Would a good God be expected to reserve a place in heaven for active murderers, assassins, or for that matter, anyone who serially and unnecessarily eats meat from slaughtered animals, all of which stem from psychopathic/uncaring behavior? Could a perfect God of goodness EVER endorse unnecessary violence? Of course not, as that would be the equivalent of endorsing uncaring/evil behavior, which is the antithesis of goodness. Not even meat eating doctors will tell you that eating meat is necessary for anyone’s survival, and so we can be assured that eating meat from slaughtered animals is an unnecessary form of violence, and therefore is an evil behavior.
- Isaiah 66:3 KJV “He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man”
Psychopathy is traditionally defined as a personality disorder characterized by [amongst other things] impaired empathy and remorse… While the term is often employed in common usage along with the related but distinct “crazy”, “insane” and “mentally ill”, criminal psychology researcher Robert Hare stresses that a clear distinction is known among clinicians and researchers between psychopathic and psychotic individuals: “Psychopaths are not disoriented or out of touch with reality, nor do they experience the delusions, hallucinations, or intense subjective distress that characterize most other mental disorders. Unlike psychotic individuals, psychopaths are rational and aware of what they are doing and why. Their behavior is the result of choice, freely exercised.
Is the majority of humanity exhibiting 100% psychopathic behavior on a daily basis? Is it possible that this type of behavior has played a role in shaping our current world rife with tyranny, violence, and the apparent destruction of the human race (not to mention the destruction of planet earth)? As we will see below, it seems that humanity may have made its own bed in this regard . . .
Eating meat from slaughtered animals is by definition (see above) a 100% psychopathic behavior, and as such puts the general population on par ethically with the Rothschild Zionist fake Jew political elites. So how can we expect the political elites to treat us ethically, when we are not even ethical ourselves?
Psychopathic behavior begets psychopathic behavior, and so it would seem that humanity may be doomed/trapped in this regard.
Veganism is nothing more and nothing less than living in accordance with the golden rule (do unto others [which include ALL sentient beings] as you would have done unto you) which is moreover, simply a matter of ethics. In my view, it is the ONLY possible path away from tyranny, violence, and the destruction of the human race.
Christians should remember God’s commandment “Thou shall not kill” which includes the unnecessary killing of animals (according to the original Bible language, which is why it has been translated to “kill” as opposed to “murder” in the KJV).
Is it not the case that ANY sin, in the context of Christianity, would ultimately set humanity on its course towards total destruction?
In the original glory of the garden of Edin, there was only vegetarianism on the face of the earth. This was followed by the glory of God forfeited through sin, which was followed at the cross by the hope for a restored glory of God, which as clearly described in the Bible will ultimately restore all saved Christians to be solely vegetarian forever more…
See “God’s End Time Vegetarian Diet: Bible Truth or Human Invention?” – http://greatcontroversy.org/reportandreview/qua-romans14pt2.php
“It is interesting to see who God selected to have join Him with His Son at the transfiguration of Christ (Matthew 17:1-3). Moses and Elijah were honored to join with the Father and the Son in that glorious event. Moses represented all those who will die and then be resurrected to everlasting life (Jude 9). Elijah represented all those who will be translated at the Second Coming without seeing death. Both Moses and Elijah ate a vegetarian diet in their later years. For both, a vegetarian diet was God’s prescribed diet while here on earth.”
“While vegetarianism is not a common practice in current western Christian thought and culture, the concept and practice has scriptural and historical support. According to the Bible, in the beginning, before the Fall, human and nonhuman animals, which are beings that have or are an änima, Latin for soul [and as such are separate and distinct from plant life], were completely vegetarian, and “it was very good”.[Genesis 1:29-31]” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_vegetarianism
- Proverbs 12:10 KJV “A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.”
- Isaiah 66:3 KJV “He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man”
- Acts 15:29 NIV “You are to abstain … from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.” [Please also note that there are no procedures in place, not even kosher, which can assure the removal of all blood from meat. In fact many Jews such as Dr Richard Schwartz of Staten Island believe that it is impossible to drain all the blood out of tiny capillaries. And since this is a New Testament command, it cannot be argued that it was nailed to the cross as were the ceremonial [non-ten commandments] laws of the Old Testament.]
