1
edit
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 32:
Line 32: − + + + +
Added a comment concerning "Kashrut in the New Testament"
Why the reversion? Surely animal cruelty is the same no matter which religion is responsible for it? The halal article mentions cruelty, so why not kosher?
Why the reversion? Surely animal cruelty is the same no matter which religion is responsible for it? The halal article mentions cruelty, so why not kosher?
:Quite honestly, I think its nonsense. It's definitely less cruel than running around shooting deer. It shoudl just be removed from the halal article.--[[User:Redsox70707|Redsox70707]] 01:13, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
:Quite honestly, I think its nonsense. It's definitely less cruel than running around shooting deer. It should just be removed from the halal article.--[[User:Redsox70707|Redsox70707]] 01:13, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
==Why Kosher exists==
==Why Kosher exists==
Either the section or the title should be changed. The laws of Kashrut exist because they are in the Torah, the only other reason that could be put is for certain medical reasons.--[[User:Redsox70707|Redsox70707]] 01:15, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
Either the section or the title should be changed. The laws of Kashrut exist because they are in the Torah, the only other reason that could be put is for certain medical reasons.--[[User:Redsox70707|Redsox70707]] 01:15, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
==Kashrut in the New Testament==
There is some disagreement concerning the view that the New Testament abrogates the food laws. See the [[Messianic_Judaism]] article. [[User:Bdbseven|Bdbseven]] 21:46, 23 December 2012 (EST)