourner who is within your towns, that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner.  For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. …” (Deuteronomy 14:21, ESV)

The final category of meat that was to be viewed as unclean was meat that had come from an animal that died of natural causes.  This specifically referred to clean meat.  By law, the people were not permitted to eat the meat of an unclean animal, no matter how it had died.  So this prohibition specifically identifies a case where clean meat becomes unclean.  What caused it to become unclean?  Disease?  Rot?  Other health related concerns?

If we assume this restriction was due to health concerns, we must remember that while God’s people were forbidden from eating this meat, they could sell it to the Gentiles.  Think about that for a minute.  Would God forbid His people from eating something that is harmful or deadly, but then turn around and suggest that they sell it to the Gentiles?  Certainly not!  God is neither devious nor malicious.  He made it clear that His people are to love their enemies and their neighbors as they love themselves.  Thus, by permitting His people to sell unclean meat to the peoples of other nations, God was making it clear that the seriousness of the distinction was not a matter of health, but of ceremonial significance.  This is why He concluded saying, “For you are a people holy to the LORD your God” (Deuteronomy 14:21, ESV).

So the question remains, what made this clean meat unclean to God’s people if health had nothing to do with the law?  The answer is this: the meat became unclean, not because of something physical, but because of a spiritual truth that was imposed upon that meat by way of symbolic representation.  In other words, the meat failed to meet a symbolic requirement, and therefore became unclean because it was no longer suitable as a type of Christ.

Here’s how.  Clean animals had a symbolic use as types of Christ.  Because of this, their  death had to adhere to the death of Christ in type and shadow.  Christ would not die of natural causes, but would die as a sacrifice.  And so, no meat, even clean meat, could die of natural causes, but must be cut (like a sacrifice – as was Christ upon the cross).  This was a symbolic requirement that had nothing to do with health concerns.

In fact, this law operates upon the same principle as that of Holy Communion, wherein it is not the significance or attributes of physical food that is in focus, but the spiritual reality that they portray.  So the consumption of food is tied to a greater reality than the physical nature of the food itself.

So now that the law has changed, and ceremonial symbolism has been replaced with the truth it represented, how are we to understand the nature of terms like “clean” and “unclean” as they exist today?

THE NATURE OF UNCLEANNESS:

“I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.” (Romans 14:14, NASB)

Uncleanness is a spiritual designation, and not a physical one.  As such, there is no such thing as something that is “unclean” in and of itself.  This again proves that health is not the determining factor in what is said to be clean or unclean.  In fact, we have just seen that this designation is imputed to things in accordance with their status as a symbol.  So the apostle Paul explained to the church in Rome that he was persuaded of this fact by the Lord Jesus Christ who had taught that “uncleanness” was unrelated to physical properties, being connected instead to spiritual realities.  Jesus had taught this to the religious men of Israel who took offense that Christ’s disciples ignored certain laws governing cleanliness.

“The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and {2} saw some of His disciples eating food with hands that were “unclean,” 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. {4} When 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.)  {5} So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with ‘unclean’ hands?” {6} He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: “These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. {7} They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.’ {8} You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.” (Mark 7:1-7, NIV)

Was Jesus dismissing the value of cleanliness?  Which of us today doesn’t wash their hands, utensils, and dishes before eating with them?  Today, we are very much aware of the dangers that germs pose to our health.  Why would Jesus respond this way to a valid health concern?  It was because health concerns weren’t the issue at hand.

The Pharisees believed that it was the physical items they came in contact with that made them unclean (in a way unrelated to germs or dirt).  But Jesus was pointing out that uncleanness comes as a result of a spiritual violation, not a physical touch.  Thus, in the Pharisee’s effort to avoid the forbidden physical realm, they ignored the realm of spiritual significance and became unclean even in their keeping of the law.  The purpose of the law was to teach men about the principles of spiritual defilement, not to protect them from some imagined physical property that could make them defiled.  So Jesus turned to the crowd and called for their attention:

“And when he had called all the people unto Him, He said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you, and understand: {15} There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.”  (Mark 7:14-15, NIV)

What was Jesus saying?  He was reminding the people that defilement is unrelated to the physical world because uncleanness is a spiritual matter.  Yet even today, there are those of us who are concerned that God’s laws governing that which is clean and unclean are based upon physical contamination or unhealthy properties.  This belief stands in direct opposition to Christ’s revelation.  When will we be persuaded as the apostle Paul was about the true nature of ceremonial uncleanness?  When will we agree with Paul, saying:

“I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.” (Romans 14:14, NASB)

The apostle Paul encountered much difficulty in conveying the spirit of the law to men and women who could not see past the letter of the Law.  In fact, much of Paul’s teaching on the spiritual nature of uncleanness, and its relationship with meats and idols, resulted from the people’s misunderstanding of a single letter.

