Leviticus 11

[Solomonthewise]

If we wernt supposed to eat meat fullstop it would have said so in the bible, but it says that there is un-clean and clean meat and we should not eat the unclean meat but only eat the clean meats.

When you think about it does it really seem all that logical? i mean god says dont eat that then turns around and says yeah sure go for it its all good now.

It just doesnt seem right to me personally, besides, better safe than sorry right!

 

[herev]

It just doesnt seem right to me personally, besides, better safe than sorry right!

lol, the basis of a lot of people's theology!!

 

[Solomonthewise]

lol, the basis of a lot of people's theology!!

Well, its been tried and tested for a few thousand years now so why not (lol).

But its true if someone doesnt feel comfortable with somthing they dont do it!

The same as, why question somthing from the bible when its in the rawest form ie a commandment, eg why question with the first commandment "thou shall not worship any other god then i the lord your god almighty, as i do not tolerate rivals"etc....

Do people of a religion really question that religion to make sure that theyre in "the right place", or do they not bother because its what theyre used to?

 

[kiwiekat]

Hmmm...I'm still confused. Firstly, does "clean" in this context mean ritually clean or sanitary? Secondly, what if something really isn't supposed to be eaten, such as bats? I noticed that Leviticus 11 describes some foods as unclean and some as detestable (and bats are detestable). Is there a difference? I think the solution to my problem is that the unclean ones are ritually unclean, while the detestable ones are unhealthy, but I want to know if this is right.

 

[Solomonthewise]

Both mean ritually unclean! Detestable meaning should not be eaten which mearly emphisises the facts!

 

[kiwiekat]

Both mean ritually unclean! Detestable meaning should not be eaten which mearly emphisises the facts!

That makes me more confused. Some of the animals (eg. bats) are dangerous to eat, so why should it be declared clean? Or are they dangerous to eat?

 

[kiwiekat]

Okay, I get it now because someone gave me an explanation by Bob Deffinbaugh, Th.M., entitled The Clean and Unclean. If anyone wants to see it let me know.

Leviticus 11 is not based on sanitation- I guess all the animals were safe to it at that time, since God does allow Noah and his family to eat all the foods, and it is up to them whether or not they want to eat less healthy foods (everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial). God made those dietary laws for an arbitrary reason.