Posts Tagged ‘kashrut’

God Is Not Binary

Saturday, April 17th, 2010

When God made mankind, he put them in the Garden and told them they could eat from every plant, right?

Genesis 1:29  And God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food.

Genesis 1:1-2:3 is a summary of creation week. Genesis 2:4-25 tells the same exact story but from a different vantage point. It’s hazy regarding the passage of time, leaves out some details, and adds some others. That doesn’t mean the two accounts are contradictory, only that they have different foci.

There is one problem, however. There is an apparent contradiction between Genesis 1:29 and 2:16-17.

Genesis 2:16-17  And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden,  (17)  but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

Which is it? Can man eat every plant or not? The answer is yes!*

There is no contradiction. The confusion is not in the words, but in the reader who treats them like a mathematical text. Genesis was written to be understood by ordinary people. It’s bare meaning had to be accessible to shepherds and farmers, so it was written in the same basic language that they themselves used. When a subsistence farmer says, “Let’s get all these fields planted,” does he mean every single field in existence? Of course not. Does he even mean all of his own fields? No again. He only means all the fields that are supposed to be planted at this time, and he expects that everyone to whom he is speaking will understand that. The ancient Hebrews knew the story of the Garden of Eden and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. When they heard it read, “I have given you every plant that grows on the earth,” they didn’t need to hear “except for this one” to understand that there was at least one exception.

We don’t need to hear it either. Instead, we need to understand that God and his words recorded in the Scriptures are holistic. They are a unified whole (echad in Hebrew) with depth and height and breadth. We cannot understand the words of Paul or John without understanding Moses and Isaiah, because the latter are a foundation and framework for the former. Likewise, since we do not live within the cultural context of Moses or Isaiah, we cannot completely understand their words either without Paul and John to finish the walls and trim. Scripture is a house, not a line.

* Consider Genesis 9:3 and Leviticus 11 with this principle in mind.

Abominations

Tuesday, March 16th, 2010

I did a quick survey of “abomination” and its close synonyms in the Torah in response to a question from a good friend. I had to correct a couple of misconceptions that I have entertained for years. There are several Hebrew words used for this idea, but two in particular stood out:

Hebrew: Shekets/shakats/shikuts
English: Something detestable/abominable, to detest, to make detestable
Context: Non-kosher animals of all kinds are to be considered detestable to you. Things that are shekets are also tamay (from a root word meaning hidden, hence walled off, usually translated as unclean, defiled, or impure). Eating non-kosher swarming things (presumably all kinds of insects except a few approved locusts) makes you unclean/tamay.

Hebrew: Toaybah
English: Disgusting, abominable
Context: Idols, idolatry, idolaters, sorcery, witchcraft, copying pagan worship, homosexuality, bestiality, wife swapping, and using unjust weights are all toaybah to God and the land. Eating with Hebrews and sacrificing sheep are toaybah to Egyptians.

There is definitely a difference between the two words, but it seems to be lost on the English translators. The major difference that I can see is that “shekets” is used when God commands us to hold a thing to be detestable, like trying to train a child not to eat something he found on the ground. It’s not that the parent is repulsed by the child eating it so much as he needs to teach the child to be repulsed for himself. On the other hand, if something is “toaybah,” then God doesn’t want us to do it for his sake, because he finds it repulsive or because the land itself rebels against it.

With that perspective, it seems perfectly reasonable to say that God told us not to eat those animals because it’s bad for us to do so. Whether it’s bad physically or spiritually or both is another question. The last option gets my vote.

What!? God Was Right!? Again!!??

Wednesday, February 10th, 2010

Biological Risks of Eating Reptiles

02/10/2010 …A study shows that eating these animals can have side effects that call into question the wisdom of eating this ‘delicacy.’

God’s rules for what animals you should eat and what you shouldn’t are not about health. Let me say that again: Eating kosher isn’t about health. It’s about obedience. However, having said that, eating kosher is almost certainly healthier than not.

Exodus 15:26 And said, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee.