Yes, this is definitely the more rational conclusion. Even if no one knew about germ theory or parasites there were likely observations made that certain foods/preparations resulted in certain outcomes and then codified this information in the laws. It seems that the grandparent comment is starting from the premise that god exists and looking for evidence to support the conclusion they already hold.
I'm not sure you understand the specificity of the mosaic hygienic laws to which I'm referring, but a bit of research into the knowledge of the time coupled with a close look at the high level of detail given in the law shows that no, human origin is not the more rational conclusion. There's a LOT more going on than 'dont eat certain foods'
>It seems that the grandparent comment is starting from the premise that god exists and looking for evidence to support the conclusion they already hold.
it seems that you are assuming anything affirming God must be irrational and therefore state that I must be approaching this irrationally.
I encourage anyone who finds the concept interesting to check out this book: