Why Do the Jews Abstain From Pork?
The fact Jews traditionally do not consume pork is known commonly enough. Some people have gone so far as to use this distinction as a focal point for anti-Semitic ostracism. But the reason as to why this is so remains incredibly unclear. A few theories have been offered, and I feel the issue is well worth our time to look over. The answer might not be as simple as one would first think.
The commonly accepted reason Jews will not eat pork is that God Himself (through the mediation of Moses or an unidentified priest) has forbidden doing so in the Torah (Old Testament). Deuteronomy’s Chapter Fourteen, Verse Eight clearly states, “The pig, because it has a split hoof but doesn’t chew the cud, is unclean to you: of their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch.” This passage is mirrored in the even earlier book of Leviticus, Chapter Eleven, Verse Seven, which proclaims, “The pig, because he has a split hoof, and is cloven-footed, but doesn’t chew the cud, he is unclean to you.” This answer might be enough to appease the most casual researcher, but we must ask ourselves three questions: first, is this ban as stated based on solid fact? Second, what deeper reason might there have been to impose such a ban? And finally, was this ban truly imposed by the Lord or by man?
The claim that pigs are “unclean” animals is not true in the strictest, most literal sense. While God might have meant “spiritually unclean” (whatever this might mean), if we take the literal sense of the word we will find scientists to be at odds with the divine conclusion. To define an animal as unclean because the beast does not chew its cud (essentially, re-eating its own vomit) is at the very least an odd characterization. Not chewing cud has nothing to do with the health of the animal, but merely its digestive process. Cows, which regurgitate their meals, are no less likely to spread disease than the swine. While there is truth to the statement that pigs wallow in mud (because their lack of sweat glands demands an outside cooling source), there is just as much truth in the statement that buffalos and other beasts do, too. Horses and cows are no more clean than pigs if we keep in mind that being “dirty” (”covered in dirt”) is not at all the same as being diseased.
The pig might be considered spiritually unclean if we understand the Jewish prohibition on ingesting blood. As the blood of a creature is seen as the life of the creature, only God may have this blood. This is why cattle, when being slaughtered, must be drained of the blood before being prepared. And the difference between cattle and pigs is allegedly that cattle will feed on grass and other plants while a pig will eat anything fed to the animal – even its own kind. If a pig has ingested the blood of another animal, it is unclean — and ingesting the pork would be (in the words of Jean Soler) “doubly unclean”. This ban on carnivores is also why the Western world will not typically think to eat cats or dogs.[Solomon: 153]
I accept this as a valid extension of the prohibition on eating blood, but I question its basis in reality. Surely God realized that pigs (as well as cats and dogs) once domesticated and raised for consumption would not have to eat meat any more than cattle or any other animal would. By banning pork as a whole, both meat-eating and plant-eating pigs are lumped into the same category of uncleanliness. Although, in fairness, if the Bible were to divide up each animal and list all possible exceptions, the dietary laws would be likely several volumes long and hardly feasible.
If pigs were spared for a deeper purpose, and this purpose was not the blood ingestion prohibition, what might this purpose have been? Was there some reason to fear pigs, or perhaps even to honor them? Plutarch of Chaeronea wrote in his book, Symposiacs, that the Greeks were undecided about whether the Jews “hated” or “worshipped” swine. On the one hand, the animals could not be eaten, because they were unclean. This labeling implies a divine hatred.
On the other hand, the animals were not allowed to be killed, which implies they were in some sense considered sacred. Callistratus claims the Jews honored the pig because it is from this animal that the Jews learned how to plow the land, witnessing a hog dig his snout into the earth. He further states this explains the relation between the words hynis (”ploughshare”) and swine. Another piece of evidence in support of the “pigs are sacred” theory tells us that in ancient times the pig (or, more precisely, the wild boar) was the totem of the Jews (according to Plutarch). As such, the creature would without a doubt be considered more of a god than a dinnertime staple. This opinion is highly suspect considering the rampant anti-Semitism of the author’s era and country (as well as the author himself, who claims “the customs of the Jews are bizarre and morose”), but perhaps worth keeping in mind regardless.
From Plutarch’s point of view, the attitude of the Jews was completely ambiguous and there was no way to be sure which (if either) position was held. One could argue pigs were spared from the dinner plate yet also not killed because all life is created, as this was a blessing from God. However, this opens up a whole seperate line of questioning regarding the animals humans will kill without practical purpose (insects, mice, and other so-called “vermin”).
Perhaps the region is in some way related to the animal’s treatment? The Syrians, who were pagan, had a similar ambiguity regarding the pig. Other cultures, such as the Egyptians, also forbade the eating of pigs. The fact these three countries have different religions but similar climates might be relevant, as we will explore next.
Some people have surmised that pigs are a poor choice of diet not for any spiritual reason, but rather that the rearing of the animal simply is not economically viable. The pig requires such an intake of foods and waters that the desert cannot properly accomodate them. Cultural materialistic anthropologist Marvin Harris supports the ecological-economical theory in his book Good to Eat: Riddles of Food and Culture. He believes that since the resources pigs need to live are scarce in Israel and Arabia, the beasts are unwanted because this scarcity puts them in competition with humans for the necessary grains. Pigs cannot eat grass for nutrition as other beasts will. Any Middle Eastern society attempting to keep large stocks of pigs would eventually destroy their entire ecosystem.
Someone might object that if raising pigs was such a difficult task, why bother to proscribe this practice in the first place? Harris explains that “since it was possible, to a small extent, to raise pigs as a luxury food, it is important to have a taboo or prohibition that says, under no circumstances are you to experiment with this animal, because over the passage of centuries it is the collective wisdom that to do so is to waste resources. The temptation will always exist for some people to try, but God says, ‘Thou shalt not raise pigs.’ This is a sacred rule which fits into a general class of prohibition termed ‘total prohibitions’. Such prohibitions are digital; that is, they are on-off things. For example, the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’ does not say it’s O.K. to kill some people and not others. Such a total taboo is necessary in a situation where the short-term benefits for, let’s say, raising pigs, might be quite good, but the long-term benefits would be quite disastrous for the larger community. The taboo is ‘on track’ in terms of ecological wisdom. It reflects long-standing, accumulated knowledge about the consequences of raising nonruminants in that habitat.”
There has been some speculation that Jews disliked the pig because of the spread of trichinosis or leprosy. Allegedly, Maimonides himself was the first to point out the possible connection between the dietary laws and the spreading of worms (specifically, the trichinella) through undercooked pork in the 1100s. The general view of pork being seen by the Jews as disease-ridden is not easily supported, however. The Bible speaks of unclean meat, but at no time does the book tell of any health-related consequence for eating this meat. No plague or epidemic in the Bible is connected with the pig. Also, the idea of hygiene as related to diet was not a popular idea at this time – illnesses were more often thought of as “bad spirits” than as the yet-undiscovered virii and bacteria. There is no reason to believe that anyone living before the common era would mentally connect their meals with their illnesses.
Author Charles Panati and anthropologist Mary Douglas point to the simplest conclusion of all. These apparently arbitrary laws are just that – arbitrary. Their purpose is nothing more than a way to identify Jews as Jews, much as the rite of circumcision was said to have done. The abstention from pork, for example, would keep Jews from intermingling (and hence intermarrying and interbreeding) with the pork-eating Gentiles, keeping the faith pure and free from outside influence. The dietary laws were not so much sins as they were guidelines to keep God’s chosen people together to help them focus on the deeper and more important tenets of their faith.
Was God the lawgiver in the book of Leviticus? I am inclined to conclude that the laws outlined in Leviticus were priestly decrees, and had little or no divine influence. My conclusion draws from two primary lines of reasoning.
First, God would have no use for arbitrary rules. The prohibition on pork (and other foods) has no apparent basis in rational thinking (people, including many Reform Jews, eat pig all the time without consequence), so why would God feel the need to ban something that is clearly not harmful? The reason would be purely arbitrary. If God was to ban something, one would think there must be some punishment for doing so or at least an intrinsically negative quality to the act or its outcome. Compare this to several of the crimes forbidden in the Ten Commandments, which are seen as essentially and universally wrong under almost every moral code. Why the harm from theft, adultery and murder is easy to illustrate, what good can come of avoiding pork? Does one’s diet make them more spiritual than another?
