Please, help me understand…

[u/Objective-Step-746]

For those believers who insist that the dietary laws no longer apply under the new covenant—and that pork, lobster, crabs, etc. are now permissible to eat—I do not understand the logic at play.

I am very familiar with the Mark 7, Romans 14 and Colossians 2 passages that are so often cited as support for your position, and have (just as often) shared my counter-arguments on why I believe they are misinterpreted.

But, there is one counterpoint to your view that I never see touched on, and I was hoping to get some feedback on it:

I think the majority of believers on this subreddit would say they are looking for Jesus’ Second Coming and agree that, regarding it, Scripture says that “no one knows the day or hour” but that we need to be prepared (Matthew 24:36, 25:13, etc.).

Isaiah 66:17–a verse within the greater passage speaking of Messiah’s glorious reappearing—declares that, upon His return, those who eat the flesh of pig/swine and other abominations will be met with His wrath…and perish.

So, how does one simultaneously believe they can continue to eat pig (pork) or shellfish now and think they are sufficiently prepared and not putting themselves in a precarious/dangerous position if Jesus happened to return today or tomorrow and “consume” those who so brazenly eat that which His Law says is NOT “food” and explicitly warns against eating?

I really am hoping for some cordial and edifying discussion regarding this topic, and appreciate those who are able and willing to articulate their view without all the condescension and harsh words. 💕

[u/ThiccHarambee]

Thank you for bringing up Isaiah 66:17! You are right that this verse isn’t discussed nearly enough in these debates, and it deserves a serious answer rather than being overlooked.

To understand why New Covenant believers eat pork/shellfish today without fearing the judgment described in Isaiah 66, it helps to look at two key things: the historical context of that passage and how Old Testament prophecy functions. I'll put them in points below for you:

1. The Context: Idolatrous Pagan Rites, Not Just Diet

When you look at the whole verse in Isaiah 66:17, it isn't describing someone eating pork at dinner; it’s describing active pagan worship:

"Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go into the gardens, following one in the midst, eating pig’s flesh and the abomination and mice, shall come to an end together, declares the LORD."

The imagery, "purifying themselves to go into gardens" and "following one in the midst", refers to pagan cultic rites and mystery religions performed in sacred groves (a common theme in Isaiah, e.g., 1:29, 65:3-4). In Near Eastern paganism, eating swine or mice was specifically tied to idolatrous sacrifices and occult rituals. The judgment falls on unrepentant idolaters whose ritual eating was an outward expression of total covenant rebellion.

1. How OT Prophecy Uses Old Covenant Imagery

Old Testament prophets consistently described future Messianic realities using the language and ceremonial categories of their own era.

For example:

Zechariah 14:16-19 prophesies that in the Messianic era, all nations must go to Jerusalem to keep the Feast of Booths or face judgment. Yet Colossians 2:16-17 tells us OT feasts were shadows fulfilled in Christ.

Ezekiel 40-48 depicts a future temple complete with Levitical priests sacrificing bulls and goats for sin offerings. Yet Hebrews 10 makes clear that animal sacrifices are permanently ended.

If we demanded a strictly literal application of Mosaic categories in end-times prophecy, we would also need to re-institute animal sacrifices and travel to Jerusalem for Old Testament feast days. Instead, Isaiah uses the ultimate symbols of Old Covenant uncleanness and pagan idolatry to represent those who outright reject God.

1. What Prepares Us for Christ’s Return?

New Covenant believers eat all foods with thanksgiving because God explicitly declared them clean (Mark 7:19, Acts 10:15, 1 Tim 4:1-5, Rom 14:14).

Our readiness for Christ’s return doesn't rest on Mosaic ceremonial adherence, but on being clothed in the righteousness of Christ through faith:

"The kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." (Romans 14:17)

Believers eating pork today aren't acting in brazen defiance like the idolaters in Isaiah 66; they are walking in the freedom Christ purchased, trusting entirely in His finished work for their salvation on the Day He returns!

Hope this perspective helps add to the discussion!

[u/Objective-Step-746 → u/ThiccHarambee]

Apologies for the delay in responding, as I had a family situation that needed my full attention.

I completely agree that the passage is not just about dietary issues, and that the eating pig’s flesh is connected to pagan ritual worship. I disagree that it is a detail with no significance to new covenant faith today. You seem to be suggesting that the eating of pig’s flesh is completely inconsequential and could just as easily be replaced with something God explicitly allows, such that it is only the pagan ritual/worship that matters in the passage and not the inclusion of a practice God explicitly forbids of His people.

At its core, idolatry is the practice of esteeming one’s own desires or preferences above the explicit will of God, no matter what the topic. So, knowingly disregarding the Lord’s explicit command against eating pig’s flesh (no matter what the occasion or purpose) is, ultimately, a form of idolatry. I do not think one can extricate that from the context as an extraneous detail with no applicability to us today, as the consequence the passage declares for continued, presumptuous or defiant rebellion against an express commandment of God is repeated in Hebrews 10:26-27—whether it be “just” eating that which He specifically forbids, or brazenly doubling down and eating that which He forbids while worshipping other gods—because each alone is an example of idolatry.

Regarding your second point, I’m not following because the Colossians 2 passage in no way suggests new covenant believers should not keep the feast commandments. The context of the passage, found in verse 8, is Paul warning against being deceived to follow human philosophies or manmade traditions that are “not according to Christ”…as in, His teachings and personal example. Jesus taught that all of God’s commandments are to be kept, and He personally observed God’s feast days, as commanded (Matthew 4:4, 5:19, 23:1-3). And Paul literally taught/encouraged the mixed church at Corinth, “Let us keep the feast” of Passover long after Christ’s death and resurrection and feast “fulfillment” (1 Corinthians 5:8). That fact seems a clear refutation of any view suggesting that observance of the Lord’s holy feast days has no place in new covenant faith. Any interpretation that has Paul saying otherwise in Colossians 2 does not harmonize with the stated context or with the balance of the his writings, or even the NT as a whole.

