Page:Bible testimony, on abstinence from the flesh of animals as food.pdf/14

 To justify the common interpretation of this law, however, and to avoid the force of what we have already advanced, it is contended by some who have undertaken to comment on the Scriptures, that the term in the Hebrew Bible translated, implies, not only an animal, but that it is also applied to an , or person, or to such as were in a state of Gentilism; in support of which they refer us to the Prophet Jonah (Chap, iii.) where not only the citizens of Ninneveh were commanded to repent but even the beasts also were directed, by the proclamation of the King, to  Admitting the propriety of this appeal to the Hebrew text; not disputing for the present, the correctness of the interpretation for which they contend; grant it all,—and does it prove that God has here allowed man the privilege of feeding on flesh with impunity? We think not. We will appeal in our turn, to the import of the original in connection with such facts as will not fail, if we are not too sanguine in our conclusions, to convince all minds, untrammelled by the traditions of men, or uninslaved by the chains of appetite, that the law under consideration, as given to Noah, has no reference whatever to eating reptiles, snakes, snails, or any other creeping thing of an animal nature, all of which are expressly prohibited or forbidden in the Levitical code (Chap. xi. v; 41.) but that it relates wholly to the productions of the vegetable kingdom;—that it is only an extension, a fuller illustration, a more particular specification of the principles comprehended in God's first law to man. If we were called on to give a translation of what is rendered, we would say rather "." But there is a great variety in the kinds of creepers. There are vegetable creepers, as well as animal ones. "The Vine" says the intelligent author of the Wonders of Nature and Art, is a noble plant of the or  kind."—