Second, if God is omniscient (all-knowing), his guidelines would have been delivered in a flawless manner. While the pork ban is written clearly enough, in the same section the dietary laws speak of four-legged insects (Leviticus 11:20) and rabbits that chew the cud (Leviticus 11:6), both of which do not occur in real life. (Actually, some biologists, including Leonard Brand, have argued that rabbits do chew the cud or at least perform a function that is analogous to the cud-chewing in cows. This issue is not really contingent on the primary thesis of this article, however, and will not be debated here.) While priests might believably be ignorant of biology, an all-knowing Creator would seemingly be familiar with the most basic features of His designs. Such glaring errors open the door for doubt, and we may suspect at least some – if not all – of the rules have no divine backing whatsoever.
Between the question of God’s authorship, and the scientific proof that pork has none of the stigmas once thought to exist, there seems to be no valid reason for anyone to abstain from pork (other than their own unfounded beliefs or fears). While this is in no way meant undermine the core of the Jewish religion, we must wonder why they would hold on to outdated and cumbersome dietary laws if the chief reason for doing so is distinction from Gentiles. Judaism is an officially established and recognized world religion, notwithstanding what lurks behind pantry doors. So I inquire, why abstain? Indulge!
Bibliography:
Brand, Leonard R. “Do Rabbits Chew the Cud?” Origins 4(2):102-104 (1977). http://www.grisda.org/origins/04102.htm Written 1977, retrieved online November 26, 2006.
deLys, Claudia. Giant Book of Superstitions. Citadel Press, 1979.
Harris, Marvin. Good to Eat: Riddles of Food and Culture. Simon and Schuster, 1985.
Panati, Charles. Sacred Origins of Profound Things. Penguin Arkana, 1996.
Plutarch. Symposiacs. http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/p/plutarch/symposiacs/ viewed December 2, 2004.
Soler, Jean. “The Semiotics of Food in the Bible,” in Food, Drink, and History, ed. Robert Forster and Orest Ranum. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979.
Solomon, Jack. The Signs of Our Time: The Secret Meanings of Everyday Life Perennial Library, 1990.
November 26th, 2006 at 12:42 pm
i was reading what you wrote and found most of it quite helpful. then i read this “While priests might be ignorant of biology, an all-knowing Creator should be familiar with the most basic features of his designs.” hmmm, kinda insulting but also presumptuous. apparently priests are not the only ones ignorant to biology. http://www.grisda.org/origins/04102.htm , this is from the chairman of biology in loma linda university. he sites his work on if rabbits chew the cud, which they do. here is another tidbit, they crap and even remember where they dropped off the turds and eat it later lol. because of the design of the rabbits stomach this is chewing the cud, but hey read what the above EXPERT said about the matter. leviticus 11:20, i have to agree here. it does say there are four legged insects. during his illustration to the israelites perhaps he did err. however, the main idea, don’t eat this still got across. oh yeah, i’d be careful because if there is something to this God thing then what you wrote could be interpreted as blasphemy. just a thought.
December 30th, 2006 at 3:50 pm
Reference your statement: “There has been some speculation that Jews disliked the pig because of the spread of trichinosis or leprosy.”
Greetings Gavin;
Tacitus discusses the Jews in his 5th book of histories, saying:
“They abstain from swine’s flesh, in consideration of what they suffered when they were infected by the leprosy to which this animal is liable.”
Thus, the connection between pork and leprosy goes back at least to mid first century CE.
One interesting point you made that had not even occurred to me was that the omnivorous nature of the pig could also have been a factor in labelling it unclean.
March 4th, 2007 at 9:53 am
It is important to note that the pig’s biochemistry excretes only 2 percent of its total uric acid content, the remaining 98 percent remains as an integral part of the body.
Lastly, try to pour the coke onto the pork, and wait for a couple of minutes.
