Why are some many Christians proud to eat meat? - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
 46Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 02-02-2015, 12:09 PM
Unintentionally Kittened
 
faded_amaranth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 683
Why are some many Christians proud to eat meat?

I can't understand this perspective and since it has come up in a few recent threads I figured it deserved its own topic. Overall I'm not saying that people who believe in a Bible should feel guilty about being allowed to eat animals; I just don't understand the flippant attitude some have, since it came with such a huge cost.

So here's how I understand things, and this might get a little confusing as I'm using mostly Genesis and that book starts off with 2 different creation stories and 2 different Flood stories.

In the first creation story God gives humans dominion/stewardship over all the other animals but He makes everyone plant eaters and sees this design as very good
Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis 1:28-31
"28 God blessed them, and God said to them [the male and female humans], “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.” 29 God said, “See, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food. 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so. 31 God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day."

In the next creation story humans are still fruit-eaters (Genesis 2:16) but this one gives the reason the Lord God created the non-human animals; the man was to find a partner (wife?) among them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis 2:18-20
18 Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner.” 19 So out of the ground the Lord God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every animal of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper as his partner.

Then there is the Fall and the Flood. God comes to terms with the wickedness of humankind and satisfy their lust for power and killing He allows them to kill and eat animals in order to divert them from committing violence against other humans. But even though humans are now permitted to kill animals (for more than clothing and offerings) the life of the animal must still be respected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis 8:21
21 And when the Lord smelled the pleasing odor, the Lord said in his heart, “I will never again curse the ground because of humankind, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth; nor will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis 9:1-5
God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. 2 The fear and dread of you shall rest on every animal of the earth, and on every bird of the air, on everything that creeps on the ground, and on all the fish of the sea; into your hand they are delivered. 3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you; and just as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything. 4 Only, you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. 5 For your own lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning: from every animal I will require it and from human beings, each one for the blood of another, I will require a reckoning for human life.

So to me if one who believes in the Bible celebrates the allowance to eat meat one is celebrating the wicked nature of humanity.

I've heard others say that God allowed humans to eat animals simply because the Flood destroyed a lot of the food. But even then humankind* still had to majorly screw up twice before being given permission to eat animals. So this is a concession that God made that is very far from His ideal and, to me, that's not something to be proud of.

*Although, based on the text I can't blame humans or snakes for the Fall.

I've seen it claimed the vegetarianism in a sign of weakness because of this passage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Romans 14:1-4
Welcome those who are weak in faith, but not for the purpose of quarreling over opinions. 2 Some believe in eating anything, while the weak eat only vegetables. 3 Those who eat must not despise those who abstain, and those who abstain must not pass judgment on those who eat; for God has welcomed them. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on servants of another? It is before their own lord that they stand or fall. And they will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make them stand.
But I think that was written in the same line as the verses below and refers only to a very specific, religious reason for avoiding meat
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1 Corinthians 8:1-13
Now concerning food sacrificed to idols: we know that “all of us possess knowledge.” Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. 2 Anyone who claims to know something does not yet have the necessary knowledge; 3 but anyone who loves God is known by him.

4 Hence, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “no idol in the world really exists,” and that “there is no God but one.” 5 Indeed, even though there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as in fact there are many gods and many lords— 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

7 It is not everyone, however, who has this knowledge. Since some have become so accustomed to idols until now, they still think of the food they eat as food offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8 “Food will not bring us close to God.” We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. 9 But take care that this liberty of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if others see you, who possess knowledge, eating in the temple of an idol, might they not, since their conscience is weak, be encouraged to the point of eating food sacrificed to idols? 11 So by your knowledge those weak believers for whom Christ died are destroyed. 12 But when you thus sin against members of your family, and wound their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if food is a cause of their falling, I will never eat meat, so that I may not cause one of them to fall.

Maybe I'm interpreting things completely incorrectly, I've seen plenty of Biblical interpretations that I can't understand at all and it's not an anthology I've really studied. And although there is some beautiful wisdom within, the Bibles are not something I would use as a moral guide for human rights, let alone animal welfare. But I want to discuss this as most people I run into are Christians and the thoughtless attitude towards how humans were given meat to eat according to their scripture seems to be common.

A plastic hutch is no substitute for a mother. Replace dairy, not mothers.

Last edited by faded_amaranth; 02-02-2015 at 12:12 PM.
faded_amaranth is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 02-02-2015, 12:43 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Joan Kennedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lovettsville, VA and Portland, OR
Posts: 1,982
My reading of Cain and Abel suggests that meat eating would have begun soon after the eviction from Eden. Abel is portrayed as a herdsman, in some translations a hunter, practicing animal sacrifice, which is seen as pleasing God. Hunting and eating meat preceded the domestication of livestock, and Abel was a practiced slaughterer, and that was many generations before Noah. There's no way they weren't eating meat by then, or that we're to believe this was considered a transgression. I mean, if you're looking for literal rationales in these old stories. Mainstream (as compared with fundamentalist) Christians don't interpret those texts literally, but as wisdom about how we should behave now, and with the understanding that they are reading translations of translations, and that the translators would have had a hard time with idioms, etc. In fact, many Christians don't read the Old Testament at all for its laws. They maintain that the laws in the Old Testament were mitigated by the coming of Jesus, after which God was seen as more merciful and less harsh than previously. I would never argue with a Christian that he was violating his own religion by eating meat, only that his religion doesn't compel the practice. It would be interesting to read just how much meat people actually consumed back then. I expect it was far less than people do now, more for special occasions except among the wealthy and the priests.
Joan Kennedy is offline  
#3 Old 02-02-2015, 12:50 PM
Impeach the gangster
 
Capstan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,052
Interesting subject; however, because it is primarily theological, and potentially political, in nature, I'm moving it to the Compost Heap, our forum for friendly debate. Please continue the conversation.
varun likes this.

"There is more wisdom in the song of a bird, than in the speech of a philosopher...." -Oahspe
"The thing is, you cannot judge a race. Any man who judges by the group is a pea-wit. You take men one at a time." -Buster Kilrain, The Killer Angels -Michael Shaara
"Anyone who doesn't believe in miracles isn't a realist." -Billy Wilder
Capstan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#4 Old 02-02-2015, 01:10 PM
Beginner
 
scwendy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 126
I'm not Christian myself, but I know a family of Seventh Day Adventists who are vegetarian based on the idea that it was God's chosen diet originally.
scwendy is offline  
#5 Old 02-02-2015, 01:40 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
The bible often contradicts itself...It was written so long ago that any comments it makes on ethical issues need to be critically appraised in the context of 21st century thought/ morality...It seems fairly clear that people were only supposed to eat fruits until the concept of sin arose...So technically Christians should be eating fruits alone...
peacefulveglady likes this.
Go Vegan is offline  
#6 Old 02-02-2015, 01:47 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Joan Kennedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lovettsville, VA and Portland, OR
Posts: 1,982
Eden was where they didn't have to work for their food; it was all just there for the taking. Once out, wearing the animal skins God handed them as they were being shown the door, they had to work for everything they ate. I have to think that would have been the beginning of hunting. All that "this fruit shall be as meat for you" was only about Eden itself, I think. Kind of like our pre-human and early human ancestors in Africa, before their territory started drying up and they had to strike out for other regions and learn how to hunt and gather, and eventually, as humans, to herd and farm. I've thought of the Eden story as possibly having its roots in ancient oral history about leaving Africa, where life had been easy for a long time, and leaving for places where gathering food was harder so they had to start growing it, fighting weeds and quarreling with one another. That would make the Eden story kind of a parable about becoming more fully human than when they were in the Garden. In line with God's warning that from then on (from when they started walking upright???) childbirth was going to be a lot harder, and that now that they were getting more verbal they'd be arguing all the time, and that they'd also have to grow crops, fighting weeds every step of the way. None of those had been issues for them until they were, maybe once their heads got to be of a certain size and self-awareness kicked in. Or maybe it was more of an ancient fable created to answer the question, "Why is life so freaking hard?"

