Question:

I read your article and liked it very much! I would like to make a comment though about eating unclean meats. I am not saying that by eating them a person will not be saved, because we are saved by grace. But if we want to be free from disease and sickness, then we should follow the biblical diet God has given us.

These are some pages from a book I wrote that was inspired by God. ... [I left out the name of the book since it isn't important to the arguments presented and it doesn't appear to be a worthwhile book to read.] ...

II Corinthians 7:1 [All these promises are made to us, my dear friends. So then, let us purify ourselves from everything that makes body and soul unclean, and let us be completely holy by living in reverence for God.]

*In this scripture many seem to notice soul but skip right over body. Why do we think it's sin to smoke cigarettes? The bible dose not say that cigarettes are bad; so then how do we know that it is bad? Exactly it's because we are to keep our bodies pure, and cigarettes damage our lungs and heart. So then if cigarettes are bad for us, do you suppose eating the wrong foods are bad for us? Many will condemn others for smoking but yet they are junk food junkies, eating food loaded with dyes and preservatives, which cause cancer. Yet in recent studies they have found that Cancer comes from a Deficient immune system damaged by chemicals in our food.

I Corinthians 6:12-13 [Someone will say, "I am allowed to do anything." Yes; but not everything is good for you. I could say that I am allowed to do anything, but I am not going to let anything make me its slave. Someone else will say, "Food is for the stomach, and the stomach is for food." Yes; but God will put and [sic.] end to both. The body is not to be used for sexual immorality, but to serve the Lord; and the Lord provides for the body.]

*Chemicals are not food, they are put in some foods, but they are not foods.

... [several verses being taken out of context and applied to situations not intended] ...

Matthew 5:17-20, "Do not think that I have come to do away with the Law of Moses and the teachings of the prophets. I have not come to do away with them, but to make their teachings come true. Remember that as long as heaven and earth last, not the least point nor the smallest detail of the law will be done away with -- not until the end of all things. So then, whoever disobeys even the least important of the commandments and teaches others to do the same, will be least in the kingdom of heaven. On the other hand, whoever obeys the law and teaches others to do the same, will be great in the kingdom of heaven. I tell you, then, that you will be able to enter the kingdom of heaven only if you are more faithful then [sic.] the teachers of the law and the Pharisees in doing what God requires.]

*[sic.] This scripture Jesus is speaking about obeying all the laws of God that were given to Moses, [sic.] he said, "not the least point nor the smallest detail shall be done away with. [sic.] I did not say this; Jesus did! Notice in the next scripture the food laws given to Moses by God.

Leviticus 11:1-47, ... [It isn't worth copying the text here.] ...

*This next scripture explains what is clean and unclean. Unclean means, disease or causing disease. Clean means healed or healing.

Matthew 8:1-4, When Jesus came down from the hill, large crowds followed Him. Then a man suffering from a dreaded skin disease came to Him, and said, "Sir, if you want to, you can make me clean." Jesus reached out and touched him. " I do want to," He answered. " Be clean!" At once the man was healed of his disease. Then Jesus said to him, "Listen!" [sic.] Don't tell anyone, but go straight to the priest and let him examine you; then in order to prove to anyone that you are cured, offer the sacrifice that Moses ordered."

* What do you suppose the sacrifice is? Do you suppose when Moses told them what foods not to eat, is a sacrifice if they had been eating them. Do you know how many times God heals people and then years later some of them get sick all over again. [sic.] Do you know why? It's because many go back to there [sic.] old bad habits. Jesus is a merciful God and he will help you the first time, that’s His grace, but when we come to God we are suppose to change for the better, God does not change to fit our ideas of thinking. We must learn from our mistakes. And strive to do better. If God heals you from lung cancer and you go back to smoking, what do you think your chances are of getting it again? If God heals you of heart disease or cancer, and you go back to eating bad food again, what do you think your chances are of getting these diseases again? I'll let you think about it.

... [This goes on and on, but I believe enough is here to give you a flavor of what was written.] ...

