The Distinction between Clean and Unclean Animals

It frequently happens that some  people hear Seventh-day Adventist ser­mons or Bible studies in which the state­ments are made that the laws the Lord gave to Israel by Moses were a code sepa­rate and distinct from that of the Deca­logue, and that they were abolished as a result of Christ's death and the dissolution of the theocracy of Israel. Afterward those same people are pointed to Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 and told that the Mosaic law found there concerning the use of the flesh of clean and unclean ani­mals as food is still binding upon men, and that Christians are under obligation to obey it.

"How can that be," we are sometimes asked, "if the laws that Moses gave to Is­rael were abolished at the death of Christ and the cessation of the theocracy of Is­rael?"

Another question asked is this: "Why should a sheep or cow grazing in a pasture be regarded as clean and suitable for food, and a horse or a donkey feeding with them in the same place be considered unclean and unfit for food? Does that make sense?"

The body of laws that God gave to Is­rael by Moses includes the one concerning the use of clean and unclean animals as food. The Lord said: "Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that shall ye eat. Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but di­videth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is un­clean unto you. And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you" (Lev. 11:3-8; see also Deut. 14:6-8). Thus some animals are spe­cifically mentioned as being "unclean."

Some animals are specifically mentioned as being "clean," as follows: "These are the beasts which ye shall eat: the ox, the sheep, and the goat, the hart, and the roe­buck, and the fallow deer, and the wild goat, and the pygarg [marg., bison], and the wild ox, and the chamois" (Deut. 14: 4, 5).

Concerning the creatures that live in water, the instruction was: "These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatso­ever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: they shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination" (Lev. 11: 9-11; see also Deut. 14:9, 10).

Some fowls are specifically designated as being "unclean," as follows: the eagle, os­sifrage, osprey, vulture, kite, raven, owl, nighthawk, cuckoo, hawk, cormorant, swan, pelican, gier eagle, stork, heron, lap­wing, and bat (Lev. 11:13-19). (In a few instances there is some uncertainty con­cerning the correctness of the English rend­ering of the Hebrew name of the crea­tures mentioned in the Bible.) "All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you" (verse 20; see also Deut. 14:11-18). Though certain lo­custs, beetles, and grasshoppers are said to be suitable for food, "all other flying creep­ing things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you" (Lev. 11:23). Such creeping creatures as the weasel, mouse, tortoise [great lizard, R.S.V.], fer­ret, chameleon, lizard, snail, and mole are declared unclean (verses 29, 30).

We do not presume to think that Leviti­cus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 list by name all animals belonging to the "unclean" and "clean" categories. Those specifically named serve as common examples of how the rule was to be applied.

Chiefly Vegetarian

As we consider the "clean" animals mentioned in the Mosaic law and elsewhere in the Holy Scriptures as suitable for food and for sacrificial purposes, we note that they are chiefly vegetarians. No beasts of prey or scavenger animals figure among them.

But when we consider the creatures spe­cifically designated as "unclean," we note that they fall mainly into three groups: (1) beasts of prey, (2) scavenger animals, and (3) vegetarians, such as the camel, hare, coney, et cetera. Swine usually are omnivorous—devouring almost everything edible. The terms "swine," "hog," and "pig" have been widely used as figures of speech throughout the centuries in nearly all lands and languages to mean that which is filthy, selfish, greedy, or loathe-some, because the animal's habits charac­terize it as such.

Few human beings would relish eating vultures, hyenas, and the other creatures that subsist chiefly upon carrion.

A report published some years ago stated that a German submarine was sunk off the coast of England during World War II. The Allied nations were feeling keenly the terrible effects of Hitler's sub­marine warfare along the shipping lanes of the Atlantic between Europe and Amer­ica. Allied leaders believed that they could get from the sunken vessel the in­formation they needed to decipher the code used by the German admiralty in communicating with its ships. The vessel lay too far down in the sea for men using conventional diving equipment to reach it. After much study and preparation for the task, an expert diver reached the ship. He told afterward that when he entered the hull, he saw swarms of lobsters feed­ing on the rotting bodies of the drowned crew. As I read the story I was reminded that lobsters are a special delicacy served in many eating places of the world.

Third-, Fourth-, and Fifth-Hand Food

Vegetation is the primary food source of nearly all animal life on our planet (Gen. 1:29, 30). When I lived in a certain tropical country some years ago, some of my neighbors did not hesitate to steal the cats of other neighbors and cook them for food. Behind our house was a shallow pool of water fringed with lush vegetation. This attracted numerous insects, which at­tracted many frogs and lizards, which at­tracted several snakes. Hearing a noise on our back porch- early one morning, I opened the door and found our cat scuf­fling with a small snake she had caught and dragged there to kill and eat. As I watched I tried to imagine a certain neighbor of mine eating that cat which ate the snake which ate the frog which ate the insect which ate the plants which grew by the pool.

