• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.
  • 2021 Internet Infidels Fundraising Drive
    Greetings! Time for the annual fundraiser.Sorry for the late update, we normally start this early in October. Funds are needed to keep II and IIDB online. I was not able to get an IIDB based donations addon implemented for this year, I will make sure to have that done for next year. You can help support II in several ways, please visit the Support Us page for more info. Or just click:

    I will try to track all donations from IIDB. Many thanks to those that have already donated. The current total is $550. If everyone dontated just $5, we would easily hit our goal.

Health and hygiene/cleanliness in the Bible

excreationist

Married mouth-breather
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Simple health related things I think the Bible doesn't mention:

Honey is "bacteria's worst enemy" (no mention of medical related purposes for honey)

Boiling water sterilizes it (from diseases, etc)

Odd verses related to boiling:
Exodus 12:9
"Do not eat the meat raw or boiled in water, but roast it over a fire—with the head, legs and internal organs."

Exodus 23:19 / Exodus 34:26 / Deuteronomy 14:21 (3 verses!)
"Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk."

Things the Bible does mention:

Quarantine?

Wait for period/menstruation until it is "clean" ("ceremonial" cleanliness?)

Wash hands to be clean (which modern medicine only discovered relatively recently)

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus 14&version=NIV
Leviticus 14
Cleansing from defiling skin diseases and moulds.... though this might be about "ceremonial" cleanliness
 

funinspace

Veteran Member
LOL...yeah, I remember preachers trying to justify some of the dumb shit from the OT as if it were for cleanliness et.al. Clearly, most of the OT food/hygiene stuff is simply ignorance. If there were some god trying to guide humanity, it certainly could have ghost written a few basic health ideas into his holy book. But the imaginary poser didn't...and its another ding in the claims of the Christian apologists. We get daemons instead of germs...
 

Learner

Veteran Member
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Simple health related things I think the Bible doesn't mention:

Honey is "bacteria's worst enemy" (no mention of medical related purposes for honey)

I suppose my view on it is: why it may not be necessary, like: 'How to apply bandages or make splints for various types of broken bones etc. & etc.. In similar context, that they would have the same everyday, access, being part of the culture knowledge, aquired through generations in the community. Like, It wouldn't be necessary to mention 20 healthy ways to cook lamb with veggies.

Honey was so widely available,that perhaps being so commonly known - the mentioning and writing about it, would be so stating-the-obvious (it's known properties and the recipes one can make) they'd find it boring and unoriginal.
 

atrib

Veteran Member
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Simple health related things I think the Bible doesn't mention:

Honey is "bacteria's worst enemy" (no mention of medical related purposes for honey)

I suppose my view on it is: why it may not be necessary, like: 'How to apply bandages or make splints for various types of broken bones etc. & etc.. In similar context, that they would have the same everyday, access, being part of the culture knowledge, aquired through generations in the community. Like, It's not necessary to mention 20 healthy ways to cook lamb with veggies.

Honey was so an abundant commodity, perhaps being so common, mentioning and writing about it, would be so stating-the-obvious (known properties and the various delicious recipes one can make) they'd find it boring and unoriginal.


Is it that hard for God to have said: "Thou shall wash your hand after taking a shit, or cleaning your stables or handling livestock. Thou shall wash your hands before you eat"? A god that can create universes doesn't know about the germ theory of disease? Really? Stop apologizing for your god's ignorance.
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Is it that hard for God to have said: "Thou shall wash your hand after taking a shit, or cleaning your stables or handling livestock. Thou shall wash your hands before you eat"? A god that can create universes doesn't know about the germ theory of disease? Really? Stop apologizing for your god's ignorance.

Not even 200 years ago, people just thought that hospitals built up an ineffable and inexplicable 'miasma' and that such facilities needed to be burned down and replaced every so often.
God need not have mentioned germ theory before there were ways to actually see germs, but he MIGHT have mentioned washing hands between patients, changing bedsheets between patients, maybe NOT thinking that the build-up of gore on an apron just indicated how experienced you were as a surgeon. Wash your tools, the bed, THE PATIENT, and so on...

If nothing else, maybe Lister and Pasteur might not have had such pushback to the idea of germs when they eventually offered it....
 

excreationist

Married mouth-breather

funinspace

Veteran Member
About washing in the Bible and washing hands in 1845:
https://www.thelastdialogue.org/article/bible-miracle-hygiene-and-sanitary/

Leviticus 15:13
"When a man is cleansed from his discharge, he is to count off seven days for his ceremonial cleansing; he must wash his clothes and bathe himself with fresh water, and he will be clean."

Apparently that is related to disease and washing....

There are a lot of verses about washing your hands:

https://www.openbible.info/topics/hand_washing

I'm not going to bother parsing a bunch of random verses that mention water. First the vast majority of the verses mentioned in the second link are about ceremonial cleansing or washing away sin. Neither of which would help people understand germs.

The funny part of the Gospel reference where the Pharisees try to pick on Jesus for not washing, is that this Jesus basically says boohaa to hand washing before a meal, and picks on their human laws over God's laws...yeah great advise.

On the first link, where they mention Lev 15:13, this discharge likely is a lot about gonorrhea (and other STDs). So after 7 days, the guy can go back to spreading the STD around? Gonorrhea is typically more communicable when there aren't symptoms. So no, the Bible doesn't get brownie points for health/hygiene knowledge from way before its time.

Then there is the BS ideas about being unclean, which are simply goat herder myths, like women menstruating's being unclean, or a guy having a wet dream, or a couple post sex being unclean. Don't mix your fibers; Don't eat shellfish; Oh yeah, and don't drive on the railroad tracks. Lots of stupid shit to mash your hands thru to find a mustard seed of 'truthiness'...
 

Learner

Veteran Member
Is it that hard for God to have said: "Thou shall wash your hand after taking a shit, or cleaning your stables or handling livestock. Thou shall wash your hands before you eat"? A god that can create universes doesn't know about the germ theory of disease? Really? Stop apologizing for your god's ignorance.
Not hard at all for God. I would suspect it was not necessary because it was already understood, washing as being the norm. The bible is 'awashed' with hand washing in all sorts of scenarios. Quite easy to understand verses which says to 'wash hands when touching anything unclean.'

The god's ignorance part, you'll have to ask someone else. I think that's a different faith - a lesser god with the small g, and ignorance.
 
Last edited:

funinspace

Veteran Member
Is it that hard for God to have said: "Thou shall wash your hand after taking a shit, or cleaning your stables or handling livestock. Thou shall wash your hands before you eat"? A god that can create universes doesn't know about the germ theory of disease? Really? Stop apologizing for your god's ignorance.
Not hard at all for God. I would suspect it was not necessary because it was already understood, washing as being the norm. The bible is 'awashed' with hand washing in all sorts of scenarios. Quite easy to understand verses which says to 'wash hands when touching anything unclean.'
I am genuinely curious as to where in the Bible you think it spells out in clear language to wash ones hands for cleanliness (aka something akin to concern about germs). I see ceremonial verses about not being in front of Yahweh's alter and such. I also see the Gospel repeats on Jesus flaunting Jewish tradition of washing hands before eating. And I see confused ones like Lev 15:13...
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Is it that hard for God to have said: "Thou shall wash your hand after taking a shit, or cleaning your stables or handling livestock. Thou shall wash your hands before you eat"? A god that can create universes doesn't know about the germ theory of disease? Really? Stop apologizing for your god's ignorance.
Not hard at all for God. I would suspect it was not necessary because it was already understood, washing as being the norm.
I don't think 'already the norm' really works as an explanation for helpful information NOT being in scripture.
If nothing else, God supposedly sees enough of the future to have known that there would come a time when His people felt that a layer of dirt kept disease away. A quick note of 'that's a good thing, keep doing it' would have helped save more than a few lives.

Also, there are 613 commandments in the OT. One is 'to know there is a God.' presumably, this was already the practice, nu? So it may not be necessary to give it, but 'reinforcement' certainly isn't a problem in scripture.

Heck, Leviticus reads like a list of OCD symptoms. Do not have relations with your daughter. Do not have relations with your daughter's daughter. Do not marry a woman and her daughter. Do not marry a woman and her son's daughter.
One line in there about 'don't pack dirt into a wound when your run out of clean bandages' might have done wonders for the survival of the wounded in the Civil War, and any conflict before that.
 

Learner

Veteran Member
Is it that hard for God to have said: "Thou shall wash your hand after taking a shit, or cleaning your stables or handling livestock. Thou shall wash your hands before you eat"? A god that can create universes doesn't know about the germ theory of disease? Really? Stop apologizing for your god's ignorance.
Not hard at all for God. I would suspect it was not necessary because it was already understood, washing as being the norm. The bible is 'awashed' with hand washing in all sorts of scenarios. Quite easy to understand verses which says to 'wash hands when touching anything unclean.'
I am genuinely curious as to where in the Bible you think it spells out in clear language to wash ones hands for cleanliness (aka something akin to concern about germs). I see ceremonial verses about not being in front of Yahweh's alter and such. I also see the Gospel repeats on Jesus flaunting Jewish tradition of washing hands before eating. And I see confused ones like Lev 15:13...