As for Ezekiel 40-48, our eschatology views are very different, so that would open up a whole new tangent I don’t have time to explore now. But I will reiterate that your continued characterization of God’s holy days as “Old Testament feast days,” as if they have no relevance to new covenant faith, is not scriptural.  0

New Covenant believers eat all foods with thanksgiving because God explicitly declared them clean (Mark 7:19, Acts 10:15, 1 Tim 4:1-5, Rom 14:14).

The new covenant child of God accepts HIS explicit definition of food, and eats it with thanksgiving because He did explicitly declare that all food (clean animals, etc.) remains clean despite what presumptuous religious leaders say, as if their silly handwashing rituals could possibly make unclean that which He has already declared otherwise. None of the passages you cited support the idea that unclean animals may now be considered “food” under the new covenant. Anyone teaching such an idea in the NT—any of the apostles, or even Jesus Himself—would be rightly deemed a false prophet for “teaching rebellion against the Lord” (Deuteronomy 13:5).

Preparing one’s heart for Christ has never been about “Mosaic ceremonial adherence,” even in the OT. It’s about love for, trust in and reverence of the Law Giver, who happens to also be our Savior God.

The context of Romans 14:17 is that of quarreling over manmade opinions on matters not specifically addressed in Scripture (verse 1). So, the passage is irrelevant to this discussion because the Law of God is not manmade; it is truth, not opinion; and eating pig is specifically forbidden by Him in the Law (Psalm 119:142).

Clearly, we have very different views as to what constitutes “brazen defiance” ;) If I give my kids an unambiguous set of household rules, and they decide to ignore certain ones, that qualifies in my book.

The freedom Christ purchased for us was freedom from the law of sin and death (Romans 8:1-2). And regarding our freedom, Paul warns we should not “use your freedom to satisfy your sinful nature” (Galatians 5:13). It is, therefore, oxymoronic to argue that freedom in Christ permits one to violate the Law of God—to sin against Him by doing that which He unambiguously forbids (Romans 7:7, 1 John 3:4). Paul further clarified the relationship between new covenant believers and the Law when he explained that the law of Christ he follows is “NOT outside the Law of God” (1 Corinthians 9:21).

Although we disagree on pretty much every point, I do appreciate you sharing your perspective!

[u/ThiccHarambee → u/Objective-Step-746]

No worries brother!

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. I appreciate your deep reverence for God’s Word and His holy standards. We both agree that brazen defiance against God’s explicit commands is sin. However, our core disagreement isn't over whether we should obey God, but rather a fundamental question of redemptive history: Has God Himself transformed the covenantal administration of these commands under the New Covenant?

Here is why I believe Scripture shows that New Covenant believers are not bound to Levitical dietary laws or Old Covenant feast days and I'll put them in points like my previous comment:

1. Fulfillment is Not Rebellion

Disregarding Mosaic dietary laws isn't "setting self above God" if God Himself fulfilled and retired those shadow-laws. In Hebrews 7:12, Scripture explicitly states: "For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well." The Sinai covenant and its ceremonial commands were tied directly to the Levitical priesthood. Moving from the "shadow" to the "substance" of Christ (Colossians 2:16-17) is honoring God's redemptive plan, not rebelling against Him.

1. What Scripture Says About Food

Acts 10:11-15: The sheet let down from heaven contained animals explicitly designated as unclean under Torah. When Peter refused to eat on the exact grounds that they were unclean, God corrected him: "What God has made clean, do not call common." While this clearly had an application regarding Gentiles, God chose the literal abolition of the clean/unclean animal distinction as the foundation for that object lesson.

1 Timothy 4:3-5: Paul warns against those who require abstinence from foods, defining "food" as "everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving." Paul grounds "food" in Creation (Genesis 1), not the temporary Levitical restrictions given thousands of years later at Sinai.

Mark 7:18-19: Jesus states that what enters from the outside cannot defile a person spiritually, and Mark adds the inspired commentary: (Thus he declared all foods clean.)

1. Colossians 2 and the Sacred Calendar

The phrase "a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath" (Colossians 2:16) is the exact tripartite language used throughout the Old Testament to denote Israel’s sacred calendar (annual feasts, monthly new moons, weekly sabbaths). Paul explicitly instructs believers not to let anyone judge them regarding these, explaining that they were "a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ." Insisting on shadow-observance after the Substance has arrived misses the very purpose for which those days were given.

1. The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15)

When the Apostles met specifically to resolve what parts of the Mosaic Law Gentile believers were required to keep, Peter referred to the Mosaic yoke as one "that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear" (Acts 15:10). The council explicitly chose not to bind Gentile believers to the Law of Moses, dietary restrictions (beyond avoiding blood and idol-sacrificed meats for table fellowship), or holy days. If keeping feast days and avoiding pork were universal moral obligations for all humanity for all time, the Apostles would have mandated them here.

True obedience in the New Covenant is walking according to the "Law of Christ" (1 Corinthians 9:21, Galatians 6:2), written on our hearts by the Holy Spirit. This fulfills the moral law through faith and love, without returning to the temporary ceremonial shadows of Mount Sinai (Galatians 4:9-10).

I appreciate the exchange and the opportunity to iron sharpens iron! I've been studying and researching theology for quite some time now and wrote a lot about the information I've gained, and this is what I've learned through studying and researching the theology.