March 23rd, 2007 at 11:35 am
Great information perfect for my homework!
March 23rd, 2007 at 12:03 pm
Some great points but i may need a few more!
Your points were great but boy it took agest so read! :)
April 12th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
I still ask the question, why Jews raise pigs (swine)? For what purpose?
May 1st, 2007 at 2:02 am
Hello Genki,
Coke on pork?
You need to read the following pages, esp. the first:
http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/porkworm.asp
http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/porkcoke.html
July 27th, 2007 at 11:56 pm
An important point, so often over-looked in these discussions… The pig is but one of numerous animals considered unclean in Torah. This suggests, for one, that the totemic aspect of the pig itself, as an especially beloved or hated creature, is not the point of the prohibition. One can make useful inferences from some of the other prohibitions. For example, the forbiddance of shellfish and bottom feeders is quite obviously based on not eating those creatures who eat “trief,” or “filth.” Meanwhile, chewing the cud is important, because it connotes a higher degree of mastication, ie. it minimalizes the “unclean” aspect of all fodder once removed. Meanwhile, the fact that the pig is questionable throughout the Middle East, including ancient Egypt, suggests that it is not simply a mark of Jewishness. (Note that the yarmulke is often considered a mark of Jewishness, but it can be understood more properly as a traditionally Jewish design for the more widespread Semitic tendency to cover the head, not as a sign of in-group, out-group, but as a sign of humility “beneath” the over-arching God–or a humbling specifically of the “mind.”) As for the cloven hooves… that I’m not sure. But most likely this is all part of an ancient grappling with the idea of a taxonomy of wildlife. In other words, a certain creature that happens not to have cloven hooves may not be a filth-eater, yet according to this ancient (and imperfect) taxonomical system it was considered “realated” to other beasts that are largly unlcean. One will find numerous examples of this almost obsessive-compulsive hyper-criticality in other “priestly” peoples, as well. Study the “shall nots” of the Hindu Brahmin class and you will see many similar prohibitions that do not make sense when isolated, yet are extent fragments of an ancient taxonomical system.
May 10th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Well, I am no Jewish, and have no intention to be one never, no offense if you going to accuse me of “antisemitism”. So I eat pork, of course with all kinds of rice, vegetables and fruits with it. If is true that pork is bad, allow me a question: how come Puerto Ricans, who eat seasoned pork on charcoals during Christmas, have lower cancer rates than Americans, including you Jews? And our heart disease rates are also lower. So it depends how you leave your life, folks. Bye!
August 6th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
I am not Jewish but I want to know how come it is so easy for you people to pick on Jewish people for their beliefs and not muslims? Muslims do not eat pork either. Why don’t you find out why? This was one of the dumbest sites I have been on. You talk as if you are smart but I think you don’t know your mouth from your tail because they both have the same thing coming out of them.
Pick on the muslims for their beliefs. Oh that’s right scared.
August 7th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Maybe a very long time ago some dude, or a group of dudes didn’t like Pigs. Maybe his neighbours Pigs kept destroying his vegie garden or stinking out his house. Or maybe he didn’t like pork and got sick of eating it at his friends dinners all the time. So when it came time to write his scripture thing he tacked in NO PIGS so he would forever be rid of having Pigs around or eating them. Actually probably more likely his reason was the thought that he was somehow eating faeces when he ate pork because pigs eat their own faeces, which is why he has also included Rabbits and a couple other animals on the list. He certainly created generations of non pork eaters though!!
September 14th, 2008 at 10:21 am
Hey Ginny Raye quite trying to change the subject if you do not know why jews eat pork. I bet you are lying, you are jewish.
October 30th, 2008 at 1:51 am
[...] i shall give you some links that might enlighten your hungry, hungry minds: The Bible on Pork Why Do the Jews Abstain From Pork? Why Muslim can’t eat pork (this site was quite interesting except for the painfully irritating [...]
