Gerryhill

The thread on Noah's ark (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=144809) includes a discussion of how many "clean" or "unclean" animals embarked. A member pointed out that this is nonsense - the concept of uncleanliness came much later, from Levitican priests.

A recent UK tv documentary suggested that the pastoral Jews eschewed pork simply because they didn't herd swine and that avoiding it distinguished them from their lowland enemies.

But that doesn't explain all the complex division of all the other animals, nor the nonsense about clothes made from mixed fibres. Is there any - well, logical rather than rational - basis behind these rules?

Toto

I do not endorse this, but there is a Messianic Jew named Jordan S. Rubin who is currently peddling a book to the holistic health - low carb crowd called The Maker's Diet, which claims that the rules on clean and unclean meat and a Biblical diet reflect some valid health concerns. (I think this is a variation on the Paleolithic Diet.) You can browse it on Amazon or at your local health food store.

For a less flattering view of the commandments, try Joseph Lewis' The Ten Commandments a book hosted online at the postiveatheism site. Lewis argues that the 10C and the other laws represent a sort of primitive sympathetic magic.

Steven Avery

Yep.. However, there is actually a lot more than Rubin, and it really is not a low carb issue.
Also Gordon Tessler and others have been teaching similar for a while.

One of the most interesting studies is referenced by Monte Kline.

http://www.pacifichealthcenter.com/updates/29.asp
The Dietary Law
"in 1953 in the Bulletin of the History of Medicine, published by Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, in a study entitled "An Experimental Pharmacological Appreciation of Leviticus XI and Deuteronomy XIV" by David I. Macht, M.D. "

The above Macht study online:
http://members.dslextreme.com/users/.../Macht1953.pdf

The neat graphic summary by Monte Kline that he published in
the earlier "Christian Health Counselor" is not so easy to find.
It woud be good to ask him to put that on the net.

A lot of information on the Macht study (and more) - kendemyer
http://www.christian-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=579

Also by kendemeyer - from the google cacher
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache...tures%22&hl=en
or register for ..
of http://www.arn.org/ubb/ultimatebb.ph.../t/002424.html

Wikidpedia discussion and references.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fl...other_cultures

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

Sheshbazzar

This assertion I addressed in that thread;
Both logic and the internal evidence of the Torah indicate that these concepts and laws did not originate with Moses, (whom is also doubted by some to even be a historical character, or even have existed at all outside of some writers imagination)
It has not been conclusively proved that the laws, concepts, and designations of "clean" and "unclean" even originated with the Hebrews, much less with Moses or the latter Levitical priesthood.

If the subject is approached with the preconceptioned prejudicial position of it being "nonsense", then that bias would interfere with the ability to grasp the underlying concept;
"And to put a difference between the holy and between the profane, and between the unclean and between the clean". (Lev.10:10)
No man can be faithful to any faith, nor to any persuasion, nor to any friend, or loved one, except by a willing submission to the making of 'distinctions' in putting a "difference between" this category and that category.
These are matters of discernment that men of faith must abide by, to discern who is a "brother", a "sister", and a "friend", or a "foe" and an "enemy",
And in many other matters to make life choices, to engage in this activity, or to shun that activity, to go here, or to go there, to support this cause, and to resist that cause.
Does it seem strange that every man that addresses you as, "My friend" is not always actually a "friend", and in fact may indeed intend to do you harm?
Or that some who would address you as "brother", would also without qualm, stab you in the back?
I have "friends" and 'neighbors", but am not so naive as to think that all of my "neighbors" are my "friends".
In other threads I have written about woven fabric, about time, about measurement, and judgment. In all manner of things, men are required to make choices, but lacking in discernment, not all men make "good" choices.
I am not the first to warn that men ought to be careful of what they willingly or ignorantly swallow.

Sheshbazzar

Pleased to welcome your participation here !

premjan

Pigs are dirty compared to your average animal. They will eat anything and they roll around in their own filth. I believe shellfish also tend to thrive in sewage conditions. So it could be a simple aesthetic issue plus some danger of infection, food poisoning, contamination and so on.

Steven Avery

You can note things simply by carefull reading in the news.

Cholera outbreaks are connected to shellfish time and again.

There is also a whole history of African swine fever, and epidemics in Cuba (possibly linked to the CIA). Much of the early research was by Dr. John Beldekas and Dr. Jane Teas' .

Here are two many links, articles by Sepp Hasslberger
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp...implicated.htm
AIDS, Chronic Fatigue: Modified African Swine Fever Virus Implicated?

http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp...e_diseases.htm
AIDS 'Made In America' - Journal of Degenerative Diseases

Of course, as with the trichinosis threat, one can heat all these foods to a high degree. That way you would, with infected trich-meat, perhaps only be eating dead worms instead of live ones. To what extent this would help with non-worm contaminants is an open question.

Now this may take us a bit astray from the basic thread. Let's just leave it for consideration that certain animals are designed to be scavengers, not food, and we would be smart to heed the distinction.

And this was written about in an Instruction Manuel some thousands of years ago.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

premjan

Even the Buddha laid down lists of animals that could be eaten and not, professions that were better to avoid etc. So nothing in those proscriptions that most peoples did not do in one form or another.

sub_zer0

What internal evidence of the Torah indicate tthat the concepts and laws did not originate with Moses?

That is not in reference to animals. And right after that it is speaking about Moses.

For sure. As it states abstain "...from all appearance of evil..." - I Thess 5:22

Our source of discernment is Jesus.

Steven Avery

Can you share those lists? Since there is indication that he died of eating tainted boar, perhaps he should have used the Bible list, to live longer and healthier.