It's a pretty good point.teo123 wrote:I think I can add something to the story. So, the slavery Bible supports is different than the slavery we think of. Well, so is the meat industry Bible supports different than meat industry we think of. There were no factory farms back then. Is this a valid argument?
I think you should say:
"IF the slavery the Bible supports is different from the slavery we think of, then so is the meat industry the Bible supports different from meat industry we think of."
Because as we saw in this thread, the slavery the Bible supports isn't necessarily different (I'm not sure if you read the whole thread).
Not only were there no factory farms, but people ate significantly less meat, in ancient Rome and prior, which was largely wild game (including mice) and fish. Very little meat was from farmed animals, because they just didn't exist on that scale. Farms were primarily for dairy.
Only the wealthy regularly ate meat, and we understand this to be the sin of gluttony: taking more than you need, which means others have less. It's the same situation we're in today with respect to the developed and undeveloped world.