• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

What is 'meat sacrificed to idols'?

DeathIsNotTheEnd

Member
Real Person
Male
Alright so bear with me.

I'd appreciate some gentle wisdom on what exactly this means.

I mean, I understand the literal idea. But I believe that in all things related to God's law we need to understand first Him and His spirit (the spirit of the law).

So things I get:
--God is rightly jealous of our worship (will not give His glory to another)
--God wants our allegiance as well as our safety (not to interact with evil spirits)
--An idol is nothing, but it is the heart behind it, of worshipping something false, that is wrong (of course,
sometimes that worship may be directed at an actual evil spirit).

What I'm unclear on is what is it that 'eating meat sacrificed to idols' is doing, if on the one hand Paul says to eat anything in the marketplace without worry, but if someone TELLS you explicitly "this meat was sacrificed to an idol", then don't eat it for, interestingly, BOTH your sakes (your conscience, and as a witness to the person).

So. I'm confused.
What WAS meat sacrificed to idols? Was it an attempt/act of worship? Was it like temple prostitution, where the idea was that by ingesting the food your body housed some of the deity (do not join your body, the temple of the Holy Spirit, with the spirit of a prositute which is the spirit of an idol)?

I suppose, in our modern society when we don't do this exact thing, I find it hard to imagine what it would be like to eat food 'to' an idol. Even when we observe the Lord's Supper, we do it as a symbolic act (unless you are of the Catholic/Orthodox traditions). So to me the idea of ingesting a deity or someone eating as an act of worship seems incomprehensible.

Paul describes explicitly that the meat is just food and the idol is nothing. There's nothing inherently wrong about the base action (eating this piece of meat). It's the intent behind it (worship of an idol?) that matters.

What, then, is that worship? Is it like, paying reverence? Was eating the food some sort of prayer request? Some sort of covenant? Was it inviting a spirit into you? I don't get it.
 
Not exactly meat, but I have heard missionaries being offered fruit and dates from alters of idols and of course tbey had to refuse and it became a teachable moment for new believers who were offering the food. In some cultures tou have to literally push the point that the God of the Bible is the only one cause some just throw him on their pile of deities unknown to very well meaning christian evangelist abroad
 
Not exactly meat, but I have heard missionaries being offered fruit and dates from alters of idols and of course tbey had to refuse and it became a teachable moment for new believers who were offering the food. In some cultures tou have to literally push the point that the God of the Bible is the only one cause some just throw him on their pile of deities unknown to very well meaning christian evangelist abroad
Right but...I mainly am confused as to what the symbolism is. I'm not confused about the rule/instruction: I definitely get that it's a good witness and for our own spiritual health too. What I don't get is what the spiritual component of 'food for an idol' is. What does that mean, that it's 'sacrificed to' another deity? Like...if the food is just sitting there...are they expecting fire to come down and consume it? o.O
 
I think a lot of it has to do with the ideas of the Nicholaitans. There’s a thread in here somewhere about them. The meat offered or sacrificed to idols was usually either consumed at a pagan temple in a feast to the god, or in some cases sold in the market as the cheapest meats.

To partake of those sacrifices typically meant that you honored or served those gods. If someone mentioned to you that this was sacrificed meat, then you may not partake to show that you do not serve those gods. If its not mentioned, there’s no point determining its origin because the ignorance of someone else who offered it to something that doesnt exist couldn’t taint the meat. It’s just meat. The only caveat to this that I’m aware of would be if it was strangled.
 
