Think God would be vegan?

[willpeavy]

I think a loving god would rather be nice to animals than eat them

 

Do you think such a god is represented in the bible?

 

Not sure. I haven't read the bible since I went to a religious elementary school and I used to do book reports praising Darwin, just to mess with the teacher.

[compassionategirl]

I think a loving god would rather be nice to animals than eat them

 

Do you think such a god is represented in the bible?

 

Not sure. I haven't read the bible since I went to a religious elementary school and I used to do book reports praising Darwin, just to mess with the teacher.

 

 

U a bad boy Will!!!

[DanDz]

Somehow, I missed all of this thread. I must have not checked in for a couple of days at that time. This is a very serious topic for me, but fortunately Natalie has said it all and more. CollegeB has also done a great job defending vegetarianism!

 

Up until recently, I too was at odds with my faith concerning Christianity. Being raised a Catholic and still practicing today, I have been told by some hard-core, non-vegetarian, but otherwise spiritual Catholics, that meat eating is fine in the eyes of God, while vegetarianism is looked down upon or unnecessary for spiritual life.

 

At the time I didn't know better. I was only vegetarian for ethical, environmental, and health reasons, but I had not yet made the connection between vegetarianism and my faith. Actually I think I had, but I just didn't know how the pieces fit together. After reading "The Lost Religion of Jesus"a by Keith Akers, my vegetarianism really came full circle. I had always knew that Jesus was a man of strict compassion and love, love of all life and creatures, but I just didn't know how to fit it all together. This book really was a great and miraculous read. I always tell people that I am vegetarian first for God. I am a vegetarian because I believe in God and believe in following the laws of God.

 

If you look at the whole issue at the most basic level, God's intention can be shown. One of the Commandments is, "Thou Shall Not Kill." It doesn't get anymore simple. It does not say we shall not kill humans, but it is acceptable to kill animals. No, it says simply, "Thou Shall Not kill." No consolations. Then we have the vegetarian state in the Garden of Eden and God's many commands of vegetarianism throughout the Bible. We also have commands of compassion towards all creatures, including our animal brethren and respect for all life. Jesus, many biblical scholars conclude, was a vegetarian. He was the Prince of Peace, the extrem non-violentist, who decried in the hours before his death to his disciples, "Put Away the Swords." It is accepted that Jesus was extremely non-violent and killing is accepted as always being inherently violent, so why would Jesus ever kill or accept food of slaughtered animals - he wouldn't. Also, although many who wish to proclaim Jesus as a fish eater, point to the story of Jesus turning a loaf of bread and some fish into enough food to feed thousands as reasons for his meat-eating and also point to other passages where fish is mentioned at his meal, many scholars agree that the term has been altered in translation, as Nat and CollegeB pointed out.

 

However, the issue isn't some much what Jesus ate then as it is, What would Jesus eat today? This most compassionate man surely wouldn't accept the factory farms, abuse, and slaughterhouses of today's world. He surely wouldn't accept the ways God creatures have been turned into living dollar signs for the meat, egg, and dairy industry at which they can torture and abuse freely. Jesus would surely reject all of these practices and would follow the laws of his father, God.

 

Furthermore, MichaelHobson you said, "If your god were actually concerned about any of these issues, couldn't he just put a stop to it?" God grants us free will. We have the right granted by God to kill or to love. To be compassionate, or evil. To be a meat-eater or vegetarian. God grants us free will to do as we please. However, it does not mean he accepts behavior which defies his commands. God is most definitely concerned with this behavior, and he does punish the wicked. Many fail to see how God punishes. We can do as we please, but if it does not please God than we will be punished. Sometimes we get wacky weather, floods, periods of drought, great cold... this is God's power. God does stop behavior that does not please him, he punishes. Some ask, if God is so kind, so loving, why we he punish his people. But, he punishes out of love. Doesn't the mother sometimes punish her child out of love? Yes of course, and God does the same. So Michael, GOd is very concerned about these issues, however we do have free will to do as we please. He does punish, but not always in the easiest, most noticeable ways.

 

God Bless!

[jonathan]

i think it is facetious to attribute weather cycles to a great creator. i am the only person here who has a fundamental problem with the idea of a god? i always find it a little perplexing as to why people seek deeper meaning where none exists.

 

in the end, you have accept all of the bible as gospel, and assume that the earth is 6000years old, the dinosaurs were riden by cavemen (according to that 'science of creation museum' that is somewhere in the states) and adam lived to be 900 odd years old.

or you believe the more logical argument that is we are born (by nothing more than an act of our parents) we live, we die, we get eaten by worms.

 

i think that judeochristian and islamic culture is a major hurdle for animal rights.

 

jonathan

[CollegeB]

Johnathan you are not the only person here that does not believe in a creator, or atleast does not find sense in their being one.

 

I feel these things are worth discussing because if we make some reasonable arguments as to veganism within various mainstream religions then I think that is a good avenue to reach others for veganism. I think that it would be easier to get a christian to believe in animal rights than an atheist. Christians should accept morals and are supposed to want to be christ-like whereas the atheist really does not have to live by anything except the physical laws of the world. I find it interesting, however (despite my reasoning) that the vegans i personally know are atheists too whereas many of the meat eaters I know are agnostic/christian.

[Gym hater]

God is a vegan, he punishes the meat eaters with cholesterol. Actually I don't believe in God. But if someone really believes in God and respect him, they should not eat the creatures created by him. That seems verry logical to me, but I often get the awnser that animals have no souls. Then I reply that they are the ones eating a living creature, and then I destroy on the idea of there being a God by pointing out the various arguments of there not being a God. Mostly they then say that there must be a God becouse earth could not just be there and therefore has to be created by God. And then I ask who created God then, and the discussion ends. Also I like to point out that there are over 600.000 murders in the name of God in the Bible.

Although I don't believe in God, I think Christians have great valeus concerning family and helping others etc.

 

Also it is fun to tease Christian girls by saying that they have sinned becouse they stole your heart. And thou shall not steal:)

[compassionategirl]

i think that judeochristian and islamic culture is a major hurdle for animal rights.

 

jonathan

 

Hi Jonathan,

 

Cannot speak of islam because I know little about it, but I can tell you that Christianity, TRUE Christianity or the "original" Christianity (i.e. what God intended for us and how he wants us to be) is NOT a hurdle to animal rights Jonathan. The hurdle comes from selfish, greedy human beings who erroneously interpret God's true will for us in a way that suits their own selfish and gluttoneous desires.

 

Dont blame Christianity as the hurdle when the real problem is with people - so called Christians - who continue to misinterpret the scriptures for self-serving reasons.

 

The anwser in Genesis is clear - vegan is what we were supposed to be. It is trite to say that humans have REGRESSED from the days of genesis in fundamental ways, not progressed.

 

I have already written volumes in this thread about some grave instances of such biblical misinterpretation (like the utterly ridiculous claim that "Animal sacrifices pleased God!!"). No need to repeat it here.

 

Like Dan Dz said, the commandment is "Thou shall not kill". Not "Thou shall not kill humans" or "Thou shall not kill each other". There was no qualification or limiting words to this command. And I think the simple reason for that is that the only person that is in any position to take away life is the Creator who gives it - NOT SELFISH AND GREEDY HUMAN BEINGS!!!

 

peace

 

For those of you that do believe in God as the Creator, I think you might enjoy these words:

 

"When I see a raccoon in my backyard or a spider in my basement, I cannot help but smile, for I am mindful that each is no less God's work than am I." author - me!!! Cause that is how I really feel!!!

[DanDz]

Nat, you always are so eloquant and profound in your words...nice job. Jonathan you said, "i think that judeochristian and islamic culture is a major hurdle for animal rights." Jonathan, by all you have said, I find you and people like you, to be the major hurdles for animal rights. I think I understand what you are trying to say, but remember it is not the religious principles themselves that are bad, it is usually the hypocritical people who follow these religions that are bad. I for one, think that aethiests are a major hurdle for animal rights. I know you don't believe in God, but if there is no God then why not kill. Why not kill and eat animals to just gratify your taste buds? Afterall, according to your thinking there is no greater being to judge your actions, so what is the harm? If there is no God, why not do everything that tempts you - lie, cheat, steal? You say there is no God, so what is the point of living compassionately? You have no reason to worry about karmic activities and the like if there is no God. Christianity is not a hurdle for animal rights - some of the followers who do not truly understand God are the major problems. On the other hand, aetheism is a huge hurdle for animal rights. The distinction must be noted.

[jonathan]

Nat, you always are so eloquant and profound in your words...nice job. Jonathan you said, "i think that judeochristian and islamic culture is a major hurdle for animal rights." Jonathan, by all you have said, I find you and people like you, to be the major hurdles for animal rights. I think I understand what you are trying to say, but remember it is not the religious principles themselves that are bad, it is usually the hypocritical people who follow these religions that are bad. I for one, think that aethiests are a major hurdle for animal rights. I know you don't believe in God, but if there is no God then why not kill. Why not kill and eat animals to just gratify your taste buds? Afterall, according to your thinking there is no greater being to judge your actions, so what is the harm? If there is no God, why not do everything that tempts you - lie, cheat, steal? You say there is no God, so what is the point of living compassionately? You have no reason to worry about karmic activities and the like if there is no God. Christianity is not a hurdle for animal rights - some of the followers who do not truly understand God are the major problems. On the other hand, aetheism is a huge hurdle for animal rights. The distinction must be noted.

 

what absolute laughable bollocks!

 

does everything you do have to be because you are scared that on judgement day that you will be deemed a sinner!?

 

i do not act in a moral way for any other reason than that if i dont, then no-one else i ever meet will feel they ought to. lead by example. i do not kill because it is unnecessary and wrong. you do not need religious dogma to give you a moral framework by which to liveyour life.

 

to say that athiests are the biggest hurdle is crazy - you lot are the first religious vegans i have ever met - every one of my vegan friends in the UK is non-religious - are they detrimental to the AR cause too?

 

the bit about 'followers who do not understand god' is particularly amusing as that is what each disagreeing faction of each religion says about the other!

"they don't understand the true nature of god anymore, I'm off to start my own church, we'll call it the 7th night evangelical movementarians!"

 

this aspect of religion is quite funny as there are so many different factions these days but they fail to see that they are all pretty much the same as they are too busy fighting each other!

 

'satified sigh' i love religion debates. always breaks me out in smiles

 

jonathan

[Richard]

aetheism is a huge hurdle for animal rights.

 

I have nothing to add about religion / Christianity because I don't know much about it. But I don't see how atheism is a hurdle for animal rights. Although I am agnostic rather than atheist, I do lack a spiritual goal or God that I worship. I behave how I think I should, how I would like other people to act, not because I am worried about punishment, and not because I am aiming to be rewarded. In this respect, animal rights goes hand in hand with me because I don't want to cause suffering. Maybe I misunderstood what you meant.

[michaelhobson]

I have one "very christian" friend who is always after me to eat meat. "Just try it and you'll like it" he says. He says he understands how I feel, but "you just can't think about it". "It seems bad but god says it's okay", so just go ahead and eat it.

[compassionategirl]

I have one "very christian" friend who is always after me to eat meat. "Just try it and you'll like it" he says. He says he understands how I feel, but "you just can't think about it". "It seems bad but god says it's okay", so just go ahead and eat it.

 

This is exactly what I mean about problematic Christians. Yes, it is THESE kind of Christians that are a hurdle to animal rights.

 

Michael, if your friend honestly thinks that God doesnt have any problem with animal suffering and cruelty, he really needs a wake up call.

 

Ask him to read books like "THE Lost Religion of Jesus" or "God's Covenant with animals" and then to reconsider his utterly ridiculous interpretation of God. And these arent the only two resources. There are TONS Of books out there that state the basic truth that God LOVES ANIMALS and would be angered by the disrespectful and cruel treatment of animals.

 

I am sorry but you and Jonathan are passing judgment on Christianity without having read any of the above mentioned resources, or even trying to understand what Christianity is really all about. YOu are saying Christianity is a hurdle based on some misguided, weak meat eating Christians that you know.

