Oh, I very much like to take part in a proper discussion, but I like them to have some sort of serious basis. As I have already said in the previous discussion on this subject which you apparently missed, humans have eaten meat for hundreds of thousands of years, and apparently mankind did rather well. If you now come and claim that over all that time we have eaten things we cannot digest and need to drastically change our diet then this is not exactly self-explaining.
I'm always willing to listen to theories that differ from what I currently believe because I'm aware that there are always new things to learn. But the least I expect is that the facts that are used to form the theory are in some way verifiable. If you, for example, just claim that meat-eaters have pounds of undigested meat in their bowels without providing any kind of credible reference for this I could just counter by asserting that vegans have pounds of undigested fruit in their bowels. You wouldn't believe me, and rightfully so, but then why should I believe you?
My current position is that while our distant ancestors were herbivores or frugivores, mankind has evolved into omnivores, perfectly capable of digesting meat, especially when cooked. As far as I can see this is the opinion of the vast majority of people and seems consistent with the success of meat-eating mankind. If you want to challenge this position I'm ready to listen, but only if you can bring more to the table than unsubstantiated assertions like you did so far. And from your response I gather that you are unwilling or unable to do so.
Did Jesus eat meat?
evidently yes
http://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVarticles/DidJesusEatMeat.htm
The Gospels specifically mention Jesus keeping three Passover feasts in Jerusalem. However, in order to keep the feast, the participants were given roasted lamb, bitter herbs, and unleavened bread to eat (Exodus 12:3-4). The entire lamb had to be eaten during the feast. If there were any leftovers, they had to be burned (Exodus 12:10). If Jesus did not eat the lamb, he would have been violating the Law and could have been accused of sin.
evidently yes
http://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVarticles/DidJesusEatMeat.htm
The Gospels specifically mention Jesus keeping three Passover feasts in Jerusalem. However, in order to keep the feast, the participants were given roasted lamb, bitter herbs, and unleavened bread to eat (Exodus 12:3-4). The entire lamb had to be eaten during the feast. If there were any leftovers, they had to be burned (Exodus 12:10). If Jesus did not eat the lamb, he would have been violating the Law and could have been accused of sin.
"... observe the Passover to the LORD. 'In the second month on the fourteenth day at twilight, they shall observe it; they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. 'They shall leave none of it until morning, nor break a bone of it; according to all the statute of the Passover they shall observe it. 'But the man who is clean and is not on a journey, and yet neglects to observe the Passover, that person shall then be cut off from his people, for he did not present the offering of the LORD at its appointed time. That man will bear his sin." (Numbers 9:10-13)
The New Testament records that Jesus did eat the Passover feast, which would include the eating of the roasted lamb (Luke 22:14-15). In fact, before the last Passover meal, Jesus specifically instructs his disciples to prepare the meal, including the lamb, for their observance.
"Then came the first day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. And Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, "Go and prepare the Passover for us, so that we may eat it."" (Luke 22:7-8)
Not only did Jesus eat lamb, but he also ate fish. "But while they still did not believe for joy, and marveled, He said to them, 'Have you any food here?' So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. And He took it and ate in their presence" (Luke 24:41-43). He served it for the 4,000 in Matthew 15:34-37. Jesus also promoted the catching of fish for the purpose of consuming them.
Hehe, nice try, bilbal. But as is easily verifiable by reading the 'atheism' thread, you are totally misrepresenting the situation. Without going into this topic here I'd like to just point out that the reason I called your credibility into question is that you repeatedly called me stupid and my arguments insane even though you were entirely unable to give even the slightest indications that my positions might be wrong, actually in the end you even openly admitted that.
you were entirely unable to give even the slightest indications that my positions might be wrong, actually in the end you even openly admitted that.
YOU were entirely unable to give even the slightest indications that YOUR positions were TRUE, THAT is the problem. They are not MY positions to prove FALSE, they are YOUR positions to prove TRUE. "It just is" is not proof by any stretch of anyone's imagination, in this galaxy or any other freaking galaxy you're an expert on, ok?
Making wild guesses and calling them true until someone can prove them false is moronic and stupid, are we clear? Quit embarrassing yourself.
So you want to continue to argue about that in this thread? Random will not be amused about this.
So just in short: Even if the burden of proof was on me (which I dispute), and even if I did not prove my position beyond any reasonable doubt (which might well be, although your claim that I was unable to make arguments in my favour is a wilful lie, as is evident for anyone who reads that thread), the fact remains that calling me a moron and lunatic even though you didn't bring a single argument against my positions is simply childish. You didn't attack my way of argumenting (as you try to do now), you attacked me and my argumentative statements. If you have no idea of mathematics then that's fine. But just because you are unable to grasp a point doesn't mean it's wrong. If my arguments were indeed moronic it should have been easy for you to refute them, right? So why didn't you even try?
Bilbal,Go back to your kindergarten where insults may actually win a quarrel, a proper discussion is obviously not your thing.
we've got canines... we're supposed to be vietnamese, i mean... eat dogs... i mean >:X oops--i dogged myself.
I think we can eat meat. Hell we can eat each other, doesn't make it "right" but who's to say there's a DEFINITE answer to this?
Just cuz the color Red can turn into the color Orange doesn't mean it can't be red, correct?
I think we can eat meat. Hell we can eat each other, doesn't make it "right" but who's to say there's a DEFINITE answer to this?
Just cuz the color Red can turn into the color Orange doesn't mean it can't be red, correct?
So you want to continue to argue about that in this thread? Random will not be amused about this.
Bilbal,Go back to your kindergarten where insults may actually win a quarrel, a proper discussion is obviously not your thing.
No, you quit on me like you always do, that's fine. I just wanted you to prove a point to random for me.
I didn't insult you, I described people who use a certain weak method of debating, but if the shoe fits...
Perfectly fine. But then you should, in my opinion, bring it up with another attitude. The way you come across in this thread is that you are already convinced that eating meat is bad. If that is so then you have to be able to back it up.
As to your argument that cooking meat is unnatural - so is, for example, flying for a land animal like us. Are you saying we should stop using airplanes because of that?
The human body isn't built to do a lot of things we still manage to do. We have found many ways to get around the limitations of our bodies. If our bodies can gain the high nutritional value of meat by cooking it, why should we not make use of this just because raw meat would be a lot harder to digest for us?
planes are not a necessity of life and because of it people die all the time from them, 9-11, crashes from malfunction, crashes from stupid asses. same goes for cars. most of my young friends that have passed were from car accidents. just because we manage to do these things doesn't make them right.
For those who are still carnivores, here's a meat buying tip. The grocery stores announce their specials for the week on Wednesday, so I wait until one runs T-bones and then I go down on Wed AM around 9. Go to the meat counter a talk to one of the "cutters" and have them cut several "porterhouse steaks. Those are T-bones but they are center cut so that you have a large amount of tenderloin on one side. I then have them cut 2 inches thick, take them home and remove the tenderloin so I wind up with a small filet Mignon and a large bone in strip steak. I bought 8 this morning so I have enough for around 12 dinners for 2 and several "beef Stroganoff" with the left overs.
physically we built like herbivores we sip water not lap it up like carnivores, we sweat to cool ourselves not pant, our mouths small compared to head size, we aren't fast and swift and have the physical skills like a cat or dog for hunting
but we got advanced thinking unlike other species in that we figured out we could come up with shit like bow and arrow to hunt them and kill them without the creation of weapons and that sort of thing we wouldn't be big meat eaters in the natural wild
but we got advanced thinking unlike other species in that we figured out we could come up with shit like bow and arrow to hunt them and kill them without the creation of weapons and that sort of thing we wouldn't be big meat eaters in the natural wild
