Read & Study the Bible Online - Bible Portal
Robert Jamieson; A. R. Fausset; David Brown

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Leviticus 11:7

7. the swine—It is a filthy, foul-feeding animal, and it lacks one of the natural provisions for purifying the system, "it cheweth not the cud"; in hot climates indulgence in swine's flesh is particularly liable to produce leprosy, scurvy, and various cutaneous eruptions. It was therefore strictly avoided by the Israelites. Its prohibition was further necessary to prevent their adopting many of the grossest idolatries practised by neighboring nations. read more

Thomas Constable

Expository Notes of Dr. Thomas Constable - Leviticus 11:1-8

Note that God began positively. He told the Israelites what they could eat (Leviticus 11:2-3; cf. Genesis 1:29-30; Genesis 2:16-17). Then He gave them a list of unclean land animals (Leviticus 11:4-8).Perhaps animals with cloven hoofs were unclean because they had only two digits instead of the basic five and were therefore thought of as abnormal. [Note: G. S. Cansdale, Animals of the Bible, p. 43.] Apparently the technical definition of chewing the cud that we use today is not what the Hebrews... read more

Thomas Constable

Expository Notes of Dr. Thomas Constable - Leviticus 11:1-23

Distinctions between clean and unclean animals 11:1-23We have here the same threefold division of animals that inhabit the land, sea, and air as the one that appears in the story of creation (Genesis 1:20-23)."It has long been recognized . . . that the order of the purity laws in Leviticus 11 follows that of the creation of animal life in Genesis 1 (Rashi). Moreover, just as in Genesis 1 God distinguished ’good’ and ’evil’ in his new creation, so also in Leviticus 11 God distinguished the... read more

Thomas Constable

Expository Notes of Dr. Thomas Constable - Leviticus 11:1-47

1. Uncleanness due to contact with certain animals ch. 11"This chapter contains a selected list of creatures that divides each type of creature into various classes of purity. According to the final verse in the chapter, the decisive question was whether a class of animals was unclean or clean. The goal of the distinctions was to determine whether an animal could be eaten. The notion of uncleanness and cleanness is specifically applied in this chapter to the question of holiness. Violating any... read more

John Dummelow

John Dummelow's Commentary on the Bible - Leviticus 11:1-34

(Leviticus 11-16) The Law of Clean and UncleanThis section deals with the subject of ceremonial uncleanness and the method of its purification. Four main types of uncleanness are referred to, viz. that of meats (Leviticus 11:1-23), of carcases (Leviticus 11:24), of leprosy (Leviticus 13, 14), and of certain bodily functions and conditions (Leviticus 12, 15). The effect of ceremonial uncleanness is that it disqualifies a person for the worship of God. Its duration varies according to the cause,... read more

John Dummelow

John Dummelow's Commentary on the Bible - Leviticus 11:1-47

Law of Clean and Unclean MeatsThe animals whose flesh may or may not be eaten are treated in four classes, viz. large land animals (Leviticus 11:3-8), water animals (Leviticus 11:9-12), birds (Leviticus 11:13-19), winged creeping things (Leviticus 11:20-23).3. Of the large land animals, those are clean which both chew the cud and divide the hoof. Unless they satisfy both these conditions they are unclean and cannot be eaten. The practical effect of this is to exclude all of prey. The flesh of... read more

Charles John Ellicott

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers - Leviticus 11:3

(3) Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted.—Better, Whatsoever is clovenfooted, and entirely separateth the hoofs. The first rule laid down by which the clean quadruped is to be distinguished is that the hoofs must be completely cloven or divided above as well as below, or, as the parallel passage in Deuteronomy 14:6 has it, “and cleaveth the cleft into two claws.” Such is the case in the foot of the ox, the sheep, and the goat, where the hoof is wholly divided below as much as above.... read more

Charles John Ellicott

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers - Leviticus 11:4

(4) Nevertheless these shall ye not eat.—As there are some quadrupeds which comply with only one of the two above-named conditions—i.e., which ruminate but have not their hoofs perfectly parted in two, or, vice versâ, are bisulcous and not ruminant—it is here declared that such animals must not be eaten.As the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not . . . —Better, though he cheweth the cud, yet he divideth not, as the same phrase is properly rendered in the Authorised Version in... read more

Charles John Ellicott

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers - Leviticus 11:5

(5) And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not . . . —Better, though he cheweth the cud, yet he divideth not. (See Leviticus 11:4.) The coney, which is the old English name for rabbit, is the meaning of the Hebrew expression shaphan, according to the definition of those who had to explain and administer this law at the time of Christ. As these interpreters lived in Palestine, where they saw the animals in question, the objection that the rabbit is not indigenous in Palestine... read more

Charles John Ellicott

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers - Leviticus 11:6

(6) And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but.—Better, though he cheweth the cud, yet. Other nations, too, shunned the flesh of hares. The Parsees considered the hare as the most unclean of all animals, and the ancient Britons abstained from eating it because of the loathsome disorders to which the hare is subject. Like the rabbit, or the hyrax, the hare has not the peculiar stomach of the true ruminant; but, like the rabbit, the hare, when sitting at rest, so moves its jaws that it appears... read more

Group of Brands