Deuteronomy 14:8

The restriction on eating pork had to due with the likelihood of dying from consuming trichinosis tainted pigs. Today pork is much safer to eat. The same restriction on eating shellfish was also based on people dying after eating it. But traditions die slowly and are usually kept alive by zealots of all faiths (that also like to ignore other traditions of their faith when it suits them)

There were cults in the Levant that used pigs in rituals prior to Abrahamic religions and others before them. The later prohibition most likely originated in a reaction against them by newcommers.

No mass dyings throughout the planet from any pig or shellfish borne pathogens - including those who have eaten the latter raw - so a cultural, rather than medical, reason makes sense.

The prohibition came from a regional problem (yes that means cultural). Getting sick from eating pork and shellfish was a problem long before the time of Christ in the middle east. In the pacific region and others, it was not. Probably had more to do with local sanitation practices or the lack thereof.

And it would not have taken mass dying events to cause tradition to be born. Enough people get sick in a small community after eating a common meal and it can quickly be ingrained that a certain food source is to be avoided. Over time that avoidance can morph into an article of faith. We today still have this same issue. After you eat something and you get sick, our brains are wired to believe the item is poisonous and to be avoided. I can't stand maple because I got car sick in my youth after eating maple candy on a vacation. My son won't eat kielbasa after he got sick after eating it even though he had a stomach virus that the kielbasa had nothing to do with, It was just the last thing he ate.

Him and I both know that the food wasn't really what made us sick, but neither of us will touch that food again. Now imagine you are the leader of a group thousands of years ago that didn't understand that.

Yes, I see what you're saying, makes sense.

It's just that the pig cults -which were prehistory - were in that area, and ritual butchering was followed by consumption. Of course, the notion of the prohibition rising as a reaction against that is merely theory, so the case may very well be as you stated...
For all we know, for example, runoff from agriculture and sewage flowing out to sea via rivers tainted shellfish so as to make them more risky to eat.

For the hypocritical anonymous,
That's the whole point.
While others evolve and don't behead people for something simple like bacon,
Tyranical islamics are stuck in a primitive mindset.

PS: Please don't tell anyone this, but I grew up knowing moslems who partook in the eating of pork, shellfish, and non-halal killed meat, alcohol, had Christian and Jewish friends, and treated women as equals, etc.
So far, allah hasn't killed them.

Progress is possible, even for those who claim to be righteous,,,

lol sure

Oh, that's right, they're not sunnis, so they don't matter,,,

PS: Atrocities by barbaric Euros a century ago doesn't justify atrocities by barbaric arabs today.

It's 1917. Ain'tcha think it's time for them to grow up?

Learn to read dumbass before making shitty comments like you just did.

CENTURY*

'Sup, 1redshoe, how are you? Yet ANOTHER alt account?

PS: This be the 21 century, yo. 1948 was in the last one, mkay?

Later, toots, have fun with your latest account,,,

No I'm not an alt acount.

Besides, "When was the last time you've heard of a Christian/Jew/atheist terrorist?"

Really? Just because you don't "hear" of it doesn't mean it's not happening.

Watch Christians beheading Muslims that your "news" won't bother to cover it up.

http://heavy.com/news/2015/12/anti-balaka-christian-extremism-terrorism-central-african-republic-car-africa-mass-muslim-islam-execution-behead-murder-mass-grave-genocide-uncensored-youtube/

Stop treating the "news" as if they were GODS. Stop believing the shit they say and do an ACTUAL research before concluding with their bullshit.

Read some history, not islamic terrorist apololgist propaganda, and stop using excuses to kill innocent people.
You ain't heard of WAR? KKK? PKK? IRA? JDL? ETA? Red Brigade? Tim McVie ring a bell?
Where you from, son?
ALL terrorism bad, mkay?

Bye bye, redshoe,,,

1l5pyo.jpg (click to show)

I nor any Muslim ever said were defending ISIS shit. Funny because Muslims are condemning every attack by them one-by-one.

