Does The Bible Endorse Veganism? Options

[simplysaved]

Although I know that you feel it is your responsibility to try to find error in any post that I make (and that is your preference) I will repeat more clearly:

The Bible is clear in Genesis we were created vegan vegetarians; God permitted meat eating of clean foods after the Flood.

Genesis 1:29-31: Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so.

God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

Genesis 9:3-5: Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man.



EGW advocates both vegetarianism & being a vegan vegetarian.

Being a vegan is not a salvation issue.

Yes, historically, mankind was created vegan in Genesis (no meat, because theri was no sin). Flesh eating was not introduced until after the Flood to Noah.

Yes, EGW writings support being a vegan.

No, it is not necessary to be be saved. God gave permission to eat clean floods for necessity. Some theologians debate over whether it was also done to decrease human longevity (which is probably true, IMO). While it is not or may not [u]optimal health for most, some people DO need to eat some meat. Since God never reversed his decision, one has to leave the issue where it is.

Salvation is not about diet....obedience to what God has told us individually and collectively as we claim to accept the sacrifice of Christ is[/u].

And was never rescinded.
They support vegetarianism... not veganism... because EGW does not direct us to eschew honey and vegans don't eat honey.
Why would a God who desired a vegan people lead them to a land flowing with milk and honey? Why would the Holy Spirit move the psalmist to say that God's words are sweeter than honey to his mouth... or move the prophet Isaiah to speak prophetically about Christ in Isa 7:14-15 where he says:

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. 15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.

While you are entitled to your opinion, Sarah, it is clear from scripture that God does not share it.

In His service,
Mr. J

This post has been edited by simplysaved: Aug 22 2007, 12:00 PM

[awesumtenor]

Although I know that you feel it is your responsibility to try to find error in any post that I make (and that is your preference)

The fact is I point out error wherever I find it... however some do make more errors than others...

I will repeat more clearly:

The Bible is clear in Genesis we were created vegan vegetarians; God permitted meat eating of clean foods after the Flood.

In Genesis we were created without sin too... and when we return to sinlessness in glorified bodies we will be vegans again. Until then, we can eat what God has said man could eat, with thanksgiving. Those who are weak and want to eat just vegetable matter, that's between you and the Holy Ghost... but it is a "let every man be persuaded in his own mind issue".

EGW advocates both vegetarianism & being a vegan.

See if you can follow this...EGW advocates the consumption of honey. Honey is NOT a vegan food. The presence of non vegan foods in a diet makes one's diet a non-vegan diet; while it may be vegetarian, it is NOT vegan. Since she never changes her stance on the consumption of Honey, while she endorsed a vegetarian lifestyle she NEVER endorsed a vegan one. This is not like her eating oysters and saying folk couldn't... or shouldn't... She consumed honey and endorsed it for the consumption of others.

Being a vegan is not a salvation issue.

Neither is *not* being a vegan... or even a vegetarian for that matter. If you are so weak in your faith that a piece of chicken will send you to hell, then it's best you don't eat it... but everyone is not you.

In His service,
Mr. J

[simplysaved]

The fact is I point out error wherever I find it... however some do make more errors than others...
In Genesis we were created without sin too... and when we return to sinlessness in glorified bodies we will be vegans again. Until then, we can eat what God has said man could eat, with thanksgiving. Those who are weak and want to eat just vegetable matter, that's between you and the Holy Ghost... but it is a "let every man be persuaded in his own mind issue".
See if you can follow this...EGW advocates the consumption of honey. Honey is NOT a vegan food. The presence of non vegan foods in a diet makes one's diet a non-vegan diet; while it may be vegetarian, it is NOT vegan. Since she never changes her stance on the consumption of Honey, while she endorsed a vegetarian lifestyle she NEVER endorsed a vegan one. This is not like her eating oysters and saying folk couldn't... or shouldn't... She consumed honey and endorsed it for the consumption of others.
Neither is *not* being a vegan... or even a vegetarian for that matter. If you are so weak in your faith that a piece of chicken will send you to hell, then it's best you don't eat it... but everyone is not you.

In His service,
Mr. J

[PrincessDrRe]

[Clay]

after the flood God said that ANYTHING that moved could be eaten.... He did not say, only clean....

[simplysaved]

That is correct according to scripture, I am aware of to date. Leviticus is where clean and unclean foods to eat are specifically mentioned.

after the flood God said that ANYTHING that moved could be eaten.... He did not say, only clean....

[remnantrob]

There were two pair of the unclean and seven pair of the clean... re-read Genesis 7:2.

In His service,
Mr. J

I'm sure this was a mistake cuz i re-read and didn't find that....

[remnantrob]

I've brought up to my friend the verses of Jesus eating meat... This was just a funny exchange... He claimed, "THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS HE ACTUALLY ATE IT!" I changed the subject. I realized that the ADVENTHOPE crowd at LLU had really brainwashed him...

I've actually heard an interesting response to the Jesus eating fish question....It had to do with the sanctuary system and how the high priest ate meat right before entering the most Holy place and Jesus fulfilling his role as our high priest...i'm gonna look it up for myself tonite.

[simplysaved]

Rob, the Bible does state that: Genesis 7:1-5 (KJV)

1 The LORD then said to Noah, "Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I have found you righteous in this generation. 2 Take with you seven [a] of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth. 4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."

5 And Noah did all that the LORD commanded him.

I'm sure this was a mistake cuz i re-read and didn't find that....

This post has been edited by simplysaved: Aug 24 2007, 03:10 PM

[PrincessDrRe]

Regardless of the "light" issue....JESUS ate meat.

Anything with a face is MEAT.

Corn does not have a face. Fish has a face.

Anything that bleeds is MEAT.

Watermelon does not bleed. Fish bleeds.

[remnantrob]

Rob, the Bible does state that: Genesis 7:1-5 (KJV)

1 The LORD then said to Noah, "Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I have found you righteous in this generation. 2 Take with you seven [a] of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth. 4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."

5 And Noah did all that the LORD commanded him.

I was messing with him cuz he said 2 pair when a pair is already two so it was like he said there were four of each unclean animal...guess i'm playing head games with myself.

[awesumtenor]

I was messing with him cuz he said 2 pair when a pair is already two so it was like he said there were four of each unclean animal...guess i'm playing head games with myself.

umm... 2 pair *is* 4, bruh... that Costa Rican sun done fried your brain, man...

In His service,
Mr. J

[jene]

umm... 2 pair *is* 4, bruh... that Costa Rican sun done fried your brain, man...

In His service,
Mr. J

But the Bible said a pair not two pair (implying four animals). That is why RemnantRob was messing with SimplySAved. Did I get that right? I'm starting to get confused myself.

[awesumtenor]

But the Bible said a pair not two pair (implying four animals). That is why RemnantRob was messing with SimplySAved. Did I get that right? I'm starting to get confused myself.

Genesis 7:2 says that 2 pair of unclean and 7 pair of clean animals were taken into the ark. Rob wasn't messing; he missed it too.

In His service,
Mr. J

[jene]

Genesis 7:2 says that 2 pair of unclean and 7 pair of clean animals were taken into the ark. Rob wasn't messing; he missed it too.

In His service,
Mr. J

Ah, you will make a regular Bible reader out of me yet. I just went and read about 6 different versions of that passage. Some clearly state the animals were taken by pairs others did not state that at all. I wondered when I was younger why an odd number of a type of animal would be taken in. It makes sense to have pairs of animals. It is funny how some of us can grow up in the church listening and reading a simple story and yet miss such a profound detail.