November 20th, 2008 at 11:09 am
You keep calling this a Jewish rule. I need to correct you on this. This is a rule for all twelve tribes of Isariel, not just the tribe of Judah. You wander why they follow this. It is because God said to. Along with all ofthe other dietary rules and other rules like the TEN COMMANDMENTS that we all want to follow. It was said that the laws such as against thieft, murder, and adultry are easy to see why they are wrong, but in the great country of the USA, adultry is now okay. You do not see God punish those people, YET. Just wait and see what happens in the end.
December 7th, 2008 at 9:29 am
If according to the Old Testament God himself has forbidden to eat pig, why then christians do eat pig? Do they not follow also the Old Testament?
December 14th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
i personally find this all ridiculous..but i guess you have to respect every persons belief unless its really hurting other people. Seriously who cares if jews don’t wanna eat pork it leaves more DELICIOUS bacon egg and cheeses for the people who do.
December 15th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Johana, The church (christians) believe Jesus came and abolished the law (Torah). Thy have unknowingly substituted licentiousness and called it grace.
January 24th, 2009 at 11:07 am
For the most part I found the article very interesting. I have alot of thoughts on the article.
I have given this alot of thoughts. Christ was a jew as so was his followers. The first truth isn`t evidence it is, that it is not important for you to believe what I believe it is only important to me. The first evidence I have about the spiritually speaking is, when all evil spirits of Legion were cast in the swine. New testiment. God is in control. shalom ya`ll
February 9th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
Of course, another atheist writing to disprove what others have in their religion. I don’t recall Jews debunking (non-Islamic) African religions or Native American religions. Why is that? Would you be offended if they did? Why is it that so many white have left these religions alone? The idea that they leave you alone (in academia and business sector), they have suffered genocide and countless crimes against their generations … places your magnifying glass on other ants who are socially acceptable to berate. Is it okay for you to outright attack the belief systems of Islam ? This is cowardice for the guilt-ridden masses who no longer believe in anything but the idea of shifting ethics based on nothing and no one.
February 9th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
When upholding homosexuality, Americans often claim that it is the dietary nonsense of the Old Testament which makes a slippery slope for all of the Torah’s uses in Christianity. And while the carrier of Christ’s Church (Peter) was given to release dietary decrees, the laws against same-sex and opposite-sex sexual immorality was no released. It is our appetite which gets us into trouble in both cases. Yet it is as Christ said,’nothing going into the man can defile him. It is what comes from his mind that makes him unclean.’ The One God is ruler over all peoples. Union with that Creator is left to choice. Peace with the Creator is freewill and impossible to those whose sexual immorality (of any kind) which creates the rift in spirit. This is our act to acknowledge God, but replacing the barrier which allows for a personal dwelling with God. Freewill.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
The evolution of humanity will have to ban all animal killings if we are to evolve. Christ brought LOVE on earth so eventually we will have to make use of this powerful force. If we do not evolve and find this way of leaving (Without meat) freely we or our future generation will witness terrible diseases killing our food sources, birds then cattle pigs etc. so if you can and have the will start on building a “meat fee” humanity your will impulse and act is taken in the vast spaces of the universe and new children will be born with this impulse and continue this effort to be more loving.
“love 1 another”
March 21st, 2009 at 3:54 pm
What is meat, though?
Animal flesh is not meat. Read in the book of Genesis.
Meat is of plant life: nuts, berries, etc.
Seek righteousness, and you’ll find righteousness is what we are told.
July 20th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
Interesting blog post. What would you say was the most important NLP factor?
