Leviticus 11:20

All fowls that creep,.... Or rather "every creeping thing that flies"; for what are designed are not properly fowls, but, as the Jewish writers interpret them, flies, fleas, bees, wasps, hornets, locusts, c.

All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you.

All fowls that crawl or creep upon the earth, and so degenerate from their proper nature, which is to fly, and are of a mongrel kind; which may intimate that apostates and mongrels in religion are abominable in the sight of God, and in conversation with men. Going upon all four, upon four legs, or upon more than four, as bees, flies, &c, which is all one to the present purpose, these pluralists for legs being here opposed to those that have but two.

Leviticus 11:20 All fowls that creep, going upon [all] four, [shall be] an abomination unto you.Ver. 20. All fowls that creep.] So all mongrels in religion, that, like the planet Mercury, can he good in conjunction with good, and bad with bad; that have religionem ephemeram, fidem menstruam. Hilar.

(20) All the fowls that creep.—Better, all creeping things which have wings. The swarming animals or insects, which, as we have seen, constitute the fourth class of the Hebrew division of the animal kingdom, are now discussed in Leviticus 11:20-23. From the fact that in the following verse several kinds of locusts are exempted, it is evident that the phrase “creeping things which have wings” denotes insects. Going upon all four.—That is, the insects in question not only fly but also creep. The phrase, however, “upon all four” does not refer to the exact number of feet, but, as in some modern languages, denotes walking with its body in a horizontal position, or near the ground, in contradistinction to the two-legged birds discussed in the foregoing verses. This is the sense which the administrators of the law in the time of Christ attached to the phrase. Hence the Chaldee paraphrase of Jonathan translates it, “And all creeping-things which have wings going upon all four, the flyspecies and the wasp or hornet species and the bee species.” Shall be an abomination unto you.—As the bee species is included among “the creeping things which have wings,” some have supposed that bee-honey comes within the unclean things which are here said “shall be an abomination unto you.” Hence it is thought that the honey (dabesh) which is so frequently mentioned in the Bible as a special feature of the promised land (Exodus 3:8; Exodus 3:17; Exodus 13:5; Exodus 16:14; Exodus 33:3; Leviticus 20:24, etc.), and which formed an important article of food among the Hebrews, was not the natural product of the bee, but is either the grape-honey, the dibs, which is still prepared in many parts of Syria and Palestine, and is exported in great quantities into Egypt; or the vegetable – honey, the exudation of certain trees and shrubs found in the peninsula of Sinai. Hence, too, it is supposed that the wild honey which Jonathan ate in the wood (1 Samuel 14:25), and which was the meat of John the Baptist (Matthew 3:4), must refer to this vegetable-honey. But though it is true that the canon which obtained during the second Temple was “Whatsoever cometh from unclean creatures is unclean,” and that in accordance with this law the milk of unclean quadrupeds and the eggs of unclean birds and fishes were forbidden, yet the honey of bees was expressly permitted. The administrators of the law in the time of Christ accounted for this exemption that it is not the direct produce of the insect itself, but is a preparation from gathered juices of clean herbs. The Chaldee paraphrase of Jonathan therefore adds, after “shall be an abomination unto you,” the words, nevertheless the honey of the bee ye may eat. John the Baptist therefore acted in perfect obedience to the Law when he ate the honey which the bees deposited in the crevices of the rocks and in the hollow of trees.

Verse 20. All fowls that creep] Such as the bat, already mentioned, which has claws attached to its leathern wings, and which serve in place of feet to crawl by, the feet and legs not being distinct; but this may also include all the different kinds of insects, with the exceptions in the following verse. Going upon all four] May signify no more than walking regularly or progressively, foot after foot as quadrupeds do; for it cannot be applied to insects literally, as they have in general six feet, many of them more, some reputed to have a hundred, hence called centipedes; and some a thousand, hence called millipedes; words which often signify no more than that such insects have a great number of feet.

Ch. Leviticus 11:1-23 [51]. The Distinction between Clean and Unclean Food [51] For the sources from which this ch. comes, and its relation from a critical point of view to Deuteronomy 14:3 ff. see App. I (c), pp. 162 f.One principle underlying this distinction appears to have been that animals which were recognised as in any way objects of worship by heathen neighbours, or even supposed by them to be connected with unseen supernatural beings, were to be considered unclean. See Bertholet in KHC., introd. note to this ch. But in other cases the prohibition probably rested on the animal’s repulsive appearance or uncleanly habits, or on sanitary or totemistic grounds. See Driver, Deut. p. 164, and Rob.-Sm. OTJC.2 p. 366. A list of animals which may and may not be eaten is given in Deuteronomy 14:3-20; it has close verbal affinity with Leviticus 11:2-21 of this ch. The two passages are placed side by side in Driver (ICC.) Deut. P. 157 f. Both lists are divided into classes: (a) Beasts Leviticus 11:2-8. Cp. Deuteronomy 14:3-8 Deut. enumerates three domestic, and seven wild animals, as clean beasts which may be eaten. Lev. does not mention the clean beasts, but both give their two distinguishing marks—‘Whatsoever parteth the hoof … and cheweth the cud,’ and specify the same four beasts which have not both of these marks as unclean. Lev. is more diffuse, but employs the same expressions as Deut. (b) Fishes Leviticus 11:9-12. Cp. Deuteronomy 14:9-10 The same criterion of cleanness, having ‘scales and fins,’ is given both in Lev. and Deut., but Lev. is more diffuse, and introduces a word (Heb. shéḳ ?eẓ ?) detestation, used frequently in this ch., also in Leviticus 7:21, and Isaiah 66:17; Ezekiel 8:10. Another and commoner form (shiḳ ?ḳ ?uẓ ?) occurs in Deuteronomy 29:16. No fish is mentioned by name, and the distinction between clean and unclean fishes in particular cases was determined by the Jewish rabbis. (c) Birds Leviticus 11:13-19. Cp. Deuteronomy 14:11-18 Deut. begins with ‘Of all clean birds ye may eat’ (Leviticus 11:11), but does not give a list like that of clean beasts. The forbidden birds are almost identical in both. (d) Winged swarming things Leviticus 11:20-23. Cp. Deuteronomy 14:19-20 Lev. adds ‘that go upon all four’ (Leviticus 11:20), and in Leviticus 11:21-22 gives a list of winged swarming things that may be eaten (those that ‘leap’), repeating in Leviticus 11:23 the prohibition of Lev 11:20. Deut. concludes the list with ‘of all clean fowls (the same Heb. word as for ‘winged things’) ye may eat’ (Leviticus 14:20), but gives no list.

Rather, “All creeping things which have wings,” etc. The word rendered creeping things may be regarded as coextensive with our word vermin.