The first part in this series can be found here.
Leviticus 11:6 tells us that hares chew the cud. They do not. Animals that chew the cud are called ruminants. When they eat plant matter, it goes to their first stomach to soften, and then it’s regurgitated to their mouth. They spend time re-chewing it, and then it is swallowed and fully digested. Ruminants (cows, sheep, goats, etc.) are recognizable because their chewing of the cud is very obvious. Hares (rabbits) don’t chew the cud; however, their mouths do move frequently, so it’s possible to see why some people may have assumed that they do chew the cud. Of course, God would know they didn’t, and this is why the passage is problematic.
There have been some good attempts at explaining this. First of all, it has been suggested that even though God knew hares didn’t chew the cud, the Israelites probably didn’t. Since they would have seen the chewing motion of hares and assumed that they were cud-chewers, God simply used language that they would understand.
I actually think this explanation has some merit. However, God also knew that the Bible would be used by all people in all times. Therefore, he would have known that this passage could be problematic for modern people. So I don’t see why he couldn’t have said “appear to chew the cud,” or something like that in order to clarify things for both groups. Also, he could have taken it as an opportunity to educate them on the fact that hares don’t actually chew the cud, regardless of what their mouths look like.
Another explanation has been to point out that while rabbits aren’t ruminants, they do re-digest some of their food through the process of coprophagia. This process sounds pretty disgusting. Basically, it’s eating feces to gain additional nutrients. Hares don’t do this with their regular droppings, but with a special type of pellet that essentially consists of partially digested plant matter.
A problem with this theory is that hares don’t actually chew these pellets, they swallow them whole. Also, pigs are known to practice coprophagia as well, yet Leviticus 11:7 says, “And the pig, because it parts the hoof and is cloven-footed but does not chew the cud, is unclean to you” (emphasis mine). So it would appear that “chew the cud” does not include coprophagia.
Bottom line: the Bible claims that hares chew the cud, but we know they do not.
We’ll look at another contradiction in the next post.
Finding Truth 
William — As I said, all of the apparent contradictions can be reconciled. I’ve done it. I’ll give you a hint. Most have to do with translation issues. I’ll give you an example. The genealogies of Matthew and Luke. Here is a short synopsis. You can verify the information. Matthew’s genealogy is of Mary and Luke’s is of Joseph. In Mathew’s account count the last 14 generations listed. There are only 13 right? Now look at the Greek word translated as father (aner) (mat 1:16) , can mean any man. If Mary’s father was also named Joseph it would reconcile both apparent problems with the text. If you take a similar approach to the other apparent problems you listed you can reconcile all of them. The main problem to overcome is personal bias.
LikeLike
Tom, I think the problems are more complex than that. If you’d like to discuss further, I wrote about it here:
https://findingtruth.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/contradictions-part-6-jesuss-genealogy/
LikeLike
On the contrary, I’ve read bible scholars on both sides as I was a very devoted and dedicated Christian for many years. But you’re right … it boils down to what each individual chooses to believe as “evidence.” It just happens that my personal research put me on the opposite side from you. 😉
LikeLike
Sorry … failed to close bold after “both”.
LikeLike
But Tom,
not all evidence or conclusions derived from the evidence are equal.
Like a rock in the hand. If let go, will the rock fall or float? Before it happens, does it really take the same degree of faith to think it will fall as it would to believe it would float?
Is it really on equal footing to believe that Muhammad flew on a winged horse or to believe that the story of him flying on that horse was made up or greatly exaggerated?
is it just as good to believe that the sun stood still for Joshua or moved backward for Hezekiah as to believe that those are just fictional legends? Does the absence of any other record of these solar events, from any other astrology-observing cultures aid either one of those positions?
Much of the evidence we have is what we know about science and the nature of people, right? Like, when things die and are dead for three days, they dont come back to life. Virgin humans dont bear children. hare’s dont chew cuds. And people are subject to mistakes and lies….
Should we take the testimony of ancient superstitious men that we do not know, when their testimony contradicts things we do know and can verify?
LikeLiked by 1 person
And Tom, yeah, let’s discuss the genealogies over on that thread that nate linked to… But please note that neither luke nor Matthew claim to be giving genealogy of Mary, but both state through Joseph – you’re having to create or imagine a possible fix to the problem that exists in the text as it’s written.
but maybe you and I understand contradiction differently. To me, it looks like any contradiction can be “reconciled” the way that Christians “reconcile” the issues in the bible.
Can you give an example of a contradiction that cannot be “reconciled” in such a way? because right now I think I can create or imagine a fix to any problem if I try hard enough…
LikeLike
William – actually no. Both genealogies are not of Joseph (hence the translation error in mathew) The greek word “aner” was translated as husband and not father. This error accounts for both the 14th generation that is not present and the differing lines present in the Matthew geneology and the one of Josephs line in Luke. If you have never studied other languages then you probably have no clue about translation issues. I will look for posts on the other link to continue.
LikeLike
only Arabic and french in some detail, and then the use of interlinear bibles in regard to hebrew and greek, but I’m not even a master of english, so I have doubt that I’ll make translation mistakes.
I do tend to trust the people making the translations, similar to how I trust a doctor or mechanic. But yeah, let’s discuss this more on nate’s link, please.
LikeLike
… lol, see? I have “No Doubt,,,”
LikeLike
Nan – that is too bad that Christianity has spoiled your faith. I had a similar experience. I left traditional Christianity but held onto the truth of God’s word (believe me there is a huge difference). Christianity includes a lot of tradition that just simply is not in line with the Bible. I agree that Christians have a lot of stuff in their belief systems that don’t add up to God’s word, but the word of God is faithful and true.
LikeLike
Tom,
I posted this in the approprite thread, here: https://findingtruth.info/2011/03/11/contradictions-part-6-jesuss-genealogy/#comment-33052
would you respond there?
you made an interesting point in regard to Matthew’s genealogy (on the other thread).
I looked up the greek word used in Matt 1:16 for “husband” here: https://findingtruth.info/2011/03/11/contradictions-part-6-jesuss-genealogy/ and this source says that the greek word was “andra” not “aner” and means husband, not father or man….
what source do you have?
LikeLike
@Tom
I read this quite often from Christians, but they never seem to be forthcoming with details.
Could you please explain what the word of God is?
Where can one find it?
And how does the laymen verify its veracity?
Thanks.
LikeLike
Very good question. You will need to read the Christian Bible or Jewish TANAKH for more information, but I can give you a brief overview. Firstly, we need to establish we are talking about the only true God. He the creator of all things. His name was given to His servant Moses. In Hebrew it is YHWH or Yahovah (Jehovah in English). The word of God is written in the Bible, but is not the Bible itself. It was the Word of God that created all things. The Word of God is both what is written (the words spoke by the almighty that were written) and the Word of God is described as God interacting with His creation. The word of God also became flesh and dwelt among us, as a Hebrew man named Yeshua (John 1). The name Yeshua has been translated through the Greek and is also known as Jesus. It is through the “word of God”, that we have redemption from sin and salvation when we are judged by God at the end of this age. The word of God can be verified through His creation, through His written word contained in the Bible, through fulfilled prophesy, through knowing His only Son Yeshua (who is the “word” become flesh), and through the indwelling of His Holy Spirit. I hope this starts to answer your question. My answer probably doesn’t come close to describing the depth of knowing God through Yeshua, but I hope in inspires you to keep looking. May God bless you, and keep you, May He make His face shine upon you and be gracious to you, may He lift His coutenance upon you and give you peace. (Numbers 6:22-27)
LikeLike
Allow me to stop you here and clear this up first, if I may?
Thanks to modern biblical scholarship as well as science ( the Human Genome Project for one) and archaeology we know the Pentateuch is nothing but geopolitical fiction and characters such as Adam and Eve and Moses are simply narrative constructs.
Knowing this , how do you square away this Word of God when there is little or no veracity to the Pentateuch?
Thanks.
LikeLike
Arkenaten — Gonna have to disagree with you about the whole “modern biblical scholarship/science/human genome project” that is assuming a whole lot that needs to be dissected a bit first. Most of which is hypothetical and not based on true science. Firstly, anything historical cannot be proven through the scientific method, because it cannot be tested, observed, and verified. I know this fact pisses people off but it is true, so there goes your reliance on science. Historically speaking all we have is evidence, not actual proof. So then what we need to do is piece together the evidence and see what emerges. There is a lot of evidence that adds a lot of credibility to the bible. The recent documentary “patterns of evidence” details archaeological evidence that gives a lot of credibility to the biblical narrative.
LikeLike
I watched the trailer to “patterns of evidence” here: http://patternsofevidence.com/trailer-videos/
I’d be interested to watch the documentary. But like those shown in the preview, it’s my understanding that much of the evidence either does not support the biblical claims or even contradicts them…
is there any literature you could cite, or do we have to watch the video?
To me, things like the sun standing still or moving backwards are big claims. And these are events that would be noticed throughout the world, not just to a small geographical area – and while there were notable astronomer societies, none of them though that incredible events like the sun ,moving backwards or standing still was noteworthy? They recorded comets and meteors and phases of the moon, but weren’t interested in these? I dunno…
No one thought it was noteworthy to record the dead bodies walking out of their graves in Jerusalem at the time of jesus’ death?
Would you accept such evidence to validate Muhammad, or anyone else, or any other religion?
LikeLike
The HGP for one has established unequivocally that humans did not derive from a single couple as per the biblical tale.
You are surely not going to tell me evolution is not fact are you?
And you must be aware of the work Collins and the hundreds of people who worked on this project?
As for Exodus. There IS evidence of the Settlement Pattern and most of it was internal.
Surely you aware of this also?
”Patterns of Evidence” shows nothing but speculation, I’m afraid.
However if you are sure of your standpoint then please name a single secular Egyptologist that will confirm the Israelites were in Egypt as per the bible and the Exodus occurred as per the story.
LikeLike
Hey Tom,
Don’t want to pile on, so please don’t take my comment that way. It’s nice to see you commenting here again, and I appreciate your respectful approach to these kinds of discussions.
You said:
Now, to be fair, couldn’t that also be said about your initial statement?
LikeLike
Arkenaten — You are kidding me right? Evolution? I thought that went away a long time ago. I think cell biology has proven evolution false, and that was proven decades ago. With all the true science showing us the complexity of the cell. The studies upon studies (using the proper scientific method) that prove one species cannot change into another. We have absolutely nothing that shows intermittent species in the fossil record. I could go on and on… Evolution is dead my friend. Give it up…. Many credible scientists readily admit that evolution is dead. As far as Egyptologists go, can you name a credible one? One that does not rely upon myth when speaking of the history of Egypt. Patterns of Evidence shows much more than speculation. Lots of evidence that support the biblical narrative.
LikeLike
Nate – yep, to be fair, I see your point. Although the context is different. I was still piling on a lot that would take volumes to unpack.
LikeLike
Oh dear, oh dear.We have a Frakking Creationist among us.
Young Earth or Old?
Hilarious! Well, there are enough Dickheads around without me feeling obliged to engage another arsehole like you.
I am surprised the host has not politely asked you to close the door on your way out.
I can guarantee even the ”normal” Christians on this blog are already cringing with embarrassment.
LikeLike
Tom, the stuff you just said about evolution is waaaaaayyyyyy outside the mainstream. I can recommend some resources, if you’re interested.
LikeLike
Arkenaten – Definitely young earth. It takes a whole lot more faith to believe the garbage science in the mainstream than in a creator. Look around you, it doesn’t take a whole lot to see evidence of the creator. No, I am far from a mainstream Christian. Left that behind a long time ago. Take care brother. Best of luck to ya.
LikeLike
I find it interesting that Tom would suggest that ‘certain’ scientists have rejected evolution. That may be the case but the reality is that the overwhelming majority of scientists accept evolution as the best explanation of the observed evidence.
Indeed Francis Collins, a Christian, and one time head of the Human Genome Project wrote a book where he argued that Evolution was a fact.
If we accept for the moment that creation might be an acceptable alternative explanation, it is puzzling why more than 99% of all the species ever to be on earth are now extinct. And don’t say it is because of the Flood!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Peter — Here is some evidence of what I am talking about concerning many scientists not agreeing with the theory of evolution (macro evolution – to be clear on what we are discussing here). https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/a-world-famous-chemist-tells-the-truth-theres-no-scientist-alive-today-who-understands-macroevolution/ . There is a lot of evidence that just plainly states that evolution is not the mechanism of how life happens. I choose creationism as the best explanation of how life happened.
LikeLike