Salem's Deer Hunter Service Sermon, Notes on Solomon's Song
Read the article this discussion is about
- H2O
- H2O
-
Joy Butler
-
Joy Butler
- reddeer20
-
Joy Butler
- H2O
-
Joy Butler
- H2O
- H2O
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
« Previous 1 2 Next »
» H2O - Re: Re: Re: Re: Is it wrong to hunt?
In response to message posted by JButler:Interesting that Romans 14 comes up. Paul writes: "One, indeed, believes he may eat all things; but the weak eats vegetables alone." (Romans 14:2).
Reading the page on Peter and his vision in Acts--how did the author come to the conclusion that this was a test from God that Peter passed because he didn't "kill and eat?" Whenever someone passes a "test" by God in Scripture, God tells them they did well. In Peter's case, God rebukes Peter and tells him not to consider unclean what he has made clean. Does a loving God rebuke those who do right?
Dietary concerns fall under "adiaphora." It is neither commanded nor forbidden what we must eat and what we must not eat. I respect your right to eat only vegetables. It is also my Christian freedom to eat meat in moderation. (Hey, all those thick juicy steaks and quarter pounders DO take their toll.)
Ultimately, if one holds to the belief that eating meat is wrong, our salvation is seriously compromised. Two situations raise serious questions, then, about our salvation and God being just and fair:
1) If eating meat is wrong, Jesus then sinned. His death on Calvary is not a sacrifice but just another death, because God decreed that the blood of a righteous person must be shed for the payment of all sin (original sin and individual sin; venal and mortal sin). Jesus ate meat. He ate it after his resurrection. He ate lamb every Passover (as it was proscribed in Exodus). Yes, he even roasted fish for his disciples after his resurrection! (John 21:13)
2. God proscribed that the Israelites celebrate the Passover every year with a lamb. This was to commemorate the lambs ate the last night in Egypt. God also proscribed the killing of animals in the sacrifices--some of the meat eaten by the congregated people (fellowship offerings, or potluck to today's Lutherans) and some used as the pay for the Levites (sin offering). If eating meat is wrong and very much against God's plan, why does he make it a central part of his worship? Or was this an on-going test that generation after generation of believers failed?
3. The fact that "unclean" animals are called out as prohibited to be eaten by Old Testament believers reasons that animals considered clean were permitted--and God states as much in Leviticus 11 ("you may eat...; you may not eat...").
john
-- posted by H2O
» H2O - Are there dietary concerns at play?
A pastor responded thus to the debate:> I am always curious about folks who feel a need to
> take a tragic absolute line on certain issues. In
> regard to eating meat - what does this person have
> to say to a person like me who would become
> dangerously ill if I do not eat meat. I tried at one
> time to curb my intake of red meat and other food
> and became very ill. This was when I was first
> introduced to the research on eating right for your
> blood type. There is a book now with that same name.
> I have informally interviewed folks who are
> vegetarian of many different stripes and am amused
> when every single one had the blood type 'AB' -
> which according to this research should avoid red
> meat.
>
> I take this then and look at the biblical witness
> and am encouraged and the radicalness of God to give
> us a variety of stories that support who we are as
> created creatures.
>
> I take the line that there is only one absolute in
> the world - at the resides in the one Jesus Christ!
Does anyone else know anything about this? Does blood type play a role in what our dietary concerns should be?
john
-- posted by H2O
»
Joy Butler
- Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is it wrong to hunt?
Addressing your first sentence, I believe rational thought, as I've already pointed out, would accept "all things" to mean "all food things" and, according to Genesis 1:29, animal flesh is not included. We must approach this from God's mindset. Many people approach Scripture from the viewpoint of what they have always accepted and do not open their heart to God's real message.
Concerning Peter's vision, you can't take a few words out of context and get an accurate meaning. If you read the entire passage from Acts 10:1 to 11:18 you will find the answer to your question in Acts 10:28 and in Acts 1:18. God was talking about humans and was not rebuking Peter, but using the vision to get the message across that he has granted repentance to the Gentiles.
Our salvation is not in jeopardy. Jesus was without sin. His death atones for us. As I've said before, there are language distortions, perhaps unintentional by interpreters who casually accepted meat eating, that make it appear that he ate meat but there is strong evidence that Jesus did not. I've already sent links explaining that in greater detail. You say that if he ate meat, he was not perfect but I say that if Jesus was perfect he could not have supported animal suffering.
And as I've also said before, the sacrifices were instituted AFTER a fallen world. God's desire is for all creation to have peace (Isaiah 11:6-9) and sent Jesus to provide for that. It is not a Christian freedom to inflict harm on feeling animals. God is love.
Though some of this is repetition, and probably futile, I have addressed all your questions and comments. I am still waiting for answers to my questions in a previous post.
-- posted by Joy Butler
»
Joy Butler
- Re: Are there dietary concerns at play?
Curiosity usually precedes understanding so I am encouraged. I grant that vegetarians must carefully choose a variety of foods in order to cover all nutritional requirements and some people with certain health problems may need to look into supplements or medication, but I very seriously doubt that anyone becomes ill from not eating meat.
I've read some of the controversy about eating for your blood type. I haven't seen any scientific evidence that this is true. Our bodies are much more complicated than to be fit into several blood groups and this theory excludes too many other factors.
