Does Paul's statement in Romans 14:14 that "I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself" mean that there was no distinction between clean and unclean meats in the early Church?
Does Paul's statement in Romans 14:14 that "I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself" mean that there was no distinction between clean and unclean meats in the early Church?
An understanding of Greek terminology can help us here.
It is important to realize that two concepts of "unclean" were referred to in the New TestamentThe 27 authoritative books of the apostolic writings: the four Gospels of Christ, Acts (a history), 21 apostolic letters and the book of Revelation., with different Greek words used to convey those ideas. "Unclean" could refer to animals not meant to be food (Leviticus 11; Deuteronomy 14). "Unclean" could also refer to ceremonial or ritual uncleanness.
In Romans 14 Paul used the word koinos , which means "common" (Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New TestamentThe 27 authoritative books of the apostolic writings: the four Gospels of Christ, Acts (a history), 21 apostolic letters and the book of Revelation. Words , Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, 1985, p. 649). In addition to the meanings of "common" or "ordinary," as used today in English (Acts 2:44; 4:32; Titus 1:4; Hebrews 10:29; Jude 3), the word was also applied to things considered polluted or defiled. This same word, along with its verb form koinoo , is used in Mark 7:2, 15-23, where it clearly refers to ceremonial uncleanness because the disciples ate with unwashed hands.
Through a concordance or similar BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ. help you can verify that koinos and koinoo are used throughout the New TestamentThe 27 authoritative books of the apostolic writings: the four Gospels of Christ, Acts (a history), 21 apostolic letters and the book of Revelation. to refer to ceremonial uncleanness , not to unclean animals or meats as defined in the ScripturesThe divinely inspired writings of both the Old and New Testaments. The term Scripture is used in the New Testament to refer to both the Hebrew Bible (Luke 24:44-45) and the new apostolic writings accepted as inspired (2 Peter 3:16; 1 Timothy 5:18).. Something could be "common"—ceremonially unclean—yet not appear on the proscribed list of meats that were biblically unclean.
An entirely different word, akathartos , is used for unclean meats in the New TestamentThe 27 authoritative books of the apostolic writings: the four Gospels of Christ, Acts (a history), 21 apostolic letters and the book of Revelation.. In the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old TestamentThose books that make up the Hebrew Bible generally accepted by Christians, Jews and to some extent Muslims. It contains a threefold division: the Law (the five books of Moses), the Prophets and the Writings. commonly used in Paul's day), akathartos is used to designate the unclean meats listed in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14.
In Acts 10 both koinos and akathartos describe Peter's vision of the sheet filled with "all kinds of fourfooted animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air" (verse 12), both clean and unclean. Peter himself distinguished between the two concepts of "unclean" by using both words in verse 14. After being told to "kill and eat," Peter replied, "I have never eaten anything common [ koinos ] or unclean [ akathartos ]." Most BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ. translations distinguish between the meanings of the two words used here. Peter used the same terminology in verse 28 and Acts 11:8 in discussing the vision.
When Paul said in Romans 14:14 that "I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself," he was making the same point he had made earlier to the Corinthians: Just because meat that was otherwise lawful to eat may have been associated with idol worship does not mean that it is no longer fit for human consumption. As seen from the context, Paul wasn't discussing biblical dietary restrictions at all.
Paul goes on to state in Romans 14:20 that "all food is clean" (New International Version). The word translated "clean" is katharos , "free from impure admixture, without blemish, spotless" (Vine's, p. 103). Clean meats as such aren't addressed in the New TestamentThe 27 authoritative books of the apostolic writings: the four Gospels of Christ, Acts (a history), 21 apostolic letters and the book of Revelation., so there isn't a specific word to describe them. Katharos is used to describe all kinds of cleanliness and purity, including clean dishes (Matthew 23:26), bodies (John 13:10) and clothing (RevelationThe disclosure of God's Word and plan to mankind. In the Bible this refers to making obscure things clear; bringing hidden matters to light; causing especially called individuals to see, hear, perceive, know and understand the things of God; the unveiling of biblical mysteries (Romans 16:25). 15:6; 19:8, 14), "pure" religion (James 1:27), gold and glass (RevelationThe disclosure of God's Word and plan to mankind. In the Bible this refers to making obscure things clear; bringing hidden matters to light; causing especially called individuals to see, hear, perceive, know and understand the things of God; the unveiling of biblical mysteries (Romans 16:25). 21:18).
Realize also that, in both verses 14 and 20 of Romans 14, the word food or meat isn't in the original wording. No specific object is mentioned relative to cleanness or uncleanness. The sense of these verses is merely that "nothing [is] unclean [ koinos : common or ceremonially defiled] of itself" and "All is clean [ katharos : free from impure admixture, without blemish, spotless]."
Paul's point is that any association of food with idolatrous activity had no bearing on whether that food was suitable for eating.