Last edited by Joan Kennedy; 02-02-2015 at 01:55 PM.
Joan Kennedy is offline  
#7 Old 02-02-2015, 01:58 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Just to clarify: anatomically modern humans originated in Eastern Africa about 200,000 years ago, mitochondrial DNA evidence confirms this...These anatomically modern humans migrated out of Africa and colonised the rest of the world...The early anatomically modern humans would probably have been "gatherers" before progressing to being "hunters"...Eventually farming practices developed, but these were much more recent ~ 12,000 years ago or so...
Go Vegan is offline  
#8 Old 02-02-2015, 02:05 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Joan Kennedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lovettsville, VA and Portland, OR
Posts: 1,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Go Vegan View Post
Just to clarify: anatomically modern humans originated in Eastern Africa about 200,000 years ago, mitochondrial DNA evidence confirms this...These anatomically modern humans migrated out of Africa and colonised the rest of the world...The early anatomically modern humans would probably have been "gatherers" before progressing to being "hunters"...Eventually farming practices developed, but these were much more recent ~ 12,000 years ago or so...
Your 200,000-years date is controversial and minority. Maybe homo sapiens goes back that far, maybe not, but I'm sure I read that Homo erectus, an ancestor of our anatomically modern people, gathered and hunted. But that's all beside the point. I was writing about how fables and legends can have their roots as oral history until the capacity develops for writing them down, the order of events less significant than the messages they hold.

Last edited by Joan Kennedy; 02-02-2015 at 02:08 PM.
Joan Kennedy is offline  
#9 Old 02-02-2015, 02:21 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joan Kennedy View Post
Your 200,000-years date is controversial and minority. Maybe homo sapiens goes back that far, maybe not, but I'm sure I read that Homo erectus, an ancestor of our anatomically modern people, gathered and hunted. But that's all beside the point. I was writing about how fables and legends can have their roots as oral history until the capacity develops for writing them down, the order of events less significant than the messages they hold.
In evolutionary biology, 200,000 years is the generally accepted amount of time that anatomically modern humans have been on planet Earth...
Go Vegan is offline  
#10 Old 02-02-2015, 02:30 PM
Unintentionally Kittened
 
faded_amaranth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 683
In response to Joan Kennedy,

I never read a translation where "hunter" was used, interesting. I didn't go reread the Cain and Able story when I was preparing this thread but I did wonder what he was up to with those sheep. I could easily explain it with "clothes and offerings" since such a big deal was made about nakedness earlier and someone had to make clothes for Adam and Eve and all of their children.

I'm not entirely sure why I only went with the literal translation of Genesis as I think that a literal interpretation is a relatively rare view point (and this is my very uneducated assumption). I guess I was just thinking about all of the 'God gave us animals to eat' arguments I've come across. These people were usually trying to take the Bible literally and although there are many places in the Bibles that deal with meat-eating, the only place the I'm aware of that states why God made non-human animals is in the beginning of Genesis. I live in a place where a lot of people believe 'you can't have a reason for Jesus's sacrifice without having a literal Adam and Eve messing things up'.

Ok, I still haven't reread Genesis 4-7 so I could be wrong here but if we were to take Genesis literally it doesn't mention eating animals before the Flood but it does say that people were doing a lot of violent things. For all we know, the writers could have envisioned that people were eating animals but not with God's permission.

"There's no way they weren't eating meat by then, or that we're to believe this was considered a transgression." I think there's no way a lot of the things depicted in the first 10 chapters of Genesis could have happened, so having them not eating meat (with permission) doesn't sound that strange to me by comparison.

