Why Did God Issue A Stronger Penalty For Eating Meat Than For Murder?

[lilymc]

Dayum, you just failed Bible 101.

Yep. Rico's foundation is veganism, not the bible.

I think many people go to the bible only to promote their own cause... but reject it when it doesn't go along with their cause or political issue.

Ironically, I think a strong case can be made that vegetarianism/veganism IS biblically based, and more in line with God's heart than flesh eating.

But there's no need to accuse God of being a sinner, or jump to the conclusion that the Luciferians ruined the bible, etc.

[pcosmar]

Your God parted from his own ethics. That is a fact according to the Bible, and furthermore, I had NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT.

That is the accusation at trial.. (to come)

You are not attempting to harass witnesses are you?
Because the witnesses will recall that,, at trial.

[RicoCabeza]

What You People Seem To Lack Is The Ability To Vet Anything Out Properly.

Your entire Bible could be written by Lucifer, and from I can tell, none of you in this room would even attempt to apply the necessary skills to vet this possibility out. Always be ready to apply vetting out skills, ESPECIALLY as it applies to religion and Gods (and also of course governments/politicians).

Do not forget that the book of 1 Enoch is scripture in 2 Christian Bibles and used to be considered scripture in other early Christian Bibles. It informs us that fallen angels initiated the evil practice of eating meat. Even the popular modern bible informs us in Psalms 78:17-31 that even after the fall of man, that eating meat was considered such an egregious sin that the act was penalized with immediate death, even as the meat was still in peoples mouths. It was ONLY the Luciferians who were encouraging/permitting the evil act of eating meat at this time, and not God the father (who was diabolically opposed to such evil acts, as clearly shown in this passage).

Who will argue here other than that Luciferianism represented tolerance of the evil act of eating meat, and Christianity/God the father represented non-tolerance of the evil act/sin of eating meat. Christians know that God the father not only has non tolerance for evil acts, but also for evil thoughts. It is clearly established here in Enoch that eating meat was a hallmark of Luciferianism (and so it is no surprise that we have a Luciferian controlled MacDonalds), and that vegetarianism was a hallmark of Christianity.

Furthermore, we all know that Luciferianism today represents a tolerance for all evil acts. Therefore, any shift within Christianity to start allowing the evil act of eating meat must be met with great skepticism. It is really nothing short of changing Christianity from a religion which sought to be evil/sin free, into a sister (or stepping stone) church of Luciferianism. All of a sudden, Christianity no longer seeks to be evil free. Now all of a sudden, both religions are OK with unnecessary violence. One person in this blog accused me of representing confusion, but where the real confusion comes in, is when Christianity starts to permit Satanic acts which are hallmarks of Luciferianism.

There may be some of you who now associate me with being like one of Lucifers agents/helpers, which only shows your lack of discernment and understanding. Luciferians will ultimately advocate unnecessary violence, which as you should all know by now is not something you will ever get from me. I am confident that I am on the right side of history here, and that many of you apparently are not.

You who try to defend unnecessary violence, like eating meat from slaughtered animals, have already entered the realms of Luciferianism. This is why it is imperative for you to research ALL of the links I have provided which clearly show that Luciferianism/Illuminati/Freemasons have had significant influence over the contents of most Christian Bibles.

From a blog user Sir Farquat 1:
+arkangael101 Are you aware of the Lost Gospel of Thomas? They can be found in the Nag Hammadi library in the Saint Catherine Monastery at Mount Sinai, Egypt. None of the present day bible readers know of this place. What still exists there and out of the control of the Jesuits are the original writings from the disciples of Jesus. The scrolls tell all of the original messages from Jesus that were removed from the bible by emperor Justinian II during the second council of Constantinople in 553 AD. Still to this day the truth about who and why Jesus was here lie preserved there in the control of a 1500 year old secret Christian Catholic society. I can promise you that the words in these writing do not match the BS printed in the bible of the new testament which is largely fabricated.

For those of you who wish to argue that the Bible has not been modified in significant ways as I am claiming, please then explain the following apparently iron clad case in the Bible, that Jesus Christ was a false prophet:

"In Matthew 16:27-28, Jesus predicts his second coming to be within the lifetime of his own followers. We all know how accurate that was. If a supposed prophet has even one prophecy fail, can he rightfully be called a prophet? The bible itself says no, in Deut. 18:22."

Here is how these passages read in the King James version:

27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

[Objection: You have applied "this generation" in Matt. 24:34 to the first century. Most modern prophecy teachers interpret this differently. Some say it refers to the generation alive at the time of Christ’s future return. Others say the Greek word ?e?e? (genea) can mean race, suggesting the Jewish race will still be in existence when Jesus returns.

