..another thing, Raw Seeker, Acts 10:1-10 describes how Peter had house guests, that "Italian band", who were already up and cooking G_d knows what foreign 'delicacies'. Peter was obviously already a meat-eater but would have picked around the Unclean meat served that morning, maybe gone off on their journey undernourished and keeled over along the path.

1There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band...

..guess who's making breakfast:/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/26/2010 01:35AM by loeve.

Raw Seeker,
What is the point of all those bible verses? Is there an inherent conflict between vegetarianism and the Bible? According to some there isn't, like 7th day adventists, Essenes like Gabriel Cousens and David Wolfe.

Banana who,
R. Crumb recently released his edition of the book of Genesis illustrated. That is so interesting, often funny, sometimes very strange. I think he said something about wanting to do a satire of the bible, but realized in short order that being true and literal to the script was thought provoking enough. Parental guidance is suggested! Now why doesn't every copy of the Bible say that!!!

Leviticus, oy vey. How many rules there are in the 'holiness code'. And then there are implied rules by extension that a lot of jews observe which aren't specifically stated. But of them all, only a few really get much press in the xtian world, mostly the one about homosexuality, the other about pork, which most xtians don't observe. But give up shrimp? avoid wearing cloth made of mixed fabrics? Avoid catfish? I was surprised to learn about catfish is inherently unclean because its a skin fish, along with eel. However, goldfish and carp can be prepared kosher.

About the biggest problem I have with xtians are vocal ones which say things so ignorant and insensitive, like Pat Robertson. I realize he doesn't speak for all xtians, but someone so prominent should be a bit more careful about what he says. A webpage has a long list of things he said in recent years which aren't accurate, thoughtful or inspiring, yet it hasn't seemed to hurt him or the 700 club. Then there is...oh never mind....

Genesis Illustrated sounds like a good read. The OP's quote, Genesis 1:29 is from what some consider to be the first of two Genesis creation accounts. Christian Scientist, Mary Baker Eddy, considered the first account to be true and the second, from Gen 2:4 onwards, to describe the fall from grace, Eve listening to the serpent and so on.

One Nazarene Essene website quotes Jewish religious text to help support its views on vegetarianism--

Genesis 1:29, Behold I have given you herb yielding seed. To you it shall be for meat.

[www.essene.com]

..please eat seeds instead of meat, guys...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/28/2010 12:22PM by loeve.

Omega Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Behold, I have given you every herb yielding
> 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 food."

I think this quote is great support for veganism and also for eating more fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds, those foods described as gifts.

Someone said the quote might be of Jewish origin --

Gen 1:29 "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."
[www.scripture4all.org]

The translation, "to you it shall be for meat", might have been more simply translated 'for food', seems to me, from looking at its derivation at the above link.

The next line speaks to me about the meaning of the first --

Gen 1:30 "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."

The animals having life ("soul" were gifted green herbs ("herbage" for meat (food), in other words they were given plant foods. This isn't to say they would have eaten herbs exclusively, but simply distinguishes what was originally given to them by God, from what they might have taken for themselves, IMO.

I think the translations vary in important ways. Going back to the Jewish text illustrates word choices made; meat vs food, herb vs herbage, shall vs is, animal life vs animal soul. Something is lost in the translation, so they sometimes say, and it's interesting for me to imagine what was originally intended by these words.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/03/2010 08:32PM by loeve.

Isn't anyone on these boards a Jew who went to Yeshiva and could break this down for us? Anyone? . . . . It shall remain subjective, I guess.

'Herbage' is a word that came up a couple of times researching Genesis 1:29 and again researching Daniel 4:33 where it is said that King Nebuchadnezzar ate grass like oxen. The original Hebrew word translated literally as 'herbage' is written variously as 'herb' or 'grass' in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles. It makes a difference. Herbage is what cattle and other herbivores graze on and includes other plants besides grass or herbs as commonly thought of. The 'grass' that the mad King Nebuchednezzar was compelled to eat with the oxen gets the point across that he was humbled and lived a natural life outdoors to regain his health and sanity, but it doesn't portray exactly what he ate as well as the original Hebrew text.

