/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>So we may of course eat animals, which is a part of God's design or we may also love God's creatures so much we eat only herbs as Paul said

Didn't he say something along the lines of those weak in the faith may avoid meat? While certainly a Christian can do so, it seems to be a negative sign of how his faith is doing. Also, first among equals? Are you implying non-human animals are our equals? I agree the way we treat animals is unpleasant. I don't see a lot of importance placed on animal welfare in scripture though.

>>654119

No. The point is that things that are done in faith are not to be despised. But my point is that maybe vegetarianism is the only option since it is difficult to find meat or milk that is not produced through highly unnatural and abusive processes. But yes, Paul seemed to say that those who believe eating meat is sin are weak in faith. But he did not say that eating only vegetables is a presentation of weak faith. One may do this out of faith and then it is good.

>>654127

The more I stay here, the more convinced I am that /k-christian/ or /out-christian/ would become a thing soon. Learn how to hunt, how to fish, how to live like in the olden days. While I disagree with >>654114 about having meat. I agree that Christians should avoid acts of cruelty no matter the justification (that is just rationalisation). I am okay with ranches, but if invasive genetic engineering (not animal husbandry) and doped up livestocks become a thing; that is where I draw a line.

At the least abstain from certain meat. Some Asians (of Chinese descent) will not touch beef for example because of some folklore religion belief which now became a tradition rather of religious reason. Also generations of not having beef made them ill-suited to consumption of beef as it will be as like a stone in their guts. Some goes from that to no land animals (some settle for fowls though) and only fishes and vegetables.

OP pic: mosaic in the house of a landowner in the city of Pontus, second century BC.

>>654114

>"first among equals" arrangement.

I'll say it in very, very, very simple manner that may get me banned: Winnie the Pooh off. We are superior than any creature in existence from dust to angels (although due to fall, we are "made little less than angels" because of our corruptible nature), because we are made in Image and likeness of God. You can take this PETA bullcrap and throw it in the Gehenna.

Also, being an Ortho, I maybe shouldnt post Anderson video, but he deals very well at least about this moronic new trend to make humans to look like yet another set of animals and thus dehumanizing us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoridxUp1nA

Also

>So we may of course eat animals, which is a part of God's design or we may also love God's creatures so much we eat only herbs as Paul said

No, Paul said that those who order others to completely abstain from meat, are heretics

>Forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful, and by them that have known the truth.

>But we have no right to modify the genetic code of animals and pump them with steroids. We have no right to keep them in dark cramped detestable confines.

we have every right to do it. In fact, Jacob did genetic selection with help of God.

God doesnt need anything, He is perfect and self-sustaining. All that exists is created for us to use. Another part is ruining it, which is simply retarded (no ruler, that isnt complete moron ruins his own kingdom), but what you states has nothing to do with it. I better have thousands of cows to die and rot in dark confines if it means that at least one human in Africa or any other continent, made in image and likeness of God, will have something to eat.

>>654191

Pride is a sin.

How do Christians feel about animals born through IVF? Not humans, animals instead?

>>654244

And not knowing what "pride" means is ignorance.

Pride is exaggerated view of yourself

What I've states is an objective fact.

>>654245

No problem about it

Stop discussing humans next to animals. What applies or not to one, doesnt apply to another

>>654191

ex Muslim? As far as I'm aware only Muslims believe man is explicitly superior to the angels.

>>654319

No, its not that the other creatures have the holy spirit its that like the other creatures we become reconciled with creation.

>>654342

>ex Muslim?

Orthodox since birth

>As far as I'm aware only Muslims believe man is explicitly superior to the angels.

What are you talking about even? Christianity says the same. We are made in image and likeness of God. A trait unique to us. And muds took the superiority from Christian apocypha.

Also, whats most important, Jesus is Fully Human while being Fully God

>For no where doth he take hold of the angels: but of the seed of Abraham he taketh hold. (Hebrews 2:16)

>14Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? (hebrews 1:14)

>3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? (1 Cor. 6:3)