I remember while listening to Homer's Odyssey, there were frequent references to "hekatombs" being offered to the gods. This was, nominally, a sacrifice of 100 bulls, though apparently often less in practice. The following quote from the Illiad (via the Wikipedia page on hekatombs) will illustrate the practice, though I'm not sure how much it probably changed in the hundreds of years between Homer and Paul.
Homer said:
[T]hey arranged the holy hecatomb all orderly round the altar of the god. They washed their hands and took up the barley-meal to sprinkle over the victims [cattle], while [the priest] lifted up his hands and prayed aloud on their behalf.
...
When they had done praying and sprinkling the barley-meal, they drew back the heads of the victims (Cattle) and killed and flayed them. They cut out the thigh-bones, wrapped them round in two layers of fat, set some pieces of raw meat on the top of them, and then [the priest] laid them on the wood fire and poured wine over them, while the young men stood near him with five-pronged spits in their hands. When the thigh-bones were burned and they had tasted the inward meats, they cut the rest up small, put the pieces upon the spits, roasted them till they were done, and drew them off: then, when they had finished their work and the feast was ready, they ate it, and every man had his full share, so that all were satisfied. As soon as they had had enough to eat and drink, pages filled the mixing-bowl with wine and water and handed it round, after giving every man his drink-offering.
Thus all day long the young men worshipped the god with song, hymning him and chaunting the joyous paean, and the god took pleasure in their voices
Two other things to note, near the end of the passage: the "mixing-bowl" turns up any time there's drinking, because wine was always mixed with water, and a "drink offering", or libation, as I understand it, is where you splash/pour some of it out onto the ground before drinking, as another form of sacrifice to the gods.
 
Last edited:
Was it inviting a spirit into you?

yarp. My take on it is if you are eating some meat whose origin you neither know nor care about, you are safe. When you knowingly ingest food offered to an idol, you partake in the spiritual meaning of the idol. And spirits are spiritual in nature, in more ways than one. Symbolism is material in the spiritual realm. Knowingly partaking in a demonic idol does more than offend conscience, (or I should say, offending conscience isn't a mere personal, internal thing. It echoes and ripples in the spiritual realm and attracts attention)

Consider that a flag is only cloth and fire is a commonplace human tool. But if you put them together in public, that rationale will not be taken seriously. There is meaning in the action that is inherent.


18Consider the people of Israel: Are not those who eat the sacrifices fellow partakers in the altar? 19Am I suggesting, then, that food sacrificed to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God. And I do not want you to be participants with demons. 21You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot partake in the table of the Lord and the table of demons too. 22Are we trying to provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He?
 
That was kind of my point about the Nicholaitans. They followed the premise that they could partake of the Lords Table and pagan feasts without issue as well as fornication with temple prostitutes and it wouldn’t affect your fellowship/relationship with the Father.
 
yarp. My take on it is if you are eating some meat whose origin you neither know nor care about, you are safe. When you knowingly ingest food offered to an idol, you partake in the spiritual meaning of the idol. And spirits are spiritual in nature, in more ways than one. Symbolism is material in the spiritual realm. Knowingly partaking in a demonic idol does more than offend conscience, (or I should say, offending conscience isn't a mere personal, internal thing. It echoes and ripples in the spiritual realm and attracts attention)

I had a longer post but on second thought...

The symbolism part is I think where we disagree, and why I ask this question.

I do not believe the Bible indicates that symbolism (the symbolism of an action) has any sort of particular value or reflection in the spiritual world. On the contrary, I think Paul especially points out numerous times (and it is reflected in-negative in the LACK of meaning of the works of the non-believing Israelites) that symbolism and action itself are nothing: it is 100% about the heart attitude. As part of that is 'loving others' and 'loving God', there are of course, actions that matter, simply by definition (hence the whole not eating meat sacrificed to idols in front of others).

But where we will disagree is the idea that there is some sort of other meaning beyond what our hearts put into it. That, I feel, is counter to what I see in the Bible.
 
Last edited:
It might be that my whole brain hasn't woken up yet, but I don't think I'm getting what you're pointing to.

