CLEAN AND UNCLEAN ANIMALS
CLEAN AND UNCLEAN ANIMALS
JT It will be readily observed that chapter 11 refers to what may or may not be eaten in our ordinary circumstances; whereas, the section in chapter 24 contemplates the holy place, and the food eaten there is prescribed. Chapter 11 is addressed to all Israel; that is to say, the people of God viewed in their ordinary circumstances; chapter 24 contemplates the same people, but in the position of priests whose privilege it is to serve in the tabernacle.
HSD Is that why so much is said in chapter 11 about what may not be eaten?
JT Yes; such instructions would have no force with those serving in the tabernacle, for the unclean things would not be there. Chapter 11 contemplates persons typified by the creatures named therein; they would be found promiscuously in our daily vocations, hence we are called upon to discriminate in our intercourse with people so as to avoid association with such as are unclean amongst them.
AFM In this chapter Jehovah addressed Moses and Aaron. Generally He spoke to Moses only; in this instance He connects Aaron with him. Would it have in view our spiritual judgment as a result of getting these directions from the priestly side?
JT Yes. Where they are both spoken to, it is typically, a question of the authority of the Lord Jesus over us, and of His priesthood. The need for discrimination with us is in view, the need of having our “senses exercised for distinguishing both good and evil”, (Hebrews 5:14).
BTF The eating spoken of here was for the sustaining of their [p. 58] bodies.
JT That is the thought in eating; we eat for sustenance, not merely for pleasure.
BTF The thought would be that what we eat forms us.
JT I think so; hence we must not eat anything unclean. It resolves itself into the manner of our relations with persons whom we meet promiscuously in the world. We have to see whether they chew the cud and divide the hoof; that is to say, whether they not only hear the word of God and believe it, but assimilate it, and then whether their walk is according to it. We have to seek out such people, and not to associate in any receptive way with others.
AP Are you applying the four classes of animals in Leviticus 11 to persons?
JT I think they are types of persons. You have the land animals, the fish, the fowl, and the creeping things. These are the four heads under which we may consider this subject.
ANW I suppose the animals in the sheet before Peter, represented persons.
JT Clearly so, it was Cornelius and those with him. Peter was to regard them as clean.
AJD Would the creatures in our chapter be representative of the classes of people with which we have to do?
JT Yes. God has, in the creation, furnished a language whereby He can address us, and in these typical books He uses these symbols to convey to us what is in His mind. What we may learn here is that in our everyday vocations we meet with all sorts of people, and must form a judgment as to them, for we are not to fall in with them indiscriminately and fraternise with them as if there were no difference, as if God had put no difference between His people and those who are not His people — between the clean and the unclean.
JEH How can we tell whether some of those [p. 59] whom we meet in our daily callings might not be the Lord’s people?
JT It is a question of whether they chew the cud and divide the hoof — whether, as professedly believing the word of God, they assimilate it.
JEH In some cases, the animals here spoken of divide the hoof but they do not chew the cud.
JT When you come to the fish, the fowl, and the creeping things, the idea of chewing the cud and dividing the hoof is necessarily dropped. We have to begin with the idea that no one can be clean save as he, according to the figure, chews the cud and divides hoof.
ARS What does dividing the hoof stand for?
JT Discrimination in walk. We are called upon to follow in Jesus’ steps, which some undertake to do without chewing the cud. Peter helps as to this, he says, “As newborn babes desire earnestly the pure mental milk of the word, that by it ye may grow up to salvation”; then he says, “For Christ also hath suffered for you, leaving you a model that ye should follow in his steps”, (1 Peter 2:2,21). It is not simply to follow His way in a general sense, but you have to pick out the steps.
AFM An animal that divides the hoof makes a distinct mark as it walks on the earth; whereas, an animal with paws makes little or no impression as it moves about.
JT When you apply that distinction spiritually, it has great significance: A Christian, properly speaking, does not go everywhere!
AP Would you say that the children of the elect lady who were found walking in truth (2 John 1) could be considered as dividing the hoof?
JT Exactly.
ANW Peter in Acts 10 seems to have failed in being too discriminating. He was hesitant to recognise the work of God among the Gentiles, and was [p. 60] told not to make common what God had cleansed. We are not careful enough sometimes to discriminate as to those that are clean.
JT In the palace of the high priest, Peter was not so careful; he sat down and warmed himself with the enemies of the Lord, and denied Him there.
WB-w In chapter 10:10, it says, “That ye may put difference between the holy and the unholy, and between unclean and clean”. Is that the principle on which this chapter is developed?
JT The idea of the priesthood necessarily underlies all this instruction.
WB-w Why does it follow the death of Nadab and Abihu?
JT It comes in here after the general instruction to the priests. Chapters 1 to 10, in furnishing instruction as to the offerings, culminate in priesthood. The priests are seen as under a charge: being responsible for the law. In drawing near to God with our offerings we merge into priesthood, and so are competent to make a difference between the unclean and the clean. The priesthood broke down (chapter 10), but this did not set aside the need for discrimination; so that in chapter 11 all the people are viewed as responsible for it.
WB-w Where would Eleazar and Ithamar come in?
JT The instruction here is to Moses and Aaron. Aaron’s sons are not mentioned; the priesthood had failed in them. Therefore; if saints viewed in that capacity fail so seriously, it is all the more urgent that the saints as a whole should see to it that the word of God is assimilated by them. It has first to be assimilated, and then there must needs be a walk in correspondence with it.
AFM The question might be raised with regard to Nadab and Abihu, as to their being influenced by natural things such as wine or strong drink when in [p. 61] the tent of meeting. Their senses were not regulated by what was spiritual, hence the “strange fire” (chapter 10:2).
JT Quite so. It should serve as a warning to us.
AL “Wherefore come out from the midst of them, and be separated”, (2 Corinthians 6:17). Would that correspond with the cloven hoof?
JT It would indeed. Psalm 1 helps as to that. The land animals point to persons in distinction or prominence; the fish to swarms of men in their natural element, as in the large cities in which we dwell. The fowl would represent men viewed with ability to be independent, whether in the way of good or evil. An unclean bird would prefigure a person who has much wealth or a liberal education by means of which he soars above the heads of others, in pride and independence of God. The clean cattle are not designated; the unclean only are named, for the reason that we are so apt to be drawn away by persons of distinction, irrespective of their condition. The names of those unclean are therefore given, in order that we may discern them. The same remarks apply to the fowl: Those mentioned are not only unclean, but “an abomination shall they be”.
AP What would the crawling things mean?
JT Well, there is more said about these than the other classes named; they would apply to persons who live on the earth, but have no power to rise above it, and are on this account especially abominable. “Every winged crawling thing that goeth upon all four shall be an abomination unto you”; that is, it represents one grovelling on the earth. Then the passage goes on to say, “Yet these shall ye eat of every winged crawling thing that goeth upon all four: those which have legs above their feet with which to leap upon the earth”. These typify Christians who can rise above the earth, who have the power by the Spirit, like the man who had [p. 62] been lame (Acts 3), to walk and leap and praise God.
BTF What would be the instruction here in regard to the earth; could it be viewed as evil?
JT Our calling is heavenly, and hence to grovel on the earth makes us unclean. The exhortation is: “Have your mind on the things that are above, not on the things that are on the earth”, (Colossians 3:2). James, in speaking of our having bitter emulation and strife in our hearts, says “This is not the wisdom which comes down from above, but earthly, natural, devilish” (James 3:15), which shows the significance of the earth in a moral sense. It is not the earth in the sense of that which produces vegetation, etc., but as the sphere in which men live and seek to enjoy themselves without God.
AR You were saying that Psalm 1 furnishes an example of one who keeps himself from the defilement spoken of here. Will you give us a word on the opening verses; it says, “Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the wicked, and standeth not in the way of sinners, and sitteth not in the seat of scorners; but his delight is in Jehovah’s law, and in his law doth he meditate day and night”.
JT The foundation of the book of Psalms is the godly man. In Psalm 1 we have moral greatness; in Psalm 2, official greatness; the latter is founded on the former, and both are seen in Christ. Eating what is clean builds up a constitution through which God can work out His thoughts in us. Separation is not only turning away from what is evil; we must be sustained in it, and this implies eating what is clean. The type here shows that there is plenty of clean food.
JS You have a very discriminating man in Psalm 1.
JT Yes; note, “walketh not”, “standeth not”, “sitteth not”.
AFM You get in the Psalm the two thoughts [p. 63] we have been dwelling upon — separation in verse 1, and mediation in verse 2; that is to say, the cloven hoof, and the chewing of the cud.
