| Back to Home Page | Back to Book Index
|
Leviticus
Chapter Eleven
Leviticus 11
Chapter Contents
What animals were clean and unclean.
These laws seem to have been intended
1. As a test of the
people's obedience
as Adam was forbidden to eat of the tree of knowledge; and
to teach them self-denial
and the government of their appetites. 2. To keep
the Israelites distinct from other nations. Many also of these forbidden
animals were objects of superstition and idolatry to the heathen. 3. The people
were taught to make distinctions between the holy and unholy in their
companions and intimate connexions. 4. The law forbad
not only the eating of
the unclean beasts
but the touching of them. Those who would be kept from any
sin
must be careful to avoid all temptations to it
or coming near it. The
exceptions are very minute
and all were designed to call forth constant care
and exactness in their obedience; and to teach us to obey. Whilst we enjoy our
Christian liberty
and are free from such burdensome observances
we must be
careful not to abuse our liberty. For the Lord hath redeemed and called his
people
that they may be holy
even as he is holy. We must come out
and be
separate from the world; we must leave the company of the ungodly
and all
needless connexions with those who are dead in sin; we must be zealous of good
works devoted followers of God
and companions of his people.
── Matthew Henry《Concise Commentary on Leviticus》
Leviticus 11
Verse 1
[1] And
the LORD spake unto Moses and to Aaron
saying unto them
From the laws concerning the priests
he now
comes to those which belong to all the people. God spake to both of them
because the cognizance of the following matters belonged to both: the priest
was to direct the people about the things forbidden or allowed
where any doubt
or difficulty arose; and the magistrate was to see the direction followed.
Verse 2
[2] Speak unto the children of Israel
saying
These are the beasts which ye
shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth.
These are the beasts — Though every creature of God be good and pure in itself
yet it pleased
God to make a difference between clean and unclean
which he did in part before
the flood
Genesis 7:2
but more fully here for many
reasons; as
1. To assert his own sovereignty over man
and all the creatures
which men may not use but with God's leave. 2. To keep up the wall of partition
between the Jews and other nations
which was very necessary for many great and
wise purposes. 3. That by bridling their appetite in things in themselves
lawful
and some of them very desirable
they might be better prepared and
enabled to deny themselves in things simply and grossly sinful. 4. For the
preservation of their health
some of the creatures forbidden being
though
used by the neighbouring nations
of unwholesome nourishment
especially to the
Jews
who were very obnoxious to leprosies. To teach them to abhor that
filthiness
and all those ill qualities for which some of these creatures are
noted.
Verse 3
[3]
Whatsoever parteth the hoof
and is clovenfooted
and cheweth the cud
among the
beasts
that shall ye eat.
Cloven-footed —
That is
divided into two parts only: This clause is added to explain and limit
the former
as appears from Leviticus 11:26
for the feet of dogs
cats etc.
are parted or cloven into many parts.
And cheweth the cud —
Heb. and bringeth up the cud
that is
the meat once chewed
out of the stomach
in the mouth again
that it may be chewed a second time for better concoction.
And this branch is to be joined with the former
both properties being
necessary for the allowed beasts. But the reason hereof must be resolved into
the will of the law-giver; though interpreters guess that God would hereby
signify their duties
by the first
that of discerning between good and evil;
and by the latter
that duty of recalling God's word to our minds and
meditating upon it.
Verse 4
[4]
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.
The camel — An
usual food in Arabia
but yielding bad nourishment.
Divideth not the hoof — So as to have his foot cloven in two
which being expressed
Leviticus 11:3
is here to be understood.
Otherwise the camel's hoof is divided
but it is but a small and imperfect
division.
Verse 5
[5] And the coney
because he cheweth the cud
but divideth not the hoof; he
is unclean unto you.
As for the names of the following creatures
seeing the Jews themselves are uncertain and divided about them
it seems
improper to trouble the unlearned readers with disputes about them.
Verse 8
[8] Of
their flesh shall ye not eat
and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are
unclean to you.
Ye shall not touch —
Not in order to eating
as may be gathered by comparing this with Genesis 3:3. But since the fat and skins of some
of the forbidden creatures were useful
for medicinal and other good purposes
and were used by good men
it is not probable that God would have them cast
away. Thus God forbad the making of images
Exodus 20:4
not universally
but in order to
the worshipping them
as Christian interpreters agree.
Verse 9
[9]
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.
Fins and scales —
Both of them; such fishes being more cleanly
and more wholesome food than
others. The names of them are not particularly mentioned
partly because most
of them wanted names
the fish not being brought to Adam and named by him as
other creatures were; and partly because the land of Canaan had not many
rivers
nor great store of fish.
Verse 11
[11] They
shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh
but ye
shall have their carcases in abomination.
Unto you —
This clause is added to shew that they were neither abominable in their own
nature
nor for the food of other nations; and consequently when the
partition-wall between Jews and Gentiles was taken away
these distinctions of
meat were to cease.
Verse 13
[13] And
these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall
not be eaten
they are an abomination: the eagle
and the ossifrage
and the
ospray
Among the fowls —
The true signification of the following Hebrew words is now lost
as the Jews
at this day confess; which not falling out without God's singular providence
may intimate the cessation of this law
the exact observation whereof since
Christ came is become impossible. In general
this may be observed
that the
fowls forbidden in diet
are all either ravenous and cruel
or such as delight
in the night and darkness
or such as feed upon impure things; and so the
signification of these prohibitions is manifest
to teach men to abominate all
cruelty or oppression
and all works of darkness and filthiness.
The ossifrage and the osprey — Two peculiar kinds of eagles
distinct from that which being the chief
of its kind
is called by the name of the whole kind.
Verse 15
[15]
Every raven after his kind;
After his kind —
According to the several kinds
known by this general name
which includes
besides ravens properly so called
crows
rooks
pyes
and others.
Verse 20
[20] All
fowls that creep
going upon all four
shall be an abomination unto you.
All fowls —
Flying things that crawl or creep upon the earth
and so degenerate from their
proper nature
and are of a mongrel kind
which may intimate that apostates and
mongrels in religion are abominable in the sight of God.
Upon all four —
Upon four legs
or upon more than four
which is all one to the present
purpose.
Verse 22
[22] Even
these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind
and the bald locust after
his kind
and the beetle after his kind
and the grasshopper after his kind.
The locust —
Locusts
though unusual in our food
were commonly eaten by the Ethiopians
Lybians
Parthians
and other eastern people bordering upon the Jews. And as it
is certain the eastern locusts were much larger than ours
so it is probable
they were of different qualities
and yielding better nourishment.
Verse 23
[23] But
all other flying creeping things
which have four feet
shall be an abomination
unto you.
All other —
That is
which have not those legs above and besides their feet mentioned
Leviticus 11:21.
Verse 24
[24] And
for these ye shall be unclean: whosoever toucheth the carcase of them shall be
unclean until the even.
Unclean —
And such were excluded both from the court of God's house
and from free
conversation with other men.
Verse 25
[25] And
whosoever beareth ought of the carcase of them shall wash his clothes
and be
unclean until the even.
Beareth —
Or
taketh away
out of the place where it may lie
by which others may be
either offended
or polluted.
Verse 27
[27] And
whatsoever goeth upon his paws
among all manner of beasts that go on all four
those are unclean unto you: whoso toucheth their carcase shall be unclean until
the even.
Upon his paws —
Heb. upon his hands
that is
which hath feet divided into several parts like
fingers
as dogs
cats
apes
and bears.
Verse 34
[34] Of
all meat which may be eaten
that on which such water cometh shall be unclean:
and all drink that may be drunk in every such vessel shall be unclean.
That on which such water cometh — That flesh or herbs or other food which is dressed in water
in a vessel
so polluted
shall be unclean; not so
if it be food which is eaten dry
as
bread
or fruits; the reason of which difference seems to be this
that the
water did sooner receive the pollution in itself
and convey it to the food so
dressed.
Verse 36
[36]
Nevertheless a fountain or pit
wherein there is plenty of water
shall be
clean: but that which toucheth their carcase shall be unclean.
Of this no reason can be given
but the will
of the law-giver and his merciful condescension to men's necessities
water
being scarce in those countries; and for the same reason God would have the
ceremonial law of sacrifices
give place to the law of mercy.
Verse 37
[37] And
if any part of their carcase fall upon any sowing seed which is to be sown
it
shall be clean.
Seed —
Partly because this was necessary provision for man; and partly because such
seed would not be used for man's food till it had received many alterations in
the earth whereby such pollution was taken away.
Verse 38
[38] But
if any water be put upon the seed
and any part of their carcase fall thereon
it shall be unclean unto you.
If any water —
The reason of the difference is
because wet seed doth sooner receive
and longer
retain any pollution and partly because such seed was not fit to be sown
presently
and therefore that necessity which justified the use of the dry
seed
could not be pretended in this case.
Verse 39
[39] And
if any beast
of which ye may eat
die; he that toucheth the carcase thereof
shall be unclean until the even.
If any beast die —
Either of itself
or being killed by some wild beast
in which cases the blood
was not poured forth
as it was when they were killed by men either for food or
sacrifice.
Verse 40
[40] And
he that eateth of the carcase of it shall wash his clothes
and be unclean
until the even: he also that beareth the carcase of it shall wash his clothes
and be unclean until the even.
He that eateth —
Unwittingly
for if he did it knowingly
it was a presumptuous sin against an
express law
Deuteronomy 14:21
and therefore punished with
cutting off.
Verse 41
[41] And
every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth shall be an abomination; it
shall not be eaten.
Every creeping thing — Except those expressly excepted
Leviticus 11:29
30.
Verse 42
[42]
Whatsoever goeth upon the belly
and whatsoever goeth upon all four
or
whatsoever hath more feet among all creeping things that creep upon the earth
them ye shall not eat; for they are an abomination.
Upon the belly — As
worms and snakes
Upon all four - As toads and divers serpents.
Verse 44
[44] For
I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves
and ye shall be
holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of
creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Ye shall be holy — By
this he gives them to understand
that all these cautions about eating or
touching these creatures was not for any real uncleanness in them
but only
that by diligent observation of these rules they might learn with greater care
to avoid all moral pollutions
and to keep themselves from all filthiness of
flesh and spirit
and from all familiar and intimate converse with notorious
sinners.
Verse 45
[45] For
I am the LORD that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt
to be your God: ye
shall therefore be holy
for I am holy.
That bringeth you up out of Egypt — This was a reason why they should chearfully submit to distinguishing
laws
who had been so honoured with distinguishing favours.
Verse 46
[46] This
is the law of the beasts
and of the fowl
and of every living creature that
moveth in the waters
and of every creature that creepeth upon the earth:
This is the law — It
was so
as long the Mosaic dispensation lasted. But under the gospel we find it
expressly repealed by a voice from heaven
Acts 10:15. Let us therefore bless God
that to
us every creature of God is good
and nothing to be refused.
── John Wesley《Explanatory Notes on
Leviticus》
11 Chapter 11
Verses 2-47
These are the beasts which ye shall eat.
The clean and the unclean
The Mosaic Law attached great importance to meats and drinks: the
Christian religion attaches none. The Apostle Peter was shown
by the vision of
a sheet let down from heaven
not only that all nations were now to receive the
gospel message
but that all kinds of food were now clean
and that all the
prohibitions which had formerly been laid upon them for legal purposes were now
once for all withdrawn. A Christian may
if he pleases
put himself under
restrictions as to these matters. You will remember that the Apostle Paul says
“I know and am persuaded of the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself;
but to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean
to him it is unclean.” The
doctrine of the New Testament is expressly laid down
“Every creature of God is
good and nothing to be refused
if it be received with thanksgiving.” And as
for the practice enjoined upon believers
“All things are lawful
but all
things are not expedient.” The Levitical law enjoined many precepts as to meats
and drinks; but those carnal ordinances were imposed until the time of
reformation.
I. It is our firm
belief that these distinctions of meats were laid down on purpose to keep the
Jews as a distinct people
and that herein they might be a type of the people
of God
who are also
throughout all ages
to be a separate people--not of the
world
even as Christ was not of the world.
1. But you will ask of me in what respects are you to be
distinguished? in a pure consistency always
in a vain eccentricity never. Not
by any peculiarity in garments or language are you to be known. Heavenly
realities within do not always need to be labelled outside
so that everybody
may recognise you and say
“There goes a saint.” There are other modes of being
distinguished from the world than any of these.
2. We ought ever to be distinguished from the world in the great
object of our life. As for worldly men
some of them are seeking wealth
others
of them fame; some seek after comfort
others after pleasure. Subordinately you
may seek after any of these
but your principal motive as a Christian should
always be to live for Christ.
3. By your spirit
as well as your aim
you should likewise be
distinguished. The spirit of
this world is often selfish; it is always a
spirit that forgets God
that ignores the existence of a Creator in His own
world. Now
your spirit should be one of unselfish devotion
a spirit always
conscious of His presence
bowed down with the weight
or raised up with the
cheer of Hagar’s exclamation
“Thou God seest me”: a spirit which watcheth
humbly before God
and seeketh to know His will and to do it through the grace
of God given to you.
4. Your maxims
too
and the rules which regulate you
should be very
different from those of others. The believer reads things
not in man’s light
in the obscurity of which so many blind bats are willing to fly
but he reads
things in the sunlight of heaven. If a thing be right
though he lose by it
it
is done; if it be wrong
though he should become as rich as Croesus by allowing
it
he scorns the sin for his Master’s sake.
5. The Christian should be separate in his actions. I would not give
much for your religion unless it can be seen. I know some people’s religion is
heard of
but give me the man whose religion is seen.
6. A Christian is distinguished by his conversation. He will often
trim a sentence where others would have made it far more luxuriant by a jest
which was not altogether clean. Following Herbert’s advice
“He pares his
apple--he would cleanly feed.” If he would have a jest
he picks the mitre
but
leaves the sin; his conversation is not used to levity
but it ministereth grace
unto the hearers. How shall I urge you to give more earnest heed to this holy
separation? If we do not see to this matter we shall bring sorrow on our own
souls; we shall lose all hope of honouring Christ
and we shall sooner or later
bring a great disaster on the world.
II. The distinction
drawn between clean and unclean animals was
we think
intended by God to keep
his people always conscious that they were in the neighbourhood of sin. It is
all the prayer that is wanted--“Lord
show me myself; Lord
show me Thyself;
reveal sin and reveal a Saviour.”
III. It was also
intended to be a rule of discrmination by which we may judge who are clean and who are
unclean-that is
who are saints and who are not. There are two tests
but they
must both be united. The beast that was clean was to chew the cud: here is the
inner life; every true-hearted man must know how to read
mark
learn
and
inwardly digest the sacred Word. The man who does not feed upon gospel truth
and so feed upon it
too
that he knows the sweetness and relish of it
and
seeks out its marrow and fatness
that man is no heir of heaven. You must know
a Christian by his inwards
by that which supports his life and sustains his
frame. But then the clean creatures were also known by their walk. The Jew at
once discovered the unclean animal by its having an undivided hoof; but if the
hoof was thoroughly divided
then it was clean
provided that it also chewed
the end. So there must be in the true Christian a peculiar walk such as God
requires. You cannot tell a man by either of these tests alone; you must have
them both. But while you use them upon others
apply them to yourselves. What
do you feed on? What is your habit of life? Do you chew the cud by meditation?
When your soul feeds on the flesh and blood of Christ have you learned that His
flesh is meat indeed
and that His blood is drink indeed? If so
it is well.
What about your life? Are your conversation and your daily walk according to
the description which is given in the Word of believers in Christ? If not
the
first test will not stand alone. You may profess the faith within
but if you
do not walk aright without
you belong to the unclean. On the other hand
you
may walk aright without
but unless there is the chewing of the cud within
unless
there is a real feeding upon precious truth in the heart
all the right walking
in the world will not prove you to be a Christian. That holiness which is only
outward is moral
not spiritual; it does not save the soul. That religion
on
the other hand
which is only inward is but fancy; it cannot save the soul
either. But the two together--the inward parts made capable of knowing the
lusciousness
the sweetness
the fatness of Christ’s truth
and the outward
parts conformed to Christ’s image and character--these conjoined point out the
true and clean Christian with whom it is blessed to associate here
and for
whom a better portion is prepared hereafter. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The clean and unclean
Great surprise and wonder have been expressed by some learned men
at the profound acquaintance with the animal kingdom exhibited in this chapter.
Our greatest men of modern science have penetrated no deeper into natural
history than the author of these laws. Leibnitz
and Buffon
and Cuvier
and
Erxleben
and Humboldt
have been unable to make any material advances upon the
classifications and distinctions
in the nature
habits
and qualities of
animals
here given long before mere human science in these departments was
born. And those may well wonder who allow no higher wisdom in these laws than
that of mere man. The fact is
that these Mosaic institutes all have upon them
such distinct traces of the hand and mind of God
that it becomes the height of
folly to refer them to the mere ingenuity of man.
I. I find in this
chapter A system of wholesome dietetics. All the animals here pronounced clean
are the most valuable
nutritious
and whole some of creatures for human food.
It does not follow that none among those forbidden are good for food; but I
wish to say that it is certain all the animals here called “clean” are the best.
II. A. second
and
somewhat more direct aim of these arrangements
looked to the keeping of the
hebrews entirely distinct from all other people. They were to be the light and
truth-bearing nation among the families of man. They were elected to perpetuate
a knowledge of the true God
and
by their peculiar training
to prepare the
way for Christ and Christianity. To fulfil this mission they needed to be
strongly fenced in and barricaded against the subtle inroads of idolatry. And
it was
in part
to effect this segregation of the Jewish people that this
system of religious dietetics was instituted
Nothing more effectual could be
desired to keep one people distinct from another. It causes the difference
between them to be ever present to the mind
touching
as it does
at so many
points of social and every-day contact; and it is therefore far more powerful
in its results
as a rule of distinction
than any difference in doctrine
worship
or morals
which men could entertain. Kitto says that when in Asia he
had almost daily occasion to be convinced of the incalculable efficacy of such
distinctions in keeping men apart from strangers. A Mahomedan
for instance
might be kind
liberal
indulgent; bat the recurrence of a meal
or any eating
threw him back upon his own distinctive practices and habits
reminding him
that you were an unclean person
and that his own purity was endangered by
contact with you.
III. A still further
and more direct intent of these religious dietetics was to train the
understanding to the perception of moral distinctions--to engrave upon the mind
an idea of holiness. Indeed
this was one of the leading objects of the entire
ceremonial law. There are islands in the sea which would not exist but for the
coral reefs upon which they rest; and so there would be no Christianity without
these ceremonial regulations
which
by small beginnings
laid in the human
mind the foundations upon which all our Christian convictions have been wrought
out. Geologists tell us that the physical world is composed of various layers
one on the other
from a deep granite base up to the fertile mould which
furnishes us food while we live and graves when we are dead. It is much the
same in the moral and religious world. It has been brought forth by degrees. As
there have been many geologic eras
so there have been various religious
dispensations
each one furnishing the basis for the next succeeding. Each of
these successive dispensations furnished a distinct stratum upon which the
following one was built. The last could not exist without the first. Each one
is a part of the grand whole. Connecting this chapter with the laws concerning
offerings and priests
we can easily see how the whole would operate in begetting
and establishing the idea of purity and holiness. Dividing off all animated
nature into clean and unclean
some would be regarded as better and purer than
others. Of this pure kind only could be taken for sacrifices. And even of the
better kind only the purest and most spotless individuals were to be selected.
The sacrificial victim would hence appear very widely separated from the common
herd of living creatures
and very clean and good. A thoroughly cleansed and
consecrated officer was then to take it in charge
and wash both it and himself
before it could come upon the altar. And when the presentation was to be made
to the Lord in the most Holy Place
only the pure blood
in a golden and
consecrated bowl
could be brought
and even that with great fear and
trembling. Thus
from the clean beast
and the cleaner priest
and the still
further cleansing of both
and the most Holy Place
which could be approached
only by so holy a personage with such sacred circumspection
the worshipper was
taught the idea of holiness
the intense purity of his God
and the necessity
of holiness in order to come into His favour. The fact is
that the religious
world has derived its idea of moral purity from the Mosaic rights. It was part
of their great office to teach mankind moral distinctions
and to open the
human understanding and conscience to the idea of sanctity.
IV. Connected with
this
then
was the still further intent of these laws to give a picture of
sin. We here have the finger of God
pointing out on the great map of living
creation the natural and material symbols of depravity. The combined
characteristics of the creatures here declared unclean furnish an exact
exhibition of what sin is. They constitute a living mirror in which the sinner
may look at himself.
1. In the first place he is unclean
filthy
disagreeable
noxious.
There may be some good qualities
as there were in many of the unclean
creatures; but
upon the whole
he is unclean. Impurity is upon him. He is
unfit for holy association
or to come acceptably before God.
2. In the next place he is brutish. His character is typified by the
vile and noxious of living things. He was originally made but a little lower
than the angels. And what are the effects of sin upon him in whom it reigns? It
dethrones intellect
and makes it the slave of mere impulse
nullifies the
deductions of wisdom
stifles and overrides the conscience
and makes the man
the servant of lust
living only for selfish gratification
and following only
the dictates of the baser nature. A brute is a thing bent downward. It goes
upon its hands. Its face is towards the ground. And what is a slave of sin but
one whose eyes have been diverted from heaven
and whose absorbing attention is
directed to what is earthy? A brute is a creature destined to perish. Its
spirit goeth downward. Its end is extinction. How like the sinner in his guilt
I What hope has he for another world? But he is not only like what all brutes
are in common
but also more or less like what the several kinds of unclean creatures
are in particular. Sin is the ugliness and spitefulness of the camel; the
burrowing
secretive
wily disposition of the coney
the rabbit
and the fox;
the filthy sensuality of the hog; the stupid stubbornness of the ass; the
voracious appetency of the dog
the wolf
the jackal
and hyena; the savage
ferocity and bloodthirstiness of the tiger
the panther
and the lion; the
sluggishness of the sloth; the prowling shyness and cruelty of the cat; and the
base treachery and mischievousness of multitudes of unclean creatures that roam
in darkness. It is the abominable thing which God hateth. It is of all things
the most hideous
an uncleanness which cannot be expressed
a filthiness so
intense that God cannot look upon it with the least degree of allowance.
3. But it is just
as abundant as it is hateful. The unclean creatures are as numerous and
abounding as they are base. The air is full of them; the earth is alive with
them; the ocean teams with innumerable kinds of them. They cover every
mountain
they crowd every plain. The crevices of the rocks are filled with
them; the deserts have them as numerous as sands. The trees of the forests are
thick with them; every stream and fountain contains them. They move about every
street; they play in every field. They are upon the most beautiful flowers
and
crawl within the most guarded enclosures. They are in our houses; they come up
upon our tables; they creep into our very beds. They are present in every
climate. They may be seen at all seasons. They continue with all generations.
And as these unclean things abound
so does sin abound; for they are God’s
natural types of sin. And looking at the appointments of this chapter as a mere
remembrancer of sin
it seems to me very remarkable. How impressive the arrangement
I All living nature
by a few simple words
at once transmuted into a thousand
tongues to remind and warn of sin and uncleanness! I do not say that there is
no good in the world. There are clean as well as unclean. There always have
been good and piety in the earth
and some virtuous ones among the base. But
with all
there were more vile than clean. We have not escaped this uncleanness
which has gone out over all the earth. (J. A. Seiss
D. D.)
Minute enactments
Many people have a notion that there is something unworthy
or
if
I may not be misunderstood
undignified
in God descending to such paltry
regulations
or
as they would call it
to little things. But may not this be
proof of His presence? The truth is
I know not whether God is greatest when He
wields and wheels the planets in their orbits
or when He clothes the lily with
all its loveliness
and finds its daily food for the ephemeral insect that is
born and perishes in a day. God’s greatest glory is often in His ministry to
the minutest things. We call them minute because
with considerable
self-conceit
we make ourselves the standpoint from which we look at
everything; that which is very much above ourselves we think very great
and
that which is below ourselves we think very little; whereas the truth is that
the microscope has revealed to man far more stupendous wonders in a drop of
water than the telescope has revealed in the starry firmament above him; and we
have more majestic footprints of infinite wisdom
beneficence
and power
and love
visible in an atom of dust than in the firmament above us. And
therefore
it
was not unworthy of God
who ministers to His creatures the bread of life
to
lay down what I may call these dietetic precepts
or such regulations for their
nutriment as are given in this and parallel chapters. God wants man not only to
be happy in heaven
but He wants him to be happy on earth; and He takes the way
of making him happy by trying in these rubrics to show him that sin and
disobedience to His Word are the spring of misery; that obedience to God’s Word
is the source of all true and lasting happiness. The classification that is
made here is a most remarkable one. It is not wholly an arbitrary one; but
evidently a distinction originally inherent in the animal economy. The
distinctions that are drawn here
have lasted till now
and are practically acted on. For instance
animals that
are called graminivorous and ruminative
and that divide the hoof
are still
found to be most wholesome for food. (J. Cumming
D. D.)
Distinguishing the precious from the vile
I. That God’s
people
the spiritual Israel
move in a scene of mingled good and evil.
1. In the sphere of daily life we have contact with both.
2. Our contact with them entails the danger of contamination.
3. In such a defiling sphere our duty is to separate the precious
from the vile.
II. That in life’s
mingled scene the godly must exercise continual vigilance.
1. We enter
by relationship with Christ
into a separated life.
2. Such a separated life must assert itself in habitual avoidance of
prohibited things.
3. Minute distinctions are forced upon us by this principle of
conduct.
III. That by
strictest adherence to divine directions sanctity of life should be maintained.
1. Every godly soul is
to a degree
put in trust with the imparted
sanctity.
2. Derived sanctity is no assurance against defilement if we forsake
God’s commands. (W. H. Jellie.)
Lessons
1. All the creatures good in themselves.
2. Of the provident care of God toward both the souls and bodies of
men.
3. God no respecter of persons (Leviticus 11:3).
4. Of the difference of sins
and divers degrees of spiritual
uncleanness.
5. The doctrine may be good
though the doctors and teachers are
evil.
6. Holiness the end of the precepts of the law (Leviticus 11:44).
7. The virtue of the sacraments depends not on the worthiness of the
minister. (A. Willet
D. D.)
Types of manhood
1. Of meditating in the Word of God. Whereas the chewing of the cud
was one mark to know a clean beast by: hereby is understood that we should
meditate
and
as it were
ruminate on the Word of God (Psalms 1:1-2).
2. To the knowledge of the Word
to join practice. Besides chewing
the cud
the clean beast was to divide the hoof. Men in their life should
discern between good and evil works
and to their profession of the Word add the
practice of a good life.
3. Of divers vices to be shunned
shadowed forth in the natural
properties of some creatures.
4. Of the necessity of sanctification.
5. Of separating the clean from the unclean. (A. Willet
D. D.)
Clean and unclean animals
It is of much significance to note
in the first place
that a
large part of the animals which are forbidden as food are unclean feeders. It
is a well-ascertained fact that even the cleanest animal
if its
food be
unclean
becomes dangerous to health if its flesh be eaten. The flesh of a cow
which has drunk water contaminated with typhoid germs
if eaten
especially if
insufficiently cooked
may communicate typhoid fever to him who eats it. It is
true
indeed
that not all animals that are prohibited are unclean in their
food; but the fact remains that
on the other hand
among those which are
allowed is to be found no animal whose ordinary habits of life
especially in
respect of food
are unclean. But
in the second place
an animal which is not
unclean in its habits may yet be dangerous for food
if it be
for any reason
specially liable to disease One of the greatest discoveries of modern science
is the fact that a large number of diseases to which animals are liable are due
to the presence of low forms of parasitic life. To such diseases those which
are unclean in their feeding will be especially exposed
while none will
perhaps be found wholly exempt. Another discovery of recent times
which has a
no less important bearing on the question raised by this chapter
is the now
ascertained fact that many of the parasitic diseases are common to both animals
and men and may be communicated from the former to the latter. In the light of
such facts as these
it is plain that an ideal dietary law would
as far as possible
exclude from human food all animals which
under given conditions
might be
especially liable to these parasitic diseases
and which
if their flesh should
be eaten
might thus become a frequent medium of communicating them to men. Now
it is a most remarkable and significant fact that the tendency of the most
recent investigations of this subject has been to show that the prohibitions
and permissions of the Mosaic Law concerning food
as we have seen in this
chapter
become apparently explicable in view of the above facts. Not to refer
to other authorities
among the latest competent testimonies on this subject is
that of Dr. Noel Gueneau de Mussy
in a paper presented to the Paris Academy of
Medicine in 1885
in which he is quoted as saying: “There is so close a
connection between the thinking being and the living organism in man
so
intimate a solidarity between moral and material interests
and the useful is
so constantly and so necessarily in harmony with the good
that these two
elements cannot be separated in hygiene . . . It is this combination which has
exercised so great an influence on the preservation of the Israelites
despite
the very unfavourable external circumstances in which they have been placed . .