Your closing question was about whether or not eating food sacrificed to idols invites demon in, and my answer (summarized) is: "Heck yes it does." If I'm eating meat that is halal because I'm in a foreign country and am wisely following Paul's advice not to ask any questions, who cares? If I want to eat some goat and chickpeas, I'm at my liberty to do so. But the moment someone points out to me, "Hey this meat is halal, then I am obliged to put it down and refuse it, because I know that this meat has been dedicated to allah, whom I absolutely do not worship. Internally, even if I ate it, it would not be an act of worship to allah. Why would it be? I'm an American. I barely know how to worship my own God, let alone someone else's. Nevertheless he who slaughtered the animal invoked allah, inviting the demons that answer to that; and he who made me aware of it presented me with a choice to accept or reject that which was invoked. If I were to shrug my shoulders and eat it anyways, those demons will take that as a de-facto invitation, and it will work as such because I'm also knowingly disobeying scripture at that precise moment. I am spectacularly vulnerable.

But meaning changes over time,

To us, maybe, but we are not the only participants or witnesses at the feast. There are angels, demons, and our God to think about as well, and I do not think time changes their views overmuch. Consider 1Cor 11:2-7, in which the reason women are to pray or prophesy with their heads covered is "because of the angels". A culture may well allow men with long hair and women with an uncovered head without even blinking, but the angels do not view it that way. Time does not change their opinions. And for whatever reason (I have my theories) Paul instructs that our fashions remain within the parameters of angelic sensibilities.

Assuming meanings can change over time, even to spiritual beings, I would expect that to only flow in one direction by human agency. God may be able to declare unclean animals clean, because He has cleansed them. And because Peter said so (and I believe him...) that also means that we gentiles are not to be called unclean or common. But how much further does that extend? Does the blood of Jesus cleanse idols to Zeus or the practices of his worship? Clearly not! Where God sets the standard, there it remains.


Is that wrong, being in a Muslim building 'dedicated' to Allah and possibly could be misconstrued by the Muslims as praying to him?

:eek:

Let me speak from a certain perspective: that of a jealous husband. If my wife were to enter another man's bedroom with him privately, and shut the door (or better yet for appearance's sake, check in to a hotel room with him for an hour or so)

I'm sure she would want to explain that she did not 'actually' commit adultery with him if anyone asks, but uhhhh... that won't actually keep anyone out of the hospital.

If I enter a mosque and pray, (unless for some reason I decided to become a martyr by loudly praying in the name of Jesus and denouncing allah) , it isn't just the Muslims who would assume that I had decided to convert and submit to allah. (I would expect them to immediately correct me on how I was supposed to be praying). Other Christians who saw or heard of it would assume that I had either converted or fallen into the belief that God and allah were one. (My poor weaker brothers, they will not understand), who knows what the non-religious people who know of it will think, but it is sure to not be the right idea. Moreover, if my prayer appears to be to allah, but is actually to God, I'm not at all certain how He would take it.

And I would expect demons to be on me like stink on rice. Without commenting on whether or not I'd expect to be demonized walking out of the place, I nevertheless have handed them quite the opportunity.


...but like I said, I didn't quite understand your post.
 
It might be that my whole brain hasn't woken up yet, but I don't think I'm getting what you're pointing to.

Your closing question was about whether or not eating food sacrificed to idols invites demon in, and my answer (summarized) is: "Heck yes it does." If I'm eating meat that is halal because I'm in a foreign country and am wisely following Paul's advice not to ask any questions, who cares? If I want to eat some goat and chickpeas, I'm at my liberty to do so. But the moment someone points out to me, "Hey this meat is halal, then I am obliged to put it down and refuse it, because I know that this meat has been dedicated to allah, whom I absolutely do not worship. Internally, even if I ate it, it would not be an act of worship to allah. Why would it be? I'm an American. I barely know how to worship my own God, let alone someone else's. Nevertheless he who slaughtered the animal invoked allah, inviting the demons that answer to that; and he who made me aware of it presented me with a choice to accept or reject that which was invoked. If I were to shrug my shoulders and eat it anyways, those demons will take that as a de-facto invitation, and it will work as such because I'm also knowingly disobeying scripture at that precise moment. I am spectacularly vulnerable.