Snap, what I'm curious about, is why you think washing hands is purely ceremonial?

I also see the Gospel repeats on Jesus flaunting Jewish tradition of washing hands before eating. And I see confused ones like Lev 15:13...
What you high lighted there, confirms that washing hands before meals was quite well known (also to Atrib's post, quoted in red).
To be clean - ceremonial or not, as you see it - both have the same significance!

Don't mix your fibers;
I've always wondered about that one, fortunately there are many out there, vigourously studying. Apparently... mixed fibres doesn't sound hygenic according to Ezekiel:

Ezekiel 44:17-18
And it shall come to pass, that when they enter in at the gates of the inner court, they shall be clothed with linen garments; and no wool shall come on them, whiles they minister in the gates of the inner court, and within. [18] They shall have linen bonnets on their heads, and shall have linen breeches on their loins; they shall not gird themselves with any thing that causes sweat.
 
Last edited:

funinspace

Veteran Member
Is it that hard for God to have said: "Thou shall wash your hand after taking a shit, or cleaning your stables or handling livestock. Thou shall wash your hands before you eat"? A god that can create universes doesn't know about the germ theory of disease? Really? Stop apologizing for your god's ignorance.
Not hard at all for God. I would suspect it was not necessary because it was already understood, washing as being the norm. The bible is 'awashed' with hand washing in all sorts of scenarios. Quite easy to understand verses which says to 'wash hands when touching anything unclean.'
I am genuinely curious as to where in the Bible you think it spells out in clear language to wash ones hands for cleanliness (aka something akin to concern about germs). I see ceremonial verses about not being in front of Yahweh's alter and such. I also see the Gospel repeats on Jesus flaunting Jewish tradition of washing hands before eating. And I see confused ones like Lev 15:13...

Snap, what I'm curious about, is why you think washing hands is purely ceremonial?

I also see the Gospel repeats on Jesus flaunting Jewish tradition of washing hands before eating. And I see confused ones like Lev 15:13...
What you high lighted there, confirms that washing hands before meals was quite well known (also to Atrib's post, quoted in red).
To be clean - ceremonial or not, as you see it - both have the same significance!
It can be considered by some readers to not be purely ceremonial. However, the reality is that most Christians thru out history didn't figure out your God's intent by the verses available. I would think it is pretty obvious that it is not good to rape one's daughter, but that sort of gets a mention. Menstruation isn't actually anything particularly bad, but it gets lots of mentions.

An 19th century doctor who stumbled onto the need for doctors to wash hands after dealing with corpses, and prior to delivering a child is certainly indicative that these people never got God's memo. And it if was so obvious, then why weren't doctors regularly washing their hands prior to delivering children. And the below is only one example of the recent history of figuring out 'the obvious'. And this doctor went thru several wrong ideas before recognizing that it was hand washing that was good.

The year was 1846, and our would-be hero was a Hungarian doctor named Ignaz Semmelweis.
<snip>
When Semmelweis crunched the numbers, he discovered that women in the clinic staffed by doctors and medical students died at a rate nearly five times higher than women in the midwives' clinic.<snip>So he ordered his medical staff to start cleaning their hands and instruments not just with soap but with a chlorine solution. Chlorine, as we know today, is about the best disinfectant there is. Semmelweis didn't know anything about germs. He chose the chlorine because he thought it would be the best way to get rid of any smell left behind by those little bits of corpse. And when he imposed this, the rate of childbed fever fell dramatically
 
Last edited:

Learner

Veteran Member
It can be considered by some readers to not be purely ceremonial. However, the reality is that most Christians thru out history didn't figure out your God's intent by the verses available. I would think it is pretty obvious that it is not good to rape one's daughter, but that sort of gets a mention. Menstruation isn't actually anything particularly bad, but it gets lots of mentions.

An 19th century doctor who stumbled onto the need for doctors to wash hands after dealing with corpses, and prior to delivering a child is certainly indicative that these people never got God's memo. And it if was so obvious, then why weren't doctors regularly washing their hands prior to delivering children. And the below is only one example of the recent history of figuring out 'the obvious'. And this doctor went thru several wrong ideas before recognizing that it was hand washing that was good.

The year was 1846, and our would-be hero was a Hungarian doctor named Ignaz Semmelweis.
<snip>
When Semmelweis crunched the numbers, he discovered that women in the clinic staffed by doctors and medical students died at a rate nearly five times higher than women in the midwives' clinic.<snip>So he ordered his medical staff to start cleaning their hands and instruments not just with soap but with a chlorine solution. Chlorine, as we know today, is about the best disinfectant there is. Semmelweis didn't know anything about germs. He chose the chlorine because he thought it would be the best way to get rid of any smell left behind by those little bits of corpse. And when he imposed this, the rate of childbed fever fell dramatically

Well you've highlighted how people would have figured it out, so to speak. This washing hands, with 'being clean' in mind, is suddenly discovered about 2000 years later?

