Did any in the early church require a kosher diet?

[Kilk1]

In the early church, we see statements suggesting that the dietary laws of clean/unclean meats from Old Testament passages such as Leviticus 11 are no longer binding. For example:

As for their [the Jews'] scrupulousness about meats, and their superstitions about the Sabbath, and their much-vaunted circumcision, and their pretentious festivals and new-moon observances...I hardly think you need instruction from me. For how can it be anything but impious to accept some of the things which God has created for our use and assert their creation to have been commendable, but to reject others as being needless and good-for-nothing? (Letter to Diognetus, 4).​

Similarly, the Letter of Barnabus contains a passage understanding the unclean meats as symbolic in modern application:

And now for that saying of Moses, You are not to eat of swine; nor yet of eagle, hawk, or crow; nor of any fish that has not got scales. In this there are three distinct moral precepts which he had received and understood. (For God says in Deuteronomy, I will make a covenant with this people that will embody my rules for holiness; so, you see, the divine command is in no sense a literal ban on eating, and Moses was speaking spiritually.) The meaning of his allusion to swine is this: what he is really saying is, 'you are not to consort with the class of people who are like swine, inasmuch as they forget all about the Lord while they are living in affluence, but remember him when they are in want--just as a swine, so long as it is eating, ignores its master, but starts to squeal the moment it feels hungry...In these dietary laws, then, Moses was taking three moral maxims and expounding them spiritually, though the Jews, with their carnal instincts. took him to be referring literally to foodstuffs. (Letter of Barnabas, 10).​

However, are there any sources from the early church that would disagree? While the quotations above oppose the binding of kosher dietary laws, do any sources support the kosher practice? I'm looking specifically for quotations from the early church period that require Christians to observe dietary distinctions between clean and unclean meats (as opposed to quotes regarding vegetarianism or other such diets).

 

[HTacianas]

In the early church, we see statements suggesting that the dietary laws of clean/unclean meats from Old Testament passages such as Leviticus 11 are no longer binding. For example:

As for their [the Jews'] scrupulousness about meats, and their superstitions about the Sabbath, and their much-vaunted circumcision, and their pretentious festivals and new-moon observances...I hardly think you need instruction from me. For how can it be anything but impious to accept some of the things which God has created for our use and assert their creation to have been commendable, but to reject others as being needless and good-for-nothing? (Letter to Diognetus, 4).​

Similarly, the Letter of Barnabus contains a passage understanding the unclean meats as symbolic in modern application:

And now for that saying of Moses, You are not to eat of swine; nor yet of eagle, hawk, or crow; nor of any fish that has not got scales. In this there are three distinct moral precepts which he had received and understood. (For God says in Deuteronomy, I will make a covenant with this people that will embody my rules for holiness; so, you see, the divine command is in no sense a literal ban on eating, and Moses was speaking spiritually.) The meaning of his allusion to swine is this: what he is really saying is, 'you are not to consort with the class of people who are like swine, inasmuch as they forget all about the Lord while they are living in affluence, but remember him when they are in want--just as a swine, so long as it is eating, ignores its master, but starts to squeal the moment it feels hungry...In these dietary laws, then, Moses was taking three moral maxims and expounding them spiritually, though the Jews, with their carnal instincts. took him to be referring literally to foodstuffs. (Letter of Barnabas, 10).​

However, are there any sources from the early church that would disagree? While the quotations above oppose the binding of kosher dietary laws, do any sources support the kosher practice? I'm looking specifically for quotations from the early church period that require Christians to observe dietary distinctions between clean and unclean meats (as opposed to quotes regarding vegetarianism or other such diets).

In the early Church, and early I mean very early, there was a debate over keeping the dietary laws as well as circumcision, see Acts 15:5. It was resolved at that time that at least for gentile converts that it wasn't necessary. It continued on with the writings of Paul. But the Acts 15:5 mentions of the Pharisees was the last requirement for dietary laws among Christians. It never came back up again until the advent of Islam and then continued to crop up among some protestant groups since that time.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

The early church was basically freedom from any of the law, but keeping what you felt convicted was right. So if your heart told you not to eat, you shouldn't eat. And others should not do something to offend a person's sensibilities. So no there was no requirement to keep a kosher diet, just what each individual felt was right and covenant as a whole to not offend each other

 

[Leaf473]

In the early church, we see statements suggesting that the dietary laws of clean/unclean meats from Old Testament passages such as Leviticus 11 are no longer binding. For example:

As for their [the Jews'] scrupulousness about meats, and their superstitions about the Sabbath, and their much-vaunted circumcision, and their pretentious festivals and new-moon observances...I hardly think you need instruction from me. For how can it be anything but impious to accept some of the things which God has created for our use and assert their creation to have been commendable, but to reject others as being needless and good-for-nothing? (Letter to Diognetus, 4).​

Similarly, the Letter of Barnabus contains a passage understanding the unclean meats as symbolic in modern application:

And now for that saying of Moses, You are not to eat of swine; nor yet of eagle, hawk, or crow; nor of any fish that has not got scales. In this there are three distinct moral precepts which he had received and understood. (For God says in Deuteronomy, I will make a covenant with this people that will embody my rules for holiness; so, you see, the divine command is in no sense a literal ban on eating, and Moses was speaking spiritually.) The meaning of his allusion to swine is this: what he is really saying is, 'you are not to consort with the class of people who are like swine, inasmuch as they forget all about the Lord while they are living in affluence, but remember him when they are in want--just as a swine, so long as it is eating, ignores its master, but starts to squeal the moment it feels hungry...In these dietary laws, then, Moses was taking three moral maxims and expounding them spiritually, though the Jews, with their carnal instincts. took him to be referring literally to foodstuffs. (Letter of Barnabas, 10).​

However, are there any sources from the early church that would disagree? While the quotations above oppose the binding of kosher dietary laws, do any sources support the kosher practice? I'm looking specifically for quotations from the early church period that require Christians to observe dietary distinctions between clean and unclean meats (as opposed to quotes regarding vegetarianism or other such diets).

I found this, but I haven't looked up the actual letter by Ignatius yet...

False Teachings and Destructive Heresies of the Early Church Fathers | Hoshana Rabbah Blog

"Teachings Against the Biblical Dietary Laws of Clean and Unclean Meats

Early part of second century A.D.—Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians, ch. 6. The author states that one who adheres the biblical dietary laws “has the apostate dragon dwelling within him.” "

 

[Red Gold]

Did any in the early church require a kosher diet?

I do not think so.

 

[HTacianas]

I found this, but I haven't looked up the actual letter by Ignatius yet...

False Teachings and Destructive Heresies of the Early Church Fathers | Hoshana Rabbah Blog

"Teachings Against the Biblical Dietary Laws of Clean and Unclean Meats

Early part of second century A.D.—Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians, ch. 6. The author states that one who adheres the biblical dietary laws “has the apostate dragon dwelling within him.” "

That is a non-Christian group off doing their own thing. They do not speak for Christianity.

 

[Greengardener]

So far as I know, there is support for the OP and subsequent posts. But when I read the line of thought, this is what comes to mind, for what it's worth:

Good question, but is this the pertinent question? From there I find myself wondering, Why would God have instructed the people He was calling to be His own to have certain lifestyle and dietary limitations and then change His mind and not care? There were Gentiles all over the Old Testament who, if they wanted to draw near the One True God, had to agree the the tenets of decent living and the dietary limitations in order to be part of the community. The people of the covenant were not restricted to helping the Gentiles live their lives (what comes to mind is like when a clean animal was found dead, the meat could be given/sold to an outsider but not consumed by people agreeing with YHWH), but if anyone wanted to draw near, certain expectations were clearly laid out by God.

I've suspected this degree of comfort and willing agreement with what God tells people about His "best practices" has to come from the inside (as opposed to being legislated, so to speak), which is why Acts 15 mentions to the effect that "We" (who have the authority to set precedence) won't insist on it, but "They" have Moses they can hear every Sabbath. This suggests to me that the Apostles agreed with the Law (as Jesus did, just not like it was being distorted by the Scribes and Teachers of the Law at that time). It also suggests to me that eventually anyone wanting to draw near to God on His terms (not ours) would likely see the sense in agreeing with the specific lifestyle practices God laid out. When I consider God's amazing patience in the plethora of examples in Scriptures and His plan from the beginning that people are free t choose, it seems to fit for me.

As for the other people who are often considered the early church fathers, I'm hesitant to base my life choices on them. I'm unsure how much "politics" played into their lives now, but I can see how deceptively people play with power over others today so I'm much more comfortable sticking with the Scriptures, especially the Old Testament, having stood a test of much time. I don't see any disagreement when I read the New in light of the Old since it seems obvious that Jesus wasn't upset with what God had said but was upset that its message was corrupted and people were being hindered to draw near. In addition, He came to make that message full.

 

[Leaf473]

Found a fuller quote here

Do not Accept Judaism.

"If any one confesses the truths mentioned, but calls lawful wedlock, and the procreation of children, destruction and pollution, or deems certain kinds of food abominable, such an one has the apostate dragon dwelling within him."

 

[BNR32FAN]

I found this, but I haven't looked up the actual letter by Ignatius yet...

False Teachings and Destructive Heresies of the Early Church Fathers | Hoshana Rabbah Blog

"Teachings Against the Biblical Dietary Laws of Clean and Unclean Meats

Early part of second century A.D.—Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians, ch. 6. The author states that one who adheres the biblical dietary laws “has the apostate dragon dwelling within him.” "

A blog trumps the writings of a first century bishop? Who knew more about what the early church taught?

 

[Leaf473]

That is a non-Christian group off doing their own thing. They do not speak for Christianity.

Could be. The OP asks about quotations from the early church period, and while dating is always iffy, I think that letter would qualify.

 

[Leaf473]

A blog trumps the writings of a first century bishop? Who knew more about what the early church taught?

I wasn't saying it was right or wrong. The OP was asking for quotes, and I found that one.

I found a fuller version of the quote at a different site, post 8 above.

 

[Kilk1]

A blog trumps the writings of a first century bishop? Who knew more about what the early church taught?

I was asking for quotations. While the blog originally linked by @Leaf473 disagreed with the quotation, denouncing it as heresy (which I'm not sure is necessarily true), the blog nonetheless listed a quotation that appears to be from the early church period, and so, Leaf linking to it is relevant to the OP.

Who is the first-century bishop you mentioned, and what did he say about distinctions between clean and unclean food?

 

[BNR32FAN]

I wasn't saying it was right or wrong. The OP was asking for quotes, and I found that one.

I found a fuller version of the quote at a different site, post 8 above.

I apologize I misunderstood your position

 

[BNR32FAN]

I was asking for quotations. While the blog originally linked by @Leaf473 disagreed with the quotation, denouncing it as heresy (which I'm not sure is necessarily true), the blog nonetheless listed a quotation that appears to be from the early church period, and so, Leaf linking to it is relevant to the OP.

Who is the first-century bishop you mentioned, and what did he say about distinctions between clean and unclean food?

I apologize I thought leaf was implying that the information contained in the blog overruled Ignatius’ writing. Ignatius was a first century bishop.

 

[Kilk1]

I apologize I thought leaf was implying that the information contained in the blog overruled Ignatius’ writing. Ignatius was a first century bishop.

No worries! And it seems Ignatius opposed the binding of Jewish dietary laws, correct?

 

[BNR32FAN]

No worries! And it seems Ignatius opposed the binding of Jewish dietary laws, correct?

Actually I can’t find the quote in his epistle to the Philippians. The blog says it’s in chapter 6 but it’s not in that chapter. I don’t know if this person got the chapter wrong or if they have the wrong epistle but I can’t find it where it is said to be in their cite.

This is the claim

Teachings Against the Biblical Dietary Laws of Clean and Unclean Meats

Early part of second century A.D.—Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians, ch. 6. The author states that one who adheres the biblical dietary laws “has the apostate dragon dwelling within him.”

Here’s the epistle

Epistle of Ignatius to the Philippians

 

[BNR32FAN]

I found this, but I haven't looked up the actual letter by Ignatius yet...

False Teachings and Destructive Heresies of the Early Church Fathers | Hoshana Rabbah Blog

"Teachings Against the Biblical Dietary Laws of Clean and Unclean Meats

Early part of second century A.D.—Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians, ch. 6. The author states that one who adheres the biblical dietary laws “has the apostate dragon dwelling within him.” "

This blog has a lot of errors in it. I see two references to Ignatius’ epistle to the Philippians that are misquoting him. What the blog claims to be written in the epistle in chapter 6 in two places is not there and it makes a false claim that Constantine changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. All Constantine did was issue the Edict of Milan which made Christianity legal and that wasn’t even the same year they quoted. They claim it took place in 321 bit the Edict of Milan took place in 313. It also makes a false claim that Easter celebration began at the council of Nicaea which is incorrect because the discussion about Easter at that council was to declare exactly which date everyone was supposed to be worshipping on because the church in Alexandria had been worshipping it on the wrong day. This just shows that the celebration of Easter predated the council of Nicaea. This blog is definitely seventh day adventist propaganda and the information contained in it doesn’t appear to be reliable.

 

[Kilk1]

Actually I can’t find the quote in his epistle to the Philippians. The blog says it’s in chapter 6 but it’s not in that chapter. I don’t know if this person got the chapter wrong or if they have the wrong epistle but I can’t find it where it is said to be in their cite.

This is the claim

Teachings Against the Biblical Dietary Laws of Clean and Unclean Meats

Early part of second century A.D.—Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians, ch. 6. The author states that one who adheres the biblical dietary laws “has the apostate dragon dwelling within him.”

