4 ms·
Sure, but GP was talking about religion. I've never heard of a religion encouraging its followers to eat meat. The biggest ones generally discourage at least so
by CivBase 3y ago
Sure, but GP was talking about religion. I've never heard of a religion encouraging its followers to eat meat. The biggest ones generally discourage at least some kinds of meat.
- adyashakti 3y agochristian evangelists propagandise meat-eating in historically vegetarian countries like india. in fact they sponsor large feasts featuring meat dishes, invest in slaughterhouses etc.
- Kamq 3y agoMy understanding is that people avoiding meat is considered a sign of the endtimes (along with people leaving the faith and avoiding marriage). At least that's my reading of 1 Timothy 4:3
- anonzzzies 3y agoDon’t think Christianity does? And if creatures of god, with consciousness, should it not be all or nothing? Not just some? And for the wrong reasons (pigs are not ‘clean’). Still don’t see why we cannot eat humans if we can eat pigs. What’s the diff? I know many humans dumber than my dogs or pig. Outside religion and humans having more power (aka law), what’s the moral difference?
- luxuryballs 3y agoGenesis 9:2-6 NIV [2] The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands. [3] Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything. [4] “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. [5] And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each human being, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another human being. [6] “Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind.
- 000ooo000 3y agoI'm responding to 'what is the implication' in the suggestion that people would otherwise have accepted animals as conscious centuries ago, if not for 'the implication'. My read of those parts of the conversation is that they have nothing to do with religion, and so I'm not responding to any religious element of the thread.
- explaininjs 3y agoThe god of Moses says that man has dominion over all animals. Can’t get much more primal than Genesis 1.
- brnaftr361 3y agoI have dominion over all my possessions, but I treat them with respect. In like manner when given authority over people, I treat them with dignity and respect. I can't imagine the spirit of such words carries with it the grotesqueries and indignities we're wont to inflict on our fellow sufferers. Nor for that matter the free reign over our environment. Instead I would espouse that the spirit is the maintenance of their well-being. As might a parent, or a landowner with some interest in his lot.
- explaininjs 3y agoThe original Hebrew word is רָדָה (radah), you can see all the other times it is used in the Bible here, which should aid in understanding its meaning and potential nuance: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_7287.htm https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_7287.htm
- ristlane 3y agoFor what it's worth, Genesis doesn't specifically mention eating meat until after the fall. Genesis 1 says "I have given you every plant yielding seed ... and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food." Likewise to the animals, "I have given every green plant for food."
- ftxbro 3y agowait what if eating gods tasty animals in eden was the original sin
- ThrowAway1922A 3y agoIt would be a much more interesting story if that were the original sin.