Is there anything in the bible that is scientifically inaccurate?

[4enlightment]

Note what this defense does. It alters the definition of chewing the cud, then acts as if a rabbit obviously chews the cud by this new definition.

"Re-chewing the cud can also be poop, and which poop was once considered as food."

This is the altered definition. I did some brief research on the phrase and its definition both in scientific and historical dictionaries and nowhere is this mentioned as what chewing the cud is. Nor does the Bible mention that this is what it is. In fact, the Leviticus section mentions other ruminants that properly chew the cud but accidentally includes rabbits in this grouping. So what the apologist did here was little make up a definition for chewing the cud, apply it to the rabbit, and then act like the rabbit does chew the cud. But it doesn't. Rabbits don't chew the cud.

We all know that the unclean animals are Bottom-feeders like shrimps, oysters and etc.., except for the certain animals like the horse and so on and that has been meant for other purposes. Most of our words we use today derived from the scriptures, but that doesn't mean that our definitions of these words are correct. But if you look at the word and how it is use, you can see what it means. There's no way for ancient people of those days to know what animals chews this so called cud unless they'd dissected the animals and study its digestion system. But if you view it from outwardly, you see what it does. Right now we hasn't really fully understand the ancient language at all; like for an instance,“Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?”; we has two definitions, but we doesn't know which definition is correct and which tell us that the scholars doesn't know it all, they are just guessing. So the only thing that cud could possibly mean is something that comes out of a being, like waste.

Proverbs 26:11 As a dog returns to its vomit, so fools repeat their folly.


Q: #215. What does "chew the cud" mean in Leviticus 11?
By: Steve Shirley
A: Animals that "chew the cud" are those that partially digest their food, and then regurgitate it from their first stomach (most have a four chambered stomach) and chew it. Animals that "chew the cud" (also called "ruminating" animals) are mentioned in (Lev 11:3-26) and (Deut 14:6-8).
These are divided into 2 categories: clean (allowed to be eaten by man) and unclean (forbidden as food). If an animal had a "cloven foot" (a hoof split into 2 distinct toes) AND "chewed its cud," it could be eaten (Lev 11:3). If an animal "chewed its cud" but didn't have a cloven hoof, it was forbidden to eat it (Lev 11:4-5). Examples given of these "unclean" animals are the camel (Lev 11:4), the rock hyrax (badger)(Lev 11:5), and the hare (rabbit)(Lev 11:6). (A pig is also called unclean in (Lev 11:7) even though it has a cloven hoof, because it does not "chew the cud." Examples of clean animals (called "kosher" by Jews) would be: oxen, cows, sheep, goats, and deer. (Lev 11:26) carries out just how bad unclean animals were by saying that if a person even touched them, they would be unclean.
There is some controversy about these verses because the rabbit and rock hyrax do not technically "chew their cud" (regurgitate their food and rechew it). Some use these verses to demonstrate the fallibility of the Bible. The explanation given by those who know about these things (not me) is that to "chew the cud" simply meant at the time it was written in the Bible "to rechew food that had been previously digested" and not necessarily "to rechew regurgitated food." Rabbits actually DO rechew their food, but apparently they swallow the food, poop it out and rechew it a second time directly from their anus (yeah... I know... Do you still want a rabbit for a pet?). This distinction between simply rechewing partially digested food and rechewing regurgitated partially digested food supposedly wasn't made until the 1800's.What does "chew the cud" mean?