|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,475 Year: 3,732/9,624 Month: 603/974 Week: 216/276 Day: 56/34 Hour: 2/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Faith vs Science | |||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2332 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Notice that the Hindu bans are for spiritual and soul issues.
Putting thinking creatures in pain and taking life. How do Christianity, Islam & Hinduism justify killing of animals for meat? How are they different from each other? - Quora Food taboos: their origins and purposes - PMC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2332 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: Well Paul talked about "conscience" in Romans 14. But here are some texts that seem to know that there is no scientific difference between a human and an animal and its ability to "feel" stuff. The Politically Incorrect star was on CNN's Larry King show back in 2008, and he talked about how Christians feel they have dominion over animals and can treat them however they want because they supposedly don't have "a soul" - "whatever that means". The guest made it clear that there was no scientific basis to defend the abuse. Well I am please to tell Cat Sci and the 2008 Larry King guest that there is scripture that aligns with science in that it considers animals brains to be the same type of thing as humans. Quotes taken from this source.How do Christianity, Islam & Hinduism justify killing of animals for meat? How are they different from each other? - Quora quote: "unclean" is one thing. Ritual "purity" is one thing.
quote: The Hindu religion and its closely-related offshoots are over 20% of the world's population.The Buddhism offshoot has forbidden meats, but allows pig consumption. But the concept of Karma makes many vegetarians automatically. "Christianity" has been twisted, for sure, but if you consider Paul's words in Romans 14, then that is another large faith (the religion of the founders has been lost admittedly) that seems to consider conscience as opposed to ritual impurities and legal technicalities (see Romans 14:14ff). Don't trash all religions for the absurd directions they went in. They all have bans on food (unless severely twisted) and clearly there was an origin of concern for life (free of unscientific absurdities like saying "dogs/pigs don't have a soul like us humans"). I think so anyway.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2332 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
I was quoted as saying "Well Paul talked about "conscience" in Romans 14"
CatSci said quote:I mentioned the issue of Romans 14:14 because I thought you were making fun of the clean/unclean concept. It turns out that you actually have your own theories about the concept, and you accept it based on your theories (of sickness issues and safety of meat). Historians say there is no evidence that food safety was the concern of ancient peoples especially the Hebrews with regard to pork and its parasites. It is often repeated by many that the concern is parasites and such. Again, the historians say there is no evidence that this was the concern. You responded to my post (which I wouldn't have made had I known you were sorta making a point of the text NOT being scientifically absurd in this area) about Romans, and quoted 14:2.
quote: Yes, vegetarians were simply described as "weak" in Romans. The consceince part was in 1 Corinthians 8:12
quote: Romans 15:1 concludes the part started in 14:1-2
quote: Remember that I thought you were making fun of the "clean" issue. The better word is "pure" anyway.I posted Romans 14:14 just to clarify that the issue isn't even part of (the original and modern so-called)Christianity anyway. quote: quote: The early Jewish Christians tied his death (c. 30 A.D.)to the end of eating animals, and the Temple destruction (70 A.D.) to the end of animal sacrifice.
quote: I was quoting what religions and their sacred texts say. I don't think they feel that a trained dog should eat the same food that a wild dog does. It's all about enlightenment I suppose.
quote: Lions can actually be quite nice. Tigers too. They actually can form friendships with animals they normally eat, and this happens in the wild. A wild Tiger formed a friendship with a young ram, but the friendship ended when it got tired of the ram playfully butting him endlessly. He threw the ram away (with his mouth), and human observers later decided to separate the 2. Wild lions can be friendly with humans too, even though they are hungry meat-eaters. But they can't digest carbohydrates (most can't anyway), so they seem to need to eat meat. About 14/17 house cats (85%) can digest carbohydrates, and can survive on a plant-based diet. But not all of them can.