"I would never argue with a Christian that he was violating his own religion by eating meat" I don't see how that argument could even be made ( but there are a lot of denominations out there with very diverse beliefs...)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Capstan View Post
Interesting subject; however, because it is primarily theological, and potentially political, in nature, I'm moving it to the Compost Heap, our forum for friendly debate. Please continue the conversation.
Sounds reasonable to me. I figured it would end up there eventually, I just didn't want to place it in automatic-debate-land right off the bat.

A plastic hutch is no substitute for a mother. Replace dairy, not mothers.
faded_amaranth is offline  
#11 Old 02-02-2015, 02:38 PM
Unintentionally Kittened
 
faded_amaranth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 683
Quote:
Originally Posted by scwendy View Post
I'm not Christian myself, but I know a family of Seventh Day Adventists who are vegetarian based on the idea that it was God's chosen diet originally.
Yeah, there are several Christian groups that, if not believe it is good to completely abstain from meat, believe it is a good idea to fast from meat occasionally- some Catholics, mainly in the Middle Ages I think, Eastern Orthodox Churches, the church in Ethiopia.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Go Vegan View Post
The bible often contradicts itself...It was written so long ago that any comments it makes on ethical issues need to be critically appraised in the context of 21st century thought/ morality...It seems fairly clear that people were only supposed to eat fruits until the concept of sin arose...So technically Christians should be eating fruits alone...
Well when people were kicked out of Eden they were punished by being forced to work hard in order to eat the "pants of the field".

A plastic hutch is no substitute for a mother. Replace dairy, not mothers.
faded_amaranth is offline  
#12 Old 02-02-2015, 02:39 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Joan Kennedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lovettsville, VA and Portland, OR
Posts: 1,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Go Vegan View Post
Just to clarify: anatomically modern humans originated in Eastern Africa about 200,000 years ago, mitochondrial DNA evidence confirms this...These anatomically modern humans migrated out of Africa and colonised the rest of the world...The early anatomically modern humans would probably have been "gatherers" before progressing to being "hunters"...Eventually farming practices developed, but these were much more recent ~ 12,000 years ago or so...
Ancestors (Homo erectus) of anatomically modern humans also hunted, also gathered. Ancestors of anatomically modern humans left Africa and began colonizing the world. That's why you find Neanderthal remains in Europe and Denisovan remains in Asia, among others who preceded Homo Sapiens. These relatively recent near-human cousins share our Homo erectus common ancestor, as I understand it. By the time Homo sapiens is on the scene, hunting is already in practice.

Last edited by Joan Kennedy; 02-02-2015 at 02:46 PM.
Joan Kennedy is offline  
#13 Old 02-02-2015, 02:51 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joan Kennedy View Post
Ancestors (homo Erectus) of anatomically modern humans also hunted, also gathered. Ancestors of anatomically modern humans left Africa and began colonizing the world. That's why you find Neanderthal remains in Europe and Denisovan remains in Asia, among others who preceded Homo Sapiens. All these near-human cousins share our Homo erectus common ancestor. By the time Homo sapiens is on the scene, hunting is already in practice.
Homo neanderthalensis is not an ancestor of anatomically modern humans...

The Out of Africa Theory says that anatomically modern humans left Eastern Africa/ the horn of Africa and colonised the world...By tracing mitochondrial DNA back to Eastern Africa, this has been confirmed to be correct...

These anatomically modern humans either wiped out Homo neanderthalensis or bred with them, thereby assimilating their gene pool...
Go Vegan is offline  
#14 Old 02-02-2015, 02:57 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Joan Kennedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lovettsville, VA and Portland, OR
Posts: 1,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Go Vegan View Post
Homo neanderthalensis is not an ancestor of anatomically modern humans...
I didn't say he was. I said Homo erectus is the common ancestor we share with Neanderthal and Denisovan, among others. It was Homo erectus who first left Africa, and you wont find Neanderthals in Africa. You find their fossils in Europe. Another descendant of Homo erectus is Denisovan, whose fossils you find in Asia. As I wrote, Denisovan and Homo erectus are our cousins.
Joan Kennedy is offline  
#15 Old 02-02-2015, 02:59 PM
Unintentionally Kittened
 
faded_amaranth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 683
(Again this is my uneducated opinion) I think that Genesis was intended to be etiological fables- explaining why life is hard, why snakes don't have legs, why childbirth is so much harder for woman than other animals, why woman love the ones who subjugate them, etc. But I think it's cool that this story seems to agree with reality about why childbirth is so difficult in humans; the large brains, which allow for 'a knowledge of good and evil,' along with bipedalism means larger head through a narrower birth canal = more pain. Maybe I shouldn't be so impressed but didn't a lot of cultures believe that thinking and/or morality came from organs (or even non-physical) other than the brain?

A plastic hutch is no substitute for a mother. Replace dairy, not mothers.
faded_amaranth is offline  
#16 Old 02-02-2015, 03:17 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joan Kennedy View Post
I didn't say he was. I said Homo erectus is the common ancestor we share with Neanderthal and Denisovan, among others. It was Homo erectus who first left Africa, and you wont find Neanderthals in Africa. You find their fossils in Europe. Another descendant of Homo erectus is Denisovan, whose fossils you find in Asia. As I wrote, Denisovan and Homo erectus are our cousins.
If you are referring to common ancestors then I see what you mean...I think Neanderthals were first found in Germany, rather than Eastern Africa, as you say...
Go Vegan is offline  
#17 Old 02-02-2015, 03:20 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Joan Kennedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lovettsville, VA and Portland, OR
Posts: 1,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by faded_amaranth View Post
(Again this is my uneducated opinion) I think that Genesis was intended to be etiological fables- explaining why life is hard, why snakes don't have legs, why childbirth is so much harder for woman than other animals, why woman love the ones who subjugate them, etc. But I think it's cool that this story seems to agree with reality about why childbirth is so difficult in humans; the large brains, which allow for 'a knowledge of good and evil,' along with bipedalism means larger head through a narrower birth canal = more pain. Maybe I shouldn't be so impressed but didn't a lot of cultures believe that thinking and/or morality came from organs (or even non-physical) other than the brain?
That's how I see it too. That's what I was getting at in post #6, but mine was wordier. Okay, a lot wordier. And you're absolutely right that pulling on the string of the Eden Fall story really messes up the narrative of the need for a redeemer to come bail us out from the fallout of that Original Sin. Committed moments before they even knew the difference between right and wrong, so I'm not sure how much of a Sin it should have been considered. As one friend of mine put it, "Eden isn't the story of a banishment, it's the story of an escape from a slave colony." Harsh, but I do see what he would have been getting at.

Last edited by Joan Kennedy; 02-02-2015 at 03:24 PM.
Joan Kennedy is offline  
#18 Old 02-02-2015, 03:25 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by faded_amaranth View Post
(Again this is my uneducated opinion) I think that Genesis was intended to be etiological fables- explaining why life is hard, why snakes don't have legs, why childbirth is so much harder for woman than other animals, why woman love the ones who subjugate them, etc. But I think it's cool that this story seems to agree with reality about why childbirth is so difficult in humans; the large brains, which allow for 'a knowledge of good and evil,' along with bipedalism means larger head through a narrower birth canal = more pain. Maybe I shouldn't be so impressed but didn't a lot of cultures believe that thinking and/or morality came from organs (or even non-physical) other than the brain?
Yes I think a lot of ancient cultures placed little value on the brain - the ancient Egyptians didn't think too highly of brains - they just scrambled them up during mummification...Even Leonardo da Vinci didn't try that hard when drawing the brain, compared to other organs...I think that ancient peoples often assigned more value to the heart...
Go Vegan is offline  
#19 Old 06-19-2015, 11:46 AM
Riot Nrrrd
 
Dave in MPLS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: St Cloud MN
Posts: 3,180
Romans 14 is actually pretty easily dealt with.