Literal translations of the Bible are out there on the web. One is Young's Literal Translation. I don't know what, if any, bias they might have that could influence the translation, but lacking the ability to read ancient Hebrew I'm finding literal renderings interesting --

29 And God saith, `Lo, I have given to you every herb sowing seed, which [is] upon the face of all the earth, and every tree in which [is] the fruit of a tree sowing seed, to you it is for food;

30 and to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the heavens, and to every creeping thing on the earth, in which [is] breath of life, every green herb [is] for food:' and it is so.
[www.biblegateway.com]

Here we see herbs, seeds and fruit are [is] for our food, and every green herb [is] food for animals with "breath of life".

Daniel 4:33 In that hour the thing hath been fulfilled on Nebuchadnezzar, and from men he is driven, and the herb as oxen he eateth, and by the dew of the heavens his body is wet, till that his hair as eagles' hath become great, and his nails as birds.
[www.biblegateway.com]

They say literal translations are more difficult to read for the modern reader and that's why most bibles are rephrased and reworded, hopefully to better convey the meaning of the original text. The syntax and some words of the ancient Hebrew would not make sense to many...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/04/2010 12:32PM by loeve.

In The Essene Gospel of Peace, the interpretation is:

"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."


Personally, I prefer the word "food" over "meat" as today the latter connotes flesh.

Hey Omega,

How do we get around the sticky point that Jesus ate cooked fish on a regular basis? Could never figure that one out...

juicerkatz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey Omega,
>
> How do we get around the sticky point that Jesus
> ate cooked fish on a regular basis? Could never
> figure that one out...

Hi juicerkatz,

Personally, I believe that Jesus was an Essene, and as such he did not eat fish.

From The Essene Gospel of Peace:

"It was said to them of old time, 'Honor thy Heavenly Father and thy Earthly Mother, and do their commandments, that thy days may be long upon the earth.' And next afterward was given this commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill,' for life is given to all by God, and that which God has given, let not man take away. For I tell you truly, from one Mother proceeds all that lives upon the earth. Therefore, he who kills, kills his brother. And from him will the Earthly Mother turn away, and will pluck from him her quickening breasts. And he will be shunned by her angels, and Satan will have his dwelling in his body. And the flesh of slain beasts in his body will become his own tomb. For I tell you truly, he who kills, kills himself, and whoso eats the flesh of slain beasts, eats of the body of death."

Interesting...

So you are saying that you don't believe the account of the Gospels where it states that he did eat fish?

Omega Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> juicerkatz Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hey Omega,
> >
> > How do we get around the sticky point that
> Jesus
> > ate cooked fish on a regular basis? Could never
> > figure that one out...
>
> Hi juicerkatz,
>
> Personally, I believe that Jesus was an Essene,
> and as such he did not eat fish.
>
> From The Essene Gospel of Peace:
>
> "It was said to them of old time, 'Honor thy
> Heavenly Father and thy Earthly Mother, and do
> their commandments, that thy days may be long upon
> the earth.' And next afterward was given this
> commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill,' for life is
> given to all by God, and that which God has given,
> let not man take away. For I tell you truly, from
> one Mother proceeds all that lives upon the earth.
> Therefore, he who kills, kills his brother. And
> from him will the Earthly Mother turn away, and
> will pluck from him her quickening breasts. And he
> will be shunned by her angels, and Satan will have
> his dwelling in his body. And the flesh of slain
> beasts in his body will become his own tomb. For I
> tell you truly, he who kills, kills himself, and
> whoso eats the flesh of slain beasts, eats of the
> body of death."

I don't know how that got started.. there is only one instance of Jesus eating a piece of fish in the Bible, where it was *given* to him by his disciples after the crucifiction so that he could prove that he was not a ghost. Jesus was being polite and it could just as easily have been a piece of bread. There may be a bit of myth or symbology here as well since it was an extraordinary occasion and not witnessed first hand by Luke...

Luke 24:42-43

Interesting way for Him to prove not being a ghost - just as easily could have eaten a piece of fruit, yes?

There are several accounts throughout the Gospels of Him multiplying fish, having a fire of coals on the shore when the disciples came to Him, etc., but I guess if we were to split hairs here, it doesn't specifically state that He ate along with them...

In the Gospel of John, Jesus invited Thomas to put his finger in His wounds to prove that He was real, in contrast with Luke.

I don't think Genesis 1:29 was lost on Jesus, depicted gathering wheat seeds along the road, breaking bread and, I believe, fond of the juice of the vine?.. didn't always get along with fig trees - though maybe a little 'bearing fruit' symbology there. Jesus was a big server, not so much a consumer...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2010 02:57AM by loeve.

