Question: In the article Seven Keys to Being Ready for the Second Coming, it says that eating unclean meat is defiling. But Jesus says (Mat 15:11) ”Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man. (Mat 15:20) These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man. (Mar 7:20) And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.” Also, God told Peter that it was alright to eat any kind of unclean animal. (Act 10:14) ”But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. (Act 10:15) And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.”
Answer: First of all, let us look at the New Testament texts. How did Peter himself understand his vision? (Act 10:28) 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. (Act 11:8) But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth. (Act 11:9) But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
From this we see that Peter himself understood the vision to mean that it was not defiling, as Jews at the time taught, to eat or stay with someone who was uncircumcised. If we wish to use the text to excuse eating unclean things, then we have to disagree with Peter about what his vision meant.
As for the response of Jesus in Matthew 15, we have to look at the question that was asked. The question was about eating without ritual washing of hands and reciting the ritual blessing that was required by Jewish tradition. Since Jesus followed the Bible only, and not Jewish tradition, he did not ritually wash his hands or teach his disciples to do so. His answer shows that following Jewish tradition in ritual ablution not mentioned in the Bible is not required. Failure to do so is not defiling, as the Jews claimed. Then he took the opportunity to remark that what comes out of a person's mouth is defiling. James makes the same point. (Jas 3:6) ”And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.” But Jesus does not deal with the issue of clean and unclean meats in this text at all, and neither did the Jews who asked the question in the first place. If we are going to use this text to justify eating unclean meats, then we have to disagree with what Jesus and James understand it to mean.
We really need to be careful about abusing the Bible, applying it to things other than what it states. That goes for the original question in Revelation 21:27. ”And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.”
Most people who read that text never stop to ask what it is that defiles. They just assume they know. But if we are serious about finding out what is allowed to enter into the kingdom of God, then we will look at the Bible to see what it says is defiling. There is very little in the New Testament that defines what defiling is. So the writer of the article had to depend on the Old Testament to find the meaning of defilement. He found seven basic defiling things based on the King James Version of the Bible.
But if we look at the Greek text, there really is a problem, at least from an academic point of view. The word used in Rev. 21:27 is koinos, which specifically refers to ceremonial defilement, such as neglecting to wash hand ritually, or eating and staying with uncircumcised persons. If we take the text literally for what it says, it does indeed conflict with Matthew 15 and Acts 10 and 11, where the word koinos is used. It is easy to make an academic case for suggesting that the book of Revelation represents a more Jewish form of the early followers of Christ than do the Gospels and the Pauline epistles. In fact, the book of Revelation does not recognize Christians at all: only true Jews and the synagogue of Satan. So we might be justified in thinking that the book of Revelation does conflict with Acts 10 and 11. In any case, that would have a far firmer justification than what the questioner implies, that the Old Testament health laws are done away with by the New Testament. Furthermore, the word koinos is not always used in the Greek version of the Old Testament, in the texts the author of the article finds to define defilement. He takes the idea of defilement and finds corresponding Hebrew words that are translated by the King James translators as defilement.
It is probably more meaningful for us to trust the King James translators here to give us a Biblical idea of what defilement is, than to latch on to the literal meaning in the book of Revelation and end up with a conflict, not between the Old Testament and the New on the issue of clean and unclean meats, but between parts of the New Testament itself; or with two separate kinds of followers of Christ, the Judaizers of Revelation, and the non-circumcisers of Acts. If we take the latter position, then we are stuck with some problems in Acts 15 as well. The Gentile Christians are still expected to refrain from things strangled, meat offered to idols, and from blood. So that too would conflict with Matthew 15, if Jesus is talking about food. Besides that, the Gentiles of Acts 15, according to verse 21, are still expected to go and listen to the reading of the law of Moses on the Sabbath day.
If we take Jesus' words in Matthew 15 to relate to eating, then Matthew also conflicts with 1 Corinthians 8:7 ”Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.” Paul is clear here that it is possible to defile the conscience by what enters the mouth as well as by what comes out of it.
The Bible is a complicated book and subject to manipulation. It confirms what is in the heart of a man, either of faith to salvation or of rebellion to destruction. The Protestant Churches today are all daughters of Babylon, so their interpretations of the Bible, which so easily come to mind and influence us, are rebellion to destruction. We should not abuse the Bible text to find conflict within it. That only results in more and more confusion, as shown above. Those who are preparing themselves to be translated into glory without seeing death will search the Scriptures to see what is defiling and make sure they avoid those things. It is not a question of salvation. All who rely on the atoning ministry of Christ will be saved and their sins blotted out, and they will be given grace to live according to the commandments of God. Eating unclean meat will not keep a person from being saved. It is not mentioned in the ten commandments. But the laws about unclean meat were given for a reason. Part of that reason is health and hygiene. If we recognize that the body is the temple of God, we will not purposefully defile it with things that were never meant to be food.
Anyone who stops to think, will realize that referring to Matthew 15 as an excuse for eating what the Bible says is unclean is precisely that. It is a rebellious excuse to do something they want to do. Anyone finding a dog lying beside the road in the sun, that had been struck by a car the day before, would not immediately say that Jesus said there is nothing that enters the mouth that can defile. He will immediately consider eating such a carcase a defilement, and rightly so. It would be a disservice to Jesus to pretend that he encourages us to eat such things. Life is not just about scraping through and being saved. It is also about living a full, happy, and healthful life. And it is about getting ready and being ready for the second coming of Christ.
