Were the food laws in Leviticus 11 and Deut 14 given for health reasons? Part 2

This week we are going to continue with the topic of clean and unclean food and are they for health reasons. Last week we established the fact that God did not give these laws for health reasons. We then talked about what clean and unclean related to, and that was ritual purity as it related to entering the Temple, touching any holy object set apart for Temple worship and what disqualified a priest from serving in the Temple. None of these things was considered sin, but knowing you were unclean and entering the temple, or touching a holy object or serving in the Temple was. The fact is, nobody claiming to keep the food laws of the Bible really does. If you say you keep them, you cannot go into a restaurant and eat and come away a “keeper” of the food laws. If you have gone into someone’s house and eaten you cannot come away a ”keeper” of the food laws. Any stove, utensil, plate, counter-top, table that has had unclean meat touch them contaminates anything else that touches unless it undergoes a ritual immersion (Lev 11.32-35). A stove cannot be immersed but torn down and destroyed if it ever had unclean meat on it. Now, since there is no Temple, holy things or priesthood these laws are simply not in force. So, what Messianic and Christian people do is just ignore the rigorous restrictions because they interfere with their “lifestyle” where they think they are Torah observant. They say that we should follow the list but that ritualistic part about the stove, utensils, pots and so on can be ignored. They say God gave the list for health reasons but there is no evidence for this, even amongst Jewish authorities. As we said last week, how can a person who was contaminated by unclean meat be decontaminated simply by the setting of the sun? They recognize that the Old Testament says nothing about the food laws and health reasons. Some say “unclean” has to do with sanitary reasons but that is not true. Tahor (clean) and tamai (unclean) are never used to designate physical, hygienic cleanliness or not. They are always understood as purity and defilement in a “ceremonial” (as relating to the Temple) sense and ritual acceptability, not moral. The laws in Leviticus 11 and Deut. 14 differ somewhat because conditions/animals in the wilderness will differ from those in the land, that is all. The food laws in the Bible are ritualistic. If not, Paul would have never instructed the Corinthians to “eat whatever was in the meat market” because none of that meat was ritually clean, even if you ate beef, chicken or anything on the clean list. Nothing we buy in the meat markets today is clean, so those who think they are following the Dietary Laws of the Old Testament aren’t really observing them. If you eat in a restaurant or someone’s home, in nearly all the cases the meat is ritually unclean according to the Torah (Lev 11.35). There is so much more to this subject but I hope this clears up a few things for you as far as the food laws for health reasons.

Q. Were the food laws in Leviticus 11 and Deut 14 given for health reasons?

A. No, health has little to do with these laws. Some say this is the reason to follow these laws today but did the Lord actually institute these laws for health reasons? Did He give the dietary laws for hygienic purposes and the unclean animals were never intended for human consumption? What does unclean mean to begin with? All these questions will be answered in the next few articles. But to answer your question, let’s go to Leviticus 11.8 where it says one is not to eat or touch the carcass of these creatures or you would become “unclean.” In v 25 it says that if you touched them you were to wash your clothes (immersion) and be unclean until evening. In v 40 it says if a clean animal died of itself and a person ate it he was told to wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. If hygienic “uncleanliness” were meant, how could a man be hygienically “decontaminated” simply by the setting of the sun? This would mean that he was in an unhealthy state just before the sun went down, but just after the sun set he instantly was in a healthy state. This clearly is not what the Lord was saying in these laws. These laws were given in a ritual, ceremonial sense and has nothing to do with physical. So in answering that question, it brings several other issues that we will begin to deal with. The Bible teaches that all people are sinners, even believers. Anyone who casually studies the Word understands this point. This means that no believer is a “keeper” of biblical law and most people know this. What I have taken issue with is those who say they “keep” the Law and at the same time violate it in other areas. The dietary laws of the Bible are violated by the very people who say they keep them, and that’s what we will talk about. As I have said before, the food laws are found in Lev 11 and Deut 14. God said certain animals with cloven hoofs and chew the cud were “clean” and those that didn’t were “unclean.” All fish with scales and fins were clean and those that didn’t were unclean. Insects of the locust family were clean. Any creature that did not meet the “clean” criteria was considered ”unclean.” These laws came from God and many debate about them even today. Some say they should be kept today and others say we don’t have to because “Jesus set us free from the Law.” Well, what does all this mean? The word “clean” in Hebrew is “tahor” and “unclean” is “tamai” and these words have nothing to do with physical or moral uncleanliness, they are to be understood as ceremonial or ritual. But what does that mean? Something clean and unclean related to three things in the Bible. If one was unclean, they could not go into the sanctuary, touch holy things and if a priest, participate in the services. Uncleanliness was not sin because Yeshua was unclean many times and we know he was without sin. In these food laws, you will not see that being unclean was sin, it’s simply not there. Clean and unclean relate to sanctuary purity. With that said, next week we will pick up there and relate this to the dietary laws and hopefully shed some light on a very misunderstood subject.