NOT THE LETTER, BUT THE SPIRIT:

In the days of the fledgling church, there was much debate between the saints over how the Law had changed under Christ.  Men who had become converted from the sect of the Pharisees were finding it particularly difficult to let go of the Mosaic Law, especially since it had defined their faithfulness from the days of their youth.

And yet, the fact that change had taken place was undeniable.  The Gentiles were clearly accepted by God, as was evidenced by the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit now flowing through them.  But did that really mean that the Law, which is to say, the ceremonies, traditions, sacrifices, feasts, and diets introduced through Moses, were no longer pleasing to God?  Who would dare risk the approval of God by making such an assumption?

So some of the brethren went out and began teaching the Gentile converts to observe the Mosaic Law.  Naturally, one can’t begin to observe the Mosaic law if they are not first circumcised.  Thus, it was taught that unless the Gentiles became circumcised and began observing the law of Moses, they could not be saved (Acts 15:5).  And this return to the Mosaic Law threatened to divide the church, brother against brother.

“Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” {2} And when Paul and Barnabas had great dissension and debate with them, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue.

{3} Therefore, being sent on their way by the church, they were passing through both Phoenicia and Samaria, describing in detail the conversion of the Gentiles, and were bringing great joy to all the brethren. {4} When they arrived at Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all that God had done with them. {5} But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses.” {6} The apostles and the elders came together to look into this matter.”  (Acts 15:1-6, NASB)

So the apostles, elders, ex-Pharisees, and teachers of Christ entered into an open and public debate before the congregation.  This discussion was passionate and lengthy (Acts 15:7).  Everyone was allowed to explain their position.  But when the apostles stood up and gave their testimony, the people fell silent (Acts 15:12).  When they had finished, James was inspired by the Holy Spirit to stand up and bring conclusion to the matter, saying:

…”Brothers, listen to me. {14} Simon [the apostle Peter] has described to us how God at first showed His concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for Himself. …  {19} It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. {20} Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. {21} For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.” (Acts 15:13-21, NASB, italicized contend added for clarity)

What was James saying?  He was saying that the testimony of the apostle Peter proved that the Gentiles were already chosen by God, cleansed, filled with the Holy Spirit, and empowered to do the work of God, all without observing the Mosaic Law and its customs.  This fact proved that the spiritual truth behind the Mosaic Law had manifested itself in Christ and was therefore to be observed in spirit, and apart from the letter of the law.

Furthermore, these Gentiles would have plenty of opportunity to learn about the Law of Moses in the synagogues, as there was no shortage of teachers.  So instead of cramming the letter of the law down the throats of these new converts, they agreed to burden the Gentiles with nothing more than the spirit behind the Law of Moses, namely, that men must be holy and separate from the world.  Specifically, it was decided that because the Gentiles of Antioch, Syria and Cilicia had grown up observing pagan traditions, they must separate themselves from any activities that were part of the traditions and ceremonies they had been saved from.

This inspired conclusion set well with the council.  The peace of the Holy Spirit was with it.  And so a summary statement was drafted, and officially sent out to the Gentile churches of Antioch, Syria and Cilicia who were at the center of this theological tug-of-war.

“Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers. {23} With them they sent the following letter:

The apostles and elders, your brothers,

To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:

Greetings. {24} We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. {25} So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— {26} men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. {27} Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. {28} It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: {29} You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality.  You will do well to avoid these things.  Farewell.”  (Acts 15:22-29, NIV)

The convictions of the apostle Paul had been vindicated. He was returning now, supported by two prophets (Acts 15:32) who would corroborate his understanding that Law of Moses was to be observed in spirit and truth, and no longer in the letter of the law as some well-meaning brethren had claimed.

In the council’s letter were four restrictions.  The Gentiles believers of Antioch, Syria and Cilicia were to abstain from:

• meat sacrificed to idols
• blood
• things strangled
• fornication

Unfortunately, most people read these restrictions according to letter of the law, and assumed that they were a list of hand-selected laws from Moses that everyone had to obey.  But this list was never meant to be understood by the letter of the law, only by the Spirit of the law.  After all, it had been agreed upon that the Gentiles should not be burdened by the Mosaic Law.  The reason for this had been made clear by the testimony of the apostles; what once came only by law had now come apart from the law, through the Holy Spirit.

The Mosaic Law was now to be understood in Christ who was Himself the antitype of that law.  So if the burden of Mosaic law was lifted from off of the Jews, why should it be imposed upon the Gentiles?  This was the apostle Peter’s point when he stood up in the council and said:

“Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. {8} God, who knows the heart, showed that He accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as He did to us. {9} He made no distinction between us and them, for He purified their hearts by faith. {10} Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? {11} No!  We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.” (Acts 15:7-11, NASB)

No, the burden of the law was not to be placed upon the Gentiles after being lifted from off the Jews.  Rather, the Spirit of the law was to be their portion under the Priesthood of Christ.  But if one was to apply the Law of Moses through Christ, what would that look like?  The Holy Spirit saw fit to provide an example and inspired the council to include four restrictions that were to be given to the Gentiles in place of the burden of the letter of the law.  Though four in number, they were in reality a single prohibition.  If we look carefully at the letter in which it was contained, we’ll see a two part message to the Gentile church.

The first message applied to all Gentiles, in all churches.   “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements…” (Acts 15:28, NIV).  In other words, the council had concluded that the Gentiles did not need to be burdened with the symbolic separation of meats, cattle, seed, thread, or circumcision.  The letter of the Mosaic Law was no longer in effect.  That idea had been defeated by the testimony of the apostles, which revealed that God had accepted men apart from those things.  And since no man could ever have been accepted apart from these things under the Old Covenant, that revealed that a spiritual change had taken place that was to be recognized and honored.

But there was a second message that was directed specifically to Antioch, Syria and Cilicia. And the message to them was intended to be simple.  They were to abstain from the ways of their past.  They were to leave the things of idolatry.  Thus, the intent behind the message they received from the council can be paraphrased like this:

“We will not burden you with the Laws of Moses.  Nevertheless, we must call you to observe the Spirit behind those laws.  You must be holy and separate from the ways of your past.  For example, you used to ceremoniously eat the flesh of animals strangled and offered to idols as part of your worship.  You used to ceremonially drink the cup of blood at the idol sacrifices.  You used to engage in ritual acts of fornication with temple prostitutes.  You, who were once involved in these things must now make a show of your departure from them.  The purpose of the Mosaic Law is to make a show of the separation between the things of God, and the things of demons.  For you, salvation is connected to your continued holiness and separation from all such things.”

In other words, these four seemingly disassociated prohibitions were completely unified around one theme: idolatry.  As such, they were never meant to be viewed as a law of general command, but as a law of conscience.  This is evidenced by the fact that, after Paul had personally delivered this letter forbidding the eating of meat offered to idols (Acts 15:22), he then wrote letters to other churches explaining why eating such meat is perfectly acceptable.

Why did Paul do this?  Because he was preaching the law of conscience, not the law of general command.  But carnal men do not read in the spirit.  They do not have ears to hear what the Spirit is saying to the church.  And so confusion followed after Paul as men continued to be confused by his permission and prohibition against eating meat offered in idiolatry.

So the Holy Spirit compelled Paul to teach further on this law of conscience.  For example, in 1 Corinthians chapter 8, Paul explains what was meant by the four laws that were sent to the Gentiles churches.  To roughly paraphrase his message, he said, “Look, the prohibition against eating meat offered to idols was not given because idols literally are demons.  Idols are nothing.  That’s not the issue.  The issue is that some people are so accustomed to associating meat and idols with demon worship, that they simply cannot eat meat that has been offered in those ceremonies without their consciences erroneously condemning them as actual demon worshipers.  That is serious.  So, then, this law is for them, because it is a law of conscience.  As such, if your conscience does not condemn you, because you know the truth (that idols are nothing and meat is nothing), then you are under no such law.  Nevertheless, if you use your freedom to temp others to act contrary to their conscience, then you sin by causing them to sin, and this law once again applies to you.”  Paul offered this same teaching in Romans chapter 14.