He was using an example of then current controversies to push his own theological views and interests. Catholic, protestent, Eastern Orthodox, whatever -- we're all plying variations on Pauline Christianity. At that time there were THREE belief systems that could lay claim to being Christianity. Jewish Christianity, Gnosticism, and Pauline Christianity.

Jewish Christianity is the beliefs of those who first followed Jesus. They were still Jews and still did "Jewish" things. Like follow the food rules.

Gnosticism's relationship to Christianity is complex, and I was pretty much telling tales when I said it could lay claim to BEING Christianity, but what's important here is that many Gnostic sects had food rules.

Along comes Paul. His view is that faith trumps things like food rules. Martin Luther later picked up that football and ran with it, but that's beyond the point here. Following things like food rules is a sign of weak faith to Paul. His decleration that the person who doesn't eat meat is weak in faith isn't commentary that the non-eater is weak in faith because he's not eating meat, rather because he's following an arbitrary rule. The Jewish Christians had a set of food rules. His example points to the Gnostics though. Many Gnostic sects practiced meat abstention as a food rule. Paul is wagging his finger and saying "Nope. It's faith, stupid. Not rules."

I hope that made sense
Ladyjay likes this.

Dave in MPLS / DISCLAIMER: I am not an actual rooster.
"It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness"
National Suicide Prevention Lifeline 18002738255
Dave in MPLS is offline  
#20 Old 06-19-2015, 02:37 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 53
In a nutshell, the Bible is the progressive revelation of God's dealings and revelation of Himself to mankind. Any "Christian" who rips scripture out of context to try to prove God is either for or against vegetarianism....or for/against meat-eating doesn't know their Bibles as they ought.

The Pauline literature in the New Testament speaks of meat that was sacrificed to idles. In that day, meat sold in the market place was in many cases meat that was used in a pagan ceremony. Paul was writing to new Christians whose faith (and conscience) was "weak" in that in their new born desire to please the One True God they were worried that eating such meat was a sin.

He was telling more mature Christians whose faith was stronger and who had no problem eating such meat to be careful when with the "weaker" Christian so as not to make them "stumble."

Today a corollary would be the use of alcohol. The Bible teaches to not get drunk. It doesn't speak of total abstinence except in the case of a Nazarite vow and maybe one or two other exceptions.

So a "strong" Christian who has no problem having a beer or two, a glass of wine or two needs to be careful exercising that freedom of conscience and faith when it comes to a "weak" Christian who may think drinking a beer is a horrible sin. Out of love and understanding for the "weaker brother" it is the right thing to do NOT to drink ("eat meat") in front of that brother.
peacefulveglady and Docbanana like this.
Robmeister is offline  
#21 Old 06-19-2015, 05:03 PM
Impeach the gangster
 
Capstan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,052
The New Testament teaches that symbolically eating the body and drinking the blood of Jesus (cannibalism) is holy. The entire faith centers around the killing of Jesus (murder) as the only way to "salvation." It's not too surprising Christians might take pride in brutal behavior, as a result.
varun and Kiwibird08 like this.

"There is more wisdom in the song of a bird, than in the speech of a philosopher...." -Oahspe
"The thing is, you cannot judge a race. Any man who judges by the group is a pea-wit. You take men one at a time." -Buster Kilrain, The Killer Angels -Michael Shaara
"Anyone who doesn't believe in miracles isn't a realist." -Billy Wilder
Capstan is offline  
#22 Old 06-19-2015, 05:34 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Any religion based around an ancient book is going to be morally outdated today. That said, I think that the New Testament is a lot more benign than many other ancient texts.
Go Vegan is offline  
#23 Old 06-20-2015, 05:45 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capstan View Post
It's not too surprising Christians might take pride in brutal behavior, as a result.
Completely ridiculous
Robmeister is offline  
#24 Old 06-20-2015, 12:38 PM
Veggie Regular
 
varun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by faded_amaranth View Post
I never read a translation where "hunter" was used, interesting. I didn't go reread the Cain and Able story when I was preparing this thread but I did wonder what he was up to with those sheep.
That story is something isn't it? Abel the righteous presented god with meat offering and got approved while Kain the tiller offered his fruit & grain and got rejected, now due to jealousy and anger Kain kills his brother. Logically this story has about as much sense as the Trials of Job, but some feel its a Hebraic folklore about how their ancestors came to be sheep-breeders.

