|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Did Jesus Declare All Food Clean? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
candle2 writes:
I only agree that meat can be contaminated. I certainly do not agree that all pork or all shellfish was contaminated at any time in history.
At least you admit that the meat mentioned is contaminated. candle2 writes:
There's a whole food chain, you know. A whole string of creatures have eaten each other without harm. Most of the people in the world eat pork and shellfish without harm. When one eats contaminated .meat he is eating everything that that animal has eaten.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9509 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Candle2 writes: At least you admit that the meat mentioned is contaminated. Meat is not generally contaminated.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8552 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
I think "contaminated" in this case referrers to some religious sense of unclean rather than any physical contamination from microbes/molecular agents.
In the ancient world there were major issues with pork and other meats being difficult to keep from contaminants both of the animal and of the meat after slaughter. The resulting dietary restrictions were quite prudent at the time and should surprise no one that they made their way into the prevailing religious memes in a population. With proper feeding, slaughter and handling these issues no longer exist. We have come a long way in 3000 years. But, as usual, the religious mind gets stuck in the old ways and makes irrational reasons to maintain the meme. The "spirit" of the animal/meat being unclean, somehow/somewhy poisoned by god, is now the rationale.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9509 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
AZP writes: I think "contaminated" in this case referrers to some religious sense of unclean rather than any physical contamination from microbes/molecular agents. In the ancient world there were major issues with pork and other meats being difficult to keep from contaminants both of the animal and of the meat after slaughter. The resulting dietary restrictions were quite prudent at the time and should surprise no one that they made their way into the prevailing religious memes in a population. Maybe, I think it more likely that it was merely ritual and control. In any case this idiot *is* saying that some animals are actually contaminated.
Candle2 writes: Some animals are clean and fit, designed for human consumption.Some animals are contaminated/polluted, not for human consumption. Therefore, not all animals are to be eaten be humans Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8552 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Maybe, I think it more likely that it was merely ritual and control. Certainly. But the priests did sometimes try to do some good for their charges. Just like Fishy Fridays for Catholics.
In any case this idiot *is* saying that some animals are actually contaminated. Can't argue against that. He/she/it did get into scavengers, bottom feeders, garbage eaters, etc. as reasons, which just so happen to correspond to the reasons of the ancient priests.
quote: A blanket statement borne of religious zeal, I think. His/her/its mind is stuck inside a book.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9509 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
AZP writes: But the priests did sometimes try to do some good for their charges. Just like Fishy Fridays for Catholics. Don't think so, it's just another ritual as a control function - a weekly remider of who's boss. This is a quote from a random Catholic site.
quote: Wiki
quote: Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
AZPaul3 writes:
Because recycling is a bad thing. He/she/it did get into scavengers, bottom feeders, garbage eaters, etc. as reasons....And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8552 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
Because recycling is a bad thing. Right, but only for things that feed off of death or the icky unappetizing leftovers from meals past. Recycling grass through a lamb is ok. Just don't mention what the grass is recycling though.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2422 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2
|
I don't know if this will be ignored by Candle, but here is why I ask.
I put ARE CHICKENS SCAVENGERS into google.I already know that chickens will eat ANY type of meat, even chicken meat, when they scavenge. Here are a few links from google.
quote: Special scavenging breeds have been developed, as the above link shows. Here is a Kosher discussion.
quote: The chicken is a scavenging animal, right? Any comments or answers on this one?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2422 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
[quoe]
Can't argue against that. He/she/it did get into scavengers, bottom feeders, garbage eaters, etc. as reasons, which just so happen to correspond to the reasons of the ancient priests. [/quote] The Rabbinical commentary included observations about the proscribed birds (Leviticus 11, Deuteronomy 14) being birds of prey. There is a difference between a scavenger and a bird of prey (the Bald Eagle is a scavenger, while an Owl is a bird of prey). I asked him for evidence to back up his claim about diseases and scavenging. Candle refused to respond to my question. (One would think he could take SOMETHING from the ancient records, even if it was highly selective and misleading)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2422 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: Even Maimonides said that (medieval Spanish?) people don't consider Pork to be harmful to health.
quote: So much for an easy answer. But the brainwashing continues.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member Posts: 850 Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
A Consumer Report test of commerically raised catfish revealed them to have bacteria counts of more than 27,000,000 per gram. Fish is unfit to eat at 10,000,000 per gram.
Jesus once fed 5000 people with a few loaves of bread and a few fish. Another time it was 4000. In both instances He ordered all scraps collected that none be wasted. Yet, this same Jesus (Mark 5) allowed 2000 head of swine to plunge into the sea. If swine was fit for human consumptionn, He would not have wasted the meat. No one but you, yourself, has said that God poisoned (contaminated, polluted) meat. A rational mind never made this stupid statement, an irrational mind did. And to state that certain animals were not permitted to be eaten because they are contaminated in a religious sense is silly. It reeks of desperation. God does not withhold good things from those who love Him. He only wiithholds harmful things, just as any loving parent does.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2422 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Candle will ignore this on
(like he ignores everything else)
quote: What does it have to do with his bogus theological claim?
quote: Still waiting for answers from "candle2".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
candle2 writes:
That's a bad example. The swine plunged into the sea because they were possessed by devils. That doesn't mean that all swine are unfit to eat.
Yet, this same Jesus (Mark 5) allowed 2000 head of swine to plunge into the sea. If swine was fit for human consumptionn, He would not have wasted the meat. candle2 writes:
In this example, that's pretty much exactly what happened. Jesus was the one who made the swine unfit to eat. No one but you, yourself, has said that God poisoned (contaminated, polluted) meat. Edited by ringo, : Added second paragraph.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member Posts: 850 Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Minchin is a fool. He is an atheist and evolutionist but certainly not an empiricist.
Evolution has nothing to do with science. It is simply a false belief system. One in which adherents cling to regardless of evidence. When Dr. Schwierter discovered soft tissue in a (supposedly) 75,000,000 year old T-Rex fossil. It sent the evolutionist community into a frenzy. They would not accept that the fossil had pliable veins, muscle, and collagen, even though nearly two dozen tests had been performed on it. Many of these so-called open-minded evolutionists refused to believe what they were observing. Some are on tecord as saying that they would never change their world view, regardless of the evidence Instead of accepting the obvious ( that Dinos are only thousands of years old) they insist that iron preserved the soft tissue. C14, which has a half life of roughly 5730 years, should have no detectable amount on fossils more than 75,000 years old. Yet, what we observe is thousands of fossils with significant amounts of C14 present. Now there are many fossils with soft tissue (squishy) in them. There are multiple dozens of eyewitnesse accounts of dino sightings. Alexander the Great; Marco Polo; Pliny; St. Georgee; and, Herodotus are just a few of reputable humans who have seen Dinos; yet, open-minded evolutionists reject these observations. Reliefs, etchings, and drawings of Dinos on pottery, rocks, an caves are also rejected by them, even though they were done before science even knew what Dinos look like What we observe is that humans produce humans; dogs produce dogs; dolphins produce dolphins; and, oak trees produce oak trees. In other words, kind produce same kind. Anything else is just wishful thinkin. And, wishful thinking is exactly what evolutionists base their views on.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024