The bat is not a bird
LEV 11:13-19 And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, and the vulture, and the kite after his kind; every raven after his kind; and the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, and the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, and the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, and the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.
DEU 14:11-18 Of all clean birds ye shall eat. But these are they of which ye shall not eat: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, and the glede, and the kite, and the vulture after his kind, and every raven after his kind, and the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind. The little owl, and the great owl, and the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, and the cormorant, and the stork, and the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.
The bat is a flying creature. A common mistake among detractors of the Bible is that they assume that God would communicate to tenth century BC pastoral peoples twenty-first century scientific genus and species groupings of animals. That would mean that the Bible could only be understood by twenty-first century urban dwellers. That would be absurd.
Rabbits do not chew their cud
LEV 11:6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
'Gerah', the term which appears in the MT means (chewed) cud, and also perhaps grain, or berry (also a 20th of a sheckel, but I think that we can agree that that is irrelevant here). It does *not* mean dung, and there is a perfectly adequate Hebrew word for that, which could have been used. Furthermore, the phrase translated 'chew the cud' in the KJV is more exactly 'bring up the cud'. Rabbits do not bring up anything; they let it go all the way through, then eat it again. The description given in Leviticus is inaccurate, and that's that. Rabbits do eat their own dung; they do not bring anything up and chew on it.
Rumination is given to animals to enable them at once to lay up a great store of food, and afterward to chew it. –Arbuthnot
The ancients did not have a scientific understanding of rumination. Please refer to the last two sentences of my reply to “the bat is not a bird.” I also refer to the following: “but divideth not the hoof, he [is] unclean to you; and so not to be eaten; so Plutarch says, that the Jews are said to abstain from the hare, disdaining it as a filthy and unclean animal, and yet was in the greatest esteem with the Romans of any four footed beast... Aristotle makes mention of that in common with those that do chew the cud, namely a "coagulum" or "runnet" in its stomach; his words are, 'all that have many bellies have what is called (puetia) , a coagulum or runnet, and of them that have but one belly, the hare;' only that: this creature being prone to lust, may be an emblem of lustful persons, who give up themselves to lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness, (Ephesians 4:19). The "hare" is this verse may be an animal that is now is (sic) extinct but was alive at the time of Moses. It is only other mentioned in Deuteronomy 14:7." 9
Insects do NOT have four feet
LEV 11:21-23 Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth; even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind. But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you.
Though some translations have “winged insects” the Hebrew does not require this meaning. It is better translated as “creeping” or “swarming animals” and “fowl”.10 (see also, “The Bat is not a Bird”). Also, the Greek text of the LXX, which may preserve a translation from an older Hebrew text, says καὶ πάντα τὰ ἑρπετὰ τῶν πετεινῶν (v. 20) or “and all reptiles of the birds”. This may be an idiom about flying animals in general, but does not seem to relate to insects at all. Also, the text does not require that the insects mentioned in v. 22 be four-footed. It would be odd that the author would understand them to be four-footed as a simple observation would affirm that these mentioned insects have six, not four “feet”. The author is making a general observation about all creeping, swarming, flying animals, most of which go about on all fours, with the exception of the insects mentioned.
Snails do not melt
PSA 58:8 As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun.
Snails leave a slimy track.11 David was talking about the wicked only leaving a trace after they are gone. Again, what is the problem?
Fowl from waters or ground?
GEN 1:20-21 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
A better translation of Genesis 1:20-21 would be the following from the NAS (New American Standard, see also the New International Version or NIV) “Then God said, "Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens. And God created the great sea monsters, and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good.” In Genesis One God uses the water to bring forth (sustain) life.12 It is God that creates using whatever medium he chooses. For the beasts of the field and the fowl of the air in both Genesis One and Two, He used the ground to create.
