Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 11:47
To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten.
47. make a difference between theunclean and the cleanthat is, between animals used and notused for food. It is probable that the laws contained in this chapterwere not entirely new, but only gave the sanction of divine enactmentto ancient usages. Some of the prohibited animals have, onphysiological grounds, been everywhere rejected by the general senseor experience of mankind; while others may have been declared uncleanfrom their unwholesomeness in warm countries or from some reasons,which are now imperfectly known, connected with contemporaryidolatry.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
To make a difference between the unclean and the clean,…. Whether of beasts, fish, fowl, and flying creeping things:
and between the beast that may be eaten, and the beast that may not be eaten; the former clause takes in all in general, this instances in a particular sort of creatures; and the first mentioned of which, that might be eaten, are, that part the hoof, are cloven footed, and chew the cud; and that might not, that chew the cud, but divide not the hoof, or divide the hoof, but chew not the cud; and now, by such like descriptions and distinctions of the creatures treated of, the Israelites would be able to make a difference between the one and the other, and know what was to be eaten, and what not.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(47) To make a difference.Better, that ye may put difference, as the Authorised Version renders the same word in Lev. 10:10. That is, the design of the dietary law is to enable both the administrators of the law and the people to distinguish, by the characteristics and criteria specified above, between what is clean and unclean.
And between the beast that may be eaten.From the fact that the same word, beast, is used in both clauses with regard to the animal which may be eaten and the one which may not be eaten without the qualifying adjunct clean and unclean, the administrators of the law during the second Temple concluded that the same clean animal is meant in both instances, under different conditions. The clean animal may be eaten when it is in a healthy state, but the same animal may not be eaten when it has organic defects, or is diseased. Hence they enacted the following canon: an animal is perfectly sound when it is capable of conceiving and bringing forth young. This is the reason why the LXX. renders the word beast here by viviparous.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
REFLECTIONS
DEAREST JESUS! enable me in every part of the law of ordinances to be looking through them unto thee. And while calling myself a member of thy mystical body, give me grace to be holy as thou art holy. Separate me, O my GOD, from all that is unclean. Let all filthiness and fornication, and uncleanness be driven far from me, and let it not be once named by me, or thy people, as becometh saints. And oh! do thou, by thy blessed SPIRIT, dwell in me and be in me. Make my body thy temple. Bring every thought into obedience to the captivity of CHRIST. And while walking through the world, LORD keep me from all the pollutions of the world. Be thou my ruler and guide, that I may so use the world as not abusing it, because the fashion of it passeth away.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Lev 11:47 To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten.
Ver. 47. To make a difference. ] Ministers also in their discourses should put a difference, and take out “the precious from the vile,” Jer 15:19 as did Zuinglius; who, when he inveighed most vehemently against sin, would usually come in with this clause, Probe vir, haec nihil ad te, This is not intended to thee, thou godly man.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
make a difference: or, put, &c. Same word as in Lev 10:10.
may not be eaten. See Lev 20:26, and compare Act 10:11-16.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Lev 10:10, Eze 44:23, Mal 3:18, Rom 14:2, Rom 14:3, Rom 14:13-23
Reciprocal: Lev 15:31 – Thus shall Num 30:16 – General Jdg 13:4 – eat not Isa 52:11 – touch Eze 1:7 – like the sole Eze 22:26 – put no Act 11:8 – unclean