It has been said that the Bible has answers to everything. It has also been said that the Bible can be used to prove any point of view. But the truth is that neither of these statements are correct. While the Bible does have answers to many, even most, of life’s questions; there are some things it is silent about. Nor is it possible for the Bible to support both sides of the same issue. Even so, people use the Bible to prove their point of view, by making “private interpretations,” which can only be found by implication, but which aren’t in the original text.
Proper interpretation of the Bible, called “Biblical hermeneutics,” follows certain rules. These rules have been developed by scholars, for the purpose of interpreting many ancient texts, not only the Bible. One of these rules is that a particular verse, sentence, phrase, paragraph or story must be taken in context. That means the context of what is around it, the context of the whole of the Bible and the cultural context of the time it was written in.
It is only when we ignore this and the other rules of hermeneutics that we come up with false doctrines or teachings. Many of the questions people raise about the Bible are merely an attempt to impose their viewpoint or their culture on the Holy Scriptures. That’s the opposite of how we are supposed to operate, allowing the writings in the Bible to impose God’s viewpoint and commandments on ourselves.
Before declaring any doctrinal point as being true or false, it is essential that it be compared to the whole of Scripture. Anything less is selling the Bible short, as well as denying ourselves the opportunity to learn the truth of God’s full message to us.
At the same time, to dismiss any statement or point of view, simply because we don’t personally agree with it, without comparing that point of view to scripture. This is an attempt to use our own opinion as the arbiter of truth, rather than allowing God’s Word to be. Such a stance is as intellectually dishonest as trying to say the Bible backs up a point, by taking something in the Bible out of context.
What does this Have to do with Eating Meat?
There are those who would say that killing animals is murder and eating meat is wrong; even to the point of trying to claim that the Bible backs up this position. As we look at this question in the light of Scripture, it becomes clear that they are using private interpretations of the Bible in order to prove their point. But just saying that, without proving it, can be seen as doing the same thing those people are, in allowing my own opinion to dictate Biblical truth. So, let’s look at it.
To start with, it is safe to say that the idea and popularity of vegetarianism has increased here in the United States through the last several decades. There are those who follow after that concept for religious reasons and those who do so because of personal convictions about protecting the lives of animals, seeing the value of human life as being no greater than that of the animals.
But just where does vegetarianism come from? There is no clear answer to this question, although the first significant rise in vegetarianism in western society likely came about during what are known as the “classical times,” a period of ancient Greece from 500 – 336 BC.
Yet the concept of vegetarianism likely predates its rise in Europe by a considerable amount of time. The start of the Hindu religion can be traced to somewhere between 2300 BC and 1500 BC. Most Hindus will not eat meat, which is probably based on their belief in reincarnation. However, some Hindus will eat meat or even eggs, although even these will refuse to eat beef, as the cow is considered to be a sacred animal.
What is known as the “New Age Movement” has its roots in Hinduism. While there are several roots to this, such as transcendental meditation and humanism, one of the principal ones was the music group The Beatles bringing their personal guru from India to be their teacher and guide. Devout groupies of the Beatles can be considered to be some of the first adherents to the New Age Movement. Amongst the various teachings of this movement is vegetarianism.
Why is this important? Because it is likely that the question of whether the Bible supports vegetarianism likely came from New Age believers. It is not uncommon for them to use the Bible to try and back up various teachings, generally by taking something symbolic in the Bible and applying their own interpretation to it.
So, What Does the Bible Say?
The very first place we see God talking about eating meat or eating animals is where God spoke to Noah and his sons, after the flood, when they left the ark:
And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that moves on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand. 3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs. 4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, it’s blood. – Genesis 9:2-4
The only prohibition we find here, is that they couldn’t eat meat with blood in it. God even gives His reason for that, saying that life is in the blood. That idea is repeated in Leviticus 17:11.
But we must keep in mind that this verse depicts a time before the Old Testament Law was given to Moses on Mount Sinai. Things changed there, as God restricted what animals the people were allowed to eat, from that time forward. We find in the Old Testament Law the following prohibitions as to the types of meat that God allowed the children of Israel to eat.
You shall not eat any detestable thing. 4 These are the animals which you may eat: the ox, the sheep, the goat, 5 the deer, the gazelle, the roe deer, the wild goat, the mountain goat, the antelope, and the mountain sheep. 6 And you may eat every animal with cloven hooves, having the hoof split into two parts, and that chews the cud, among the animals… – Deuteronomy 14:3-6
This chapter of the Bible continues on, providing more specific instructions about what can be eaten and what can’t. Verse 6, above, talks about animals with cloven hooves that chew the cud; but the following verses make it clear that the animal has to do both. If they only have cloven hooves or chew the cud, the people of Israel were not to eat them. It also talks about what sorts of fish and fowl may be eaten, while prohibiting eating of “every creeping thing that flies is unclean to you” (Deuteronomy 14:19).