In 1 Corinthians, chapter 10, Paul discusses the significance behind eating meals, as it relates to worship.  Specifically, he compares the false communion of idolatry to the true communion of Christ.  Idols are representations of false gods.  So blood is the false wine of the idol’s communion cup, and strangled flesh is the false body of the idol’s communion dinner.  And because two are made one in sexual union, the temple prostitute is the false unity of the idol’s servants with their god.  All these things were once practiced by the Gentiles of Antioch, Syria and Cilicia.  So the Holy Spirit revealed that these Gentiles must separate themselves from those realms that had become second nature to them.  There was a tie of conscience between them and the practices of idolatry that could not be ignored.  Thus, it was a necessary part of their confession to avoid all traces of their past, as a matter of conscience.

So Paul urged people to flee from those places where idolatry was practiced, not as a matter of law, but as a matter of conscience and common sense (1 Corinthians 10:14).  “Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry. {15} I speak to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say.”  In other words, Paul was saying, “Use your common sense to apply what I’m saying, for it is not the letter of the law that I speak, but the law of conscience.  Judge what is right and wrong, therefore, by the approval or condemnation of your own consciences as confirmed by the Holy Spirit.”

As God’s people, we are called to partake of the Lord’s table, which is to say, we are to partake of those things that God offers and not those things that the world offers.  Our participation, therefore, is a form of faithfulness and witness, which is understood and interpreted by those things in which we partake.

“Consider the people of Israel: Do not those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar? {19} Do I mean then that a sacrifice offered to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? {20} No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. {21} You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord’s table and the table of demons.”  (1 Corinthians 10:18-21, NIV)

We associate ourselves with the significance of the food that we eat in the eyes of others.  We become partakers of the spiritual truth behind the symbol.

For example, if we refuse to eat certain meats due to Old Covenant laws, we testify of a separation between Jews and Gentiles in Christ.  If we bless all meats and receive them in thanksgiving, we bear witness to the fact that Christ is able to cleanse all men, and make them acceptable to be Divinely consumed, which is to say, made one with Christ’s body.  And while it is permissible to eat meats offered to idols, we are also to “abstain from all appearance of evil” (1 Thessalonians 5:22, KJV).  We must not give the appearance that we are in communion with the evil spirits while exercising our freedom in Christ.

But is this really the truth that we are professing when we either abstain from, or accept, meat on the basis of the Mosaic Laws governing clean and unclean meats?  Has the distinction between what is clean and unclean really changed under the New Covenant?

THE MESSAGE OF OUR CONFESSION:

“About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. {10} He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. {11} He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. {12} It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. {13} Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter.  Kill and eat.”  {14} “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.” {15} The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.” {16} This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.”  (Acts 10:9-16, KJV)

Tradition can blind us.  We can become so used to following certain rules, that we no longer think about the spiritual message that created those laws in the first place.  Peter had forgotten that unclean meat was a symbolic reference to the Gentiles, who God was now cleansing through Christ.  So God reminded him by sending unclean meat that had been cleansed in a vision, and then sending newly cleansed Gentiles to call upon him when he awoke.

“While 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. {18} They called out, asking if Simon who was known as Peter was staying there. {19} While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit said to him, “Simon, three men are looking for you. {20} So get up and go downstairs.  Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them.”"  (Acts 10:17-20, KJV)

It was at this point that the Spirit of God made the connection in Peter’s mind.  By law, Peter was forbidden from eating unclean meat.  But in a vision, God had sent unclean meat to him and commanded him to eat it.  And when he refused, the Lord rebuked him saying, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”  This is a simple, but profound truth.  If an unclean meat is made clean, it is no longer unclean.  Period.  And if a symbol or type of something is cleansed, then so is the antitype.

So, while Peter pondered the significance of his vision, the interpretation came knocking.  God sent Gentiles to find Peter.  They requested that Peter come to their master’s house and speak to his family about the Lord.  By law, Peter was forbidden from associating with Gentiles for the same reason Jews were to abstain from eating unclean meat.  There was to be separation between what God called clean and unclean.  And yet God commanded him, saying, “Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them.”  So Peter did not refuse the Lord this time, because he finally understood what the Lord was saying.  God had cleansed the unclean meat of his vision because He had cleansed its antitype; He had cleansed the believing Gentiles.