Answer: All such opinions are presumptuous and irrelevant. The only interpretation worthy of consideration is the one taught in Scripture by Christ’s "holy apostles" (Eph. 3:5) who together with the prophets are the foundation of the Church of God (Eph. 2:19b-20; Rev. 21:14). Without exception, they understood Christ’s predictions to mean the Second Coming and all related events would occur within their lifetime; their generation. The Holy Spirit inspired this interpretation! Those promoting other interpretations attack the very foundation of the Church, deny the work of the Holy Spirit and according to Jesus and Paul, could be in danger of eternal condemnation (Mark 3:28-29; Gal. 1:8-9, 12). Please read The Apostles Predicted a First-Century Return of Christ [ http://www.preterism.info/apostles-predicted.htm ] ...

How could the Jews not be in existence at the return of Christ? They were the very people to whom Jesus was returning; to destroy some (Luke 21:22) and reward others (v. 28). Why would anyone ever make such an unnecessary statement as "Truly I say to you, you will still be in existence when I return to you?" Clearly, the "Jewish race" argument is beyond weak, it is absurd.]

- http://www.preterism.info

Also includes:

Objection: Most commentators say Matt. 16:28 refers to the Transfiguration described in the following chapter.

Answer: Matt. 16:28 cannot be referring to the Transfiguration. Please read Did the Transfiguration Fulfill Matt. 16:28? - http://www.preterism.info/transfiguration.htm

which in summary states:

[For the transfiguration to qualify as the fulfillment of Matt. 16:26-28, it must include several key elements:

1. Jesus coming "with his angels in the glory of his Father" (v. 27);
2. People being rewarded for what they have done, i.e., the judgment (v. 27). This would include people Christ was ashamed of (Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26). MacArthur writes, "Here...the Lord was concerned with the reward of the ungodly--final and eternal judgment" (John F. MacArthur, Jr., The MacArthur Study Bible, NASB ed. [Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006], Matt. 16:27);
3. The "kingdom" (v. 28).

Not one of these vital components was apparent at the transfiguration.]

In the final analysis, it seems that we are left with only two possibilities: either 1) the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ already took place nearly 2000 years ago (a concept most Christians would find to be preposterous, since the Bible states that all eyes would bear witness to this event, yet it is not recorded anywhere in history to have occurred), or 2) according to Matthew 16:27-28, we see that Jesus Christ is found to be a false prophet, and therefore we ought not be wary of him (again, this is coming from the Christian Bible itself, in its present state, as anyone can verify within the passages cited).

[TER]

This entire thread is an example of why doctrines matter and why Christ established a Church and a system of ordained teachers to pass down the faith.

[RJB]

This entire thread is an example of why doctrines matter and why Christ established a Church and a system of ordained teachers to pass down the faith.

I don't know. How do we know Christ didn't wait 2000 years to establish His Church and ordain RicoCabeza as its father.

[pcosmar]

I don't know. How do we know Christ didn't wait 2000 years to establish His Church and ordain RicoCabeza as its father.

He made no mention of it.

Though Christ did warn of such teachings.. and it has ever been.

[presence]

For the believer, there is no sin Jesus's sacrifice does not cover; there is no sin God cannot forgive, even if we consider it the “worst” (see 1 Timothy 1:15).

I had real turkey and veggetarian turkey and the church Christmas party yesterday.

hmm brings an interesting thought...

lets assume for a second that eating turkey is sinful
which would be be more sinful:

to eat turkey cause you ain't got no veggeturkey
to seek out and eat veggeturkey while fantasizing about the real thing

???

[pcosmar]

???

I would assume he would only eat raw vegetables. following the alleged theology..

Nor would he be using a computer.

[presence]

I would assume he would only eat raw vegetables.

u think john the baptist quit eating locusts and gave up his leather belt after meeting jesus?

[squarepusher]

[phill4paul]

I'll say yet again...My Nature's God has blessed me with that which is an omnivore.

[RicoCabeza]

I'll say yet again...My Nature's God has blessed me with that which is an omnivore.

Please listen to what Gary Yourofsky says about those canine's:
“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]

[phill4paul]

Please listen to what Gary Yourofsky says about those canine's:
“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]

Did tads of each and..no. I'm fine being created as an omnivore. Why do you hate others God so much?

[lilymc]

I'm fine being created as an omnivore.

Are you OK with that?

[lilymc]

[Anti Federalist]

Yes.

I hunted, I commercial fished, I've raised animals for meat, fur and eggs.

Having livestock means having deadstock.

And how other people want to handle or take care of their property is no business of mine.

Are you OK with that?

[RicoCabeza]

Yes.

I hunted, I commercial fished, I've raised animals for meat, fur and eggs.

Having livestock means having deadstock.

And how other people want to handle or take care of their property is no business of mine.

Perhaps one day a righteous God will send the Luciferians/Zionist Jews (or their New World Order) your way to abduct you, own you, eat you, sacrifice you, or spirit cook you and grind you up and and include you in their McDonalds hamburger recipe, and it will have all been done in accordance with YOUR version of the Golden Rule.

