Singular Mistake by Editor

Pacific Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Oakland, California · Jul 17, 1879

Singular Mistake.

By Editor

"PROF. COPE has recently made a curious discovery in Western Texas of a breed of hogs whose hoofs are not divided. The breed was raised from a single hog, which, unexpectedly, was found to have this charcteristic. This seems to be rather an instance of creation than evolution. Since these new animals do not answer to the Levitical specifications of unclean animals, it would be a curious question whether they would be obnoxious to the Mosaic law."

The above we find in the N. Y. Independent, and we are led to wonder how it ever found a place there. If these animals did not "answer to the Levitical specifications of unclean animals," there could be no question whether they would be obnoxious to the law on that subject. The error is found in the previous statement; they do answer in every particular to the specifications of unclean beasts. The law is as follows:—

"Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is cloven-footed, and cheweth the cud, among beasts, that shall ye eat." Lev. 11:3.

The swine is placed among the unclean beasts for reason as follows:—

"And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcass shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you." Verses 7, 8.

But these Texas animals neither part the hoof nor chew the cud. They present the characteristics of unclean beasts in full.

We dislike the designation of "Mosaic law," as applied to this law in Leviticus. It may be proper in itself, but people are so prone to gather a wrong impression from it. It was a divine law, coming directly from Jehovah. And the law was not an arbitrary enactment—not in any sense "Jewish," as people use that term. It was founded in the nature of beasts. The distinction of clean and unclean beasts was recognized by the Lord himself in the days of Noah, nearly a thousand years before the time of Moses. Gen. 7:2. On this latter text Dr. Clarke remarks: "This distinction seems to have been originally designed to mark those animals which were proper for sacrifice and food, from those that were not."