Forcing Your Child to be Vegan/Vegetarian.
Options
Replies
-
2. The original Ebionites, Jewish Christians, of which Jesus was certainly a member as was his brother James, was vegetarian.
Jesus was a member of a sect that was named after him?
4. There are places in the Bible where Jesus seemed to eat meat, such as, e.g., John 21, but all of these can be shown without much difficulty to have been later additions
John is accepted as the youngest of the gospels any many believe at least partially written by Gnostic authors. Is it possible that they edited existing stories to fit their world view?5. Biblical tampering extends to the Sermon on the Mount as I have shown using John and Irenaeus. There are dozens of other arguments that we never got to.
Tampered by using a word that can mean fish or relish (relish being a sauce served with bread that can be made out of fish).6. Early Christians were almost universally vegetarian. Only after the Paulist philosophy took hold and it was decided to spread Christianity to the pagans (good marketing move on his part) did not being Jewish, circumcised or vegetarian come into being in Christianity. The Romans never would have become Christians if Paul hadn't made these changes.
then why was circumcision not stamped out with as much vigor as vegetarianism supposedly was?
7. Some sects, such as the Gnostics maintained their vegetarianism for over a thousand years.
8. Jesus' teacher, John the Baptist was vegetarian.
9. At the last supper, Jesus, even in your version of the story did not eat meat.
10. The early Christian Church made great efforts to stamp out vegetarians, There are hundreds of examples I could give of this but the one we have focused on most was the Albigensian Crusade where Pope Innocent III killed a million vegetarians. Some by pouring molten lead down their throats.
11. The issue of vegetarianism was huge in the early Chruch and was consider a heresy.
why? You have yet to supply a motive for this.
13. The official Church was a church militant. The gentle Jesus would never have killed heretics, nor would he have set up a hierarchy of rulers headed up by the Pope.
I agree with this. I have always held that Christianity had a good thing going until they tried to make it a form of government.
14. James was the leader of the Christian Church after Jesus died. James was Jesus' brother.
Islam has this same issue of succession.0 -
I know of no recognized scholar of New Testament backgrounds of contents who agrees with your first point (Jesus was a member of the Nazarene sect). My bet is that you will provide a source, if you do, from some conspiracy theory book written by someone who reasons like you do about historical documents.1. Jesus was a member of the Nazarene sect, which was vegetarian
There is no good basis for your second point. You are equivocally using “Ebionite” (there were two very different versions of this movement). I know of no recognized NT scholar who takes your position on this.2. The original Ebionites, Jewish Christians, of which Jesus was certainly a member as was his brother James, was vegetarian.
I have already replied to this and you have consistently refused to respond.3.Much of Catholic and other mainstream Christianity was borrowed from pagan mythology, for example, the Virgin Birth, dying for our sins, ascending into heaven, in the case of the Catholic religion, the mother goddess.
Such things can only be “shown” to be later additions to those who have already concluded that Jesus was a vegetarian before looking at the data. The burden of proof is on you to show that a first-century Jew whose culture used meat and sacrifices, etc., on every hand, chose vegetarianism. A few references in Gnostic writings is certainly weak evidence.4. There are places in the Bible where Jesus seemed to eat meat, such as, e.g., John 21, but all of these can be shown without much difficulty to have been later additions
You often refer to sources and arguments without identifying them. Based on what I have seen, there is little reason to fear your “dozens” of arguments.5. Biblical tampering extends to the Sermon on the Mount as I have shown using John and Irenaeus. There are dozens of other arguments that we never got to.
Wow. This is quite an unsubstantiated statement. I’d like to see evidence for “almost universal vegetarianism” among early Christians.6. Early Christians were almost universally vegetarian. Only after the Paulist philosophy took hold and it was decided to spread Christianity to the pagans (good marketing move on his part) did not being Jewish, circumcised or vegetarian come into being in Christianity. The Romans never would have become Christians if Paul hadn't made these changes.
Gnosticism was contrary to original Christianity and that is why they rejected most of the biblical writings. Their source of information was their own imagination and the contents of Gnosticism have almost nothing to do with Judeo-Christian roots.7. Some sects, such as the Gnostics maintained their vegetarianism for over a thousand years.
John the Baptist was not Jesus’ teacher!!! Ha! Where did you get THAT one?8. Jesus' teacher, John the Baptist was vegetarian.
Jesus did celebrate the Passover with his disciples and would have eaten meat (lamb)! He took the end of that meal when the final cup was used and the unleavened bread and instituted a new celebration but the lamb would have been eaten earlier.9. At the last supper, Jesus, even in your version of the story did not eat meat.
Back to the Albigensians. You haven’t answered whether you agree with the Abligensians on everything they taught. Are you claiming that the Church has gone around looking for vegetarians and killing them for that? The issues, as usual, are far more complicated.10. The early Christian Church made great efforts to stamp out vegetarians, There are hundreds of examples I could give of this but the one we have focused on most was the Albigensian Crusade where Pope Innocent III killed a million vegetarians. Some by pouring molten lead down their throats.
Eating meat offered in sacrifice to idols was an issue in the early Church. Vegetarianism was not.11. The issue of vegetarianism was huge in the early Chruch and was consider a heresy.
Most of this point is nonsense and is consistent with your conspiracy theory orientation. Jesus did claim to be God’s Son and the authorities considered this “blasphemy” and worthy of death. It is interesting how you conveniently dismiss anything in the Gospels that doesn’t fit your version of things as “additions” but yet you accept bizarre claims by later Gnostic sects with not a word of criticism. Your inconsistency and tendency to gravitate towards the bizarre and unusual shines out everywhere.12. The Council of Nicea codified a church that was nothing like Jesus' version. Jesus never claimed to be a god. The reason for the formalization of rules for the Christian Church at Nicea was to create a socio-political organization that would back the emperor and keep the people quiet. Constantine himself was NOT a Christian. He was using them. Those he used were used willingly because it meant great wealth for them.
The gentle Jesus forced people out of the Temple and declared eternal damnation for some. I’ve often thought that many versions of Jesus do pretty well until people read the Gospels. You have created a “Jesus” (the one you call “MY Jesus”) that has little to do with the one we find in the primary sources. You find no objection to manipulating the data at your whim to support what you want Jesus to be. I think it would be more intellectually honest to simply discard Jesus and declare yourself the final authority on these matters.13. The official Church was a church militant. The gentle Jesus would never have killed heretics, nor would he have set up a hierarchy of rulers headed up by the Pope.
To say “James was the leader of the Christian Church” presupposes there was a single leader over all the Christian communities. Are you granting that kind of structure from the very beginning? Was Christianity, from the start, a reality that had a one-leader structure? This seems to pose some problems for your vision of the early Church. I’m betting you will ignore this point as well as most of the ones above!14. James was the leader of the Christian Church after Jesus died. James was Jesus' brother.0 -
Summertime, MacPatty(i) and Kimmy - you inspire! You are each at different stages in your curiosity and research regarding what you eat but you are all curious, aware, and engaged. I thought I finally had it all figured out with a pescetarian diet but then had to amend that slightly when I became seriously allergic to soy isolate protein recently. :sad: My research, though, and curiosity allowed me the ability to flex appropriately when the universe seemed to deem I needed to. We all have to do the best we can and really, with valid information easily available, the only excuse is willful ignorance.
Three cheers to you three :drinker: :drinker: :drinker:
-Debra
:flowerforyou: Aw, thank you!0 -
Summertime, MacPatty(i) and Kimmy - you inspire! You are each at different stages in your curiosity and research regarding what you eat but you are all curious, aware, and engaged. I thought I finally had it all figured out with a pescetarian diet but then had to amend that slightly when I became seriously allergic to soy isolate protein recently. :sad: My research, though, and curiosity allowed me the ability to flex appropriately when the universe seemed to deem I needed to. We all have to do the best we can and really, with valid information easily available, the only excuse is willful ignorance.
Three cheers to you three :drinker: :drinker: :drinker:
-Debra
:flowerforyou: Aw, thank you!
Now where's that LIKE button I keep looking for? Oh well...here's to you all: :drinker:0 -
Now where's that LIKE button I keep looking for? Oh well...here's to you all: :drinker:
And because apparently I want us all to have diabetes...
0 -
I love your creative use of jpg's to correct MFP's lack of proper features. Plus, PANDAS with oreo feet!!! I'm willing to risk diabetes for one of those.0
-
I love your creative use of jpg's to correct MFP's lack of proper features. Plus, PANDAS with oreo feet!!! I'm willing to risk diabetes for one of those.
We can split one--then we're only half at risk.
0 -
Summertime, MacPatty(i) and Kimmy - you inspire! You are each at different stages in your curiosity and research regarding what you eat but you are all curious, aware, and engaged.
I will begin participating in "Meatless Mondays" this Monday!
I am so glad to hear this. Thank you for being a great example of open-mindedness
0 -
So I have read through a lot of this debate and I think a lot of good points have been made by both sides, but I think in the end the vegetarians who do not eat meat for moral issues are akin to pro-lifers who think life begins at conception. Once a person decides, in both cases, that something is a conscious life form and has value they consider it's killing murder. Those who do not think it is conscious do not believe it is murder. Once the lines have been drawn, there really isn't much way for either side to back away from their stance.
I was thinking the same thing. And what I am getting from this conversation is people who thing it's morally wrong to kill and eat a an animal but it's perfectly fine to abort a human fetus.. :huh:
Call me biased, but my thinking goes the other way - I am always surprised when the same people who argue for the rights of a cluster of cells take no issue with the needless slaughter of other sentient creatures.
Both of which have heartbeats. I suppose I would be more empathatic if they were against the slaughter of both.
I guess the big issue for me is that animals have developed brains and nervous systems and feel pain, can suffer and grieve.
I am also against the idea of animals being brought into the world only to be be slaughtered or used as food. Really, if I were to get down to it, I would be against the ritual impregnation of cows, pigs and other animals of the "food industry" and the eventual birth of their offspring, because if there were no animals brought into the industry, there would be nothing to slaughter. Plus, everything that goes along with the "miracle of birth" in the factory farm setting - gestation crates and the dairy industry, to name two examples. It bothers me that humans think so highly of themselves that they would bring a baby cow into the world only to eventually kill and eat it (or steal the mother's milk and send said baby cow to the veal factory). Really, I'm more anti-birth in the farm animal world than anything else.
I don't really feel that the two are comparable.If we are debating the worth of a "cluster of cells" in comparison to a cow, I'd say the cow has more value and worth as a life. Get further along in a pregnancy, my answer would change. But everything is on a scale, in my opinion. I'd have no qualms about squashing a bug, but I'd cry if I hit a dog with my car by accident. I have no moral objection to eating a cheeseburger, but I couldn't bring myself to eat a dolphin steak. Not every animal is equal, and a clump of cells is not a baby, in my view.
Please bear in mind that this is simply asked out of curiosity, but do you find that society dictates what animals you find "valuable", such as a dog, or is it a hierarchy that you create?0 -
I don't think anyone here has insinuated that atheists, agnostics, or the religious are either more or less moral than eachother. But as far as morality coming from god or the bible, once again I need to point out that there is nothing in the bible forbidding animal torture, but whether you're a meat eater or veggie, we can all agree that it is wrong. How did we come to these conclusions without supernatural guidance?
Edit: Nothing in the bible to my knowledge.0 -
I want to throw a question out here: what is the moral difference between what we know as animal cruelty and killing an animal to eat?0
-
\I want to throw a question out here: what is the moral difference between what we know as animal cruelty and killing an animal to eat?
To my knowledge, The butcher my dad used to work for did it at their shop and they did it quickly and as painlessly as possible.
Killing an animal out of cruelty is doing it with the intent to see it suffer and feel pain.
Killing an animal to eat can be a means of survival and be done is an easy/painless way if done right.0 -
I want to throw a question out here: what is the moral difference between what we know as animal cruelty and killing an animal to eat?
