Rockingham
Banned
Weren't their some restrictions on meat on Sundays in medieval Europe? Something along the lines of "you can only eat Fish" and no ther meat on those days. Of course people found ways of getting around that....
Foods banned in Christain based civilisations
- Thread starter DMA
- Start date
Fridays actually. but they got around that by eating beaver
Rockingham
Banned
It was argued that a beaver was a fish, because it swam in the riversBeaver?
. As a result, beavers were wiped out in Britain.It was argued that a beaver was a fish, because it swam in the rivers
Talk about AH...
Early christians were prohibited from eating meat of animals sacrificed to the gods. Since a large proportion of the population, at least the urban population where christianity was centered, got most of their meat from the public distribution after the sacrifices, then extend this to a ban on all meat just in case it was from a sacrifice. No equivilent of kosher.
This total ban on meat only has to last until say Theodosius' time. After that bigot gains control he will impose the ban by the sword and it may very well become a central tenet of christianity.
This total ban on meat only has to last until say Theodosius' time. After that bigot gains control he will impose the ban by the sword and it may very well become a central tenet of christianity.
All Fridays were always fast days, which meant at a minimum no meat, eggs or dairy (serious believers often reduced their food intake to water and bread or porridge). Many times and places, Wednesday was an Ember Day, meaning no meat, though eggs and dairy were permitted. There were also fast days preceding major holidays (Lent being universal, though again local tradition placed fast periods of varying lengths before Christmas, Whitsun, IIRC Annunciation and other holidays. Some required a full four weeks of fast in Advent.
Note that originally, Christians were not supposed to just follow dietary strictures but generally lead a sober life in those times, forgoing sex and luxuries, unnecessary adornment, amusements, and bathing. Sex and food, though, were the only areas regulated overtly, which, of course, invited the lawyerly mind (and yes, beavers class as fish, if only the part that has no fur opn it. So did at various times geese, ducks, seagulls, puffins, auks, cormorants and, at least under one particularly epicurean abbot, cows and sheep pushed into the millpond).
the_lyniezian
Banned
The first sentence actually has some bearing in RL in te 'Council of Jerusalem' mentioned in Acts. In 1 Corinthians Paul takes a much more pragmatic view, suposedly saying that whatever is sold in the markets, to eat without question, but if anyone offers you food saying it was sacrificed to a pagan god, not to take it as a matter of concience (i.e. to provoke the other person's). I think he bases his argument on the fact that idols themselves are nothing, nor is the meat of itself, but that sacrifices made are to devils/demons and Christians should have no part in this. He also says it is better not to offend a fellow believer. (See 1 Cor. chapters 8 and 10)
If I were to suggest a POD I suggest that somehow this teaching somehow becomes disregarded by the church. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it disappears entirely, given as I view this letter as part of divinely inspired scipture and thus cannot be changed. I certainly wouldn't have it as being a command of God that any particular food was no allowed to be eaten, beyond that mentioned of blood and meat acrificed to idls, decided at the council of Jerusalem but according to the letter which followed, was under the direction of the Holy Spirit. (It does irk me sometimes that people on this forum allow for such possibliities, as suggesting that God and his will could be in any way different seems a bit blasphemous! (I'd prefer myself at least not to take liberties where God is concerned). Having said that, I acknowledge that a. it isn't my position to stop people and b. God could do or command whatever He wants, so *if* He wanted to, then He could!)
How about banning a specific, commonly eaten Middle eastern fruit, say the date, because of the 'eating of the fruit' story from Genesis?
Well, remember that many food prohibitions aren't arbitrary, but the product of the environment. Raising pigs in the Middle East is an economic nonsense, and cows are too valuable in the Indian fields to be slaughtered. I think that in Europe there could be a ban on the eating of reptiles, specially snakes. The Church can claim that this is because reptiles are evil (invoking the passage of Satan made a snake to convince Eve to eat the forbidden fruit), but in reality it is because reptiles aren't common in the continent, especially in winter. Eating horses could be banned as well, as they would be seen as animals too "noble" and "aristocratic" to be slaughtered and eaten like pigs or sheep.
Flocculencio
Donor
Are you sure? I was under the impression that most Northern European societies were pig-based with the yearly fattening and slaughter of the pig being central to their lifestyle.
WOW ...
Sounds Like Somebody Ought to Actually Read The Book, Before Telling Others Not to Change What it Says:
Mathew 7:1 said:
Sounds to me like he's read it. Maybe you should just roll with a serious answer to the thread and ignore it if you don't like it.
Keenir
Banned
so what're you doing among the heathen blaspheming Protestants?
seriously - first God tells Moses et al about the 600+ laws to be kept, including which animals are/aren't permitted to be eaten....and then God comes along and says "nevermind, you don't have to keep all 600+ laws."
sounds like God changed His Mind.