Should Christians Hunt?

[Beastt]

I find your response to be friendly and respectful and for that I thank you, armyman_83. As such I find it somewhat difficult, yet necessary to point out that all you have stated suggests that when it is convenient for you to partake in the inventions which came of the ideas of non-Christians, then you do so. Yet, when it is convenient to dismiss reason because it comes from a non-Christian, you do this as well. If any one man can be said to have been instrumental in the ideals that formed this country, (the U.S.), that man would likely be Thomas Jefferson. You should perhaps aquaint yourself with his works. When you defend your homeland, you do so based largely on the works of non-Christians. I find this not inappropriate. But to dismiss reason soley on the basis of the religious beliefs of those who present it, lacks propriety. Good ideas and intelligence are not the exclusive realm of Christians.

 

[4380william]

I would say that God has given us dominion over the animals. That does't mean it's wrong not to hunt--especially if it's distasteful to you and you don't need the meat.

I love animals. I can set for hours and watch wildlife. I also raise livestock for a living. I cannot tell you how many nights I have spent up all night in bad weather just to save a baby calf or to birth a litter of pigs. All of my livestock recieves the best of care and the best nutrition available free of hormones or drugs. They are treated very humainly and always well cared for.

I also love to hunt. It's not the killing that draws me--it's watching them and learning their habits--watching them move and play.

The hard, cold reality is that all animals will die a violent or agonizing death. When wildlife is allowed to overpopulate they become unhealthy, weak and suseptible to disease. The recourses they feed on become diminished because of over grazing.

These beautiful creatures are not our brothers. The Lord has given them to us for our use----Not Abuse. To hunt will enhance the lives of the ones that are left. A good clean shot ends quickly and humainly that which would otherwise end in agonizing old age, preditors or starvation.

There is no substitute for red meat. This a renewable food source that God has blessed us with in abundance. Red meat is packed with protein and amino acids that are essential for life. Red meat is the only natural source of the vitamin B12 complex that is so essential for proper child development. To top it off lean meat has less fat than chicken, fries, chips or a whole host of other fast foods! That is why the Adkins diet stressing more protein and less carbohydrates has helped millions of people to get their weight, colestrol and blood pressure under control without harmful drugs!

Our God is sooo gracious!!! Let us use his gifts and blessings and give him all the glory!!

May the Lord be with you----------Bill

 

[Beastt]

There is no substitute for red meat. This a renewable food source that God has blessed us with in abundance. Red meat is packed with protein and amino acids that are essential for life.

I rather suspect that like all the rest you'll decline my offer. But since so many seem content to spread fallacies about meat and health, I will invite you, as I have so many others, to take that subject to a thread more appropriate for such a discussion. You can choose one or I can offer you a list to pick from.

 

[Ouch]

Christians can hunt if they want to. God did gift us with animals. Different cultures have different views about animals, but throughout history humans have hunted. If this was a great evil you would imagine that the Bible would have condemned it, since it has rules about things like incest that are much less common than hunting. Animals don't have souls, and were not created for their own purpose. God gave animals to humans and tied the fate of the animals to the will of the humans. If killing animals was a crime why would God require it in sacrifice for centuries? I'm not condemning vegetarians, or animal right people. I'm just stating that my opinion is that animals don't have rights.

 

[Beastt]

Christians can hunt if they want to. God did gift us with animals. Different cultures have different views about animals, but throughout history humans have hunted. If this was a great evil you would imagine that the Bible would have condemned it, since it has rules about things like incest that are much less common than hunting. Animals don't have souls, and were not created for their own purpose. God gave animals to humans and tied the fate of the animals to the will of the humans. If killing animals was a crime why would God require it in sacrifice for centuries? I'm not condemning vegetarians, or animal right people. I'm just stating that my opinion is that animals don't have rights.

There would appear to be some confusion between what is a belief, however strongly held, and a fact. But I do appreciate your opinion.

 

[pastel]

Well, this sure is an interesting thred. I guess il put my two cents worth in.
To start with , my whole family has been hunters for generations, but the only exampls i have of this is my folks. We grew up on a ranch in southern Colorado also. So as most of you can imagin, we did kill and eat what we raised and hunted. God gave us dominion over all the earth and the animals upon it, that is not to say that we should disrespect it in any way. We are also to be good stewards of what God has given us in all ways. God has given us a bountiful earth, to disregard part of it because the prosesing of it is distastful to you is not being a good steward in my opinion. As an example of what im talking about i will tell you somthing that i hope you can see with an open mind. Imagin if you will, a herd of dear or elk that has not been hunted for many years in a place that has banned hunting. To start with, the herds prosper and multiply. They become so numerous and unafraid that that soon this place has animals grazing in backyards and parks. The people thought this was great. Man and beast almost living in harmony with each other. Sounds almost perfect doesent it ? Well, the first problem is there are no natural predators anymore to keep the population in check because years ago the farmers and ranchers killed them all off or chased them all away to protect there own livestock. So guess what ? The herds of dear and elk have become so pletiful that soon there is not enough food for them in the winter. So alot of them will starv. But thats not the end im sad to say. Due to the over population of the herds, nature takes a cruel twist. Sickness strikes the herds.
Soon, there are dead animals where there was once such a seeming harmony. And before this sickness can be brought under control, nearly all the dear and elk are dead. And the ones who survived it is doubtful that they will make it past another winter.
I know this is a sad tale, but let me tell you, this is a very mild version of the absolute truth. And just so you know, i do not advocate torture or cruelty to animals. My folks never did, and neither did anybody else that my family hunted with.
Now, go ahead and pick my story apart. Disclame anything you wish about it. But you can never tell me personaly that by being a good steward i should not be a responsibl hunter. Other men have created a situation that we have to deal with now. Next year i plan on picking up my bow, going up to those mountains and forests. (That God created.)I am going to shoot, kill and eat what i hunt. I will be doing my part in providing for my family and being a good steward for the land. But thats not all there is to it is there ? I know that. I hope yall do to.
God Bless yall

I wish all hunters were like your family! What you say is true, and I agree with what you said 100%. For myself, personally, I could not hunt to kill, but that is just me. I will not point a finger and accuse anyone who does choose to hunt. I have eaten meat from a hunter's game. It tastes very good, and is probably nutritionally better than what one gets from the store. I will never be a vegetarian... lol. The Bible does not condemn hunting, but as you say, being a bad steward on God's green earth is being sorely irresponsible for the next generations.

God bless you!

Charlene

 

[Ryder]

The overpopulation was more than likely caused by hunters killing the natural predators. Hunting is the problem, not the solution.

Sure it is, you just have a bias against one species doing the hunting instead of another. So wolves killing the deer, keeping their population under control, and eating their kills is ok, but humans doing it is not. Why is that?

 

[Ryder]

Unfortunately, few people like to read through a whole thread or even the last few pages before they post. I understand that and I'm probably just as guilty as anyone else. But, it does lead to posting the same responses to the same replies repeatedly.

Nature has a balance system, Armyman. If we disrupt that balance by killing the predators then the scales will tip and overpopulation of the prey species will result. But all it does when hunters continue to keep the predator populations down and step in to cull game populations themselves, is to maintain and promote this imbalance. And, as I've pointed out many times in this thread, nature is not a see-saw. You can't kill off the predators and restore balance by hunting the prey animals. Predation doesn't work the way hunters do. Firstly, hunters in many areas protest whenever natural predator populations begin to increase. They often respond swiftly to again destroy the predator populations because they claim this presents competition. We can survive without killing animals. Predators cannot. If we care about nature, about natural balance and about animals, the only thing we can do is to allow the natural predator population to return. Once nature has regained its balance, man has to stay out and take on his natural role which excludes predation.

Man is not a natural predator. There isn't one scientific bit of evidence to indicate otherwise. Yet, whether people wish to believe it or not, man is part of nature. When we act outside of our natural role, we disrupt the balance in nature. Your contention is that we continue to act outside of our natural role which only leads to maintaining an imbalance in nature. The predator species become endangered and the prey species become weakened as a whole. Man doesn't take the sick, young, weak or injured like a predator does. Man takes the best of the best, leaving the weaker genes to continue the species. There is just no justification for hunting. It is only a practice of cruelty and suffering which leads to disruption of natural balances.

