Could they have missed the point more completely?

[Sophia7]

Was soy a part of man'a original diet?

I doubt it.

 

[StormyOne]

Was soy a part of man'a original diet?

there are alot of myths surrounding the idea of the "original" diet.... and as many of us have said previously, there is alot of talk about the original diet, but very little talk about the original wardrobe, or the original relationship....

 

[moicherie]

there are alot of myths surrounding the idea of the "original" diet.... and as many of us have said previously, there is alot of talk about the original diet, but very little talk about the original wardrobe, or the original relationship....

Well you see Stormy the original relationship requires one to recognise that since Adam and Eve were both created on the 6th day then one is not superior to the other.
The original wardrobe requires an appreciation of the nekkid human body and you know as Christians doing that is close to porn....

 

[tall73]

but very little talk about the original wardrobe

lol

That calls for a debate thread!

Oh wait...they will just say it is a robe of light.

 

[sentipente]

Oh wait...they will just say it is a robe of light.

And I'm all for going back to it.

 

[StormyOne]

lol

That calls for a debate thread!

Oh wait...they will just say it is a robe of light.

the good thing about the progressive forum is that we can debate here....

 

[Sophia7]

I think he meant a separate debate thread. It doesn't really matter, though, because we don't have an off-topic rule here either.

 

[sentipente]

I think he meant a separate debate thread.

Yeah. That one went around the vette.

 

[NightEternal]

The Trads seem to be annoyed that I have started this thread. That's just thier tough cookies, isn't it?

As usual, the real issues are completely overlooked.

No. They still don't get it.

This thread was not started to 'bash' anyone. It was started because I was and still am being grossly misrepresented by certain people.

Again: I have no issues with people being vegetarian, and for some to imply that I do is simply dishonest and a blatant attempt to cast me in the most negative light possible. It's completely insulting to say the least, considering my wife is a vegetarian. I am not 'annoyed' or 'bothered' by vegetarianism one bit.

I won't say what they can do with these slanderous accusations, I think everyone here knows.

The point is that EGW clearly connected a person's spiritual and moral worth with vegetarianism. Period. They cannot deny that, it's all over her writings on the meat issue. They are naive if they try to deny it:

http://www.sda-inverness.org/docs/meat.htm

She even went so far as to claim that those SDA's who will be translated in the end will be non-meat eaters:

More EGW Quotes on Meat-eating

"Let not any of our ministers set an evil example in the eating of flesh-meat. Let them and their families live up to the light of health reform. Let not our ministers animalize their own nature and the nature of their children."39​

"If ever there was a time when the diet should be of the most simple kind, it is now. Meat should not be placed before our children. Its influence is to excite and strengthen the lower passions, and has a tendency to deaden the moral powers. Grains and fruits prepared free from grease, and in as natural a condition as possible, should be the food for the tables of all who claim to be preparing for translation to heaven.""40 ​

"You should be teaching your children. You should be instructing them how to shun the vices and corruption's of this age. Instead of this, many are studying how to get something good to eat. You place upon your tables butter, eggs, and meat and then your children partake of them. They are fed with the very things that will excite their animal passions, and then you come to meeting and ask God to bless and save your children. How high do your prayers go?"41 "Those who have received instruction regarding the evils of the use of flesh foods...will not continue to indulge their appetite for food that they know to be unhealthful. God demands that the appetites be cleansed, and that self-denial be practiced in regard to those things which are not good. This is a work that will have to be done before His people can stand before Him a perfected people."42​

http://www.ellenwhite.org/contra6.htm

I have encountered others in the church who believe the same thing and they have been hostile about it. Some here seem to always apply everything I say to just this forum alone. No, I am making a broad application to the whole church. However, if the shoe fits for some here, wear it I say.

Now for those who still have problems comprehending the issues, here is my list again.

Let's recap, shall we? According to some, meat-eaters:

* Are abnormally aggressive
* Oppress others
* Are the primary perpetrators of road rage
* Cause family arguments
* Cause tears
* Cause war
* Cause annihilation
* Cause suppression
* Result in hardened criminals
* Need to be put down like dogs
* Have a weak, inferior spirituality
* Are incapable of sympathy
* Have bad skin
* Are repulsive
* Are disgusting
* Are heartless
* Are cruel
* Can't comprehend truth
* Are psychologically deficient
* Have the potential to become serial killers
* Believe that Christ's sacrifice means nothing to them
* Are unnatural
* Are disobedient to Jesus
* Are nasty
* Are mean

These are the issues. Yes or no? Do certain Trads agree with any of these assertions? Since every one was taken from the locked vegetarian discussion thread and even made by some of them themselves, what am I supposed to assume?

And while we're at it, someone please tell me how context would make any of this acceptable in the least or how any of it can be taken in a 'right way'?

 

[StormyOne]

people will believe what they believe.... you will not be able to refute everything incorrect that is said about you Night..... why not enjoy this forum for what it is, resist the urge to react and discuss any topic here to your hearts content.....

 

[NightEternal]

Maybe you're right Stormy. It's tantamount to rocking back and forth furiously in a rocking chair and naively believing all that expended energy and time is actually accomplishing anything in the way of forward momentum.

I think I give up.

 

[DrStupid_Ben]

Was soy a part of man'a original diet?

I think the soy bean was, but its products like tofu would have been a latter development.

 

[DrStupid_Ben]

Yes, a lot of what she wrote was reflective of the era in which she lived. Although I disagree with Bradford's conclusions, at least he is honest about the fact that she wasn't really 100 years ahead of her time in her health messages.

There is an Adventist doctor (whose name escapes me at the moment) who researched EGW health writings, and concluded that EGW was about 90% on the general problem/principle, but had very little success when she was trying to explain why and mostly used arguments from her time.

That kind of fits with a possible view of inspiration. Someone given the right message, but used an explination from their own time.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

yes that book made a big splash though few have read it me included. It seems to me his whole premise is based upon his subjective view. So all in all I don't think it means much.

 

[sentipente]

I think the soy bean was, but its products like tofu would have been a latter development.

You truly believe that first humans knew how to prepare the soy bean for consumption?

 

[moicherie]

Maybe you're right Stormy. It's tantamount to rocking back and forth furiously in a rocking chair and naively believing all that expended energy and time is actually accomplishing anything in the way of forward momentum.

I think I give up.

NE why give people so much power over you by letting them get to you? Are they really worth it?

 

[moicherie]

And I'm all for going back to it.

you going to start an Adventist nudist camp? 'lol'

 

[sentipente]

you going to start an Adventist nudist camp? 'lol'

Nope. An Adventist Light Camp. Keep to the facts.

 

[moicherie]

Nope. An Adventist Light Camp. Keep to the facts.

ah thats no fun, some lights may blind the others....you know one of the causes blindness right?

 

[sentipente]

It's soft light. No worries.