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 which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 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. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Genesis 1:29-31
If you believe the Bible, that it is the Word of God, appropriate for all mankind (and womankind, as well), and you are familiar with what it teaches, then you must realize that in many respects Christianity has dropped the proverbial ball when it comes to Creation, and what God intended when He created the world. In Genesis, God puts man and woman in the Garden of Eden and appoints them the caretakers of the world, responsible for all the animals, plants and resources. If this sounds like an odd idea, that God established man and woman as the caretakers, the gardeners, husbandmen, farmers and veterinarians of Earth, then you should probably take a few moments to reread Genesis Chapters 1 and 2, and read it slowly, and carefully. If you've never read it before, go ahead and give it a shot, it's fascinating reading (and you might wish to schedule some time each day to go through the whole Book of Genesis, I know that sounds freaky, actually READING the Bible, but you should try it; after Genesis, give Exodus a shot).
The keyword that leaps out of Chapters 1 and 2 is definitely "dominion." Now, taken by itself, the word "dominion" can mean "warlike," to crush, to dominate, to beat down; however, given the context in Chapters 1 and 2, the word cannot be any of these negative connotations. Why? Simple, SIN had not entered the world. Mankind was still inherently righteous. Chapters 1 and 2 cover the time "before the Fall." Man and woman and animalkind, at Creation, are perfect. There is no death (think about it, without death, there cannot be hamburgers, can there?). And because in Chapter 9, after the flood, we see that for the first time animals develop a fear of man, in a sense they go to war with him, or at least defend themselves against him as he for the first time goes to war with them -- and why...?
...because for the first time in the history of the world, God allows man to eat animals as food -- with the condition that there is no blood in the meat (see Genesis 9:2-4). Yes, even here, after the flood, God has rules, laws to live by, and He makes certain that man KNOWS His will.
So dominion, in a perfect world (before sin entered) cannot mean "beat down" or "trample" or "enslave." I think Matthew Henry gives a very insightful rendering of "dominion" in his brilliant nondenominational Protestant commentary:
In his place and authority: Let us make man
in our image, and let him have dominion. As
he has the government of the inferior creatures,
he is, as it were, God's representative, or
viceroy, upon earth; they are not capable of
fearing and serving God, therefore God has
appointed them to fear and serve man. Yet his
government of himself by the freedom of his
will has in it more of God's image than his
government of the creatures.
(Matthew Henry's Commentary, Genesis 1:26-28 PP4)
To paraphrase Henry, God set up man to fulfill the job of "god" to the animals. As God watches over us (Psalm 23) we are to watch over the animals. But the Christian world has interpreted this passage as: kill the animals, plunder them, eat them, and man is the king of the earth and can do as he pleases with anything on the earth. That WAS God's plan, wasn't it? DIdn't He make animals so that man can have sport killing them -- weren't animals created to be slaves that we can kill at will? If we put pigs in crates so that they cannot develop musculature and their bodies can swamp with fat so that we can eat them at their tastiest, God planned this all out, didn't He? So when, in Chapter 2, God brings all the living animals to Adam in order for the man to name all the animals he will be caring for, the Christian world has harbored a comical view (and I'm not talking about Jesse Duplantis' blasphemous notion that Adam "spoke" the inanimate lumps of clay into souls), but Christianity (unlike Judaism) has had a notion somewhat in the neighborhood of:
Yahweh:
We created all these marvelous animals for you,
And now, beloved son, name your pets.
Adam:
Wow thanks. Okay, this first one is a deer.
He's going to be great to hunt down and kill.
I can't wait to have his head on my wall.
Though I can already tell that I'm not going
To enjoy eating him as much as I will killing
Him. And this next stupidest of all things I'll
Call cow. Mmm, I can almost taste her juicy
Steak already, and I'll raise these stupid
Burgers-on-hooves by the millions, and kill
Them and grow wealthy! Whoopie! Yea!
Do you think Creation was anything similar to this scenario? Why would Christianity believe such a thing? Where did they come up with such a bizarre notion? Then again, many Christians believe that the Book of Genesis is a collection of fairy stories, generational kiddy stories borrowed from pagan storytellers teaching a tiny moral, but not much more. Because God appoints food, in clear-cut words:
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.
Genesis 1:29
The Bible teaches that when God speaks, He creates, that God SAID . . . and there WAS. God tells us that we are to eat meat, pure and simple, it is the Word of God, and speaking, God created our meat. And God said that our meat was to be plant based, from the plant world, the kind of plants that produce seeds and fruit, and God called it . . . MEAT. In other words, when the Bible uses the word "meat" it most often means, literally, FOOD (e.g., what is eaten). The word used is:
402 'oklah (ok-law');
feminine of 401; food:
KJV-- consume, devour, eat, food, meat.
Amazing, isn't it? That the Bible teaches one thing, and people turn and twist scripture into meaning something else (generally 180 degrees something else!). I've even heard new age charismatic teachers like Andrew Wommack teach that this is the "doctrines of demons," as mentioned in 1 Timothy 4:2-5:
Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their
conscience seared with a hot iron;
Forbidding to marry, and commanding
to abstain from meats, which God hath
created to be received with thanksgiving
of them which believe and know the truth.
For every creature of God is good, and
nothing to be refused, if it be received
with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by
the word of God and prayer.
Now, taken out of context, as Andrew Wommack does, you could, just possibly, say that "anything goes" with God, that God doesn't care what you do, what you think, what you teach, or what you eat (because God created all animals to be MEAT, is what Wommack and others lie). But the key to catch up false teachers is this, in the aforementioned verse it refers to "meat which God created to be received." Now, refer back to Genesis 1:29, and tell me what is the meat that God created? Which is the matter, stuff, material, substance that God created for us to be MEAT?
It isn't animals at all referred in this verse!
Simple, there is only one answer possible. The seed-bearing plant, the fruit from trees, vegetable matter, which is the same mentioned as what will be our heavenly food. But Andrew Wommack teaches something far different, because God HAS forbidden us to eat certain meats, because they are not clean (and no animal was created to be human food), and when God tells us not to eat certain things, you can hardly call it "doctrines of demons." If you DO call it doctrines of demons, the Word of God, it is proof of what type of fruit you produce (that of the false prophet, the false teacher).
The context of the 1 Timothy verse is the issue that caused such dissension in the Book of Acts, between Peter and Paul, and the Church leaders in Jerusalem, namely, that new Christians, once gentiles, were purchasing meat (food) from vendors that were selling meats (food) which was previously offered to idols. So as not to cause dissension among believers, the Church leaders issued a commandment stating that:
For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to
us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these
necessary things; That ye abstain from meats
offered to idols, and from blood, and from things
strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye
keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
Acts 15:28-29
However, Paul later addressed this same issue and clarified it even further, in 1 Corinthians 8 (yes, the whole chapter is devoted to this issue), to which Paul concludes: I won't eat these foods that were offered to false gods if it's going to offend another Christian. But, looked at in another way, taking into consideration the culture of the day and the Jewish mindset, these verses in Acts say nothing more than: as far as food and food preparation goes, live a "kosher" lifestyle, and the early Christians, most of which were Jewish, knew explicitly and implicity WHAT kosher meant (i.e., no unclean meats, only foods from the ample clean category, and no blood in the meat).
God DID make an allowance for people to eat meat, long after sin had entered the world -- after the flood destroyed the world. As mentioned earlier, this is found in Genesis, Chapter 9. But there are some very interesting things to note, in Chapter 7, God dictates that Noah will take onto the ark all the animals of the earth, and the notable fact is that God says:
Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by
sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts
that are not clean by two, the male and his
female.