quote: Even the right-wing anti-vegetarian Dr. Michael Savage recently had to admit that vegetarians had more bioavailability of L-CARNITINE than meat-eaters. I remember when he claimed that vegetarians couldn't get enough. Meat eating was a latecomer and it isn't necessary (it is a more efficient way to get protein, but nothing more)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2332 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: Romans 14 was about total abstinence from food. Here is what Jerome said. CHURCH FATHERS: Against Jovinianus, Book I (Jerome) see section 18 1:18
quote: Here is the early church father (from the 2nd century!) Clement of Alexandria.
quote: Read on and you will see that he gives a reason for the Jews not eating pork that is not based on health issues. Clement also said (though not here) that Matthew was a vegetarian. I already quoted it in another thread.
quote: Vegetarians ever complain about this? Has a Hindu complained? Did the early Jewish Christians ever complain? I don't know. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2332 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: Reptiles from 65 million years ago are so like humans (uh huh). Reminds me of Dr. Michael Savage trying to tell people that it SHOULD be illegal to eat dogs. Callers kept calling up and arguing that "half the world lives on this stuff" and often China was used as an example. Savage was nearly exasperated at all the b.s. logic. "No matter what I say, [the responce is] 'just like China' , 'just like China'. People would say but "most of the world eats dogs", and Savage would respond, "I KNOW they do, but I'm saying they are barbarians". Anyway. CatSci made a statement that might be false anyway. Here is hit one on google when I type "apes meat eaters" into engine.
quote: Maybe we better start by looking at Mammals? Maybe we better start by looking at the last 20 million years or so? Maybe we better look at our ancestors from that period too? Maybe we better see what our bodies get from certain foods (like how much L Carn)? T-Rex is so so new age. WWJD? Ask James and the Jewish Christians from the first century. Even Catholics like Jerome and Clement of Alexandria agree with me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2332 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
I said, "Romans 14 was about total abstinence from food."
quote: Paul came down on a vegetarian conclusion. You are using his stated logic and teaching techniques as an excuse to disagree with his conclusion. You did the same thing with 1 Corinthians 8:10-13. Then when I was talking about Clement of Alexandria.
quote: It matters because the "health issue" for not eating pork is a modern invention. And you still have to deal with the fact that even the gentile European Christians (in the Roman Catholic orbit) disagree with you at times. There were still many Jewish Christians around who kept the knowledge of the strict 1st century vegetarian commands of Jesus, James, Paul, and the rest. The 1st century Jewish Christians (and the following centuries) were unanimous on meat being prohibited. It is clear when reading Paul as well. (though James and his followers were the most powerful reason for the unanimity on eating meat being strictly prohibited) (the reason for not eating meat was very very clear. The Temple destruction also meant the end of sacrifice in Jerusalem so NO MORE ANIMAL KILLING for sacrifice as well as the previous food ban) Amazing (and I do mean amazing) that even a 4th-5th century Roman Catholic like Jerome sees it. But he was a genuine scholar. That fact alone settles the issue.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2332 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Your post seems unconnected to this discussion.
As far as my posts are concerned, anyway. Re read what I typed, and pay close attention to the posts you read (which you think were my posts?).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2332 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: Look at the problem I have with about a half-dozen or so posters. I'm almost not allowed to talk about the vegetarian issues related to prophecy, the new covenant/testament, Jesus, and the Temple destruction. Never mind that all the Jewish Christians all saw them as very closely connected. Nevermind that the Roman Catholic scholar Jerome of the 5th century clearly saw it as connected. Nevermind Clement of Alexandria (essentially a Roman Catholic and a gentile for sure) saw the connection. I show that even the (almost pagan) Manicheans were strict vegetarians because of their connection to the Elkesaites (a 100/101 A.D. Jewish Christian sect that had features that connected them to the Jerusalem Jewish followers of James from 30-62 A.D. and then after that when they fled to Pella in TransJordan), and I get either blank stares or posts shouting at me because people can't connect dots. I'm never allowed to connect obvious dots.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024