It's a good question and further illustrates my point here and in past discussions about morality. I am a meat eater, although I have heard a lot of good points by the vegans/vegetarians here. The difference for me is that while I eat meat, I don't like seeing anything suffer needlessly or cruely.0 -
I've already granted that you don't have to be religious to believe torturing animals is wrong. But you can't say it's morally wrong for someone to eat meat because Jesus didn't. Just say you think it's morally wrong and leave Christianity out of it. (this is a general 'you', not directed to you).It's a good queston and further illustrates my point here and in past discussions about morality. I am a meat eater, although I have heard a lot of good points by the vegans/vegetarians here. The difference for me is that while I eat meat, I don't like seeing anything suffer needlessly or cruely.0 -
I've already granted that you don't have to be religious to believe torturing animals is wrong. But you can't say it's morally wrong for someone to eat meat because Jesus didn't. Just say you think it's morally wrong and leave Christianity out of it. (this is a general 'you', not directed to you).It's a good queston and further illustrates my point here and in past discussions about morality. I am a meat eater, although I have heard a lot of good points by the vegans/vegetarians here. The difference for me is that while I eat meat, I don't like seeing anything suffer needlessly or cruely.
No, I understand what you are saying, and we are on the same side of the issue, albeit for different reasons. But we were speaking to the moral aspects of it and exactly why it is wrong to be cruel to an animal if you were using christianity as a reason. That was all. It wasn't an attack on the faith as much as a debate on the foundation of of the value that torturing an animal is bad. It's actually a very interesting look at morality, because many people who enjoy activities such as dog fighting do not view it as morally wrong while others make the excuse that it is cultural, mirroring things like ****-fighting.
I've thought about it and decided that decided that animal cruelty is sensless and deranged free of scripture guiding me. I was just wondering if you could point to anything the bible said declaring animal cruelty was wrong. It is sort of a gotcha question because if there isn't, then you have come to the same conclusion I have without divine intervention which is something we have debated on before. But to be fair, I am not rock solid on that position that the bible doesn't speak of it, I just couldn't recall anything of that nature.0 -
\I want to throw a question out here: what is the moral difference between what we know as animal cruelty and killing an animal to eat?
To my knowledge, The butcher my dad used to work for did it at their shop and they did it quickly and as painlessly as possible.
Killing an animal out of cruelty is doing it with the intent to see it suffer and feel pain.
Killing an animal to eat can be a means of survival and be done is an easy/painless way if done right.
I suppose if it really came down to it, I would rather a death be quick and painless than prolonged and painful, but ultimately, isn't it a death? Does the "quick and painless" nature somehow justify it?
Sure, eating meat "can" be a means of survival, but for most of us posting here, who are not in any way starving, left on a desert island, etc., the consumption of meat goes beyond a means of survival and becomes a matter of taste, and ultimately greed. Even though the human body doesn't need meat, people still choose to kill and eat them - plus, if we get those meats and animal products from factory sources (and even "organic", "local" and "free-range" sources), there is a stunning amount of cruelty involved in their "production" that the public never sees, mostly because people just plain don't want to think about it. And don't get me wrong - for a large part of my life, I too put up my blinders because the thought of a doe-eyed cow might ruin my steak dinner.
But I think it's important to note that for the most part, cruelty is a big ingredient in the production of animal products. Even on hyper-local farms, the ultimate goal is to make a profit no matter how much a farmer "cares" for his animals - that means male calves and "spent" cows are useless to a dairy farm, male chicks are useless to an egg farm. Even if it's not just the killing that qualifies as cruelty, certainly the production of meat and animal products should.
I remember not too many months ago, the US ban on horse meat was lifted, and people (well, my Facebook at least) went absolutely ballistic. Horse steaks? Disgusting! The dog meat festival in China? Barbaric! Yet Hindus in India might just as quickly point the finger at us for our unrivaled consumption of cows.