Cows, goats, sheep, deer, and other "clean" animals specified as cloven-footed and chewing the cud are vegetarians. Who­ever eats them eats secondhand food, for he eats beasts that eat plants or portions of them. But whoever eats tigers, snakes, lions, dogs, et cetera, gets such food third hand, fourth hand, or even fifth hand.

Lobster a Scavenger

Science Digest, a popular magazine sold on American newsstands, carried in its issue of October, 1955, an article entitled "The Delectable Lobster," by A. Hyatt Verrill. It described the lobsters of Maine and Florida, their habits, and their differ­ences. The writer pointed out that whereas the northern lobster has claws, the south­ern (which is a crayfish) does not. He re­marks:

"Since northern lobsters rely so much upon their claws for fighting and for cap­turing and cutting up their food, you may wonder how the clawless crayfish survive.

"Unlike northern lobsters, who devour dead fish, live fish, shells, other crustaceans and almost anything else, the crayfish de­vour only small creatures that do not have to be torn to bits in order to be swallowed, as well as carrion that is so thoroughly de­composed that it almost falls to pieces."—Page 8.

The writer says also: "It is odd that lobsters should be considered edible at all when we consider their habits. Few peo­ple will eat crows, and no one would dream of dining on a vulture; yet neither of these birds can compare with the lob­ster when it comes to the matter of feed­ing on carrion. Lobsters may at times prey upon other living creatures, but they are primarily scavengers and prefer carrion to fresh meat."—Ibid., p. 6.

In his article "The Lobster: Oddball of the Ocean," David MacDonald (Reader's Digest, December, 1966, page 204) speaks of the lobster as "this scavenger."

When the Lord gave to Israel the law concerning the use of "clean" and "un­clean" animals as food, He expected the people to obey it. We doubt that He gave it arbitrarily to show Israel that He was their boss and that He required of them blind or unreasonable obedience.

The adversary, in the guise of a serpent, argued that such was the motive that prompted the Creator to forbid man to eat of the fruit of the forbidden tree in Eden (Gen. 3). We dare not cooperate with the enemy in maligning and impugn­ing the character of our Maker, the God of Israel. He has said expressly that "no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly" (Ps. 84:11).

A wise and good father does not deny his child that which is good merely to dis­play parental authority or to deal arbi­trarily with his offspring. He refuses to give to his child that which is harmful, because he loves him and has his welfare at heart. Our all-wise and loving heavenly Father, who is the Creator of both man and animals, knows better than we what is best and what is not good for His earthly children.

Ritualistic Purification

It is true that connected with the ban against the use of the flesh of "unclean" animals as food, Israel was given also a law concerning ritualistic purification (Lev. 11:24-45), which served as a means of teaching the people the wisdom and the need of abstaining from that which is sin­ful, harmful, and defiling. The purifica­tion ceremony itself possessed no magical power to sanctify and perfect a man, but it did teach that faith in God and coopera­tion with Him by man were essential in order for the Lord to effect His redemp­tion from sin and its effects.

Sanctification Includes Whole Man

Let us beware of any doctrine of sancti­fication which denies that the God of the Bible seeks the physical well-being of His people. True sanctification, in God's plan for our redemption from sin, embraces the whole man. "The very God of peace sanc­tify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be pre­served blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thess. 5:23). Also: "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bod­ies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service" (Rom. 12:1).

The Lord's purpose in giving the law concerning the use of "clean" and "un­clean" animals for food was that when man should find it necessary to supple­ment his vegetarian diet with flesh food, he should use that which is least objection­able.

Why those animals that are beasts of prey and those that are scavengers, are not the most desirable for food is obvious. But why were the horse, ass, camel, elephant, which are vegetarians, banned as a source of food? The Bible gives us no direct, spe­cific answer to this question. But it does assure us this concerning God, that "no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly." Because He with­holds from us the eating of the flesh of certain animals as food, we know that it would not be for our good to eat it. The flesh of horses, donkeys, camels, elephants, et cetera, though these animals are vege­tarian, contains something that makes it unsuitable for human consumption. Could it be that some glandular secretions, some chemical substances, or other things in their bodies make their flesh unfit as nour­ishment for the human organism? Why is it that the flesh of such animals generally is not relished so much or eaten so freely by civilized peoples as that of cows, goats, sheep, et cetera, when both are available? Perhaps scientific investigation will throw light on this subject someday.

Called to Holiness Not Uncleanness

Though we may not know all the whys and wherefores of what the Lord asks of us, we can trust His love and infinite wis­dom, knowing that His way of life is best for us.

The Mosaic law as found in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 has not been bind­ing upon God's people since the dissolu­tion of the theocracy of Israel. However, the sanitary principles upon which that law was based, and the primeval law that was its precedent and is embodied in it, are still binding upon all mankind. "God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness" (1 Thess. 4:7).