Objection:
You hold extreme views on health reform and a plant-based diet, and such teachings restrict the liberty that belongs to Christians. Moreover, the very distinction you make about what is right to eat and drink brings you under the Bible’s condemnation (See Romans 14:2; 1 Timothy 4:3).
Answer:
Today, after many years of research in medical lines, the scientist meets this accusation for us and rather generally changes the word “fanatical” to “sane” and “scientific” as regards our views on liquor, tobacco, tea, coffee, et cetera. We hold that certain things called “food” are to a greater or less degree harmful to the body. Therefore we believe that they have no proper place in our diet. Paul exclaims, “What? Know you not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which you have of God, and you are not your own? For you are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.” 1 Corinthians 6:19-20.
How a Christian can partake of food or drink that is in any way injurious and still obey the solemn command to “glorify God in your body” we do not know. The Bible declares that “if any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy.” 1 Corinthians 3:17.
Further: We are to cooperate with God in our habits and customs to develop perfect Christian characters. It is a known fact that correct habits of eating and drinking have much to do with a good disposition and a sound constitution. Certainly, the reverse is true.
The apostle Peter clearly shows that there is a direct relation between food and holiness. When he writes, “Be ye holy in all manner of conversation [living],” he refers to the Old Testament passage containing God’s condemnation of unclean foods (See 1 Peter 1:15-16; cf. Leviticus 11:44-47).
But it will be urged: Does not the Bible allow us to partake of certain meats termed “clean”? Yes, permission is given. But let us ask, What would you think of a man who, because it pleased his palate, made a part of his diet some herb that science has proven harmful to the body, and who defended his dangerous dietary course by stating that the Bible said he might eat of any herb (See Genesis 1:29)? You would probably answer him that this statement in Genesis must be considered in the light of the continual degeneracy taking place as the result of the curse resting upon the world. And so with the eating of what was once termed in the Scripture “clean” meat. Furthermore, flesh food was not a part of the original diet of man (Genesis 1:29).
However, recognizing that every man must be guided by his conscience in all matters not explicitly forbidden in the Scriptures, we don’t make eating the “clean” meats a test of fellowship. But we urge people to study the whole question of their diet in the light of Scripture and scientific findings carefully so that they won’t, in any particular, “defile the temple of God.”
While remembering the Biblical pronouncement that “the kingdom of God is not meat and drink,” we do not fail to keep in mind the inspired command: “Whether therefore you eat, or drink, or whatsoever you do, do all to the glory of God.” Romans 14:17; 1 Corinthians 10:31.
Endeavoring to obey this and similar warnings have led us, contrary to the desires of carnal appetite, to become abstemious concerning what they eat and drink. We hold that such a course enables us more easily to obey the injunction, “Abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul,” and to follow the practice of Paul, who declared, “I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection.” 1 Peter 2:11; 1 Corinthians 9:27.
The objector referenced Romans 14:1-5. The text in its context reads as follows: “Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.”
Jewish ceremonial rituals made various contacts with the diet of the Jews. There were days of fasting, for example. It is easy to see how some Jews who had just accepted Christianity might still honor such days and refrain from food on those days or obey other related ceremonial requirements. In writing to the Colossians, Paul says, “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day.” Colossians 2:16. Paul is not here discussing the dietetic question of the food value of things that might be eaten or drunk. He is concerned only to free Christians from such restrictions as grew out of ceremonial requirements or out of the false idea that men can gain salvation by a particular diet.
As various commentators bring out, the Jews who were dispersed abroad, as was true of those at Rome, could not be sure that what they bought in the marketplace was clean, according to Jewish standards; even “clean” meat might not be ceremonially clean. Hence some Jews might refrain from eating any meat at all.
Again, in the pagan cities of the Roman Empire, it was often the case that meat was first offered to the idols, in a kind of dedication, and then placed on the market. Paul talks to the Corinthian church about this very matter. Some Christians could not eat such meat without the trouble of conscience; others were not so troubled. This lead Paul to offer the same kind of counsel that he gave in Romans 14 regarding forbearance one of another. (See 1 Corinthians 8.) Indeed some commentators believe that 1 Corinthians 8 is the explanation of Romans 14:1-5.
In the light of these facts, what conceivable relation does Romans 14:2 have to our health teachings? The difference between them is as vast as the difference between ceremonial and dietary reasons for eating or not eating certain foods.
Let us look, now, at 1 Timothy 4:3. This text in its context reads thus:
“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.” 1 Timothy 4:1-5.
Bible commentators agree that this passage finds its primary fulfillment in the Gnostic and related heresies that were already beginning to take shape in Paul’s day. And many Protestant commentators believe that the passage finds its further and complete fulfillment in the Roman Catholic Church. The proof in support of this belief is both plentiful and persuasive.
The Gnostics, who early made deep inroads into the Christian church, believed that matter is essentially evil and that the food we eat was not made by God but by an inferior deity. They denounced marriage as evil. The Manicheans, another early heretical sect, “held that wine sprang from the blood and gall of the devil.” See Lange’s commentary commenting on 1 Timothy 4:3.
Later, the Roman Catholic Church, observes Harnack, over which Gnosticism gained half a victory, established celibacy of the clergy, and instituted prohibitions against meat at various times of the year.
Well might Paul warn against such heresy. To refrain from certain meat or drink for the reasons given by the Gnostics and others would be to endorse their false teachings by one’s very course of life. Neither we nor the objector could practice or promote abstinence from wine, for example, on the basis set forth by these apostates. But the objector’s denunciation of the reasoning of the Gnostics or Manicheans would not make him any less a believer in temperance and perhaps in dietary reform as well.
Even so with us, we join with Paul in denunciation of the heresies described in 1 Timothy 4:14 while still believing that it is better, on dietary grounds, to abstain from certain foods and drinks.
In closing, we should add that the word “meats” in 1 Timothy 4:3 is from the Greek word brōma, which simply means food. In the old English phrase, “sit down to meat,” we preserve the idea of “meat” simply as food. This was the original meaning of the word as seen in Genesis when the Lord said, “I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.” Genesis 1:29-30.
Hence, Paul’s discussion does not focus on the question of flesh food versus a non-flesh diet. Instead, he is concerned to forewarn against heresies that would lead Christians to “abstain” from various “foods,” not because of any valid dietary grounds, but because of false philosophical, pagan reasons. We think that if Paul were alive today, he would be more than a little startled to find his words of warning against the already developing Gnostic heresy being interpreted to apply to our dietary views!