I think that even if a person chooses to eat meat, it's important that they step back and ask "why?" If the answer is some variation of "because that's how it's always been", then it might be time to do a little research.0 -
\I want to throw a question out here: what is the moral difference between what we know as animal cruelty and killing an animal to eat?
To my knowledge, The butcher my dad used to work for did it at their shop and they did it quickly and as painlessly as possible.
Killing an animal out of cruelty is doing it with the intent to see it suffer and feel pain.
Killing an animal to eat can be a means of survival and be done is an easy/painless way if done right.
I suppose if it really came down to it, I would rather a death be quick and painless than prolonged and painful, but ultimately, isn't it a death? Does the "quick and painless" nature somehow justify it?
Sure, eating meat "can" be a means of survival, but for most of us posting here, who are not in any way starving, left on a desert island, etc., the consumption of meat goes beyond a means of survival and becomes a matter of taste, and ultimately greed. Even though the human body doesn't need meat, people still choose to kill and eat them - plus, if we get those meats and animal products from factory sources (and even "organic", "local" and "free-range" sources), there is a stunning amount of cruelty involved in their "production" that the public never sees, mostly because people just plain don't want to think about it. And don't get me wrong - for a large part of my life, I too put up my blinders because the thought of a doe-eyed cow might ruin my steak dinner.
But I think it's important to note that for the most part, cruelty is a big ingredient in the production of animal products. Even on hyper-local farms, the ultimate goal is to make a profit no matter how much a farmer "cares" for his animals - that means male calves and "spent" cows are useless to a dairy farm, male chicks are useless to an egg farm. Even if it's not just the killing that qualifies as cruelty, certainly the production of meat and animal products should.
I remember not too many months ago, the US ban on horse meat was lifted, and people (well, my Facebook at least) went absolutely ballistic. Horse steaks? Disgusting! The dog meat festival in China? Barbaric! Yet Hindus in India might just as quickly point the finger at us for our unrivaled consumption of cows.
I think that even if a person chooses to eat meat, it's important that they step back and ask "why?" If the answer is some variation of "because that's how it's always been", then it might be time to do a little research.
Like I said, all interesting points, and I promise I will look further into the healthiness of being a vegetarian. Problem for me is that I desire a lot of protein consumption to keep the muscle I already have, and I have a lean body mass of around 190-200 lbs. If I can get that kind of protein support from being a veggie, I'll consider it. Past that, I do think that the anti-animal eating crowd has made good a good argument. I can't promise I would convert, but who knows. I did eat a lot of Boca stuff because of a friends wife while I was in the Army.0 -
\I want to throw a question out here: what is the moral difference between what we know as animal cruelty and killing an animal to eat?
To my knowledge, The butcher my dad used to work for did it at their shop and they did it quickly and as painlessly as possible.
Killing an animal out of cruelty is doing it with the intent to see it suffer and feel pain.
Killing an animal to eat can be a means of survival and be done is an easy/painless way if done right.
I suppose if it really came down to it, I would rather a death be quick and painless than prolonged and painful, but ultimately, isn't it a death? Does the "quick and painless" nature somehow justify it?
Sure, eating meat "can" be a means of survival, but for most of us posting here, who are not in any way starving, left on a desert island, etc., the consumption of meat goes beyond a means of survival and becomes a matter of taste, and ultimately greed. Even though the human body doesn't need meat, people still choose to kill and eat them - plus, if we get those meats and animal products from factory sources (and even "organic", "local" and "free-range" sources), there is a stunning amount of cruelty involved in their "production" that the public never sees, mostly because people just plain don't want to think about it. And don't get me wrong - for a large part of my life, I too put up my blinders because the thought of a doe-eyed cow might ruin my steak dinner.
But I think it's important to note that for the most part, cruelty is a big ingredient in the production of animal products. Even on hyper-local farms, the ultimate goal is to make a profit no matter how much a farmer "cares" for his animals - that means male calves and "spent" cows are useless to a dairy farm, male chicks are useless to an egg farm. Even if it's not just the killing that qualifies as cruelty, certainly the production of meat and animal products should.
