Swan in Lev 11
Swan in Lev 11
Swan in Lev 11
Leviticus 11 records the laws that divide all the animals into two groups such as
the clean and unclean animals. The clean animals are suitable or fit for God’s people to
eat, while the unclean animals are unsuitable or unfit for food. The description of clean
and unclean living creatures in Lev 11 is divided into three categories as follows: (1) land
creatures (11:2-8); (2) water creatures (11:9-12); and the air creatures (11:13-23). Under
the last category, unclean birds were enumerated but no distinguishing features are given
as it does in the case of beasts and fishes. Thus, the identification between clean and
unclean birds today is quite difficult, particularly those birds that are not mentioned in the
Bible.
Among the unclean birds mentioned in Leviticus 11 as rendered in King James
Version (KJV) is “swan,” which consequently forbidden as an article of diet. The KJV
rendition as “swan” caused some members of the Seventh-day Adventist to ask question
whether “swan,” “geese,” and “ducks”1 are unclean. This question was answered by
some renowned SDA theologians and was printed in some prominent SDA magazines.
In 1934, LeRoy E. Froom commented that “the identity of the bird cannot be--fixed with
certainty,”2 but did not clearly declared that swan is clean. In 1958, Don F. Neufeld
concluded that “no dogmatic conclusions can be drawn from Leviticus 11:18 with regard
to the classification of ducks and geese in the category of clean and unclean animals.”3 A
year later, W.E. Read declared:
In the light of these considerations from the Bible, Jewish writings, and other
sources we conclude that fowls, chickens, ducks, geese, guinea fowls, doves,
pigeons, and the like are clean according to the Levitical law.4
The question about “swan” in Lev 11:18 was again asked in the year 1984 and
answered by Frank B. Holbrook in These Times magazine. Holbrook stressed that the
“Orthodox Jews regard the duck and goose as lawful,” and presumed that “Only unclean
fowl are listed. Those not identified thus are presumed to be edible.”5 From this period,
many Seventh-day Adventist members started to eat swan, geese, and ducks even here in
the Philippines.
Today, despite of those previous researches, many Seventh-day Adventist
Christians are still wondering whether “swan” mentioned in Lev 11:18 (KJV), including
“geese and ducks,” is clean or unclean birds. Thus, this paper seeks to further clarify this
issue and hoping to suggest probable solutions.
The Placement of Tinšeºmet
1
“Swans, genus Cygnus, are birds of the family Anatidae, which also includes
geese and ducks.” See the online Encyclopedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swan
2
LeRoy E. Froom, The "Swan" of Leviticus I I Ministry Magazine, April 1934.
3
Don F. Neufeld, Is Goose Unclean? The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald,
Vol. 135, No. 21 May 22, 1958.
4
W. R. Read, Ducks and Geese; Are They Unclean? The Advent Review and
Sabbath Herald Vol. 136, No. 8 February 19, 1959.
5
Frank B. Holbrook, [Is the duck "unclean"?] These Times February, 1984, p.28.
1
The word Tinšeºmet is tris legomenon.1 First, in Lev 11:18 the word Tinšeºmet
is used in the context of the unclean “air creatures,” while in Lev 11:30, a word
Tinšäºmet is used in the context of the “creeping creatures.” The third usage of the
word Tinšäºmet is in Deut 14:16, which is again in the context of the “air creatures.” If
Tinšeºmet is an “air creature” in Lev 11:18 and Tinšäºmet in Lev 11:30 is mentioned
among the land creatures, and Tinšäºmet in Deut 14:16 is an “air creature,” therefore, it
is interesting to observe that this word is obscure even among the expert morphologists
and translators. Notice the table below.
As observed in the table above, the LXX rendition of the word Tinšeºmet in Lev
11:18 is porphuriôna, aspalax in Lev 11:30, and ibin in Deut 14:16. The LXX usage of
the three different words to translate the same Hebrew word is a clear indication of the
uncertainty of the word. Since the LXX did not use the Greek word “kuknon” “swan” to
translate Tinšeºmet, therefore, the LXX translators do not identify Tinšeºmet as
“swan.” Moreover, because the word Tinšeºmet is tris legomenon, its meaning could
hardly be understood in its own context.
1
Which means that the word is used only three times in the Bible. See
BibleWorks 7, BDB.
2
Ludwig Koehler, Walter Baumgartner, M.E.J Richardson and Johann Jakob
Stamm, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, Volumes 1-4 Combined
in One Electronic Edition., electronic ed. (Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, 1999, c1994-
1996), 1765.
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid. See also Wilhelm Gesenius and Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, Gesenius'
Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures, Translation of the
Author's Lexicon Manuale Hebraicum Et Chaldaicum in Veteris Testamenti Libros, a
Latin Version of the Work First Published in 1810-1812 Under Title: Hebräisch-
2
same scholars who suggested various etymological derivatives declared that “this
identification is not certain.” Thus, etymologically, the identification of the word
Tinšeºmet remains uncertain.
The word “swan” rendered in the KJV derives from the Hebrew word Tinšeºmet.
Notice how this word is translated by the different versions.
Tinšeºmet Hebrew
Conclusion
The following conclusion is drawn after a careful investigation of the passage. (1)
The contextual, linguistic, and morphological study affirmed the uncertainty of the
meaning of the word Tinšeºmet; (2) the KJV rendition of Tinšeºmet as “swan” should
not be taken as translation; (3) the basis of other Adventist scholars’ teaching that “swan,
geese, and ducks” are clean is not biblical, but rather based on the way the Jewish people
identify the clean or unclean birds; (4) no dogmatic conclusions can be drawn from Lev
11:18 with regard to the classification of swan, ducks and geese in the category of clean
and unclean animals.
Recommendation:
1. As the remnant people in these last days, it is better not to eat “uncertain” things
to be safe in our conscience (Rom 13:5).
2. Among those who are waiting for the coming of the Lord, meat eating will
eventually be done away; flesh will cease to form a part of their diet. {CG 383.2}