The last verse of this chapter is interesting, in that it states “You shall not eat anything that dies of itself;” which would include all animals that die of disease or old age. However, it makes provision for the meat of those animals, so that it doesn’t go to waste – “you may give to the alien who is within your gates, that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner.” (Deuteronomy 14:21). From this, it appears that God’s prohibition against eating these animals doesn’t have anything to do with the meat being tainted or dangerous to eat.
So, it is clear in Old Testament Law that some animals, birds and fish were acceptable to eat, while God has declared others as being unhealthy to eat. But why is this so?
One answer which has been proposed is that the animals which God has prohibited from being eaten are so because they are unhealthy to eat. Many people consider pigs to be unhealthy to eat, primarily due to the risk of parasitic infections from undercooked pork. Shellfish, which are also prohibited under the Old Testament Law, are unhealthy because they are high in cholesterol.
However, those who claim this interpretation only use a few examples to back up their point. As best I know, nobody has ever gone through the entire list of animals that are included as being “unclean” in Deuteronomy, chapter 14, determining if they are all unhealthy to eat. Nor does the Bible provide any reasoning to back up this provision. Therefore, it is possible that this is a mistaken interpretation of Scripture.
However, that really isn’t important, as it appears that Jesus Himself negated the Old Testament’s laws concerning what can and cannot be eaten, in the gospel of Mark.
…Hear me, everyone, and understand: 15 There is nothing that enters a man from outside which can defile him; but the things which come out of him, those are the things that defile a man… 18 So He said to them (His disciples). Are you thus without understanding also? Do you not perceive that whatsoever enters a man from outside cannot defile him, 19 because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods? 20 And He said, What comes out of a man, that defiles a man. – Mark 7:14-20 (some verses skipped)
Some versions of the Bible add the phrase “(by this, He declared all foods ceremonially clean.),” either parenthetically or without the parenthesis, to the end of verse 19, quoted above; but not all do. But even in the New King James Version, shown above, the phrase “thus purifying all foods” is included, leading to essentially the same conclusion. So, it appears that if we take the verse in its original form, Jesus did in fact declare all foods clean.
But let’s not stop there. It is a principle in both the Old and New Testaments that testimony should be established “by the mouth of two or three witnesses.” So, let’s add another witness from the Bible to the verses quoted above. Fortunately, we have that witness, from the Apostle Peter, in the book of Acts:
I was in the city of Joppa praying; and in a trance I saw a vision, an object descending like a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came to me. 6 When I observed it intently and considered, I saw four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. 7 And I heard a voice saying to me, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” 8 But I said, “Not so Lord! For nothing common or unclean has at any time entered my mouth.” 9 But the voice answered me again from heaven, “What God has cleansed you must not call common.” 10 Now this was done three times… – Acts 11:5-10
Let me start with the end of that passage, where it says that the events in the vision occurred three times. The ancient Hebrew language that the Bible was written in didn’t have the words or punctuation that we have today, to add emphasis to a statement. The way the biblical text handles this is by repetition. The various authors of the books of the Bible commonly repeated words, as a means of creating the necessary emphasis. We can understand from this, that the vision was important, because it happened three times.
Some would say that this vision was purely symbolic, based upon the verses before and after Peter explaining this vision. Those verses dealt with him eating with non-Jews, something that the Jews of the day understood to be sin. Yet that understanding doesn’t preclude a more basic interpretation of that vision.
The rule of thumb is that if something can be understood in the Bible, without resorting to seeing it as symbolic, then we can interpret it that way. However, if it makes no sense as it stands, then it is probably symbolic. Even so, some verses can be taken in both ways, such as the one we are looking at. Taken literally, these verses and the vision they describe, clearly say that it is okay for New Testament believers to eat all types of meat, regardless of where they come from. Some still may not be healthy to eat, but that’s not what’s being discussed.
Between these two witnesses, we can say that Christians are allowed by the Bible to eat the meat of any kind of animal they so choose. Even so, we are told to take others into consideration before eating.
Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never again eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble. – 1 Corinthians 8:13
The verse above comes from a chapter where the Apostle Paul was discussing eating meat offered to idols. While Paul’s explanation ultimately comes to the conclusion that it really doesn’t matter, as long as we are not seeing that meat as offered to idols. We have liberty, because those idols are literally nothing, spiritually speaking. But he ends with this verse, saying that he himself would not eat meat at all, if it would cause his brother to stumble.
Paul’s concern here wasn’t the idea of idolatry, but rather a desire to protect others from falling into sin or stumbling in their faith. Some weaker believers might not understand eating that meat, either causing them to question their own faith or question what is and isn’t allowed for the believer. Taken too far, they may even see it as permission to worship those idols; something that is clearly prohibited in scripture.
