to make a distinction between the unclean and the clean, and between the living thing that may be eaten and the living thing that may not be eaten.’ ”
Parallel Translations
-
to make a distinction between the unclean and the clean, and between the living thing that may be eaten and the living thing that may not be eaten.’ ”
-
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.
-
to make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the living thing that may be eaten and the living thing that may not be eaten.
Examined in Scripture Analysis
Commandments (1)
The laws of the Torah, each cited and shown as a primary source.
Cross-references (5)
Passages linked to Leviticus 11:47 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Leviticus 10:10 You are to make a distinction between the holy and the common, and between the unclean and the clean.
- Ezekiel 44:23 They shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean.
- Romans 14:13-23 Therefore let’s not judge one another any more, but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block in his brother’s way, or an occasion for falling. I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean of itself; except that to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. Yet if because of food your brother is grieved, you walk no longer in love. Don’t destroy with your food him for whom Christ died. Then don’t let your good be slandered, for God’s Kingdom is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men. So then, let’s follow after things which make for peace, and things by which we may build one another up. Don’t overthrow God’s work for food’s sake. All things indeed are clean, however it is evil for that man who creates a stumbling block by eating. It is good to not eat meat, drink wine, nor do anything by which your brother stumbles, is offended, or is made weak. Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who doesn’t judge himself in that which he approves. But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because it isn’t of faith; and whatever is not of faith is sin.
- Malachi 3:18 Then you shall return and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him who serves God and him who doesn’t serve him.
- Romans 14:2-3 One man has faith to eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. Don’t let him who eats despise him who doesn’t eat. Don’t let him who doesn’t eat judge him who eats, for God has accepted him.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (4 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Lev 11:47 To make a difference between the unclean…
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.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain To make a difference between the unclean and the…
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.
Read full note →
Next: Leviticus Chapter 12
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain make a difference between the unclean and the clean--that…
make a difference between the unclean and the clean--that is, between animals used and not used for food. It is probable that the laws contained in this chapter were not entirely new, but only gave the sanction of divine enactment to ancient usages. Some of the prohibited animals have, on physiological grounds, been everywhere rejected by the general sense or experience of mankind; while others may have been declared unclean from their unwholesomeness in warm countries or from some reasons, which are now imperfectly known, connected with contemporary idolatry.
Next: Leviticus Chapter 12
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (47) To make a difference.—Better, that ye may put…
(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.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.