You’re Not Eating That!

5 the deer, the gazelle, the roe deer, the wild goat, the mountain goat, the antelope, and the mountain sheep.

These are animals which can be hunted for game and eaten as ‘clean’, but cannot be offered as offerings and sacrifices, for as wild beasts they already belong to Yahweh (Psalm 50.10).

6 And you may eat every animal with cloven hooves, having the hoof split into two parts, and that chews the cud, among the animals.

The principle on which they are chosen is declared. They have the hoof cloven in two and ‘chew the cud’. The principle was that they ate slowly and deliberately, and took good time over eating their food, all of which was of a kind suitable for that purpose.. The point is that they ate ‘proper food’. The makeup of their feet meant that they tended to remain and eat on clean land, land good for growing crops and herbage, and not to wander into ‘unclean’ areas. The way they ate made them careful in what they ate. (The goat can be an exception to this, but probably not as herded by the Israelites).

7 Nevertheless, of those that chew the cud or have cloven hooves, you shall not eat, such as these: the camel, the hare, and the rock hyrax; for they chew the cud but do not have cloven hooves; they are unclean for you.

Other animals which are seen as edible to other nations, were not to be seen as so to Israel. These animals may chew slowly and obviously, or they may have cloven feet, but they do not have both. Thus the camel’s feet enable it to wander in desert regions, where death is prevalent. Such regions were looked on with foreboding in Israel. The hare and the rock badger, while they chew slowly and deliberately, go into places which are ‘unclean’ because their feet enable them to scrabble and encourage them to do so. They are thus ‘unclean’.

8 Also the swine is unclean for you, because it has cloven hooves, yet does not chew the cud; you shall not eat their flesh or touch their dead carcasses.

The pig or swine is a further example. In this case it parts the hoof, but it does not chew slowly and deliberately. It nuzzles in the dirt and eats what is unsavory. That a sow that was washed returned to its wallowing in the mire became a proverb, because that was how through the ages it was seen (2 Peter 2.22). It was therefore not seen as suitable food for Yahweh’s people.

These distinctions would preserve Israel from many, although not all, diseases is unquestionable. But the overt point is not so much avoidance of disease as the fact of unsuitability, although the one merges into the other. Those that wandered in doubtful environments or nuzzled in the dust, both connected with death, must not be eaten. In all cases the behavior of unclean creatures was the opposite of what Yahweh was. And His people were to model their lives on what was wholesome.

9 “These you may eat of all that are in the waters: you may eat all that have fins and scales. 10 And whatever does not have fins and scales you shall not eat; it is unclean for you.

The distinction with sea and river creatures is again clear and specific. All fish with fins and scales, of which they were aware, swam in the rivers but did not delve into the mud. These were thus ‘clean’. Other creatures did delve in the mud, and were therefore unclean. Again this was not a scientific survey but a fact of observation. This excluded some that were certainly edible, but included shellfish which under certain circumstances could cause unpleasant diseases. But what was most important as seen in this context was their contamination by their contact with dirt and mud.