Man killing the strongest is a "practice of cruelty and suffering", but wolves tearing apart the weak, sick, injured, and young is what? A bed of roses? And "leaving the weaker genes to continue the species"?! Should we be worried about weak genes in our own species too?

 

[Dak man]

Is there a difference between me killing a deer or a fish and eating all the meat off of it I can and anyone else buying a steak at the local market knowing that it was genetically bred to die and was systematically killed?

 

[Beastt]

Sure it is, you just have a bias against one species doing the hunting instead of another. So wolves killing the deer, keeping their population under control, and eating their kills is ok, but humans doing it is not. Why is that?

My bias is against a non-predator species wiping out predatory species, just so that they can claim overpopulation of prey species to then try to justify hunting as a way to control the overpopulation which they have caused.

Wolves are natural predators. They have no choice but to act as predators and maintain predatory habits. Man is not a predator by any measure and leaves the wolf with one option - die. When wolves act by their nature which is the only way they can survive, hunters claim competition and shoot the wolves, perpetuating the overpopulation of the species wolves prey upon and thereby claiming hunting of prey species necessary.

If you wish to continue insisting otherwise, I really wish you would take me up on my offer to take this to a thread where I can show you the facts of the matter without derailing this thread.

 

[Beastt]

Man killing the strongest is a "practice of cruelty and suffering", but wolves tearing apart the weak, sick, injured, and young is what? A bed of roses? And "leaving the weaker genes to continue the species"?! Should we be worried about weak genes in our own species too?

Well, we've covered this many times but I will happily go over it again. Wolves show no natural compassion toward prey animals. This is their nature as it is their nature to hunt and consume the flesh of prey animals. Their anatomy and physiology are in line with this behavior. Humans do have a natural compassion for other animals, though they are often taught that compassion shows weakness or childishness unless it is directed only at other people. Did you consider my exercise with the carrot and the rabbit? Humans also display a physiology consistent with a non-predatory species. Ecologically, predator species are vastly more expensive to support than are non-predatory species. When 6.4 billion creatures on the planet detour from their nature and begin to practice predation, the whole of the planet suffers. We start to see a decline in topsoil, insufficient fresh water supplies, an increase in the need for agriculture of at least 5-fold and destruction of the rain forests due to the destruction which has already occurred on our own land. There are so many adverse affects that it takes books to cover them all. But... as I have offered repeatedly, if you would care to take these issues to another thread or if the OP would consent to expanding the topic of this thread, (if that is permissible within forum rules), I would be most willing to discuss all of the ramifications with you.

I'm not sure how you interpret the relative strength of human genes into this topic but if you would not mind explaining in a bit greater detail how hunting or not hunting affects the perpetuation of either stronger or weaker human genes, I will do my best to address those concerns.

 

[PACKY]

Sure it is, you just have a bias against one species doing the hunting instead of another. So wolves killing the deer, keeping their population under control, and eating their kills is ok, but humans doing it is not. Why is that?

Beasett,
This type of post is why I wanted to end this thread..To compare humans to wolves in order to justify hunting is absurd.
But then when you or I say that thou shall not kill doesnt only apply to humans
and that god wouldnt want us killing any of his creation we are verbally chastized and told that we are wrong for comparing Animals and Humans.
Hmmmm.. its amzing how quickly a argument can be switched up to meet ones needs.

 

[Ryder]

Wolves show no natural compassion toward prey animals. This is their nature as it is their nature to hunt and consume the flesh of prey animals. Their anatomy and physiology are in line with this behavior. Humans do have a natural compassion for other animals, though they are often taught that compassion shows weakness or childishness unless it is directed only at other people. Did you consider my exercise with the carrot and the rabbit? Humans also display a physiology consistent with a non-predatory species.

I have no compassion for my steaks Beastt. I think you confuse that which is meant for food and that which is meant for companionship. Just because humans get along with some animals does not mean that all animals are meant for that same exact purpose. I love our family dogs. I go hunting from time to time. I have no conflicts in any ways regarding this. Also, if you'd like to paint humankind as non-predatory, may I suggest that you've got an impossible job ahead of you. With all the wars and bloodshed clear through recorded history, the use of animal meats all through recorded history, and all the aggression man is capable of, you're saying to us that we are naturally compassionate? I don't even subscribe to your line of thinking, knowing that killing animals for food is no sin in the first place. But just for a second I'll play along. You're saying that we are naturally too compassionate towards animals to be a predatory species?!!! And this is shown in our history where? I think you may want to review the broader human history some. Looking back, I'm not even sure one could say we are naturally compassionate to our own species, never mind the blooming cows!

 

[Ryder]

Beasett,
This type of post is why I wanted to end this thread..To compare humans to wolves in order to justify hunting is absurd.
But then when you or I say that thou shall not kill doesn't only apply to humans
and that god wouldn't want us killing any of his creation we are verbally chastised and told that we are wrong for comparing Animals and Humans.
Hmmmm.. its amazing how quickly a argument can be switched up to meet ones needs.

I've got an atheist telling me what the Bible 'really' says, so forgive me if a fire back an argument or two in his Naturalistic framework. It goes both ways.

 

[Beastt]

Beasett,
This type of post is why I wanted to end this thread..To compare humans to wolves in order to justify hunting is absurd.
But then when you or I say that thou shall not kill doesnt only apply to humans
and that god wouldnt want us killing any of his creation we are verbally chastized and told that we are wrong for comparing Animals and Humans.
Hmmmm.. its amzing how quickly a argument can be switched up to meet ones needs.

As much as I do see what you're saying, I really have no problem with such an argument. It's not at all difficult to show the lack of credibility to such a view so, in my opinion, it offers little if anything to substantiate the pro-hunting viewpoint.
Personally, I can't read too much into whether one wishes to extend the commandments to animals or not. Everything we need in order to understand what habits should and shouldn't be observed by any species is plainly obtainable through scientific facts. Emotionally, anatomically and physiologically, wolves are equipped as predators. Emotionally, anatomically and physiologically, humans are equipped as non-predators. The environment is more than sufficiently equipped to handle all species if man observes his obvious nature. If man does not, the environment is strained and begins to fail as we can now observe. If one believes that God created all we can see, all we can test, and all we can know, then his intentions are clearly presented to us despite interpretations, misinterpretations, language limitations and all of the rest.

 

[Ryder]

Perhaps man is evolving into a predator Beastt?

 

[Beastt]

I've got an atheist telling me what the Bible 'really' says, so forgive me if a fire back an argument or two in his Naturalistic framework. It goes both ways.

Touche'

No one adopts ideas other than their own without a few growing pains along the way. Perhaps I owe you an apology for attempting to approach the topic from an angle which I felt you would be more able to grasp. The Bible does say, "Thou Shalt Not Kill". As you have offered, it also contains passages wherein man is instructed to kill. This is, despite the linguistic contortions so popular in such a discussion, a contradiction. Since the Bible says first one thing and then the exact opposite, is it such a stretch to see that the world around us can so easily clarify the meaning?

 

[Beastt]

Perhaps man is evolving into a predator Beastt?

Perhaps that's worth exploring. Can you offer the traits which have evolved in man to show this is occuring?

(At work for the next few hours. I'll look forward to seeing what you present when I return tonight.)

 

[Ryder]

Well, I don't believe in evolution myself, but one does have to make something of the fact that man has been eating animals for all of recorded human history, save for the antediluvian period before the flood. I make little of this, believing we are allowed to eat meat since the flood.

Genesis 9:2-3 KJV
The fear and dread of you will fall upon all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air, upon every creature that moves along the ground, and upon all the fish of the sea; they are given into your hands. Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.

But I would think that even an evolutionist has to make something of the fact that humans have essentially been predators in virtually every sense for so long. To say we aren't 'meant' to be is kinda weird. 'Meant' by who? If evolution created us (again, this is hypothetical on my part) than we aren't 'meant' to be anything but what we wind up being. So I think it looks like men have already become predators, they already eat meat. Technically omnivores I guess.

-Have fun at work!

 

[PACKY]

I've got an atheist telling me what the Bible 'really' says, so forgive me if a fire back an argument or two in his Naturalistic framework. It goes both ways.

I dont see any religeous affliation on his screen?