Why God Said Eat Meat

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
there was only noah and his family. and just a handful of animals. i believe god could have postponed making noah eat the few animals left and make the tigers and the wolves themselves carnivores. that if indeed all the animals before the flood only ate vegetation. including the t-rexes. and sabretooth tigers. and raptors. who had razor sharp teeth to kill the elusive plants.

It does seem strange that the sabretooth tiger would have such teeth
if they also were only eating vegetation before the flood. I wonder
when did they become extinct. Was it before or after the flood?

Though God commanded man to eat meat He forbade man to eat blood. I will not trace all the passeges on this now. But the abstenance from eating blood is throughout BOTH the Old Testament and the New Testament. Eating of blood is always spoken against except in one and only one case. That is eating of the blood of Jesus Christ figuratively.

You will have to take my word for it for the moment that abstenance from blood eating is NEVER lifted even in the New Testament. That point is not too important to me as what BLOOD the people of God are told they must eat. Christ's blood, symbolically.

Blood is not to be taken in the dispensation of the patriarchs, the dispensation of the law, or the dispensation of grace.

Jesus said to eat His flesh and drink His blood though. In John chapter 6 Jesus came saying He was the bread of life. He said His flesh was true food and His blood was true drink. Jesus repeated over and over again in John 6 that His bnlood wasa the true drink and that man must drink His blood in order to have life.

Jesus said those who drink His blood will be raised up in the last day and will receive life from Him. He repeated this teaching until many of His disciples couldn't take it anymore and left following Him.

Where are we now? Man may eat meat. Man may not eat blood. The Son of God commands His believers to eat His flesh and even drink His blood. What does this mean ?

The ordinance regarding abstinence from blood tells us taht there is only ONE redemption and ONE salvation. We cannot have another redemption besides the one God has provided. ONLY the blood of Jesus Christ can be taken (in a symbol).

All other blood is forbidden to eat. Christ's blood, He teaches us, is however, true drink. Those who drink His blood will live and will be raised up in resurrection on the last day. Only the blood of Jesus God tells man, he must drink.

This drinking of the blood of Jesus is not actual. It is symbolic. Christ teaches this Himself in John chapter 6. It is the Spirit that gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that He speaks are spirit and are life. He is saying His WORD is the way we take Him in as food.

If we believe into Christ, if we take His word into our hearts, we also benefit from taking the shed blood of Jesus. There is no salvation to man apart from the shed blood of Jesus. So ONLY His blood, does the Bible say, drink ... eat.

The blood of Christ signifies His redemption. All other blood is forbidden. His blood signifies salvation. There is one kind of blood for the believer, Christ's blood. Only Christ's blood can save the sinner. And I as a Christian will not accept any otherblood. We reject any other salvation.

By not taking other blood, the saved man makes a stong testimony before men. We do not take other blood because we have taken one kind of blood. We have taken this blood of the Son of God for redemption. we can no longer accept any other "redemption".

We refuse to consider reincarnation. There is no divine redemption there. This is why I eat meat but not any blood. It is of spiritual significance at its core. Only Christ's salvation is salvation. Only Christ's redemption is God's redemption. And only the blood of Jesus Christ can cleanse us from all sins that we may be saved unto eternal life.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
however don't you think its highly illogical that the human race survives for some hundreds of years on weed, noah's family and all the animals eat only weeds on the ark then after the whole shebang is over, they are to start eating meat all of a sudden? instead of waiting for the populations of the animals to be replenished? and 7 pairs of clean anima ...[text shortened]... ing for meat right then? and the tigers wouldn't abstain to only eat the eggs of the birds.

I am not convinced that all animals God created were vegetarians.
It just does not make sense.

Originally posted by jaywill
Though God commanded man to eat meat He forbade man to eat blood. I will not trace all the passeges on this now. But the abstenance from eating blood is throughout BOTH the Old Testament and the New Testament. Eating of blood is always spoken against except in one and only one case. That is eating of the blood of Jesus Christ figuratively.