TA It says of John the baptist, “And, looking at Jesus as he walked”, (John 1:36).
ABP Is the reference to the first of the four classes of clean animals suggested to us when the Lord says, “My mother and my brethren are those who hear the word of God and do it”, (Luke 8:21)?
JT Yes. They chew the cud and divide the hoof. It is remarkable that we have so much about “winged crawling” things, and yet some of them are clean; that is, they have the power to rise above the earth; suggestive of saints who can leave their ordinary affairs and come to a meeting like this for instance, and enjoy it! The winged crawling things and the crawling things would typify the masses of mankind. God has cleansed some of these crawling things, relatively a few. Some of the distinguished animals and birds in creation are violent and destructive, and so prefigure men who are so characterised. The lower creatures represent more the seething character of sin by which men make themselves abominable (verse 43).
AMcN Would you say that spiritual energy is conveyed in leaping?
JT That is it. Spiritual energy as seen in the man of Acts 3:8 “And leaping up he stood and walked, and entered with them into the temple, walking and leaping, and praising God”.
WGT These energetic features in the healed man would show us that he was a different kind of man now.
JS How would you connect what we are now considering with the manna?
JT The manna is Christ. There was no question of discrimination with it; the Israelites had simply to gather it, as it lay on the ground in its whiteness like [p. 64] hoar-frost. It is Christ as He was in His daily life here on earth; not Christ as He now is in heaven. The clean food of our chapter is found among the people of God. You meet those who are His and those who are not, and also worldly Christians. Indeed, you meet all kinds of people in your everyday life, so that you are called upon to discriminate as to those whom you commune with — whom you appropriate, so to speak, for eating implies that.
JS Would you discriminate between your associations and what you eat? Here it is a question of what you eat.
JT It is, but I think the idea is that you seek the company and fellowship of “clean” people.
AFM By not discriminating when amongst men, one becomes like the men prefigured by these unclean things; we are to be completely separated from what is unclean, and associated with what is clean.
CAM As was remarked, the man in Acts 3 is a very striking example of this: His feet and ankle bones were adjusted so that he could leap; Peter and John were in the good of their priestly privilege to go into the temple; and he entered with them.
JT Spiritually, the man left the earth — to which in his helplessness he had been bound — and entered into fellowship, for he held Peter and John, as with them he would find clean food.
WB-w He was like the locusts in verse 22.
JT There are four different kinds of locusts mentioned here: it says, “These shall ye eat of them; the arbeh after its kind, and the solam after its kind, and the hargol after its kind, and the hargab after its kind” (verse 22 and footnote). There being four kinds, I think, helps — they are differentiated, but convey a general idea. They represent a class; i.e., believers that are available to us. “The locusts have no king, yet they go forth all of them by bands”,
([p. 65] Proverbs 30:27). Their use as food by John the baptist is significant.
AFM Would you say something about the fish in waters, seas, and rivers? The word “abomination” is introduced in connection with those that have not fins and scales.
JT The order here is not the same as in Genesis 1; there you have fish and fowl together on the fifth day. Here you have land animals first, because, I think, verses 3 - 8 refer to men viewed in a more dignified way. The fish are next in order; they picture men, not in dignity, but promiscuously in their natural element, “the waters”.
JS Probably, men viewed in adverse circumstances.
JT Yes; and so the clean ones are marked as able to go forward in spite of such circumstances. They have fins and scales. “These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatever hath fins and scales in waters, in seas and in rivers, these shall ye eat”. These are persons who have power to go against the current. They are not controlled by surrounding influences. We are not, for the moment taken out of the world, but kept from the evil in it (compare 1 Corinthians 5:10).
ANW It is not sufficient merely to repel; but we have the power to propel — to make progress.
JT Yes, repel with the scales, and propel with the fins.
JTJr Like the man in John 9 who went against the stream.
WB-w Eating is equivalent to having fellowship with, is it not?
JT Acts 10:13 is the best illustration you can get. Peter was hungry on the housetop, and the sheet came to him: “And there was a voice to him, Rise, slay and eat”. The allusion was to men, to the Gentiles.
AP [p. 66] The children of Israel were not to join Moab, but were to go straight through to the land.
JT Yes, but they fell into sin with the Moabites, because they did not observe these instructions.
TA “Wherefore come out from the midst of them and be separated, saith the Lord, and touch not what is unclean, and I will receive you”, (2 Corinthians 6:17).
JT The same idea of “touch not” is dwelt upon here. The “touch not what is unclean” idea appears seven times in the chapter.
AP There is the thought, not only of coming out from the midst of them, but also the going through adverse conditions, as indicated in the fish with fins and scales.
JT Yes; otherwise, “Ye should go out of the world”, as the apostle says; (1 Corinthians 5:10). Referring again to the crawling things, it says, “And these shall be unclean unto you among the crawling things which crawl on the earth: the mole, and the field-mouse, and the lizard, after its kind; and the groaning lizard, and the great red lizard, and the climbing lizard, and the chomet, and the chameleon”. These two verses are as instructive as any in the chapter as to the subject in hand; none of the animals mentioned could be called vicious, but they crawl on the earth. Take the mole, the field mouse, and the lizard: they appear harmless, but you find they do great damage — the mole and the field mouse especially.
TA Jude 4 says: “For certain men have got in unnoticed”.
JT Just so. The mouse is tame, as we say, but it possesses great voracity and fecundity, and so may do enormous damage to crops, etc. Moles work underground — suggesting [p. 67] undermining operations.
WGT Would they suggest features such as all of us are liable to exhibit?
JT You may inquire, ‘What good are they all?’ Well, they are part of a language through which God can speak to us. Through these creatures truth is impressed upon us in the most practical way. People marked by the characteristics of the mole and the mouse interfere disastrously with the growth and fruitfulness of the saints, and so are unfit for our companionship or fellowship.
Rem Would the chameleon speak of instability, or changeability?
JT It would represent a nominal Christian who takes colour from the company in which he is found — whether worldly, in which event he is a worldling, or Christian, when he becomes a Christian.
Rem There are several kinds of lizards.
JT Yes, the chameleon is of that family. Each species of “the lizard, after its kind”, is unclean. There is “the groaning lizard”, descriptive of many of those about us — groaning people.
CAM Such are a very depressing kind of people.
JT Yes, they are not “filled with joy and the Holy Spirit”, (Acts 13:52). We are exhorted to “be filled with the Spirit, speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and chanting with your heart to the Lord”, (Ephesians 5:18,19). That is the opposite of groaning.
HSD I was thinking about Paul and Silas in prison. They had good reason to groan, but instead, “in praying, were praising God with singing”, (Acts 16:25).
ANW If groaning is to be allowed, it should be within ourselves. “We also ourselves groan in ourselves”, (Romans 8:23).
JT Groaning is right, of course, in that sense. The Lord groaned more than once, [p. 68] as the gospels show; but this groaning is characteristic of discontented people.
AFM Then there is “the great red lizard” and “the climbing lizard”. One would be suggestive of display, and the other of ambition, as among the people of God.
JT They are very convenient figures here. As you say, the great red lizard is like one very conspicuous, and who would be so. Ahimaaz said, “Let me run”, (2 Samuel 18:23). He would excel as a runner.
JS What a contrast we have between the climbing lizard and the mole! The latter is seldom seen but is very destructive of the roots of vegetation.
AJD Would the climbing lizard be like Diotrephes?
JT Just so. “Diotrephes, who loves to have the first place among them”, (3 John 9). The devil knows that this element is in every one of us. He thought that of the Lord, when he set Him upon the edge of the temple. He evilly thought the Lord was such a one as himself. But the Spirit of God says: “Who, subsisting in the form of God, did not esteem it an object of rapine to be on an equality with God; but emptied himself, taking a bondman’s form, taking his place in the likeness of men” (Philippians 2:6,7); He was entirely the opposite of all this depicted by the lizard!
BTF You were speaking of creation as being a language by which God speaks to us. Had you any particular scripture in mind as to that? We have: “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the expanse showeth the work of his hands”, (Psalm 19:1).
JT Romans 1:20 helps: “For from the world’s creation the invisible things of him are perceived, being apprehended by the mind through the things that are made, both his eternal power and divinity, so as to render them inexcusable”. If you go through scripture, you will find an immense [p. 69] variety of things in creation, employed by God to convey divine thoughts.
BTF There are many things which speak of that which is good, and then there are those that speak of that which is evil.