The problem is that new believers or those with little knowledge of the scriptures can easily be led astray, either by ill-meaning people, demons or even their own thoughts. When one has little actual knowledge of the scriptures, it is easy to come to the wrong conclusions. Paul wrote this closing verse in an effort to protect such people.
But What About “Murdering” the Animal?
This brings us to another argument that is used by those who are opposed to the killing and eating of animals; that of pointing to the commandment against killing:
Thou shalt not kill. – Exodus 20:13 KJV
But this verse is more accurately translated in the New King James version of the Bible, where it says:
You shall not murder. – Exodus 20:13
The word that is alternately translated in that verse as “kill” or “murder” is the Hebrew word râtsach, which literally means to commit premeditated murder on a fellow human. It can also be used for killing done by the avenger of blood (Numbers 35:19 and following). That makes sense, as the taking of life in revenge, even when allowed by the law, is a premeditated act. While our laws do not allow for it, biblical law did.
This does not refer in any way to the killing of animals, whether killing them in slaughter for the table or killing them hunting. There is a different word used for those, just as there is a different word used for killing an animal as a sacrifice to God. Nor does it refer to killing in war, as that is also referred to by a different word. The Bible can be very specific in its use of language in some cases and this is one of them.
At the same time, the killing of animals is directly connected with killing them for food, not for sport. While there is no specific prohibition against killing animals for sport, there is no specific permission for it either.
So, where does that leave deer hunters?
Most hunters I know, especially deer hunters, save the animal’s carcass to be butchered for food. Even those who are trophy hunting want the meat, as you can’t exactly buy venison in most grocery stores and the places where it is for sale, sell it at a high price. Those who hunt normally like the flavor of venison and other game meat, which is at least part of their motivation for hunting. The Bible makes no prohibition against this.
From a logical point of view, it only makes sense to want to make efficient and effective use of all the resources that God has provided us. We are to be stewards of this world, utilizing it for our benefit, while ensuring that it will be able to provide for our children and our children’s children as well. That must include all the resources we have, including the animals which inhabit this earth with us.
With that in mind, it only makes sense that if we are going to kill animals, other than in self-defense, we should make good use of the animal’s carcass, including the meat and perhaps the hide. Killing animals for trophies is morally questionable; but killing them for food is not. If the motivation is to feed our families and we have a chance to get a trophy out of the act as well, that shouldn’t be considered immoral.
Please note that there are those who state that “sport hunting” is a sin. But if you look at who those people are and what they believe, they are starting out with the viewpoint that it is sin and trying to find a way of proving that from the Bible, rather than just seeing what the Bible says.
It is also worth noting that Islam apparently has a prohibition against hunting for sport. But Islam isn’t Christianity and those of us who call ourselves by the name of Christ should not allow our theology to be determined by Islam. There may be things we agree on; but the two are far from being one in the same.
But What About Animal Sacrifices?
We live in a time where animal sacrifices have been outlawed in the western world. About the only people who do so here in the United States are witches and satanists, as ritualistic acts. Islamic countries allow animal sacrifices and it is apparently practiced. But outside those counties, animal sacrifices are rare.
Yet the Old Testament Law, especially the book of Leviticus, speaks extensively about making animal sacrifices for the forgiveness of sins committed, as part of the nation’s ritualistic worship of God and even as voluntary gifts to God. It is clear throughout the Old Testament that animal sacrifices are not only acceptable to God, but desired by Him. But only certain animals, sacrificed in certain ways. Even so, these sacrifices are not made by the Jews today, because they do not have a holy temple dedicated to Jehovah God. Those sacrifices would need to be made at the temple and without it, they do not have a proper means of making their sacrifices.
It is the hope of many Jews to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem, dedicating it to God and reinstating at a minimum the national sacrifices delineated in the Old Testament. To this end, much work has been done in preparation for building the temple, including breeding the red heifers needed as sacrifices for the dedication of the temple.
But what about Christians… should we make animal sacrifices?
While the Old Testament provides many commandments, detailing how and when to make animal sacrifices, the New Testament offers us an alternative. The basic message of the Gospel tells us that Jesus died on the cross, a sinless man, to pay the penalty for our sins. In doing this, He became the one and only sacrifice that we Christians need.
For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, 14 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? – Hebrews 9:13-14
It doesn’t matter if we’re talking about a sacrifice for our sins, a sacrifice to show our devotion to God the Father, or any of the other sacrifices commanded in the Old Testament Law, Jesus Christ has become the one and only sacrifice we need. Our job is to accept Him as that sacrifice, made as redemption for our sins and our lives. We no longer need to sacrifice animals to satisfy the “price” for our sins. We can kill them to eat; but we don’t need to sacrifice them.