You will hav ...[text shortened]... d of Jesus Christ can cleanse us from all sins that we may be saved unto eternal life.

Blood does not save persons who sin.

If you want to be saved from taking birth in this world of suffering you must raise the consciousness to a level where you do not desire to sin and therefore do not sin.

All the blood in China will not raise the consciousness.

You must raise the consciousness to the platform of love of God, and you do this by embracing transcendental knowledge.

The Bible is devoid of transcendental knowledge because it was compiled by the meat eaters for the meat eaters and these persons were in ignorance.

They were so ignorant and deceitful they turned a man in to God.

And to have emotional control over the people they said this man/god suffered terribly for you on a cross so you better pay him back for that and join our church.

God cannot suffer.

God never suffers.

To say God suffers is absurd.

Originally posted by Dasa
Blood does not save persons who sin.

If you want to be saved from taking birth in this world of suffering you must raise the consciousness to a level where you do not desire to sin and therefore do not sin.

All the blood in China will not raise the consciousness.

You must raise the consciousness to the platform of love of God, and you do this by embrac ...[text shortened]... nd join our church.

God cannot suffer.

God never suffers.

To say God suffers is absurd.

====================================
Blood does not save persons who sin.
===============================

The BLOOD signifies that Judgment has taken place on the sinner's behalf.

IF you do not realize that you DESERVE to be judged by God you will not realize the meaning of the blood of His death for you.

Only because you have been JUDGED in Christ, on His cross, by substitution, can you and will you be reconciled to God.

==========================
If you want to be saved from taking birth in this world of suffering you must raise the consciousness to a level where you do not desire to sin and therefore do not sin.
====================================

Suffering is secondary. If I had a HAPPY life or if I had a SUFFERING life, I am a transgressor against the law of God.

Maybe I am a non-suffering, happy-go-lucky sinner. I am still a sinner. The cross of Christ is the place where the Son of God suffered the judgment of God on my behalf for my sins - even my happy sins.

=========================
All the blood in China will not raise the consciousness.
=========================

I don't know what you meant by this. I have no comment.

================================
You must raise the consciousness to the platform of love of God, and you do this by embracing transcendental knowledge.
====================================

If God were to reveal Himself to you the shock of the difference between His righteousness and holiness and your sinfulness would probably shock you to death.

We are being warned BEFOREHAND. We need to be reconciled to God through the redemption of His Son.

The righteousness of God in this case is like a Hydrogen Bomb. The redemption of Jesus Christ is like a effective bomb shelter.

We simply have no idea WHO we are dealing with. We are dealing with PERFECT. And we sinners need the redemption accomplished by the Son of God.

Now I have to go. Cannot debate anymore now.

Originally posted by jaywill
Though God commanded man to eat meat He forbade man to eat blood. I will not trace all the passeges on this now. But the abstenance from eating blood is throughout BOTH the Old Testament and the New Testament. Eating of blood is always spoken against except in one and only one case. That is eating of the blood of Jesus Christ figuratively.

You will hav ...[text shortened]... d of Jesus Christ can cleanse us from all sins that we may be saved unto eternal life.

No black pudding then eh? Unlucky...

Originally posted by Doward
I largley think the Noah story is not meant to be read literally, but offered the information for clarification purposes

of course. however, when i try to debate something with a fundie, i find it is a waste of time to bring all the yucky science into question. the facts contradicting a global flood are so many as to form a book in themselves and the fundies will ignore each and every one of them. geological data, the imposibility of an arc to hold that many animals, the logistics needed to bring koalas and so on at the arc, the special diets many animals would need, they will all be dismissed by fundies with a minimum of an effort.


instead of using the yucky science, i try to use the bible when dealing with the fundies. and the bible has holes when it comes to these stories. big ones. i only need to show them and have my point made.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It does seem strange that the sabretooth tiger would have such teeth
if they also were only eating vegetation before the flood. I wonder
when did they become extinct. Was it before or after the flood?

well they went extinct before but i am not allowed to bring carbon dating into discussion on this forum.

