In the very beginning, the LORD created animals clean and unclean.  There is no scripture that says that any unclean animals were ever made clean or given for food.  For anyone interested, they may contact us for a tract concerning this issue.

      I will begin the response with Romans 14.  The apostle Paul made some statements in this chapter that must be kept in context.  The context is established in the beginning of the chapter.  Paul was not establishing new doctrine in this chapter.  Everything in Romans 14 is in agreement with the rest of the scripture or else these passages would not be scripture that is profitable for doctrine.

     Before I address the passages that relate to eating, I want to look at verse 5 to help illustrate the point that will be made concerning keeping the scripture in context.

"One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike.  Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind."

     If this particular scripture is generalized beyond the text of the passage, then Paul is advocating that the seventh day Sabbath can be discarded.  We know that many try to use this scripture to argue this point.  We also know that Paul is being very specific and his statement is not in conflict with the scriptures on the Sabbath issue.  Paul makes this statement within the given truth that God's commandments are to be kept including the seventh day Sabbath (Anyone interested in a more in-depth discussion of this issue may contact us.).

     Likewise, the passages in Romans 14 that pertain to eating are very specific and cannot be generalized.  Paul is writing within the scriptural framework of the Law of Clean and Unclean and not writing in conflict with it.  Romans 14:1-3 states,

"Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.  For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.  Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him."

      Notice in the passage that Paul describes those that do not eat all things as those that eat herbs.  The division is not between those that eat clean and unclean animals and those that eat only clean animals, but the division is between those that eat meat and those that do not.  This statement agrees with the rest of the scriptures regarding the clean and unclean animals.  It is not sin to eat creatures that God created for food and it is not sin to abstain from them.  The sin comes when we judge another's liberty given by God.  There are those that will condemn people for eating any type of flesh.  According to Romans 14, this would be wrong.  I will now go to Romans 14:14.

"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."

         It is obvious that if this scripture is pulled out of context and generalized, sin would not exist in some people's minds.  If Paul is saying that the only way something could be unclean is if we think it is, then Paul's statement would be in direct contradiction to a huge volume of scripture, even many of Paul's own writings.  The NLT version wants to limit the esteemed thing to food, but their is no indication in the original Greek of this limitation.  Once again, we must keep verse 14 in the specific context that Paul sets up in the beginning of the chapter.  He is speaking of eating flesh (clean by the Word) and eating only herbs.  To expand the meaning of this verse anymore is to bring contradiction to God's Word and His Word is always in agreement.

     There are two main points to Paul's discourse in Romans 14.  The first is to not judge others in those things that are sanctioned by the Word  and also not be an offence to others (the weak) by exercising that liberty.  Verse 21,

"It is good neither to eat flesh, not to drink wine, nor anything whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak."

     The other point is this.  If we partake of something, even though it may not be sin, if we doubt, we are condemned. There are other examples given in I Cor. 8th and 10th chapters about meats sacrificed to idols of which Paul says the same thing.

     In I Cor. 8th chapter, Paul talks about how to deal with meats sacrificed to idols.  Once again, his teaching must be within the framework of the scriptures, otherwise, he would be in conflict with the scripture.  In this chapter, Paul says that we know, as Christians, that the idol is nothing, so meat that is sacrificed to idols is the same as meat that is not.  However, there are those that do not feel the same, even some that have been converted to Christianity.  I know that the whole bit about meat being sacrificed to idols is hard for us to even relate to in our present day culture, but things were very different in Corinth and many other places when Paul wrote this letter.  From the context of the chapter we can conclude that meats that were sacrificed to idols was something that so concerned the Corinthian believers that they wrote to Paul about it.

     There were many believers that had been delivered from idolatrous practices that would feel it is wrong to eat meat that was sacrificed to idols, whereas, Paul, being a Jew, would not feel that same condemnation.  But, Paul says that we should not eat if it causes our brother to stumble.  Once again, the issue is not whether we should eat unclean animals or not, but the issue is meat that has been sacrificed to idols.  Since the scripture is very clear about what God created to be used as food., we can  say with full assurance that Paul is restricting these meats to those clean for food.  To believe otherwise conflicts with the Word.

     In chapter 10 of I Cor. , the apostle Paul is again addressing the issue of meats sacrificed to idols.  Read verse 27 -28.

"If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.  But if any man say unto you,  This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof:"

     Wherever we are we live for Jesus.  We abide by His word if He lives within us.  Paul was not telling Christians to forget about how God wants us to eat when we go to an unbeliever's house, he was giving us instructions about meats that were sacrificed to idols.  The reason Paul said to not eat if your host informs you that the meat was offered to an idol is not because it would be sin.  Paul has already established that in the 8th chapter.  But, because the unbelieving host has conscience of the idol and he would think that you are willingly participating in idolatry and your witness for the gospel would suffer.  If you do not know about the meat, your host cannot make that accusation.

     Many people today say that we will offend others if we do not eat the unclean flesh that might be set before us, so we should just eat it and ask no questions  First of all, that doctrine may work well for many in the United States, where it is acceptable to our culture to eat swine, catfish, and shrimp, but what about in a culture such as that of China where your host may serve unborn human babies as part of the meal.  If we generalize the scripture, then we would need to eat, asking no questions.

