07/03/2026
Excellent!
https://www.facebook.com/share/1JoqMAAfh9/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Noah Knew the Law Before It Was Written
Many Christians read Genesis 9:3 as permission to eat anything, then use that understanding to dismiss the boundaries God defines later in Leviticus 11. God tells Noah in Genesis 9:3, "Every moving thing that lives will be food for you. As I gave you the green herb, I have given everything to you." The broader context of the surrounding books of the law gets left out of that reading.
God changing His mind between the flood and the wilderness would mean He granted universal permission to Noah only to revoke it later for a specific group of people. Leviticus 11:4 gives specific boundaries for what to avoid: "Nevertheless these you shall not eat of those that chew the cud, or of those who part the hoof." Readers have to decide whether these instructions change the definition of food or whether the two texts work together.
Noah knew the difference between clean and unclean animals when God gave him instructions for loading the ark. That distinction between creature categories was already in place. In Genesis 7:2, Noah was told to take "seven pairs of every clean animal with you, the male and his female. Of the animals that are not clean, take two, the male and his female." Scripture doesn't record an explanation of this difference being given to Noah, because he didn't need a new revelation to identify what was already known.
The comparison sometimes gets pushed back further to Adam and God's words in Genesis 1:29 when He says, "Behold, I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree, which bears fruit yielding seed. It will be your food." People argue that Adam received that instruction without any listed exceptions, suggesting Noah's instruction should be read the same way. That logic fails because a forbidden category of plant did exist from the beginning. God set a boundary in Genesis 2:17 with the command, "but you shall not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; for in the day that you eat of it you will surely die." God established limits on what was permitted for consumption right from the start. Even beyond that specific tree, the original statement carries a limit built into creation itself. Certain plants contain toxins that can sicken or kill, and no one reads Genesis 1:29 as removing that fact.
"Every moving thing" carries the same general language as "every herb," describing what falls within the allowable created order rather than declaring every single item is meant for food. Animals had already been separated into clean and unclean categories before the flood came. Reaching back to Eden does not remove the standard Genesis 7:2 had already put in place.
The instruction given to Noah after the flood remains consistent with the earlier chapters, since Noah already understood the requirements. The command to eat every moving thing applies only to the category of animals God had already defined as food. Noah brought a surplus of clean animals onto the ark for sacrifice and consumption, while the unclean animals came in pairs to ensure survival, since eating one would have wiped out that species.
Treating Genesis 9 as a final, unchangeable rule that overrides any later command runs into a problem. A later, more precise command naturally governs how we understand the general instruction that came before it. God gave more specific details in Leviticus, and the earlier statement to Noah does not prevent Him from doing that. Ignoring how God communicates over time is the only way to make the argument that the first statement always wins.
God establishes the foundational rule for diet in Leviticus 11:3: "Whatever parts the hoof, and is cloven-footed, and chews the cud among the animals, that you may eat." The instructions go on to describe fish requiring fins and scales, and they name specific winged creatures that are forbidden. These instructions define what is set apart for consumption, and God built biological markers into creation to show which animals were meant to be eaten. Pigs process what other creatures leave behind, which is part of why they fall outside that category.
The claim that these instructions were given only to the ancient nation of Israel and hold no weight for Christians today runs against the text itself. This division among animals existed centuries before Israel formed as a nation at Sinai, which means it was never a custom tied to that nation alone. The text presents a single standard for the people of God across all generations, and that standard continues for anyone who chooses to follow Him.
People search scripture for a way to keep eating whatever they want rather than submit to the boundaries God has outlined, building arguments around isolated passages to justify their appetites. Paul addresses this mindset in Romans 8:7, describing the mind of the flesh as one that "is not subject to God's law, neither indeed can it be." Refusing to align with dietary instructions is a decision to prioritize individual choice over the word of God.
Some use Romans 14 to argue that all food is clean, but that chapter addresses disagreements among believers over vegetarianism and over which days one man might personally regard over another (possibly talking about fast days), not the categories established in Leviticus. Reading the early chapters of Genesis in isolation creates a contradiction that doesn't exist in scripture once the fuller context is included. Paul writes in Romans 14:12 that "each one of us will give account of himself to God." Dietary habits need to be weighed against the full counsel of scripture rather than against the justifications common in church tradition.