To us, maybe, but we are not the only participants or witnesses at the feast. There are angels, demons, and our God to think about as well, and I do not think time changes their views overmuch. Consider 1Cor 11:2-7, in which the reason women are to pray or prophesy with their heads covered is "because of the angels". A culture may well allow men with long hair and women with an uncovered head without even blinking, but the angels do not view it that way. Time does not change their opinions. And for whatever reason (I have my theories) Paul instructs that our fashions remain within the parameters of angelic sensibilities.

Assuming meanings can change over time, even to spiritual beings, I would expect that to only flow in one direction by human agency. God may be able to declare unclean animals clean, because He has cleansed them. And because Peter said so (and I believe him...) that also means that we gentiles are not to be called unclean or common. But how much further does that extend? Does the blood of Jesus cleanse idols to Zeus or the practices of his worship? Clearly not! Where God sets the standard, there it remains.




:eek:

Let me speak from a certain perspective: that of a jealous husband. If my wife were to enter another man's bedroom with him privately, and shut the door (or better yet for appearance's sake, check in to a hotel room with him for an hour or so)

I'm sure she would want to explain that she did not 'actually' commit adultery with him if anyone asks, but uhhhh... that won't actually keep anyone out of the hospital.

If I enter a mosque and pray, (unless for some reason I decided to become a martyr by loudly praying in the name of Jesus and denouncing allah) , it isn't just the Muslims who would assume that I had decided to convert and submit to allah. (I would expect them to immediately correct me on how I was supposed to be praying). Other Christians who saw or heard of it would assume that I had either converted or fallen into the belief that God and allah were one. (My poor weaker brothers, they will not understand), who knows what the non-religious people who know of it will think, but it is sure to not be the right idea. Moreover, if my prayer appears to be to allah, but is actually to God, I'm not at all certain how He would take it.

And I would expect demons to be on me like stink on rice. Without commenting on whether or not I'd expect to be demonized walking out of the place, I nevertheless have handed them quite the opportunity.


...but like I said, I didn't quite understand your post.
Great post.
 

Like I said, I disagree with most of that. Or at least, some of the bases of your analysis, so, we shall have to agree to disagree.

My question was more along the lines of:
"What is the intent of the pagan who sells food that has been 'sacrificed' to another god?" I think I got a decent answer tho that.

My follow up question was going to be (but I deleted it):
"Where does action (eating the meat) and heart worship mix?"

To that it sounds like I won't really get an answer I can comprehend here, because we disagree on how to even go about answering the question.
*sigh* time to go find another forum lol
 
I heard a story about a missionary who had gone with his wife to evangelize a remote place. He and his wife had gotten separated as he scouted and she was taken. Eaten.
It took him some years to get his head straight, and under the goading of Holy Spirit, return.
He found them readily receptive to the message. He was astounded, asked them why. They told him that they had Jesus in them already. That Jesus had been in his wife when they partook of her and had been in them ever since.
I told this story to a guy who had been around and he got a strange look on his face and told me that had heard a similar story about people being saved after eating a Christian child and he never understood it until hearing my story.

When Ali was in Iraq and hanging with the Ugandan security forces, they were telling her that they would handle food with their hands and could feel the evil if someone was trying to poison the king.

Studies have shown that food prepared with love has a different effect on the body than food that was prepared differently.
 
If I'm eating meat that is halal because I'm in a foreign country and am wisely following Paul's advice not to ask any questions, who cares? If I want to eat some goat and chickpeas, I'm at my liberty to do so. But the moment someone points out to me, "Hey this meat is halal, then I am obliged to put it down and refuse it, because I know that this meat has been dedicated to allah, whom I absolutely do not worship
I thought Halal meat was OK? Isn't it just basically how they kill it? All meat in NZ is Halal, they do it on a large scale here so they know it is all safe to be sent overseas and there won't be any mix ups.
 
Well, the method of slaughter is certainly part of it. The other part is:

" The head of an animal that is slaughtered using halal methods is aligned with the qiblah. In addition to the direction, permitted animals should be slaughtered upon utterance of the Islamic prayer 'Bismillah' "in the name of God"."
" The requirement to invoke Allah's name is a must."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halal

So basically the animal must be faced towards Mecca and slaughtered in the name of allah to be considered halal. I don't know what NZ standards are at all.

Wait, all meat in NZ is halal? Does that mean you don't have pork in New Zealand? What the heck? I clearly know very little about your country.

I'm guessing that NZ meat conforms to halal standards for slicing the jugular and draining it of blood, but probably are not actually halal according to Islam?

Unless... what, do they hire muslims to do the slaughtering? How does your country work?


Edit: EEEEEEEEEEK!

"Yes. New Zealand has developed regulatory standards for Halal meat production."

"Anyone who undertakes halal slaughter (halal slaughterman) must also meet a number of competency requirements including NZQA unit standards that cover knowledge of Shariah Law; knowledge of stock recovery; knife handling and sharpening skills; hygiene and food safety and work safety."

https://www.mia.co.nz/what-we-do/trade/halal/


duuuuude... whaaaaaat...
 
Last edited:
Yeah Samuel knows more about this, but he's out for the day. I'm guessing they don't bother with pork. We do have pork here. All the other meat is for sure halal though so they can sell it as such.
If we can't eat halal, then we can't eat any meat except for home kill, which has massive ramifications.
 
Yeah Samuel knows more about this, but he's out for the day. I'm guessing they don't bother with pork. We do have pork here. All the other meat is for sure halal though so they can sell it as such.
If we can't eat halal, then we can't eat any meat except for home kill, which has massive ramifications.

I sent @Slumberfreeze a message but I will repeat this here, because I disagree strongly with that notion. Of course, "decide for yourselves what is right", and obviously Samuel will be the better person to get an opinion on, but:

I'd direct us to 1 Corinthians 8: 6-8:
"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.
7 But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. 8 But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do."

It has nothing to do with the action. It has everything to do with our heart intent.

And 1 Corinthians 10:19-20
"Do I mean then that food sacrificed to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons."

Again. The food and the idol are meaningless. It is the heart direction of who the person is offering it to that matters.

And again, 1 Corinthians 10:28-30
"But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, both for the sake of the one who told you and for the sake of conscience. 29 I am referring to the other person’s conscience, not yours. For why is my freedom being judged by another’s conscience? 30 If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for?"

Conscience. Nothing to do with the action. Note that it is entirely about the other person, not ourselves. We are not in danger of inviting demons by eating food or anything, no matter who blessed it or whatever. Demons will act as they will, and as God allows. They do not require an invitation. That is a pagan mindset that will not be found in the Bible, and sounds distinctly like Christian Mysticism. What matters about meat sacrificed to idols is our hearts, and in the context of eating with/by another person, it matters what we communicate to THEM through our action.
 
My follow up question was going to be (but I deleted it):
"Where does action (eating the meat) and heart worship mix?"

To that it sounds like I won't really get an answer I can comprehend here, because we disagree on how to even go about answering the question.

You're really quick with these presuppositions, you know? How are you going to decide that you're not going to get a proper answer for the question that you didn't even post?

You should pose the question and give someone the chance to surprise you...

I'll try to formulate my own personal answer to where you seem to be going.
Is it like, paying reverence?

Well, yes it is. As much as partaking in a Passover lamb is meant as reverent obedience to God, so is partaking of meat sacrificed to idols meant and understood as reverence to the idol. The life of the animal has been offered to the idol, partaking of the meat is an act of worship to the idol. To repeat Paul again 18Consider the people of Israel: Are not those who eat the sacrifices fellow partakers in the altar?
To eat from the idol's sacrifice is to partake in the idol. Intentional or not, that is the inalienable quality of the act, when done knowingly. That is why it should offend both the consciences of the informer and the Christian eater of the meat.


Some sort of covenant?

Yes. Exactly that. Details probably vary from idol to idol, but the contract is sure to be a poor one.


"Where does action (eating the meat) and heart worship mix?"