As for the question of this thread, I don't know if Christians are proud to eat meat because of their religion or because their family always were meat-eaters. Lets face it technically Christianity is a Roman-Pagan religion with primary roots in the European nations which spread to the whole earth afterwards. Its the Jews who have kosher laws (as demanded by God the Lord), not the Christians, that's because of their European diet which conveniently ignored the Tanach where not negotiable. It has nothing to do with religion.. just the heritage and regional diet continuing on.

The earth has enough resources for everyones need but not their greed.

varun is offline  
#25 Old 06-20-2015, 02:26 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by varun View Post
Lets face it technically Christianity is a Roman-Pagan religion with primary roots in the European nations which spread to the whole earth afterwards.
LOL! LMAO!!! Where do you guys come up with this stuff?

Going back to the original question of this post; Just like any other group or religion, you're going to have some individuals or segments that go off the rails with strange interpretations and what not that do not represent (or misrepresent) the "mainstream" if you like. There's nothing scriptural or Christ-prescribed that supports Christians as being particularly "proud of" being meat eaters.

Last edited by Robmeister; 06-20-2015 at 03:40 PM.
Robmeister is offline  
#26 Old 06-20-2015, 07:44 PM
Veggie Regular
 
vefo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by faded_amaranth View Post
I can't understand this perspective and since it has come up in a few recent threads I figured it deserved its own topic. Overall I'm not saying that people who believe in a Bible should feel guilty about being allowed to eat animals; I just don't understand the flippant attitude some have, since it came with such a huge cost.
Without getting into a discussion about the short comings of religion, a few things come to mind that are aimed at people of religious persuasion. The heart of the issue is honesty, integrity and awareness without being selective.

From my observations, the religious are the least likely to be critical thinkers, Its easy to be a good religious person without any depth of thought, hey you don't want to be drawn into discussion about animal abuse because you love your lamb roast, and then you would have to think about the ethics of the whole process.

If they in fact felt guilty about eating animals, then they should have the honesty and integrity to address that guilt, how many times have we all heard the " I'm uncomfortable with animal farming but I couldn't live without my meat" ? I've heard it a lot! the same people continue to eat meat and be selective about their ethical behavior.
varun likes this.
vefo is offline  
#27 Old 06-20-2015, 07:52 PM
Veggie Regular
 
varun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robmeister View Post
LOL! LMAO!!! Where do you guys come up with this stuff?
I never write anything related to religion without expecting sceptical/hostile responses. While I'm no expert in the matter most of the terms I say can be verified using history. The 1st and 2nd centuries were an interesting time for religion, or should I say unification of religions. The 3rd week of December was a Roman-Pagan festival called Saturnalia, loosely related to Hanukkah but never on the same days, later it was decided that December 25th would be the official day of Saturnalia (beginning from midnight), it was also called Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (birthday of the everlasting Sun), this accompanied the fact that Dec 25th was winter solstice and people celebrated the beginning of a new crop season. Easter/Eastre was a word used in Germany to denote the change of season from summer, typically in the month of April. Eggs were supposedly symbolic of a new beginning in those days and was used to symbolize Easter, this resembles the Jewish festival Passover but not completely. The cross has long been a pagan symbol in Egypt, Rome & Greece, some explanations point to a constellation of a similar shape, some feel its a symbol of God. Saint Nicholaus or Santa Claus also had its origins from Europe (he was a German-origin saint from European border of Turkey). Germans celebrated his acts of kindness as an example of why charity should be done.

I'm not writing any of this to offend you or any religion, just pointing out a few influences of Christianity which are proven to be older traditions followed in the B.C era. Most other modern-day Christmas traditions came from various European countries which symbolized their unique faith.
no whey jose likes this.