. The idea of parasitic and infectious maladies
which has conquered so great a
position in modern pathology
appears to have greatly occupied the mind of
Moses
and to have dominated all his hygienic rules. He excludes from Hebrew
dietary animals particularly liable to parasites; and as it is in the blood
that the germs or spores of infectious disease circulate
he orders that they
must be drained of their blood before serving for food.” It may be added that
upon this principle we may also easily explain
in a rational way
the very
minute prescriptions of the law with regard to defilement by dead bodies. For
immediately upon death begins a process of corruption which produces compounds
not only obnoxious to the senses but actively poisonous in character; and what
is of still more consequence to observe
in the case of all parasitic and
infectious diseases
the energy of the infection is specially intensified when
the infected person or animal dies. Hence the careful regulations as to cleansing of those
persons or things which had been thus defiled by the dead: either by water
where practicable
or
where the thing could not be thus thoroughly cleansed
by burning the article with fire
the most certain of all disinfectants. But if
this be indeed the principle which underlies this law of the clean and the
unclean as here given
it will then be urged that since the Hebrews have
observed this law with strictness for centuries
they ought to show the
evidence of this in a marked immunity from sickness
as compared with other
nations
and especially from diseases of an infectious character; and a
consequent longevity superior to that of the Gentiles who pay no attention to
these laws. Now it is the fact
and one which evidently furnishes another
powerful argument for this interpretation
that this is exactly what we see.
Even so long ago as the
days when the plague was desolating Europe
the Jews so universally escaped
infection that
by this their exemption
the popular suspicion was excited into
fury
and they were accused of causing the fearful mortality among their
Gentile neighbours by poisoning the wells and springs. In our own day
in the
recent cholera epidemic in Italy
a correspondent of the Jewish Chronicle testifies
that the Jews enjoyed almost absolute immunity
at least from fatal attack.
Professor Hosmer says: “Throughout the entire history of Israel
. the wisdom of
the ancient lawgiver in these respects has been remarkably shown. In times of
pestilence the Jews have suffered far less than others; as regards longevity
and general health
they have in every age been noteworthy
and
at the present
day
in the life-insurance offices
the life of a Jew is said to be worth much
more than that of men of other stock.” (S. H. Kellogg
D. D.)
Answers to objections respecting these regulations
It is Very strange that it should have been objected to this view
that since the law declares the reason for these
regulations to have been religious
therefore any supposed reference hereinto
the principles of hygiene is by that fact excluded. For surely the obligation
so to live as to conserve and promote the highest bodily health must be
regarded
both from a natural
and a Biblical and Christian point of view
as being no less
really a religious obligation than truthfulness or honesty. The central idea of
the Levitical holiness was consecration unto God
as the Creator and Redeemer
of Israel--consecration in the most unreserved sense
for the most perfect
possible service. But the obligation to such a consecration
as the essence of
a holy character
surely carried with it
by necessary consequence
then
as
now
the obligation to maintain all the powers of mind and body also in the
highest possible perfection. That
as regards the body
and
in no small
degree
the mind as well
this involves the duty of the preservation of health
so far as in our power; and that this
again
is conditioned by the use of a
proper diet
as one factor of prime importance
will be denied by no one. It
may be asked
by way of further objection to this interpretation of these laws:
Upon this understanding of the immediate purpose of these laws
how can we
account for the selection
of such test-marks of the clean and the unclean as the chewing of the cud
and
the dividing of the hoof
or having scales and fins? What can the presence or absence of these
peculiarities have to do with the greater or less freedom from parasitic
disease of the animals included or excluded in the several classes? It may
fairly be replied
that the object of the law was not to give accurately
distributed categories of animals
scientifically arranged
according to
hygienic principles
but was purely practical; namely
to secure
so far as
possible
the observance by the whole people of such a dietary as in the land
of Palestine would
on the whole
best tend to secure perfect bodily health. It
may be objected
again
that according to recent researches
it appears that cattle
which occupy the foremost place in the permitted diet of the Hebrews
are found
to be especially liable to tubercular disease
and capable
apparently
under
certain conditions
of communicating it to those who feed upon their flesh. And it has
been even urged that to this source is due a large part of the consumption
which is responsible for so large
part of our mortality.
Two answers may be given. First
and most important
is the observation that we
have as yet no statistics as to the prevalence of disease of this kind among
cattle in Palestine; and that
presumably
if we may argue from the climatic
conditions of its prevalence among men
it would be found far less frequently
there among cattle than in Europe and America. Further
it must be remembered
that
in the case even of clean cattle
the law very strictly provides
elsewhere that the clean animal which is slain for food shall be absolutely
free from disease; so that still we see here
no less than elsewhere
the
hygienic principles ruling the dietary law. It will be perhaps objected
again
that if all this be true
then
since abstinence from unwholesome food is a moral duty
the law concerning
clean and unclean meats should be of universal and perpetual obligation;
whereas
in fact
it is explicitly abrogated in the New Testament
and is not
held to be now binding on any one. But the abrogation of the law of Moses
touching clean and unclean food can be easily explained
in perfect accord with
all that has been said as to its nature and intent. In the first place
it is
to be remembered that it is a fundamental characteristic of the New Testament
law as contrasted with that of the Old
that on all points it leaves much more
to the liberty of the individual
allowing him to act according to the exercise
of an enlightened judgment
under the law of supreme love to the Lord
in many
matters which
in the Old Testament day
were made a subject of specific
regulation. But
aside from considerations of this kind
there is a specific
reason why these laws of Moses concerning diet and defilement by dead bodies
if hygienic in character
should not have been made
in the New Testament
of
universal obligation
however excellent they might be. For it is to be
remembered that these laws were delivered for a people few in number
living in
a small country
under certain definite climatic conditions. But it is well
known that what is unwholesome for food it- one part of the world may be
and
often is
necessary to the maintenance of health elsewhere. A class of animals
which
under the climatic conditions of Palestine
may be specially liable to
certain forms of parasitic disease
under different climatic conditions may be
comparatively free from them. Abstinence from fat is commanded in the law of
Moses (Leviticus 3:17)
and great moderation in
this matter is necessary to health in hot climates; but
on the contrary
to
eat fat largely
is necessary to life in the polar regions. From such facts as these it would
follow
of necessity
that when the Church of God
as under the new
dispensation
was now to become a world-wide organisation
still to have
insisted on a dietetic law
perfectly adapted only to Palestine would have been to defeat the physical
object
and by consequence the moral end for which that law was given. Under
these conditions
except a special law were to be given for each land and
climate
there was and could be
if we have before us the true conception of
the ground of these regulations
no alternative bat to abrogate the law. (S.
H. Kellogg
D. D.)
Bodily holiness
It follows
as a present-day lesson of great moment
that the
holiness which God requires has to do with the body as well as the soul
even
with such commonplace matters as our eating and drinking. This is so
because
the body is the instrument and organ of the soul
with which it must do all its
work on earth for God
and because
as such
the body
no less than the soul
has been redeemed unto God by the blood of His Son. There is
therefore
no
religion in neglecting the body and ignoring the requirements for its health
as ascetics have in all ages imagined. Neither is there religion in pampering
and thus abusing
the body
after the manner of the sensual in all ages. The
principle which inspires this chapter is that which is expressed in 1 Corinthians 10:31. If
therefore
a man needlessly eats such things
or in such a manner as may be injurious to
health
he sins
and has come short of the law of perfect holiness. No less
needful is the lesson of this law to many who are at the opposite extreme. For
as there are those who are so taken up with the soul and its health
that they
ignore its relation to the body
and the bearing of bodily conditions upon
character
so there are others who are so preoccupied with questions of bodily
health
sanitation and hygiene
regarded merely as prudential measures
from an
earthly point of view
that they forget that man has a soul as well as a body
and that such questions of sanitation and hygiene only find their proper place
when it is recognised that health and perfection of the body are not to be
sought merely that man may become a more perfect animal
but in order that
thus
with a sound mind in a sound body
he may the more perfectly serve the
Lord in the life of holiness to which we are called. (S. H. Kellogg
D. D.)
Apologetic value of this law
The question will at once come up in every reflecting mind: Whence
came this law? Could it have been merely an invention of crafty Jewish priests?
Or is it possible to account for it as the product merely of the mind of Moses?
It appears to have been ordered with respect to certain facts
especially
regarding various invisible forms of noxious parasitic life
in their bearing
on the causation and propagation of disease--facts which
even now
are but
just appearing within the horizon of modern science. Is it probable that Moses
knew about these things three thousand years ago? Certainly
the more we study
the matter the more we must feel that this is not to be supposed. It is common
indeed
to explain much that seems very wise in the law of Moses by referring
to the fact that he was a highly educated man
“instructed in all the wisdom of
the Egyptians.” But it is just this fact of his Egyptian education that makes
it in the last degree improbable that he should have derived the ideas of this
law from Egypt. Could he have taken his ideas with regard
for instance
to
defilement by the dead
from a system of education which taught the contrary
and which
so far from regarding those who had to do with the dead as unclean
held them especially sacred? And so with regard to the dietetic laws: these are
not the laws of Egypt; nor have we any evidence that those were determined
like these Hebrew laws
by such scientific facts as we have referred to. Whence
had this man this unique wisdom three thousand years in advance of his times?
The secret will be found
not in the court of Pharaoh
but in the holy tent of
meeting: it is all explained if we but assume that which is written in the
first verse of this chapter is true: “The Lord spake unto Moses and unto
Aaron:” (S. H. Kellogg
D. D.)
The clean and the unclean
Here we find Jehovah entering
in most marvellous detail
into a
description of beasts
birds
fishes
and reptiles
and furnishing His people
with various marks by which they were to know what was clean and what was
unclean. With regard to beasts
two things were essential to render them
clean--they should chew the cud and divide the hoof. We pass on to the
consideration of that which the Levitical ceremonial taught with respect to
“all that are in the waters.” Here
again
we find the double mark (Leviticus 11:9-10). Two things were
necessary to render a fish ceremonially clean
namely
“fins and scales
”
which
obviously
set forth a certain fitness for the sphere and element in
which the creature had to move. But
doubtless
there was more than this. If a
fish needs a “fin” to enable him to move through the water
and “scales” to
resist the action thereof
so does the believer need that spiritual capacity
which enables him to move onward through the scene with which he is surrounded
and
at the same time
to resist its influence--to prevent its penetrating--to
keep it out. These are precious qualities. From Leviticus 11:13 to Leviticus 11:24 of our chapter we have
the law with respect to birds. All of the carnivorous kind
that is
all that
fed on flesh
were unclean. The omnivorous
or those who could eat anything
were unclean. All those which
though furnished with power to soar into the
heavens
would
nevertheless
grovel upon the earth
were unclean. As to the
latter class
there were some exceptional cases (Leviticus 11:21-22); but the general
rule
the fixed principle
the standing ordinance
was as distinct as possible;
“all fowls that creep
going upon all fours
shall be an abomination unto you”
(Leviticus 11:20). All this is very simple
in its instruction to us. Those fowls that could feed upon flesh; those that
could swallow anything or everything; and all grovelling fowls were to be
unclean to the Israel of God
because so pronounced by the God of Israel; nor
can the spiritual mind have any difficulty in discerning the fitness of such an
ordinance. We can not only trace in the habits of the above three classes of
fowl the just ground of their being pronounced unclean; but we can also see in
the striking exhibition of that
in nature
which is to be strenuously guarded
against by every true Christian. Such an one is called to refuse everything of
a carnal nature. Moreover
he cannot feed promiscuously upon everything that
comes before him. He must “try the things that differ.” Finally
he must use
his wings--rise on the pinions of faith
and find his place in the celestial
sphere to which he belongs. As to “creeping things” (see Leviticus 11:41). How wonderful to think
of the condescending grace of Jehovah! He could stoop to give directions about
a crawling reptile. He would not leave His people at a loss as to the most
trivial affair. The priest’s guide-book contained the most ample instructions
as to everything. He desired to keep His people free from the defilement
consequent upon touching
tasting
or handling aught that was unclean. They
were not their own
and hence they were not to do as they pleased. (C. H.
Mackintosh.)
The right use of things
We are easily led in the direction of our preferences. All the
animals in this chapter were good creatures of God
in the sense of having been
created by the Almighty. “And these are they which ye shall have in abomination
among the fowls; they shall not be eaten
they are an abomination: the eagle
”
&c. Who made these? God. Then are they not good creatures of God? Possibly
so; but they are forbidden in that particular use. You do not depose the
creature from any dignity to which it is entitled as a creation of God; you do
but discern the right use and purpose of the creature in the intent of God.
This argument must be applied to every man according to his own circumstances.
The argument of the chapter does not end in itself. There are educational
beginnings; there are points to start with. The argument is cumulative and
becomes stronger and stronger as the instances are plied in illustration of its
meaning
Is God so careful about the body and has He written no schedule of
directions about the feeding of the mind? May the body not eat of this
but the
soul eat of everything? Are there poisons which take away the life of the body
and no poisons that take away the life of the spirit
the mind
the soul? That
is the chapter magnified by spirituality. This is an instance of how things may
be made symbols of truth infinitely greater than themselves. It is impossible
to believe that God
who takes care of the body
pays no attention to the soul.
(J. Parker
D. D.)
The coney unclean
The coney was a very timid creature
which burrowed in the rocks.
Now
there are some people who seem as if they like the gospel truth
and they
may be put down in the class in which Moses puts the coney
which appeared to
chew the cud
though it did not really do so. They like the gospel
but it must
be very cheap. They like to hear it preached
but as to doing anything to
extend it
unless it were to lend their tongues an hour
they would not dream
of it. The coney
you know
lived in the earth. These people are always
scraping. John Bunyan’s muck-rake is always in their hands. Neither to dig nor
to beg are they ashamed. They are as true misers
and as covetous
as if they
had no religion at all. And many of these people get into our Churches and are
received when they ought not to be. Covetousness ought to exclude a man from
Church fellowship as well as fornication
for Paul says
“Covetousness
which
is idolatry.” He puts the brand right on its forehead
and marks what it is. We
would not admit an idolater to the Lord’s table; nor ought we to admit a
covetous man; only we cannot always know him. St. Francis de Sales
who had a
great many people come to him to confession
makes this note
that he had many
men and women come to him who confessed all sorts of most outrageous crimes
but he never had one who confessed covetousness. It is a kind of sin that
always comes in at the back door
and it is always entertained at the back part
of the house. People do not suspect it as an inmate of their own hearts. Mr. Covetousness
has changed his name to Mr. Prudent-Thrifty;
and it is quite an insult
to call him other than by his adopted name. Old vices
like streets notorious
fur vice
get new names given them. Avaricious grasping
they call that only
“the laws of social economy”; screwing down the poor is “the natural result of
competition”; withholding corn until the people curse
oh I that is “just the
usual regulation of the market.” People name the thing prettily
and then they
think they have rescued it from the taint. These people
who are all for earth
are like the coneys who
though they chew the cud
burrow in the ground. They
love precious truth
and yet they are all for this earth. If there are any such
here
despite their fine experience
we pronounce them unclean--they are not
heirs of heaven. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The hare unclean
The hare is such a timid creature; she leaveth her food
and
fleeth before the passer-by. I would not say a hard thing
but there are some
people who appear to chew the cud
they love to hear the gospel preached; their
eyes will sparkle sometimes when we are talking of Christ
but they do not
divide the hoof. Like the hare
they are too timid to be domesticated among the
creatures whom the Lord has pronounced clean. They do not come out from the
world
enter into the Church
and manifest themselves wholly on the Lord’s side.
Their conscience tells them they should be united with the people of God
and
confess Christ before men--but they are ashamed! One fears lest his wife should
know it
and she might ridicule. Some start abashed lest their friends should
know it
for the finger of scorn or the breath of raillery could frighten them
out of their senses. Others of them are alarmed because the world might
perchance
give them an ill name. Do you know where the fearful go? The fearful
that are afraid of being persecuted
mocked
or even laughed at for Christ--do
you know where they go? “But the fearful and unbelieving shall have their part
in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone
which is the second death.”
Have you never read that sentence which says
“Whosoever shall be ashamed of Me
and of My words
of him shall the
Son of Man be ashamed when He shall come in His own glory
and in
His Father’s
and of the holy angels “? There you are
young man! you are
ashamed of Christ. You have just come up from the country
and you did not pray
to God the other night because there was another young man in the room
and you
were ashamed of Him. There are others of you who work in a large shop
and you
do not want to be jeered at
as the other young fellow is who works with you
because
he is a Christian. You keep your love as a secret
do you
and will not let it
out? What! if Christ had only loved you in secret
and had never dared to come
on earth to be despised and rejected of men
where would you have been? Do you
think that Christ has lit a candle in your hearts that you may hide it? Oh! I
pray you
be not like the hare. Let your hoof be so divided from the rest of
mankind that they may say
“There is a man--he is not as bold as a lion
mayhap
but he is not ashamed to be a follower of Jesus; he does bear the sneer
and gibe for Him
and counts it his honour to be thought evil of for Jesu’s
sake.” Oh! be not
I pray you
like the timid hare
lest you be found among the
unclean! (C. H. Spurgeon.)
These shall ye eat of all
that are in the waters.--
Clean and unclean fish
It is a well-known fact
that all fish that have both scales and
fins are both wholesome and nutritious. This provision
therefore
secured to
the people the free use of what was certainly profitable
and kept them back
from the uncertainty of choosing among the others what might have injured them.
Again
therefore
they were taught that it is better far to lean to the side of
abstinence
in doubtful cases
than to run the risk of doing evil. They were
trained to the principle
“If meat make my brother to offend
I will eat no
flesh while the world standeth” (1 Corinthians 8:13). Those “without
fins or scales” are partly creatures of the mud and marsh; whereas the others
swim through the clear
limpid waters of “seas and rivers.” Others of them that
are “without scales
” are such as the voracious shark. Thus they were naturally
fitted to exhibit purity. In Leviticus 11:9 we are to read
“in the
waters
i.e.
whether seas or river.” In Leviticus 11:10
“All that move in the
waters
” is rather
“All that crawl in the waters”; and even any living thing
there that has not the specified qualities. In the same verse
and at Leviticus 11:11
“They shall be an
abomination
” is more emphatic if read thus--“They are an abomination to you
and they shall be an abomination.” And it is thus strongly stated
because the
people might be ready to neglect the rule in the case of some of the smaller
creatures in the water. Many of the forbidden creatures are exceedingly small
in size; yet
nevertheless
even that atom is to be abhorred
if the Lord has
given the command. It is not the importance of the thing
but the majesty of
the lawgiver
that is to be the standard of our obedience. “Sin is the transgression
of the law” (1 John 3:4). There were tribes that
were to dwell by the waters. Thus Simeon and Dan had a sea-coast from the river
of Egypt up to Joppa. Ephraim and the half tribe of Manasseh had a sea-coast as
far as Carmel--the glorious plain of Sharon descending to the waterside.
Zebulun and Asher
too
had their creeks and bays; while Napthali
as well as
Zebulun and the other half tribe of Manasseh
encircled the lake of Galilee
so
plentiful in its supply of fish; and the waters of Merom
no doubt
swarmed
with their kinds. Others of the tribes lay near Jordan
or had some lesser
streams and lakes at hand. Hence there was not probably one tribe but had some
need of these laws and opportunity for exercising faith by attending to them.
The Lord also thus evidenced His care over the spiritual health of the seamen
and fishers of Israel. It tried their faith when they needed to cast away
whatever unclean fish they had enclosed in their net. Some
indeed
might
reckon such minute and arbitrary rules as these to be trifling. But the
principle involved in obedience or disobedience was none other than the same
principle which was tried in Eden at the foot of the forbidden tree. It was really
this--Is the Lord to be obeyed in all things whatsoever He commands? Is He a
holy Lawgiver? Are His creatures bound to give implicit assent to His will? But
this discrimination between holy and unholy penetrated farther. It reached
Israel’s hours of recreation
and kept them
even then
in mind of their Holy
One. A wealthy Israelite
who has his villa by the lake of Gennesaret
goes
forth on the bosom of the lake. In its clear waters he finds fish
darting on
before the slow sailing bark in the strength of their ties
and reflecting back
to the surface
from their scales
the light that fell on the waters. All here
speaks of purity--conformity to what the law pronounced clean. But at another
time he strolls along by some shallow
or is compassing the waters of Merom
and there he finds the crawling reptiles of the mud and marsh--teaching him to
draw back in haste from the touch of uncleanness. In like manner
far within
their land
at the little brook flowing through the valley of Elah
fringed by
its green terebinths
the youth of Judah
in their sports
were taught to keep
before them the difference between good and evil
while they scrupulously
rejected the unclean minnows
and chose the clean
amid their easy angling at
the stream. “Holiness to the Lord”--obedience to His revealed will--thus
pervaded Israel’s land and Israel’s families
in public and in secret
in
business and in recreation; their youth and their aged men
in their fields and
by their riversides
must remember “The Holy One of Israel!” (A. A.
Bonar.)
Among the fowls.
Lessons from the fowls
The eagle
darting down from the hills of Moab or Bashan
or from
the heights of Lebanon
would often teach the shepherd who saw his flock thus
endangered. Those by the sea shore would have the same lesson taught them when
the sight or cry of the sea-eagle and fish-hawk called to their mind that God
had made a difference between the clean and unclean even in the fowls of the
air. The vulture
in their streets or highways
allured by the scent of death
and the kite
poised on its wings till it found a prey upon which to dart down
and the hoarse
unpleasant note of the raven would constantly recall the same
distinctions
while their loathsome qualities would serve to make the feeling
of uncleanness more and more detestable to the men of Israel. While in the
wilderness
and afterwards on their borders
they would meet with the ostrich
whose disagreeable cries
voracious habits
and parental unkindness
would all
contribute to deepen their aversion to whatever was unclean. And not less so
the small
but most ravenous night-hawk that flies in at the open windows and
seeks the life of infants; and the seagull incessantly watching for its
victims
over whom it screams in savage delight; and the hawk
so furious in
its attack on the birds of the air; and the owl at evening
awake for designs
of destruction. All these
every time they were been
helped to deepen Israel’s
remembrance of the difference between holy and unholy
and to give them
intimations of the hateful qualities of sin. (A. A. Bonar.)
The eagle as a type
Reminds one of those people who are conspicuous for certain noble
and praiseworthy qualities
but also for qualities ignoble and deserving of the
sternest condemnation.
1. Here is a man who is just
but has no mercy.
2. Another man is kind
but ill-tempered.
3. Ill-temper is often associated with earnestness.
4. Another man is moral
but niggardly. (A. F. Forrest.)
The osprey as a type
The osprey has been identified with the sea-eagle. Some species of
it is to be found in almost every part of the world. The most noticeable thing
about it is its fierce
temper. A writer describes “its savage scream of anger
when any one approaches
the neighbourhood of its nest
its intimidating gestures
and even its attempts
to molest individuals who have ventured among its native crags.” Like the osprey
some people
are most noticeable for their ill-nature.
1. People with bad tempers are terribly numerous.
2. Nothing so much embitters the intercourse of life as the ebullitions
of a violent disposition.
3. There are more unhappy homes through bad temper than through any
other cause.
4. There is this great peculiarity often about ill-tempered people:
they are very good in other respects.
5. Society may be to blame somewhat for the great prevalence of bad
temper. It should not be spoken of (as it usually is) as a misfortune
but as a
sin.
6. The Bible regards bad temper as a sin
and its denunciations of it
are of the most unmistaktable character (see Ecclesiastes 8:9; Matthew 5:22; 1 John 3:15).
7. But the punishment of anger is not altogether in the next life--in
the future.
8. Anger leads to other and often greater evils.
9. One of the grandest sights is to see a man
under circumstances of
provocation and injury
restraining his anger and showing a composed and
peaceful spirit.
10. A good practical specific for the treatment of anger is that given
by Solomon (Proverbs 19:11).
11. These ebullitions of temper are not Christlike.
12. Sometimes people attempt to palliate their bad temper on the
ground of natural disposition. This is a delusion. (A. F. Forrest.)
The vulture as a type
The vulture is a type of those people who revel in the
wreck of their neighbour’s reputation.
1. These are people you never like to meet. They have nothing good to
say of anybody.
2. In their stories they uniformly exaggerate.
3. Their caution is remarkable.
4. The gossip makes a pretence of wishing a thing to be kept a
secret. But it is only that he may himself enjoy the monopoly of the scandal
and be the first to tell it to everybody.
5. This depraved habit of evil-speaking may spring from various
causes.
6. Of all bad people
none are so thoroughly as the tale-bearer.
Conclusion:
1. The way to keep the city clean is for every one to sweep before
his own door.
2. Expulsive of the feeling which swells in the bosom of the
evil-speaker is that charity which thinketh no evil. (A. F. Forrest.)
The kite as a type
1. The kite is remarkable for its very keen sight
and for the
immense velocity with which it darts upon its prey. But
its legs and claws
being weak
it is withal a cowardly creature. It never attacks large prey
but
only insects
mice
and small birds.
2. God would have His people characterised by courage and a spirit of
noble heroism.
I. The lowest form
of courage is that which meets danger unconscious of fear or flinching:--Bravery.
A constitutional quality. Costs no effort.
II. A higher form
of courage is that which shrinks not in the presence of danger
not from
insensibility to it
but from patriotism
or friendship
or some such noble
feeling.
III. A still higher
courage is that which adheres to duty--to truth and conscience
in the face of
opposition and hardship.
1. How few have the courage of their convictions!
2. Many are cowards only in the matter of avowing and adhering to
their religious principles.
3. What you are convinced is right
do
whether the world frowns or
smiles
sneers or applauds. Be influenced by no fear but the fear of God.
4. Do you do well to go away? Is it wise to lose heaven to escape
from a laugh?
5. What is your cross compared to the cross of those who had
in
their adherence to Christ
to brave imprisonment and death? (A. F. Forrest.)
The raven as a type
I take selfishness to be the leading characteristic of the
raven. It has no pity and no generosity. With it “number one” is the only
number.
1. God did not mean man to be like the raven. The happiness of the
creature
like the happiness of the Creator
was to be in giving
and not in
receiving.
2. What happiness thus did God intend for the human race! Nothing to
hurt or destroy could even enter a society in which love held undisputed sway.
3. But the unhappy revolt of man from God
and his assertion of
independence
effectually prevented the accomplishment of the Divine purpose.
4. Before
therefore
the mischief effected by the Fall of man can be
adequately repaired
we must find that which will destroy the selfishness of
man’s heart.
5. The gospel of Jesus Christ
alone of all religious systems
has
recognised this important fact
and proposed to remove the disorder by removing
the cause.
6. The sufficiency of this remedy for man’s disease has received
abundant proof.
7. The early Christian Church affords us just such a spectacle of
unselfish enthusiasm on behalf of the race as we would have anticipated from
the renewal of men’s hearts
and the restoration to them of the lost principle
of benevolence.
8. Is it asked why in this age we have not a repetition of
Pentecostal phenomena? The explanation is to be found in the character of those
who are now entrusted with the commission to preach the gospel. The Christian
of this age is
only partially restored from his enmity against God
partially cared of his
disease. (A.
F. Forrest.)
The owl as a type
A melancholy bird. Flies about at night. Children afraid of
it. Owl typifies all moping
morose
melancholy people
who have no sunshine in
their soul.
1. No Christian should belong to this genus. Inconsistent.
2. The Bible everywhere represents religion as a thing of joy.
3. This joy is entirely independent of worldly conditions. (A. F.
Forrest.)
The bat as a type
The bat is a type of those people who seek both to walk in
worldliness and to fly in heavenliness. Neither believers nor unbelievers; half
for Satan
and half for God.
1. The vast majority of professing Christians belong
probably
to
this genus. I have read of a Spanish bishop who took a strange way once of
ending a controversy. The clergy in his diocese had been debating together in
regard to the fate of Solomon in the other world. Some maintained that he was
in heaven; others that he was in hell. They referred the matter at last to this
dignitary. He thought he would gratify both parties. Accordingly
he ordered an
artist to paint on the walls of his chapel a picture of the Jewish king
representing him as half
in hell and half in heaven. Multitudes of people could only be represented in
the same way.
2. This state of indecision in religion may arise from various
causes.
3. However caused
this indecision is most unsatisfactory. Those in
this state have neither the mirth of the sinner nor the happiness of the saint.
“Woe to the double mind
” says Augustine. “Of God’s own they make a share--half
to Him and half to the devil. But
indignant at such treatment
the Lord
departs; and the devil gets all!”
4. Choose ye this day whom ye will serve.
5. Oh
why do you hesitate?
Every flying creeping
thing.--
Clean and unclean insects
All insects are unclean except four classes; for it is insects
that are here meant by “the creatures that both fly and creep
” using feet in
the manner of quadrupeds. All reptiles
worms
and insects
e.g.
flies
and bees
are thus pronounced unclean--except only the four classes that have
springing legs
in addition to the legs used in creeping. The sight of insects
without number in their groves
on the leaves of their fig-trees
or the
vine-leaves that shaded them--the innumerable hosts that thickened the air at
sunset
or that played on the waters
and from time to time alighted on the
head of the solemn Jew who marked the sight--could not fail to remind the soul
that it was
encompassed with unholy things. I remember (while in Palestine in 1839) the
vast number of such insects
some of them very beautiful and rare
which we saw
one afternoon by the lake of Galilee
near Magdala; and
also
on a previous
day at the pools of Solomon
near Bethlehem. They skimmed along the waters
or
flew gaily through the air
or kept their seat upon a sappy leaf--and the eye
could not but be attracted by them. Now an Israelite would feel in these
insects a memorial of sin
however fair the external form appeared. No
retirement into quiet seats and bowers could give freedom from the presence of
what was unclean. The dragon-fly that wafted itself past their eye
and the
many magnificent insects
though fed amid the fragrance of Lebanon and the
excellency of Carmel and Sharon
were all made to speak of God having set a
mark on this earth as no longer a paradise. These creatures on the wing were
like messengers sent to admonish the saints of God that the sweetest spots of
earth were polluted
and
therefore
they must watch and keep their garments.
The only clean insects were the locusts--the insects so often used by God to punish a guilty land
and an unclean people. (A. A. Bonar.)
──《The Biblical Illustrator》