That's the thing is that the body/soul/spirit are different parts, but all part of the whole and all connected. What is done in the physical must match what is intended in the spiritual, or else the result is mixed, and not pure. Certainly not 'holy'.

Just as one does not offer a pig in the Temple genuinely, but only to profane it on purpose. Or one does not offer vegetables when only shed blood can offer remission of sins. There are no meats that are unclean, for they are all sanctified by the Word of God and by prayer, but if you know that an idol has already been given the credit and the praise for the meat then even giving thanks for it in Jesus name will only serve to create meat with "two masters" as it were. There will be ambiguity in the mind of the person that informed you about who is truly receiving the glory. Someone who informs you that the meat is offered to an idol is already well aware of the conflict between the two paradigms. Sometimes believers who are accustomed to walking in the liberty that grace affords can forget how profound simple acts can be. Which is why I believe Paul makes the point of giving the commandment.
 
I think I responded to this mostly in the message I sent you but for others' sake I will quickly say:

Well, yes it is. As much as partaking in a Passover lamb is meant as reverent obedience to God, so is partaking of meat sacrificed to idols meant and understood as reverence to the idol. The life of the animal has been offered to the idol, partaking of the meat is an act of worship to the idol. To repeat Paul again 18Consider the people of Israel: Are not those who eat the sacrifices fellow partakers in the altar?
To eat from the idol's sacrifice is to partake in the idol. Intentional or not, that is the inalienable quality of the act, when done knowingly. That is why it should offend both the consciences of the informer and the Christian eater of the meat.

Again, intent. They are partaking out of intent and a heart attitude of worship. The question, as always, is 'why are they partaking of the meat'. To say that simply the action is an act of worship...that's where I disagree.

Your argument that "intentional or not, that is the inalienable quality of the act' is directly contradictory to 'when done knowingly'. When done knowingly, which I agree with, is important because of the intent. The 'intentional or not' is in direct contradiction to Scripture, as I quoted above.

And Paul seems to take a different view of whether it 'should offend the conscience', again, as I quoted.


That's the thing is that the body/soul/spirit are different parts, but all part of the whole and all connected. What is done in the physical must match what is intended in the spiritual, or else the result is mixed, and not pure. Certainly not 'holy'.

I agree. But the physical only matters as it reflects the spiritual. That is why God is about intent and heart, and the rest flows from that, not the other way around. God does not ask that we match our heart to our actions, but the reverse. "For out of the heart flows envy, deceit," etc etc. "It is not what goes into the mouth, but what comes out of a man's heart that makes him unclean". Etc. I feel like that's pretty clear...

Just as one does not offer a pig in the Temple genuinely, but only to profane it on purpose. Or one does not offer vegetables when only shed blood can offer remission of sins. There are no meats that are unclean, for they are all sanctified by the Word of God and by prayer, but if you know that an idol has already been given the credit and the praise for the meat then even giving thanks for it in Jesus name will only serve to create meat with "two masters" as it were.
Are we talking transubstantiation now? :\ One doesn't offer a pig in the Temple because the Temple is used for the Old Covenant, under which a pig is unclean. You're mixing two different rule-sets. One does not offer vegetables when only shed blood..etc, because again, God specifically said "this is what I want". You're adding a mystical interpretation onto the blood, where God only indicates symbolism. Blood is not some 'spirit conduit'. "For the life is in the blood" is again, a matter of symbolism. Blood itself has no inherent power, it is the meaning and heart intent.

There will be ambiguity in the mind of the person that informed you about who is truly receiving the glory. Someone who informs you that the meat is offered to an idol is already well aware of the conflict between the two paradigms. Sometimes believers who are accustomed to walking in the liberty that grace affords can forget how profound simple acts can be. Which is why I believe Paul makes the point of giving the commandment.

