Why Was Pork Forbidden in the Bible Old Testament Law?

We’ve talked about the topic of clean and unclean foods in several other places on this blog. This time, we’re addressing the subject from a different angle — that of a question that’s often posed by both Torah-observant and non-Torah-observant Christians, alike:

Why was pork forbidden in the Bible?

We primarily see the prohibition in the Old Testament:

“And the pig, though it has a divided hoof, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you.” (Leviticus 11: 7-8)

Passages in the New Testament seem to contradict the law given to Moses and suggest that “Jesus made all foods clean” and we are now able to eat swine’s flesh as we please.

But is that really the case?

Let’s take a closer look at some of the most common passages of Scripture that are often used to justify the consumption of pork. By the end of this post, we hope to not only answer the question of why it was forbidden; we also aim to determine whether the command to abstain from eating pork indeed came to an end at the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (We like to call him by his Hebrew name, Yahushah — or as some people pronounce it — Yeshua, so you’ll see them used interchangeably throughout our content).

A Word About “Old Testament Law”…

Often referred to as the “law of Moses” or “Levitical Law” (among other titles), the law given in the Old Testament is commonly thought to be a requirement under the old covenant.

Many believers will claim that we are now under a new covenant, rendering God’s instructions given to the people of Israel irrelevant for today’s “Gentile Christians.”

But is there really such a thing as a Gentile Christian?

The word Gentile comes from the Hebrew word gôy, which simply means a nation, or a people, usually of non-Hebrew descent. Abraham was a gentile, called by God from the pagan nations to become the Father of the nation of Israel (which happened when he fathered Isaac, who later fathered Jacob, whose name was later changed to Israel.)

According to the apostle Paul, if we are in Christ, then we are Abraham’s seed (Galatians 3:29), grafted by faith into the nation of Israel (Romans 11).

Therefore, the term “Gentile Christian” becomes a bit of an oxymoron. As Christians, we are no longer part of a foreign nation (Gentiles). We are now God’s people.

Regarding the “new covenant” — it’s actually a re-newed covenant. According to the book of Hebrews, the only change that took place was a change in priesthood. But that’s a much more involved topic for another day…

Was the Law Abolished at the Cross?

Yeshua said:

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law (Torah), or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfill.” (Matthew 5:17)

So he clearly states that he didn’t come to destroy or abolish it. But what does it mean to “fulfill”?

Strong’s concordance gives several nuanced definitions, including: to make full, to complete, to consummate, fully preach, perfect …

None of which mean “abolish”.

Thayer’s Greek Lexicon clarifies the usage of this word and its nuance of meaning in the context of Matthew 5:17 as: universally and absolutely, to fulfil, i.e. “to cause God’s will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God’s promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfilment”.

In short, Yeshua came to clarify the Torah — demonstrating in both word and deed the way in which it is to be obeyed so that God’s promises could be fulfilled. Taking on human flesh and enduring the same trials and temptations we often experience ourselves, he lived in perfect obedience and became our example of what it means to “love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself.”

What About the Dietary Laws?

If the law was not abolished, does that mean the dietary restrictions still stand?

Many Christians will claim that we are only supposed to obey the Ten Commandments (or … is it just 9 out of the 10, because the 4th one is often argued to have been “abolished” as well? But I digress…)

If that’s the case, then the dietary laws would no longer be in effect — along with all of the other laws given throughout the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

Still others will claim these were “Jewish laws” — meant only for the Jews of that time and no longer relevant for Gentile Christians.

Well, we’ve already established that “Gentile Christians” is an oxymoronic phrase, which throws that argument out the window. Moreover, Noah knew the difference between clean and unclean animals as we see in the instructions that were given for gathering living creatures onto the ark. This confirms that the distinction was made long before the tribe of Judah — from where the Jews descended — even existed.

But even if certain laws were only meant for Jewish people to follow, how do we know which ones those are? Are the rest of us “Gentile Christians” permitted to commit adultery, steal, murder and bear false witness post-resurrection? Or is it just the 10(ish) commandments that were meant for all of us, while the rest of the Torah — including the dietary laws — are “just for the Jews”?

