Deuteronomy 14:7 mentions the hare as “chewing the cud,” yet modern science shows rabbits do not chew cud. How can this be explained?

Deuteronomy 14:7 in Context

Deuteronomy 14:7 states: “But of those that chew the cud or have a split hoof completely divided, you may not eat the following: the camel, the rabbit, or the rock badger. Although they chew the cud, they do not have a split hoof; they are unclean for you.” In this verse, the hare (often understood as “rabbit”) is identified among animals that appear to “chew the cud.” Modern readers sometimes question how the biblical description aligns with our contemporary scientific understanding that rabbits do not literally ruminate in the same manner as cows or sheep.

Ancient Observational Classification

Biblical writers relied upon direct observation of animal behavior and categorized animals according to visible traits. From an ancient Near Eastern perspective, if an animal continually moved its mouth in a way resembling repeated chewing, it was considered to be “chewing the cud.”

In Hebrew, the idea conveyed by “chewing the cud” (the phrase often rendered from Hebrew as “bringing up again” what was eaten) did not necessarily fit a modern scientific concept of rumination. Instead, it referred to any observable repetitive chewing motion. Rabbits do exhibit behavior that can be seen as chewing for extended periods when they consume or re-consume food. Given the ancient Israelite viewpoint, this action could easily be regarded as “chewing the cud,” even if it differs from the digestive process modern zoology classifies as rumination.

The Rabbit’s Eating Habits

Though rabbits are not technically ruminants, they practice cecotrophy (also called cecotrophy or coprophagy):

• They produce special droppings called cecotropes, which are partially digested.

• These nutrient-rich pellets are then re-ingested.

By doing this, rabbits effectively reprocess key nutrients. While this is not the same as the multi-stomach system of cows or goats, an ancient observer would still see the rabbit periodically chewing material that had already passed partway through its digestive system. This reality can explain why Deuteronomy 14:7 categorizes the hare as a creature that “chews the cud,” fulfilling the visual element of repeated chewing, even if modern biological definitions differ.

Hebrew Terminology and Broader Meaning

The Hebrew text conveys the core notion of physically “bringing up” or “working over” swallowed materials. The Hebrew classification system was not bound by contemporary scientific labels but by practical observations in daily life. This broader mode of taxonomy allowed the Israelites to group animals that displayed characteristic behaviors—continuous or repeated chewing motions—under the umbrella of “chewing the cud.”

Archaeological and Manuscript Corroboration

Archaeological discoveries and ancient manuscripts consistently corroborate the textual reliability of Deuteronomy. The references to everyday husbandry, dietary distinctions, and local fauna demonstrate the text’s deep roots in the Israelite experience. Furthermore, the manuscript evidence (including the Dead Sea Scrolls and other early copies) shows remarkable consistency regarding Deuteronomy’s wording and classification of animals. These findings are well-documented among biblical archaeologists and manuscript scholars, illustrating that the original Hebrew terms remain intact without scribal corruption.

Consistency with the Purpose of the Food Laws

The dietary regulations in Deuteronomy served a ceremonial and instructive purpose in setting apart the Israelites. From the historical vantage point, distinguishing animals that might pose health risks or that were viewed as ritually unclean was part of a broader covenant identity. The text’s classification reflects a practical and observable method appropriate to the time, not a modern scientific categorization.

Implications for Biblical Authority

1. Ancient Context: The Bible’s statements about animals align with how people in the ancient Near East classified and described them. Modern scientific definitions of taxonomy are far more specialized than ancient taxonomies.

2. Reliability of Scripture: The Hebrew text of Deuteronomy has been preserved accurately, as confirmed by extensive manuscript evidence and scholarly analysis. The fact that the biblical text uses ancient dust-language descriptions, rather than modern scientific distinctions, does not undermine its reliability.

3. Understanding Cultural Insights: Recognizing the ancient frame of reference allows readers to see how Scripture, though timeless in its theology and moral teachings, engages the language and perspective of its original audience. This approach is consistent throughout biblical history and literature.

Conclusion

Deuteronomy 14:7’s reference to the hare “chewing the cud” can be reasonably understood through the lens of ancient observation, where repeated chewing motions—including the rabbit’s habit of re-ingesting certain droppings—are perceived as a form of rumination. The biblical writers used accessible, observable criteria to classify animals, rather than a modern scientific structure.

This text thus remains consistent within its historical-cultural framework and does not contradict modern scientific data when one accounts for context and language usage. It continues to stand within the broader reliability of Scripture—a reliability confirmed by archaeology, manuscript evidence, and internal consistency.