Christspiracy Movie

[Smit]

Rotten tomatoes 0%

Vegan Christians 96%

Who could have guessed that? 🤔

[Jim at Gentex]

Yes in that verse it does indicate that Jesus ate the fish he was given. However there is greater meaning to that verse. His disciples did not believe he had risen and that he was a spirit or ghost. He tried to convince them by telling them to touch him, but they still did not believe. Finally he asked them for food to convince them he was really risen. They gave him fish so he ate some to show them he was real.

Now your turn, Do you think God would be ok with billions of his creatures being killed annually? When we breed livestock for food are we creating the life or is God?

Please read this article and tell where it is actually wrong, not your opinion, but where their facts or assertions can be easily proven false. https://medium.com/sant-mat-meditation-and-spirituality/evidence-that-jesus-and-the-original-aramaic-christians-were-vegetarians-b8784ac42506

So if the eating of the fish were a sinful act, regardless of why He did it, by your assertion that would make Jesus a sinner, and thus we would have nothing further to discuss because we can't agree on even the most basic theology.

I will try to read the article and give you some feedback, but again, if Jesus actually ate fish, he cannot by definition be a vegetarian.

[YoDoug]

Look I don't really expect any of you to really openly consider my position. One of the hardest things for a man to do in life is deny the flesh. Possible only second to accepting the existence of a higher power. Virtually nothing is more ingrained into our fleshly desires than the food and drink we consume. To accept my position means you have to change your entire life. Very few people have the will power to overcome that. To acknowledge killing animals is wrong means the "wall" has to come down. It goes against everything you have been raised to believe and lived your life accordingly.

[YoDoug]

So if the eating of the fish were a sinful act, regardless of why He did it, by your assertion that would make Jesus a sinner, and thus we would have nothing further to discuss because we can't agree on even the most basic theology.

I'm not saying it is a sin. God made concession to allow us to eat meat. I am saying he did not create us to do, nor does he approve of it.

[mowens]

One of the biggest mistakes any human can make is to claim to know the mind of God.

[Jim at Gentex]

I'm not saying it is a sin. God made concession to allow us to eat meat. I am saying he did not create us to do, nor does he approve of it.

That which God 'does not approve of' is SIN.
You can't have it both ways.

Yes, man did not eat meat until after the fall, that is true according to Genesis.

Genesis 3:21 also says God provided 'skins' for clothing for Adam and Eve, and most scholars I have read agree that these would have been animal skins, and the inference is that the animals in question would have been killed by God Himself before their skins were taken. (Hence the word 'provided').

Again, letting the text speak for itself and applying logic and common sense.

And to be fair, Genesis 3:18 does make a point that supports your argument:
18thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field.
19By the sweat of your face
you shall eat bread,
till you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken;

However, the text does NOT say you shall eat ONLY of the plants of the field, so we can't insert that word just because it fits our argument.

[Jim at Gentex]

One of the biggest mistakes any human can make is to claim to know the mind of God.

True, we can't possibly know His mind.

But we can have a somewhat limited understanding of His written Word, which he gave to us so that we could know of Him.

[YoDoug]

That which God 'does not approve of' is SIN.
You can't have it both ways.

Yes, man did not eat meat until after the fall, that is true according to Genesis.

Genesis 3:21 also says God provided 'skins' for clothing for Adam and Eve, and most scholars I have read agree that these would have been animal skins, and the inference is that the animals in question would have been killed by God Himself before their skins were taken. (Hence the word 'provided').

Again, letting the text speak for itself and applying logic and common sense.

And to be fair, Genesis 3:18 does make a point that supports your argument:
18thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field.
19By the sweat of your face
you shall eat bread,
till you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken;

However, the text does NOT say you shall eat ONLY of the plants of the field, so we can't insert that word just because it fits our argument.

You still have not answered my question if think God would approve of us killing billions of his creatures. You keep skipping over that question.

[Jim at Gentex]

You still have not answered my question if think God would approve of us killing billions of his creatures. You keep skipping over that question.

Not skipping over it.
You realize that is a loaded question, right? 

I will answer with Scripture:
Acts 10:12-15

12In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air. 13And there came a voice to him: "Rise, Peter; kill and eat." 14But Peter said, "By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean." 15And the voice came to him again a second time, "What God has made clean, do not call common."

So yeah, if God told Peter specifically, "kill and eat", then yes, He does approve of it.

[YoDoug]

You realize that is a loaded question, right? 

It's not a loaded question, It's an honest question. I just don't see God, the author of all life, giving the breath of life to animals to suffer cruelty and an untimely death for us and being ok with it. You can easily say he creates the animals and allows us to create their suffering but to say he is ok with goes against who God is.

Job 12:7-10
"But ask the animals, and they will teach you, or the birds of the air, and they will tell you; or speak to the earth, and it will teach you, or let the fish of the sea inform you. Which of all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this? In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind."
 

[MIL-TFP-41]

I believe that justifying a diet over a book is just as pointless as justifying murder over the same book. Yet, over the past 2000 years or so, people have attempted to do both.

[Jim at Gentex]

...but to say he is ok with goes against who God is.

I thought I was clear that HIS WORD says He is ok with it. (Acts 10:13)

Unless you can twist some alternate meaning out of the simple phrase 'kill and eat' I will maintain that His words to Peter confirm that He is in fact ok with it.

His words, not mine.

[Dan_AKA_ROY23]

(Jim's winning this argument because he is using scriptural support.)

Let's see the word of God, Doug, otherwise I can't take anything seriously (with respect, Doug).

Well done Jim with your recent posts. Impressive. 

[Incogneeto]

(Jim's winning this argument because he is using scriptural support.)

Let's see the word of God, Doug, otherwise I can't take anything seriously (with respect, Doug).

Well done Jim with your recent posts. Impressive. 

YoDougs a Looser!! YoDougs a Looser!!! Nanner!! Nanner!!

Next subject.. "Interpretive Dance"

Was God For it or Agin'it??

[Incogneeto]

You Guys are Polite as Hell.

It's really Boring.

So Far Ghuns is the only one keeping this interesting.

And while we are here , shouldn't the Classic Rock thread be in the Music Forum?

And Christspiracy in the Conspiracy Sub?

I don't what kinda outfit you're running?