August 24th, 2009 at 1:30 am
As a Korean American Catholic, I actually grew up eating pork and didn’t think anything of it. It was just a regular part of my diet. I don’t remember how it began, but one day I started to think ill of the food source. It may have been a vegetarian influence, as I became a vegetarian for five years, but it was probably due to the influence of my Persian Jewish friend and Pakistani Muslim ex-boyfriend. I remember going through a phase in my life where I wanted every butcher in every Korean American market in Los Angeles to stop selling the meat and other types of foods not considered to be Kosher or halal or non-violent. Koreans even eat pork blood sausages, aka Sundae, something I never actually tried. I became fascinated with middle eastern cultures and religions, even going so far as to convert to Islam at one point in my life partly due to the influence of my ex-boyfriend. (I converted back to Catholicism later.) Every Saturday evening, when I was a practicing Catholic, my Korean American friends would drive me to a Korean American Catholic church where after mass, we would gather together to eat, pray, sing, talk, and praise the good Lord Jesus Christ. I think at that time I was a vegetarian and so desperately wanted to convince everyone in our little group that eating pork was bad, that we should all be peaceful vegetarians. I didn’t do a very good job, because as I remember it correctly, I never actually did enough research to back up my claims, and the people had good questions. Some type of pork was served up at least once or twice a month every month at our church meetings. My parents eat pork and living with them, I found it hard to avoid. Eventually, I returned to being a meat eater (fish, shellfish, pork, red meat, chicken, you name it). My father loved to buy and eat Italian salami and canned spam, and once in a while I would eat it with him. However I noticed that whenever I ate the pork products and went out in the backyard to play with my dog, I would always, always, without fail develop a dirty taste and smell in my mouth. I knew it came from the pig meat. Right now, I’m just trying to eat healthy foods (like those from the Mediterranean diet) and just concentrate on being a healthy person overall. I believe I have learned and grown quite a bit from my journey though and my faith in Christ is stronger than ever.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:09 am
After reading this lengthy article and all 24 comments above mine as of this writing, I got so hungry, I ate dinuguan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinuguan.
I am Catholic and I consider myself much read about Jewish and Muslim customs. But I dare say I have no problems eating – or trying even for once – anything on the planet, excepting humans, of course, unless survivability comes to play. Heck, even boxer Juan Manuel Marquez publicly admits to drinking his own urine.
I tend to agree with the writer’s conclusion on why pork was considered taboo in biblical times – it was the sociological culture, the obsolete taxonomy system and – dare I say – the misguided beliefs of our “inspired” ancestors. Even the most fantastic and amazing writers of our modern times declare “they can’t all be gems” – and they’re referring to their written works.
In these worldly scientific times, everything now is made clearer and things make more pragmatic sense. And we can always rely on our religious beliefs to still become morally guided in our life and work. So it would be great to have some alcoholic beverage and well-cooked pork to celebrate our life and work milestones once in a while.
Pork is delicious. Barbecued pork is awesome, you really have to try it, especially if you’re new to eating pork.
November 23rd, 2009 at 10:46 am
If A is success in life, then A equals x plus y plus z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:15 pm
This is just a thought – but is it possible that a prohibition on pork in middle eastern countries has anything to do with its similarity to human meat? I remember a story about a German butcher in the war who seemed to have far more pork than rations allowed and it turned out that he was a serial killer selling the fruits of his terrible labour.
I can easily imagine this as a way of detaching Judaism from older religious where cannibalism may have been permitted (or indeed something Judaism inherited from an older religion that had the same goal to make a taboo out of cannibalism.
Discuss!
December 6th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Here we go again. The reason we do not eat pork has nothing to do with cannibalism. It is because GOD instructed us in the TORAH that we should eat only meat that both eats it cud and has a true split hoof. Pigs and hogs do not fall into this; therefore, we do not eat them. Please just read the BIBLE and try not to put to much thought into why GOD said DO NOT. If you want to honor GOD then you will follow his rule for living. If you do not want to honor GOD then don’t. It’s up to you. We can see who is right in the end of days.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:03 am
In reply to “Just a Hebrew”, I would ask how far biblical literalism should be taken? I am prepared to respect anyones love of their scripture, but I would be cautious in accepting it verbatim in all senses. I say this because, pragmatically, we know that the bible, the Torah and the Quran, are all documents created by men, in the belief they represent the word of God. Even if this is true, which for all I know it may be, is it not also true that unscrupulous religious leaders may be tempted to impose their own earthly wishes in God’s name? These ideas might then be accepted over time as enjoying God’s authority, when they arise out of lesser minds. I this sense, its not hard to see how a sensible rule about not eating pork could be adopted as God’s will too. The logic might be that pork is preserved commonly through salting, which in an arid climate consumes too much water (in salt production) whereas beef can be airdried easily. This good sense gets accepted over time as God’s will. Nothing wrong with that, but maybe a way scripture evolves.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:15 am
Oh, on a lighter note, I read somewhere that in one imprint of the King James edition of the Bible some centuries ago, a misprint gave us instruction that “Thou Shalt commit adultery”. Readers of the day must have been rejoicing at the relaxation of this commandment and asking when, how often and with whom? Seriously though, if we are to believe in the word of God, we might perhaps be suspicious of the printing of men. I’d hate to think what might happen if we adopted a strict position insisting we all scrupulously carry out the word of God had the misprint been “Thou shalt kill”.