 

If your positions carry with them an implication that Christians like your friend are correct in their interpretations of God and Christianity. Well, if you havent studied Christianity, then, frankly, you are in no position to decide one way or the other (i.e. whether my interpretation of Christianity is correct or whether your friend's is). But I will say that even from a logical point of view, the assertion that God and Jesus would approve of wilfull blindness towards the plight of morally innocent and vulnerable beings DEFIES ALL LOGIC AND COMMON SENSE.

 

Like I keep saying, I think the problem isnt with Christianity. It is with the way people, including many 'old school' religious leaders, have interpretted the Bible.

 

ANd just for the record, I dont believe nor have I ever suggested that you cannot be compassionionate and ethical without being Christian. That would be a ridiculous suggestion. BUt if you ARE Christian and do purport to believe in Christ, then you have a religious duty to BE compassionate and kind, as Christ would be kind and compassionate.

 

 

TO your friend who is typical of many misguided Christians out there, all I have is this to say:

 

"To stand for Christ is to stand against the evil of cruelty inflicted on those who are weak, vulnerable, unprotected, undefended, morally innocent, and in that class must UNAMBIGUOUSLY fall animals!!" - The Revered Andrew Linzey

 

Honestly, it is Christians your friend that that are the "obstacle" to animal rights. They are flat our wrong about their views.

 

Hopefully, Jonathan and Michael, having met people like myself and DanDz, you will soften up a bit on your opinion that Chrisitianity - PROPERLY INTERPRETTED - is anti-vegan or anti-animal. IN fact, it is necessarily the opposite.

 

It is just too bad that most Christians have yet to really understand Christ's message of love, kindness and mercy instead of distorting his messages to suit their own glutteneous, vain and selfish desires.

 

And at any rate, I dont think this should turn into a thread where people are "laughing" at the religioun (or lack thereof) of others. That is clearly inappropriate and in very poor taste.

 

The original question/purpose of this thread was "DO you think God would be vegan?" The question assumes an existence of God. IT doesnt invite sentiments, express or implied, like "Your a fool and deserve to be laughed at if you believe in God."

 

And just for the record, "vegan Christians" are not a faction. They consist of Catholics, Anglicans, etc. etc. A vegan Christian is one who believes that Christ would choose compassion over killing. This in my view is such a statement of the obvious that I am puzzled at religious attempts to convince people of otherwise.

 

God and Christ would be vegan. it is really that simple and I am always amazed at Christians who actually have delusions to the contrary.

[compassionategirl]

I think I understand what you are trying to say, but remember it is not the religious principles themselves that are bad, it is usually the hypocritical people who follow these religions that are bad.

 

STRONGLY AGREE AND EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO HAMMER INTO EVERYBODY'S HEAD HERE.

 

BUt I strongly disagree about the part where you say "why not kill if you dont beleive in God."

 

Why not kill? Because although one may not beleive in God, they may still have a compassionate and merciful heart, along with an actual conscience.

 

I dont think that Christianity is a prerequisite for compassionate and merciful behaviour BY ANY MEANS!! What I do think, however, is that if you ARE a supposed follower and beleiver of Christ, then your compassion and kindness then become a religious obligation, on top of just a basic human moral obligation.

 

I cannot explain in any shorter terms than that.

Edited August 17, 2005 by compassionategirl

[Richard]

I cannot explain in any shorter terms than that.

 

Maybe in a smaller font?

[Vamprilla]

I think I understand what you are trying to say, but remember it is not the religious principles themselves that are bad, it is usually the hypocritical people who follow these religions that are bad.

 

STRONGLY AGREE AND EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO HAMMER INTO EVERYBODY'S HEAD HERE.

 

BUt I strongly disagree about the part where you say "why not kill if you dont beleive in God."

 

Why not kill? Because although one may not beleive in God, they may still have a compassionate and merciful heart, along with an actual conscience.

 

I dont think that Christianity is a prerequisite for compassionate and merciful behaviour BY ANY MEANS!! What I do think, however, is that if you ARE a supposed follower and beleiver of Christ, then your compassion and kindness then become a religious obligation, on top of just a basic human moral obligation.

 

I cannot explain in any shorter terms than that.

 

I am not christian or anything like it and I would not kill.