It seems to me that from 2000 years ago, things started to go backwards in the middle ages. People were known to throw their human waste in the river or out in the back streets. No records of that happening in Israel.

The 2,700-year-old private toilet at Armon Hanatziv in Jerusalem, Israel.
10-5-21-Ancient-toilet-2160x1200.jpg


A stone toilet found inside the Holy of Holies of Lachish’s city-gate temple.
pic-2-7.jpg


An Iron Age toilet stone uncovered in the City of David in Jerusalem
main-pic-12-1168x657.jpg


Roman public toilets
dad429467bb8c798022a0bf5535a97ab.jpg
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Are mosquitoes mentioned anywhere in the Bible?

I ask because the current estimate is that mosquito bourne disease (mostly malaria) has killed about half of the people who have ever lived.

So a couple of tips from a loving and all powerful god about not living near swamps, not allowing stagnant water to sit around in your village or town, and generally avoiding mosquitoes as much as possible, would seem to be in order.
 

Learner

Veteran Member
Perhaps tips have been provided. Everybody from the old ancient communities and traditions, from all over the world, boiled leaves.

Several studies have scientifically validated a combination of Magnifera indica (mango), Carica papaya (paw-paw), Vernonia amygdalina (bitter leaf), Psidum guajava (guava), Ocimum gratissimum (sweet basil), Cymbopogon citratus (lemon grass), Azadirachta indica (neem), seeds of Citrus aurantifolia (lime), Nauclea latifolia and Morinda lucida to produce 100 per cent elimination of malaria parasites, even drug-resistant strains, in humans
Previous study demonstrated how hot infusion from the boiled green leaves of pawpaw combined with leaves of neem tree, lemon grass, guava, and stem bark of pattern wood drunk as one wine glass full three times daily provided effective treatment for drug-resistant malaria.


Indeed, several local plants have been validated for treating drug-resistant malaria. The local plants were identified by two recent but separate studies published in International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research and Bio-science and International Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Drug Research.


The local plants include: Neem tree (Azadirachta indica), Pattern wood (Alstonia boonei); Tropical almond (Terminalia catappa); Pawpaw (Carica papaya); Akuamma plant (Picralima nitida); Pentaclethra macrophylla (African oil bean tree); Phyllanthus niruri (stonebreaker); Euphorbia hirta (asthma herb and eczema drug); Newbouldia laevis (Chieftaincy leaf). https://guardian.ng/features/health/local-herbal-cures-for-malaria-validated/

This wouldn't be a surprise, if we were to consider this was being the case - because you could get all those leaves (in the above quoted), in the Middle East.
 
Last edited:

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Perhaps tips have been provided. Everybody from the old ancient communities and traditions, from all over the world, boiled leaves.

Several studies have scientifically validated a combination of Magnifera indica (mango), Carica papaya (paw-paw), Vernonia amygdalina (bitter leaf), Psidum guajava (guava), Ocimum gratissimum (sweet basil), Cymbopogon citratus (lemon grass), Azadirachta indica (neem), seeds of Citrus aurantifolia (lime), Nauclea latifolia and Morinda lucida to produce 100 per cent elimination of malaria parasites, even drug-resistant strains, in humans
Previous study demonstrated how hot infusion from the boiled green leaves of pawpaw combined with leaves of neem tree, lemon grass, guava, and stem bark of pattern wood drunk as one wine glass full three times daily provided effective treatment for drug-resistant malaria.


Indeed, several local plants have been validated for treating drug-resistant malaria. The local plants were identified by two recent but separate studies published in International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research and Bio-science and International Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Drug Research.


The local plants include: Neem tree (Azadirachta indica), Pattern wood (Alstonia boonei); Tropical almond (Terminalia catappa); Pawpaw (Carica papaya); Akuamma plant (Picralima nitida); Pentaclethra macrophylla (African oil bean tree); Phyllanthus niruri (stonebreaker); Euphorbia hirta (asthma herb and eczema drug); Newbouldia laevis (Chieftaincy leaf). https://guardian.ng/features/health/local-herbal-cures-for-malaria-validated/

This wouldn't be a surprise, if we were to consider this was being the case - because you could get all those leaves (in the above quoted), in the Middle East.
Leaving aside the fact that there are no 100% effective treatments for anything (a hallmark of specious medical claims is that of 100% effectiveness), and that the article you cite is utter garbage, from a country notorious for Internet lies and scams, the question I asked was:

"Are mosquitoes mentioned anywhere in the Bible?"