Incidentally, I happen to know at least two vegetarians that are not type AB.
-- posted by Joy Butler
-- posted by Joy Butler
» H2O - Some passages to consider
Your take on Genesis 3:21?2 Timothy 2:14--quarreling about words, which seems to be what this has become. Probably the greatest tool the devil uses are these little books telling the layperson what the Greek words are. There is no study of the language or the use of the words in their culture. I heartily recommend a set of Kittel's "Theological Dictionary of the New Testament" which looks at word usage in classical Greek, koine Greek, and the Septuagint. Remember, God uses the language of the common person to speak to the common person.
A pastor friend's wife (a therapist) states that God is not "passive-aggresive." A passive-aggresive will passively accept things until the pressure forces an explosion. As there are NO clear Scriptures *against* eating meat--and in fact Paul calls those who "eat only vegetables" as "weak" (see above), but we must *infer* that eating meat is wrong, then God must be considered "passive-aggressive." Ever live with a passive-aggressive? You kind of walk on eggs trying to avoid the aggressive stages. Not a very "loving" picture of God, is it? The fact is, eating meat was very common in Paul's day, in New Testament times, and was part and parcel of Jewish society. Jesus as the Good Shepherd knows that sheep not only provide wool, they also provide meat--meat which Jesus ate at the Passover as decreed by his own Father on Mount Sinai (Exodus 12:4; Leviticus 23:4,5; Deuteronomy 16:2,3). Obviously, Jesus had to eat the lamb to fulfill the Passover. He ate meat.
Incidently, the Old Testament uses the term "fat"--not a term one finds in use among plants.
Deueronomy 14 lists the animals God's people could and could not eat. Animals are stated as which could be eaten and which couldn't be.
Ultimately, Satan loves these debates. How many times has the subject of our salvation come up in these debates? As long as we argue and debate what we must or must not or can or cannot do, our focus on Christ's sacrifice is lost and we bind ourselves with the laws of men. There is *no* clear prohibition against eating meat in Scripture--and some clear verses that encourage such eating. But that doesn't mean one doesn't have the freedom to choose to abstain from eating meat. It is a Christian freedom! Daniel exercised this freedom when in training for Nebuchadnezzar's court--as well as staying true to his faith.
I'd also like to speak on the phrase "a loving God" or "a God of love." Why is it when I read/hear those words I cringe? Usually something following such a phrase will be something that is reasoned as an action of a "loving God" to deny what God has clearly stated in Scripture or to promote an opinion of something not spoken of in Scripture. A loving God demands perfection. A loving God states explicitly how to obtain perfection. A loving God sees sinful human beings and loves them anyway. A loving God sent his Son to earth to live among us, be tempted as we are all tempted, to eat and drink with us not only broccoli and herbs but lamb and wine. A loving God sent his Son to die as payment for our sins, raised his Son from death to assure each of us of our eternal life, and has elevated his Son to be ruler over the universe.
john
-- posted by H2O
»
Joy Butler
- Re: Some passages to consider
Thank you for addressing my questions, but frankly, your passive-aggressive paragraph made little sense to me in the context of this discussion.
I do not cringe when I hear the term, "a loving God", nor do I apologize for using it because I'm so thankful that it's true. Let me try to explain again. In the beginning, a loving God created a peaceful and perfect world, where there was no human or animal death, or suffering, and where animals were not intended as food (Gen 1:29). When sin entered that world, all suffering and strife, that we still have even today, entered with it. Our sin caused animal sacrifices to be necessary at one time. The key here is that sin caused it. But God loved the world so much that He sent His Son to die to pay for our sin, so that we all might have everlasting life. After Jesus' death, our debt was paid in full and sacrifices were no longer necessary. Let me use an example. A person with a perfect body does not desire surgery (God did not desire animal sacrifice or the death of His Son). But let's say a tumor is found invading that body. The person then "wants" surgery to remove it. I'm sure this person would be "pleased" to have surgery, though not with the surgery per se, but with the removal of the tumor.
God is no respector of persons. He speaks to the lay person and the rocket scientist alike. Love, compassion, wisdom, and salvation are all found in the heart, not in a textbook or in seminary.
I still hold fast to the belief that our loving God desires perfect peace for all, as He created it in the beginning, and as He will bring about again one day. We pray, "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven."
I do not consider this an argument of cans and cannots, but my honest attempt to protect the defenseless, just as many rightfully attempt to protect unborn babies. Killing unborn babies is not a Christian freedom and neither is killing animals. This was never meant to be a quarrel and I'm sorry that you consider it such. My seeds are planted and, unless someone is interested in hearing more, I will stop responding.
-- posted by Joy Butler
» H2O - Re: Re: Some passages to consider
In response to message posted by JButler:Joy:
I just want to thank you for raising this topic--and forcing me back into the Bible and doing study. As always, I believe the Christian's focus ought to be on the Lamb who was slain who now reigns on high. And certainly the Greek doesn't explicitly state "meat" in the New Testament. I do question, however, why the sites you cited quote the King James Version? Anyway, I hope that this dialogue has been educational for all involved.
john
-- posted by H2O
» H2O - Another word...
1 Timothy 4Instructions to Timothy
1The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. 2Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. 3They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. 4For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.
-- posted by H2O
« Previous 1 2 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.