Animals And Allegories In The Bible Quiz

Answer: False

No, it was NOT flattering to be called a "dog"!

Consider the following story from Matthew, chapter 6.

"Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour."

Dogs were held in great contempt by the Jews, but were worshipped by the Egyptians. Among the Jews, to compare a person to a dog was the most degrading expression possible (see 1 Samuel 17:43 24:14 and 2 Samuel 9:8.)

The state of dogs among the Jews was such that since many of them had no owners they simply ran wild through the streets in packs, and were sometimes fed by people from sympathy, or by living on such dead things that they might find. Many of them lived near the point of starvation, so they would devour corpses, and in the night even attack living men (see Psalm 59:6,14,15 and
1 Kings 14:11.) In various places in Scripture the epithet "dogs" is given to certain classes of people, indicating their status as lower-class citizens or worse, unworthy of even being thought of as human.

Jesus was not intentionally insulting the woman from Lebanon in this scripture; after all, she knew her standing, and just how low on the human rating scale she fell. She was a descendant of Canaan, the son of Ham and the grandson of Noah. Canaan had a curse put on him after the Great Flood by Noah himself, and that same curse was still in effect during the time of Jesus' earthly ministry. After her strong confession of faith, however, Jesus extended His compassion toward her and cast the demon out of her daughter "in that very hour."

All gentile people at the time were considered to be rated right down there with dogs, for the most part, by the Jews, because Jews had the living God and others only had idols. When the Jews chose to worship idols (as they often did, according to scripture,) one has to wonder; did they consider themselves as reverting to "dog" status along with non-Jewish peoples?

Answer: False

While goats do get a "bad rap" at times in the scriptures, they actually receive a certain amount of "good press" as well. Consider this: goats were considered a "clean" animal according to Levitical law, and as such, were an edible food. They were also used frequently as sacrificial offerings to God. Many times, the left-over meat was given to the priesthood of the Levites for consumption, as per God's directives.

Now, conversely goats were sometimes used as a "bad example." For instance, consider this scripture found in Matthew 25:

"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left."

This is an allegorical reference to people, both the "sheep" and the "goats".

Now, we see another example of the allegory of goats, this time in the Old Testament. In Leviticus 16, we read God's instructions to Moses concerning the duties of his brother, Aaron, the High Priest -

"And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and make an atonement for himself, and for his house. And he shall take the two goats, and present them before the LORD at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat. And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the LORD'S lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering. But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness."

Christians tend to identify Christ as fulfilling the role of both goats, because they feel that while the sins of mankind were hung on Jesus as He hung on the cross (scapegoat), He also made atonement for those sins simultaneously with His blood sacrifice (sacrificial goat).

Answer: False

Swine were considered to be THE single most filthy of all animals to the Jewish people (as well as to many others of Middle Eastern extraction). Eating the flesh of pigs was expressly forbidden in the Levitical law. Not only was it against God's law for them to consume it, quite possibly one very valid reason for this law was practically and simply for that of maintaining good health. Pigs can carry parasites and worms, and in warm climates without refrigeration this could certainly raise a real health concern.

Swine meat was forbidden as food to the Hebrews, who held its flesh in such distaste that they would not so much as pronounce its name (see Leviticus 11:7 and Deuteronomy 14:8.) The eating of swine's flesh was among the most odious of the displays of idolatry that was charged upon some of the Jews (see Isaiah 65:4)

For a people that were prone to the disease of leprosy, pig's meat would have perhaps aggravated that condition also, and it would almost certainly have been considered unhealthy for the amount of fats produced at any rate.

In an interesting parable, The Prodigal Son, which is found in the 15th chapter of Luke, (vss. 11-32), a young Jewish man was feeding swine and desiring to eat with them, which shows the utter depravity of his mind. As a Jew, he KNEW better than to even associate himself with such a creature, but circumstances that had been totally WITHIN his control had brought him to such a low place as being a swine herder. The scripture notes that when he "came to himself", meaning when he got back into the right frame of mind, he left the swine-herder, and returned to his father (representing God).

Answer: Jesus

Yes, Jesus Himself was called the lion of the tribe of Judah in Revelation 5:5, even though He was born many, many generations removed from Judah. He has been called a lion, a lamb, the son of God, the son of man, the Alpha and Omega, the first and last. These titles and names may seem contradictory on the surface, but they each represent a different facet of Him.

Some Christians believe that He came first as a sacrificial lamb (see John 1:29) and that He will return during the time of His second advent as a roaring lion (Proverbs 19:12), filled with indignation at those who reject Him and ready to pass judgment upon the earth and all its inhabitants.

They also see Him as the son of God, and often in the gospels we see reference to Him being the son of man. They believe that this dual-sided aspect of His nature shows Him to be in in complete authority, yet understanding of man's predicament of sin, since He is both God AND man. The gospel author Matthew presents Jesus as the lion, while the gospel of Luke demonstrates His humanity. The four-headed beast in Revelation 4:7 also may be seen as an archetype of Christ; with the one having the face of a lion (as seen in Matthew), representing Jesus' royalty; another face like a bull, the suffering sacrificial Christ (seen in the book of Mark); yet another side of the beast has the face of a man (the gospel of Luke), where Jesus is often called the "son of man"; and yet a fourth face, like an eagle, and thus showing Him coming from the heavens, as the son of God (as He is viewed in John).

Answer: False

Eagles are mentioned MANY times throughout the Bible, and as already stated, they usually represent freedom. They also represent other things as well; strength, power, dominance over their enemies, just to name a few.

One of my personal favorite scriptures concerning eagles is found in Isaiah 40:31.

"But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint."

The allegory here is obvious; men cannot actually fly without an engine attached to a machine, but this verse says those who wait upon the Lord will "fly" in a spiritual sense.

(Eagles, however, are considered to be an "unclean" bird, because of their feeding habits.)

Answer: False

No, camels are mentioned quite a few times in the New Testament, with at least three references to camels in the gospel of Matthew alone. Even the forerunner of Christ, John the Baptist, wore clothing made of camel's hair, and even though this animal was considered "unclean" under Jewish law this did not prevent it from being used in a variety of ways, including providing clothing. It merely was not to be eaten, due to its lack of a divided hoof.

In Deuteronomy 14:7-8 we see these instructions regarding the unclean status of camels, as well as a few other "unclean" beasts of the field:

"Nevertheless these ye shall not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the cloven hoof; as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof; therefore they are unclean unto you. And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase."

From my best efforts of research, a coney may be a shaphan or a rock-badger, (possibly meaning a hare.)

Answer: John 21

In John 21:13-17 we see the following exchange between Peter and Jesus:

"Jesus then cometh, and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish likewise. This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead.

So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my LAMBS. He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my SHEEP. He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my SHEEP."

These "sheep" and "lambs" of course, are taken to represent people.

Peter had denied Jesus three times prior to His crucifixion. I believe that this was Jesus' method of negating Peter's negativity of denial of the Christ. In other words, for each of the denials of Peter, which grew stronger each time he denied knowing Christ, Jesus later grew stronger with each POSITIVE statement that He made to Peter, thus totally removing the negative effects of Peter's tongue and replacing it with positive statements. Just as Jesus had been grieved at Peter's denials, Peter was now grieving because he felt that Jesus did not believe him.

This was not done just for "effect", but was in a very real sense used as a complete reversal of Peter's own words and causing positive results to occur. Yes, I believe that there is a mighty power in words, and the words we choose can create life or death; sickness or health; poverty or prosperity for each of us.

Peter later became an intense follower of Christ, strongly preaching to those who had crucified Christ as well as becoming a "healing agent" for those who believed in the Messiah.

Answer: as a "dirty" bird because of its feeding habits

The raven's name comes from an interesting word, "Oreb" or "Arab", meaning "dark" or "nightfall". Ravens, which are black, (hence the name), were regarded as unclean because of their feeding habits of eating carrion and refuse - scavengers, in other words.

In Proverbs 30:17 we see the following statement:

"The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat it."

Answer: True

Oxen were usually teamed up in pairs when they were required to pull a load. Frequently, heavy loads were reserved for oxen to pull since they were such strong beasts, especially when operating in tandem.

They were also used in sacrificial rites, as evidenced in Numbers 7:84-88.

"This was the dedication of the altar, in the day when it was anointed, by the princes of Israel: twelve chargers of silver, twelve silver bowls, twelve spoons of gold: Each charger of silver weighing an hundred and thirty shekels, each bowl seventy: all the silver vessels weighed two thousand and four hundred shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary: The golden spoons were twelve, full of incense, weighing ten shekels apiece, after the shekel of the sanctuary: all the gold of the spoons was an hundred and twenty shekels. All the OXEN for the burnt offering were twelve BULLOCKS, the rams twelve, the lambs of the first year twelve, with their meat offering: and the kids of the goats for sin offering twelve. And all the OXEN for the sacrifice of the peace offerings were twenty and four BULLOCKS, the rams sixty, the he goats sixty, the lambs of the first year sixty. This was the dedication of the altar, after that it was anointed."

You will notice that each tribe of Israel (all 12 of them), was represented by one bullock (or ox) when it came time for the sin offering, yet twice that many, 24, were necessary for the peace offering. Twelve is often used to typify a form of 'government' in scripture, so 24, or twice that many could be seen to be a type of 'doubled' or perfected government.

(This number of 24 may also be seen in the seats of the four and twenty elders in John's vision in the book of The Revelation Of Jesus Christ, with the 12 tribes of ancient Israel of the Old Testament and the 12 apostles of the New Testament representing both Testaments.)

In Solomon's temple there were 12 oxen made of brass (representing humanity) that supported the brazen sea. In 1 Kings 7 we read:

"And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. And under the brim of it round about there were knops compassing it, ten in a cubit, compassing the sea round about: the knops were cast in two rows, when it was cast. It stood upon twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the south, and three looking toward the east: and the sea was set above upon them, and all their hinder parts were inward."

Answer: as an unclean bird

Owls are considered unclean, according to scripture.
In Deuteronomy 14:11-20 we can find a listing of the unclean birds. It doesn't take much to see that all of them eat carrion, vermin, dead things, or other unclean animals, which of course renders them unclean as well.

"Of all clean birds ye shall eat. But these are they of which ye shall not eat: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, And the glede, and the kite, and the vulture after his kind, And every raven after his kind, And the OWL, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, The LITTLE OWL, and the GREAT OWL, and the swan, And the pelican, and the gier eagle, and the cormorant, And the stork, and the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat. And every creeping thing that flieth is unclean unto you: they shall not be eaten. But of all clean fowls ye may eat."

King David once likened himself to two of these unclean animals in Psalm 102:6.

"I am like a pelican of the wilderness: I am like an owl of the desert."

He was bemoaning a sorrowful situation and may have chosen to compare himself to these birds to emphasize his dire situation and his utter hopelessness without God's intervention.