What Does the Bible Say About..? Logo

What Does the Bible Say About...Eating Swine?

God and Christ both told you not to eat swine flesh. Also read Leviticus 15: 1

If I were you I would read a lot more.

Answer

I have read, and can find no place where Jesus mentioned the eating of pork. Please let me know the reference, because I cannot find it. Apparently your mention of Leviticus 15:1 was incorrectly typed, because that simply says "And the Lord spoke unto Moses and to Aaron, saying." Please send me the reference you originally intended. I will never object to anyone who is Jewish keeping kosher. After all, the Law was given specifically for the Jews. Since I am not Jewish, however, I do object to anyone telling me not to eat pork. That restriction was never laid upon non-Jews. It certainly was never laid upon non-Jewish Christians. In Acts 15, the apostles and elders in Jerusalem laid out what they taught should be required of non-Jews from the Law of Moses. The laws specifying unclean animals was not part of what they said was required. Several times Paul wrote about how it was not even wrong to eat meat that had been offered to idols. Even today a Jew that keeps kosher may eat pork under some circumstances, but would be forbidden to eat meat offered to idols. So Paul, although he continued to keep the Law himself, said there were no restrictions on what Christians could eat. If you can give me any New Testament reference requiring non-Jews to refrain from pork I would be willing to publicly change my position.

Did Christ change the law or laws of God? As you read in Matthew he did not change any of it, because it is Gods words or laws that man must abide in them. Also Christ commanded the unclean spirit into the swine. Do you get the hint?

Elohim gave the clean and unclean foods to eat in the following books:

Leviticus 11:1-47

Deuteronomy 14: 3-20

Several things we must understand what is written A hog or pig is called a swine

Next, I want you to understand why God said not to eat there flesh (Meat) because they have only one stomach, also they have no sweat glands to sweat out the poison in their blood stream. God made the unclean animals to clean up the earth.

In other words they were created to be garbage disposals or scavengers of the earth, there to eat dead flesh animals that die upon the earth. For what reason?

If something didnít clean up the animals everyday that dies, then all the animals would pile up and up and man couldnít keep the earth clean all over.

Even if you feed the swine pure grain, it is not clean to man to eat period. I hope you understand now. Pork and ham will give you all kind of diseases, and many people die of them. Also if you raise up a pigs foot, you will see that it has sores on the bottom of its foot. Is that written in scripture as well? Yes it is. Pigs are loaded with worms. There are 19 different types found in a hog. Ask a farmer or a health doctor; they can tell you the same as I tell you. Did you ever wonder why the hog loves the mud? Remember, no sweat glands. Also a very poison snake canít kill a pig? You know why? They have more poison than the snakes do. Remember god gave us the DIETARY LAWS not to be sick of.

Also read in the book of Isaiah. Ask a farmer about the sores under a hogís foot. It is written in Isaiah about the swineís foot as well.

Isaiah 1:6 From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment.

Isaiah 65:2-4 I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts; A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick; Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat swine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels.

Understand this really makes God very unhappy. Your being told that God hates what the children do to their blood stream.

Isaiah 66:3 He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations.

Ok. Also many people say in the book of acts 10:10 peter was to eat the unclean food that God had cleansed. If they read it, for what it says, the Holy Spirit is dealing with Peter about people. Verse 10:28 is the answer there, not food

Answer

I never made the claim that Jesus changed the law of God. In reference to the eating of pork, you are claiming that the law was changed, not me. The prohibition on eating pork, as you point out, can be found in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. Both of these passages are part of the Law as given to the Jews. They were never binding on non-Jews. For anyone to say that non-Jewish Christians are required to refrain from eating pork is to say that the laws of God have been changed. Such is your claim, not mine.

The apostles of Jesus very carefully refused to bind the prohibition against pork on non-Jews. In Acts 15 they had the opportunity to do so, and chose not to. They chose not to change Godís law; why do you choose to change it?

Jesus did command the unclean spirits, in one case, to enter a herd of swine. The only hint I get from that, though, is that he was in a region that was not largely Jewish in population. There is nothing in the passage to indicate that he would not have sent the spirits into a herd of cattle, or any other group of animals, had they been available. Swine were there, so he used them. If cows had been present instead, he might have used cows. It says nothing to the appropriateness of the particular animal as food.

You also make a claim that the laws of kashrus (kosher) were instituted for health reasons. There is not a scripture in the Law that claims that as the reason for these laws. Few, if any, of the rabbis even make that claim. Most will argue that the prohibition on eating pork is one of the laws for which we can not give a clear reason. That is, it is one of the laws the Jews were to obey simply because God said to. If the scholars give any reason, it is usually that it was a law primarily to set the Jewish people apart from others. As Herman Wouk has said, if it was primarily for health reasons, then everyone would have adopted the law, both Jews and non-Jews. If you have scripture that says that the prohibition was for health reasons, please show it to me. I donít think you will find one.

If you do find a scripture showing it was for health reasons, then you still have to answer the question, why not cows or sheep? As we have seen over the past few years, eating poorly prepared beef can be just as dangerous as eating pork. Beef is subject to e. coli infection, mad cow disease, and many others. Sheep are especially prone to cholera and anthrax. Pork, when properly cooked, is as safe as beef or mutton. When not properly cooked, beef and mutton are as dangerous as pork.

You quote Isaiah 1:6, which has nothing at all to do with swine. While swine may have sores on the bottoms of their feet, this passage is about the people of Israel. It has nothing to do with eating flesh of any sort.

I grant that the passage from Isaiah 65:2-4 does talk about Godís objection to the Jewish people eating swine flesh. Because they were commanded not to do so, of course God is very upset when they violate his commands. Note that this is addressed specifically to the people of Israel. When Isaiah and the other prophets spoke against other lands, they never addressed the eating of swine because it was not prohibited to them. The same applies to Isaiah 66:3. Here he is pointing out the sins of Israel, not of those to whom the Law was not given.

Your argument on Acts 10 is a valid one. God is telling Peter not to consider people as unworthy of the gospel. However, you need to apply the same argument to your quoting Isaiahís prophecies. You contradict yourself by using one argument in interpreting Isaiah and then condemning those who use the same type of argument in Acts 10. You canít have it both ways.