Last I checked, shitty Nigerian websites were neither reliable sources of information, nor (and this is particularly pertinent here) are they part of the Bible.

Would you like to try again, with the actual question asked?
 

Learner

Veteran Member
Leaving aside the fact that there are no 100% effective treatments for anything (a hallmark of specious medical claims is that of 100% effectiveness), and that the article you cite is utter garbage, from a country notorious for Internet lies and scams, the question I asked was:

And what I quoted in my previous posts, as you browsed over. Was your conclusion an automatic one, based on some past experience ... like from Nigerians sending you e-mails to assit them in putting a large amount of funds in your bank account?
"Are mosquitoes mentioned anywhere in the Bible?"

No, nor the other vast amount of insects that can cause disease, which is also not mentioned,... sure. However, fevers and illness that have similar discriptions are mentioned.

Last I checked, shitty Nigerian websites were neither reliable sources of information, nor (and this is particularly pertinent here) are they part of the Bible.
Underestimating a people group as a whole i.e. beause they're Nigerians, - just because of what some people do, it seems you are implying, , is erroneus. But I think you may have tested the source yourself, and the data showing the failure of those "false claims" when boiling leaves etc..

Look forward to hearing your investigation of these particular claims..
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Leaving aside the fact that there are no 100% effective treatments for anything (a hallmark of specious medical claims is that of 100% effectiveness), and that the article you cite is utter garbage, from a country notorious for Internet lies and scams, the question I asked was:

And what I quoted in my previous posts, as you browsed over. Was your conclusion an automatic one, based on some past experience ... like from Nigerians sending you e-mails to assit them in putting a large amount of funds in your bank account?
"Are mosquitoes mentioned anywhere in the Bible?"

No, nor the other vast amount of insects that can cause disease, which is also not mentioned,... sure. However, fevers and illness that have similar discriptions are mentioned.

Last I checked, shitty Nigerian websites were neither reliable sources of information, nor (and this is particularly pertinent here) are they part of the Bible.
Underestimating a people group as a whole i.e. beause they're Nigerians, - just because of what some people do, it seems you are implying, , is erroneus. But I think you may have tested the source yourself, and the data showing the failure of those "false claims" when boiling leaves etc..

Look forward to hearing your investigation of these particular claims..
I didn't give shit the first about those claims. This is supposed to be a discussion of what the Bible says about health, hygiene, and cleanliness.

The more that it becomes obvious that the Bible says almost nothing useful about this topic, despite there being a large number of very simple commandments that could have been included and would have thereby saved millions of lives, and reduced the suffering of millions more, the less interested you seem to be in discussing the topic at all.

The Bible failed to provide even the most basic guidance on how to protect against disease. That modern day Nigerians are posting bullshit claims about boiling leaves to cure malaria is not even tangentially related to this fact, and you appear to have brought it up solely to divert the discussion away from the gross failure of the Bible to even hint at divine inspiration, or any special understanding of reality, on the part of its authors.
 

excreationist

Married mouth-breather
I found some more relevant verses:
Moses wrote down health laws, dictated to him by God, which were hundreds and thousands of years before they were discovered by doctors/scientists.

Below is the first written law for quarantine in c. 1500 BC. It comes from the book of Leviticus in the Old Testament Bible.

“….And if there be in the bald head, or bald forehead, a white reddish sore; it is a leprosy sprung up in his bald head, or his bald forehead. Then the priest shall look upon it: and, behold, if the rising of the sore be white reddish in his bald head, or in his bald forehead, as the leprosy appeareth in the skin of the flesh; He is a leprous man, he is unclean: the priest shall pronounce him utterly unclean; his plague is in his head. And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and his head bare, and he shall put a covering upon his upper lip, and shall cry, ‘Unclean, unclean.’ All the days wherein the plague shall be in him he shall be defiled; he is unclean: he shall dwell alone; without the camp shall his habitation be.” The Mosaic Law in Leviticus 13:42-46 (c. 1500 BC) KJV

The word “quarantine” comes from the Italian quarantina giorni, meaning “space of forty days,” from quaranta “forty,” from the Latin quadraginta. Quarantine was first enforced in 1377 AD, 2,877 years after the Mosaic quarantine law, when there was an outbreak of the plague. Venice required ships from plague-stricken countries to wait in their port for 40 days to make sure no active cases of plague were aboard the ships.
Washing after handling a dead body is prescribed. Numbers 19:11-19

“Whoever touches the dead body of any human being will be unclean for seven days.” Numbers 13:11
There are Biblical Laws on how to handle human excrement. It must be buried away from the camp:

“You shall have a designated area outside the camp to which you shall go. As part of your equipment have something to dig with, and when you relieve yourself, dig a hole and cover up your excrement.” Deuteronomy 23:12,13

Human waste, left in the open as many societies did and still do, carry viral and bacterial diseases. Many in our own day use rivers for toilets and for bathing. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates nearly 2.2 million people die annually from diseases caused by contaminated water.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
I found some more relevant verses:
Moses wrote down health laws, dictated to him by God, which were hundreds and thousands of years before they were discovered by doctors/scientists.

