It was not clear to Clement of Alexandria (150-215) that the cleansing of the temple and Jesus' vegetarianism were inextricably united.  Clement's views are not perfectly in line with those of the Ebionites, Nazarenes, Essenes and the late Jewish prophets who taught that God desired a pure heart and good deeds, not the slaughtering of God's creatures and the eating of their corpses.
 
   In "The Instructor" (The Pedagogue) Clement of Alexandria did not recognize sentience and free will as existing among animals, whom he, like the Pauline writers of the New Testament, regarded as "irrational creatures."  Clement also accepts the traditional interpretation of Jesus' statement that what goes into a person's mouth is secondary to what comes out of it.  In "The Instructor" Clement saw moderation as more important than vegetarianism.  Yet he does in a number of his writings regard dietary purity as essential to the early Christians who saw themselves as a religious group practicing compassion towards other creatures.  For example, contradicting his relatively complacent attitude towards flesh-eating in "The Instructor," regarding the sacrifices at Delos, Clement is the voice of vegetarianism when he says:

"They are fond of talking about the purity of the most ancient altar at
Delos, that altar which, we are told, was the only one approached by
Pythagoras, because it was unpolluted by slaughter and death: will they then refuse credence to us when we say that the truly hallowed altar is the righteous soul, and the incense which ascends from it, the prayer of holiness?  Sacrifices, I believe, are an invention of mankind to excuse the eating of flesh... "  P. 112, Alexandrian Christianity: "Selected translations of Clement and Origen" with Introductions and Notes by John Ernest Leonard Oulton, D.O. and Henry Chadwick, B.O. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.
1954.

    What the scholar must conclude is that Clement himself accepted the false scriptures that were being written by the Pauline faction that was in the process of successfully subverting the original teachings of Jesus.

    Moreover, we must realize that the writings of Clement of Alexandria, like the writings of most of the Church Fathers, has been in the hands of the Roman Catholic Church, which has from the beginning, as indicated by the Roman in its name, vested with the parochial interests of Rome which included meat-eating and the collection of taxes from the meat industry.   Only in its own mind is the Roman Catholic Church objective.  It always keeps its own interests as foremost, as is indicated by the fact that it kept the Dead Sea Scrolls, after buying them for Israel, for over forty years before publishing them, their scholars and bishops no doubt pondering whether some of them should be released.   And who knows, with the technological capabilities available to one of the richest institutions on the face of the earth, for the Roman Catholic Church is little more than Mammon attempting to wear a halo, the Roman Catholic Church could also have revised the Dead Sea Scrolls.  Nonetheless, however, there is indisputable evidence in virtually all the translations of the Scrolls that I have read that animal sacrifices were denounced, and that the Essene tradition was vegetarian as well as egalitarian.

    In other words, not only have the scriptures of the world been revised, but so too have the writings of the earliest commentators been revised by orthodox authorities.  That too is one of the problems in reading the Hadith, the teachings outside of the Koran, of Muhammad. However, even in that case, there are numerous Hadith, as we shall see, that contradict the sanctioning of animal sacrifices.
 

"Matthew the apostle used to make his meal on seeds and nuts and herbs, without flesh meat." Pp.107-108, The Fathers of the Church, Clement of Alexandria,  "Christ the Educator," translated by Simon P. Wood, C.P. New York, Fathers of the Church, Inc. 1954.
 

     In his "Commentary on Matthew" Origen says that Matthew the apostle and the evangelist are the same person.  "First was written the Gospel according to Matthew, formerly a publican and later an apostle of Jesus Christ, who published it for believers from Judaism, composed in Hebrew letters..." P. 52, New Testament Apocrypha by Edgar Hennecke, Westminster Press, Philadelphia, l963.
 

                    The On-going Deception by Orthodox Christian Scholars

    Later orthodox Christians contradict Origen because, knowing that Matthew was documented as vegetarian by Clement, and knowing that Matthew was one of the vegetarian Ebionites, it would be only too obvious that the vegetarianism of the hand-picked apostles and disciples of Jesus had been changed to affirmations of carnivorism in the New Testament.  In spite of the blunt declaration in "Epistle to the Hebrews" that Jesus' mission was to abolish the animal sacrifices, in spite of the cleansing of the temple, an event in which Jesus in a one day demonstration chases the animals to be sacrificed out of the temple, and in spite of the fact that Jesus over and over again quotes the late Jewish prophets who were vegetarians, those assembling and writing the scriptures to be put into the New Testament state that Jesus stated "all foods are clean."  Thus, the bishops under the auspices of Constantine put Jesus into the same lying mold as the revisers of the Torah put Moses before him and the revisers of the Quran put Muhammad after him.
 
 

   All three teachers were presented preposterously as supporting slavery, resentment-breeding societies of rich and poor, male chauvinism, bigotry against homosexuals, the disease-promoting diet of carnivorism, and the notion that humans were sanctioned by God to subdue the earth and have dominion over other creatures.