shellfish an abomination

One of the criticisms that is leveled against Christians is their tendency to pick and choose which parts of the Bible they want to obey. Skeptics think that we are being hypocritical for condemning some sins while blatantly committing other sins. One example that is often used is that most Christians eat shellfish, when the Bible says (according to the skeptic) “Shellfish is an abomination.”

I, too, am frustrated with how some Christians throw out any commands they don’t like. But when it comes to this issue, modern Christians and those of years past are correct in saying that we can now eat shrimp, crab, lobster, etc.

While many Christians are too quick to throw out Old Testament laws, we must acknowledge that the New Testament does repeal some of those laws. Traditionally, Christians have noted that there are some OT laws that reflect God’s never-changing views on morality. But by looking at the whole Bible (OT & NT), we see that some laws were only for the nation of Israel in OT times. These temporary laws are often described as “ceremonial” laws. Some examples of these laws would include the animal sacrifices, circumcision, etc. Some of the ceremonial laws fall into the category of “separation laws.” These laws were designed to keep the Israelites culturally separate from the godless peoples around them. These laws were to be done away with when the new covenant came and the gospel would be sent forth to all nations.

So, what does this have to do with eating shrimp? Are shrimp no longer an “abomination?”

Actually, the Bible never says that shellfish are an abomination. It does say that the Israelites were not to eat animals that lived in the water and that “do not have fins and scales” (Leviticus 11:10). This would include shrimp, clams, etc. But notice that Lev. 11:10 says that these creatures were to be “an abomination to you [the Israelites].” These were not an abomination in a moral sense. They weren’t an abomination to God like certain sinful activities are. God made these water creatures after all, so there’s nothing immoral about them.

These finless, scaleless water animals were to be despised by Israel (as far as for food). But why? Again, this was a separation law. This law would have made a separation between the Jews and the Gentiles. One way to build community is to share meals together. The food laws were designed in part to hinder this cross-cultural fellowship between Jew & Gentile.

How do I know that? Because the book of Leviticus says so. In Lev. 20:24-26, we read that Israel was given the list of clean animals (those they could eat) and unclean animals (those they couldn’t), because God had “separated them from the [other] peoples.”

If that’s not a convincing enough argument, let’s turn to the NT and see God showing Peter that both the food laws and the Jew/Gentile separation idea is no longer binding on us in the new covenant.

In Acts 10:9-16, God gives Peter a vision. In that vision, Peter (a Jew) is told by God to eat “unclean” animals. Peter, being a good Jew, protests and says that he won’t eat those unclean things. God tells him that He has made those unclean animals “clean” (v. 15). So, God was saying that the food laws are no longer binding on us. But why? Because from this time forward, there would not be this Jew/Gentile separation (see Gal. 3:28; Eph. 2:11-16, etc.). So, even though the vision that Peter received did have something to do with the OT food laws, Peter was about to learn the other reason for this vision.

While Peter was still pondering this vision, some Gentiles came to him and invited him to come to the house of a Roman (Gentile) officer named Cornelius (Acts 10:17-22). Peter, being a good Jew, normally would not have had close fellowship with, or even gone into the house of, a Gentile (Acts 10:28; see also 11:2-3). But, since he knew that the OT food laws were for the purpose of separation – and now knew that those laws had been repealed – he knew God was telling him that it was now all right to fellowship with Gentiles. Now, he should not call any food or “any man” unclean (Acts 10:28).

In conclusion, we can only say that an OT law is no longer in effect if the NT tells or shows us that that law is no longer binding. The food laws are one of those categories of law that has been repealed. Those “abominations” in the OT that are evil because they violate God’s unchanging standard of morality are still abominations in NT times. But, those foods that were to be an abomination to only the Israelites – those foods are now “clean.”

While Christians do act hypocritically in other areas, this is one area where not obeying the OT is okay. The rest of the Bible shows us that the food laws have been repealed.