The Healthy Church - part II
January 1, 2005 - 12:00am - Gary E. Fraser
An obvious starting point is Genesis 1:29-30, which recommends a vegetarian diet. Following the Noachian flood, God specifically allows the use of certain meats, perhaps reflecting a special situation (Gen 9:3). The next place in the Bible to report divine directions regarding health habits is the laws of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. These laws, with the exception of the 10 commandments, are usually classified as ceremonial. They are seen as wholly religious in nature. They point towards and are fulfilled and nullified by the crucifixion of Jesus. However, this neat dismissal of these laws as merely ancient ritual does not hold up under close examination. Leviticus 11-15, especially, point to a significance other than mere ritual.
Chapter 11 deals with dietary proscriptions. Chapter 12 gives rules for the uncleanness of a woman after childbirth. Chapter 13 deals with infectious skin diseases (probably leprosy and others), and the measures to be taken with anyone that has a swelling or a rash or a bright spot on his skin that may become an infectious skin disease. The ritual responses to these problems include quarantine, washing ofclothes, and regular inspection by the priests with detailed criteria for the pronouncement of cure. The motivation here is clearly the health of the community and limiting the spread of infectious diseases.
The latter part of chapter 13 and all of chapter 14 deal with green and red mildew infestations of clothes and walls of houses (stones, timber and plaster are mentioned), clearly treated as an infectious problem. Mildews are caused by fungus organisms living off organic materials such as those used in clothing, or in the construction of dwellings, or in foods. Certain fungi can cause such diverse disorders as ringworm, farmer's lung, bone abscesses and valley fever in humans.
Moulds of the genus Aspergillus1 (A. glaucus and A. flavus) appear as green or yellow (and others red) patches. They thrive in moist or dry conditions; live on foods, clothing, leather or soft wood; and occasionally infect the human ear canal or skin. Similar modern, and unhealthy, infestations of homes were recently reported in the Los Angeles Times.2 Other Aspergilli can cause severe allergic reactions in certain individuals, or produce toxic chemicals, some of which are now known to have useful antibiotic activity in small doses, or to be a potent cause of cancer, such as the aflatoxin produced by A. flavus. Although there is no conclusive evidence that these specific moulds are the topic of Leviticus 13-14, the advice to avoid clothes or building materials infested with such moulds would seem prudent.
Leviticus 15 deals with potentially infectious bodily discharges, such as semen or menstrual blood. Any high-protein-containing fluid is an excellent medium for bacterial growth. Our modern knowledge of medical microbiology makes all this quite sensible. The more modern demonstration by Semmelweiss of the effects of lack of cleanliness at the time of childbirth is clear indication that care when dealing with body fluids is of great value! Whatever the primary motivation for the rules in these chapters health, holiness, ritual cleanliness the guidance was prescient and remains sound from the perspective of public health.
Commentators have suggested various motivations for these laws: concern for public health, ethnic identity, ecology, holiness, aesthetics or asceticism.3 All of these have some merit, except asceticism, which was not part of the Jewish tradition.
Given the Adventist understanding of inspiration, it is appropriate to distinguish the divine intent behind these laws from the Jewish understanding and practice. There is little evidence the ancient people saw foods as physically healthy or unhealthy. They did not have our concept of contagion. But the health laws of the Pentateuch are strongly supported by the findings of modern public health. Inspired guidance led the people to a level of health practice that was clearly more advanced than their understanding. Holiness is explicitly stated as a reason for these requirements in Deuteronomy 14:1,21, Leviticus 11:43-45 and elsewhere. One mark of a holy community particularly acceptable to the creator appears to be healthfulness. This is implied in the Genesis accounts of the great age of the holy antediluvian patriarchs. When God linked these health laws to holiness, he used a universal conceptholiness to accomplish a particular objective healthiness.
The Bible explicitly states God's concern for health as well as holiness. If you listen carefully to the voice of the Lord your God, if you pay attention to his commands and keep all his decrees, I will not bring on you any of the diseases I brought on the Egyptians, for I am the Lord, who heals you (Exod 15:26). Worship the Lord your God.... I will take away sickness from among you.... I will give you a full life span (Exod 23:25). See also Deuteronomy 7:15.