"not islamic terrorist apololgist propaganda" LOL Because the site I gave you was Islamic right?

"stop using excuses to kill innocent people." Here we go again, as if America clearly didn't kill 2,000,000 of WOMAN & CHILDREN (and NOT those so-called militants) in Iraq and Afghanistan right?

Idiot brainwashed Islamophobes like you only consider it "bad" when those "Muslims" (whose 99% of attacks are against Muslims anyway) kill people but completely okay when America & Europe do WORSE than them (which again, the "news" won't bother to cover it up).

"If you aren't careful enough, the news will have you oppressing the oppressed (Muslims, blacks) and loving the oppressor (the West)" -Malcolm X

Read some history, not islamic terrorist apolologist propaganda, and stop using excuses to kill innocent people.
You ain't heard of WAR? KKK? PKK? IRA? JDL? ETA? Red Brigade? Tim McVie ring a bell? Westboro? Wisonsin Sikh Temple attacked? The Charleston Baptist Church attack?
Where you from, son?
ALL terrorism bad, mkay?

tsk tsk, redshoe,,,

1l5pyo.jpg (click to show)

Why did you repeat your reply?

And besides, "Read some history" What??? First you say "Atrocities by barbaric Euros a century ago doesn't justify atrocities by barbaric arabs today" so if you say bad things done a long time ago doesn't mean they're guilty today, that means anything "bad" Muslims did doesn't count now right?

"The question of why people convert to Islam has always generated intense feeling. Earlier generations of European scholars believed that conversions to Islam were made at the point of the sword, and that conquered peoples were given the choice of conversion or death. It is now apparent that conversion by force, while not unknown in Muslim countries, was, in fact, rare. Muslim conquerors ordinarily wished to dominate rather than convert, and most conversions to Islam were voluntary. (...) In most cases worldly and spiritual motives for conversion blended together. Moreover, conversion to Islam did not necessarily imply a complete turning from an old to a totally new life. While it entailed the acceptance of new religious beliefs and membership in a new religious community, most converts retained a deep attachment to the cultures and communities from which they came." -Albert Hourani, CHRISTIAN.

In 602AD, a mere 40,000 arabs conquered Iran who had an army of 1,000,000 (embroiled in a civil war tho), and forced them to convert by sword. Mind you, Iran at the time included all lands ending with "stan" back then, from Afganistan to Uighurstan, and down around the Persian gulf to Yemen.
THIS is the cause of the Sunni/Shiite rift. The Ali vs Hussein bit was just an excuse. The two sects are ethno/cultural based, and Shiia is really Zoroastrian dressed up as islam,,,
As a result of the slaughter of those who refused to convert, only 150,000 Zoroastrians exist today, most in India where they had literally fled to for their lives.

Do you not know ANY of YOUR religion's history?

One last note: Because you were so busy trolling, you didn't notice that I was backing YOUR position and arguing YOUR argument for you, in other words, I WAS IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU. But typical redshoe thick headedness obtused you into blindness.

Except for the PKK and JDL and Red Brigade, ALL the terrorist organizations and acts I mentoned were Christian.

Thanks for playing and have a nice day.

I love trolling trolls,,,

Just to clarify, 1redshoe is a Christian and I'm a Muslim. I'm *not* an alt.

Oh really? How'd you know his religion?
And why need to explain it to me?
A newb with one meme knows him so well and is trolling me exactly as he did?
Really?

I give you permission in future trolling ventures to utilize the facts I presented concerning Christrian terrorists.

And please, do yourself a favor, READ everything you are arguing against, so that you don't butcher your own points by disagreeing with someone who was actually agreeing with you (albeit troll style).

K, my good deed of the day is done, lesson complete.

You're welcome.

OK bye :)

Wow! 602! Prophethood sure was declared that year! Another example of reading from non-Islamic sources as a reason to hate. Now get out.

Mark 7:19