DEUTERONOMY 14: IS A BAT A BIRD?

A representative from our local atheist community was once invited to take part in a dialog concerning the subject of free will carried out at our church. At one point this gentleman gratuitously put up two slides with six examples of scientific errors he found in the Bible. I am going to spend a fair time on these six criticisms in the following posts because I think that they provide good introductory examples of atheists' criticisms in the name of science.

The first "scientific" objection was in regard to the food laws in Deuteronomy 14: “Of all clean birds ye shall eat. But these are they of which ye shall not eat: the eagle...and the stork and the heron after her kind, the lapwing, and the bat.” (Deuteronomy 14:11-18, KJV)  As the speaker concisely noted, “A bat is not a bird.” The first thing to mention, as any good commentary or study Bible will explain, is that the exact identification of Hebrew words for particular plants, animals and minerals listed in the Bible is somewhat uncertain. For example, look at the names given to the various species of birds found in this passage.

1. Compare NEB and NRSV

crow = raven?

griffon-vulture = eagle?

stork = heron?

2. NRSV Study Bible notes

desert owl = pelican?

“Identification of several of the birds in verses 12-18 is uncertain.”

3. Animal before “bat”

lapwing (KJV) = hoo-poe (all modern translations)

However, assuming that the last animal on the list does refer to a bat, the Hebrew name literaly translates as “night flier,” a much more scientifically accurate word for bat than those used in some other cultures:

    Germanic languages = die Fledermaus = flying mouse

    Latin word means = nocturnal insect

The next thing to keep in mind is that all methods of taxonomy are to a great extent arbitrary. Linnaeus, the father of modern taxonomy (1700's), used a method based on similarity of body parts, size, shape and methods of getting food. “The atmosphere in which he lived and had his being was saturated with biblical theology and this permeated all his thinking.” (Andrew Dickson White). However, the Jews, along with Aristotle used just as logical a method by grouping animals according to where they could live: sky, land or sea.You can see this clearly in Genesis 1.

Note that the general category for the cited passage in Leviticus is that of all flying animals (the more general meaning of the Hebrew word usually translated as “bird”). Next, look at where “bat” is placed in this list: it is sandwiched in between carnivorous birds (and only 1% of bats are carnivorous), and flying insects, but obviously belongs to neither of those groups. In other words, the Bible clearly distinguishes bats from both birds and insects. 

But what about the latest method of grouping animals into families?There has always been a great deal of trouble for biologists pinning down where bats actually fit in. They were first grouped in the superorder Archonta, along with primates and some other mammals. Then later they were placed in another superorder along with carnivorans, ungulates, whales and porpoises. There have been equal problems as to where they fit within that later superorder. A fairly recent study placed them in a sister taxon to the clade including horses and other odd-toed ungulates. However, the first phylogenomic analysis of bats, published only in 2013, shows even that to be false.

Well, if the Bible actually distinguishes bats from birds in Deuteronomy 14, what animals does it associate bats with? There are only two other times in the OT that the Hebrew word for bat appears, one is a parallel passage in Leviticus and the other is Isaiah 2:20: “On that day people will throw away to the moles and bats their idols of silver and idols of gold.” This verse pairs up the bat with the mole. According to the latest DNA results, both bats and moles are not only in the same superorder, but they are actually very close cousins. So we could just as well use this cited “error” as evidence that the Bible knew much more than any scientist did up to the 21^st century as to where bats belong in the scheme of things.