It has been written about extensively how the Royal Family enjoys eating and sacrificing humans by the way, and they are not the only ones . . .

[“Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy.” —Matthew 5:7]

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah, well, down the hatch I suppose.

Perhaps one day a righteous God will send the Luciferians/Zionist Jews (or their New World Order) your way to abduct you, own you, eat you, sacrifice you, or spirit cook you and grind you up and and include you in their McDonalds hamburger recipe, and it will have all been done in accordance with YOUR version of the Golden Rule.

It has been written about extensively how the Royal Family enjoys eating and sacrificing humans by the way, and they are not the only ones . . .

[“Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy.” —Matthew 5:7]

[lilymc]

Yeah, well, down the hatch I suppose.

It might be easy to say that in theory. But if a more powerful species came to this planet, and decided to eat you... but only after putting you in a cage, then torturing you before finally butchering you... I tend to doubt that you would be so blasé about it.

[presence]

Are you OK with that?

Freedom of religion; how others choose to feed themselves and tend their property is none of my business.

I don't personally encourage the "factory farm" practice;
generally the meat I eat gets shot w/ 308 through the heart;
its pretty quick... and usually occurs in a frozen snow filled field.
The rest of its life it wanders free on open range.

Deer was tonight's dinner. Bear yesterday. Rainbow trout night before.
Might have to pull a 3 pack of squirrel out of the freezer tomorrow.

General rule of thumb... I like to look it in the eyes before I eat it...
or at least look the man who took its life in the eyes before accepting it.

[lilymc]

Freedom of religion; how others choose to feed themselves and tend their property is none of my business.

I don't personally encourage the "factory farm" practice;
generally the meat I eat gets shot w/ 308 through the heart;
its pretty quick... and usually occurs in a frozen snow filled field.
The rest of its life it wanders free on open range.

Deer was tonight's dinner. Bear yesterday. Rainbow trout night before.
Might have to pull a 3 pack of squirrel out of the freezer tomorrow.

General rule of thumb... I like to look it in the eyes before I eat it...
or at least look the man who took its life in the eyes before accepting it.

If you don't mind me asking... are you an atheist? Or a christian or another religion?

[Anti Federalist]

It might be easy to say that in theory. But if a more powerful species came to this plant, and decided to eat you... but only after putting you in a cage, then torturing you before finally butchering you... I tend to doubt that you would be so blasé about it.

I have had apex predators try to eat me.

I'll show you the scars on my leg.

That said, I get it...it concerns you.

It doesn't concern me.

[presence]

If you don't mind me asking... are you an atheist? Or a christian or another religion?

Yes. I did watch the video... and frankly I've seen much worse.

I'd classify myself as "other" religion wise; I'm well studied in many religions past and present, east and west... and draw from them all philosophically. On "the chart" I'm probably somewhere between unitarian universalist, diest, and virtue ethicist. My wife is a deontological secular humanist.

[lilymc]

I have had apex predators try to eat me.

I'll show you the scars on my leg.

That said, I get it...it concerns you.

It doesn't concern me.

I should've made it more clear, I meant a more intelligent species...not just stronger. I still don't think anyone would be nonchalant about that scenario.

[specsaregood]

Why Did God Issue A Stronger Penalty For Eating Meat Than For Murder?

Because your God is a petty and selfish God that wants to keep all the delicious, healthy meat to himself.

[lilymc]

Yes. I did watch the video... and frankly I've seen much worse.

I'd classify myself as "other" religion wise; I'm well studied in many religions past and present, east and west... and draw from them all philosophically. On "the chart" I'm probably somewhere between unitarian universalist, diest, and virtue ethicist. My wife is a deontological secular humanist.

I have too. (seen worse) I posted that one, because it was so short and shows a variety of animals.

Thanks for sharing your religious views.

[ChristianAnarchist]

Why Did God Issue A Stronger Penalty For Eating Meat Than For Murder?

The short answer is - He didn't...

Because some person wrote something down 4000 years ago and claimed he heard it from God does not make it true...

[pcosmar]

Yes.

I hunted, I commercial fished, I've raised animals for meat, fur and eggs.

Having livestock means having deadstock.

And how other people want to handle or take care of their property is no business of mine.

Agreed

But how someone cares for animals tell a lot about them.

Factory farmer or Trophy hunter are low on the list,, down with folks that kick dogs and beat wives.

A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.

[monte]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FImOEDY9mmQ

Apologies, not sure how to embed, but I love this short video.

[Anti Federalist]

I should've made it more clear, I meant a more intelligent species...not just stronger. I still don't think anyone would be nonchalant about that scenario.

Probably not.

But that's not where we are.

So, until such time that we are, I'm not too concerned, and I'm going to continue to enjoy bacon, eggs, burgers and steaks.