Question: Are the dietary laws abolished under the New Covenant?
Answer: No. WLC believes that the dietary laws remain binding upon believers under the New Covenant for the following reasons:
Kindly refer to the following for a rebuttal of the most common objections to oberserving the dietary laws found in the Old Testament.
Mark 7:18-19: "So He said to them, 'Are you thus without understanding also? Do you not perceive that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods?'" (NKJV)
Many have interpreted this passage to mean that Yahushua declared all foods clean (including those declared unclean in the Old Testament). Some translations lean very heavily towards this biased interpretation. The Revised Standard Version, for example, says the following:
And he said to them, "Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a man from outside cannot defile him, since it enters, not his heart but his stomach, and so passes on?" (Thus he declared all foods clean.) (Mark 7:18-19, RSV)
The context makes clear, though, that this is not what Yahushua was saying. The entire conversation was about eating with unwashed hands. There was no mention whatsoever of clean or unclean animals. When lord Yahushua said that all foods were clean, he was referring to all foods eaten with unwashed hands – because they were cleansed by the body and purged/eliminated from the system. This was the context of the entire dialogue. This understanding is further evidenced by the fact that the Pharisees, who were outwardly zealous for the writings of Moses, did not immediately create a great uproar or accuse him of speaking against Moses. Yahushua, who was born under the Old Covenant law of Moses (Gal. 4:4), never once spoke against it. He kept it perfectly and fulfilled its aims with precision (Matt. 5:17). This why the leaders of Israel had to seek false witnesses to accuse him. They could not come up with even one legitimate accusation pertaining to Yahushua’s teachings or practices (Matt. 26:59; Mark 14:56).
Acts 10:15: "And a voice spoke to him again the second time, 'What Yahuwah has cleansed you must not call common.'"
The meaning of Peter’s vision in Act 10 as understood and expressed by Peter himself was this:
You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But Yahuwah has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean. (Acts 10:28)
Peter understood the vision to mean that the uncircumcised Gentiles were no longer unclean in the sight of Yahuwah. Nothing is said about the animals that were used to communicate this understanding. (See also: Acts 11:4-18)
Romans 14:14: "I know and am convinced by the Lord Yahushua that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean."
Paul, here, is not referring to clean/unclean meats as they are defined in the Old Testament. This is made clear by his statement in verse 2:
For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. (Rom. 14:2)
Why would someone who was uncomfortable eating unclean meats (as delineated in the Old Testament) resort to eating only vegetables? They wouldn’t. They would simply abstain from the meats they believed to be unclean. The fact that those in view felt it necessary to abstain from all meats suggests that Paul was referring to meats sacrificed to an idol, which was common practice among the unregenerate Gentiles (1 Cor. 8-10).
1 Tim. 4:4-5: "For every creature of Yahuwah is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of Yahuwah and prayer."
This, again, is not talking about clean/unclean meats (as delineated in the Old Testament). We see this clearly when we zoom out and view the entire passage:
Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which Yahuwah created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For every creature of Yahuwah is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of Yahuwah and prayer. (1 Tim. 4:1-5)
The distinction between clean/unclean meats in the Old Testament was certainly not given by “deceiving sprits” or “demons,” and it is certain the Paul would never suggest something so blasphemous or preposterous. Furthermore, nowhere in the entire “word of Yahuwah” (which was only the Old Testament when Paul was writing this) is unclean meat “sanctified,” or set-apart, for consumption. Add to this the fact that Paul says that those he is warning about have had their “conscience seared with a hot iron” (verse 2) and are “forbidding to marry” (verse 3). Does this sound like he’s simply referring to someone who teaches that we should abstain from eating pork or shellfish? Clearly, no. There is much more at play here. While it is beyond the scope of this study to elaborate on the exact circumstances and meaning of Paul’s remarks, we can conclude with certainty what Paul was not saying. He was not saying that there was no longer a distinction to be made between clean/unclean meats.