Genesis 7:2
Now, to this point, eating the flesh or blood of animals was not allowed. For any one. (And it's silly to attempt to make a distinction between "Jew" and "Gentile" because at this point in time no such distinction can or could be made.) Yet, Noah knows the difference between "clean" and "unclean." If, before this point, Noah did not know the difference -- by the time he entered the ark he DID know the difference, because clean animals came in by sevens, while the pigs and their fellows came in by twos.
Amazing, isn't it? Clear, distinct context from God, in His Word, and yet to most Christians, if you quote from these passages they will scream "under the law" or "not under the law" or "that's for the Jews." Why? Tradition, for one thing. Or, as in the case of Andrew Wommack, it is because they are teaching something other than what is in the Bible -- in some cases it is teaching based on what they "get in their spirit" (a phrase Wommack often employs) which is usually something 180 degrees from what God teaches in His Word.
Genesis Chapter 7, Verse 2 is a natural law, just the same as gravity. God says this certain animal is "clean," and this certain animal is "not clean." Obviously, there is nothing "ceremonial" about this distinction between "clean" and "unclean," as there was no "ceremonial law" at this point in Bible history, which came much later.
Why did God bring the clean animals in by seven while the unclean came in by two? Genesis 8:20 provides part of the answer:
And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and
took of every clean beast, and of every clean
fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
Upon exiting the ark Noah immediately made burnt offerings of the clean animals. Now, you have two options here: 1) Noah made up this whole offering thing, and invented the practice of offering only clean animals to God, or 2) God inspired Noah, either directly via speaking, or through God-given wisdom, to perform the sacrifice in a fashion that would be a sweet smell to God (Verse 21).
Taken with Genesis 7:2, with God sending the clean animals into the ark by sevens, and then Noah making a "sweet-smell" sacrifice to God from only the "clean" animals, we know that God sent these animals in extra number in order for Noah to make these good sacrifices, and the unclean animals were not sacrificed as they would then become extinct. It makes clear and obvious sense that Noah sacrificed one of each of the clean animals (though this isn't delineated) leaving three pairs of clean animals for breeding, and, to follow through with the simple logic, for eating. It is at this point that God allows Noah, his wife, their sons and their wives, to eat flesh of the animals (but not the blood).
Obviously, just as Noah couldn't sacrifice the unclean animals, he also could not EAT them, as this would have made the line extinct. It could be argued, "Yeah, but, like, you know, Noah could have bred the suckers, and THEN ate'em!" Instead of playing with conjecture, let's look at a very similar verse in the New Testament:
Know ye not that ye are the temple of God,
and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
If any man defile the temple of God, him
shall God destroy; for the temple of God is
holy, which temple ye are.
1 Corinthians 3:16-17
Apparently, we are to know as much as Noah knew. And, as in Noah's case, we don't have to "make it up," because God has made His will abundantly clear, in His Word. Do you know what is clean, and what is not clean? If you don't, why don't you?
Your body is the temple of God, and His Spirit dwells in you. In the earthly, physical temple, do you think they ever brought unclean animals for sacrifice? It was God, not Noah, that determined which animals were appropriate, and which were not. In the same manner, God has made His will abundantly clear in dictating which "meats" are acceptable to us for food, and which are not, which are appropriate for bringing into the temple of the Holy Spirit and which are not, and Old Testament and New Testament agree, 100 percent, that no blood is to be in the meat (how much do you think you would enjoy your hamburger if it didn't have the blood flavor, or the urine taste either, for that matter?).
"We should remember in our dealings
with animals that they are a sacred
trust to us from our heavenly Father.
They are dumb and cannot speak for
themselves."
- Harriet Beecher Stowe
"A human can be healthy without
killing animals for food. Therefore if
he eats meat he participates in
taking animal life merely for the
sake of his appetite."
