Vegetarianism

[Claudya]

Baggy, you asked the question and then reveal you've already made your mind up? Hmm ...

At any rate, vegetarians will tell you of the social sacrifice you're going to make, that people like me will look down on you, make fun of your diet, ridicule you for your choice, etc. I've known a lot of vegetarians and I've never done any such thing nor have I seen them subjected to that kind of treatment.

It actually IS a sacrifice, because I really used to love meat. Or fish. I will never taste salmon again. But if my pleasure is the reason other creatures have to die before their time I rather sacrifice that pleasure. Maybe "sacrifice" is a bad word choice here, it sounds like a big spiritual act... "relinquish" or "forego" might be better.
And I can tell you there ARE people that make fun of vegetarians. Not all meat eaters are like that and you can live a vegetarian life for months without being mocked, most people just accept that kind of diet nowadays, but the mockery happens. It happened to me three times *this week*.
My guess is those people that are okay with eating meat are relaxed about that topic and accept that someone else does not eat meat, and thus won't mock. But the mockers are the ones who's own conscience is secretly nagging them to reconsider their own meat consumption, but they chose to ignore it because their burgers are too tasty.

It seems many of them chose the lifestyle actually hoping they would be subjected to such treatment so they could feel like martyrs.

I won't lie: getting attention is nice, and when I "converted" to vegetarianism the mockery was a reward for me. Yes, it made me feel morally superior. (But it wasn't the motivation to become a veggie in the first place!) I was rather young then But I suppose many new vegetarians go through that weird kind of martyr joy, it's a phase on the way. And for me it's not like that any more. Today I only feel bad for causing additional effort if someone has to prepare a seperate dish for me, and being made fun of is just boring. I heard all of the veggie jokes before, they've grown old. So any psychological gratification I could gain from the mockery has ceased, and lo and behold - I'm still a veggie.
Those that become vegetarians as a "lifestyle choice" will capitulate the next time they smell a barbeque. Those that keep going for years are *convinced* of it being their right way. So forgive us veggies if we step into that psychological trap of feeling superior. You will still be able to tell who of us is serious and who is just a life style veggie.

They often hype the healthy way they live as superior to a standard diet, but wind up taking a much higher dose of multivitamins because of the lack of meat in their diet. They also have to take protein supplements, or eat a lot of legumes and risky being gassy.

Nope, vegetarians that are at good health don't need food supplements, as long as they do occasionally eat eggs or dairy products.
Even vegans can have a healthy and complete diet without supplements, but they have to plan and control it extremely well (and it's rather expensive).
On the other hand some meat eaters have to take supplements too.

The most-often voiced argument for vegetarianism is concern for the animal population. I grew up on a farm. I care about animals, too. We were very careful to treat them well.

That's great and I'm absolutely fine with people buying all their meat from a farm where they know they are treated well. I knew a guy that used to hunt ducks to eat them, that's pretty awesome, too.
What I absolutely can't stand are people that don't care. You know, city people that can't tell a cow from a sparrow. They just want their meat as cheap as possible and have no idea what ordeal their tasty steak may have gone through. When pointed to animal cruelty on farms they respond like: "Well, as long as I don't have to watch it I don't care." That's just plain evil.

 

[farouk]

Claudya: Vegetarianism is a perfectly valid choice.

(Any hint of compulsory vegetarianism is unscriptural; and in Acts Peter's vision specifically sanctions the eating of meat.)

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

It actually IS a sacrifice, because I really used to love meat. Or fish. I will never taste salmon again. But if my pleasure is the reason other creatures have to die before their time I rather sacrifice that pleasure. Maybe "sacrifice" is a bad word choice here, it sounds like a big spiritual act... "relinquish" or "forego" might be better.
And I can tell you there ARE people that make fun of vegetarians. Not all meat eaters are like that and you can live a vegetarian life for months without being mocked, most people just accept that kind of diet nowadays, but the mockery happens. It happened to me three times *this week*.