Arriving at the house of Cornelius (the man who had sent for him), Peter went inside and shared his revelation.

“Talking with him, Peter went inside and found a large gathering of people. {28} He said to them: “You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him.  But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. {29} So when I was sent for, I came without raising any objection.”  (Acts 10:27-29, NIV)

“Then Peter opened his mouth and said: “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. {35} But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.”  (Acts 10:34-35, KJV)

The law had been changed.  Through the atoning work of Christ, God was now cleansing things that were once unclean.  As such, God’s prohibition against eating unclean meat and associating with Gentiles was now amended to reflect the truth of atonement.  To say differently is to create a contradiction between type and antitype.  Meat is a type of men, and men are the antitype of meat.  What is true of one is true of the other.  This is why God gave Peter the vision.  If meat and men were unrelated, God could have simply skipped the vision altogether and just told him that the Gentiles were now clean without involving meat at all.  Instead, God first made sure to amend the type before giving revelation of the antitype.

I say that God amended the laws as opposed to canceling them due to the caveat that God gave to Peter.  God was not saying that everything that was once unclean is now clean, but that we are not to call anything impure that “God has made clean.”  So this brings us to our next question.

WHAT HAS GOD MADE CLEAN?

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; {2} Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; {3} Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. {4} For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: {5} For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”  (1 Timothy 4:1-5, KJV)

Timothy was a young man who assisted Paul in his ministry.  At the time of this letter, Timothy was entering into leadership within the church.  So Paul set out to mentor him and lay a solid foundation for his ministry.

In his first letter, Paul repeatedly addressed a serious danger to Timothy’s leadership – false teachers.  After all, Paul had already been opposed in the council by brethren who taught error in all sincerity.  However, those men had repented of their error when the Holy Spirit revealed to them that the Mosaic Law was now to be interpreted in Christ.  Because of this, anyone who continued to teach against this revelation after hearing it was to be counted as a false teacher and as one void of the Spirit of God.

So Paul warned Timothy that these teachers would come brandishing the symbolic laws of holiness, which is to say, those Levitical laws that once governed the separation of the clean from the unclean.  So in the passage above, Paul lists two primary areas that these false teachers would target – marriage and meat.  Both of these issues had been strictly governed under the Old Covenant according to the ceremonial laws of separation.  But under the New Covenant, that law recognized a change in priesthood, and began to reflect the work of redemption, which is to say, the cleansing of sinners.

So Paul taught Timothy an important principle.  In effect, Paul said, “Timothy, you will hear false teachers expound upon the uncleanness of certain marriages and meats as they were understood under the Old Covenant, but you need to understand how things are made clean under the New Covenant.  Marriages and meats are made clean, first and foremost, by the declaration of the word of God, and secondly by prayer and thanksgiving.”

Under the Old Covenant, marriages between Jews and Gentiles were considered unclean because of the law which separated the Jews (who knew God) from the Gentiles (who did not know God).  In the Temple, this separation was illustrated, even between believers, by a wall which divided the inner court (reserved for the Jews) from the outer court (reserved for the Gentiles).  The wall was established because “…it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins” (Hebrews 10:4, KJV), and thus the symbolic separation remained.  But when the Messiah came it was revealed that when men die to sin, and are born-again into Christ, both Jew and Gentile are cleansed in the same way and made one in Christ.  All distinctions of nationality and gender are removed (Galatians 3:28).  Thus, there is no middle wall of separation in Christ as there was in the temple.  In scripture, this spiritual reality is explained this way:

“Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— {12} that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. {13} But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. {14} For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, {15} having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, {16} and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. {17} And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. {18} For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.” (Ephesians 2:11-19, NKJV)

And yet, the distinction between the clean and unclean remains.  For example, in marriage, men and woman may marry whomever they wish, but “…only in the Lord” (1 Corinthians 7:39, KJV).  This reveals that there is still a distinction between clean and unclean men and women, but it is no longer to be observed on the basis of nationality.