And I don't think God would be a vegan, or a vegitarian eaither.

[V VII Hero]

God is a vegan, he punishes the meat eaters with cholesterol. Actually I don't believe in God. But if someone really believes in God and respect him, they should not eat the creatures created by him. That seems verry logical to me, but I often get the awnser that animals have no souls. Then I reply that they are the ones eating a living creature, and then I destroy on the idea of there being a God by pointing out the various arguments of there not being a God. Mostly they then say that there must be a God becouse earth could not just be there and therefore has to be created by God. And then I ask who created God then, and the discussion ends. Also I like to point out that there are over 600.000 murders in the name of God in the Bible.

Although I don't believe in God, I think Christians have great valeus concerning family and helping others etc.

 

Also it is fun to tease Christian girls by saying that they have sinned becouse they stole your heart. And thou shall not steal:)

 

ahahahaha niice.

[michaelhobson]

Talk about being lumped together. Jonathan and I are in fact two distinct individuals with separate opinions living on opposite sides of the pond. We agree on many things, but not necessarily this one. I personally don't really see Christians as a roadblock to animal rights. They are no more of a nuiscance than anyone else really.

 

As far as studying the bible? I gave it about a year of proper study and found it rather lacking in substance. I found Hinduism has much more to offer in understanding who is god, who are we and our place in the universe, practical advice for day to day life and social structure. By comparison the bible is a first grade reader compared to a great novel.

 

As far as god is concerned, I see no reason to believe that he/she would have a problem with eating meat. If you believe in a creator, then that creator made numerous carnivores. Clearly there is no concern at all for one creature dying a painful death for the pleasure of another. In fact the god of the bible seems to enjoy bringing death and misfortune to both humans and animals through disease, raining fire, insect infestations, floods etc.

 

Jonathan is quite right with one point in particular. EVERY christian faction shares in common one thing. They all think they have found the correct interpretation of the bible. Vegetarian christians are no different, in fact they have to stretch the bible further than anyone to support their claims.

 

The original question/purpose of this thread was "DO you think God would be vegan?" The question assumes an existence of God. IT doesnt invite sentiments, express or implied, like "Your a fool and deserve to be laughed at if you believe in God."

 

In fact discussing religion on a public forum does invite such criticism.

 

STRONGLY AGREE AND EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO HAMMER INTO EVERYBODY'S HEAD HERE.

 

Perhaps a little more listening and conversation and a little less hammering would yield better results.

[compassionategirl]

 

I am not christian or anything like it and I would not kill.

And I don't think God would be a vegan, or a vegitarian eaither.

 

If you "would not kill", then I assume that you are at least vegetarian (since if you're not, then you are paying somebody else to kill for you, which is fundamentally the same thing as having done it yourself).

 

 

As far as the latter sentence, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I would, however, like to hear what your basing that conclusion on. That was the whole point of this thread after all - to see if people think God would be vegan, assuming one exists, AND to explain why or why not.

Edited August 16, 2005 by compassionategirl

[compassionategirl]

Talk about being lumped together. Jonathan and I are in fact two distinct individuals with separate opinions living on opposite sides of the pond. We agree on many things, but not necessarily this one. I personally don't really see Christians as a roadblock to animal rights. They are no more of a nuiscance than anyone else really.

 

Sorry Michael for lumping you and Jonathan together. I was under the (obviously mistaken) impression that on this particular topic, you guys felt the same way. Sorry for being wring. However, note your sweeping lumping together of all Christians in your last two sentences quoted above.

 

As far as studying the bible? I gave it about a year of proper study and found it rather lacking in substance.

 

If you studied the Bible, I would love to hear you thoughts on Genesis and the Garden of "Vegan" (because that is essentially what it was).

 

 

I found Hinduism has much more to offer in understanding who is god, who are we and our place in the universe, practical advice for day to day life and social structure. By comparison the bible is a first grade reader compared to a great novel.

 

Yes, although I havent studied it, I too think that Hinduism offers some truly wonderful tenets which should guide our daily lives. In fact, the funny thing is, most of the world's major religions really do have one fundamental thing in common, accoridng to my understanding, and that basically is the "Do unto others..." principle/philosophy.

