Halal, is it meat you're looking for?

That's a very apologetic answer to paul. Only by following some of pauls words while ignoring others and by completely ignoring the whole of Acts and therefore Luke as an author could you believe a word of what you have written us true.

Of course I always believe first the account of someone who only writes about themselves, their deeds, and their self praise and calls them self an apostle when no one else does (excluding luke whom you already discarded).

If you do truly believe in Paul and only paul then you also say women should be silent in church and offer no voice, and that men should live like they have no wives etc? That's quite a dangerous theology you subscribe to and one that is ignored today by Christians, why?

Also note that both muslims and Jews reject his status as jesus's replacement on earth which Paul himself casts himself as.
 
Look running man, like I said if you seriously want to discuss the ins and outs of Dual Covenant Theology, the validity of Acts and Paul's Epistles and the historicity of both then start a thread outlining your argument against such in Speakers Corner with the relevant sources and accompanying scripture. I will then present the various denominational views as opposed to the cultist one. If you don't then it's time for you to move on and let the thread proceed with its debate on Halal in a secular world.
 
Last edited:
It can be argued that the Quran doesn't require the prayer prior to slaughter but prior to consumption, however it cannot be argued that the Quran allows prohibited foods.
 
if i promise to eat halal will you two stop ?

i just want to point out the irony of this.... 2 grown men, each unable to back down on interpretations of 2000+ year old, irrelevant nonsense, trying to get 1up on each other.

Wars have probably been started for less.
 
Last edited:
It can be argued that the Quran doesn't require the prayer prior to slaughter but prior to consumption, however it cannot be argued that the Quran allows prohibited foods.

Ao you have the koran c5 v5 that repeats what you say is the all clear in the bible

5:5 This day (all) the good things are allowed to you; and the food of those who have been given the Book is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them; and the chaste from among the believing women and the chaste from among those who have been given the Book before you (are lawful for you); when you have given them their dowries, taking (them) in marriage, not fornicating nor taking them for paramours in secret; and whoever denies faith, his work indeed is of no account, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers.

unless the implicit understanding in the bible is that not all food is good and still must be blessed which contradicts your view that jesus said all food is good and also contradicts the apostlistic decree in Acts.

In this instance you can't literally have your cake and eat it and say that one passage allows one thing ignoring all the passages before and after it which contradict such a narrow interpretation.
 
The Book they refer to is exclusively the Pentateuch, not the Bible in its entirety. So Paul has nothing to do with how Muslims derive their Juris from the Quran.
 
It's a start though. Now, people will be able to vote with their wallets, which will ultimately have an impact on how prevalent these practises are.

could easily see a bit of a dip in sales/backlash against 'musliamic meat'...

I don't really care as long as it has been pre-stunned... tis important for some Sikhs though
 
I think the main problem here is, Muslims want Britain to conform to their religious beliefs and cultures but when the shoe is on the other foot Muslims don't want to conform to our Religious beliefs and culture. Most recently the big fuss about shops being closed on Christmas Day. If you are all that desperate for a loaf I'm sure there are plenty of Muslim corner shops open.
 
Back
Top Bottom