Biblical view on Cannibalism

[redleghunter]

I don't know about that, but the agreement was God would want them to survive at all costs, even if that requires cannibilism. (Of course they did not have Bibles to verify this.)

That sort of rationalization leads to all sorts of things God never signed up to do.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Wishing to kill someone is murder in the heart, per Jesus. So, a desire to, uh, consume someone would be a sort of lust to murder. The act is merely a literal consummation. Ugh.

Murder is just the act of killing someone. Eating a human is not killing him because he is already dead.

Now wishing to kill someone for your consumption is another matter.

 

[GodLovesCats]

That sort of rationalization leads to all sorts of things God never signed up to do.

Examples?

 

[GenemZ]

If people can provide where it says explicitly in scripture not to eat another man post it here. Thanks!

God explicity tells man what He has given man for food.

Before the flood? Plants.

After the flood? God then adds animals to the list. (Genesis 9:1-3)

Nowhere does God state man was to be used as food.

 

[Toro]

Eating a person, even for "survival" is justification. It is man leaning upon mans understanding and man's justification.

If there were no women on an island.. does it suddenly become okay for man to be joined with man?

Its not the same topic, but it is the same logic.

You say "God would want me to survive at all cost" yet we are warned to not worry about what can kill the flesh, instead to fear He who can destroy body and soul.

IF physical, fleshly life were the end all be all... then why does the Lord encourage us to foresake it... even HATE this life in comparison to the Spiritual eternal life that is to come.

Did God not provide for the Israelites?
Did God allow Christ to starve?
Are we to live on bread alone?

Its easy as humans to lean upon our understanding and justify it by our standards, rather than Gods standards... but... who has more authority to judge correctly.. God.. or man?

Again, if God wanted someone to survive at all cost.... could He NOT provide that which He DOES allow for consumption to be provided WITHOUT there being ANY weight placed on the conscience.

Would Jesus have sinned IF He had turned the stone to bread? After all, He had the power to do so... yet, He valued obedience to the Father over obedience to the stomach. The devil tempted Him to eat..... the Father didbt tell Him to do so... so He denied temptation and said man shall not live on bread alone, but every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

 

[GenemZ]

One of the reasons i feel kind of squicky about Christianity is because of the cannibalism aspect. Communion rituals. The idea of pretending to eat jesus’ flesh and blood is revolting

That's the same kind of misunderstanding all the false disciples had when they took off after Jesus stated they must eat his flesh and drink his blood. (John 6:66)

Jesus explicitly said that his words were "spiritual." Not to be taken in a temporal, worldly, literal sense. He did it on purpose! The expose the phony religious types!

By being not able to discern Jesus himself... His words lead certain souls to a brick wall at an end of a one way, dead-end street. Jesus wanted them there!

When Jesus stated that one must eat his flesh and drink his blood? He was knowing that many would misunderstand him and follow him no more.

He did that because many false/religious types who had been following him were seeking works to do that they must do to inherit eternal life. These "religious" Jews were puppets of the pharisee's way of teaching.

So? Jesus knowing they were seeking not faith? But seeking some works to do to be saved? Gave them what appeared to be an impossible work. Eat his flesh and drink his blood!

Yet, if faith were their key? They would have not taken offense and taken off. No more than Abraham, would have as an old man take offense when the Lord told him that his "old bag" post-menopausal wife was to carry his promised son! And, that the old and post andropause Abraham would provide the seed to have it accomplished with. To ordinary human reasoning? The promise seemed like a cruel bad joke.

Some people? If they were in Abraham's place? They would have taken offense and would have thought this one who claims to be the Lord, was playing a game with them. But, Abraham discerned it was the Lord! Faith kicked in even though it could not be understood.

Likewise. Not able to discern who Jesus really was? Those who stopped following Jesus in John 6:66, only saw him as a charismatic human rabbi.

Jesus weeded out the dead weight from the huge crowd following him. Many wanted to hear about new works to do to be saved. Jesus wanted to see faith.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Of course we know God can perform miracles to help people live without food.. But Jesus turned only five fish into enough food for 5,000 Israelites. When people were hungry, he wanted them to eat. So if no real food is provided in a very unlikely circumstance, is God telling the people they should die?

 

[bèlla]

That's the same kind of misunderstanding all the false disciples had when they took off after Jesus stated they must eat his flesh and drink his blood. (John 6:66)

Jesus explicitly said that his words were "spiritual." Not to be taken in a temporal, worldly, literal sense.

You’ve answered the OP’s question. If you can’t eat Him, your neighbor is a no-no.

Problem solved!

 

[GenemZ]

Of course we know God can perform miracles to help people live without food.. But Jesus turned only five fish into enough food for 5,000 Israelites. When people were hungry, he wanted them to eat. So if no real food is provided in a very unlikely circumstance, is God telling the people they should die?

One of the horrible curses the Lord warned Israel for being untrue as God wanted them to be?

