The Bible on Human Waste and Carcasses

I wholeheartedly agree with you that the dietary and sanitary laws of Israel do not contain information that was unavailable to other nations of the time, and I would like to hear what you think of my reason why.If the Bible is true, then evolution did not occur and man was created with all the same physical and mental capacities which we possess today. (Gen 1-2)If the Bible is true, then all men are descended from a just man who communicated directly with God on multiple occasions. (Gen 6:9, 6:13, 7:1, 8:15, 9:1, and 10:32)If the Bible is true, then all of the dietary and sanitary laws that the Israelites were required to follow came from God Himself. (Lev 11:1)If the Bible is true, then all the nations existing at the time of the writing of Leviticus could have had access to any scientific knowledge which Noah had passed down to them as a result of his walk with God.Therefore, if the Bible is true, then as we study history, we should expect to find that many other nations would have dietary and sanitary laws similar to those found in the Bible. We could, perhaps, speculate that some nations would have discarded some of their dietary and sanitary habits over a period of time, but we would probably still expect to find some remnant of evidence that such nations had better knowledge of diet and sanitation in their past.Thus I would agree with you that God did not present any scientific information to the Israelites that was not in some way available (though possibly dificult to find) to all other nations of that time.Edited by w_fortenberry, : No reason given.

Actually, I just posted an answer to this comment on another thread. A very important clarification. Thank you. I was focusing on the scientific aspects of the law and neglected to mention that certain religious aspects would probably remain peculiar to the nation of Israel. Thank you for the correction.

That is not a valid conclusion. You cannot logically draw a positive conclusion from a negative premise. Your statement here would be similar to me claiming that if money doesn't grow on trees, then we could expect it to grow on cars. You see, I am drawing a positive conclusion from a negative premise, and it just doesn't work. To properly come to the positive conclusion that we could expect money to grow on cars, I must start with a positive premise or premises such as the following.Money grows on things that contain metal.
All cars contain metal.
Therefore, we could expect to find money to grow on cars.Of course, in this case my premises are false thus making my conclusion valid but false. The goal of deductive reasoning is to arrive at a conclusion which is both valid and true.To parallel this syllogism about money to my statements about the Bible, I would change it in the following ways.If money grew on things that contained metal,
And if all cars contained metal,
Then we could expect money to grow on cars.Notice that here I have at least two positive premises leading to a valid and true positive conclusion. My statements about the dietary and sanitary laws in the Bible were arranged in just this way. The conclusion that I arrived at is both valid and true.Now, just as I changed my syllogism about money, you can also change your statement to make it valid. For instance, you could say...The Bible is always false.
The Bible makes ____________ claim.
Therefore, __________ claim is false.This would be a valid syllogism. I would, of course, argue the truth of your premises, but I would not deny that you had arrived at a valid conclusion based on those premises.You could even arrange your comments so that I could not argue against either the truth or the validity of your conclusion. You could say...The Bible makes __________ claim.
If the Bible were always false,
Then _________ claim would be false.If you were to phrase your statement thus, then it would be both valid and true.