God gave us dominion over the animals. He intended us to use them for food, clothing, and whatever else they may be useful for. Therefore, killing on does not mean they "die before their time." It means someone eats who might otherwise not do so.

My guess is those people that are okay with eating meat are relaxed about that topic and accept that someone else does not eat meat, and thus won't mock. But the mockers are the ones who's own conscience is secretly nagging them to reconsider their own meat consumption, but they chose to ignore it because their burgers are too tasty.

I doubt that. Some people are just idiots who mock anything they don't understand. They'll turn from the vegan and mock a black person just as easily.

I won't lie: getting attention is nice, and when I "converted" to vegetarianism the mockery was a reward for me. Yes, it made me feel morally superior. (But it wasn't the motivation to become a veggie in the first place!) I was rather young then But I suppose many new vegetarians go through that weird kind of martyr joy, it's a phase on the way. And for me it's not like that any more. Today I only feel bad for causing additional effort if someone has to prepare a seperate dish for me, and being made fun of is just boring. I heard all of the veggie jokes before, they've grown old. So any psychological gratification I could gain from the mockery has ceased, and lo and behold - I'm still a veggie.

Reread this paragraph, please, and tell me again you aren't enjoying the martyrdom.

That's great and I'm absolutely fine with people buying all their meat from a farm where they know they are treated well. I knew a guy that used to hunt ducks to eat them, that's pretty awesome, too.
What I absolutely can't stand are people that don't care. You know, city people that can't tell a cow from a sparrow. They just want their meat as cheap as possible and have no idea what ordeal their tasty steak may have gone through. When pointed to animal cruelty on farms they respond like: "Well, as long as I don't have to watch it I don't care." That's just plain evil.

Again I reiterate, animals were given by God to people for dominion over them, to use as they see fit. God created all the Earth for man's use. We make bad decisions about many, many things, but God did not see the death of animals for the use of man as a bad thing. He, in fact, encouraged it. Look at the method of sacrifices. The vegan view will cause people to raise an unbelievable outcry about that when Israel builds the next temple and beings the sacrifice again.

 

[Claudya]

Do you know the ratios of legumes or green leafy things you have to eat to meet the protein input of 3 oz. of steak? Man was given meat to eat in the Bible. We are not herbivores.

Probably less legumes than a pig has to eat to build up that delicious 3 oz steak.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Probably less legumes than a pig has to eat to build up that delicious 3 oz steak.

Uh ... steak comes from cattle, Claudya.

 

[farouk]

While moralizing against meat eating is clearly unBiblical, yet vegetarianism itself does not need to carry this moralizing connotation. I myself actually choose vegetarian dishes sometimes when at restaurants.

 

[Claudya]

Uh ... steak comes from cattle, Claudya.

Sorry. Anyway, it's not relevant what kind of animal we are talking about. So any reply on topic?

 

[Claudya]

While moralizing against meat eating is clearly unBiblical, yet vegetarianism itself does not need to carry this moralizing connotation. I myself actually choose vegetarian dishes sometimes when at restaurants.

Tend to agree, but with a small addition.
Moralizing from a christian point of view against eating meat is unbiblical. But moralising from an "earthly" point of view, like if a vegetarian appeals to a meat eater's compassion and sympathy with livestock animals, is not unbiblical. As I said in my first post: compassion is something God values in us.
You can be a moral vegetarian, it's no sin. It's just a sin to claim it's in the Bible.

 

[Pizzaguy]

I'm no vegetarian, but I know several of them, and a few of the "raw food only" crowd and I can tell you they are healthier than the rest of us.



EDIT: I just had a raw food lunch (not quite vegetarian, but all raw and plant based), it's part of my fight against heart disease and clogged arteries.

 

[reba]

Uh ... steak comes from cattle, Claudya.

A southern guy, and raised on a farm? and you have never heard of a hamsteak! :gah

Big ol chunk of ham setting next to a pile of fried taters, don't forget the onions,....

Some biscuits to go with those eggs..... cup of good coffee....

 

[farouk]

Tend to agree, but with a small addition.
Moralizing from a christian point of view against eating meat is unbiblical. But moralising from an "earthly" point of view, like if a vegetarian appeals to a meat eater's compassion and sympathy with livestock animals, is not unbiblical. As I said in my first post: compassion is something God values in us.
You can be a moral vegetarian, it's no sin. It's just a sin to claim it's in the Bible.

C: But is pagan moralizing really appropriate, if one's values are from the Bible?

(Trying to think it through logically; I enjoy discussing things with you, Claudya.)

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

A southern guy, and raised on a farm? and you have never heard of a hamsteak! :gah

Southern? What part of north Missouri is southern?

Big ol chunk of ham setting next to a pile of fried taters, don't forget the onions,....

Where I come from, that's a slice of ham, not a "hamsteak."

Some biscuits to go with those eggs..... cup of good coffee....

Now you're talkin'! But it still won't get me to refer to a slice of ham as "hamsteak."

 

[Claudya]

God gave us dominion over the animals. He intended us to use them for food, clothing, and whatever else they may be useful for. Therefore, killing on does not mean they "die before their time." It means someone eats who might otherwise not do so.

You are slightly shifting the topic here.
I agree, God allowed us to use animals. I can choose not to make full use of that dominion though. And that means I can choose that no salmon will have to die for me, even though I love their taste. As far as I am concerned any salmon (or any other animal) shall live the happiest and freeest (superlative of free? lol) life possible, and die "at their time", while doing what a salmon does, not because of something shallow like my enjoyment (shallow compared to the value of a life).

Reread this paragraph, please, and tell me again you aren't enjoying the martyrdom.

I told you I did in the foolishness of my youth enjoy the martyrdom, but I don't do so anymore.
Heck, I asked you for forgiveness on behalf of all "martyr vegetarians", so would you please stop rubbing it in.

But just hypothetically, if I were enjoying it- what would be wrong about that?

Again I reiterate, animals were given by God to people for dominion over them, to use as they see fit. God created all the Earth for man's use. We make bad decisions about many, many things, but God did not see the death of animals for the use of man as a bad thing. He, in fact, encouraged it. Look at the method of sacrifices. The vegan view will cause people to raise an unbelievable outcry about that when Israel builds the next temple and beings the sacrifice again.

Again, I reiterate as well: I agree, and never said otherwise, that God allowed for us to eat meat.
I'm not sure He likes how we are handling our dominion over the world. But the sin wouldn't be eating meat. Eating meat is fine with God. The actual sin would be cruelty, greed, ignorance, and in some cases sadism.

 

[Claudya]

C: But is pagan moralizing really appropriate, if one's values are from the Bible?

(Trying to think it through logically; I enjoy discussing things with you, Claudya.)

Hehe thanks
Well, it's not pagan. It's just "worldy". Even if someone's values are from the Bible there are issues that aren't discussed in the Bible because either God didn't consider them relevant, or because those problems just didn't exist when the Bible was written.
One of those things is whether it's okay and approbriate, or even necessary, to forego eating meat when you live in a society where you can't know whether the animal you eat has been treated humanely or uneccessarily tortured.
In this case we have the Holy Spirit to help us make those decisions. And we have been given brains capable of ethical, compassionate and reasonable thinking. So God has given us what it takes to make a wise decisions in such cases where the Bible isn't clear.
That doesn't mean you're moralising is pagan, it's just "self-reliant".

 

[abide]

I have been thinking about becoming a vegetarian for months, even years, but I've never done it. I keep getting horrible images of animals being slaughtered in my head and I woke up this morning with a really strong desire to be a vegetarian. What's Christianity's view on vegetarianism?

1 Timothy 4:1-3 states, "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils [‘demons,’ NKJV]; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth."


If this passage were given to you answer questions on. How would you answer the following.

What are the seducing doctrines and those of demons mentioned here in this passage.