 

 

As far as god is concerned, I see no reason to believe that he/she would have a problem with eating meat. If you believe in a creator, then that creator made numerous carnivores.

 

In genesis, people and animals were vegan. If you studied the bible, then you already know this. I dont understand why you seem to dismiss or ignore it.

 

Clearly there is no concern at all for one creature dying a painful death for the pleasure of another. In fact the god of the bible seems to enjoy bringing death and misfortune to both humans and animals through disease, raining fire, insect infestations, floods etc.

 

According to the Bible, yes these things happened, but to say that God actually "enjoys" inflicting destruction, and that he takes "pleasure" in the suffering of innocent people and animals , is to essentially suggest that God is no different than a twisted, evil, cruel monster. I cannot accept that assertion, nor do I think one is categorically warranted by the Bible. TO say that God lets bad things happen to good people is one thing, and indeed a mystery to many people of faith. But to say that he not only lets bad things happen, but actually derives some pleasure from it is just plain misguided.

 

 

Jonathan is quite right with one point in particular. EVERY christian faction shares in common one thing. They all think they have found the correct interpretation of the bible. Vegetarian christians are no different, in fact they have to stretch the bible further than anyone to support their claims.

 

There is no stretching anything - Genesis, God's ideal for us all, was vegan. Plain and simple. It is stated in clear words in the Bible. People and anmals were only permitted a vegan diet by God. How is this stretching anything? If Genesis did not exist, then yes, it would be much more difficult to support the notion that veganism pleases God. But it did exist (for Christians) and the message was clear: only veganism is God's ideal for us all. Everything that followed reflected a regressive, degenerate state of the mankind. What is it exactly that you are disagreeing with here? I am genuinely confused.

 

Oh absolutely Michael I agree. But the categorical assertion of unsubstantiated conclusions will not make for a fruitful or insightful discussion at all, and so I encourage REASONED discussion. I dont expect everybody to go into as much thought and detail as I have on this topic, but still, I encourage people to provide reasons for their conclusions, so that a fruitful and insightful discussion may ensue.

 

The bottom line is that Christian, Jew, Hindu, athiest, agnostic, black, white, purple, orange, or green - if you are any of these things but also a vegan, then you cannot be fairly described as an "obstacle" or a liability to the animal movement.

 

 

Perhaps a little more listening and conversation and a little less hammering would yield better results.

 

peace

 

Editted a million times because I am trying to figure out how to break the quotes up in separate blocks but am unable to do so!!!! Can anybody tell me how please???

Edited August 17, 2005 by compassionategirl

[compassionategirl]

In fact discussing religion on a public forum does invite such criticism.

 

 

 

Michael,

 

The calibre of people thus far on this forum (including Jonathan, you and DanDz) makes me less inclined to agree with the above. This is a rather respectful community and that is one of the reasons, I believe, for its growing popularity. While many of us dont agree on many things, an element of respect has always been maintained. I would hate to lose that.

 

There is NOTHING to be gained by personal attacks and by insulting somebody's core beliefs. Although the post was directed at DanDz's words, I took offense to Jonathan's mocking of his beliefs and thoughts. An athiest may think they are inane and comical, but from a Christian's perspective, athiesm is just as inane and comical.

 

I dont think JOnathan and DanDz have had much interaction with each other before, so I would hate for either one to be offended by the other. BOTH are friends and valuable members of our community here.

 

How is attacking an athiest for being athiest or laughing at a Christian for being Christian going to yield a productive cyberspace conversation.

 

Oops editted to make sure I get my names right.

[jonathan]

 

And at any rate, I dont think this should turn into a thread where people are "laughing" at the religion (or lack thereof) of others. That is clearly inappropriate and in very poor taste.

 

 

ah but a thread entitled 'would god be vegan?' is inviting criticism because the above statement infers the existence of god. coincidentally, the title of my last essay for my philosophy course was 'Is there good reason to believe in an intelligence who has designed the universe'.