so let's try and figure it out just using the bible, shall we?


before the flood there is no mention of any animal going extinct, right? and you claim all the animals were vegetarians before the flood, including humans, right?

so either the dinosaurs and the sabretooths were brought on the ark and then got extinct after or they died because of the flood.
the first one seems unlikely, why would god bring them on the ark just to let them go extinct afterwards?

if the latter, then why didn't the dinosaurs get on the ark? it says in the bible god instructed noah to take from EVERY species of the earth, including creeping things and birds. why weren't the dinos included? also it results from this that the sabretooth got extinct as a vegetarian. meaning he had those teeth made for ripping flesh while he ate vegetables.








doesn't anything from the above sound stupid to you? none at all?i know that you believe the bible is the ultimate truth but isn't it a bit arrogant of you to claim to understand it without flaw? or even the ones inspired to write it? what if they misunderstood god's word? or the ones who translated it?

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am not convinced that all animals God created were vegetarians.
It just does not make sense.

i can't keep track of everything fundamentalists believe to make the genesis fit with things not even you can ignore.


so ok, you don't believe god created all creatures to be vegetarians. which is sensible, the ecosystem would probably not survive if all animals were grass eaters.

then we must ask what did the meat eating tigers and wolves eat on the ark? did they bring dead cows as well? meat couldn't survive that long in those days.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html lists all the problems. among them, the fact that some snakes need the prey to be moving to aid digestion, that aphids cannot eat anything but fresh plants, koalas need eucalyptus leaves, and so on.

Originally posted by Dasa
The Bible has been fashioned by the meat eaters for the meat eaters.

Of course, I see it now; why didn't I see this revelatory wisdom before?

The Bible was indeed contrived down the centuries; but not through the machinations of manipulative men looking to control the masses, no, it was the carnivores who were looking for a clear conscience to eat steak!

Flip the record mate.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i can't keep track of everything fundamentalists believe to make the genesis fit with things not even you can ignore.


so ok, you don't believe god created all creatures to be vegetarians. which is sensible, the ecosystem would probably not survive if all animals were grass eaters.

then we must ask what did the meat eating tigers and wolves ...[text shortened]... , that aphids cannot eat anything but fresh plants, koalas need eucalyptus leaves, and so on.

So you didn't know there were really 10,000 arks? Noah could not have been expected to carry 2 of EVERY beast so the job was split among the 10,000 arks. God assigned each one a different set of species and the food that would last 40 days and 40 nights.

That part of the bible got lost during the flood, the missing chapter........

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
No black pudding then eh? Unlucky...

* Laughter *
* Applause *

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i can't keep track of everything fundamentalists believe to make the genesis fit with things not even you can ignore.


so ok, you don't believe god created all creatures to be vegetarians. which is sensible, the ecosystem would probably not survive if all animals were grass eaters.

then we must ask what did the meat eating tigers and wolves , that aphids cannot eat anything but fresh plants, koalas need eucalyptus leaves, and so on.

Since they were baby tigers and wolves, they were probably given cows or
goats milk and many of of the animals would become dormat and hibernate
or brumate at times, therefore needing less food. I believe with God's help,
all the problems could be overcome because the Holy Bible says all things
are possible with God.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So you didn't know there were really 10,000 arks? Noah could not have been expected to carry 2 of EVERY beast so the job was split among the 10,000 arks. God assigned each one a different set of species and the food that would last 40 days and 40 nights.

That part of the bible got lost during the flood, the missing chapter........

You could be right because the writers of the Holy Bible only
wrote about the world they knew. They certainly did not know
about the Americas and there was no need for God to tell them.

Originally posted by jaywill
The first humans were instructed to eat vegetation. Latter after the flood of Noah God expanded the human diet to include meat. This thread will discuss some of that matter.

First, here we see God telling His created man to eat vegetation:

[b]"And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth and ...[text shortened]... commanded now to include meat in his eating. The theological significance I will discuss.

You know, it's impossible to eat meat without eating the blood, which cooks right in the flesh.