December 26th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
You can believe what you want. We will all find out in the end of days. I for one plan to follow the Torah. In regards to the King James edition of the Bible, there are more problems than what you talked about. That is why you need to go back to the Hebrew version of the Torah, not the english version.
February 25th, 2010 at 1:10 am
You should try to write some top list style articles or something like it
March 9th, 2010 at 11:13 pm
Hit Commence for the PS3 controller and you also see Kratos with a narrow path on the mountainside. The Sun God Helios appears to buzz all around on his Sun Chariot, but we can rip his skull later on. Far more pressing matters are at hand (or blade). You happen to be instantly drawn from the action because the soldiers through the Army of Olympus surround you. Tapping SQUARE to hack and slash is usual of God of War. Nevertheless, Kratos can now Grab in several designs utilizing different buttons. Grab enemies utilizing CIRCLE after which it is possible to use several buttons to throw them, use as battering ram, rip it away, and so on.
April 4th, 2010 at 9:10 am
You have to realsie that the people that God had to deal with back in those days had verry little
knowledge of science , any type of technology for the Jewish people it was about survival and finding a home land which the can prosper. Pretty much very little education . As a father will explain to a child that yet knows better Don’t run on the road , dont touch the oven full stop. The child doesn not know that he can touch the oven when it is not on , or that he can cross the road when there are no cars , but due to his lack of know how , he is told so without reasoning for him/her to survive. There are laws that God placed in the old testament that He had ordered the Jews so that they may survive , yes could be social cultural or biological reasons. Camels where required for travel so can you imagine if the ate them. Pigs while travelling in the deserts would of got hungry and probably would fed on them at night. these are just reasons Yes the law might not make sense to us But God foresaw the Jewish Journey and if these laws where not present their destiny might of been different. And regarding to why Jesus came and changes things he firstly did not abolish the old testament he cam to fullfill and complete it for us to understand and know. No longer through Law do we Live but through Faith and love. If we look at the time that jesus came Civilisation was peaking the Jews had found home established a Land of some kind. these laws of travel and survival where no longer needed, the greeks where studying medicine , the romans where building roads and technology was birthing . Man was becoming a god of his own . The child has now Grown no longer does he/she need to be told but now given the choice . The Jews themselves where given the choice to believe in christ , he did not force and order like in the old testament. No more baby feeding . The world was about to change and indeed it did.
August 21st, 2010 at 10:11 am
Basically anything that is a scavenger animal and eats or would eat poop we forbidden to eat, this still includes the pig. God wants His people to be able to distinguish between clean and unclean. He wants a people that will obey him. After all, the first sin was eating something God said not to! Yahshua (Jesus) sent the unclean spirit (demon) into the unclean animal, the pig. Anyone that looks at the scientific reasons alone, should avoid the pig’s tainted meat.
August 29th, 2010 at 8:47 am
As people have said, it is not just pig that is considered unclean “to you”. btw, it’s not unclean as an objective universal fact, just to the recipients of the Torah.
What hasn’t been mentioned yet is the overall context of any restrictions: In the biblical narrative, originally humans were vegetarian. After the Flood, meat was considered ok as part of the diet. What’s significant about Kosher laws is that the only restrictions are on animal flesh (and a milk/meat mixing restriction “you will not soak the kid in its mother’s milk” that seems to be to be about moral irony); any plant is ok, if, of course, it doesn’t poison you). Perhaps the aim was to make meat-eating something that people had to think about rather than pursue w/ abandon. You are mindful that you can’t kill every animal for food.