Below is the first written law for quarantine in c. 1500 BC. It comes from the book of Leviticus in the Old Testament Bible.

“….And if there be in the bald head, or bald forehead, a white reddish sore; it is a leprosy sprung up in his bald head, or his bald forehead. Then the priest shall look upon it: and, behold, if the rising of the sore be white reddish in his bald head, or in his bald forehead, as the leprosy appeareth in the skin of the flesh; He is a leprous man, he is unclean: the priest shall pronounce him utterly unclean; his plague is in his head. And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and his head bare, and he shall put a covering upon his upper lip, and shall cry, ‘Unclean, unclean.’ All the days wherein the plague shall be in him he shall be defiled; he is unclean: he shall dwell alone; without the camp shall his habitation be.” The Mosaic Law in Leviticus 13:42-46 (c. 1500 BC) KJV

The word “quarantine” comes from the Italian quarantina giorni, meaning “space of forty days,” from quaranta “forty,” from the Latin quadraginta. Quarantine was first enforced in 1377 AD, 2,877 years after the Mosaic quarantine law, when there was an outbreak of the plague. Venice required ships from plague-stricken countries to wait in their port for 40 days to make sure no active cases of plague were aboard the ships.
Washing after handling a dead body is prescribed. Numbers 19:11-19

“Whoever touches the dead body of any human being will be unclean for seven days.” Numbers 13:11
There are Biblical Laws on how to handle human excrement. It must be buried away from the camp:

“You shall have a designated area outside the camp to which you shall go. As part of your equipment have something to dig with, and when you relieve yourself, dig a hole and cover up your excrement.” Deuteronomy 23:12,13

Human waste, left in the open as many societies did and still do, carry viral and bacterial diseases. Many in our own day use rivers for toilets and for bathing. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates nearly 2.2 million people die annually from diseases caused by contaminated water.
Deu 23 notably fails to mention:

A latrine hole should be at least 1.5m deep; at least 6m from dwellings; at least 30m from wells, springs, rivers and other water sources; should never be uphill from water sources used for drinking or bathing; and these minimum 30m distances should be doubled on porous ground such as sand or limestone.

It wouldn't have been difficult to include these requirements, and would have prevented a lot of dysentery and cholera. Did the all knowing god not know that making these explicit rules would prevent suffering; Or did the all loving god not care?
 

excreationist

Married mouth-breather
Deu 23 notably fails to mention:

A latrine hole should be at least 1.5m deep; at least 6m from dwellings; at least 30m from wells, springs, rivers and other water sources; should never be uphill from water sources used for drinking or bathing; and these minimum 30m distances should be doubled on porous ground such as sand or limestone.
It says "It must be buried away from the camp" which implies it is at least 6m from dwellings. It involves a single use hole.... that is covered up after use. So I don't think it should have added "at least 1.5m deep".
It wouldn't have been difficult to include these requirements, and would have prevented a lot of dysentery and cholera. Did the all knowing god not know that making these explicit rules would prevent suffering; Or did the all loving god not care?
So do you think single use holes would have caused "a lot of dysentery and cholera"?
 

Learner

Veteran Member

Leaving aside the fact that there are no 100% effective treatments for anything (a hallmark of specious medical claims is that of 100% effectiveness), and that the article you cite is utter garbage, from a country notorious for Internet lies and scams, the question I asked was:

And what I quoted in my previous posts, as you browsed over. Was your conclusion an automatic one, based on some past experience ... like from Nigerians sending you e-mails to assit them in putting a large amount of funds in your bank account?
"Are mosquitoes mentioned anywhere in the Bible?"

No, nor the other vast amount of insects that can cause disease, which is also not mentioned,... sure. However, fevers and illness that have similar discriptions are mentioned.

Last I checked, shitty Nigerian websites were neither reliable sources of information, nor (and this is particularly pertinent here) are they part of the Bible.
Underestimating a people group as a whole i.e. beause they're Nigerians, - just because of what some people do, it seems you are implying, , is erroneus. But I think you may have tested the source yourself, and the data showing the failure of those "false claims" when boiling leaves etc..

