LEVITICUS 11

Leviticus 11

Clean and Unclean / Holy and Unholy

Read Leviticus 10:10 as background to chapters 11-16.

1 This is a rare instance where Aaron is also addressed, probably because of the priest's charge in 10:10.

2-8 quadrupeds: These are not divided according to modern taxonomy, but by more practical criteria according to their appearance (rabbits do not chew cud but move lips as if they are). The rules basically restricted the Israelite's meat diet to sacrificial domestic animals (oxen, sheep and goats).

9-12 Sea food must have the typical properties of fish, namely fins and scales.

13-19 Birds are listed negatively; all others are clean. Birds of prey generally excluded and those that feed on carrion. There are several translation difficulties in this list. By one estimate, only 40% of species can be identified with any surety. Example: verse 16--sea gull (RSV), long-eared owl (NEB). Bats are also included here since the animals are divided up according to whether they inhabit the land, sea or sky.

20-23 Insects are mostly banned except locust and grasshoppers. In general, swarming insects are banned because they moved erratically. Locusts move in regular manner when they are on the ground.

24-40 “Road Kill”   The reason here, if strictly related to diet, may have been hygienic or because the blood was not drained out properly according to prescribed ritual. (Blood represents life and belongs only to God.) Another possibility: death is an unnatural state compared to life. Later the Sadducees held that contact with living unclean animals polluted a person. Verse 33 – earthen pots were considered to be disposable if rendered ritually unclean.

41-42 Dietary laws are resumed here. One of the letters in verse 42 is the center letter in the whole Pentateuch according to the scribes (called Sopherim, derived from those who count).

43-47 The reason for rules is given here. The summary in vv. 46-7 also recalls 10:10.

Leviticus stresses ritual impurity while other parts of the OT stress moral impurity. Both are related – “acts of ingratitude and rebellion against the covenant deity.” NT references to impurity use OT language (I Thessalonians 2:3, James 4:8). There is much greater emphasis in the NT on the moral aspects of uncleanness.

CLEAN AND UNCLEAN

<------Sacrifice<------

<------sanctify <------cleanse

                                                            holy          clean          unclean

profane-------> pollute-------->

-------->SIN and INFIRMITY-------->

Allen P. Ross (Holiness to the LORD) used the above useful chart to explain the whole idea expressed in Leviticus. Movement to the left is possible through proper sacrifices. Thus, unclean can be cleansed and clean can become made holy, but unclean can never become holy. Conversely, through sin or disease, holy things can become clean and clean can become polluted, but holy can never become unclean.

Holiness, as applied to God, is not just one of his attributes. It means utterly different, set apart. “It is a separate and dangerous category of being.” The opposite is “common,” which itself has two categories. Clean and unclean should be translated pure and impure.

For Israel to be holy meant that they were not to compromise by adopting beliefs and customs of those people who were their neighbors. The terms unclean or defiled are used over 100 times in chapters 11-15, but sin rarely appears. These are primarily ceremonial, not ethical, rules but still important theologically.

There have been a number of unsuccessful attempts to find a single reason behind all of the dietary laws:

1. Medical reasons for regulations: pig (trichinosis caused by inadequate cooking), hare (tularemia obtained from cuts when skinning), bottom feeders vs. free swimmers (parasites). An American physician in 1953 published a study of levels of toxic material in the meat of clean and unclean animals and found much higher levels in the latter.

2. An early explanation was that unclean animals were associated with pagan cults. That is doubtful since “clean” animals were much more likely to be worshiped in the Near East than animals such as pigs. There is no evidence that the vast majority of unclean animals were ever worshiped by pagans.

3. Naturally repellant animals (eels, mice, rats, most insects). But that doesn't apply to all the restrictions.

4. Animals that have “bad” habits (pigs, vultures). As symbols of human behavior, we should not consume them.

5. Irenaeus (185AD) came up with allegorical interpretations in which the animals were symbolic of classes of mankind: divided hoofs means those who proceed toward the Father and the Son, chewing the cud means those who meditate on God's word day and night. Gentiles do neither; Jews only do the latter.