Comment: I Timothy 4:1-5 in the original Greek uses the word broma, which means all meats according to Levitical Law may be eaten with a prayer of thanks. I like your article, but if we want the blessing of good health we need to stay within the Levitical Law. We are still saved by grace, but to have abundant health we have to keep the health laws. But I do agree with you about eating meat. I go by what the word of God says and not by man. Science has already proven now that pork and shellfish destroys your immune system.


Answer:

Generally I clean up the spelling and grammar of notes sent to me to make the author's point easier to read and understand. However, I left this one mostly intact, other than removing the heavy usage of all capital letters, bold letters, and underscoring which were distractions. I marked the grammar errors that I noticed because the author claims she wrote this by inspiration. Paul stated that the inspired writers were given the very words which to write (I Corinthians 2:13). This work cannot be inspired of God simply because God is quite capable of writing good English. God doesn't make grammatical errors, thus we conclude that the author is already self deceived.

Next, the quoted text are not from any translation. They appear to be paraphrases of The New Living Translation, which itself is a paraphrase and not a translation. It is important to realize this because she makes the Bible appear to say things that are not in the Scriptures. In other words, the author is not making honest arguments, but must resort to distortions of the text in order to make her point. Peter warned us about false teachers who seek out difficult passages, "which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked" (II Peter 3:16-17).

II Corinthians 7:1, which actually says, "Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God" is an encouragement to avoid immorality, whether external (of the flesh) or internal (of the spirit). We understand this because "filthiness" is contrasted to "holiness." The application of Paul's statement to dietary laws is a misapplication.

I Corinthians 6:12-13, actually says, "All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. Foods for the stomach and the stomach for foods, but God will destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body." In the verses, just prior, Paul lists a number of sins which will keep people out of heaven. Many of these sins are of a sexual nature. Starting with verse 12, Paul is addressing the excuses people give to continue in these sins. The first is to claim, "This is way God made me!" In other words, if I'm hungry then I have the right to eat. The implication is that if I have a desire for sex, then I have the right to it. Paul's point is that this is worldly thinking. It is elevating things which will perish over the teachings of God. Yes, a person eats when hungry, but they should not spend all their life eating (i.e. becoming a glutton). We understand there are appropriate times and amounts to eat and we regulate our body's demands in regards to what we know is best. The same is true of sexual appetites. There is an appropriate time and place for sex -- within marriage -- and even there we do not give ourselves wholly over to sex. The application of this passage to the use of additives in foods is a complete twisting of what Paul stated.

I've addressed Matthew 5:17-20 in details in other places (see "How can the Sabbath be moved when Christ said he did not come to destroy the law?" and "The Sermon on the Mount: The Law"). The passage actually reads, "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:17-20). Jesus does not state that the Mosaical law will continue forever as the twisted version above claims. Jesus states it will remain in effect until its purpose is reached and then it would end.

I find it interesting that the author says Jesus wants us to obey all the laws of Moses. I wonder if she still practices the daily animal sacrifices, the rules about stoning, traveling to the temple three times a year for the festivals, and the like. You see, people who claim they are following Moses' law are not doing so. They pick and choose the parts they like and ignore the rest. "For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. For He who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law" (James 2:10-11). They open Pandora's box because the Law is a complete unit. It cannot be arbitrarily divided at the whim of man. This is why Paul warned us not to go back to the Law. "Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace" (Galatians 5:1-4).

Notice in Matthew 8:1-4 she twists the meaning of sacrifice from the offering given after being made clean from leprosy (Leviticus 14) into a "sacrifice" of giving up foods a person wants to eat. Jesus was not telling the man to give up pork.

In I Timothy 4:1-5, the author claims that the Greeks had a special word for foods eaten by the Hebrew people -- isn't that amazing! And completely false. Yes, the word broma appears in this passage, but it was translated accurately as "food." That is what the word means. It wasn't restricted as this author claims to only Levitically approved food. Notice what Jesus stated, "And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.)" (Mark 7:18-19). Paul is reiterating the same point. All foods are clean in the Christian age. Yet, this writer, in her eagerness to assert her personal beliefs, directly contradicts Jesus statement that "whatever goes into a man from the outside cannot defile him" to claim that pork and shellfish destroys the immune system.

Oh, and did you notice that she claims science has proven this without giving one shred of evidence to back up her claim?


See also: