Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,910 Year: 4,167/9,624 Month: 1,038/974 Week: 365/286 Day: 8/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The flood, and meat eating.
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 183 (222458)
07-07-2005 8:26 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by SantaClaus
07-05-2005 7:21 PM


I believe that the most common creationist belief is that meat-eating started right after the Fall, not after the Flood. There was no death and suffering before the Fall, but eating that darned apple brought death and disease, suffering and a taste for meat.
That said, it is one of the silliest parts of the creationist dogma. I mean, why wouldn't there be carnivorous animals (and plants!) before the fall? The fact that the Bible allows people to eat meat of animals but not to eat other people, and the death of humans is treat as more serious than the death of animals, so it would be perfectly consistent to allow animals to kill and eat other animals before the Fall while humans remain a special creature, protected from the death that other life must suffer. And since, supposedly, animals don't have souls, one wonders whether a creature without a soul (the repository of consciousness in many Christians' beliefs) could even "suffer".
On the other hand consider the lion. It is built to eat meat. Its claws and teeth make it very difficult to obtain plant food in enough quantity to feed itself, and its digestive tract is too short to efficiently digest plant matter. The panda is a case in point -- it is descended from carnivores and has the carnivore digestive system, but since it mainly eats plants now it must eat constantly. It also has certain adaptations that allow it obtain its food more efficiently.
So either the loving god who doesn't want his creation to suffer made lions that would be hungry all the time, or right at the fall every lion suddenly grew teeth and claws and lost a lot of intestine -- the changes would be far more "micro-evolution" than required to produce a human from a chimpanzee-like ape.
But maybe god, knowing that it would only take a couple of hours before Adam and Eve would fall, made lions as carnivores, knowing that they would only be hungry for a couple of hours. But by designing a world prepared to fall, one wonders how one can say that god ever really intended for humanity to life in a peaceful, perfect world.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SantaClaus, posted 07-05-2005 7:21 PM SantaClaus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by coffee_addict, posted 09-19-2005 12:07 AM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 183 (222472)
07-07-2005 9:29 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by SantaClaus
07-07-2005 8:58 PM


There's also the question why did god even make animals? Feral animals are fairly useless, and domesticated animals mainly serve as helpful servants in a fallen world where people have to "work by the sweat of their brow". Pre-Fall, there was no tilling requiring oxen or horses, and no crime requiring watch dogs -- and the Bible specifically says that god created Woman because the animals weren't good companions to Man. And in a pre-Fallen world, there would be plenty of nice, pleasant people for company.
Omnipotent God could easily have made an ecosystem that could produced fruits and vegetables for human consumption without needing animals to be a part of it.
So, God created oxen and horses ready to be used by humans to till the ground, dogs to serve as guardians against crime, deer to be prey, lions to be predators; God clearly never intended humans to live in an eden. God had the Fall and everything planned from the start. The Fall was basically people falling into the trap that God had deliberately set for them.
How's that for a conspiracy theory?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by SantaClaus, posted 07-07-2005 8:58 PM SantaClaus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by arachnophilia, posted 07-10-2005 4:22 AM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 183 (223106)
07-11-2005 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by randman
07-11-2005 4:10 AM


Re: Vegetarians?
Oh, sort of like in 1984. We are at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia. We have never been at war with Eurasia.
Corrected a stupid error.
This message has been edited by Chiroptera, 11-Jul-2005 01:56 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by randman, posted 07-11-2005 4:10 AM randman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by lfen, posted 07-27-2005 10:53 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 183 (226441)
07-26-2005 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by TheLiteralist
07-26-2005 6:47 AM


Re: The Big Bang
quote:
Can you think of any facts that support the Big Bang?
The red shift in the spectrum of distant galaxies, proportional to their distance from us, is a pretty good one.
Quasars only exist very far away (and therefore very long ago) is another one.
The cosmic microwave background radiation is another one, and should be seen as the clincher.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by TheLiteralist, posted 07-26-2005 6:47 AM TheLiteralist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by TheLiteralist, posted 07-28-2005 2:10 AM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 64 of 183 (226442)
07-26-2005 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Yaro
07-26-2005 9:55 AM


Re: Vegetarians?
quote:
Why do we assume that god is 'outside of time'?
More important, what does that even mean?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Yaro, posted 07-26-2005 9:55 AM Yaro has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 132 of 183 (254051)
10-22-2005 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by Lysimachus
10-22-2005 4:52 PM


Are you Seventh Day Adventist? Even though Adventists only forbid the Leviticus unclean foods, they recommend vegetarianism.

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Lysimachus, posted 10-22-2005 4:52 PM Lysimachus has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 136 of 183 (254192)
10-23-2005 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by evolutionimpaired
10-23-2005 9:48 AM


Cain's calling
Actually, Cain was a farmer of the vegetable/grain variety. God wasn't happy that Cain would offer his vegetables/grains as offering.
This message has been edited by Chiroptera, 23-Oct-2005 04:08 PM

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by evolutionimpaired, posted 10-23-2005 9:48 AM evolutionimpaired has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by jar, posted 10-23-2005 12:46 PM Chiroptera has not replied
 Message 138 by evolutionimpaired, posted 10-23-2005 6:12 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024