Last edited by varun; 06-20-2015 at 08:01 PM.
varun is offline  
#28 Old 06-20-2015, 08:08 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by vefo View Post
how many times have we all heard the " I'm uncomfortable with animal farming but I couldn't live without my meat" ? I've heard it a lot! the same people continue to eat meat and be selective about their ethical behavior.
Not the dreaded "my meat" comment! No! I always hear this

"I need my meat"
"I love my meat"
"I couldn't live without my meat"

As we were saying in another thread it's NOT YOUR meat and it never was!
varun and no whey jose like this.
Go Vegan is offline  
#29 Old 06-20-2015, 08:16 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by varun View Post
I never write anything related to religion without expecting sceptical/hostile responses. While I'm no expert in the matter most of the terms I say can be verified using history. The 1st and 2nd centuries were an interesting time for religion, or should I say unification of religions. The 3rd week of December was a Roman-Pagan festival called Saturnalia, loosely related to Hanukkah but never on the same days, later it was decided that December 25th would be the official day of Saturnalia (beginning from midnight), it was also called Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (birthday of the everlasting Sun), this accompanied the fact that Dec 25th was winter solstice and people celebrated the beginning of a new crop season. Easter/Eastre was a word used in Germany to denote the change of season from summer, typically in the month of April. Eggs were supposedly symbolic of a new beginning in those days and was used to symbolize Easter, this resembles the Jewish festival Passover but not completely. The cross has long been a pagan symbol in Egypt, Rome & Greece, some explanations point to a constellation of a similar shape, some feel its a symbol of God. Saint Nicholaus or Santa Claus also had its origins from Europe (he was a German-origin saint from European border of Turkey). Germans celebrated his acts of kindness as an example of why charity should be done.

I'm not writing any of this to offend you or any religion, just pointing out a few influences of Christianity which are proven to be older traditions followed in the B.C era. Most other modern-day Christmas traditions came from various European countries which symbolized their unique faith.
I completely agree that Christianity absorbed the pre-existing Roman religion and other pagan religions.

I also think once the Roman empire decided to adopt Christianity as its official religion the Romans would have been involved in deciding precisely what would remain canon and what would be cut out so they did play a role in directly shaping the religion as well.
varun and no whey jose like this.
Go Vegan is offline  
#30 Old 06-21-2015, 06:15 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by varun View Post
I never write anything related to religion without expecting sceptical/hostile responses. While I'm no expert in the matter most of the terms I say can be verified using history. The 1st and 2nd centuries were an interesting time for religion, or should I say unification of religions. The 3rd week of December was a Roman-Pagan festival called Saturnalia, loosely related to Hanukkah but never on the same days, later it was decided that December 25th would be the official day of Saturnalia (beginning from midnight), it was also called Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (birthday of the everlasting Sun), this accompanied the fact that Dec 25th was winter solstice and people celebrated the beginning of a new crop season. Easter/Eastre was a word used in Germany to denote the change of season from summer, typically in the month of April. Eggs were supposedly symbolic of a new beginning in those days and was used to symbolize Easter, this resembles the Jewish festival Passover but not completely. The cross has long been a pagan symbol in Egypt, Rome & Greece, some explanations point to a constellation of a similar shape, some feel its a symbol of God. Saint Nicholaus or Santa Claus also had its origins from Europe (he was a German-origin saint from European border of Turkey). Germans celebrated his acts of kindness as an example of why charity should be done.

I'm not writing any of this to offend you or any religion, just pointing out a few influences of Christianity which are proven to be older traditions followed in the B.C era. Most other modern-day Christmas traditions came from various European countries which symbolized their unique faith.
OK then...You a little more accurately point out actual history here summarized neatly here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by varun View Post
Most other modern-day Christmas traditions came from various European countries which symbolized their unique faith.
That's a FAR CRY from Christianity being a Roman-pagan religion.
Robmeister is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in




Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off