I remember not too many months ago, the US ban on horse meat was lifted, and people (well, my Facebook at least) went absolutely ballistic. Horse steaks? Disgusting! The dog meat festival in China? Barbaric! Yet Hindus in India might just as quickly point the finger at us for our unrivaled consumption of cows.
I think that even if a person chooses to eat meat, it's important that they step back and ask "why?" If the answer is some variation of "because that's how it's always been", then it might be time to do a little research.
Like I said, all interesting points, and I promise I will look further into the healthiness of being a vegetarian. Problem for me is that I desire a lot of protein consumption to keep the muscle I already have, and I have a lean body mass of around 190-200 lbs. If I can get that kind of protein support from being a veggie, I'll consider it. Past that, I do think that the anti-animal eating crowd has made good a good argument. I can't promise I would convert, but who knows. I did eat a lot of Boca stuff because of a friends wife while I was in the Army.
My heart is all aflutter to hear this No need to look at it as "conversation" - Meatless Mondays are a great place to start! Maybe this isn't the place to put it, but I feel the need to get a little tangential here.
I completely understand the need for adequate protein - when I went vegan while on my school's Olympic weightlifting team, I had the same concerns. Here's some good animal-free sources of protein:
Seitan (home-prepared or store bought): 118 calories/24g protein per 3.5oz. (Also, my favorite).
Tempeh: 240 calories/20g protein per 1/2 package
Vegan Boca Burgers: 100 calories/19g protein per patty
Black Beans: 240g/16g protein per cup
Lentils: 230g/18g protein per cup, cooked
Vegan Protein Powder (brown rice/gemma pea blend): 118 calories/25g protein per scoop
Tofu (when you learn how to prepare it, it is sooooo delicious): 60 calories/6g protein per 3oz.0 -
I remember not too many months ago, the US ban on horse meat was lifted, and people (well, my Facebook at least) went absolutely ballistic. Horse steaks? Disgusting! The dog meat festival in China? Barbaric! Yet Hindus in India might just as quickly point the finger at us for our unrivaled consumption of cows.
Yep. Just as most people in the U.S. do not eat bugs and say "eww gross," others balk at our meat consumption. And I was waiting for someone to bring up the lack of beef consumption in India. I know people who eat veal, but won't eat a lamb, and vice versa. It's pick-and-choose based on the culture you live in, and/or how you were raised. People just don't want to admit they're hypocrites.
Personally, I know I cannot cut meat out cold turkey (pun somewhat intended ). I live with a butcher, so it's especially hard. I'm sure it doesn't mean much to a real vegetarian or vegan, but stuff like this inspires me to eat LESS meat. Maybe one day I can cut it out entirely, who knows. I often think about it. 0 -
I remember not too many months ago, the US ban on horse meat was lifted, and people (well, my Facebook at least) went absolutely ballistic. Horse steaks? Disgusting! The dog meat festival in China? Barbaric! Yet Hindus in India might just as quickly point the finger at us for our unrivaled consumption of cows.
Yep. Just as most people in the U.S. do not eat bugs and say "eww gross," others balk at our meat consumption. And I was waiting for someone to bring up the lack of beef consumption in India. I know people who eat veal, but won't eat a lamb, and vice versa. It's pick-and-choose based on the culture you live in, and/or how you were raised. People just don't want to admit they're hypocrites.
Personally, I know I cannot cut meat out cold turkey (pun somewhat intended ). I live with a butcher, so it's especially hard. I'm sure it doesn't mean much to a real vegetarian or vegan, but stuff like this inspires me to eat LESS meat. Maybe one day I can cut it out entirely, who knows. I often think about it.
It probably doesn't mean much coming from one person on the internet, but don't feel this somehow cheapens your choices. Every vegetarian/vegan that would say that lessening your meat consumption "isn't a big deal" forgets about their own past that likely involved cheeseburgers and mom's meat loaf.
Like a lot of things (weight loss, for example), the decision to eliminate meat and animal products only comes when the person is ready. To the animals spared by your decision to give up meat, it's no small thing 0