- Leo Tolstoy
The truly incredible thing is, vegetarian food TASTES SO GOOD. Try Morningstar Farms -- incredible hot dogs, breakfast bacon, sausages, "meat" pies, hamburgers and taco meat. At your nearest Red Robin, try a luscious burger featuring Boca Burger -- it will be the best tasting hamburger you've ever had, and no animal has to die to tide over your tummy-tum-tum. Food that is violence free, that tastes better than the bloody dead flesh -- AND IT IS GOOD FOR YOU.
"I am conscious that meat eating is
not in accordance with the finer
feelings, and I abstain from it
whenever I can."
- Albert Schweitzer, M.D.
Is it just habit that keeps you supporting the "Dead Animal Industry?" Or is it just because, as John Travolta said in Pulp Fiction: "Pork Tastes Good."
You owe it to yourself, try Morningstar Farms, or Loma Linda products, Worthington, or Natural Touch. Food that is low in cholesterol and high in nutritional value. And by doing this little thing, sampling something that is better for you and tastes better too, you will actually be saving an animal's life.
"If slaughterhouses had glass walls,
everyone would be vegetarian. We
feel better about ourselves and better
about the animals, knowing we're not
contributing to their pain."
- Paul and Linda McCartney
"Many things made me become a
vegetarian, among them. the higher
food yield as a solution to world hunger."
- John Denver
"To become vegetarian is to step
into the stream which leads to nirvana. "
- Buddha
"Animals are my friends, and I don't
eat my friends."
- George Bernard Shaw
It was God's original plan, vegetarianism, and it works today. You'll help your health. You'll improve your figure, increase your strength and speed, boost your immune system, and UP your energy levels. It's a smart plan for today. Vegetarians live longer, enjoy life more, think better, experience better sex, express themselves better -- it's just another proof that God exists, and that He knows best. In the words of Isaac Bashevis Singer:
"To be a vegetarian is to disagree --
to disagree with the course of things
today. Starvation, world hunger,
cruelty, waste, wars -- we must
make a statement against these
things. Vegetarianism is my statment.
And I think it's a strong one."
For by fire and by his sword will the LORD plead with all flesh: and the slain of the LORD shall be many. They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD. For I know their works and their thoughts: it shall come, that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come...
Isaiah 66:16-18
Christians ought to meditate upon this verse:
I am sought of them that asked not for me; I am found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name. I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts; A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick; Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat swine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels; Which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou. These are a smoke in my nose, a fire that burneth all the day.
Isaiah 65:1-5
"The man who regards his own life and that of his fellow creatures as meaningless is not merely unhappy but hardly fit for life."
- Albert Einstein
"If a man earnestly seeks a righteous life, his first act of abstinence is from animal food..."
- Leo Tolstoy
"I do not see any reason why animals should be slaughtered to serve as human diet when there are so many substitutes. After all, man can live without meat."
- Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet
____________________
It is a very sad fact, that there are far, far more non-Christian quotes on the wisdom of a vegetarian diet than there are "Christian." It is a sad, sad fact that Christians find it laughable, that God asked them to care for the world, and the animals. It is a sad, sad fact that 98% of Christians consider Genesis 1 and 2 to be fiction, a fairy story, and even worse, a laughable fairy story.
Are Buddhists wiser than Christians? Are Hindus? Why is it that pagans tend to care more deeply for the world and its animals than do Christians?
The Truth is the TRUTH. Grab it, hold onto it, don't release it, don't be shaken by half-baked lies, and rotting-flesh propaganda.
Ways to aid this ministry include praying for this site www.TruthSeek.net, www.DeceivingtheElect.net, and www.DramaticParables.com, donations and provision may be gifted using the TruthSeekGift page (and please only use this if you feel you are inspired by God to do so), and also feel free to use the Prayer Request page to submit prayer requests, and praying for the prayer requests of others, as well as exploring the various advertisements and links on these pages (regrettably, the advertising is necessary to recompense the many costs of keeping a website running, so exploration of the advertisers, which are not connected to any of these studies, is greatly appreciated). Any aid is joyously accepted, even if that means a smile and a well-wish. Thank you so much!
Art et Amour Toujours
