The entire passage reads, in context: “On that very day some Pharisees came, saying to Him, ‘Get out and depart from here, for Herod wants to kill You.’ And He said to them, ‘Go, tell that fox, “Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.” Nevertheless I must journey today, tomorrow and the day following; for it cannot be that a prophet should perish outside of Jerusalem’” (Luke 13:31-33).

Christ made the statement in the context of His violent death which would occur in the city of Jerusalem. Halley’s Bible Handbook points out that Jesus spoke His words when He was “in Perea, Herod’s domain. He was safer there than in Judea. His answer: ‘You, not Herod, are my murderers. Jerusalem, not Perea, the place for it.’”

In fact, many prophets were and are going to be killed in that city (compare the death of the prophet Zechariah, 2 Chronicles 24:20-22; the death of the prophet Urijah, Jeremiah 26:20-23; and the future death of the two witnesses, Revelation 11:3, 7-8).

As we explain in our Q&A about the role of Christ as a prophet, Christ was indeed a prophet, and He was recognized as such by the people and the religious establishment (Matthew 21:11; John 9:17; Luke 7:16; Luke 24:19). He referred to Himself as a prophet in the above-quoted passage in Luke 13:33. In fact, He was THE Prophet spoken of by Moses in Deuteronomy 18:15 (compare Acts 3:19-26), and some recognized Him as such (John 6:14; 7:40).

But did Christ mean to say that every prophet was or will be killed in the city of Jerusalem?

In addressing the Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes and lawyers who resided in Jerusalem, He said in Luke 11:49-51:

“… ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and persecute,’ that the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah who perished between the altar and the temple. Yes, I say to you, it shall be required of this generation.”

Christ might have had in mind that His generation would be severely punished through the Romans in 70 AD when Jerusalem was occupied and the temple was destroyed. Or, He could have referred in general to the Jewish race (note our Q&A on the meaning of “generation”).

His recorded words in Matthew 23:34-35 shed further light on His statement:

“… I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, that on you may come  all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.”

Notice that He says in Matthew 23:34 that the prophets, wise men and scribes would be persecuted from city to city… showing that His statements (including in Luke 13:33) were not limited to the city of Jerusalem.

Not every prophet was killed in the city of Jerusalem. Abel was not killed in the city of Jerusalem (the city did not even exist at that time), even though Christ called him a prophet. As Noah was a preacher of righteousness (2 Peter 2:5), warning the people of the coming flood, so Abel probably prophesied to Cain and others about the consequences of their evil lifestyle; and we read that Abel’s blood still speaks to us today in a figurative sense (Hebrews 12:24).

We stated in a previous Q&A on the death of Paul:

“It is therefore reasonably certain that Paul was murdered under Nero through beheading. He was buried in Rome, but his body was later transferred to England, where it is today.”

Paul was a prophet (Acts 13:1), but he was apparently not killed in the city of Jerusalem.

What, then, might Christ have meant with His statement that “it cannot be that a prophet should perish outside of Jerusalem”? Did He utter an historically and prophetically inaccurate statement?

Several explanations are possible.

(1)  Exception: Death of a Prophet through Foreigners

John the Baptist was a great prophet (Matthew 11:7-9; Luke 1:76), but he was not THE Prophet (John 1:21-25). He was beheaded in the palace of Herod (called the fortress Machaerus), which was not in the city of Jerusalem, but which was a fortified hilltop palace located in Jordan 25 kilometers (16 miles) southeast of the mouth of the Jordan river on the eastern side of the Dead Sea (compare Wikipedia on Machaerus; note also comments in the Nelson Study Bible).

But “John died at the hands of Herod and Herodias, neither of whom were, properly speaking Jews. John, therefore, died as a prophet to foreigners rather than as a prophet to the Jewish people” (The Fourfold Gospel).

