What animals are forbidden to eat in the Bible?

ANIMALS ALLOWED OR DISALLOWED FOR FOOD (vv. 1-8)

Never since the flood has man been commanded to be a vegetarian. After the flood Noah was told, "every moving thing that lives shall be food for you" (Gen. 9:3). Nothing at that time was forbidden, except the eating of blood, a matter that has not changed through the ages. However, under law, and under law only, God put strict limits on what animals, birds or water creatures were permitted to Israel to eat. These laws were never put upon Gentiles, but only on Israel. The reason for some being forbidden was simply because of a spiritual significance, not that there was evil in the creature itself. This is clearly seen in Acts 10:9-15 and Acts 10:28. In a vision the Lord told Peter to eat all kinds of animals. Peter objected, but the Lord insisted. Then he realized that the unclean animals were symbolical of people, that is, Gentiles, as Peter says in Acts 10:28, that God had shown him he should not call any man unclean. Before the cross, Israel was strictly separate from Gentiles because Gentiles were considered unclean to them, but the sacrifice of Christ cleanses all who trust Him as Saviour, whether Jews or Gentiles, therefore God has removed the barrier between clean and unclean animals, so that "every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving" (1 Tim. 4:4).

ANIMALS ALLOWED OR DISALLOWED FOR FOOD (vv. 1-8)

Never since the flood has man been commanded to be a vegetarian. After the flood Noah was told, “every moving thing that lives shall be food for you” (Gen. 9:3). Nothing at that time was forbidden, except the eating of blood, a matter that has not changed through the ages. However, under law, and under law only, God put strict limits on what animals, birds or water creatures were permitted to Israel to eat. These laws were never put upon Gentiles, but only on Israel. The reason for some being forbidden was simply because of a spiritual significance, not that there was evil in the creature itself. This is clearly seen in Acts 10:9-15 and Acts 10:28. In a vision the Lord told Peter to eat all kinds of animals. Peter objected, but the Lord insisted. Then he realized that the unclean animals were symbolical of people, that is, Gentiles, as Peter says in Acts 10:28, that God had shown him he should not call any man unclean. Before the cross, Israel was strictly separate from Gentiles because Gentiles were considered unclean to them, but the sacrifice of Christ cleanses all who trust Him as Savior, whether Jews or Gentiles, therefore God has removed the barrier between clean and unclean animals, so that “every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving” (1 Tim. 4:4).

With Israel it was different. What animals were to be offered are distinctly specified, and what animals might be eaten as clean and what might not be eaten as unclean are given in detail. Of beasts the clean were those that divided the hoof and chewed the cud: those that had only one of these distinguishing marks were unclean. Of the fishes those only were to be eaten which had fins and scales. Of the fowls a list is given of those that must not be eaten, and of the winged crawling things, that go on all fours, only those 'which have legs above their feet to leap with' might be eaten. The locust, the bald locust, the beetle, and the grasshopper, each after his kind, might be eaten (probably four species of locust); but all other flying, creeping, or swarming things, which have four feet were unclean. 'Every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth' was unclean whatsoever goeth upon the belly, and whatsoever goeth upon all fours, or hath a multitude of feet, among all creeping things, was unclean. These directions are respecting what might or might not be eaten. Those that were not to be eaten were to be regarded as an abomination, and if the dead bodies of any such fell upon any vessel or garment it rendered it unclean, and any one who touched their carcass must wash his clothes and be unclean until the evening. Lev. 11; Deut. 14:3-20. These animals in their habits and instincts were used of God to teach His people as to habits and ways of the flesh that were unclean in His sight.

We know from other scriptures that the animals described here as unclean are not really so, but good as creatures of God; yet they were by Israel to be regarded as unclean and an abomination. The unclean are mostly those that are flesh-eating.

The particulars given of the unclean have doubtless symbolical meanings. They are principally these:

Dividing the hoof and chewing the cud may point to a steady patient walk (as the camel or the ox), and the digesting or meditating upon what is received: cf. Psalm 1:1-2; Prov. 12:27.

The distinction between clean and unclean animals was known before the flood (Gen. 7:2). Here, however, the Lord for the first time gives marks by which to distinguish them, whilst in Deut. 14:4-5, Moses, by God's command, mentions the beasts that were clean. The distinguishing marks were two; the one relating to their habit, the other to something which characterised them in their walk. The habit was that of ruminating, or chewing the cud. The characteristic about their walk was that they parted the hoof, and were cloven footed. Thus the habit, and the character of the walk were common to all the beasts of which the Israelites might eat. Such comprised those of the herd, or of the flock, from which alone sacrificial victims could be selected, and the hart, the roebuck or gazelle, and fallow deer, the wild goat, the pygarg or antelope, the wild ox or onyx, the chamois, or perhaps mountain sheep. Of these the hart, roebuck, and fallow deer, were served up daily at Solomon's table (1 Kings 4:23). The rest are not mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament.

To be a beast fit for an Israelite's table, it must have had both the above-mentioned distinguishing marks. The presence of the one without the other, whether real or apparent, would not suffice. We say real or apparent, because though neither the coney nor the hare chew the cud, yet they move their jaws in such a way that a common observer might class them as ruminants with the cow and the camel. So to instruct such as would never be naturalised, the law-giver uses language which is not scientifically correct. He spake in a manner that all could understand. This is often the way in Scripture. By the rules laid down, then, the camel, the coney, the hare, and the pig, were all excluded from the list of beasts fit for the people's food. Of their flesh they were not to eat, nor their carcases were they to touch. They were unclean to them. These directions, however, about clean and unclean, rested not here. All animated nature was thus classified, and in a very simple way. Beasts, fishes, birds, insects, and reptiles, were arranged by the Creator in one or other of these classes.

As to fishes, the possession of both fins and scales were requisite for any of them to be reckoned clean. Of birds, all were clean, except certain kinds which are enumerated. Carnivorous, omnivorous, foul-feeding birds, and night birds were unclean. By this standard, eagles, vultures, ravens, hawks, and owls, were shut out, as well as the ostrich, translated "owl" in verse 16, the gull, translated "cuckoo," the ibis, perhaps translated "swan," and the lapwing or hoopoe. Everything, too, which crept, though it had wings, was forbidden, except such as had legs above their feet to leap withal upon the earth, which comprised, it would seem, four species of locusts, among which the beetle could never be classed, for the word chargol, translated beetle (verse 22), must be taken as the name of some kind of locust. Of creeping things that creep upon the earth, the weasel (or perhaps mole), the mouse, and different kinds of lizards, translated in the authorised version tortoise, ferret, chameleon, snail, and the mole (or perhaps the chameleon) are enumerated as unclean. Besides, however, being merely unclean everyone was to be an abomination to them, it was not to be eaten. "Whatsoever goeth upon the belly, and whatsoever goeth on all four, or whatsoever has more feet among all creeping things that creep upon the earth, them shall ye not eat, for they are an abomination" (verses 41, 42).

No one, then, of the common people, even when made acquainted with the marks which distinguished the clean from the unclean animal, need make any mistake. Scientific distinctions, however correct, or the classification of genera, however full, would have been here out of place. God could have given such by Moses, had it pleased Him! From whence has man derived his knowledge of the things of nature, but from the Creator? (Isaiah 28:26). But for the unlearned, the common people, scientific distinctions would have been of little use without a special education, and natural ability to receive it. Now, in no country are all the inhabitants capable of such an attainment. Yet it was necessary that every one in Israel, from the highest to the lowest, should learn about clean and unclean animals. Hence God directed Moses thus to classify them. For it is probable that a ready and a simple way of distinguishing what they might eat and what not, was all that they were intended to understand; coupled, however, with the reminder that enjoying the privilege of being Jehovah's people, they were to keep themselves from being defiled by eating of animals of which Gentiles were free to partake. But we, who are taught in the New Testament deeper lessons than Israel ever were, may draw from these directions about clean and unclean, important teaching for ourselves, learning from the characteristic marks enumerated by Moses, what those moral features are, which in God's sight are regarded as clean.

As to fishes, there were two things which, when found together, marked that which was "clean" — having fins, and also scales; all others were unclean. "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. And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: they shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination. Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you." (vv. 9-12.) "Fins" show that the creature has power to go down, or rise high, or to swim against the stream; and the scales so completely enveloping them illustrate the covering or armour which the true servants of God have. We know how invulnerable Jesus was to every fiery dart of Satan. He could truly say, "The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me." In the perfectness of faith, He who took upon Him the form of a servant, effectually resisted every temptation with, "It is written;" and every child of God, through grace, in Christ his righteousness has strength to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one, and to escape his wiles. Our strength being in Another, and not in ourselves, we are enjoined to "be strong in the Lord, and in the power of His might," and thus to "put on the whole armour of God." Being born of God, and also having the Holy Ghost dwelling in us, we are able to go against the tide of circumstances; to refuse the world's patronage and honours; to go down, if need be, to the place of self-abasement, or to rise higher and higher in the power of faith.

With regard to "beasts," Moses is thus instructed to speak to the redeemed people among whom Jehovah dwelt: "Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, These are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth. Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is cloven-footed, and cheweth the cud among the beasts, that shall ye eat. 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. And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be cloven-footed, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean unto you. Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch: they are unclean to you." (vv. 2-8.) They were thus directed to distinguish between clean and unclean, so as to feed on some and to refuse others, not even to touch them, but in the most decided way to hold that "they are unclean."

The clean, as we have observed, shadow forth Christ. They were marked by two distinguishing features — parting the hoof and chewing the cud. When an animal was found bearing both these characteristics it was clean, and might be eaten; but if only one of these qualities existed in the beast, no matter however prepossessing it might otherwise seem, it must be entirely rejected. "Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you." (v. 8.) The "divided hoof" is clearly suggestive of walk, and "chewing the cud" of meditation on the word of God. Both these were strikingly and perfectly set forth in Jesus the Son of God, whose fellowship with God knew not a moment's interruption until He was made sin and a sacrifice for us on the cross. We know that He walked not after the counsel of the ungodly, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of the scornful. He was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners. His delight was in the law of Jehovah, and in His law did He meditate day and night. (Ps. 1:1-2; Heb. 7:28.) From these clean beasts then we are instructed not only to gather up spiritual food, but to go over it, portion by portion, in meditation, that it may be effectual for present comfort and strength in the walk. The importance of meditation on the Word can scarcely be over-estimated. It is more than reading, and one of the essentials of communion. By thus being occupied with the Scriptures, in dependence on the Holy Ghost and in faith, we receive God's thoughts into the mind and heart, and are thus guided and strengthened to walk for His glory. In all this Jesus was our perfect model. Meditating in the law of Jehovah day and night, He did always those things which pleased Him. Obedience was His constant employ. He said, "My meat is to do the will of Him that sent me, and to finish His work." He was "obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

But now that the priests were consecrated, particulars follow. Israel must have no fellowship where the outward walk was not firm, and this associated with the inward work of full digestion. The two requisites among the land animals are here marked respectively, by the hoofs not cloven in part, but feet quite split open, and by chewing or bringing up the cud. One only is insufficient. Both must co-exist to meet His mind for His people. Hence the cases are explained of animals familiarly known to them.

On the one hand the camel must be unclean to them, because it had not cloven hoofs, though a ruminating animal. The rock-badger, in the Authorised Version called the coney, was in the same predicament; and similarly, as it appears, the hare. On the other hand stood the swine, which did not chew the cud but swallowed its food voraciously, though it had cloven hoofs and feet quite split open; it should be unclean to them. They must neither eat the flesh nor touch the carcase.

The eleventh chapter consists in commandments concerning clean and unclean animals. In chapter 20:24-26, the reason for this distinction is given. "But I have said unto you: Ye shall inherit the land and I will give it unto you to possess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey; I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people. Ye shall therefore put a difference between clean beasts and unclean, and between unclean fowls and clean; and you shall not make your souls abominable by beast, or by fowl, or by any manner of living thing that creepeth on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean. And ye shall be holy unto me: for I the LORD am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be mine."

All those beasts were unclean which do not both chew the cud and divide the hoof (see also Deut. 14)--those fishes were unclean which have not both fins and scales--and those birds were unclean which are known as birds of prey, as well as insects (with the exception of certain locusts) and flying mammalia. The subject before us deserves a far deeper and more extended study than we can give it here. We are obliged to confine ourselves to but a few hints. We need not to devote much space to the wisdom revealed in these laws. As God is the author of them they must necessarily reveal His wisdom. It is interesting that all civilized races abstain from the use of the greater part of the animals, which this code prohibits. With the exception of a number of forbidden animals, civilized nations partake of only such which these laws permit. And those which are commonly eaten, such as the oysters, the hog and others, prohibited in this code, science has shown to be more or less responsible for certain diseases and therefore dangerous as a food. The discoveries made by science fully demonstrate the wisdom of these distinctions between the different animals. These laws in their literal meaning are, of course, no longer binding; the religious observance of them was not a permanent thing, and is done away with in the New Testament. The church has no such laws distinguishing between the clean and unclean animals. The clean typify the Jew and the unclean the Gentile. Peter's vision on the housetop of Joppa warrants this interpretation (Acts 10). The clean, the Jews, and the unclean, Gentiles, are, in believing, gathered into the one body. Read Colossians 2:16-17, where the fact is stated that Leviticus 11 is no longer in force. (While these laws have no longer a religious significance, it is wise to follow them as much as possible. Orthodox Jews who hold strictly to these dietary laws and keep them are far more free from certain diseases than Gentile races, which ignore these laws. It has also been shown by statistics that the mean duration of Jewish life averages much higher than that of others.)

In general the creeping things were forbidden, though in verses 21 and 22 there are certain exceptions. So when John the Baptist made locusts his food he was strictly within the law.

After the flood, God gave to man a grant of every moving living creature for food. (Gen. 9:3). Here, under the law, He introduces restrictions. Were men, then, contaminated in their souls by the indiscriminate use of animal food? Was that a source of moral defilement? Demons would instil into man's mind that it was. But the Lord has taught us (Matt. 15:18) from whence the moral defilement comes — even from out of the heart of man. Hence abstinence from meats will not promote true piety (1 Tim. 3:16 — 4:5). But why these restrictions? Because the law not only places man at a distance from God, and makes him conscious of it; but it also is meant to teach him the great difference between standing on the ground of its observance, and on the ground of grace. How simple and free was the intercourse between the patriarchs and the Lord Jehovah whenever He made Himself known to them; whereas, though He dwelt in the midst of Israel, it was in thick darkness, and they never could get personally into His presence. How free was the grant to Noah and to his sons? How stringent the restrictions placed on Israel! For, since it was Jehovah who brought them up out of the land of Egypt to be their God, they were to be holy, for He was holy (Lev. 11:45). The privilege of being God's people, which was great, entailed on them responsibilities which were not to be neglected. So it always must be. By Israel, as we are told in this chapter, ceremonial defilement was to be carefully avoided. With Christians the danger arises from that which is within (2 Cor. 7:1).