How can Christians justify eating meat?

[Steve Petersen]

Then God said "I now give to you all the plants on the earth that yield seeds and all the trees whose fruit produces its seeds within it. These will be your food."

I take that to mean 'no.' So when exactly did God give man canine teeth?

 

[grasping the after wind]

I take that to mean 'no.' So when exactly did God give man canine teeth?

When he ate the apple. If he ate a steak we'd still be in paradise.

Yes I know it wasn't actually an apple. It was the forbidden fruit though not the forbidden meat. Serpent might have been a better entree.

 

[eckhart]

I wasn't aware that eating meat required some kind of justification. Does eating a plant need justifying as well? I am an omnivore. If you want me to justify what I am should you not, as a Christian, first justify what you are ? The whole speck in the eye thing.

If I say I eat meat because

1) I believe that plants have feelings that are as strong as animal's feelings but since animals can express themselves in ways that humans can relate to many assume that plants have no such feelings.
2) If I am willing to eat a plant and cause it to suffer for reasons of self preservation why would I not also be willing to do the same to an animal for the same reasons?
3) Many animals and some plants are very tasty others are not. Many plants and animals are poisonous. I would say one can morally eat all the tasty non poisonous food one can healthfully eat and one ought to refrain only from eating the poisonous food and cannibalism because that would be in direct violation of the idea of self preservation. The one as an individual the other as a group.

Why is that less reasonable than believing that plants , though they are living creatures just as surely as animals are, are in some way more morally acceptable as food?

Sorry if I am too strong with my view I'm not trying to put you down for what you eat, maybe I could be wrong and that is why I wanted other people to debate on this topic.
Plants do not have nervous systems ans differ in primary cells, they cannot feel pain, lets agree that type of pain is cutting some fruit from a tree, and they do not display any type of pain behaviour either when cut because they do not have pain receptors.
If you cut an animal, lets say a chicken's beak off, then it does feel pain.
This is what I disagree with, not you, but the ethics and process behind meat, now feel free to argue why it is ok for animals to feel pain in the process of meat conversion

 

[eckhart]

Isiah wrote about vegetarianism, I will get the passage, basically its about living like life in Eden with no sin or death

 

[Steve Petersen]

Sorry if I am too strong with my view I'm not trying to put you down for what you eat, maybe I could be wrong and that is why I wanted other people to debate on this topic.
Plants do not have nervous systems ans differ in primary cells, they cannot feel pain, lets agree that type of pain is cutting some fruit from a tree, and they do not display any type of pain behaviour either when cut because they do not have pain receptors.
If you cut an animal, lets say a chicken's beak off, then it does feel pain.
This is what I disagree with, not you, but the ethics and process behind meat, now feel free to argue why it is ok for animals to feel pain in the process of meat conversion

Because God authorized eating meat. Judaism has done what it could to reduce animal suffering during slaughter. There are pretty strict rules for a slaughter to be kosher.

 

[TheyCallMeDave]

I wasn't aware that eating meat required some kind of justification. Does eating a plant need justifying as well? I am an omnivore. If you want me to justify what I am should you not, as a Christian, first justify what you are ? The whole speck in the eye thing.

If I say I eat meat because

1) I believe that plants have feelings that are as strong as animal's feelings but since animals can express themselves in ways that humans can relate to many assume that plants have no such feelings.
2) If I am willing to eat a plant and cause it to suffer for reasons of self preservation why would I not also be willing to do the same to an animal for the same reasons?
3) Many animals and some plants are very tasty others are not. Many plants and animals are poisonous. I would say one can morally eat all the tasty non poisonous food one can healthfully eat and one ought to refrain only from eating the poisonous food and cannibalism because that would be in direct violation of the idea of self preservation. The one as an individual the other as a group.

Why is that less reasonable than believing that plants , though they are living creatures just as surely as animals are, are in some way more morally acceptable as food?

You can eat whatever you like and it wont offend God or be a problem to him ; its just that its wise to choose which foods to eat because they can have a positive or negative affect on our nutrition , circulatory system, and the major organs of our body .. plus obesity if we get lax.

 

[Rajni]

Then God said "I now give to you all the plants on the earth that yield seeds and all the trees whose fruit produces its seeds within it. These will be your food."

The bible seems to be pretty much all over the map on this one. It also says: "Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything." (Gen 9:3). Then there's Romans 14:2 that doesn't speak very highly about eating only vegetables, and 1 Timothy 4:3, which warns about people telling folks to abstain from certain foods.

I do think that the process in which meat is obtained could be a heck of a lot more humane, but that's because the problem actually lies with the methods of modern-day meat-production, not meat-eating.

 

[Miss Spaulding]

I am vegetarian, but my reasoning for not eating meat is simply because I don't like it. I've never liked meat, even as a child.

I believe there are certainly very good benefits to not eating meat, or switching to fish and chicken. And for those who choose not to eat meat in order to be healthier, I say good for them. However, there is absolutely nothing morally wrong in eating meat. Now, if you think it's wrong to eat meat because of the cruelty in slaughtering the animals (which, I agree, does go on), that's a whole different subject. ...Is this indeed about animal cruelty or is it about whether or not, in a spiritual/religious sense, is it right to eat it?

