Testimony:
Finding Veterinary Medicine in the Bible: How Moses Anticipated Pasteur and KochThe Bible has numerous references to a wide variety of animals and also makes mention of disease and death. The books of Moses mention numerous regulations regarding the sacrifice and eating of animals and the handling of disease conditions. How much of this regulatory discourse is of ceremonial significance versus health significance is difficult to discern. It is also possible that the passages have a double meaning just as C.S. Lewis has a chapter devoted to second meanings in the Psalms. The detail and extent of the Mosaic regulations seem to suggest that they are based on microbiological principles that were not understood until the work of Pasteur and Koch in the late 19th century some 3,000 years after Moses. Since the regulations were God given, Moses and the Hebrews did not have to understand the principles behind them as long as they obeyed them as a matter of faith. A prominent theme woven through out these passages is the idea of clean and unclean and washing to be clean. The regulation regarding the eating of clean and unclean animals is found in Leviticus 11. The prohibition against swine may be due to the omnivorous habits of eating carrion (dead animals) because the carrion eating birds are also prohibited. Trichinosis is passed to swine through the eating of infected animals such as rats that are often present wherever grain is stored. Ruminants, however, are strict herbivores and therefore safer. Today pork is safe to because thorough cooking assures that any trichina cysts are destroyed. In ancient Israel such was less likely due to scarcity of fuel for adequate cooking. The indiscriminant eating habits of swine and their voracious appetite for garbage probably has ceremonial (symbolic) significance. Those who live a God centered life are to be disciplined and discriminating between good and harmful. Feeding swine by the prodigal son is used by Jesus to illustrate how low he had sunk. In contrast, the vision of Peter, Get up Peter, kill and eat...do not call anything unclean that God has made clean, Acts 10:9-16, is used to teach a shift from the mentality of the law to an understanding of God's grace. In modern times cattle have been duped into eating animal products due to the addition of meat byproducts into cattle feed. This practice has led to BSE (mad cow disease) due to such an unnatural treatment. The Levitical prohibition against eating strict herbivores such as horses and camels is not clear. In the ancient world the horse was an instrument of war and that fact could have been a reason for avoiding cultivation of horse herds. Another interesting observation is the peculiar selectivity of neurotropic viruses for humans and horses. Eastern, Western and St. Louis encephalitis are carried by mosquito vectors from the avian host reservoir to horses and humans as so-called dead end hosts. The same is true for West Nile virus but with a new twist. Recently the CDC confirmed that a human transplant patient had died of West Nile virus contracted from an infected organ donor. Such a scenario could occur with horses that are used to produce antibodies for passive immunity for tetanus and botulism. The current interest in xenotransplantation (organ transplantation from animals to humans) is of interest since swine are the most commonly projected donors. Currently pig heart valves are transplanted to people but their treatment with glutaraldehyde would probably destroy all viruses but is less likely to eliminate prions. The cleansing of living organs is probably the greatest hurdle for xenotransplantation. Leviticus 17:13 and 14 is the basis of Kosher slaughter. The important element is a good bleed out. Such would not be the case with an animal that died before slaughter and Leviticus 17:15 is an admonition to avoid such animals. Occasionally veterinarians dealing with injured livestock such as downer cows are asked can we eat her doc. In the ancient world and third world counties today there is always a strong temptation to consume animals that died quickly and therefore appear to be in good flesh. Such practice has led to many deaths due to anthrax as mentioned in the recent article by Turnbull (pg.3). Adherence to the Biblical admonition of only eating well bled out animals would protect against such deaths. Turnbull speculates that the fifth and sixth plagues on the Egyptians were due to systemic and cutaneous forms of anthrax respectively (pg. 2). Ex. 9:1-12. To this point, the reason for the bleed out has not been considered. Leviticus 17:11 states that the life of the creature is in the blood and it is given of God as an atonement for one’s life. The ultimate example of this principle is the shed blood of Christ that made atonement for the sins of the whole world. Herein is an example of the apparent dual significance of the Mosaic regulations. The discussion in Numbers 19:11-22 about washing after touching a dead person is of interest because medical history records a dramatic drop in the death rate of women in obstetrical wards in Austria in the mid 19th century after hand washing was instituted, especially when going from an autopsy to a delivery case. Today this seems like a no brainer; but just 150 years ago, it was not clear how disease spread. At that time, contagious diseases were often blamed on bad air; but the idea of microscopic organism transmitted by hands was not understood until Pasteur and Koch who had an uphill battle to convince the intelligencia of their day about the nature of microbial transmission. A few decades before Pasteur, Semmelweis in Vienna made the observation that the incidence of death in obstetrical wards was much higher for women treated by medical students who often were involved in autopsies than for woman treated by midwives who were never attended autopsies. When Semmelweis convinced his physician colleagues to adhere to a rigorous hand washing regimen, there was a dramatic drop in the obstetrical death rate. Unfortunately, Semmelweis was on the wrong end of some intramural politics and his hand washing program ended because it was too much bother. Even though the obstetrical death rate when up, no one seemed to make the connection and Dr. Semmelweis went to his death in despair. How this could happen seems incomprehensible to all but those familiar with academic politics! Even today, hospital infections are still linked to lack or incomplete hand washing. This makes the ancient teaching of Numbers 19 quite remarkable. The passages that seem to be most microbiologically oriented are in Duet. 23 and Leviticus 15. In Deut. 23:12-13 the Israelites were told to go outside their camp to relieve themselves and to dig a hole to bury their excrement. This passage seems to be solely health related with little sign of spiritual significance. Likewise, the first 12 verses of Lev. 15 seem to be health related only. The idea that the discharges from a sick person’s body were unclean is in line with current thinking as is the suggestion that the infectivity could be transmitted by another person or an object such as earthenware. The difficulty comes with the second half of Lev. 15 where similar regulations apply to seminal emissions and menstrual flow. A consideration of venereal disease might be useful in this regard. Venereal disease is common in humans and animals but far more serious in humans. While AIDS and syphilis can be fatal or have serious systemic effects, the main effect of venereal disease in animals is abortion. Cattle herds and sometimes bands of horses may have abortion storms;. The most serious organism is Brucellosis which causes abortion in cattle (B. abortis) and undulant fever in humans (B. meletenis) bit is not a venereal disease. Dogs have transmissible venereal tumors but, once again, the effects are not life threatening. These human vs. animal differences may point to the importance of monogamy and limitations on sexual partners as mentioned in scripture.( I Tim 3:2,12; Prov 5:18; Lev. 18). While there are some examples of monogamy among animals such as the emperor penguin, to expect the same of most animals would be absurd. It appears that the creator has made us different in our modes of disease susceptibility. Animal models are often used to study human diseases, but this approach does not seem to apply for STDs (sexually transmitted diseases). Since Biblical times and probably before, harlots have been looked down upon because the natural law within us tells us that our bodies should not be for sale. [the way the AIDS virus eludes many bright scientists in their effort to produce a vaccine may point to a lesson God is trying to teach us but much of humankind will not accept – if it feels good do it!]. As with other negative behaviors, the greatest tragedy is the suffering of innocent spouses, blood recipients, and children. Human-animal bond - The way people treat animals mirrors the way they treat other people. Our Lord teaches compassion for all creatures. Some examples are: 1. Deut 25:4. You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain; I Cor 9:9, I Tim. 5:18 2. Rescuing a sheep that falls into a pit on the Sabbath, Matt 12:11-12. 3. Not boiling a kid in the mother’s milk, Exodus 23:19, 34:26, Deut 17:15. This is the origin of the Kosher prohibition against use of meat and dairy products at the same meal. The intent, however, seems to be to teach compassion towards animals. In a broader sense, it could apply to all weak and vulnerable individuals. 4. Care of a shepherd for the sheep, Matt 18:12,13 and Luke 15:4. |
