There probably is (believed to be, at the time) a difference. Most of these rules aren’t really spiritual. They’re about health. Most of the time the banned animals are thought to be dirty and spread disease. Pigs, for example, because of their proximity to humans, as well as small enclosures, often carry diseases that are harmful to people. That’s why it’s frequently banned in religions.
This is well before germ theory or anything though, so they’re just guesses based on trends. They’re sometimes wrong, but they were trying to create rules to keep people healthy.
Sure, and there are religious ppl who update their beliefs based on changes on society, discovery in science, …
but there are religious nuts who stick to taking 2000+ years old stories and insist on taking them literally. actively ignoring facts that where known back then. one example is numbers: there are places where religious stories mention specific numbers (10’000, 1’000’000, don’t remember and won’t look it up). people back then used these as “too many to count” or “really much”. but some ppl nowadays insist, that whatever their god is made sure, that these numbers are exactly the correct number…
Health or culture more than religion in some cases. Same reason we don’t eat horses, cats, and dogs in the west. They’re companion species for us the same as some of these are for them.
There probably is (believed to be, at the time) a difference. Most of these rules aren’t really spiritual. They’re about health. Most of the time the banned animals are thought to be dirty and spread disease. Pigs, for example, because of their proximity to humans, as well as small enclosures, often carry diseases that are harmful to people. That’s why it’s frequently banned in religions.
This is well before germ theory or anything though, so they’re just guesses based on trends. They’re sometimes wrong, but they were trying to create rules to keep people healthy.
Yes for sure. But well the border between science and religion should always be updated and moved
Sure, and there are religious ppl who update their beliefs based on changes on society, discovery in science, …
but there are religious nuts who stick to taking 2000+ years old stories and insist on taking them literally. actively ignoring facts that where known back then. one example is numbers: there are places where religious stories mention specific numbers (10’000, 1’000’000, don’t remember and won’t look it up). people back then used these as “too many to count” or “really much”. but some ppl nowadays insist, that whatever their god is made sure, that these numbers are exactly the correct number…
If the Pope can be a quasi-guiding figure head for most Christians (not just Catholics) to drive change, Islam and Judaism desperately need one.
Health or culture more than religion in some cases. Same reason we don’t eat horses, cats, and dogs in the west. They’re companion species for us the same as some of these are for them.
The horses thing I think is specifically an American and English thing though I think, but yeah.
You can eat horse in France
IIRC, Germany, Italy, and Spain too. Pretty much all of “the west” It’s fine and not that abnormal besides England and the US.