     The second point is this.  Paul says not to eat if we know that the meat is sacrificed to idols.  Wouldn't we still be offensive to our host?  Paul was concerned with Christians not being an offence to others in relation to the gospel.  To eat unclean flesh at an unbelievers house would destroy our witness just the same as if we broke any other of God's commandments at the bidding of an unbeliever.

     I will now go to the account of Peter's vision in Acts 10.  The scripture describes Cornelius, a gentile, as a devout man, feared God with all of his house, gave much alms to the people and prayed to God all the time.  Who did Cornelius pray to?  The idols that Rome worshipped?  No!  He was praying to the One who sent the angel to him, the LORD of Israel.  It is no leap in logic to conclude that Cornelius was a proselyte to the Jewish faith.  Otherwise, how could the scripture call him devout?  What would the measure be?   Anyway, you can read the whole account if you wish, but this introduction is important to a later point.

     Peter fell into a trance and saw a vision sent from God.  In the vision he saw a sheet let down with clean and unclean animals in the sheet.  He heard a voice say, "Rise, Peter, kill, and eat."  Notice that Peter did not obey the voice.  Why?  Peter knew a precept that is found in Heb. 6:18 which states, "...it was impossible for God to lie..."  Peter knew the word, and if he did as bidden, he would be in violation of the Word.  This is what Peter said, "Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean."      God told Peter, "What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common." 

     Now Peter doubted what the vision meant.  Peter knew that God's word is forever settled in heaven, but he did not know the meaning of the vision.  As we progress in the account, we find Peter at the household of Cornelius.  Peter states in verse 28,

"And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation;  but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean."

     The vision was not about God cleansing unclean animals and giving them to us for food.  The vision was about breaking down the partition of prejudice between the Jew(clean) and the Gentile(unclean).  Peter said that God had shown him not to call any man!, not animal!, common or unclean!   To generalize Peter's vision beyond what God revealed unto Peter and say that we can eat unclean meat brings contradiction to the Word.  Peter declined to eat based on the Word!

     The contention the disciples had with Peter in Acts 11 was not that Peter had eaten unclean flesh. Remember, Cornelius was devout.  There would be no unclean flesh in his house!  The contention was that Peter was keeping company with Gentiles.  Please remember that before Jesus came, the Gentiles were, as Paul describes in Ephesians 2, "...having no hope, and without God...".

     In Galatians, Paul talks about Peter eating with the Gentiles, but when some Jews came from the church in Jerusalem, Peter feared their reaction and he withdrew and separated himself from the Gentiles.  Paul confronted Peter because Peter was trying to build again the partition between the Jews and the Gentiles that Jesus Christ had destroyed.  Ephesians 2:13-15, “But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.   For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; (the Jew and Gentile)  Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;”

     In Galatians 2:18, Paul states, “For if I build again the things that I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.”  The ordinances that were part of the old covenant were destroyed, however God’s command concerning meats, as well as His moral law are eternal.  The eating of meats is not a covenant issue, it is a holiness issue.  When the LORD gave the law concerning the beast and fowl in Leviticus 11, He stated in verse 44, “For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves , and ye shall be holy; for I am holy…”

     Now let’s go to I Timothy 4.  Please notice in verse 3, “which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving…”  God created the clean animals to be received, not the unclean!  Also look at verse 5, “For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”

What animals are sanctified for food by the word of God?  Unclean animals?  No!!  The animals that are sanctified by the word are the animals that God created to be received as food!!!  Paul was not speaking contrary to scripture in this letter either.  Paul was warning of heresy that would come into the world.   The Roman Church is who the Spirit was speaking expressly of.  They forbid their priests to marry and command to abstain from meats that God created to be received  at certain times.

     Finally, let’s go to Isaiah 66:16-17, “For by fire and by his sword will the LORD plead with all flesh: and the slain of the LORD shall be many.  They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine’s flesh, and the abomination, and mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD.”

     People that pervert the word of God so that it will fit their own agenda, or the current culture, will not escape the judgment of God.  No matter how we try to justify sin, sin will always be sin.  Isaiah wrote these scriptures under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and these scriptures are relevant for us today.  According to these scriptures, those that eat the unclean will be destroyed, because eating unclean meats is in direct violation of God’s laws regarding holiness living.  The apostle Peter instruct us to be holy, “…in all manner of conversation;  Because it is written, Be ye holy for I am holy.”  I Peter 1:15-16 (Peter was speaking from the passage of scripture about clean and unclean animals.  See Leviticus 11:44).

     This is the sum of the above.  The LORD created clean and unclean animals.  We are instructed to abstain from eating the unclean.  There is no scripture in the old or new testaments that refutes His command.  We are to abide by God’s laws concerning what we eat, and if we do not we are guilty of transgressing the law of God.  As you can see, every point brought by Bro. Lance Harrell in his article has been fully addressed.

      My prayer is that all who read this will study the word of God concerning this issue, and not be swayed by modern day theology and seek God’s will in your life.