How does Pork Kill you?

[zer0das]

I'd like to point out the pork vs lamb data posted earlier isn't normalized: one has a portion size far smaller than the other. Correcting for this we have:

Lamb
2.2 calories/g
0.89 g fat/g
0.33 g saturated fat/g
5.01 mg cholesterol/g

Pork
1.9 calories/g
0.07 g fat/g
0.02 g saturated fat/g
0.92 mg cholesterol/g

So, about the same caloric intake (a bit more for lamb), but it has a lot more fat (over ten times) and cholesterol (5 times). Aside from parasites, I don't really think there's any other reason to consider pork more unhealthy than most other meats (except poultry and fish, maybe). The amount of meat most people eat these days could be considered abusing their bodies, along with a lack of exercise, drinking alcohol, etc. As long as you take care of your body and cook your food properly, I don't think there's much of an issue.

 

[turnorburn]

All of you listen up, are we going to live by the law? Its been tried multiple times and it don't work.

A definition for uncooked pork if you please... :crazy
Trichinosis, also called trichinellosis, or trichiniasis, is a parasitic disease caused by eating raw or undercooked pork and wild game infected with the larvae of a species of roundworm Trichinella spiralis, commonly called the trichina worm. There are eight Trichinella species; five species are encapsulated and three are non-encapsulated. [1] Only three Trichinella species are known to cause Trichinosis: T. spiralis, T. nativa, and T. britovi. [1] The few cases in the United States are mostly the result of eating undercooked game, bear meat, or home reared pigs. It is most common in the developing world and where pigs are commonly fed raw garbage.

The list goes on in Leviticus , care to eliminate crab meat? lobster? clams? and etc. etc. etc.

I Corinthians 10:26 For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof.

10:27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

10:28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

10:29 Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience?

10:30 For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?

10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

10:33 Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.



turnorburn

 

[stranger]

Hi Fembot,

...about animal 'parts' used in humans

The practice will result in 'admixture' which is the essence of unholiness - my argument would be that the image and likeness of God is reserved for man (generic) and man alone. Animals were not created in God's image and likeness.

In this discussion I have attempted to drawn a line between man and animals. Where will science draw the line not predicated in belief and obedience to the revelation of God?

There is a principal 'first comes the phyiscal then the spiritual'. If the 'physical' is an admixture won't it follow that the spiritual has been compromised? A physical admixture of man's flesh and animal's flesh (kept together by chemicals inhibiting the immune system) is a lessing, by degree, of being truly human. Science is not about to stop at a pig's heart valve is it?

blessings

 

[Vic C.]

First off, the essence of unholiness is transgression of the Law, which we can't help because of our sin nature, which is why we need a Savior in the first place.

Stranger, you will have to prove of course, that admixture is transferred to the reproductive genes. Until someone can prove without shadow of a doubt this is cause for concern and somehow can lead to human mutations, I stand on what I believe and posted. Separating the physical from the spiritual, nothing can affect the spiritual likeness between man and God. That is the essence of Gen 1:26.

If the 'physical' is an admixture won't it follow that the spiritual has been compromised?

No. The essence of God's Spirit is demonstrated here:

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

Meaning, He never changes and since God is Spirit, we have to see this from the spiritual perspective.

Science is not about to stop at a pig's heart valve is it?

Probably not and I addressed this in an earlier. Science is a tool. Man uses tools for both good and bad. The problem leis within man's heart and our propensity to sin. Fix that and you are now getting somewhere. Unfortunately that can't be fixed simply by taking away man's tools.

 

[Elijah674]

God said NOT to eat of the forbiden fruit, (or whatever else is documented!) or you would die
And we all know the 'TEACHING' of most of the Rev. 17:5 ones today.

And unlike satans claim of calling God a liar & these ones of Rev. 5 also teaching that bottom/line for truth??? 'i' Believe Christ's Word of Obad. 1:16 as speaking of the SECOND ETERNAL DEATH. And PORK?? That is just one of the 'restrictive' requirerments of God.

--Elijah

 

[Elijah674]

Perfect Adam, stated as VERY GOOD! God does not create flawed goods! Gen. 2:15 finds an FORBIDDEN TREE in the Garden with a FATAL WARNING. And we find in Heb. 13:8 that CHRIST/GOD is SAME FOREVER, HE NEVER CHANGES!(and this disobedience is no worse that any of the other ten! James 2:8-12)

Then here comes satan telling us that God is a LIAR! (Gen. 3:4) And with the Rev. 17:5 ones 'mostly' all teaching the same stuff!

And as satanic, is the teaching that there is NO CONDITION TO SALVATION, or the GODHEADS GRACE!

Again, Christ NEVER CHANGES! And Adam was SINLESS & UNDER ETERNAL GRACE, [as long as the Eternal Covenant CONDITION WAS OBEYED!] Heb. 13:20

--Elijah

 

[Fembot]

Hi Fembot,

...about animal 'parts' used in humans

The practice will result in 'admixture' which is the essence of unholiness - my argument would be that the image and likeness of God is reserved for man (generic) and man alone. Animals were not created in God's image and likeness.

In this discussion I have attempted to drawn a line between man and animals. Where will science draw the line not predicated in belief and obedience to the revelation of God?

There is a principal 'first comes the phyiscal then the spiritual'. If the 'physical' is an admixture won't it follow that the spiritual has been compromised? A physical admixture of man's flesh and animal's flesh (kept together by chemicals inhibiting the immune system) is a lessing, by degree, of being truly human. Science is not about to stop at a pig's heart valve is it?

blessings

I agree. Thanks for putting it in better words.

 

[Fembot]

First off, the essence of unholiness is transgression of the Law, which we can't help because of our sin nature, which is why we need a Savior in the first place.

Stranger, you will have to prove of course, that admixture is transferred to the reproductive genes. Until someone can prove without shadow of a doubt this is cause for concern and somehow can lead to human mutations, I stand on what I believe and posted. Separating the physical from the spiritual, nothing can affect the spiritual likeness between man and God. That is the essence of Gen 1:26.

I'm up for having this discussion. But not in this thread. Stranger, would you care to start a thread, seeing you have more knowledge than I do on this subject?

 

[Vic C.]

You two, go for it. I will refrain. I said what I believe and I also believe it is a matter of interpretation, especially the interpretation of Gen 1:26.

 

[Fembot]

Ok

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." Genesis 1:26

If we are made in God's image and are given the right to rule over all the earth (and it's creatures). Would it not be going against this privilege if we willfully change part of our body into that of a creature?

God didn't say He made creatures in His image. He made man in His image.

If our bodies are His temple and made in his image, what are we doing when we replace a part of that temple with something unholy?

I just want to point out that our world is heading in a scary direction. A direction that is more serious than eating bacon. It's about choosing to live in God's image or as a human engineered, quasi-human. He is the only one to decide whether we have eternal life. Extending our own lives by desecrating His temple is not what I believe he intended for us. Though I will admit that I have not fully grasped what the consequences will be..I am very much against this.

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/20 ... -fi-1.html

 

[Fembot]

Please read this article:

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/20 ... -fi-1.html

 

[stovebolts]

Elijah674,

I believe the creation text makes no mention of anything being perfect, it simply says, "Good" and "Very Good".

All of God's creation is packed with potential. If you notice, the bible starts in a garden (Genesis) and ends in a city (Revelation).

Fembot,
When we look at creation, as far as it concerns humanity, being created in God's image is more than our physical. As humans, we feel, we have emotions. In short, we are sentient beings.

If you read the creation account, you will find that humanity is told several things. For one, they are to name the animals. If you look at how the Hebrews viewed their world, you'll find that names are more than simple names. They are descriptions and attributes of the things around them. Thus, it is through experience that man realizes that he is different than the rest of the animals and thus, finds his connection to his creator. Reading further in the text, we find that God sees something that is not good, and shortly after Adam realizes that he is lonely and as a result, woman is created from man.

Being created in God's image is more than skin deep, after all, if the story starts in a garden and ends in a city... and if we start with this body, become part of the body of Christ, and receive a new body after our resurection... then it may just be about something bigger, yet still connected to this lifetime. It's about realizing and experiencing the world around us. It's about progress and potential. It's about interaction, choices and the freedom to experience./// among other things.

God bless.

Jeff

 

[Vic C.]

Hi Fem,

:naughty Nope, you're not going to drag me in. I believe our image and likeness of God is spiritual. That's my final answer. :D

1 Cor 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

I like the KJV. What version is that you posted? You need to site it for copyright purposes if it's not public domain. ;)

Anyway,

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

One of the reasons I like the KJV is because it uses the word dominion instead of rule.

Sovereign or supreme authority; the power of governing and controlling; independent right of possession, use, and control; sovereignty; supremacy.

http://www.brainyquote.com/words/do/dominion156672.html

Of course dominion comes with responsibility. If we are going to use pig valves for replacement parts, we must also put down the animal as humanely as possible.

 

[Fembot]

He never said that our image were to be merged with other creatures. Yes we will be spirits. My concern is how that spirit is affected if we are not living according to His laws?

To change our bodies into something He did not intend might lead to other sin we can not fathom.

 

[Vic C.]

Hmm... Jeff quoted something by Larry King on the previous page. One has to wonder if King would have not even thought of asking this question if that pig valve didn't save his life. Actually, I take that back; if Larry had died, he wouldn't have had the chance to say what he said. But since he is still alive, there's still hope for his soul, thanks to a pig's heart valve. ;)

Larry King wrote:
But King says that if he could land an interview with God himself, he’d ask him one simple question, “Did you have a son?†King says with a mischievous smile.

Since the Bible is silent on this matter, I try not put God in a box. I'm a "the glass is half full" kinda guy.

 

[Elijah674]

Elijah674,

I believe the creation text makes no mention of anything being perfect, it simply says, "Good" and "Very Good".
*******
Elijah here: Do you think that the Godhead in Unity created anything FLAWED??? And Christ the second Adam needed to be reborn as Adam required? John 3:3.
I do know that there are some who think that a perfect Christ/God did creat an fermented wine that is caused by sin! But NO, these are not my convictions. Even Eze. 28 speaks of an covering Cherub being CREATED PERFECT!
*******

All of God's creation is packed with potential. If you notice, the bible starts in a garden (Genesis) and ends in a city (Revelation).

Fembot,
When we look at creation, as far as it concerns humanity, being created in God's image is more than our physical. As humans, we feel, we have emotions. In short, we are sentient beings.

If you read the creation account, you will find that humanity is told several things. For one, they are to name the animals. If you look at how the Hebrews viewed their world, you'll find that names are more than simple names. They are descriptions and attributes of the things around them. Thus, it is through experience that man realizes that he is different than the rest of the animals and thus, finds his connection to his creator. Reading further in the text, we find that God sees something that is not good, and shortly after Adam realizes that he is lonely and as a result, woman is created from man.

Being created in God's image is more than skin deep, after all, if the story starts in a garden and ends in a city... and if we start with this body, become part of the body of Christ, and receive a new body after our resurection... then it may just be about something bigger, yet still connected to this lifetime. It's about realizing and experiencing the world around us. It's about progress and potential. It's about interaction, choices and the freedom to experience./// among other things.

God bless.

Jeff

 

[follower of Christ]

To change our bodies into something He did not intend might lead to other sin we can not fathom.

I very seriously doubt that using a some part of an animal to save a father and husbands life is going to lead to sin.

.

 

[Fembot]

To change our bodies into something He did not intend might lead to other sin we can not fathom.

I very seriously doubt that using a some part of an animal to save a father and husbands life is going to lead to sin.

.

I don't doubt that going against God's laws can cause serious repercussions.

 

[Benoni]

We were created in God's image...on the sixth day. God is a spirit not flesh..

On the seventh day (notice the context) we were formed from the dust of the earth and made a living soul...

So on the seventh day God lowered us from being spiritual (made in His image and likeness) and formed us as I will put it "a soul man", "a dirt man".

God set man up for the fall and Adam had no choice.

Our spirit is the temple of God not our dirt body,

Ok

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." Genesis 1:26

If we are made in God's image and are given the right to rule over all the earth (and it's creatures). Would it not be going against this privilege if we willfully change part of our body into that of a creature?

God didn't say He made creatures in His image. He made man in His image.

If our bodies are His temple and made in his image, what are we doing when we replace a part of that temple with something unholy?

I just want to point out that our world is heading in a scary direction. A direction that is more serious than eating bacon. It's about choosing to live in God's image or as a human engineered, quasi-human. He is the only one to decide whether we have eternal life. Extending our own lives by desecrating His temple is not what I believe he intended for us. Though I will admit that I have not fully grasped what the consequences will be..I am very much against this.

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/20 ... -fi-1.html

 

[Sparkey]

Pork death... ahhhh, please no. Not pork death. :D
[attachment=0:2z4vdeer]porkdeath.JPG[/attachment:2z4vdeer]

If I were to say, "Happy is the man who does not condemn himself for that which he allows himself," could anyone precisely know what I meant?

IF somebody were to take what I said and form the "Cult of Sparrow" and call themselves the "HappyBirds of Bliss" and went around saying, "I have heard it sung by the Sparrow himself -we can do all things!!"

Would they have the right of it? :shocked!

What if I added, "Consider and act upon the LAW of God in order to be happy"?
What then if just for my own pleasure I also said, 'It is according to the conscience"?
What if I told one son, "you will never touch a gun in my house!" and to another I bought him a loaded gun? Would it be a "happy thing" if the one killed the other?
What if in his heart he had "allowed" this. Even if he were a full-fledged member of the "HappyBirds" he would not be allowed. Not by my father's heart, no.

In other words, brothers, sisters, "Know ye not that ye shall judge angels?"
Let us depart from empty words and consider the truth.

~Sparrowhawke