I hope it’s becoming clear that many of the claims made to justify living as we please and no longer needing to keep some of God’s holy instructions start to crumble as we more closely examine the Scriptures.

If not, it should be clear by the end of this post as we now dive into the specific claims made to justify the consumption of pork.

Claim 1: “Jesus declared all foods clean.”

This statement comes from Mark 7. In this passage, the Pharisees accused Jesus’ disciples of eating without completing the ceremonial handwashing ritual they had instituted as a prerequisite for meals (but which is found nowhere in God’s actual Torah/instructions. They were adding to the law, which is explicitly forbidden in Deuteronomy 4:2.)

To this accusation, Yeshua responds:

“Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.) — Mark 7:18-19 (NIV)

Notice that the final sentence is in parentheses. That’s because it does not actually say this in the original text. The KJV provides a more literal translation:

“Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?” (Mark 7:19)

The word for “meats” in this verse simply means “food.” Food had already been defined by God in the Torah as that which is clean. The disciples were not in the habit of eating unclean food. And the Pharisees, who had instituted a required handwashing ritual on top of the given Mosaic Law, which they obeyed to the letter, would most certainly have raised hell if Jesus even remotely implied that all food was suddenly clean and good for consumption.

That’s clearly not what he’s saying here. And never mind that this passage is not even about food being clean or unclean in the first place. His response is addressing the hypocrisy of the Pharisees in disobeying the Torah by placing unnecessary burdens on the people’s shoulders, in the form of unwritten handwashing rules.

In laymen’s terms, he’s saying: “look, it doesn’t matter if a little dirt from their hands gets on the food (clean meats) that they swallow. It’s going to be cleansed and purged by their bodies anyway. And by the way, stop disobeying the law by adding to it — don’t you remember what God said about that?”

The fact that Jesus never declared all foods clean is further supported by Matthew’s recording of the same incident in chapter 15 of his gospel:

“Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.” … So Jesus said, “Are you also still without understanding? Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is eliminated? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. These are the things which defile a man, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man.” (Matthew 15:11, 16–20)

Surely Matthew would have re-emphasized the statement that Jesus declared all foods clean — if it was actually stated — but he doesn’t.

Claim 2: God told Peter that nothing is unclean

Peter’s vision in Acts 10 is often quoted to claim that nothing is unclean, and therefore we can now eat anything we want. Pigs, cats, dogs, snakes, vultures, raccoons, you name it … it’s all good.

(By the way, I find it interesting that there is such a strong defense for pork; eating bacon is a hill many people are willing to die on, yet most would agree nothing else in that list is even remotely fit for human consumption.)

“Then he became very hungry and wanted to eat; but while they made ready, he fell into a trance and saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to the earth. In it were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. And a voice came to him, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” But Peter said, “Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean.” And a voice spoke to him again the second time, “What God has cleansed you must not call common.” (Acts 10:10-15)

The first thing that stands out in this passage is the fact that Peter says he has never eaten any thing unclean. If Jesus had indeed declared all foods clean many years prior, then why was Peter still observing the instruction to abstain from unclean foods at this point?

Later in the chapter, we’re told that Peter realizes the meaning of the vision:

”And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.” (Acts 10:28)

Once again, this passage is not even about food! It’s about people. Claiming otherwise is grasping at straws to justify a behavior that God explicitly calls an abomination:

“They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine’sflesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD.” (Isaiah 66:17)

Abominations are things that God finds detestable. Some other things that are labeled abominations in the Bible: worshipping pagan idols, murder, stealing, pride, sexual immorality, homosexuality…

“So you really think God cares if I eat a piece of bacon?”

Well, what does Scripture say? Clearly, He finds the consumption of pork to be among the list of other detestable things.

Look up every reference to pigs in Scripture. You’ll find that most, if not all, refer to them in an overwhelmingly negative context.

Don’t get me wrong — they were created for a purpose. But that purpose is not for us to eat them.

The Word of God says our bodies are a temple of the holy spirit and we were bought with a price. Why, then, would we want to dishonor that temple by doing something our Creator considers detestable?

Claim 3: “Paul said nothing is unclean in Romans 14.”

“Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. … Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way. I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.” (Romans 14:1–3, 13–14)

Just reading the last sentence of this passage without considering the rest of what he said, his audience, and the context, it’s easy to see why someone would believe that nothing is unclean.

But in verse 2, he clearly contrasts him who eats “all things” to him to who eats “only vegetables”. In this passage, the Greek word for “meat” refers to “that which is eaten — food”, which at that time would have only consisted of clean meats. The Jews were not, nor had ever been, in the habit of eating unclean foods in Jesus’ time nor up to this point, as was made clear by Peter’s statement in Acts 10. So in hearing the word “meat”, they only thought of the clean variety since unclean meats are not defined as “food” by our Creator.

Also, Paul is talking about new converts here — those who are “weak in the faith.” Many of these people were vegetarians, meaning they didn’t eat meat at all and likely believed it to be an unclean practice. In this case, he’s not referring to “unclean” in the same sense that it’s referred to when talking about animals, since they refrained from eating animals altogether.

Claim 4: “Paul said let no one judge you in food or in drink.”

This verse in Colossians is often used to discourage things like eating clean foods and keeping the Sabbath, emphasizing the dangers of such “legalistic” practices:

“So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths.”(Colossians 2:16)

But a quick history lesson reveals that the opposite is actually true. When reading confusing statements like this, we have to ask ourselves: “Who was he talking to? Who is the writer’s audience? What did they believe? How did they behave? Were they keepers of the covenant?”

Most of the people in the city of Colossae were ascetics who believed that the simple pleasures of life (celebration, eating good food, enjoying oneself, etc.) were evil, carnal practices that should be avoided. They criticized the Christian converts for eating clean meats and for their celebration of God’s holy days — not the other way around, as is often claimed.

Thus far, we’ve clarified and refuted four claims often used to justify eating unclean things. There are more, but these are probably the top ones among the most cited.

This still begs the original question:

Why Was Pork Forbidden in the Bible?

Perhaps it was for health reasons…

Medical evidence actually supports the Biblical instruction to abstain from pork. Pigs were created to be the earth’s “clean-up crew”. They eat everything including cancerous tumors on human carcasses. Their flesh is ridden with parasites, many of which may be resistant to heat/cooking. There are significant potential health risks associated with eating pork, and our Creator is a loving father who simply wants what’s best for His children.

As a parent, this has completely shifted my paradigm when it comes to Biblical law. Many Christians (myself included before God showed me otherwise) view the law as an impossible burden that was only meant to point to our need for a Savior and wasn’t actually meant to be obeyed.

But think about that from the perspective of a physical father or mother. When you set up rules / guidelines for your children to follow, it’s because you love them, right? It’s because you want to protect them and help ensure they live a good life.

It’s not because you simply want to prove to them that they need you. That would be manipulative, and I don’t believe our Creator is manipulative…

When they disobey, it’s frustrating, saddening, and sometimes downright infuriating. It may break your heart, but it doesn’t make you love them any less.

If you’ve never examined the law from this perspective, I encourage you to read the entire book of Deuteronomy. While you’re at it, read Hosea too. I honestly don’t see how anyone could read those Scriptures and come away with the conclusion that the Father’s law is an impossible burden that Jesus “thankfully came to free us from and nailed it to the cross.” On the contrary, I think it will further confirm to you what an awesome, loving, thoughtful, merciful Heavenly Father we have.

One who loves us enough to discipline and guide us into all truth and show us the way to eternal life through faith in his Son, our Messiah, Yeshua…

who was one with His Father in Spirit…

perfectly obedient “unto death” (Philippians 2:8)…

and the ultimate example of how we are to live as children of the Most High God.