The same can be said about the murder of other prophets through foreign people. We read in Revelation 18:24 that the blood of prophets and saints, and of all who were slain on the earth, were found in “Babylon”—the Gentile political, military and religious Babylonian system (compare Revelation 16:6; 18:20; 19:2).

The Schlachter Bible comments that Jesus wanted to show that most prophets in the Old Testament had not been killed by foreign enemies, but by the Jewish people. At the same time, Christ would have excluded those prophets in His statement in Luke 13:33 who were not killed by Jews.

Passages such as Acts 7:52 and 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15 reiterate the murder of the prophets through Israelites and Jews. Hebrews 11:37 speaks of the death of God’s followers, and that some were sawn in two. Tradition has it that the prophet Isaiah was killed in this manner.

(2)  “Jerusalem” Symbolic for Jewish Nation

From the previous statement, it would follow that Christ’s use of the word “Jerusalem” in Luke 13:33 was not limited to the city.

The Life Application Bible says:

“Jerusalem, the city of God, symbolized the entire nation. It was Israel’s largest city and the nation’s spiritual and political capital, and Jews from around the world visited it frequently. But Jerusalem had a history of rejecting God’s prophets … and it would reject the Messiah just as it had rejected his forerunners.”

(3)  “Jerusalem” Symbolic for “Forces of Evil” and Babylonian System

However, the term “Jerusalem” might have a much broader application than just referring to the nation of Judah.

The Bible Study New Testament writes:

“Jerusalem (the earthly city) was symbolic of the forces of evil which fight against God (see Revelation 11:8). Jesus would die there, and his church would begin there!”

Note that Revelation 11:8 states that the two witnesses will be killed in Jerusalem, “which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.” Note also God’s harsh condemnation of end-time Israel and Judah in Isaiah 1:10; 3:9, describing them as “rulers of Sodom” and “people of Gomorrah.”

As mentioned above, Revelation 18:24 says that the blood of ALL who were slain on the earth can be found in “Babylon.” It is clear that this statement must include the blood of those who were killed in “Jerusalem.” This means that “Jerusalem” is part of the worldwide ancient and modern Babylonian system which reigns over the kings of the earth (Revelation 17:18; Isaiah 47:5); which deceived ALL the nations through its sorcery (Revelation 18:23; Isaiah 47:9); and which has made the inhabitants of the earth drunk with the wine of her fornication (Revelation 17:2; Jeremiah 51:7). Revelation 18:2 tells us that Babylon is fallen twice (“Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen”), referring to ancient Babylon in Old Testament times and modern Babylon with its capital Rome, under the rule of the beast and the false prophet.

This is the reason why God’s people throughout the centuries and millennia are told to come out of Babylon, so that they don’t have any part in this rotten ancient and modern system (compare Revelation 18:4; Isaiah 48:20; Jeremiah 50:8; 51:6, 45, 50). Rather, God’s people wait for a heavenly, better country and a continuing city (Hebrews 11:9-10, 14-16; 13:14).

In this day and age, “Jerusalem” is part of this present evil world, which is ruled by Satan the devil (Luke 4:5-7), who is responsible for the persecution of the saints and the murder of God’s prophets. God’s people are to worship God the Father in spirit and in truth, and not in Jerusalem (John 4:20-24).

(4)  Only Jewish Court in Jerusalem Could Legally Condemn a Prophet

At the same time, Christ might have focused on legal requirements.

The Benson Commentary says:

“… the supreme court, whose prerogative it was to judge prophets, had its seat at Jerusalem. Inferior courts did not take cognizance of such causes; and therefore, if a prophet was put to death, it must be at Jerusalem… Our Lord, ‘in saying a prophet could not perish out of that city, insinuated, that he knew the intentions of the Pharisees too well to pay any regard to their advice respecting departing from Galilee for fear of Herod…”

Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible says:

“… the great sanhedrim only sat at Jerusalem, to whom it belonged to try and judge a prophet; and if found false, to condemn him, and put him to death… Not… that prophets sometimes perished elsewhere, as John the Baptist in Galilee; but not according to a judicial process, in which way Christ the prophet was to be cut off, nor was it common; instances of this kind were rare, and always in a violent way; and even such as were sentenced to death by the lesser sanhedrim, were brought to Jerusalem, and publicly executed there, whose crimes were of another sort; for so runs the canon…”

Meyer’s NT Commentary disagrees with Gill’s conclusion, saying:  “‘it cannot be done, it is not possible’… with ironically excited emotion makes the frequent and usual hyperbolically [sic] to appear as necessary (for all the prophets were not actually slain in Jerusalem, as is shown even in the instance of the Baptist) for the purpose of showing how empty the threatening of Herod appears to Jesus, since He must rather go to Jerusalem to die. The opinion… that He refers to the right belonging exclusively to the Sanhedrim of judging prophets and condemning them to death… is mistaken… since Jesus could not place Himself on a level with those who were condemned as false prophets.”

But Meyer’s conclusion is wrong. The people demanded Christ’s death because they considered Him to be an imposter, a false prophet, someone who did not come as their King to free them from the Romans, even though they had thought at one time that He had promised them such deliverance (Luke 19:38). They later changed their minds, claiming that they had no king but Caesar (John 19:14-15).They simply did not understand—nor do people understand this today—that His Kingdom was and is NOT of this world (John 18:36), and that He had not come to establish the Kingdom of God on earth at that time (Acts 1:6-7), but “to give His life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28).

Compare Adam Clarke’s commentary: “A man who professes to be a prophet can be tried on that ground only by the grand Sanhedrin, which always resides at Jerusalem; and as the Jews are about to put me to death, under the pretense of my being a false prophet, therefore my sentence must come from this city, and my death take place in it.”

(5)  Greek Meaning of the English Words “Cannot Be”

Reviewing the Greek, the translation “cannot be” is not compelling.

The Greek word for “can be” is endechomai and is defined in Young’s Analytical Concordance as “to receive” and “to admit.” Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible adds the additional meaning (under Number 1735), “it is accepted.” Strong’s explains that the word dechomai (under Number 1209) means, “receive” (in various applications, lit. or fig.).” The Greek words for “it cannot be” are ouk endechomai.

This Greek expression is only used in the passage in Luke 13:33. Therefore, its meaning is somewhat open to interpretation.

Several alternate renderings have been proposed: “impossible” (New Revised Standard Version); “unthinkable” (Revised English Bible); “it would not be right” (New Jerusalem Bible); “it will never do” (Amplified Bible); “it’s against the rules” (Gaus, The Unvarnished Gospels). The German Bibles have virtually unanimously: “es geht nicht an” (“that won’t do”).

Barnes’ Notes on the Bible says:

“The reason why he said that a prophet could not perish elsewhere than in Jerusalem might be:

“1. That he knew that he would be tried on a charge of blasphemy, and no other court could have cognizance of that crime but the great council or Sanhedrin, and so he was not afraid of any threats of Herod,

“2. It ‘had been’ the fact that the prophets had been chiefly slain there. The meaning is, ‘It cannot easily be done elsewhere; it is not usually done. Prophets have generally perished there, and there I am to die. I am safe, therefore, from the fear of Herod, and shall not take the advice given and leave his territory.’”

Calvin’s Commentary on the Bible states:

“It does not usually happen… It usually happened that the prophets were slain there…”

Bengel’s Gnomen states:

“… it is not usual… This phrase admits of exceptions: for instance, John the Baptist was ‘a prophet’ who ‘perished out of Jerusalem.’”

(6)  The Prophet Had to Be Condemned in Jerusalem

There is still another possibility as to what Christ might have meant, considering that He was THE Prophet.

In the Greek, there is no indefinite article (“a”). There is only a definite article (‘the”). But when a definite article is omitted, that does not necessarily mean that an indefinite article must be used in the English. Compare our Q&A on 2 Corinthians 6:2 and the day of salvation.

According to the Disciples’ Literal New Testament, the literal Greek wording is as follows (quoted from the original; note that the English words in italics and underlined are not in the literal Greek):

“Nevertheless, I must proceed today and tomorrow and the next day, because it cannot-be that a prophet should perish outside of Jerusalem.”

So, it is possible that the definite article (“the”), rather than the indefinite article (“a”) must be added here in reference to the word prophet, so that Christ was actually referring to Himself, saying that it is impossible that THE prophet would be condemned to death outside of Jerusalem. The modern Weymouth New Testament seems to imply this conclusion, by rendering Christ’s wording in this way: “Yet I must continue my journey to-day and to-morrow and the day following; for it is not conceivable that a Prophet should perish outside of Jerusalem.”  Even though they do not say, “the” Prophet, they do capitalize the word “prophet.” The word “prophet” is also capitalized in the following older renditions: King James Bible 1611; Geneva Bible 1560; The Great Bible 1539; and Tyndale Bible 1534.

This understanding finds support in the very next two verses, in Luke 13:34-35, where Christ speaks about Himself, stating: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, but you were not willing! See! Your house is left to you desolate; and assuredly, I say to you, you shall not see ME until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is HE who comes in the name of the LORD!’”

In conclusion, Christ’s words might have had a variety of meaning, but it is clear that He spoke with compelling and indisputable accuracy, while in no way contradicting other biblical passages, history or the prophesied future.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

In this series, we have been pointing out many of our doctrines and practices, which, if taken together, clearly distinguish us from virtually every other Christian organization. In this last installment, we will discuss further defining aspects of our teaching and understanding.

Very few believe the Bible when it tells us what man is.

We say in our Statement of Beliefs, under “Human’s Mortal Nature”:

“We believe that humans are mortal and subject to death, and that they can only obtain immortality through a gift from God.”

When man (“the soul”) dies, he (“it”) is dead (Ezekiel 18:4, 20; Psalm 22:29, Authorized Version). To become alive again, he (“the soul”) must be resurrected from the dead (Revelation 20:4). Man has no consciousness in death (Psalm 6:5; 115:17; 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:10; Isaiah 38:18-19).

At this point, the only MAN who has obtained immortality through the resurrection from the dead (Romans 1:3-4) is Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 6:14-16; compare Titus 2:13; 1 John 5:20; Revelation 1:18). But God offers all of mankind eternal life and immortality. Romans 6:23 tells us that eternal life is the gift of God. Those who accept and obey Christ and receive God’s Holy Spirit will inherit eternal life at the time of Christ’s return to this earth (Mark 10:29-30; John 10:27-28; 17:1-2).  Others will be given this opportunity later, in the Millennium and during the Great White Throne Judgment period.

But God will only give us eternal life if we obey Him, and He will not give us immortality if we refuse to obey Him (Romans 2:5-11). John 3:36 says, in the Revised Standard Version: “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does NOT OBEY the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him.” God won’t even give us His Holy Spirit—the guarantee or down payment for eternal life (Ephesians 1:13-14)—if we show Him that we do not want to be obedient to Him (Acts 5:32). It is the clear teaching throughout the Bible that we must obey God (Romans 1:5; 16:26; Acts 6:7). We are still obligated to uphold God’s Law (Matthew 19:17; Hebrews 5:8-9; John 15:10, 14). This means, for example, that we observe God’s weekly and annual Holy Days, and that we REFUSE to observe those days in God’s honor which are of pagan origin. God tells us clearly not to worship Him in the way in which pagans worshipped their gods (Deuteronomy 12:29-32).

It can be easily ascertained that many religious holidays of orthodox Christianity are of pagan origin. This includes the celebrations of Sunday, Christmas, Easter (“Good Friday” and “Easter Sunday”), New Year’s Day and Valentine’s Day. Additional unbiblical “Christian” holidays with incorrect teachings attached to them include Catholic holidays such as Epiphany, Ash Wednesday, Palm Sunday, Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and All Saint’s Day (which was adopted from the Satanic festival of Halloween), just to name a few. The biblical teaching is clear: We are to keep ONLY those days as RELIGIOUS days of worship which are commanded in the Bible, and we are not to ADD religious days of worship which are not commanded in Scripture and which are contrary to biblical teachings. The same applies to days and seasons which might not be designated as Christian holidays per se, but which are observed by the “Christian” world, even though they are pagan in nature, such as St. Patrick’s Day and Carnival celebrations, as well as school preparations for the Easter and Christmas holidays.

We also reject the concept of the Evolution Theory which postulates that we are, in effect, part of the animal kingdom. God created animals “according to their kind”—the animal kind—but He created man after the God kind. We read in Acts 17:28-29, in the translation of the new Luther Bible of 2009, that man is “of the God kind” (“von Gottes Art”). Man is not an animal. Every human being receives, at the moment of conception, a human spirit, and it is because of the human spirit that we can explain the vast difference between humans and animals.

We say in our Statement of Beliefs, under “Human Spirit”:

“We believe that every human being has in himself or herself a ‘human spirit’ given by God, that distinguishes man from animals (1 Corinthians 2:11), and that goes back to God when man dies (Ecclesiastes 12:7).”

In the book of Isaiah, we are told that each human being has a spirit within him: “Thus says God the LORD, Who created the heavens and stretched them out, Who spread forth the earth and that which comes from it, Who gives breath to the people on it, And spirit to those who walk on it” (Isaiah 42:5).

We read in Zechariah 12:1: “…Thus says the LORD, who stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him.” When the spirit of man leaves a person, that person is dead. James 2:26 says, “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.”

When a person dies and his spirit returns to God, that spirit does not continue to live consciously, apart from the body. Rather, God “stores” it, so to speak, in heaven, until He unites it at the time of the resurrection of man with a new spiritual or physical body. The human spirit is not an immortal soul. It does not continue to live when the human being dies. The concept that man’s soul is immortal is as wrong as the concept that man’s spirit continues to live consciously after death.

When a person dies, his body returns to dust. But the spirit of man in him has recorded the appearance of the person, the personality and the personal attributes, and at the time of the resurrection, God gives the spirit of that person back into the newly created Spirit-composed or physical body.

The spirit in man is not the same as the Holy Spirit, either. The Bible distinguishes clearly between the spirit in man and the Holy Spirit. God gives to everyone the spirit of man at the time of conception, while He only grants His Holy Spirit to those whom He specifically calls.

Paul says in Romans 8:14-16, “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption [sonship] by [which] we cry out, Abba, Father. The Spirit [itself] bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God.”

Paul speaks very clearly about two spirits—the spirit of man and the Holy Spirit. Notice 1 Corinthians 2:11 and 14, “For what man knows the things of man except the spirit of the man which is in him. Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God… But the natural man [a person who has the spirit of man, but who does not have the Holy Spirit of God] does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

It is the gift of the Holy Spirit which distinguishes a converted person from a carnally-minded individual. And it is the spirit in man which distinguishes man from animals. Inasmuch as man is not an animal, God has decreed that man is permitted to eat animal meat. If man was an animal, then man would clearly be prohibited from doing so, as God condemns cannibalism. Some Scriptures which clearly disapprove of cannibalism and show how much God abhors it, describing it as a curse, can be found in Deuteronomy 28:52-57; Jeremiah 19:1-9; Lamentations 2:19-21; 4:10-11; and Ezekiel 5:7-10.

But not every animal is fit for human consumption.

We say in our Statement of Beliefs, under “Unclean Meats”:

“We believe that we are to refrain from eating meats which the Bible instructs not to eat and designates as unclean in passages such as Leviticus 11:1-47; Deuteronomy 14:3-20; and Acts 10:1-21, 28.”