Here’s the epistle

Epistle of Ignatius to the Philippians

This blog has a lot of errors in it. I see two references to Ignatius’ epistle to the Philippians that are misquoting him. What the blog claims to be written in the epistle in chapter 6 in two places is not there and it makes a false claim that Constantine changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. All Constantine did was issue the Edict of Milan which made Christianity legal and that wasn’t even the same year they quoted. They claim it took place in 321 bit the Edict of Milan took place in 313. It also makes a false claim that Easter celebration began at the council of Nicaea which is incorrect because the discussion about Easter at that council was to declare exactly which date everyone was supposed to be worshipping on because the church in Alexandria had been worshipping it on the wrong day. This just shows that the celebration of Easter predated the council of Nicaea. This blog is definitely seventh day adventist propaganda and the information contained in it doesn’t appear to be reliable.

Perhaps the blog isn't the best place from which to quote, though it appears its quotation attributed to Ignatius does exist. @Leaf473 also found a more reliable source that contains the quotation. I'll re-post it below:

Do not Accept Judaism.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

This blog has a lot of errors in it. I see two references to Ignatius’ epistle to the Philippians that are misquoting him. What the blog claims to be written in the epistle in chapter 6 in two places is not there and it makes a false claim that Constantine changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. All Constantine did was issue the Edict of Milan which made Christianity legal and that wasn’t even the same year they quoted. They claim it took place in 321 bit the Edict of Milan took place in 313. It also makes a false claim that Easter celebration began at the council of Nicaea which is incorrect because the discussion about Easter at that council was to declare exactly which date everyone was supposed to be worshipping on because the church in Alexandria had been worshipping it on the wrong day. This just shows that the celebration of Easter predated the council of Nicaea. This blog is definitely seventh day adventist propaganda and the information contained in it doesn’t appear to be reliable.

Here's a third one: Justin Martyr First Apology 47 deals with the prophecy that Jerusalem will be destroyed.

Now the end of Justin's First Apology 57 does states that the local church gathers together on Sunday

"But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead.”​

Justin to Trypho 47 does show that there are four groupings regarding following some of the Judaic laws: Those that enforce Judaic law, those that follow Judaic law, those that do not follow Judaic law, and finally those that refuse to associate with Judaic law. So by ~150AD, Greeks and Jews are making a final separation following the Third Jewish Roman war from the 130s.

Justin: There are such people, Trypho, and these do not venture to have any intercourse with or to extend hospitality to such persons; but I do not agree with them. But if some, through weak-mindedness, wish to observe such institutions as were given by Moses, from which they expect some virtue, but which we believe were appointed by reason of the hardness of the people's hearts, along with their hope in this Christ, and [wish to perform] the eternal and natural acts of righteousness and piety, yet choose to live with the Christians and the faithful, as I said before, not inducing them either to be circumcised like themselves, or to keep the Sabbath, or to observe any other such ceremonies, then I hold that we ought to join ourselves to such, and associate with them in all things as kinsmen and brethren. But if, Trypho, some of your race, who say they believe in this Christ, compel those Gentiles who believe in this Christ to live in all respects according to the law given by Moses, or choose not to associate so intimately with them, I in like manner do not approve of them.​

 

[Kilk1]

Here's a third one: Justin Martyr First Apology 47 deals with the prophecy that Jerusalem will be destroyed.

Now the end of Justin's First Apology 57 does states that the local church gathers together on Sunday

"But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead.”​

Justin to Trypho 47 does show that there are four groupings regarding following some of the Judaic laws: Those that enforce Judaic law, those that follow Judaic law, those that do not follow Judaic law, and finally those that refuse to associate with Judaic law. So by ~150AD, Greeks and Jews are making a final separation following the Third Jewish Roman war from the 130s.

Justin: There are such people, Trypho, and these do not venture to have any intercourse with or to extend hospitality to such persons; but I do not agree with them. But if some, through weak-mindedness, wish to observe such institutions as were given by Moses, from which they expect some virtue, but which we believe were appointed by reason of the hardness of the people's hearts, along with their hope in this Christ, and [wish to perform] the eternal and natural acts of righteousness and piety, yet choose to live with the Christians and the faithful, as I said before, not inducing them either to be circumcised like themselves, or to keep the Sabbath, or to observe any other such ceremonies, then I hold that we ought to join ourselves to such, and associate with them in all things as kinsmen and brethren. But if, Trypho, some of your race, who say they believe in this Christ, compel those Gentiles who believe in this Christ to live in all respects according to the law given by Moses, or choose not to associate so intimately with them, I in like manner do not approve of them.​

Thanks for the additional information! Do you know if Justin Martyr wrote on kosher dietary laws in particular?