‹‹ Back to the Serious discussions Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 [36]
Posts: 1059  
Users visited: 478  
Search this topic:  


The original post

Posted by Black Winter on 11.03.2008 at 21:55
Since the old thread had exceeded its limits,here is a new thread to continue some of the previous discutions,please post a logic and a meaningful contributions and try to avoid all kinds of extremism and disrespectful remarks.
I myself will try to contribute meaningfully to clarify some points .



Page 36 of 36

Bad English
nobody

Posts: 38463

Age: 29
From: Sweden

  19.11.2014 at 17:34
And if we say what would arabs be whit out oil


what Greece has fucked up economics , S Italy, Spain, Portugal , Ireland ----all nations rise from join in EU , if in Iran wont be Islamic revolution I bet my money many tourists would go more to Iran as in the Greece .. if there wont be 2 words, I think those medeteranian nations wont be in EU ... what Bulgaria, Romania has .. communism is gone, they have nothing and even had before sinc Moscow supported ... so , Yugo collapsesd all goes to Croatia, Slovenia, Monte Negro
Greece had paradise in cold war, its west, same time close to ussr ---- so before judge what other has or has not, judge your won country and origin country as well ----
----
Life is to short for LOVE, there is many great things to do online !!!

Stormtroopers of Death - ''Speak English or Die''

I better die, because I never will learn speek english, so I choose dieing
Ozman
Grumpy Fuck

Posts: 36719

Age: 46
From: The Netherlands

  19.11.2014 at 18:13
Written by Mary N. on 19.11.2014 at 17:25

if what you say was true, they couldn't eat lamb or cow meat either.



actually cow meat can be eaten in such instances (lamb I am not sure about). Chicken is the most dangerous one around and not pig.
----
Member of the true crusade against European Flower Metal

Yesterday is dead and gone, tomorrow is out of sight
Dawn Crosby (r.i.p.)
05.04.1963 - 15.12.1996

Bad English
nobody

Posts: 38463

Age: 29
From: Sweden

  19.11.2014 at 18:20
Written by Ozman on 19.11.2014 at 18:13

Written by Mary N. on 19.11.2014 at 17:25

if what you say was true, they couldn't eat lamb or cow meat either.



actually cow meat can be eaten in such instances (lamb I am not sure about). Chicken is the most dangerous one around and not pig.


but does chicken historically lives in that area?
in those days you can not get water melons in Comanche lands and reindeer meet in berlin
----
Life is to short for LOVE, there is many great things to do online !!!

Stormtroopers of Death - ''Speak English or Die''

I better die, because I never will learn speek english, so I choose dieing
Mary N.
Evil Butterfly

Posts: 1658


  19.11.2014 at 19:23
Written by Bad English on 19.11.2014 at 18:20

but does chicken historically lives in that area?

no only camels in those areas.
----
The Fangirl.
Mary N.
Evil Butterfly

Posts: 1658


  19.11.2014 at 19:26
Written by Ozman on 19.11.2014 at 18:13

actually cow meat can be eaten in such instances (lamb I am not sure about). Chicken is the most dangerous one around and not pig.

well I don't know, still I don't think because they can't preserve pig's meat there so they don't eat it.
----
The Fangirl.
Ozman
Grumpy Fuck

Posts: 36719

Age: 46
From: The Netherlands

  19.11.2014 at 20:20
Written by Mary N. on 19.11.2014 at 19:26

Written by Ozman on 19.11.2014 at 18:13

actually cow meat can be eaten in such instances (lamb I am not sure about). Chicken is the most dangerous one around and not pig.

well I don't know, still I don't think because they can't preserve pig's meat there so they don't eat it.



Like I said you also can't preserve chicken meat there. and yet that is considered alright to be eaten.
----
Member of the true crusade against European Flower Metal

Yesterday is dead and gone, tomorrow is out of sight
Dawn Crosby (r.i.p.)
05.04.1963 - 15.12.1996

Bad English
nobody

Posts: 38463

Age: 29
From: Sweden

  19.11.2014 at 20:37
Written by Mary N. on 19.11.2014 at 19:26

Written by Ozman on 19.11.2014 at 18:13

actually cow meat can be eaten in such instances (lamb I am not sure about). Chicken is the most dangerous one around and not pig.

well I don't know, still I don't think because they can't preserve pig's meat there so they don't eat it.


maybe becase ppl get poisona n sick they thought its gods punishment .. who knows, those ppl are religious
----
Life is to short for LOVE, there is many great things to do online !!!

Stormtroopers of Death - ''Speak English or Die''

I better die, because I never will learn speek english, so I choose dieing
IronAngel

Posts: 4393

Age: 25
From: Finland

  19.11.2014 at 22:27
The problem with practical explanations is that it doesn't explain why particular rules have become part of particular religions, while there are plenty of foods that could be restricted on practical grounds but aren't and there are other people/religions/cultures in the vicinity or with equivalent knowledge that haven't adopted such restrictions. In the New Testament discussions on Jewish food restrictions (Paul's letters primarily), it is very apparent that it is very much a social issue.

There are of course multiple levels of explanation. The theological justification at the time and the interpretation today are a totally different thing than the academic/anthropological theory of what function such rules serve. We can take it for granted that there will be some guidelines concerning food in almost any major religion - it's just so fundamental to the human psyche and a natural way to define identity - but why it's some specific food instead of another probably has to take into account both the practical economic context as well as the literary/cultural/mythological background when a given practice is first introduced.

The idea that "they just didn't like pig" or "they didn't have many pigs around back then" is just nonsense. If that was the case (and archaeological sites in the area of the old Israelite regions are full of pig bones), why would they have instituted such a rule in their holy texts? On the contrary, the fact that it's mentioned and made such a big deal of suggests that it was a relevant option, and abstaining was a conscious religious and cultural decision to set themselves apart. It's akin to suggesting Europe must have had a shortage of meat every spring and that's why they observed the Lenten fast before Easter. >_>

I'm pretty sure it's part of Islam primarily because it's part of Judaism. The origin is to be found in the few hundred years BC, not the 7th century. Why they chose that specific restriction to preserve and not something else, though, is interesting. I don't know.
deadone
Mainstream Poser

Posts: 4367
From: Australia

  20.11.2014 at 02:04
I'm with Iron Angel here - this is a spiritual matter and not a practical one.

Advertise on Metal Storm
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 [36]


Login or register to post here.



Similar topics

Forum Topic Similarity Started
Serious discussions Buddhism 3 05.01.2008 by Fuath
Serious discussions Discordianism 3 11.05.2009 by jupitreas
Serious discussions Theory: Religion Causes War 2.5 19.09.2007 by {aud}devil
Serious discussions The Religion and Spirituality Thread 2.5 19.05.2006 by
Serious discussions Religion: Double Standards 2.5 08.04.2008 by APOHAKC