We have published a list, setting forth clean animals, which can be eaten, and unclean animals, which must not be eaten. http://www.eternalgod.org/q-a-3192/

God does not teach us that we must be vegetarians, but He does not compel us to eat meat. The same applies to alcohol, which is not mandated for us (except for a small portion at the time of the Passover). On the other hand, Christ and His disciples ate meat (Luke 22:13-15) and drank wine (Matthew 11:19), and Paul admonished Timothy to drink a little wine—not just water—because of his frequent infirmities (1 Timothy 5:23). It would be clearly WRONG to be a vegetarian because of religious reasons, as this idea is of demonic origin (compare 1 Timothy 4:1-3; see discussion below). On the other hand, God did not suddenly make unclean meat fit for human consumption. [This is another proof that cannibalism is prohibited, because even IF we were to say that man was an animal (allegedly a “mammal” according to science), man would not qualify as a “clean” being fit for consumption, since only mammals can be eaten which divide the hoof, having cloven hooves and chewing the cud (Leviticus 11:3).]

Some turn to several Scriptures to “prove” that all animal flesh can be eaten, including frogs, scorpions, snails, snakes, crabs, dogs, horses, skunks, pigs or rats, just to name a few.

One of those passages is Genesis 9:3, which says that God has given man as “food” “every moving thing that lives” “even as the green herbs.”  Some claim that prior to this time, humans did not eat animal meat (compare Genesis 1:29, even though this passage does not specifically prohibit the consumption of meat). In any event, beginning with Noah, God allowed expressly the consumption of animal meat which is clean, wholesome and fit for food. The comparison with “green herbs” makes clear that neither unhealthy or poisonous green herbs were included in God’s permission, nor animal meat which is unclean and unfit for human consumption.

Please note that just prior to the Flood, Noah had been instructed to take clean and unclean animals into the ark (Genesis 7:2). Did God abolish this distinction right after the Flood?

Matthew Poole’s Commentary points out that God’s permission to eat all meat includes “… an exception to be gathered both from the nature of the thing, and from the distinction of clean and unclean beasts, mentioned before and afterwards… [Excluded is also the consumption] of those creatures which either died of themselves, or were killed by wild beasts, which is here forbidden implicitly, and afterwards expressly. See Exodus 22:31 Leviticus 22:8.”

The Pulpit Commentary agrees. It quotes the statements in the above-stated commentary with approval and adds: “Though the distinction between unclean and clean animals as to food, afterwards laid down in the Mosaic code (Leviticus 11:1-31), is not mentioned here, it does not follow that it was either unknown to the writer or unpracticed by the men before the Flood.”

This understanding is clearly correct. The opposite interpretation makes no sense, as one would be compelled to say that God gave His people permission at the time of Noah to eat unclean animals, only to revoke that permission at the time of Moses, when the consumption of unclean animal meat was clearly and expressly prohibited.

Another passage which is quoted to “prove” that all animals are clean today, and fit for human consumption, is Mark 7:19. The Authorized Version translates Mark 7:19 as follows: “… it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, PURGING all meats…”

Christ was addressing a situation where a little bit of dirt might have been attached to our hands or the CLEAN food. When we eat this, it does not defile us inwardly, as it is eliminated out of the body into the draught. The clean food will be “cleansed,” in that little particles of dirt will be eliminated out of the body.

Another “proof text” is Acts 10. In that passage, Peter had a vision, seeing a great sheet of clean and unclean animals, and a voice asking him to eat. Peter refused and did not eat, although the voice told him that he should not call common what God had cleansed (verse 15). Subsequently, Peter went to the Gentiles—normally treated as common or unclean by the Jews—and baptized them. When confronted by the disciples, who were, at that time, exclusively of Jewish background and descent, Peter explained the meaning of the vision. It had nothing to do with declaring unclean animals as appropriate for human consumption. Rather, Peter said, in verse 28: “… God has shown me that I should not call any MAN common or unclean.” And so, the disciples recognized the purpose of the vision—to show the New Testament Church that God had “granted to the GENTILES repentance to life” (Acts 11:18).

