Since God sees everything from the beginning to the end, He knew we were going to, He knew He was going to give us permission, He made our bodies able to digest it, so maybe he did design us from the beginning to be able to eat meat.
But you are not disagreeing with me, you are disagreeing with Scripture, Gods words, not mine. My only suggestion is to just read and learn for your self what Gods words really say.
I will not keep repeating why you are making logical errors if you will stop telling me to read for myself even though I have said repeatedly that I have.
I will not keep repeating why you are making logical errors if you will stop telling me to read for myself even though I have said repeatedly that I have.
um, hard to make logical errors when just stating scriptures, being God's infallible word and you didn't say you had read the Bible, you said you went to school. That is not taking the time read His word and become intimate with Him, forming your own personal relationship with him.
Designed to eat meat? Well, I think we were. God's design? As a Christian, I would also say yes - we were designed by God (and perhaps evolution) as omnivores.
Personally, I don't know that I see a discrepancy between Christianity and evolution. I don't know whether Genesis is a historically biographical account of two actual human beings named Adam and Eve - or whether Genesis is an allegory for evolution of man from beast to human and the transition from hunter/gatherer to farmer (I read a very compelling argument of the latter by Jewish Rabbi Harold S. Kushner titled How Good Do We Have to Be? A New Understanding of Guilt and Forgiveness (He also wrote the book When Bad Things Happen to Good People).
To discount evolution entirely, makes it very difficult to understand the fossil record (intelligent design is a compromise position - a God-guided evolution).
All I can say personally, is that I don't know - but I find it interesting that intelligence in the animal kindgdom is associated with meat eating. Fat fuels brain development, and one of the prevailing theories of human development is that human intelligence as we understand it, developed only after hominids were able to include more meat in their diet.
Whethere it is still needed (particularly as we have the technology to extract vegetable oils) is another question.
Having a personal relationship with God, doesn't mean that I can necessarily understand God's will, or God's design - but I do have to think that if eating animal protein was inherently wrong - it doesn't explain the existence of predators.
There's an Inuit proverb, "The caribou feeds the wolf, but it is the wolf who keeps the caribou strong."
I think it reflects the idea of stewardship, we have to ask ourselves whether our actions are keeping the animals we care for strong, or is it making them weaker (and ourselves weaker as a result, perhaps).
I used to view predation as a necessary evil (the lion has to eat), but it's a much more reciprical relationship than that. Wild animals don't die quickly and painlessly, they die slowly and/or brutally. Often they're alive for much of the time they're being consumed. They die of illness, injury, bacterial infection, starvation, and interspecies as well as intra species conflict (taking human intervention out of the equation 60 to 70% of wolf deaths can be attributed to other wolves). And it's not just the predators, the hebivores have to be just as brutal to survive. The "gentle, peaceful" creature is often a myth. One of the most aggressive, dangerous animals on the planet was thought to be an herbivore (the hippo), but recently scientists have learned that hippos do enjoy meat when they can get it.
Maybe humans are supposed to evolve (physically or spiritually) to a meat-free diet, but I don't think it's a foregone conclusion. I don't think that meat eating is "obviously" the less ethical choice (in fact to say that, I think implies that predators are "lesser" creatures than herbivores). Shouldn't intelligence make the difference? Maybe not, since there's at least some evidence that meat eating can claim some of the credit for the intelligence.
I think on both sides of the argument, each side tends to think they have the "obviously" correct perspective. Sometimes I suspect that often when someone says "I respect you're opinion, but I disagree," there's a lot more disagreement than respect - and I suspect that some of that is to be expected.
After all, it's a very fundamental difference of belief. I used to believe that you couldn't love animals much if you were a hunter, and then I moved to Wisconsin (where it seems everyone hunts - I was shocked to learn that every one of my doctors are hunters). I have to say that I've never met more people who love and understand wild animals and their local ecosystem any better. It was the hunters who were thrilled that wolves have returned to Marathon County (I believe only one pack, I've been trying to learn more, as wolves are my favorite non-human animal on the planet).
Even "agreeing to disagree" isn't much of an option when people belief ethics and morals are involved. If you believe something very strongly (ethically), it's hard to find a comfortable middle-ground with a person who holds the opposite belief. Especially since the middle-ground can seem like a complete compromising of principles.
Of course I understand that some folks will consider my choice to eat meat (whether it's locally and humanely grown or not) to be immoral. I understand, and I am sympathetic - but since I disagree, I will continue to eat meat - according to my own conscience.
Hubby and I recently learned that there are some truly old-fashioned farms in our area that raise small numbers of truly free-range animals. They're not even expensive (because they're not promoting themselves). They're really a hidden treasure in the community, that the majority overlook, because they're southeast asian families, primarily selling to other southeast asian families (mostly Hmong).
To the community, they would be considered "hobby farms," but this isn't these people's hobby, it's their livlihood. They also have a food philosophy of letting nothing go to waste, so every part of the animal (or plant, for that matter) is eaten.
Often we think "I couldn't live that way," when we really mean "I won't live that way." And I'm not even saying it's alway wrong, but I think understanding that we do have a choice, is important no matter what that choice is.
Hmmmm
Thought this was an interesting thread of food...till I got to the 2nd page.
Maybe this thread would be more appropriate in the christain forum
My own experience with vegetarianism has been far less dramatic.
I think every body, as in the actual body requires different things. The same way I don't eat something when a friend says they're hungry. I can only eat when I'm hungry. It doesn't make sense to do what others do, you have to do what feels right for you.
Personally, I was never a meat fan, or milk and eggs for that matter. As I became an adult, and started cooking for myself, I naturally cooked foods I liked, which includes less and less meat.
I will say that I was a fat vegetarian, and now I'm a thinner one. My feeling better and healthier is probably due to losing weight by eating less sugar and almost no restaurant food (used to eat out almost every meal).
We all gained weight for different reason, and the changes we make to be healthier will not be the same
I also hate using food labels, can't we all just be people that eat food, different kinds at different times.
Do your own research (this thread does not count as research-this thread is like asking the best way to get to xyz in new york, 20 people arguing to the death about different ways to get to the same place)
....but....