JT That is the thought. Take Noah’s ark, for example, if one who rightly understood God’s creation had surveyed the creatures therein, he would have found portrayed in every one of them some divine thought. If Solomon could have gone into the ark, think of what he would have said! He spoke of all the living creatures, including these creeping things. No doubt there will be great intelligence as to the creation in the millennium, for Solomon is a type of Christ in relation to it. The fulness of life in every respect will then be seen. The prophets show that ferocious creatures will then become harmless, and carnivorous ones will then live on vegetable food.
TA Do we not see wisdom in Adam when he “gave names to all cattle, and to fowl of the heavens, and to every beast of the field”, (Genesis 2:20)?
JT Yes. God did not change any one of those names; Adam evidently named them correctly.
AP It is very interesting, in the light of our chapter, to view men in that discriminative way.
JTJr The Lord called Herod a fox (Luke 13:32), because he possessed the craftiness of one.
JT Besides the care enjoined in eating, the touching of what is unclean is also forbidden in the chapter. It says of the swine, “Their carcase shall ye not touch”; and beasts that have paws, that go upon all four, are unclean, and “whoever toucheth their carcase shall be unclean until the even”. It is not only a question here of eating, but of touching. I am affected by any association in which I am, and in which unclean persons are, even though I may not wish to [p. 70] be so.
CAM We always take character from the lowest company we keep.
AAT What is the difference between eating and touching?
JT Eating is a deliberate act, but you might touch an object without wishing to. There are those who say, ‘Well, I know that the association in which I am has unconverted people in it, and is marked by worldliness, but then I hold myself aloof as much as I can’. However, you are in their fellowship and you cannot escape the consequence of being defiled by it.
AFM One might touch what is unclean and be defiled, but when something unclean touches you, how would you regard that?
JT Well, it should impress us with the seriousness of being in proximity to these unclean things, and so prompt us to keep out of their way.
GMcP “Whoever toucheth them when they are dead”. What would be the force of that?
JT It would refer to men in whom there is no pulsation Godward. I think it is death in a moral sense.
AR “And every earthen vessel into which any of them falleth — whatever is in it shall be unclean; and ye shall break it”.
JT There again it is not a question of the will, but of being in a position where you are affected by what is unclean; so the point is, not to be in that position; as it says, “Hold aloof from every form of wickedness”, (1 Thessalonians 5:22).
WB-w What is the force of being “unclean until the even”?
JT I think it is in the sense of penalty. You will observe in this chapter that there is nothing said about the process of cleansing. It is rather that you suffer penalty in your soul. You have to wait, [p. 71] as a matter of discipline, a certain period before you are restored.
JS You have lost communion for that day.
JT Yes. You have to wait until evening, no matter what exercise you may go through. There is a penalty attaching to the contamination, and you cannot get rid of it at once.
WB-w Is there a possibility of going through each day clean?
JT Yes, in the sense that we have it here. The Lord went through every day entirely undefiled.
AJD What do you mean by, ‘The sense that we have it here’?
JT That of penalty — the governmental consequences from which you cannot escape. You may say ‘I affiliated with this and that one, and I got damaged in my soul, and I judged it’; but then you suffer nevertheless, and cannot avoid being unclean “until the even”. However, I am not overlooking what is set forth in the red heifer of Numbers 19 where you get provision for cleansing, which you do get here; although that chapter contemplates longer periods of uncleanness.
AFM Numbers 19:12 speaks of the third and the seventh day.
WB-w Why is “a spring or a well, a quantity of water” clean?
JT It alludes to the energy of the Spirit, especially in a collective sense. There is that, although in this world, which is impervious to the evil or defilement of it. We may have to deal with defiling things in caring for the Lord’s interests, but if in the power of the Spirit, we are not defiled by them. The assembly is not “unclean until the even”. Acts 5 is an example of this.
WB-w What about the carcase falling upon [p. 72] the sowing-seed?
JT The seed for sowing is not unclean by an unclean thing falling upon it, unless water has been put on it. The inference is that if one is baptised and comes in contact with these unclean things, then he is unclean, for he has taken up a new position of responsibility (see Romans 6:4). Verses 32 - 40 afford most important instruction as to the bearing of this subject on servants and service. All the instruction given is imperative because of what God is to us, as He says: “For I am Jehovah your God; and ye shall hallow yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy; and ye shall not make yourselves unclean through any manner of crawling thing which creepeth on the earth” (verse 44).