1 Timothy 4:1-5 is also used to “prove” that all animal flesh can be eaten. This passage talks about the false teaching that we must abstain from FOOD which God has sanctified and created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. God never created unclean animals for food. The distinction between clean and unclean animals already existed under Noah, long before Moses. It still existed long after Christ’s death when Peter refused to eat unclean meat, and it will still exist at the time of Christ’s return, as God will punish those who consume the flesh of pigs and other unclean animals, calling such a practice “abominable” (compare Isaiah 65:2-7; 66:17).

In 1 Timothy 4:1-5, Paul is not permitting the consumption of the meat of unclean animals, but rather, he addresses those false preachers who teach against the consumption of the meat of CLEAN animals for religious reasons. Paul is condemning the concept of that version of vegetarianism that is taught by people believing that they must not eat meat because they perceive it to be holy. (We might think of the belief in “holy” cows in certain parts of the world.) God says through Paul that every creature CREATED FOR FOOD (verse 3) is good and can be eaten, AS IT IS SANCTIFIED BY THE WORD OF GOD (verse 5). God’s Word, the Bible, never sanctified or set aside for consumption unclean animals, but it DOES sanctify or set aside for consumption the meat of every CLEAN animal. We are permitted to eat the flesh of clean animals with thanksgiving, for we believe God and His Word, and we know the truth (verse 3). And such consumption is good (verse 4) and also sanctified by prayer (verse 5), as we thank God (verse 4) and ask Him to bless the food and to set it aside for the nourishing of our bodies.

God still requires of us that we abstain from consuming the meat of UNCLEAN animals. But this does not necessarily include the use of medicines, vitamins and mineral supplements derived from unclean animals, and the use of gelatin products, which might be derived from parts of unclean animals; while the prohibition of consuming certain parts of clean animals, such as fat and blood, is still valid for us today. We are not to consume blood, see Genesis 9:4 and Acts 15:20. However, this prohibition does not include, for example, blood transfusions. Animal fat refers to the fatty portion of the meat (Leviticus 3:17; 7:23, 25) which can be easily separated from the lean portion. It does of course not refer to “fatty” food such as butter or cheese (compare Genesis 18:8; Isaiah 7:15; and 2 Samuel 17:27-29; all in the Authorized Version).

Finally, some turn to Hebrews 13:9 and claim that this passage permits the consumption of all animal meat. The passage says: “Do not be carried about [away] with various and strange doctrines. For it is good that the heart be established by grace, not with foods [or meat] which have not profited those who have been occupied with them.”

Paul addresses the fact that various and strange doctrines had been added. These rules did not originate with God’s Law, but with human traditions and ideas. Doctrines pertaining to the distinction of clean and unclean meats were not “strange” to God or the Hebrews. Rather, the Jews were very familiar with these teachings. Paul was addressing traditional Jewish teaching and traditions (outside the pages of the Old Testament) and the concepts of pagan or “Gnostic” teachers who were trying to convince the Hebrews to adopt “new” or “strange” ideas regarding food or meat. Men, under demonic influence, had added the concepts of rejecting some meats that God created as clean or proper for human consumption, while allowing the consumption of animal flesh that God has specifically prohibited.

For more information on the issues which were discussed in this installment, please read or order the following free literature:

“Do We Have an Immortal Soul?”

“Is that in the Bible? Man’s Holidays and God’s Holy Days”

“Don’t Keep Christmas”

“The Theory of Evolution—a Fairy Tale for Adults?”

“Old Testament Laws—Still Valid Today?”

In this seven-part series, we have shown you that and how we are different from other Christian organizations. We have explained that our teachings and practices are based on and derived from the Bible. Will you, the reader, follow the example of the people of Berea, who “were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so” (Acts 17:11)? When they did, “many of them believed” (verse 12).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link