- Exodus 20:13 KJV “Thou shalt not kill” [There are no other surrounding qualifiers, so as stated here (supposedly by one of God's chosen translation servants), it apparently applies to all sentient lifeforms, which would include animals].
- Proverbs 23:20 World English Bible “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat”
- Genesis 1:29-30 KJV “29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.”
- Isaiah 65:25 KJV “The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent’s meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the Lord.”
- Job 5:23 KJV “For thou shalt be in league with the stones of the field: and the beasts of the field shall be at peace with thee.”
- Isaiah 7:14-15 “Therefore, the Lord himself shall give you a sign–Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and shall bear a son and call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil and to choose the good. One interpretation of the butter and honey is that Christ would belong to a lower socio-economic class. However, some vegetarians believe that refusing the evil and choosing the good means refusing to consume animal flesh.
So the Bible seems to make the point within the passages quoted above, that world peace is not possible when sentient beings of any species (including humans) are eating meat. Keeping in mind these Bible passages, how then can the Bible also condone the eating of meat in certain select cases? Some Christians may say that God cursed the world in this way when sin entered the world to remind us daily that the consequence of sin is death. Others may cite this as psychopathic/unloving/disconnected thinking (because, for example, what sin did vegetarian cows commit to justify slaughter by meat eaters?). The Bible does teach that there was no death, even of animals, prior to sin – ( http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2010/03/02/satan-the-fall-good-evil-could-death-exist-before-sin ). So if sin alone causes death, even of animals, and Christians are to refrain from sin, then it would seem anomalous for the Bible/Christians to ever condone the eating of meat, since as has been clearly shown here, the unnecessary eating of meat is evil psychopathic behavior, and therefore is clearly a sin. Since the Bible presents God as perfect and good, it should seem quite obvious that any endorsements in the Bible by God which allow for unnecessary eating of meat, stand as a clear contradiction – Good God versus Evil God. Could it be that the original Bible was modified in this way, pardoning in a few select cases the sin of eating meat, for selfish, political and/or Illuminatti Satanically evil inspired reasons?
That the Bible has been modified is certainly not a new concept. For example “The Book of Enoch was considered as Scripture in the Epistle of Barnabas (16:4) and by many of the early Church Fathers, such as Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus and Tertullian, who wrote c. 200 that the Book of Enoch had been rejected by the Jews because it contained prophecies pertaining to Christ. However, later Fathers denied the canonicity of the book, and some even considered the letter of Jude uncanonical because it refers to an “apocryphal” work. By the 4th century, the Book of Enoch was mostly excluded from Christian canons, and it is now regarded as scripture by only the Ethiopian Orthodox Church and the Eritrean Orthodox Church.”
Also, “a letter written by Clement, the third bishop of Rome, was considered as scripture for nearly two hundred years, as were seven letters written by Ignatius, who was the bishop of Antioch early in the second century. Also, there was a book called The Shepherd of Hermas and another called The Teachings of the Twelve Apostles that were also approved as scripture by the Church.”
However, the Bible declares:
- “As for God, his way [or method of inspiring scripture] is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless….” (Psalm 18:30)
- “All scripture is given by inspiration of God.” (2 Timothy 3:16)
- “… I [God] will put my words in his [the prophet's] mouth” (Deuteronomy 18:18)
If this is true, then what has been inspired and later recognized as scripture (through God’s perfect word for word way of inspiring scripture) cannot change or arbitrarily be thrown out (not even under the pretext that it was not inspired), for any Christian canon, because we have been assured right in the Bible itself that all officially recognized Christian scripture was already perfect to begin with. The Bible also proclaims that Gods words will not pass away (Mark 13:31).
Granted, the Bible also states in Deuteronomy that there will be false prophets who will claim to speak inspired words of God. However, to be clear, many ‘inspired words of God’ (spoken by prophets) are not considered to be ‘Bible scripture’ – these are not one and the same. So it would be patently false to conclude that the Bible is saying here that alleged inspired words of false prophets would EVER be included in any Christian Bible/canon.
On the other hand, imagine the Bible credibility issues that would be created if Christians were to argue, that words of false prophets would continually attempt to attack, corrupt, or even destroy the Bible, and that at times these blasphemy’s would become part of Bible scripture. And all during this process the Bible would be preached as ‘the perfect word of God’?
So it seems that no matter how we slice it, historically, there was nothing at all “perfect” about the process of determining for a given time period, what is officially recognized as scripture/truth, and what is not. It has been a wishy washy, arbitrary, contradictory process which can by no stretch of the imagination be considered perfect. In consideration of this it seems anomalous that Christianity claims that the Bible has been perfectly inspired (like what Bible… and like what time period are they talking about? Even in modern times there is not one singularly agreed upon Bible canon throughout all of Christianity) or that God is perfect. If God is perfect, he could, should, and in all likelihood, out of necessity in order for Christians to be able to claim that the Bible is consistent and trustworthy, and true, WOULD have seen to it that there were no attempts to ever alter (or take away from) his so called perfect scripture. Are we not assured, as argued above, that this would never happen?
Take note also how in modern day Christian Bibles, the book of Jude 1:14 not only quotes (using very similar wordings) from the Book of 1 Enoch, but it also identifies Enoch as a prophet, thereby delineating him as a person who had inspired words of God to share with the public. Fragments of the Book of Enoch found among the Dead Sea scrolls witness to its availability in the Holy land in apostolic times.
Also, “Most scholars agree that the post-resurrection stories of Jesus eating fish were added to the Gospels long after they were written, in order to settle various schisms in the early Church. (e.g., the Marcionites and other early Christians believed that Jesus did not actually return in the flesh. What better way to prove that he did than to depict him eating?) The scribes who added the stories were not, apparently, averse to eating fish. But since this is the only depiction anywhere in the Gospels of Jesus eating any animals at all, it seems clear that he was. The loaves and the fishes – Although it would not contradict the technical definition of a vegetarian to multiply fishes who are already dead to feed people who eat aren’t opposed to eating fish, there are some interesting points to notice about this story. First, the disciples ask Jesus where they will get enough bread to feed the multitudes, never even thinking of buying fish or other animal products, and never suggesting a fishing expedition, despite being beside a sea. Also, evidence indicates that the story of the loaves and the fishes did not originally include fish. For example, the earliest (pre-Gospel) accounts of this miracle do not include fish, and Jesus, when he refers to it, refers only to the bread (e.g., Mt 16:9-10, Mk 8:19-20, Jn 6:26). Fish were added to the stories by Greek scribes, probably because the Greek word for fish, ixous, is an acronym for the phrase “Jesus Christ Son of God Savior.” Indeed, the fish is still a symbol of Christianity today. In this very likely interpretation, the multiplication represents a prediction of the burgeoning Church and has nothing to do with eating animals.” – http://www.jesusveg.com/qow199.html
So a question to keep in the back of your mind is, how can anyone really know what is inspired and what is not within the context of Christianity, even for whichever Bible YOU may consider to be truth? It would seem therefore disingenuous to attempt to justify the eating of meat based on the Bible, which has clearly been modified to the point of contradiction with regard to this topic (assuming there ever was a time when the Bible was contradiction free). Besides, common sense should tell us that goodness cannot include unnecessary violence, which is exactly what the eating of meat from slaughtered animals entails. In the final analysis, what could be more noble and unadulterated than living in accordance with the Golden Rule?
Also, contrary to popular belief, human beings are in actuality herbivorous biologically, and not designed to be carnivores, as demonstrated so well by Gary Yourofsky (which for this and other reasons should be considered required viewing EQUALLY IMPORTANT AS READING THIS ARTICLE):
“Best Speech You Will Ever Hear” [ also available in over 30 languages at gary-tv.com/en ]
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1bG2EPGmI0 [humorous intro ~5 min]
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULrEOZCSLcI [part 2 humorous intro ~1 min]
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es6U00LMmC4 [Gary’s speech in English]