|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,766 Year: 4,023/9,624 Month: 894/974 Week: 221/286 Day: 28/109 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Should Christians go vegetarian? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
Random mutation is one possibility that comes to mind. Why are they the way they are? To find out, we'd have to trace our ancestry back to when the canine teeth evolved (which is above my pay grade).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 91 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
We have canines for the same reason gorillas and hippos do. Probably because our ancestors used them to eat raw meat off of carcasses.
Personally the most use my canines get is when I'm chomping bits out of apples. Seriously - If we filed down your canines would it have any effect at all on your diet? Do you really need canines to eat burgers, chicken drumsticks or even steaks? That we cook our meat makes our canine teeth pretty superfluous to our ability to eat meat. So what is your point here? You have canines....therefore what?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Well I found this, but I haven't read through it yet. Looks interesting.
Just a moment...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
So what is your point here? To learn something by asking questions. It didn't work. I'll just keep Googling, thanks anyways.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
quote:Since our ape relatives also have canines, I was thinking we'd have to go back farther than hominids.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Whether we should be trying to recover the pre-Fall state: no, partly because as CS said we are going on to something better, but also because it isn't in our power to reclaim any of it. Jesus' death set the stage for God to re-make the whole Creation when the time comes, but right now we are in an interim period, saved but not perfected. I don't think we'll go back to nakedness -- there seems to be a fashion in white linen among the perfected saints. And the only way to go back to nakedness would be in a state of complete innocence, but we've certainly lost that and can never get it back.
Also, you said back a ways that God's telling Noah they should now eat meat seemed to imply that they couldn't choose to be vegetarians as if it was a command to eat meat. But there are at least two instances where meat was rejected, both by the prophet Daniel, first as a teenager in Babylon when he and his friends refused to eat Nebuchadnezzar's meat, because it would have been sacrificed to idols, and had to prove to the eununch in charge of them that they would be glowing with health rather than sickly if permitted to eat only vegetables. The other time was a fast Daniel did that eliminated meat completely for three weeks. This isn't exactly an example of "going vegetarian" but it suggests that there's certainly nothing wrong with choosing to eat vegetarian if you want to or have a reason to. ABE: Thought of another example:
Rom 14:2-3 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1309 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
Probably because our ancestors used them to eat raw meat off of carcasses.
But the (shortened) list of herbivores with canines i gave shows that canines are not *only* used for tearing meat. Were our distant ancestors meat eaters? and before them? were they foragers? did they have canines?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1309 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
partly because as CS said we are going on to something better
Better than god's perfect creation? surely that was the ideal? no sin, no death, abundant food etc.
there seems to be a fashion in white linen among the perfected saints. what a bizarre thing to say. Have you met perfected saints? what were they wearing?
And the only way to go back to nakedness would be in a state of complete innocence
Or perhaps just an acceptance that nudity isn't "dirty", while still appreciating the beauty/sexuality of the human body. Not necessarily innocence.
God's telling Noah they should now eat meat
I guess i see a difference between God saying "should" or "can" eat meat. One is giving an instruction, the other is giving permission.
another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
I can vouch, after 22 years that being vegetarian does not make you weak, (or necessarily thin!)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Rev 19:8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. Rev 19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. I don't think the idea ever was that nudity was "dirty," it's more like you feel exposed and vulnerable, all your sins open to public view. Not that nudity itself is the sinful thing but that it's symbolic of the exposure of your sins. God clothed Adam and Eve with animal skins, which is understood to be a prophetic type of Christ's sacrifice for sin. "Covering" is protection. I took the "should" in "should eat meat" as a recommendation that had to do with better health and strength, not a command. Up until modern times people led hard physical lives, and especially if agriculture wasn't very productive meat would have been the best option for nutrition. The eunuch's worry that Daniel and friends would become sickly on nothing but "herbs" shows the prevailing mentality. I suppose we have to assume that God preserved their health miraculously through their diet of vegetables. But now, when conditions of life have so generally improved, there's no reason not to go back to living on "herbs." ABE: Oh but the "weakness" mentioned in connection with eating only vegetables in the New Testament had nothng to do with physical weakness. It was the weakness of faith: these people were super aware of the practice of sacrificing meat to idols and didn't have the faith not to have their conscience taken captive by that knowledge. The "strong" in faith just ignored the sacrifice to idols as meaningless. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 91 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Heathen writes: But the (shortened) list of herbivores with canines i gave shows that canines are not *only* used for tearing meat. I agree. But did canines originate for the purpose of eating meat? That they have subsequently been commandeered for other uses is indisputable.
H writes: Were our distant ancestors meat eaters? and before them? were they foragers? did they have canines? My understanding is that the earliest mammals were omnivorous. Plants, insects and small lizards were their diet. I don't know when the first canines emerged however.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024