Anyway, I think it's extremely sad that there is animal cruelty going on in slaughtering animals for food (in the process of how it's done, not that they're even being killed in the first place), but there really are more important things in life to be concerned about, such as the murder of unborn children. If people like you, Evie, are willing to take such a stand about eating meat, than y'all sure as heck better take a bigger stand in ending abortion of babies. Humans have souls, animals do not.

 

[razeontherock]

I take that to mean 'no.' So when exactly did God give man canine teeth?

He didn't. Man took those from the dinosaurs

 

[razeontherock]

Serpent might have been a better entree.

ROFL

How can we insert the term "snake oil salesman" into this, anachronistically?

 

[razeontherock]

argue why it is ok for animals to feel pain in the process of meat conversion

God addresses this! Mosaic law specifically forbids chomping on live critters, and spells out humane slaughter. Animals with pain receptors will die sometime and when they do, they will feed a LOT of ecosystem, somewhere along the food chain.

Why not us? Balance of power, and all that.

Also, the sacrificial death of Christ is foretold in Genesis. Upon booting them out of Eden, God performed a sacrifice, showing them how to do it, and the really important part, restoring fellowship to the limited degree the blood of bulls and goats could achieve. This is how A & E got their clothes, made out of animal skins, that God provided for them. All these details are GREATLY important, in the process of God restoring His relationship with mankind.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Great point. God killed the first animal.

 

[eckhart]

I agree with these agruments, there is no fault in the Genesis account. Sadly this type of lifestyle, the animal living a good life free from suffering and dying naturally or being sacrificed by God for use of fur was needed for that time, and had no other effect on the earth at that time.
I dont understand where to draw the line on this topic, its ok if you raised an animal on your farm and let it live freely, and it died of old age, and then you used it. In reality that scenario doesnt happen much, which is very much like the Biblical accounts used.
Infact I wish we could go back to this lifestyle of producing and consuming our own food but it couldnt work, not for six billion of us

 

[ebia]

The bible seems to be pretty much all over the map on this one. It also says: "Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything." (Gen 9:3).

The clear implication being that the rules change at that point in the story. By implication that's a concession to the corrupted state of things, not the original intent.

 

[Rajni]

The clear implication being that the rules change at that point in the story. By implication that's a concession to the corrupted state of things, not the original intent.

Perhaps, though when dealing with the divine intent of an Omniscient God, it's not quite a "didn't-see-that-coming" sort of thing. Intent on God's part would take everything into consideration, from beginning to end, before He began it. Therefore, if He didn't intend for something to happen, it wouldn't have happened.

 

[ebia]

Perhaps, though when dealing with the divine intent of an Omniscient God, it's not quite a "didn't-see-that-coming" sort of thing. Intent on God's part would take everything into consideration, from beginning to end, before He began it. Therefore, if He didn't intend for something to happen, it wouldn't have happened.

I don't agree. Intent doesn't imply "is always going to happen". But that's irrelevant to the point: God's ideal in Genesis 1 is vegetarian. Meat eating in Genesis 9 is a concession for a fallen world. We are a people called to love in a fallen world in a way that anticipates its full restoration.

 

[quatona]

(I think this is more of a personal conviction rather than a religious one.)

What's the difference?

When the question is "How can Christians justify eating meat?" (emphasis added) the difference is clearly in the approach to answering the question.
Ordinary pedestrians like me would simply give their reasons for or against eating meat while Christians (when asked to give Christian answers) would have to answer from the Christian doctrine of their choice which supposedly is founded in their Holy Book.

 

[razeontherock]

Quatona:

and yet, you see Christians with convictions on both sides of this issue. You even see the Bible address this very fact, telling us how to get along, in view of the potential difficulties.

So Ebia's point has merit: it's a personal conviction (and possibly preference, and possibly metabolic / digestive differences come into play)

 

[quatona]

Quatona:

and yet, you see Christians with convictions on both sides of this issue.

Sure. I see that all the time, on pretty much every issue.
Doesn´t change the fact that the question - as has been asked - demanded a different approach than the question "How do you justify eating meat?" would have done.
If you want to make the point that arguments form biblical doctrine and arguments from personal conviction are indistinguishable criteria, ok. I certainly won´t dispute that. If we´d all agree on that discussion would be much easier: We could simply leave the bible out of it.

 

[eckhart]

As a Christian I have a concern for the future human beings on this planet. Being faithful to my brothers an sisters in Christ, who I love as myself, means making sure that they live in a world that is sustainable and not clouded by environmental damage and problem.
And that means that faithfulness to the human race, as everyone has a future with God, brings with it the faithfulness to the material environment in which we live.(and God made for us out of love).
We can't be faithful to each other without a care for the natural world which we are part of.
At present there is irreversible damage and degeneration of the environment, of many the destruction of rainforests (to grow grain to feed livestock farms and cheaper mcdonald containers), and so on, take it for granted that the human future is part of the planets future.
This crosses over into the animal world, disappearance of species, experimentation on live animals, factory farming and so on, assume that our practical interests aren't engaged. Its an indifference to the rest of creation that corrupts our own human morality