Look forward to hearing your investigation of these particular claims..
I didn't give shit the first about those claims. This is supposed to be a discussion of what the Bible says about health, hygiene, and cleanliness.

I haven't wandered off anywhere. Mosquitos relates to malaria, that relates to anti-malarial remedies i.e. boiling leaves, in which I suggesed, ancient people would have as well boiled leaves - also having access to the same plants back then in the Middle East.

The more that it becomes obvious that the Bible says almost nothing useful about this topic, despite there being a large number of very simple commandments that could have been included and would have thereby saved millions of lives, and reduced the suffering of millions more, the less interested you seem to be in discussing the topic at all.
The Bible failed to provide even the most basic guidance on how to protect against disease. That modern day Nigerians are posting bullshit claims about boiling leaves to cure malaria is not even tangentially related to this fact, and you appear to have brought it up solely to divert the discussion away from the gross failure of the Bible to even hint at divine inspiration, or any special understanding of reality, on the part of its authors.


The bible has a particular narrative - the bible writers assumes that man has some degree of intelligence, and, that there'd be some understanding that the bible was not written to be specific as a medical journal. Trying to make arguments as if it should be like it, is not a good idea.
I don't look there for any mentions for testing my blood sugar levels.

It wouldn't have been difficult to include these requirements, and would have prevented a lot of dysentery and cholera. Did the all knowing god not know that making these explicit rules would prevent suffering; Or did the all loving god not care?

excreationist post #20 (a like) sufficiently highlights the particular mindset back then. There is enough info to simply deduce from... with lots of the obvious emphasis throughout the bible, on cleansiness & washing.
 
Last edited:

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Deu 23 notably fails to mention:

A latrine hole should be at least 1.5m deep; at least 6m from dwellings; at least 30m from wells, springs, rivers and other water sources; should never be uphill from water sources used for drinking or bathing; and these minimum 30m distances should be doubled on porous ground such as sand or limestone.
It says "It must be buried away from the camp" which implies it is at least 6m from dwellings. It involves a single use hole.... that is covered up after use. So I don't think it should have added "at least 1.5m deep".
It wouldn't have been difficult to include these requirements, and would have prevented a lot of dysentery and cholera. Did the all knowing god not know that making these explicit rules would prevent suffering; Or did the all loving god not care?
So do you think single use holes would have caused "a lot of dysentery and cholera"?
Yes. If they're not a suitable distance from drinking water, and/or not deep enough.

Shallow pits, even single use, contaminate surface run-off.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum

Leaving aside the fact that there are no 100% effective treatments for anything (a hallmark of specious medical claims is that of 100% effectiveness), and that the article you cite is utter garbage, from a country notorious for Internet lies and scams, the question I asked was:

And what I quoted in my previous posts, as you browsed over. Was your conclusion an automatic one, based on some past experience ... like from Nigerians sending you e-mails to assit them in putting a large amount of funds in your bank account?
"Are mosquitoes mentioned anywhere in the Bible?"

No, nor the other vast amount of insects that can cause disease, which is also not mentioned,... sure. However, fevers and illness that have similar discriptions are mentioned.

Last I checked, shitty Nigerian websites were neither reliable sources of information, nor (and this is particularly pertinent here) are they part of the Bible.
Underestimating a people group as a whole i.e. beause they're Nigerians, - just because of what some people do, it seems you are implying, , is erroneus. But I think you may have tested the source yourself, and the data showing the failure of those "false claims" when boiling leaves etc..

Look forward to hearing your investigation of these particular claims..
I didn't give shit the first about those claims. This is supposed to be a discussion of what the Bible says about health, hygiene, and cleanliness.

I haven't wandered off anywhere. Mosquitos relates to malaria, that relates to anti-malarial remedies i.e. boiling leaves, in which I suggesed, ancient people would have as well boiled leaves - also having access to the same plants back then in the Middle East.

The more that it becomes obvious that the Bible says almost nothing useful about this topic, despite there being a large number of very simple commandments that could have been included and would have thereby saved millions of lives, and reduced the suffering of millions more, the less interested you seem to be in discussing the topic at all.
The Bible failed to provide even the most basic guidance on how to protect against disease. That modern day Nigerians are posting bullshit claims about boiling leaves to cure malaria is not even tangentially related to this fact, and you appear to have brought it up solely to divert the discussion away from the gross failure of the Bible to even hint at divine inspiration, or any special understanding of reality, on the part of its authors.


