Vegetarians 'have lower heart risk'

[David Conklin]

>You keep ignoring the priests.

I haven't ignored anyone. Not all Israelites were priests.

>Would God give the Israelites something that He didn't approve of (quail)?

Quail is clean meat--note that He didn't give them pigs, etc. of the unclean.

Why do you ignore the cost of eating the quail?

Numbers 11:33 And while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the wrath of the LORD was kindled against the people, and the LORD smote the people with a very great plague.

 

[Argy Lacedom]

Jesus invited us to drink his blood and eat his flesh. If that's not an endorsement of meat eating nothing is.

_

 

[David Conklin]

Metaphor--not literal. If you take it literally then He was endorsing cannibalism. There's no record of any apostle doing that.

 

[Argy Lacedom]

Metaphor--not literal. If you take it literally then He was endorsing cannibalism. There's no record of any apostle doing that.

Yet his apostles accepted his message as literal and all but twelve abandoned him when he spoke of eating his flesh (John 6:53-6:66)

It fits with the whole idea of the blood sacrifice. If the idea of eating his flesh is an allegory then it is only reasonable to accept that the idea of the crucifixion was an allegory, no?

_

 

[ricker]

[=David Conklin;57420778]>You keep ignoring the priests.

I haven't ignored anyone. Not all Israelites were priests.

Thank you, now you haven't ignored them. The priests were Israelites, however, and God told them to eat meat.

Quail is clean meat--note that He didn't give them pigs, etc. of the unclean.

Of course God didn't give them unclean meat, as that would be breaking His law for them.

Why do you ignore the cost of eating the quail?

Numbers 11:33 And while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the wrath of the LORD was kindled against the people, and the LORD smote the people with a very great plague

They didn't even consume any quail. God was mad at them because they craved food other than Manna.

34 Therefore the place was named Kibroth Hattaavah, because there they buried the people who had craved other food.


There is meat eating throughout the Bible, and it is never spoken of disparagingly as far as I know. Jesus ate fish after His ressurection. Sigh.....

 

[David Conklin]

>Yet his apostles accepted his message as literal

Some of his disciples may have done that, not all of them. They understood His message as being a call to sacrifice, not cannibalism.

>now you haven't ignored them.

I never ignored them--why do you lie like that?

 

[ricker]

>
I never ignored them--why do you lie like that?

Unless I missed it you ignored my point about the priests being told to eat meat until post 21. If you did address it before that I apologize.

 

[Argy Lacedom]

>Yet his apostles accepted his message as literal

Some of his disciples may have done that, not all of them. They understood His message as being a call to sacrifice, not cannibalism.

I don't know how you can say that. When he told his disciples to eat his flesh many of them (all but twelve) were so disgusted they left him. If he had meant differently he would have called them back to explain, surely?

_

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I don't know how you can say that. When he told his disciples to eat his flesh many of them (all but twelve) were so disgusted they left him. If he had meant differently he would have called them back to explain, surely?

_

Spiritual things need spiritual discernment Argy... you are not open to receiving wisdom from the Holy Spirit, so there is nothing anyone on here can say to you that will make any sense to you. If you are only here to argue our faith, you are in violation of forum rules...

 

[Argy Lacedom]

Spiritual things need spiritual discernment Argy... you are not open to receiving wisdom from the Holy Spirit, so there is nothing anyone on here can say to you that will make any sense to you. If you are only here to argue our faith, you are in violation of forum rules...

I'm trying to get a grip on what you believe in and why. The passage in John seems to be pretty easy to understand at face value. Indeed, as I have said previously it seems that a great many of the disciples he had about him felt the same way as me and Jesus did not try to give them a different explanation. There is nothing in the text to suggest that the twelve who stayed thought he was talking metaphorically. Other than wishing it were not the case, can you give me a reason for your interpretation?

 

[Princessdi]

Argy, nice to meet you, as this is our first encounter.

Ok so where did you get this......premise?

I don't know how you can say that. When he told his disciples to eat his flesh many of them (all but twelve) were so disgusted they left him. If he had meant differently he would have called them back to explain, surely?

_

 

[Argy Lacedom]

Argy, nice to meet you, as this is our first encounter.

Ok so where did you get this......premise?

G'day!

I'm not sure what you mean by premise. The story reads pretty simply. Jesus tells his followers to eat his flesh and drink his blood. He even asks them whether this offends them. Many left him that day.

6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
6:52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
...
6:60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
6:61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?
...
6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
​

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

It was because He was speaking spiritually and they were hearing literally... Jesus partially did this to weed out those that were not truly His disciples. His flesh and blood are symbolized by His Word and the Holy Spirit which He demonstrated at the last supper.

 

[Argy Lacedom]

It was because He was speaking spiritually and they were hearing literally... Jesus partially did this to weed out those that were not truly His disciples. His flesh and blood are symbolized by His Word and the Holy Spirit which He demonstrated at the last supper.

A couple of points spring to mind. First, why would Jesus want to weed out anyone at all? His aim is to save everyone from eternal damnation. No sinner is beyond redemption. Yet you would have me believe that for some reason he decided to let his disciples keep their misunderstanding and risk eternal damnation. If that was true then you are describing a god that says one thing and does another. Knowing the hearts of all men he would have known they were under the wrong impression, being omnipotent he would have known how to convince them of his true meaning and being omniscient he would have had the ability to get them to see the truth. The spin you are trying to put on the story doesn't have the ring of truth.

Second, it seems to me you are being inconsistent in your interpretation of scripture. You are asking me to treat his words about eating his flesh and drinking his blood as allegory. Yet you ask me to take a literal view of creation as described in Genesis despite the incontrovertible scientific evidence against it. There appears to be no consistency in your approach. Can you detail how you decide which is literal and which is not? (As a side note, the Catholic church has the opposite view to you. They believe Genesis is allegory and believe literally that they eat Jesus' flesh and drink his blood every Sunday in their Communion ritual.)

_

 

[grasping the after wind]

Could be carrying around a smaller brain is easier on the heart.
Vegetarians Have Smaller Brains -- Health & Wellness -- Sott.net

 

[Argy Lacedom]

Could be carrying around a smaller brain is easier on the heart.
Vegetarians Have Smaller Brains -- Health & Wellness -- Sott.net

LOL!

If we weren't supposed to eat meat why were we given canine teeth? Or did the designer make a mistake?

 

[grasping the after wind]

LOL!

If we weren't supposed to eat meat why were we given canine teeth? Or did the designer make a mistake?

One needs canine teeth to be able puncture the can of V8 that one might encounter in the wild.

 

[Spiritlight]

Could be carrying around a smaller brain is easier on the heart.
Vegetarians Have Smaller Brains -- Health & Wellness -- Sott.net

Or maybe they have bigger hearts