(1) Forbidding to marry CELIBACY
(2) Abstaining from meats VEGETARIANISM

If a person wants to become a vegetarian that is their choice, or if they want to be celibate it is their choice...BUT THE BIBLE SHOULD NEVER BE USED TO ADVOCATE EITHER. DOING THIS IS FALSE.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

You are slightly shifting the topic here.

Not at all. I'm calling attention to the fact that God gave us the animals for our use, including food.

I agree, God allowed us to use animals. I can choose not to make full use of that dominion though. And that means I can choose that no salmon will have to die for me, even though I love their taste. As far as I am concerned any salmon (or any other animal) shall live the happiest and freeest (superlative of free? lol) life possible, and die "at their time" ...

Which again, assumes that you have no right to choose "their time" when in reality, the fact you have been given dominion over them makes whatever time you choose "their time."

Salmon and other fish have no memory, no ability to serve other than by being food. That is why God gave them to us as such. Higher animals, so called because they appear to be higher functioning, actually have only higher instinct and the same can be said for them. They may serve at a higher function for a time, and certainly domesticated pets have a greater function than food, but in the end, that is all animals were put here for.

Nonetheless,the argument that animals should be treated properly can be based entirely on the need for human beings to behave morally, rather than on the rights of animals:

• Human beings have an awareness of moral ideas and understand the difference between right and wrong.
• Human beings accept that certain things are morally wrong and should not be done - regardless of whether the victim has any rights or not.
• Causing pain and suffering is morally wrong, whether the victim is human or an animal.
  • This is not because it violates the rights of the victim, but because causing pain and suffering is inherently wrong.
  • Causing pain and suffering therefore diminishes the moral standing of the human being that causes it.
• Therefore human beings should not be cruel to animals.

Nothing need be said about whether animals are suffering when being used for food. A painless or humane method of killing them is sufficient.

 

[Free]

God gave us dominion over the animals. He intended us to use them for food, clothing, and whatever else they may be useful for. Therefore, killing on does not mean they "die before their time." It means someone eats who might otherwise not do so.



Again I reiterate, animals were given by God to people for dominion over them, to use as they see fit. God created all the Earth for man's use. We make bad decisions about many, many things, but God did not see the death of animals for the use of man as a bad thing. He, in fact, encouraged it. Look at the method of sacrifices. The vegan view will cause people to raise an unbelievable outcry about that when Israel builds the next temple and beings the sacrifice again.

I agree but with some qualification. Having dominion does not preclude certain responsibilities, particularly the humane treatment of animals. As man is to be a steward of the earth and all that is in it, humane treatment of animals ought to be a priority for the Christian. The way the industry typically does things is wrong.

As such, my wife and I buy only organic meat (and eggs) from animals that have been humanely treated and killed. It costs a lot more so we eat less but now our consciences are clear.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I agree but with some qualification. Having dominion does not preclude certain responsibilities, particularly the humane treatment of animals. As man is to be a steward of the earth and all that is in it, humane treatment of animals ought to be a priority for the Christian. The way the industry typically does things is wrong.

No, the way you have been told industry does it is wrong. But the food processing industry isn't the evil master many believe it to be. As I said earlier in the bullet points I listed, man has a responsibility to treat animals morally. The industry largely -- and by that, I mean almost exclusively -- treats animals humanely and morally. The events you see in the videos the animal activists, particularly PETA, release are the extremely rare exception. Certain there are failures in following accepted procedures, and small firms may rarely try to cut corners. They always pay for those mistakes, and those mistakes feed PETAs misinformation campaign to convince you that what you said here is correct. It is not.

In fact, PETA extends its lies even further by being a huge hypocrite regarding respect for animal life. Their shelter in Hampton Roads, Virginia has killed over 27,000 animals in the last ten years. But that's another thread.

As such, my wife and I buy only organic meat (and eggs) from animals that have been humanely treated and killed. It costs a lot more so we eat less but now our consciences are clear.

And it is a totally unnecessary expense, because the rest of industry is doing things morally and humanely, too. God bless.