Replies

As far as the species of a bat or hare I would have to see what verse you're referring to

For someone who reads the Bible I would expect you to know what verses I was referring to. But since you insist, let's just stick with Leviticus (because there is a many, many more), 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 stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat."

In fact, the very next set of verses continues in the same manner:

Lev 11:20 "11:20 All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you."

Creeping fowls? Four-legged fowls?

Or, you may go a few verse up, to Leviticus 11:6 and read

"And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you."

"And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls...and the bat."

This is your evident that the Bible is in error? Classification of animals is a manmade invention based upon some criteria. The criteria used back then was different than it is today. Consider what Aristotle states about the bat:

"...a little bird which flies in the night, Aben Ezra says; Kimchi (s) describes it a mouse with wings, which flies in the night, and we sometimes call it the "flitter mouse"; it is a creature between a fowl and a beast; and, it partakes of both, and is of neither; and it is the only fowl, as Pliny (u) observes, that has teeth and teats, that brings forth animals, and nourishes them with milk. It is a creature so very disagreeable, that one would think almost there was no need of a law to forbid the eating of it; and yet it is said by some to be eatable, and to be eaten, as Strabo (w) affirms, yea, to be delicious food. " - Aristotle - De Part. Animal. l. 4. c. 13.

Animals are constantly being classified and reclassified. They defined it as something between "fowl and beast".

You cannot make a case of the Bible being in error simply based upon some way people classified animals back then. The writers simply used the current definition of the day.