Of course, there was a strong element of ritual in the Levitical laws. But if the goal was adherence, it has been shown that ritual can be a very effective promoter of adherence to community norms. In sum, it seems likely that the original motivation for Leviticus 11-15 was a concern for public health which was allied with but not identical with holiness.4
A New Testament reaction to Judaic dietary laws
The apostle Paul is often cited by those who believe Christianity should completely separate our concern for health from the work of the church.
Paul wrote, One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables (Rom 14:2), or As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14)! Paul probably uses the concept of cleanness here as a measure of spiritual status in the prevalent legal tradition of Judaism. Clearly he argues that what we eat is not a direct gauge of holiness. And the question arises, is Paul in fundamental disagreement with the important distinction made in Leviticus 11 between clean and unclean foods?
Paul's concern was ultimate salvation. He had no idea that diet might significantly affect the healthof the body temple. If the concern of Leviticus was for physical health in the community and Paul's concern was spiritual health through eternity, then the apparent conflict between Romans 14 and Leviticus 11 disappears.
This makes sense of other New Testament passages that clearly express a concern for the health of believers, such as: Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you? Therefore honor God with your body (1 Cor 6:19, 20; see also 1 Cor 3:16-17). Clearly, even in the NewTestament, God wants healthy people. One of Paul's major concerns was the use of Jewish lifestyle practices as a gauge of a person's holiness. In Romans 14:1-20, he writes,Who are you to judge someone else's servant? (verse 4);You, then, why do you judge your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat (verse 10); Therefore let us stop passing judgement on one another (verse 13). Paul goes on to plead that the believers not destroy the work of God for the sake of food (verse 20), admonition that might have saved a good deal of pain in our own ranks. Diet, for Paul, was simply one example of the kinds of outward manifestations that should not form the basis for religious criticism. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit (verse 17).
Even in Romans 14, however, Paul hints at a moral component of our health decisions. So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves (verse 22). Here Paul reminds us we have a responsibility to carefully decide what we approve, then to act according to our conscience.
Health habits and the Christian experience
What then is the place of health practices in religion? Practices such as prayer, Bible study, memorization, simplicity, etc., are widely honored as spiritual disciplines. Although they do not lead directly to the pearly gates, these practices do affect character and values, and thus help us become better Christians. Embracing the disciplines of health is another way to practice discipleship. By cultivating physical and mental vigor I make myself my body and my mind more available for the work of my master Flouting the laws of health has an immoral component. Not because evil exists in a particular food or drink, but because reckless disregard for the body temple means condemning myself by what I approve. I am not suggesting a hyperscrupulosity that makes a major case out of every piece of meat or bite of candy. But I am arguing that the Bible provides ample support for a morally aware concern for safe-guarding our health.
A growing body of data shows that religious persons of many denominations experience decreased mortality rates from many common diseases.5 The reasons are not clear and space does not permitdetailed discussion here. However, a number of questions arise. What is the effect of the Sabbath rest on health? Does being at peace with and communing with our creator provide an important degree of psychological support with its attendant health consequences? Is it just that religious folks live more conservatively and take fewer risks?
Conclusions
From a historical perspective Adventists are far from unique among religions by incorporating an emphasis on diet. The Adventist health emphasis of many decades has been a real force for good in local communities. At the national and international level, we have contributed to the body of scientific evidence guiding opinion, official recommendations,and, to some extent, practice. This concern for health is solidly rooted in biblical teaching and precedent.
Footnotes1Thom, C. and Raper, K. B. A Manual of the Aspergilli, Williams and Wilkins, 1945; and Braude, Al. Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology, second edition, W.B. Saunders Co., 1986.
2Ed McMahon sues over mold in house, Los Angeles Times, April 10, 2002, page C1; and Officers sickened, police post shut in Long Beach, Los Angeles Times, April 12, 2002, page B7.
3Grivetti L. E., and Pangborn, R. M. Origin of selected Old Testament dietary prohibitions, Journal of the American Dietetic Association 65: 634-638, 1974.
4Note that the above brief discussion avoids any mention of the extensive Jewish dietary and other health regulations in the two Talmuds and the Mishnah, as they are extra-biblical.
5Jarvis, G. K., and Nortcott, H. C. Religion and differences
in morbidity and mortality, Social Science and Medicine, 1987;25:813-24; and Ferraro, K. F., and Jensen, C. M. A. Does religion influence adult health? Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion 30: 193-202, 1994
A BIBLICAL BASIS FOR HEALTH PROMOTION
Ellen White had a dominant role in proclaiming personal health as a part of our religion. So the question naturally arises, Is there a biblical basis for linking concern for personal and public health concerns with our religious identity?