 

if someone started a thread entitled 'would leprechauns be vegan?' im pretty sure a fair few people would state that they didnt believe in them and found the whole idea silly. i am afraid that as an athiest i feel that way.

you cannot ask a question, based on a contraversial assumption and expect people not to respond to the assumption. as regards your beliefs, you cannot justify them unless you constantly challenge them. discussions like this are valuable to anyone who reads them, athiest, agnostic or whatever.

 

i do have a question though. you seem well versed on the bible nat, so do you believe it all literally? i struggle to take people seriously when they pick and choose which bits they believe, according to their priorities. maybe it is that exact reason that causes 99% of christians to ignore any bits refering to respecting animals.

 

jonathan

[Richard]

oh man

[compassionategirl]

 

And at any rate, I dont think this should turn into a thread where people are "laughing" at the religion (or lack thereof) of others. That is clearly inappropriate and in very poor taste.

 

 

ah but a thread entitled 'would god be vegan?' is inviting criticism because the above statement infers the existence of god. coincidentally, the title of my last essay for my philosophy course was 'Is there good reason to believe in an intelligence who has designed the universe'.

 

I am shocked at the implied comparison of a leprocan (or however you spell it) to God. [/b] YOu may take the topic of this thread as an invitation to attack or question the existence of God, and as an invitation to ridicule those who do believe, but I choose not to take your attack of the existance of God as an invitation or justification, in turn, to attack your athiesm. There are ways to present our beliefs, Christian and athiest, without resorting to the mocking of the other person him/herself.

 

As long as people are not wantonly and gratuitously hurting other beings, freedom of choice, lifestyle, expression etc etc. is fine. I have a bigger problem with meat eating Chistians than I do with vegan athiests (alll else being equal, of course), in case there was any doubt.

 

Now that statement will appaul many Christians who are not vegan. But too bad for them because there lack of empathy for animals appauls me. [/color][/color][/b]

if someone started a thread entitled 'would leprechauns be vegan?' im pretty sure a fair few people would state that they didnt believe in them and found the whole idea silly. i am afraid that as an athiest i feel that way.

you cannot ask a question, based on a contraversial assumption and expect people not to respond to the assumption. as regards your beliefs, you cannot justify them unless you constantly challenge them. AGREED. So challenge them, but stating an opposite conclusion without evidence or an explanation of how you arrive at that conclusion is not going toteach anybody anything. discussions like this are valuable to anyone who reads them, athiest, agnostic or whatever.

 

i do have a question though. you seem well versed on the bible nat, so do you believe it all literally? i struggle to take people seriously when they pick and choose which bits they believe, according to their priorities. maybe it is that exact reason that causes 99% of christians to ignore any bits refering to respecting animals.

 

 

I would not call myself well-versed in the Bible at all. But I do know enough, I think, about it to say that veganism, or kindness in general to animals, (human and non) would please God, and the opposite wouldnt, to say the least. As far as the literalistist approach to the Bible, I not sure. I have struggled with this and continue to do so.

 

But by all means tell me your thoughts, on all of this, and explain them and who you arrived at them, but just dont go mocking somebody for beleiving in a God that according to you is a joke. That just aint cool Jon

jonathan

 

P.S. But I hope U realize that I still think you rock, notwithstanding any of this.

[compassionategirl]

 

i struggle to take people seriously when they pick and choose which bits they believe, according to their priorities. maybe it is that exact reason that causes 99% of christians to ignore any bits refering to respecting animals.

 

jonathan

 

I agree. Meat eating Christians are prolly the worst offenders of this.

 

But do you think I am picking and choosing because I beleive that God would be vegan and that he wanted us all to be vegan in genesis? Please explain.

 

[Gym hater]

Like Dan Dz said, the commandment is "Thou shall not kill". Not "Thou shall not kill humans" or "Thou shall not kill each other". There was no qualification or limiting words to this command.

 

That is true, and this would be a really great argument. But it also does not say "Thou shall not kill plants". Now I don't know much about the bible, but does the bible refer to plants as "alive"?

I would like to know this, becouse if it didn't it would be the ultimate argument against religious meat eating people.

 

Also there are a lot of Morons in America, which I don't understand. I am currently reading The Book of Mormon and it is quite rascist. I don't think I will continiue reading it. But does anyone know how the Morons feel about killing animals?