Our job is not to avoid ambiguity, it is to be correct before the Lord. It's not our task to make sure our brother's thoughts are correct (!), as I'm sure you'd apply to me attempting to change your mind lol ;)
Our job IS, of course, to be loving to others. Which again, is why honesty is important. Someone who informs me that the meat is offered to an idol, I'm avoiding doing so, again, as Paul says, for the sake of THEIR conscience, not mine. In order to not tempt THEM into an act of worship to a false deity.
Let's be careful with word choice here. Paul does not give Commandments. Paul can give instructions and illuminations, or the Holy Spirit can give Commandments. They are different. Cultural instructions will change, and must be ultimately subject to the Spirit of God. Commandments never change.
I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at by 'how profound simple acts can be', I may have already addressed it, but something about it seems off to me... without further explanation I can't directly answer it though.
 
I have a completely different perspective on this issue to everyone who has posted so far. There's a bit of background to explain why I think this way, I'll try to be brief. But in being brief I run the risk of giving the wrong impression. So, if anything I am about to say sounds blasphemous, or insulting to God, or a promotion of Islam, or anything of that nature, you've misunderstood me...

This thread is about meat offered to idols. The example being used is Halal meat. I do not believe this is an example of meat offered to an idol. If anything, it's the exact opposite - halal meat by definition has NOT been offered to an idol. That is a controversial statement that will need some explanation...

I do not believe Muslims worship a demon named Allah. The word "Allah" is simply the Arabic version of the Hebrew "Elohim" (note the "al" / "el" at the start), and is equivalent to the English word "God". Arabic Christians were calling God "Allah" long before Mohammad was born, and still call Him "Allah" today. Muslims ATTEMPT (please note the stress on that word) to worship the God of Abraham, the Creator. There is only one God of Abraham. There is only one Creator. He is YHWH, the one true God. However, Muslims have been taught many lies about who He is and what He wants them to do.

To put it another way - Jews attempt to follow the God of Abraham, but have incomplete understanding of Him as they reject His Messiah, so fail to follow Him correctly. Muslims, Mormons and other such cults also attempt to follow the God of Abraham, and accept His Messiah at least partially (as a prophet), but have been seduced by false prophets and doctrines of demons, to believe lies, and therefore also do not follow Him correctly. When a Muslim says "Allah says we must do X", he does not mean "a false god says we must do X", but rather "I believe that the God of Abraham says we must do X (but I don't realise that I'm actually wrong about that...)". When he prays to "Allah", he is not intentionally praying to a demon, but rather is genuinely trying to pray to the God of Abraham - whose commands he unfortunately severely misunderstands, and demons may certainly be whispering to him and be pretending to be the voice of God responding to his prayer.

Another way of looking at it: Say I tell my daughter to tell my son "Dad says take your dirty washing to the laundry", and she actually tells him "Dad says to burn your dirty washing", and my son responds by burning his washing. When asked why he is doing something so ridiculous, he says adamantly "Dad commanded me to burn my washing, and I am doing what he said". Is my son choosing to not obey Dad, but rather obey some false dad (let's call him "Evil Dad")? Of course not. Rather, he's genuinely trying to obey his dad - but is the victim of a lie. He should have looked into the truth of the instruction better of course, he's arguably being foolish - but even that doesn't change the fact that he genuinely believes he is obeying his dad.

Allah isn't an idol. Allah simply means "God". But many people think very wrong things about God, as we all know well...

So, what is Halal? Halal simply means "acceptable", like kosher. Most food, by definition, is halal. A food can be both halal and kosher simultaneously - fresh vegetables for instance are acceptable to both Muslims and Jews so are both halal and kosher.

Although Muslims have an enormous amount wrong, when it comes to meat they basically believe a simplified version of Torah. Don't eat pork, don't eat blood, don't eat meat offered to idols. They are very strong on not eating meat offered to idols - that's why fanatical Muslims go around blowing up anything that even looks like an idol... To make sure they never eat such meat, a Muslim is only allowed to eat meat that has been slaughtered by a Muslim, a Christian, or a Jew - because such believers would never offer their meat to an idol, but only to the God of Abraham. Meat that has been slaughtered by a Muslim, Christian or Jew is therefore "halal" - acceptable for Muslims to eat.

