Science & The Bible(was First human)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

At 12:29 AM 3/31/98 -0000, J. Michael McGill wrote:

>MCGILL

>OK, how about "hares chew the cud".

>

>The hare IS NOT a cud chewer. The Hare is NOT a ruminant.


Lose one argument and move to the next. Since I'm neither
a Rabbi/Hebrew scholar nor an expert on Mideastern
mammals in ancient times, I have no idea which animal
the author and Biblical translators called a hare. But
the point is that hares were not to be eaten by human
beings, not what the digestive processes of the hare were.
The truth doesn't involve whether or not hares chew the
cud but whether hares should be part of the human diet.
You won't find anyone in the American Southwest now who
eats jackrabbits, which are actually hares, not rabbits,
another falsity of American culture. Why aren't they
eaten? Just what is the truth of hares as human food?
Have you eaten hares? Does McDonalds sell hareburgers?

For many years, European and American biologists classified
hares as rodents, which is false.

Dick Jones

• Previous message: Science & The Bible(was First human)
• Next message: Science & The Bible(was First human)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]