An obvious starting point is Genesis 1:29-30, which recommends a vegetarian diet. Following the Noachian flood, God specifically allows the use of certain meats, perhaps reflecting a special situation (Gen 9:3). The next place in the Bible to report divine directions regarding health habits is the laws of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. These laws, with the exception of the 10 commandments, are usually classified as ceremonial. They are seen as wholly religious in nature. They point towards and are fulfilled and nullified by the crucifixion of Jesus. However, this neat dismissal of these laws as merely ancient ritual does not hold up under close examination. Leviticus 11-15, especially, point to a significance other than mere ritual.
Chapter 11 deals with dietary proscriptions. Chapter 12 gives rules for the uncleanness of a woman after childbirth. Chapter 13 deals with infectious skin diseases (probably leprosy and others), and the measures to be taken with anyone that has a swelling or a rash or a bright spot on his skin that may become an infectious skin disease. The ritual responses to these problems include quarantine, washing ofclothes, and regular inspection by the priests with detailed criteria for the pronouncement of cure. The motivation here is clearly the health of the community and limiting the spread of infectious diseases.
The latter part of chapter 13 and all of chapter 14 deal with green and red mildew infestations of clothes and walls of houses (stones, timber and plaster are mentioned), clearly treated as an infectious problem. Mildews are caused by fungus organisms living off organic materials such as those used in clothing, or in the construction of dwellings, or in foods. Certain fungi can cause such diverse disorders as ringworm, farmer's lung, bone abscesses and valley fever in humans.
Moulds of the genus Aspergillus1 (A. glaucus and A. flavus) appear as green or yellow (and others red) patches. They thrive in moist or dry conditions; live on foods, clothing, leather or soft wood; and occasionally infect the human ear canal or skin. Similar modern, and unhealthy, infestations of homes were recently reported in the Los Angeles Times.2 Other Aspergilli can cause severe allergic reactions in certain individuals, or produce toxic chemicals, some of which are now known to have useful antibiotic activity in small doses, or to be a potent cause of cancer, such as the aflatoxin produced by A. flavus. Although there is no conclusive evidence that these specific moulds are the topic of Leviticus 13-14, the advice to avoid clothes or building materials infested with such moulds would seem prudent.
Leviticus 15 deals with potentially infectious bodily discharges, such as semen or menstrual blood. Any high-protein-containing fluid is an excellent medium for bacterial growth. Our modern knowledge of medical microbiology makes all this quite sensible. The more modern demonstration by Semmelweiss of the effects of lack of cleanliness at the time of childbirth is clear indication that care when dealing with body fluids is of great value! Whatever the primary motivation for the rules in these chapters health, holiness, ritual cleanliness the guidance was prescient and remains sound from the perspective of public health.
Commentators have suggested various motivations for these laws: concern for public health, ethnic identity, ecology, holiness, aesthetics or asceticism.3 All of these have some merit, except asceticism, which was not part of the Jewish tradition.
Given the Adventist understanding of inspiration, it is appropriate to distinguish the divine intent behind these laws from the Jewish understanding and practice. There is little evidence the ancient people saw foods as physically healthy or unhealthy. They did not have our concept of contagion. But the health laws of the Pentateuch are strongly supported by the findings of modern public health. Inspired guidance led the people to a level of health practice that was clearly more advanced than their understanding. Holiness is explicitly stated as a reason for these requirements in Deuteronomy 14:1,21, Leviticus 11:43-45 and elsewhere. One mark of a holy community particularly acceptable to the creator appears to be healthfulness. This is implied in the Genesis accounts of the great age of the holy antediluvian patriarchs. When God linked these health laws to holiness, he used a universal conceptholiness to accomplish a particular objective healthiness.
The Bible explicitly states God's concern for health as well as holiness. If you listen carefully to the voice of the Lord your God, if you pay attention to his commands and keep all his decrees, I will not bring on you any of the diseases I brought on the Egyptians, for I am the Lord, who heals you (Exod 15:26). Worship the Lord your God.... I will take away sickness from among you.... I will give you a full life span (Exod 23:25). See also Deuteronomy 7:15.
Of course, there was a strong element of ritual in the Levitical laws. But if the goal was adherence, it has been shown that ritual can be a very effective promoter of adherence to community norms. In sum, it seems likely that the original motivation for Leviticus 11-15 was a concern for public health which was allied with but not identical with holiness.4
A New Testament reaction to Judaic dietary laws
The apostle Paul is often cited by those who believe Christianity should completely separate our concern for health from the work of the church.
Paul wrote, One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables (Rom 14:2), or As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14)! Paul probably uses the concept of cleanness here as a measure of spiritual status in the prevalent legal tradition of Judaism. Clearly he argues that what we eat is not a direct gauge of holiness. And the question arises, is Paul in fundamental disagreement with the important distinction made in Leviticus 11 between clean and unclean foods?
Paul's concern was ultimate salvation. He had no idea that diet might significantly affect the healthof the body temple. If the concern of Leviticus was for physical health in the community and Paul's concern was spiritual health through eternity, then the apparent conflict between Romans 14 and Leviticus 11 disappears.
This makes sense of other New Testament passages that clearly express a concern for the health of believers, such as: Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you? Therefore honor God with your body (1 Cor 6:19, 20; see also 1 Cor 3:16-17). Clearly, even in the NewTestament, God wants healthy people. One of Paul's major concerns was the use of Jewish lifestyle practices as a gauge of a person's holiness. In Romans 14:1-20, he writes,Who are you to judge someone else's servant? (verse 4);You, then, why do you judge your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat (verse 10); Therefore let us stop passing judgement on one another (verse 13). Paul goes on to plead that the believers not destroy the work of God for the sake of food (verse 20), admonition that might have saved a good deal of pain in our own ranks. Diet, for Paul, was simply one example of the kinds of outward manifestations that should not form the basis for religious criticism. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit (verse 17).
Even in Romans 14, however, Paul hints at a moral component of our health decisions. So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves (verse 22). Here Paul reminds us we have a responsibility to carefully decide what we approve, then to act according to our conscience.
Health habits and the Christian experience
What then is the place of health practices in religion? Practices such as prayer, Bible study, memorization, simplicity, etc., are widely honored as spiritual disciplines. Although they do not lead directly to the pearly gates, these practices do affect character and values, and thus help us become better Christians. Embracing the disciplines of health is another way to practice discipleship. By cultivating physical and mental vigor I make myself my body and my mind more available for the work of my master Flouting the laws of health has an immoral component. Not because evil exists in a particular food or drink, but because reckless disregard for the body temple means condemning myself by what I approve. I am not suggesting a hyperscrupulosity that makes a major case out of every piece of meat or bite of candy. But I am arguing that the Bible provides ample support for a morally aware concern for safe-guarding our health.
A growing body of data shows that religious persons of many denominations experience decreased mortality rates from many common diseases.5 The reasons are not clear and space does not permitdetailed discussion here. However, a number of questions arise. What is the effect of the Sabbath rest on health? Does being at peace with and communing with our creator provide an important degree of psychological support with its attendant health consequences? Is it just that religious folks live more conservatively and take fewer risks?
Conclusions
From a historical perspective Adventists are far from unique among religions by incorporating an emphasis on diet. The Adventist health emphasis of many decades has been a real force for good in local communities. At the national and international level, we have contributed to the body of scientific evidence guiding opinion, official recommendations,and, to some extent, practice. This concern for health is solidly rooted in biblical teaching and precedent.
Footnotes1Thom, C. and Raper, K. B. A Manual of the Aspergilli, Williams and Wilkins, 1945; and Braude, Al. Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology, second edition, W.B. Saunders Co., 1986.
2Ed McMahon sues over mold in house, Los Angeles Times, April 10, 2002, page C1; and Officers sickened, police post shut in Long Beach, Los Angeles Times, April 12, 2002, page B7.
3Grivetti L. E., and Pangborn, R. M. Origin of selected Old Testament dietary prohibitions, Journal of the American Dietetic Association 65: 634-638, 1974.
4Note that the above brief discussion avoids any mention of the extensive Jewish dietary and other health regulations in the two Talmuds and the Mishnah, as they are extra-biblical.
5Jarvis, G. K., and Nortcott, H. C. Religion and differences
in morbidity and mortality, Social Science and Medicine, 1987;25:813-24; and Ferraro, K. F., and Jensen, C. M. A. Does religion influence adult health? Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion 30: 193-202, 1994
(Vol.13, Issue 1, p12-14)
| Gary E. Fraser | n/a |