Kosher Food

A similar problem arose concerning food.  Jewish Christians continued to keep the Jewish food laws and a compromise was agreed that to some extent Gentiles should do so too:

... it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from unchastity.                                                                (Acts 15:28-29)

The firmest Old Testament support can be adduced for not eating meat with the blood still in it (Leviticus 17:10-14) and the decision at the Council of Jerusalem was that these “necessary things” applied to the Gentile believers too. In addition, the Gentiles were not to eat meat which had been killed as a sacrifice in the temples of pagan gods, and they were to refrain from unchastity.  This last requirement (refraining from unchastity) concerns moral behaviour and it is therefore to be expected that this would continue under the New Covenant. But since this, along with the requirement that meat should be prepared according to Jewish regulations, is listed among “necessary things”, should we not still observe all of these today?

Jehovah’s Witnesses conclude that we should, and they extend refraining from blood to refraining from blood transfusions.

Although this medical use of blood does not involve literally eating blood, Jehovah’s Witnesses point to terminology like “drip feed” to justify updating the restriction on eating blood.  Jesus in his comments about food apparently declared the food laws inapplicable (Mark 7:19), but the full implications of this were not at first realised. The need to keep Jewish and Gentile believers united lay behind the compromise in Acts 15. The full spirit behind the New Covenant was revealed to Peter in the vision in Acts 10:12-15.  Not only were the Jewish food laws no longer relevant in Christ Jesus but the Jew/Gentile distinction was no longer relevant either.

And Peter opened his mouth and said: “Truly I perceive that God shows no partiality, but in every nation any one who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him....”                                     (Acts 10:34-35)

Even so, Peter and the believers in Jerusalem, found this message hard to accept:

But when Cephas [Peter] came to Antioch I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For before certain men came from James, he ate with the Gentiles;  but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party.                 (Galatians 2:11-12)

It was Paul, under the guidance of God, who spelled out most clearly that under the New Covenant the former distinctions no longer applied:

Now before faith came, we were confined under the law, kept under restraint until faith should be revealed. So that the law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian; for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith.  For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female;  for you are all one in Christ Jesus.                                                                         (Galatians 3:23-28)

Nevertheless, the practice of slaughtering animals in pagan temples was a continuing problem because some converts felt that eating meat obtained in this way implied some acknowledgement of the power of the pagan god.  The real position is this:

I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself.

                                                                                  (Romans 14:14)

There was the risk, however, that eating meat from or in pagan temples might cause some people to abandon their newly found Christian faith. In such circumstances, it was necessary to avoid the practice.

... nothing is unclean in itself;  but it is unclean for any one who thinks it unclean. If your brother is being injured by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love.  Do not let what you eat cause the ruin of one for whom Christ died.                                                             (Romans 14:14-15)

The fact that compromise was necessary in the first century on this issue did not alter the fact that the true Christian position regarded the kind of food eaten as irrelevant. The right spirit is to be grateful to God for whatever we eat, but to take care not to cause others to lose faith where they incorrectly adopt a contrary position.

As for the man who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not for disputes over opinions. One believes he may eat anything, while the weak man eats only vegetables. Let not him who eats despise him who abstains, and let not him who abstains pass judgment on him who eats;  for God has welcomed him.                                                                                          (Romans 14:1-3)

As regards blood transfusions, if the true Christian position is that the kind of food eaten is no longer relevant, the same applies concerning blood transfusions.  Jesus’ comment also about how David broke the law in the case of human need also directs us to the Christian understanding.

“Have you never read what David did, when he was in need and was hungry, he and those who were with him:  how he entered the house of God, when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those who were with him?”   And he said to them, “The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath;  so the Son of man is lord even of the sabbath.”      

(Mark 2:25-28)

The Sabbath was made for man and not vice-versa and therefore human need is more important than ritual legislation.  Blood transfusions are given in the case of human need.  Just as Jesus regarded curing people on the Sabbath as more important than the ban on working, even if the rule against eating blood were literally still applicable, it is in keeping with the spirit of Jesus that such a rule would be secondary to the need to save human life.  The giving of blood to the transfusion service is an act of caring and compassion and is therefore to be encouraged.  The same principle also applies in other medical issues such as organ transplantation and stem-cell research.