The bible has a particular narrative - the bible writers assumes that man has some degree of intelligence, and, that there'd be some understanding that the bible was not written to be specific as a medical journal. Trying to make arguments as if it should be like it, is not a good idea.
I don't look there for any mentions for testing my blood sugar levels.

It wouldn't have been difficult to include these requirements, and would have prevented a lot of dysentery and cholera. Did the all knowing god not know that making these explicit rules would prevent suffering; Or did the all loving god not care?

excreationist post #20 (a like) sufficiently highlights the particular mindset back then. There is enough info to simply deduce from... with lots of the obvious emphasis & viewpoint throughout the bible, on cleansiness & washing.
Yeah, god simply never realised that people wouldn't understand something so obvious as the germ theory of disease without him explicitly mentioning countermeasures against its spread.

It's all our own fault for not realising how fucking ignorant god was about everything. :rolleyes2:

The Bible isn't supposed to be a manual on any specifics about how to survive or how to avoid shitting your life out; Just on the details of important things, like how much to beat slaves, or what burned offerings smell nicest to god.
 

excreationist

Married mouth-breather
Deu 23 notably fails to mention:

A latrine hole should be at least 1.5m deep; at least 6m from dwellings; at least 30m from wells, springs, rivers and other water sources; should never be uphill from water sources used for drinking or bathing; and these minimum 30m distances should be doubled on porous ground such as sand or limestone.
It says "It must be buried away from the camp" which implies it is at least 6m from dwellings. It involves a single use hole.... that is covered up after use. So I don't think it should have added "at least 1.5m deep".
It wouldn't have been difficult to include these requirements, and would have prevented a lot of dysentery and cholera. Did the all knowing god not know that making these explicit rules would prevent suffering; Or did the all loving god not care?
So do you think single use holes would have caused "a lot of dysentery and cholera"?
Yes. If they're not a suitable distance from drinking water, and/or not deep enough.

Shallow pits, even single use, contaminate surface run-off.
They were in the desert.... I think outside of the camp it would be unlikely for a single use hole to contaminate drinking water (because the drinking water probably wouldn't be nearby). And it would be a lot better than cultures that use a river as their toilet.
BTW what about people going camping in modern times.... where they don't stay long at a particular spot - do you think they'd always dig a hole that is at least 1.5m deep?
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Deu 23 notably fails to mention:

A latrine hole should be at least 1.5m deep; at least 6m from dwellings; at least 30m from wells, springs, rivers and other water sources; should never be uphill from water sources used for drinking or bathing; and these minimum 30m distances should be doubled on porous ground such as sand or limestone.
It says "It must be buried away from the camp" which implies it is at least 6m from dwellings. It involves a single use hole.... that is covered up after use. So I don't think it should have added "at least 1.5m deep".
It wouldn't have been difficult to include these requirements, and would have prevented a lot of dysentery and cholera. Did the all knowing god not know that making these explicit rules would prevent suffering; Or did the all loving god not care?
So do you think single use holes would have caused "a lot of dysentery and cholera"?
Yes. If they're not a suitable distance from drinking water, and/or not deep enough.

Shallow pits, even single use, contaminate surface run-off.
They were in the desert.... I think outside of the camp it would be unlikely for a single use hole to contaminate drinking water (because the drinking water probably wouldn't be nearby). And it would be a lot better than cultures that use a river as their toilet.
BTW what about people going camping in modern times.... where they don't stay long at a particular spot - do you think they'd always dig a hole that is at least 1.5m deep?
They should. But probably don't.

Anyway, an all-knowing god would be aware that his book would be hugely popular outside the Middle East. That it's obviously not written for Medieval Europeans or Modern Americans is not a point in its favour.
 

excreationist

Married mouth-breather
BTW what about people going camping in modern times.... where they don't stay long at a particular spot - do you think they'd always dig a hole that is at least 1.5m deep?
They should. But probably don't.
It would be very uncommon for campers to always dig a hole that at least 1.5m. I think a shallow single use hole outside the camp isn't necessarily worse than a 1.5m hole that stays open for a significant amount of time. I mean it could allow flies to breed, etc.
Anyway, an all-knowing god would be aware that his book would be hugely popular outside the Middle East. That it's obviously not written for Medieval Europeans or Modern Americans is not a point in its favour.
Well the rules about what not to eat, about the Sabbath, circumcision, etc, became somewhat irrelevant centuries earlier than that - in Paul's time.... I think scientific problems (creation, flat earth, etc) are a more serious problem than having hygiene rules that don't apply to future people that aren't wandering the desert.
 
Last edited:

Politesse

Sapere aude
If a scriptorium of priestly ceremonial laws is being taken as a panacea of all medical knowledge, that says more about the reader than it does about the book.
 
Top Bottom