OK, so what's up with the four-legged insects?

Factual Questions
1

I suspect that this is one of those things that all you Americans know right off the bat, but as a Northern European growing up in a very secular (and ignorant) household, I’m puzzled. I am of course referring to Leviticus, chapter 11:

“All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper. But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest.”

So. What’s up with the four-legged insects?

2

Here’s one American that is similarly clueless.
I appreciate the generalization, though.

3

Huh?

Is it “because the bible is wrong, frequently”?

4

Perhaps the author considered grasshoppers, et al, to have four legs and two arms?

5

I think it’s a translation error, where “goes on four legs” really meant “moved in a non-bipedal fashion”.

6

I have known a lot of insects that have walked on all fours…as soon as I pinched two of their legs off.

7

These insects are kosher??? I’ve never heard of locust kreplach or katydid-stuffed brisket or cricket blintzes or gefilte grasshopper.

8

A praying mantis pretty much walks on just four legs.

9

Huh. So my hatred of Bee Movie is because of an edict from God. That’s good to know.

10

One must look very close to spot the K-Pareve logo.

11

And, of course, this question is posted after sunset on Friday evening. Perhaps it’ll get a response on Sunday…

12

NLT version:
Leviticus 11:-20 to 11:23

“You are to consider detestable all swarming insects that walk along the ground. However…[the locust/cricket exception]…But you are to consider detestable all other swarming insects that walk or crawl.”

13

BTW, many Christian groups consider this as obsolete as the prohibition vs pork.

14

I though that this might be something that was copied from the King James Bible, but the description is present in the Vulgate:

“Omne de volucribus quod graditur super quatuor pedes, abominabile erit vobis. 21 Quidquid autem ambulat quidem super quatuor pedes, sed habet longiora retro crura, per quæ salit super terram, 22 comedere debetis, ut est bruchus in genere suo, et attacus atque ophiomachus, ac locusta, singula juxta genus suum. 23 Quidquid autem ex volucribus quatuor tantum habet pedes, execrabile erit vobis.”

I’m not sure how far back the phrase “on all fours” goes, but I suspect that it is just a figure of speech that was picked up at some point and made its way into most translations.

15

Exactly; that’s why the NLT says “on the ground” rather than “on all fours”.

16

The verses in Lev XI 20-23 are dealing with critters that hop about like crickets. Insects that have four legs and then a third pair that are used for hopping are kosher (like those mentioned). The author does not see insects as having three pairs of legs, but as having two pairs of legs and a third pair. The function of the third pair determining if the being is suitable for lunch or an appetizer.

Crawling things, many legged critters, and other internal skeletonally challenged animals are forbidden later on in verse 42.

17

I find this statement far more perplexing than the whole insect thing.

18

Just by-the-by, but yes, locusts are kosher. Not exactly delicacies…

When John the Baptist, who presumably would have adhered to the food laws, goes off into the wilderness he subsists on locusts and honey, IIRC.

19

Well, I just get the impression that Americans are a lot more concerned about and educated on religious subjects, certainly about the Bible, than my particular demographic, which is Northern European, as we have long since stopped giving a toss about this whole Christianity thing, and replaced it with science and rationality and stuff. I just figured that this might be one of those cases where you would go “oh, that’s because of the Greek term for blah blah and the King James Translation being blah blah! Didn’t your grandmother teach you anything?!” Guess I was wrong in this case.

20

You have to remember, not counting the legs on bugs isn’t exactly out of character for the level of ignorance in the bible. They couldn’t be bothered to count the number of ribs in a woman.

Insofar as I recall, when someone in the west *did *bother to count ribs it caused a controversy. It probably was just self evident that they had four legs and no one had the gumption to question it.