This means that if any of you kill and eat your own mutton / goat / beef (provided you drained the blood), you're eating halal meat. Meat that a Muslim visitor would be happy to accept as acceptable, because it was slaughtered by a Christian.

Now when a Muslim slaughters an animal, they are supposed to do a couple of very minor things - pray thanking God for the animal (which most of us would probably do also in some form, not legalistically but just through gratitude), and kill the animal facing Mecca (which is only natural since they always pray facing Mecca, so if they're praying when they kill the animal they'll be facing that direction anyway). This is simply expressing gratitude to the God of Abraham for providing the meat, in the particular way that Muslims act when they pray.

Throughout most of history, a Muslim would get "halal" (acceptable) meat by simply going to their nearest Muslim, Christian or Jewish butcher, buying meat, and they'd know it was not offered to idols and therefore acceptable to eat. However in these days of global trade, you don't know who actually killed the animal you buy, and for all you know it might have been someone who truly does worship idols, such as a Hindu. So some groups of imams have set themselves up as halal certification authorities, and go and inspect meatworks and other food production facilities and certify whether they are acceptable for Muslims given their own particular understanding of the rules, and have copyrighted "halal" logos that they allow particular businesses to use to demonstrate compliance. As happens with religious people, the rules of a particular certification board might actually be more restrictive than the bare minimum outlined above - for instance they may only accept Muslim slaughtermen. But the "halal" label does not mean the food has been offered to an idol - rather it still just means the food is "acceptable" for a Muslim according to the view of a few individuals.

New Zealand produces massive quantities of beef and mutton, and over 90% is exported to dozens of countries, many being Muslim. To simplify processing, every cattle beast or sheep killed for export in NZ is halal slaughtered. Then meat going to Malaysia gets a halal sticker, meat going to the USA does not, depending on what will sell better in that particular market, but it's all the same meat... In practice, as I understand it, "halal slaughter" here simply means that there's a person who's done a brief certificate of study in halal slaughter techniques slitting the throats of the still animals after they've been electrically stunned, while pretending to pray. In practice, there are two praying people, so they don't get bored and forget to pray or tired and do a poor job, so one works inside while pretending to pray while his mate stands around outside having a smoke, then they swap places for a while... It's considered the easiest job in the meatworks, basically a joke job, just a box-ticking exercise to allow export into large Asian and Middle Eastern markets.

Is such meat acceptable to Christians? I'll jump back to the illustration of my clothes-burning son for a bit. Now, let's say this son goes to the pantry, gets out a cake, calls out "Thanks Dad for making the cake", and then goes to share the cake with his siblings. Should his siblings say "He didn't really thank Dad, because he doesn't follow Dad, he actually follows Evil Dad. So when he said "Dad", he must have actually meant "Evil Dad". So he gave Evil Dad the credit for making the cake, not Dad. We can't take this cake, because Evil Dad's been given the credit for it and not Dad, so it's been defiled and we have to refuse it.". Ponder it for a bit, because that seems a bit ridiculous, but it truly does parallel the situation we're discussing here where a Muslim thanks "Allah" for meat and then Christians say "well he doesn't really mean Elohim because he actually serves Evil Elohim / Evil Allah...".

I have no problem eating halal meat.

In fact, if you want to avoid pork, the simplest way in most of the world is to eat halal! America is very unusual in having a large Jewish population so kosher food is actually available. I've never seen a kosher label in my life, but see halal labels everywhere in the supermarket. So if for instance I wanted to only buy sweets made using non-pork gelatin, I'd look for the halal label and buy those ones - and if I were to look up local Jewish lists of acceptable food items I'd find that exactly the same items were listed as kosher. Because halal doesn't mean "offered to an idol". It just means "accepable".

On the other hand, if I were to be offered meat off the altar of a pagan idol, then I'd have to refuse for the sake of others conscience, as outlined by Paul.

Remember what I said at the start - if you think I'm promoting Islam you've completely misunderstood me, Islam's evil.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top