Was to be taken siege by an evil enemy and starved. One of the worst level curses states was that a parent will end up killing and cooking here own child!

Cannibalism was seen as being horribly cursed by God!

21 “‘If you remain hostile toward me and refuse to listen to me, I will multiply your afflictions seven times over, as your sins deserve. 22 I will send wild animals against you, and they will rob you of your children, destroy your cattle and make you so few in number that your roads will be deserted.

23 “‘If in spite of these things you do not accept my correction but continue to be hostile toward me, 24 I myself will be hostile toward you and will afflict you for your sins seven times over. 25 And I will bring the sword on you to avenge the breaking of the covenant. When you withdraw into your cities, I will send a plague among you, and you will be given into enemy hands. 26 When I cut off your supply of bread, ten women will be able to bake your bread in one oven, and they will dole out the bread by weight. You will eat, but you will not be satisfied.

27 “‘If in spite of this you still do not listen to me but continue to be hostile toward me, 28 then in my anger I will be hostile toward you, and I myself will punish you for your sins seven times over. 29 You will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters."

​

Lev 26:21-29

 

[GenemZ]

You’ve answered the OP’s question. If you can’t eat Him, your neighbor is a no-no.

Problem solved!

Just the same?

... Baby Christians are to eat the "milk of the Word."

With the Bread of Life to follow...

And, when entering into maturity?
We are to feed on the meat of the Word.

He is the Word of God!!!!!!!!!!!!! (John 1:1)
We do eat Him when we hunger for His Word!

When your words came, I ate them;
they were my joy and my heart’s delight,
for I bear your name,
Lord God Almighty."

Jer 15:16​

 

[prodromos]

Of course not. His book his hostile to Catholicism, and Eastern Orthodox is its sister.

It's actually hostile to Christianity, but it's lack of any historical value is due to most of his conclusions having no basis in fact. He basically made stuff up. Hislop's work has been thoroughly debunked. It is total rubbish

 

[Blade]

Is it not already written in your heart whats right and wrong? As for the word of God milk, meat or communion. Some are looking at this from the natural.

 

[bèlla]

Just the same?

If Christ wasn’t referencing His physical flesh in that statement. It is unlikely He’d sanction us adopting a practice that embraces it.

Their reaction is telling:

The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying,i“How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

 

[GenemZ]

If Christ wasn’t referencing His physical flesh in that statement. It is unlikely He’d sanction us adopting a practice that embraces it.

Their reaction is telling:

The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying,i“How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

First of all.... When the disciples ate the last supper? And, were told to drink his blood? If they thought for one second he indicated his literal blood? There would have been loud howls of protest. For it was highly forbidden... with the penalty of death... for any Jew to eat blood.

It would not have been taken matter-of-factly like they had because they understood the ritual symbolism. For the foods of the Passover meal were all symbolic of some reality that took place in the Exodus. They even had one dish to represent the mortar used in laying the bricks.

Jesus was simply following the protocol of having symbolism for the Passover.

 

[AlexDTX]

It's actually hostile to Christianity, but it's lack of any historical value is due to most of his conclusions having no basis in fact. He basically made stuff up. Hislop's work has been thoroughly debunked. It is total rubbish

I've heard this before with other documents. Snopes says this often. Such statements & claims are meaningless. Believe what you want. I found the book valuable.
Ps 116.11: I said in my haste, All men are liars.

 

[GenemZ]

I've heard this before with other documents. Snopes says this often. Such statements & claims are meaningless. Believe what you want. I found the book valuable.
Ps 116.11: I said in my haste, All men are liars.

Its a pseudo refutation. Its what one tries when he has nothing substantial to say...

 

[Brightmoon]

One of the reasons i feel kind of squicky about Christianity is because of the cannibalism aspect. Communion rituals. The idea of pretending to eat jesus’ flesh and blood is revolting

I never thought of it that way but I guess we Christians are so used to thinking of it one way we don’t see it like that. It’s sorta like learning the words to a song wrong . even when you know better you’ll still sing it wrong . Bad analogy but I tried

 

[bèlla]

First of all.... When the disciples ate the last supper?

That wasn’t from the Last Supper. It’s from John 6:52.

How are your replies to me in relation to this OP? Because that’s what I’m responding to and he isn’t speaking symbolically.

 

[Brightmoon]

I feel that it could be an necessary evil [to eat a dead body]that would require confession anyways.

why would you think that . Why would you make someone feel guilty about Eating a dead body that dies of natural causes , to save your own life?Survivor guilt will be a serious problem in a normal person then you’re going to make them feel as if they shouldn’t have survived and make that worse. I remember that horrific plane crash in the mountains and the subsequent desperation and how guilt ridden the survivors felt about eating their deceased friends and teammates. I thought about it then and decided that I would not feel guilty in the same situation because at that point the dead were worm food(honestly I’d be more scared of catching a disease from raw meat)

 

[martymonster]

Christ had to be fully human, otherwise he wouldn't be able to identify with us.