If scientists, for whatever reason—and I'm sure we could think of a few if we tried—successfully bred pigs without cloven hooves, would ham become Kosher? Or am I missing a few scriptural reasons?
Nifty. Never heard about that. Do you have a citation? • • • Ah, I had not thought of that. But you've raised a pretty mystery. Several centuries ago, the discussion of evil among creation included considerations of a blind horse. I'd have to dig it up, but it seems to me that if there was a scriptural precedent about deformed animals (other than humans), that would have settled the argument right then and there. Of course, it was, as I recall, the Catholics, so who knows what arguments were disqualified at the time ....
************* M*W: Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't sheep and goats have cloven hooves? They ate them, didn't they? I'm too tired to look it up right now.
If an animal meets both criteria—is a ruminant and has a cloven hoof—all is cool. I believe sheep and goats qualify as such. I'm looking at Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. Scripture is specific about pigs:
what does it mean does not chew? Sure it chews - it's got teach ain't it? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! PS: Pork is YUMMY Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You do not know what chew the cud means. Chewing the cud is when a herbivore regurgitates its food and chews it a second time. So a cow will chew grass and then later it will vomit/regurgitated the partly digested grass into its mouth and then chew it again before finally swallowing it again and finishing the digestion.
Aye, because in his infinite wisdom god made a grass eating animal with the inability to digest grass.. Guy's sure got a sense of humour, I'll give him that.
He created his children with foreskin when he didn't want his children to have foreskin.. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
[QUOTE=Photizo;1662514 Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Then may you also do good who are accustomed to do evil. There's enough trouble in Ethopia . Please don't add to it Your skirts have been uncovered. I bet Ruth looked stunning in a miniskirt Because you have forgotten Me And trusted in falsehood. Do you pray for amnesiacs ?
Re: Draqon, #2, 9 The Jewish Virtual Library (A Division of The American-Israel Cooperative Enterprise) entry, "Kashrut: Jewish Dietary Laws" makes no reference to trichinosis, and is largely based on passages from Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, and also the Oral Torah. The Wikipedia entry on Kashrut—with, of course, the standard disclaimers about Wiki's accuracy—notes: Maimonides° was a Rabbi of the twelfth century, a scholastic who sought—as scholastics did—to reconcile theology and knowledge (e.g. science). The Wiki discussion of Kashrut suggests: ____________________ Notes: ° Maimonides — Many theologians consider Maimonedes' strongest contribution his assertion of "negative theology"; that it is more appropriate to state what God is not than what God is. Theologically, this does make a certain amount of sense, as the concept can prevent certain conflicts of attributes that seem mutually exclusive. Eight hundred years later, though, we might wonder how the notion contributes to anti-identification, that is, labeling oneself according to what one is not. (Political candidates often specialize in anti-identification.) Works Cited: "Kashrut: Jewish Dietary Laws". Jewish Virtual Library. 2007. See http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/kashrut.html "Kashrut". Wikipedia. 7 December, 2007. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashrut "Maimonides". Wikipedia. 27 November, 2007. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maimonides