What meat does the Bible say not to eat?

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.

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.

In these days, when men's minds are so active in raising questions about almost everything, not a few have said a great deal about what should be eaten, and what should not be eaten. But concerning this we have the clearest instruction in the New Testament. The Christian, on the one hand, is told that "every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer." (1 Tim. 4:4-5.) On the other hand, "things strangled" and "blood" are as much prohibited now as ever. Before the deluge God gave men "the herb of the field" for food (Gen. 3:18); but after the deluge, and when the Lord smelled a sweet savour, or a savour of rest, in the clean beasts that had been sacrificed, and blessed Noah and his sons, He said, "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat." (Gen. 8:20 to 9:4.) Thus blood was prohibited by God in the days of Noah; and man, whether Jew or Gentile, infidel or Christian, has never from that time had liberty from God to eat blood. To believers in Christ who are brought into the liberty of children of God, it has been written by the apostles: "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well." (Acts 15:28-29.) From this scripture it is clear, that, however literally this chapter in Leviticus called for an observance on the part of the children of Israel in daily food, to us it can have no such meaning; for the only prohibitions we have are "from things strangled," and "from blood."

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 Israel God insisted that it was a perpetual statute that they eat neither fat nor blood (v. 17). Today believers are warned definitely not to eat blood (Acts 15:20). This restriction was introduced when God first allowed men to eat animals (Gen. 9:3-4), long before the law was given to Israel. Neither at that time, nor under grace today is there any restriction as to eating fat, however. Most of us may find that our health is better if we refrain from eating fat, in spite of our liberty to do so.

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).

Nor is this forgotten in the licence where no sacrifice was in question. "And the fat of the dead carcase, and the fat of that which is torn, may be used in any other service; but ye shall in no wise eat it." What died of itself or through another animal's violence, as a whole, had been forbidden already in Ex. 22:31, and was to be thrown to the dogs; much more was its fat unlawful to Israelites, as they were holy to Jehovah. In any other way it might be used. "For whosoever eats the fat of the beast of which men offer a fire offering to Jehovah, the soul that eats shall be cut off from his peoples."

But the blood was universally interdicted to the people who knew, as none others did of old, that life belongs to God. It mattered not what the animal might be, fowl or beast, all was forbidden absolutely. "And ye shall eat no blood, of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings: whatever soul [it be] that eats any manner of blood shall be cut off from his peoples." It denied the rights of God, the Creator; and if man forfeited his by sin, Jehovah maintained His title over it unimpaired. He instituted government by man in the first place to take cognisance of death by violent intent. Shed blood is its sign, and it belongs to God exclusively; man has no title to appropriate it. So we see that, long after the Holy Spirit was given, and Gentile freedom from circumcision was insisted on, eating of blood was still prohibited, as well as personal purity enjoined. The Christian is the last who should make light of a "faithful Creator." The principles laid down for Noah are not Jewish statutes, and subsist: so the apostles decided in Acts 15.

The other two commands, which are really one, to avoid things strangled and blood, come from Noah's day. Before the flood it seems as though men lived on grain, vegetables and fruit, and that they did not eat meat. But after the flood, in Genesis 9:3, God gave to Noah and his sons flesh to eat. He says, "Every moving thing that liveth shall be food for you; as the green herb I have given you everything. Only the flesh with its life, its blood, ye shall not eat." In Leviticus 17:10-11 we read, "I will set My face against the soul that hath eaten blood, and will cut him off from among his people; for the soul [or, life] of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that maketh atonement for the soul. Therefore have I said, … No soul of you shall eat blood." "The blood is the life." In the Scriptures God always claims the blood as His portion. Life belongs to God. The blood tells us of the precious blood of Christ, and that He gave His life for our lives; so Christians may not eat blood. In "things strangled" the blood has not been poured out, so we Christians may not eat such meat.

There are those today who command the Lord's people to "abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer." 1 Timothy 4:3-5. From these verses we see that Christians today are perfectly free to eat pork which was forbidden under the law. Now we may eat it, and give God thanks. There are those today who forbid it, but such persons do not "believe and know the truth."

The Israelite was not to partake of each animal which he might meet with. What was monstrous in one way or another was forbidden; what was according to divine order was lawful to him. Thus animals in the waters without fins and scales; winged insects without springing hind legs distinct from their four legs; the ravenous and nocturnal among birds; the carnivorous among beasts were of course excluded; but there were others also in divine wisdom and with a typical regard. When dead too, their touch defiled, even to a vessel or raiment, etc. (verses 9-35.) Not so a fountain or pit, or gathering of water, which cleansed instead of contracting uncleanness (ver. 36); not so sowing seed (ver. 37). The power and life of the Spirit are incontaminate. Reptiles which did not fly or leap were all unclean. Jehovah laid all this on His people, who were to be holy because He was.

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.