“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? {15} And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? {16} And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. {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,” (2 Corinthians 6:14-17, KJV)

Nevertheless, if a man or a woman becomes saved after they are married, the apostle Paul noted a way in which sanctification can occur within an unequally yoked marriage between a believer and an unbeliever.

“For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.”  (1 Corinthians 7:14, KJV)

Now, it may be asked how an unbeliever, who is at enmity with God, can be sanctified.  Our answer is found in the nature of the sanctification that occurs.  It’s not the spirit or soul of the unbeliever that is sanctified, but the “meat” of their body.  This sanctification works according to the principle found in Hebrews 2:11, which states, “both He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one.”  This reality is understood by the principle of ownership.

When this principle of ownership is applied to an unequally yoked marriage, we find that the right of ownership and use of a spouse’s body effects a temporary sanctification.  For “the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does” (1 Corinthians 7:4, NASB). Thus, the believer has the authority to commission their spouses body for the purpose of bearing Divinely favored children.

This sanctification, however, is temporary, and lasts only as long as the believer (and thus presence of the Holy Spirit within them) is joined together with the unbeliever in sexual union under the covenant of marriage. For example, when the Lord spoke to Moses from the burning bush, His first command was that Moses take off his sandals before approaching, “for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground” (Exodus 3:5, KJV). Was the ground surrounding this bush holy before the Lord’s presence abode there?  No.  Has that ground remained holy to this day?  No.  The ground was only sanctified, and made holy, for the duration of the Lord’s presence upon it.

The same was true for Mount Sinai. There, the presence of the Lord descended upon an entire mountain.  So God instructed Moses to “set bounds about the mount, and sanctify it” (Exodus 19:23, KJV).  The mountain was already sanctified by God’s presence, but Moses was commanded to visibly mark what belonged to the Lord.  Moses obeyed, and the scope of God’s sanctifying presence was known upon the land and reserved for the Lord’s use.  But again, that sanctification only abode for the duration of God’s presence upon the mountain.

And so it is with conception and unredeemed spouses, for “both He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one” in the flesh, for “know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot [or unbeliever] is one body? for two, saith He, shall be one flesh. {17} But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit” (1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:16-17, KJV, italicized content added by author for the continuity of thought). This is the distinction between the sanctification of one’s spirit, and one’s flesh.

All meat is sanctified in this manner.  After all, flesh is flesh.  So Paul explains to Timothy that meat is cleansed in the same manner that men are – through the power of Christ.  In effect, Paul says, “Understand this Timothy, every creature that God has made is to be considered good and clean on one condition – that you acknowledge the word of God which grants you the power to bless (cleanse) your food before eating it.  Armed with this knowledge and power, you must not refuse to eat what is put before you due to the Old Testament laws that reflected the spiritual reality of that day.  Because, today, all food is cleansed when it is blessed by the believer, just as all men are cleansed when they are blessed by God through the cross of Christ.  Every creature of God is good and has been created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth” (1 Timothy 4:1-5, paraphrased).

This cleansing power is very real.  But if by the law of Moses you presume that you are still made unclean by the physical world, you have fallen from the grace of Christ’s provision for you.  It is possible to render Christ’s provisions ineffectual by clinging to the laws of type and shadow, ignoring their applications in Christ, and placing one’s hope in the letter of the law to the abandonment of the spiritual intent behind it (Galatians 5:4).

So if we continue to call blessed meat unclean, we defy the power of Christ and profess that the type remains unchanged because the antitype has failed.  In other words, we are professing that Christ died on the cross, but failed to cleanse the Gentiles.  That is a false teaching, regardless of our motivation for observing Old Covenant laws.

IN CONCLUSION:

We conclude, then, that the distinction between things that are clean and unclean is now to be understood by the cleansing power of Christ’s atonement, and its application to both men and material through the blessing of prayer and thanksgiving.  We understand that this cleansing is applied through faith.

Nevertheless, we also note that if something can be cleansed, it can also be left unclean.  In other words, if a man’s conscience refuses to embrace the truth, and clings to a past reality, then what that man calls unclean remains unclean to him by reason of conscience.  Therefore, if your conscience will not permit you to either marry or eat on account of uncleanness, then that becomes a law unto you of your own creation.  It is not a law to you because God made it to be, but because you have made it to be.

Let our consciences be conformed to the truth, and not ignorance, so that we may honor God in all things.