Very much so. And there's more. The "ceremony" of not eating pork is simply that. Here's what Jesus felt about such ceremony: Luk 11:39 And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness. Therefore did He say that it is not what goes into the mouth but what comes out of it.
I just don't think we need an old book to establish our morales. I'm sure the guy he was quoting said alot of nice things but a few billion people said the same things before him and a few billion after him.
Bu that wasn't your point, was it? You said "it wasn't accurate." I disagreed, and thought Dead's posting it was worthwhile. Beyond that, whether from an old book, a new book, "it's been said before," whatever it may be, if it contains something of worth, personally, I'm glad to receive it.
I think we have to talk about showing respect to other peoples beliefs instead of Pork being clean or unclean in this case. One side says it is unclean and not allowed in our religion (By the Islam has permission to do unallowed things in necessity , so you can eat pork if you will die from hunger etc) , the other side says hey pork is delicious and nutricious. That makes no sense everything is the same. It says "Everybody wants to rule the world" in an old song , funny and sad at the same time.
Yes Dead Corn's post was worthwhile, I'm not saying it wasn't. It annoys me when people quote holy books, thats all. What you say with your mouth, rather than what you eat with it, can potentially make you unclean.
If there was no "old book" to start with - where would our morales stand? The only reason we have these morales today (or claim to have them) is because it's all routed from religion. For example, all laws in the UK originated from teachings in the Christian religion - but over the years the laws have changed according to public need/desire. We need these "old books" now because these laws and morales are changing for the worse, so we need to know where the line is drawn.
That's precisely why I asked the question and worded it so. Personally, until the French Pork Soup thing, I had no idea (or had forgotten) Muslims weren't allowed to eat pork. I knew Jews weren't allowed to eat pork. What I didn't know - and still don't, really - is why not? What's wrong with it? Why is it considered 'unclean'?
McFox here is a good place to start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unclean_animals I still get a kick out of that "Curb Your Enthusiasm" episode where they have to bury the plate because bacon was on it.
You know, those "old books" as they were called have been around for thousands of years...and societies have lasted that long by using these books...maybe we all need to put more trust in what they say..
Well I cannot speak for the Muslims, but what I as a Christian view as the old Testament, which is also included in the Jewish holy texts, states not to eat certain classes of animals. Those that do not chew cud, and those that do not have cloven hooves. Pigs do not chew cud, so according to these rules, they are not to be eaten. Why are these particular classes of animal considered ceremonially unclean animals? Well, other than the fact that the holy book says so... I honestly don't know. It could be that they were seen as unclean animals before hand, and so the entier people, as a holy people, were to avoid these animals.
That is what I am implying, the only reason I referred to them as "old books" was because I was quoting from what someone else had said previously in the thread.
I disagree with this statement. I think that without the religion the world would be a sad and dreary place.
From the beginning of time there has been religion...always a belief in a higher power. So why is religion such a bad thing? Something had to create all of this and set it in motion. Maybe it was the big bang, but who pushed the galaxies together to form such a bang?