Bible's original PICTURE of vegetarian life

[Guest guest]

ACTUALLY, the Bible DOES give us a PICTURE of a vegetarian creation, with a vegetarian species (us), and this discussion (the texts and oral narratives circulated among HUMAN beings) addresses OUR origins in the context of cosmic origins.For the PICTURE to be of US as VEGETARIANS, we have a hard time moving out of that, since THAT is seen as GOD's DESIGN.Now, if the later texts (including the flood, Noah and family and 2x2 and 7x7) go out, why are they taking clean and unclean animals, if there is no permission to eat animals UNTIL AFTER the flood, and even then, "for the hardness of their hearts"?ALL VERY STRANGE, unless, of course, it's a human book of lore among humans, with manifestations of local human biases, not always in the long-term interests of those involved, even if they had decided that it was in their interests.Of course, if people REALLY believed Genesis 1 to be literally true, why aren't they vegetarians?For that question there is a discussion list: BibleVeggies (AT) Groups (DOT) com, which purports to bring together practicing vegetarians with a working knowledge of the Bible to discuss this ONE particular question, and to move through the texts and to ask HERMENEUTICAL questions about the texts... Are these texts really normative, given the FIRST TEXTS? or is the apparent lack of moral and logical consistency evidence of the texts' merely human origins?Maynard S. Clark"On the Satan front," I'm not sure that it's "stupid" to believe that Satan is a real fallen angel alive and at work commanding a legion of like-minded fallen thwarting our best directions and influencing us towards evil deeds and self-destructive actions.* However, solid evidence of such seems IMO to be lacking, and my sense of "philosophical standards" keeps me from AFFIRMING anything for which there is insufficient logical ground.*They're probably working in MTV and the rock music industry, some posiing as "vegans."

elisabeth_rb <erbraun wrote: Simon, (and all the team here)Could you please give the citation for the text you quoted? It sounds similar to the one at Genesis 1:29 which was directed to humans and would, therefore, exclude the carnivorous animals, (although as we're all well aware, all animal life depends on plant life ultimately however they get it, ie directly or by eating the intestines of herbivores), thus satisfying both the points made about this text. Could be that it isn't a good translation too. (Actually, it would be better to cite ALL your quotations - carries a lot more weight that way and is much easier to reference).Anyway, the Bible actually doesn't comment much on diet. Some say it is anti-vegetarian and some others quote passages out of context to prove that it actively promotes it, but the truth is, it barely touches on the subject of diet, esp where veggie issues are concerned, but leaves that sort of thing to the individual.=) As both a Christian and a vegan, I have no problem with this, and would never use the Bible to prove either ethic. Moral and other issues are another matter.....Simon, I was surprised at your saying that Satan was the evil in things. You quoted Christ on the adultery front, but it's worth remembering that Christ spoke of, (and TO), the Devil as a real personality!On the Satan front, I don't think that anyone is stupid for believing that he exists, but I do feel that he likes it when people don't - means his tactics are pretty effective. However, I also don't think it's quite on to blame all evil on him. Sure, he influences things on the earth to an alarming degree, but humans are free to make their own decisions and act on them. Also, perhaps it is a little out of harmony with the gentleness of the vegan ethic to be calling others "stupid"??Love and mango,Elisabeth

Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards®