Philosophical Vegan Forum

Hello everyone, its great to be here and I thank you for giving me the opportunity to be a part of the forums. Just a brief introduction to give you a heads up on where I'm coming from. My Name is David Henson, I'm from the Midwestern United States, I'm 48 years old. I was raised an atheist of sorts, not in a militant fashion but simply an unbeliever and irreligious. At the age of 27 I decided to try and learn something about that which I so vehemently disliked, namely, Christianity, so I began an intense Bible study. Instead of debunking Christianity as I intended I became a believer. My early study was heavily influenced by the Jehovah's Witnesses, I studied with them briefly but disagreed with some of their practices, so I have never belonged to any organized religion. Being somewhat a loner in this regard I have never been baptized so I can't claim to be an actual Christian. My beliefs are very similar, but not exactly the same as the Jehovah's Witnesses. I'm retired so most of my spare time is spent on my website, Pathway Machine. If you want to know more about where I'm coming from I refer you to it (follow the link in my sig).

I usually prefer to have discussions with skeptics of the Bible as it teaches me from another perspective. I enjoy these discussions very much and appreciate the opportunity to engage in them. I respect your position, as atheists, agnostics and skeptics and have no inclination to "convert" anyone. I believe the obligation of someone who has discovered this knowledge I have accumulated over the last 20 years is to simply give the information the best I can so that the listener can make an informed decision to accept or reject it. I don't see myself as morally or otherwise superior to anyone else. I'm apolitical, since I am not a part of the World, but a follower of Christ. I don't vote, or influence in any way legislation or social issues. I remain irreligious in a sense due to the unnecessary moral policing of the globe and hypocrisy of Christendom.

I hope we can have some good discussions. I intend to follow the forum rules, which I've read, and to have respect for each of you, at the same time I understand that in the heat of debate sometimes people get frustrated. I'm not thin skinned, but very patient.

Thanks,

Hi David, Welcome.

As you see yourself as a follower of Christ, do you support factory farming and other animal abuse?
How do you see the cleansing of the temple, and Yeshua's attempts to abolish animal sacrifice?

How do you feel about Saul of Tarsus? Are you a supporter of his divine inspiration, or do you think he got things wrong? And if so, what?

Welcome to the forum DLH. Looking forward to interesting discussions.

brimstoneSalad wrote:Hi David, Welcome.

As you see yourself as a follower of Christ, do you support factory farming and other animal abuse?
How do you see the cleansing of the temple, and Yeshua's attempts to abolish animal sacrifice?

How do you feel about Saul of Tarsus? Are you a supporter of his divine inspiration, or do you think he got things wrong? And if so, what?

Hello, brimstoneSalad, and thanks for the welcome.

Since I am an omnivore I suppose that, unfortunately, in some way, I do support factory farming. It is unfortunate that that is the way things are done. Of course, I don't support animal abuse aside from the unfortunate manner in which they are prepared for food. I don't approve of having pets or zoos or using animals for entertainment purposes. I have the Earthlings video on my website, Pathway Machine: Documentaries.

From a Biblical perspective we should treat animals with gentleness and respect, as protectors. (Proverbs 12:10; Psalm 145:15, 16; Deuteronomy 5:14) After the flood Jehovah God gave man, through Noah, permission to use animals as food, as long as their blood was drained and returned to the ground in respect for life, which is sacred to God. (Genesis 9:3, 4) Though, prior to the flood animals were already being used for clothing and sacrifice.

Jesus' cleansing of the temple wasn't a product of concern for the welfare of animals, it was a problem with money changers, the equivalent to today's fractional reserve bankers (see the documentary The Money Masters on the same page as given above). They charged exorbitant fees for the sacrificial animals based upon the need for foreign monetary exchange. Don't forget it was Jesus who supplied fish to eat in great quantities on various occasions.

Often the case of Daniel and his three companions in captivity in Babylon and refusing to eat the meat prepared for the King, Nebuchadnezzar, is used to support vegetarianism, though in fact their objection was only due to those meats being sacrificed to the King's idols. (Daniel 1:8-20) Later Paul would be faced with the same sort of scenario when it was needed to determine whether eating meats that were sacrificed to pagan idols. He determined that if you were not informed of the meats having been sacrificed then there was no call for concern, and no reason to inquire, but if eating meat would cause those of weaker faith to stumble, even if there was nothing wrong with it, he would refrain from it nevertheless. (Romans 14:2, 3 / 1 Corinthians 10:25-33) This is why Paul said "One man has faith to eat everything, but the man who is weak eats vegetables. "

Another verse that is commonly misunderstood is Isaiah 66:3 (Revised Standard Version) which says: “He who slaughters an ox is like him who kills a man.” Again, this is referring to animals slaughtered for sacrifice rather than food. This is evident in context since the text also reads: "He who presents a cereal offering, like him who offers swine’s blood.” In this case Jehovah was rejecting the formal worship of hypocrites, saying their sacrifices were pointless.

From a vegan perspective it is relevant that God created man and animals to live together in peace and harmony, all with a vegetarian diet, and although that perfect arrangement is temporarily stalled, it will eventually continue.

TheVeganAtheist wrote:Welcome to the forum DLH. Looking forward to interesting discussions.

Thanks, Vegan Atheist, I appreciated the welcome and likewise look forward to interesting discussions.

DLH wrote: Since I am an omnivore I suppose that, unfortunately, in some way, I do support factory farming.

We are all omnivores- which means we CAN eat animals and/or plants.
Omnivore just means we have a choice.

Why do you choose to support factory farming, despite your concerns?

It seems, in the modern day, the issue is almost a reversal of what Saul said.
Because animals are no longer sacrificed to idols, eating meat is not longer a sign of strong faith.
Instead, eating meat is a sign of weakness of will and weakness of faith (such as the lingering fear that humans can not live on vegetables), despite all of the evidence that supports the belief that we can.

DLH wrote: Of course, I don't support animal abuse aside from the unfortunate manner in which they are prepared for food.

Why not go one step further, and be fully consistent?

One of the first things that turned me away from Christianity was that Christians largely eat meat. I see most Christians (although thankfully not all) as hedonists every bit as much indulging as most atheists.

Can you name one way in which you really inconvenience or deprive yourself of something you might like to do, because it would materially harm others, that is actually a completely free choice (e.g. not illegal or forbidden by religion)?

I can. I know very few Christians who can.

You'll see we're not hedonists here, unlike on most atheist forums.

DLH wrote: From a Biblical perspective we should treat animals with gentleness and respect, as protectors. (Proverbs 12:10; Psalm 145:15, 16; Deuteronomy 5:14) After the flood Jehovah God gave man, through Noah, permission to use animals as food,

Why? And were the conditions then different from what they are now?

It seems the Christian bible suggests that vegetarianism is an ideal that YHWH prefers, but has been compromised due to the actions of man.

Although you are allowed to eat meat, why would you not choose to abstain if you are able?

DLH wrote:Though, prior to the flood animals were already being used for clothing and sacrifice.

Because of the fall. Are those things still necessary?

DLH wrote:Jesus' cleansing of the temple wasn't a product of concern for the welfare of animals, it was a problem with money changers, the equivalent to today's fractional reserve bankers (see the documentary The Money Masters on the same page as given above). They charged exorbitant fees for the sacrificial animals based upon the need for foreign monetary exchange.

We disagree here. I think you're shamefully politicizing the Bible in this case with economic theory and neo-conservative ideas. I've seen that documentary, and I don't agree with it.

I see it as a moral act. In revulsion at sacrificing innocent animals so that humans may revel in sin, in sinning frivolously just because there's a loop hole that was provided by YHWH to cover accidental or unavoidable human imperfection, and in profiting on and encouraging the whole thing.

DLH wrote:Don't forget it was Jesus who supplied fish to eat in great quantities on various occasions.

That's debatable, but let's assume he did.

First, he was feeding people who were basically starving and in great need- does the bible say he ate it himself? Human life always comes first, if somebody is starving all bets are off, but human gluttony does not. Almost everybody here agrees on that point.
This is likely irrelevant to your situation- which is not one of such great need, instead one of plenty through the bounty of seed giving plants, fruits, and vegetables.

Are you aware that fish (way back when, in the day it was without heavy metal contamination) is the only animal product that can be even close to seen as healthy?
Do you only eat fish from such pristine sources? If not, you're contaminating your body in a way Yeshua never endorsed.

Are you aware that today's oceans and lakes are polluted with heavy metals, making even most fish unhealthy?
Are you aware that over-fishing is destroying the ocean's ecosystems?

If we lived 2,000 years ago, there might be an argument for eating fish (and only fish). Today that argument doesn't stand anymore

Often the case of Daniel and his three companions in captivity in Babylon and refusing to eat the meat prepared for the King, Nebuchadnezzar, is used to support vegetarianism, though in fact their objection was only due to those meats being sacrificed to the King's idols. (Daniel 1:8-20)

I don't think that has ever been relevant to the case of vegetarianism in Christianity, which has more to do with the metaphysical foundations and the will of YHWH for the world without human sin.
Obviously, it was given as a choice due to extenuating circumstances- but it's a choice that Christians do not have to take advantage of to gluttonous ends - which is, in my view, what destroys the credibility of Christianity as a moral force in the world.

Any time Christians are given a real choice (outside the domain of religious command, or social norms), they choose wrongly more than anybody else. I suspect this is because they feel self-satisfied, as if forgiveness from Yeshua is enough and from there on it doesn't matter how terrible of people they are. Maybe it's something else?
The hypothesis of Christian forgiveness is that, due to the forgiveness of Yeshua, people will be so thankful in grace that they'll become better people - it's fine as a hypothesis, but from my perspective that has been proven false.

When I see that more atheists can even be vegetarian than Christians, that's proof enough to me that Christianity has negative moral value in the world.
Which is really a shame. I don't have any problem with Yeshua, just the way things ended up playing out in practice with Christians.

DLH wrote: From a vegan perspective it is relevant that God created man and animals to live together in peace and harmony, all with a vegetarian diet, and although that perfect arrangement is temporarily stalled, it will eventually continue.

Right, but Christians have a choice to come as close as they can to embody that peace here, now, today. For the most part, they choose not to.
If they made that choice more often than not, despite not being commanded to, I would have a very different view of Christianity.

Sup bro! Glad to see a respectful theist here. I think the moderators are very fair here, so I hope you find our arguments at the very least intellectually stimulating.

I have a theistic question that I hope we can discuss on another thread. If you are up for it I would like to open a thread on the fallibility or infallibility of the Bible. I ask my fellow participants to hold off and pose one question and response at a time, seeing as how you are grossly outnumbered. I'm opening it on atheist theist debates, titled bible fallible or infallible.

Don't forget it was Jesus who supplied fish to eat in great quantities on various occasions.

It is assumed that what Jesus did was take a fish that was already dead and multipy that fish to feed the people.

He did not kill any fish, he multiplied dead fish to feed people who otherwise would have killed fish.

It also say's in the bible
Matthew 4:18-22

18And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea: for they were fishers.

19And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.

20And they straightway left their nets, and followed him.

21And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and he called them.

22And they immediately left the ship and their father, and followed him.


Seems that Jesus took the fishermens away from their lives as fisher men and tells them "I will make you fishers of men"

Do not forget the first commandment is though shalt not kill!

PrincessPeach wrote: Do not forget the first commandment is though shalt not kill!

That's actually pretty far down the list of the 13 commandment statements...

1. I am the lord thy god
2. Have no other gods before me
3. Make no graven images, don't bow down to them and worship them
4. Don't take the name of the lord in vain
5. Remember the Sabbath to keep it holy
6. Honor thy mother and father
7. Thou shalt not murder
8. Thou shalt not commit adultry
9. Thou shalt not steal
10. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor
11. thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house
12. thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife
13. Or his slave or donkey or anything that is thy neighbor's

Summarized.
Different sects take different groupings to delineate different commandments.

Not killing (or not murdering, which is more accurate), is either the fifth, sixth, or seventh depending on who you ask. Nobody thinks it's the first.


The point about the fish already being dead is interesting, I'm not sure how clear it is on the point of the fish's state. I will have to re-read that.

brimstoneSalad wrote: That's actually pretty far down the list of the 13 commandment statements...

1. I am the lord thy god
2. Have no other gods before me
3. Make no graven images, don't bow down to them and worship them
4. Don't take the name of the lord in vain
5. Remember the Sabbath to keep it holy
6. Honor thy mother and father
7. Thou shalt not murder
8. Thou shalt not commit adultry
9. Thou shalt not steal
10. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor
11. thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house
12. thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife
13. Or his slave or donkey or anything that is thy neighbor's

Summarized.
Different sects take different groupings to delineate different commandments.

Not killing (or not murdering, which is more accurate), is either the fifth, sixth, or seventh depending on who you ask. Nobody thinks it's the first.


The point about the fish already being dead is interesting, I'm not sure how clear it is on the point of the fish's state. I will have to re-read that.

Ahh, I don't know why I thought it was first, I guess it's always been first for me!

Please re-read very compelling and intersting point of view on the subject, ay?