What is Kosher?

[Kuan]

I keep hearing kosher but I have no clue what it means...Can someone please explain?

[cnorman18]

The Kosher Laws are as written in the OT describing foods that are good for eating and the proper way of preparing them. The Kosher laws provide the best guidance ever given to the best diet. It is of great health benefit to all who follow it.

A couple of corrections:

First, the kosher laws are not given in the OT, only certain hints and remarks that gave rise to them; the details of kosher preparation for food are found only in Jewish tradition, not in the Bible. The Bible does not even contain a comprehensive list of animals that are and are not kosher (the only class of nonkosher animals that is listed by species are the nonkosher fowl, and it will be noted that all of them are birds of prey or scavengers). The Bible never explicitly says not to combine milk and meat; that, too, is tradition, drawn from the repeated admonition not to boil a kid in its mother's milk.

That last shows us something else; the kosher laws are not about health, though they are not unhealthy. Combining milk and meat products has no bad health effects at all. The kosher laws were and are about something else -- the ethical treatment of animals, to coin a phrase, and humility about nourishing one's own life from the death of another creature.

That is my own opinion. Any rabbi will tell you that the REASON for the kosher laws is that they are commanded; the reason WHY is not given in Scripture or anywhere else, though we are allowed to speculate.

A more detailed discussion can be found in Post 4 on this thread.

[Adstar]

The Kosher Laws are as written in the OT describing foods that are good for eating and the proper way of preparing them. The Kosher laws provide the best guidance ever given to the best diet. It is of great health benefit to all who follow it.

A couple of corrections:

First, the kosher laws are not given in the OT, only certain hints and remarks that gave rise to them; the details of kosher preparation for food are found only in Jewish tradition, not in the Bible. The Bible does not even contain a comprehensive list of animals that are and are not kosher (the only class of nonkosher animals that is listed by species are the nonkosher fowl, and it will be noted that all of them are birds of prey or scavengers). The Bible never explicitly says not to combine milk and meat; that, too, is tradition, drawn from the repeated admonition not to boil a kid in its mother's milk.

That last shows us something else; the kosher laws are not about health, though they are not unhealthy. Combining milk and meat products has no bad health effects at all. The kosher laws were and are about something else -- the ethical treatment of animals, to coin a phrase, and humility about nourishing one's own life from the death of another creature.

That is my own opinion. Any rabbi will tell you that the REASON for the kosher laws is that they are commanded; the reason WHY is not given in Scripture or anywhere else, though we are allowed to speculate.

A more detailed discussion can be found in Post 4 on this thread.

And this post is exactly why i stressed that Kosher law is contained in the OT. I said that because i knew for sure a traditions of men jew would post this kind of post to state that kosher law is a creation of the traditions of men and that the OT laws are just a basic pointer.

No. The guidance given by the God of Abraham was sufficient and He gave everything that the Hebrews needed to know and follow. All other traditions of men injected since are declaring God's guidance as insufficient or not good enough. I believe the Word of God is sufficient.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

[cnorman18]

The Kosher Laws are as written in the OT describing foods that are good for eating and the proper way of preparing them. The Kosher laws provide the best guidance ever given to the best diet. It is of great health benefit to all who follow it.

A couple of corrections:

First, the kosher laws are not given in the OT, only certain hints and remarks that gave rise to them; the details of kosher preparation for food are found only in Jewish tradition, not in the Bible. The Bible does not even contain a comprehensive list of animals that are and are not kosher (the only class of nonkosher animals that is listed by species are the nonkosher fowl, and it will be noted that all of them are birds of prey or scavengers). The Bible never explicitly says not to combine milk and meat; that, too, is tradition, drawn from the repeated admonition not to boil a kid in its mother's milk.

That last shows us something else; the kosher laws are not about health, though they are not unhealthy. Combining milk and meat products has no bad health effects at all. The kosher laws were and are about something else -- the ethical treatment of animals, to coin a phrase, and humility about nourishing one's own life from the death of another creature.

That is my own opinion. Any rabbi will tell you that the REASON for the kosher laws is that they are commanded; the reason WHY is not given in Scripture or anywhere else, though we are allowed to speculate.

A more detailed discussion can be found in Post 4 on this thread.

And this post is exactly why i stressed that Kosher law is contained in the OT. I said that because i knew for sure a traditions of men jew would post this kind of post to state that kosher law is a creation of the traditions of men and that the OT laws are just a basic pointer.

No. The guidance given by the God of Abraham was sufficient and He gave everything that the Hebrews needed to know and follow. All other traditions of men injected since are declaring God's guidance as insufficient or not good enough. I believe the Word of God is sufficient.

The very word "kosher" is not found in the Bible, but only in Jewish tradition; it is not even a Hebrew word. It is Yiddish.

The kosher laws are not found in the Bible; they just aren't. If you claim that they are, perhaps you can show where the details of kosher slaughter (through the throat with a razor-sharp knife), of kashering (packing the butchered meat in salt to draw off all traces of blood), and where exactly it says that fruit, vegetables, fish and eggs are neither meat nor milk and may be eaten with both, where it says that one may not eat chicken together with cheese.

If you want to come up with a list of "Abrahamic" dietary laws and show how and where they are found in the Bible, feel free; but (1) do not call them the "kosher" laws, because they aren't; and (2) don't denigrate my religion and put words in Jewish mouths by claiming that anyone ever said that God's guidance was insufficient or not good enough. The kosher laws are not the creation of humans, but humans are charged with extending and applying the laws given by God; and though you have the right to read the Bible as you choose and believe as you choose, you have neither the right nor the warrant from God to call OUR reading of OUR book false or invalid.

Abortions are not mentioned in the Bible either; is the religious opposition to that practice also a matter of "traditions of men" that ought to be ignored and discarded?

I would add this: Calling me a "traditions of men jew" is a gross personal insult and an insult to my religion.

[Adstar]

The Kosher Laws are as written in the OT describing foods that are good for eating and the proper way of preparing them. The Kosher laws provide the best guidance ever given to the best diet. It is of great health benefit to all who follow it.

A couple of corrections:

First, the kosher laws are not given in the OT, only certain hints and remarks that gave rise to them; the details of kosher preparation for food are found only in Jewish tradition, not in the Bible. The Bible does not even contain a comprehensive list of animals that are and are not kosher (the only class of nonkosher animals that is listed by species are the nonkosher fowl, and it will be noted that all of them are birds of prey or scavengers). The Bible never explicitly says not to combine milk and meat; that, too, is tradition, drawn from the repeated admonition not to boil a kid in its mother's milk.

That last shows us something else; the kosher laws are not about health, though they are not unhealthy. Combining milk and meat products has no bad health effects at all. The kosher laws were and are about something else -- the ethical treatment of animals, to coin a phrase, and humility about nourishing one's own life from the death of another creature.

That is my own opinion. Any rabbi will tell you that the REASON for the kosher laws is that they are commanded; the reason WHY is not given in Scripture or anywhere else, though we are allowed to speculate.

A more detailed discussion can be found in Post 4 on this thread.

And this post is exactly why i stressed that Kosher law is contained in the OT. I said that because i knew for sure a traditions of men jew would post this kind of post to state that kosher law is a creation of the traditions of men and that the OT laws are just a basic pointer.

No. The guidance given by the God of Abraham was sufficient and He gave everything that the Hebrews needed to know and follow. All other traditions of men injected since are declaring God's guidance as insufficient or not good enough. I believe the Word of God is sufficient.

The very word "kosher" is not found in the Bible, but only in Jewish tradition; it is not even a Hebrew word. It is Yiddish.

The kosher laws are not found in the Bible; they just aren't. If you claim that they are, perhaps you can show where the details of kosher slaughter (through the throat with a razor-sharp knife), of kashering (packing the butchered meat in salt to draw off all traces of blood), and where exactly it says that fruit, vegetables, fish and eggs are neither meat nor milk and may be eaten with both, where it says that one may not eat chicken together with cheese.

If you want to come up with a list of "Abrahamic" dietary laws and show how and where they are found in the Bible, feel free; but (1) do not call them the "kosher" laws, because they aren't; and (2) don't denigrate my religion and put words in Jewish mouths by claiming that anyone ever said that God's guidance was insufficient or not good enough. The kosher laws are not the creation of humans, but humans are charged with extending and applying the laws given by God; and though you have the right to read the Bible as you choose and believe as you choose, you have neither the right nor the warrant from God to call OUR reading of OUR book false or invalid.

Abortions are not mentioned in the Bible either; is the religious opposition to that practice also a matter of "traditions of men" that ought to be ignored and discarded?

I would add this: Calling me a "traditions of men jew" is a gross personal insult and an insult to my religion.

Why should it be an insult to you?

Your claim is that Kosher is a creation of your religion outside what is written in the OT. Therefore you cannot provide direct Word of God directives that teach Kosher Law as you believe them to be. So therefore the traditions of men jew tag i used to describe you is factual because the Koshar laws you support are exactly that, Traditions of men passed down within the current religion that is refered to as Jewish.


All Praise The Ancient of Days

[Darias]

Going to Church on Sunday instead of the Sabbath is a Christian "tradition of men"

The practice of communion is a "tradition of men" which evolved from the passover meal.

Deacons, Bishops, Pastors, Ushers, Hymns, Choirs, services which allow men and women to sit together rather than apart -- all traditions of men. None of these things are taught from the Bible (containing many traditions of men, including polygamy, slavery, women not speaking in church/covered up, etc. etc.)

Traditions of men all -- good and bad...

So if you want to invalidate someone else's beliefs because "they are not in the Bible" I suggest you start examining your own un-Biblical practices first.

"Traditions-of-men-Jew" is offensive. Plain and simple.

[Adstar]

Going to Church on Sunday instead of the Sabbath is a Christian "tradition of men"

The practice of communion is a "tradition of men" which evolved from the passover meal.

Deacons, Bishops, Pastors, Ushers, Hymns, Choirs, services which allow men and women to sit together rather than apart -- all traditions of men. None of these things are taught from the Bible (containing many traditions of men, including polygamy, slavery, women not speaking in church/covered up, etc. etc.)

Traditions of men all -- good and bad...

So if you want to invalidate someone else's beliefs because "they are not in the Bible" I suggest you start examining your own un-Biblical practices first.

"Traditions-of-men-Jew" is offensive. Plain and simple.

No it is not. If it is a true tag of what His view on Kosher is. Kosher as he sees it is a tradition that has been built up by men through the generations beyond what is written in the Torah or OT. So I am very accurate when i describe it as such.

As for you examples you gave about the tradition of men of the religions that call themselves Christian. they are not biblical Christians.

Jesus never instituted the practice of going to a church building on the Sabbath. that’s a tradition of men. Both going to church and going to church on Sunday are traditions of men. The Biblical Sabbath starts at sundown Friday and ends on sundown Saturday. And there is no call to attend any church on this day.

The practice of breaking bread and drinking wine in remembrance of the Messiah Jesus on the day of Passover is Biblical Christianity. So it is not a tradition of men.

As for the rest of your examples some are some are not the traditions of men.

Bringing forth "Christian" traditions of men does not disqualify my descriptor on the modern Jewish practice of Kosher as traditions of men. They are traditions of men.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

[cnorman18]

Your claim is that Kosher is a creation of your religion outside what is written in the OT. Therefore you cannot provide direct Word of God directives that teach Kosher Law as you believe them to be. So therefore the traditions of men jew tag i used to describe you is factual because the Koshar laws you support are exactly that, Traditions of men passed down within the current religion that is refered to as Jewish.

First, there is this:

The Kosher Laws are as written in the OT describing foods that are good for eating and the proper way of preparing them.

That is factually false, as I have shown. Again: if you'd care to show where the details of the kosher laws are written in the OT, which is apparently your claim, please do so. Do you stand by your claim here? If so, please prove it.

Second: If you want to say, without the negative implications, that the Jewish religion is primarily based on tradition, I would have no argument with that at all; I have said so many times. The PROBLEM is your obvious implicit claim that it is therefore invalid, false, and inferior to your own beliefs. THAT is what makes it an insult. If you'd care to make it clear that that isn't what you mean, we're OK here. If you don't, then I'll stand by my characterization of your remark as an insult.

Up to you.

[McCulloch]

Moderator Warning

Adstar referred to another debater as a "traditions of men jew". Applying labels to others who do not apply them to themselves is uncivil. This label could be seen as an attempt to be demeaning, insulting and degrading.

_______________
When the moderators feel the rules have been violated, a notice will frequently occur within the thread where the violation occurred, pointing out the violation and perhaps providing other moderator comments. Moderator warnings and comments are made publicly, within the thread, so that all members may see when and how the rules are being interpreted and enforced. However, note that any challenges or replies to moderator comments or warnings should be made via Private Message. This is so that threads do not get derailed into discussions about the rules.

[Adstar]

Your claim is that Kosher is a creation of your religion outside what is written in the OT. Therefore you cannot provide direct Word of God directives that teach Kosher Law as you believe them to be. So therefore the traditions of men jew tag i used to describe you is factual because the Koshar laws you support are exactly that, Traditions of men passed down within the current religion that is refered to as Jewish.

First, there is this:

The Kosher Laws are as written in the OT describing foods that are good for eating and the proper way of preparing them.

That is factually false, as I have shown. Again: if you'd care to show where the details of the kosher laws are written in the OT, which is apparently your claim, please do so. Do you stand by your claim here? If so, please prove it.

Second: If you want to say, without the negative implications, that the Jewish religion is primarily based on tradition, I would have no argument with that at all; I have said so many times. The PROBLEM is your obvious implicit claim that it is therefore invalid, false, and inferior to your own beliefs. THAT is what makes it an insult. If you'd care to make it clear that that isn't what you mean, we're OK here. If you don't, then I'll stand by my characterization of your remark as an insult.

Up to you.

Two points.

It seems we have a definition problem and an ownership problem with the word Kosher.

You seem to be trying to claim exclusive ownership of the word Kosher to the traditions of the modern day religion called judaism. While i am using the word Kosher as it is generally used in the Christian community to refer to laws in the OT regarding correct foods and food preparations.

So you are trying to undermine my message because of the words of use. Arguing over semantics in an attempt to avoid the message i am actually given.

I can continue with this and no longer use the word Kosher, I can call it the "Will of the God of Abraham in regards to the correct food and food preparation for His people" Hows that happy now.

So the "Will of the God of Abraham in regards to the correct food and food preparation for His people" is contained in the OT/Torah and any other traditions added to that or traditions that teach in opposition to that are the traditions of men.

Second point.

I read your descriptions under your name. Stating that you are now a jew but where a former Christian.

So you show by your very own decision to convert to modern judaism that you see modern judaism as superior to Christianity. If you had not seen it as superior you would not have converted to modern judaism in the first place. So it is pretty rich for you to start complaining about others who believe their faith is superior.

Obviously if i thought modern judaism was superior to Christianity i would convert today. I don't get all bent up and start to cry and moan because a muslim thinks islam is superior, or a jew thinks judaism was superior or a athiest thinks atheism in superior to belief in God. I don't walk around moaning and playing the victim. I accept that others believe what they believe and believe they are right to believe what they believe. Why don't you.



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

[Adstar]

Moderator Warning

Adstar referred to another debater as a "traditions of men jew". Applying labels to others who do not apply them to themselves is uncivil. This label could be seen as an attempt to be demeaning, insulting and degrading.

_______________
When the moderators feel the rules have been violated, a notice will frequently occur within the thread where the violation occurred, pointing out the violation and perhaps providing other moderator comments. Moderator warnings and comments are made publicly, within the thread, so that all members may see when and how the rules are being interpreted and enforced. However, note that any challenges or replies to moderator comments or warnings should be made via Private Message. This is so that threads do not get derailed into discussions about the rules.

So then McCulloch

Please tell me the correct and acceptable way to refer to religious laws that are not written down in a religions foundation Book that is believe by them to be the direct Word of God, but are religious laws added to those laws by men. And those laws are now traditions of the said religion?

So what is the acceptable, niceness, politically correct terminology for these laws please?



All Praise The Ancient Of Days