6. The diet sets the Israelites apart from other nations by expressing their pastoral nature.

7. Animals must be in their proper place. Thus, quadrupeds should hop, jump or walk; fish should swim freely. Unfortunately, these categories don't always fit. Other abnormalities or lack of order may be birds that consume meat (and thus blood), and insects that fly or move erratically instead of hopping.

8. A combination of all of the above.

9. It may have been a somewhat arbitrary list designed to teach self control and set the nation apart.

    10. The three general classes of animals (unclean, clean, and sacrificial) may correspond to the three classes of mankind: Gentiles, Jews, and priests. Just as God limited himself to one nation, the Jews must limit their diet to God's chosen animals. If the parallel holds, then selection of both animals and people is wholly up to God and not due to any merit of the chosen party. Keep these parallels in mind when we discuss the following NT passages.

NT passages of interest:

1. Mark 7:18-20: Since Christ declared all meat to be clean, the last explanation is most consistent with this fact.

2. John 4:7-9: Jesus accepts a drink from a Samaritan.

3. Acts 10:11-28: Peter's vision (repeated twice more by Luke). Notice how Peter links the vision of animals (vv. 12-15) with the statement about mankind in 10:28. Both threads of Jesus' teachings above come together here.

4. Acts 15:19-21: The Jerusalem Conference Note that only the ritual law expressing the special status of Jews was eliminated. Prohibition against blood goes back to the Noahic covenant with all mankind.

5. Paul's teachings on food depend on a different principle, the law of love

Matthew 7:6

a. This saying is only found in Matthew's Gospel.

b. Saying is chiastic (i.e., pigs trample and dogs bite).

c. Dogs and swine were names that the Jews originally applied to Gentiles; does this mean the Gospel is not to be preached to Gentiles or to some other people who are “beyond help”? The early church document called the Didache (about 100AD) applied to this verse to unbelievers partaking of communion.

d. C.S. Lewis: “When Christianity does not make a man very much better, it makes him very much worse. Conversion may make of one who was, if no better, no worse than an animal, something like a devil.” Satan was an angel. I wonder have any of us taken seriously enough the prohibition of casting pearls before swine?

e. “Do not offer participation in sacred things to those who are incapable of appreciating them. Even Jesus did not attempt to answer Herod Antipas.” (F.F. Bruce)

f. F.F. Bruce: The context is the paragraph on judging beginning in 7:1. First are teachings against too restrictive judging followed by this saying as a corrective – one must show discernment and proper discrimination.

Matthew 8:5-13

Other centurions who “believed” include Cornelius, guard at the cross, and Paul's guard on ship.

7 This should be a question: “Am I supposed to heal him?” expressing astonishment since Jesus would be defiled by entering the house. This adds emphasis to verse 8.

9-10 Contrast between Jews who had to see a sign and the Gentile who did not need to see in order to believe (historical implications since the Jews at Jesus' time rejected him while later the Gentile nations were converted even without seeing).

11 Gentiles sitting with Patriarchs at a feast implies that the latter are not defiled by their presence. The distinction between clean and unclean people has been erased.

11-12 Possible interpretations: (a) Israel has rejected Jesus and is thus removed from status as the people of God; (b) Only those Jews who believe will be seated at the banquet table (the new people of God); or (c) Rejection by Jews at least opens the door for evangelism to Gentiles even if the Jews are still God's people.

Luke 7:1-10

“Amazement” in Luke 7:9 only occurs one other place in the Synoptic Gospels, at Mark 6:6 where Jesus marvels at the lack of faith of his kinsfolk.

 Note the irony in the double use of worthy. Jews feel the man is worthy because of his good works (Verse 4). Jesus feels he is worthy because of (a) his faith and (b) his sense of unworthiness in Jesus' presence (Verse 6).