David Henson

The Bible critic will sometimes make the uninformed claim that the Bible isn't scientific because it says that insects have four legs.

Leviticus 11:20-23 - Every winged swarming creature that goes on all fours is a loathsome thing to you.

Only this is what you may eat of all the winged swarming creatures that go upon all fours, those that have leaper legs above their feet with which to leap upon the earth. These are the ones of them you may eat of: the migratory locust according to its kind, and the edible locust after its kind, and the cricket according to its kind, and the grasshopper according to its kind. And every other winged swarming creature that does have four legs is a loathsome thing to you.

In 11:22 a the Hebrew word arbeh is translated "locust" and is the migratory locust, fully developed and winged. The Hebrew word yeleq refers to the creeping, wingless locust, the immature undeveloped locust. (Joel 1:4) and the Hebrew term solam refers to the edible locust as in 11:22 b. That is a leper locust rather than a flier. The Greek akris is rendered "insect locust" and "locust." (Matthew 3:4 / Revelation 9:7)

The leaper insect has two pairs of wings, four walking legs and two much longer leaper legs.

The question put forth by the Bible critic is, does the Bible say that insects have four legs when it says that they are 'going on all fours?' The answer of course is no. The writers of the Bible - in this case, Moses - were not scientist of entomology and botany, but we are talking about Moses' dietary restrictions. They ate the insects. They would have noticed how many legs they had and would have been capable of making the distinction between a leaper insect that actually had six legs but walked on four, or in fact would not have been far removed from using the expression even when considering six legged insects who walk as if on all fours like a four legged creature. We would use the term walking on all four legs in application to a two legged human doing the same.

To me it is an example of how far the Bible critic has to stretch the obvious truth in order to substantiate or promote propaganda rather than learning the application of rational thinking. In the name of science?

lpetrich

Actually, grasshoppers often walk on all six of their legs, as can be seen in this YouTube video:

Walking GRASSHOPPER
Mr. Greenie
walking grass hopper

anthrosciguy

Beautiful theory, meet ugly fact.

David Henson

Now, are those solam, yeleq or arbeh?

David Henson

Pssssttt! Maybe you should try reading more carefully.

lpetrich

I shouldn't have to try to figure such things out. If the Bible was written so obscurely that one can't figure out what many of its words mean, then it is a poor candidate for a universal message.

premjan

If only you guys were backstage when all these restrictions were made up, you might have a lot less respect for them. Probably these were done to maintain the power of the priesthood in addition to whatever social function they had.

lpetrich

Some of the food restrictions are rather baffling, like forbidding the eating of all those birds. They are difficult to catch, and they don't have much meat on their bones, so why forbid it? Some sort of posturing?

And some of them likely come from an ick factor, like don't eat creepy-crawlies. Though it's interesting that they made an exception for orthopterans (grasshoppers, locusts, crickets, katydids)

Forbidding shellfish was likely a way of distinguishing the Israelites from people who lived near the coasts, who could easily catch such food.

Forbidding pork may have been done for similar reasons, though I like the ecological-nuisance hypothesis. Pigs are not well-adapted to semidesert conditions, and they will wallow in whatever water they can find to keep cool. Furthermore, pigs are not very directly useful while they are alive, so refusing to eat pork makes it pointless to keep them around.

The Israelites emerged as an ethnicity in the hill country north and south of Jerusalem; pig bones dropped in abundance there around 1000 BCE. Since pigs had not been troublesome before, this may indicate that some pig-averse nomads had settled there, with the rest of the population joining them to distinguish themselves from their neighbors.

In fact, many of the daffy customs of Orthodox Jews may have just such a purpose -- to distinguish and socially separate them from the people around them.

premjan

My guess is they were done just to make the priests who made up the rules look important, mysterious and insightful.

trendkill

There's a difference between "walking on four legs" and "going on all fours". The second would seem to imply that four limbs is "all" that the animal has. So that accuracy of that part of the translation might be important as well.