Ok, good points...Something else to consider; After the account of the flood, God permits/allows mankind to eat/consume meat (every moving thing that liveth) (Gen. 9:3)

What to make of that? And back to the NT accounts of Jesus; If man were to eat a solely raw diet, why was Jesus constantly offering cooked foods/meats to people, enabling the disciples of large catches of fish?

As a raw foodist & also a Christian, these are the types of questions that I am bombarded with from my meat eating friends...I just haven't been able to come up with real solid answers that will hold water against their arguments.

juicerkatz,

If I may humbly interpolate my parochial school education into this discussion: I personally believe Jesus was a man of his time and, having come from a fishing community, would have been a pescatarian. Not being a Christian with a capital C, this in no way impacts my self identification as a raw foodist. If I were a Christian with a capital C, it would still not impact my self identification as a raw foodist because I would not consider it necessary, nor possible, to exactly reproduce the lifestyle of The Nazarene. It is not important to emulate His actions so much as His general behavior. To wit: what would have been Jesus's most appropriate response to the hunger of the Devoted Multitude, having only a handful of loaves and fishes with which to feed them all? To multiply helpless fish for the crowd to consume, or to let the crowd suffer hunger? It is a matter of degrees, rather than directions.

It isn't fair of your friends to challenge you to comform what you and they understand of Jesus to your choice of lifestyle, for how can you?

"...Something else to consider"

You also raise good points and the question of what Jesus truely ate is worth pursuing further. When John the Baptist was in prison, Jesus spoke to the crowds of John's greatness and how John came "neither eating nor drinking", whereas "the Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Look a glutton and a drunkard...' Matthew 11:18-19 Jesus liked to eat and drink and I believe much of it was as a guest in the homes of those who welcomed him along his journey. I think He deserved some comforts.

The only other reference I can think of where Jesus was depicted as actually consuming food or drink was on the cross when he said "I thirst" and they gave him some common wine. "When Jesus had taken the wine, he said, "It is finished." And bowing his head, he handed over the spirit. John 19:28-30

The sacraments of bread and wine, as Jesus asked, honor herbs (wheat) with seed and fruit of the vine.

"Jesus liked to eat and drink"

I don't think I ever quite understood Matthew 11:19. Jesus is talking to the crowd saying he came "eating and drinking", but then they, usually meaning the Pharisees, say outlandish things like they had said about John the Baptist being posessed by a demon.

Going through the New Testament trying to find occasions where Jesus is depicted actually eating something, only turns up a few, like the wine while on the cross in order to fulfull the prophecy...

King James Version
11:19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.

Darby's English Translation
11:19 The Son of man has come eating and drinking, and they say, Behold, a man that is eating and wine-drinking, a friend of tax-gatherers, and of sinners: -- and wisdom has been justified by her children.

Douay Rheims
11:19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say: Behold a man that is a glutton and a wine drinker, a friend of publicans and sinners. And wisdom is justified by her children.'

[www.greeknewtestament.com]

Regarding possible symbolic interpretations of Jesus eating a piece of fish before the disciples after his resurrection according to the Gospel of Luke.

From the BBC --

"Christian teaching has associated the vesica piscis symbol with Christ from the very beginning, as inscriptions from the catacombs show. The standard Christian explanation is that the symbol represents an acrostic for the Greek words Iesous Christos Theou Huios4 Soter, the first letters of each word being used to spell the word Ichthys - Greek for fish. The fish seems to have been used by early Christians as a recognition symbol during the period in which they were a persecuted minority."

[search.aol.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2010 01:26PM by loeve.

juicerkatz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting...
>
> So you are saying that you don't believe the
> account of the Gospels where it states that he did
> eat fish?

Hi juicerkatz,

I believe that the original words of Jesus are found in The Essene Gospel of Peace and that that book provides the most accurate portrayal of him.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2010 02:05PM by Omega.

Did Jesus drink milk?

" After the account of the flood, God permits/allows mankind to eat/consume meat (every moving thing that liveth) (Gen. 9:3) ... What to make of that?"

The implicit allowance of meat began much earlier, purhaps from the very beginning. Remember Adam and Eve's sons, Cain and Able, and how the Lord approved of Able's offering of fat from the first born of his flock of sheep--

Genesis 1:4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:

[www.sacrednamebible.com]

In the creation accounts there were beasts, fish, birds and crawlly things; and then there were cattle. There were always cattle, even from Adam and Eve's day. It was "every moving thing" that was *given* by the Lord in Noah's day. Such food could always have been *taken*, but now we could partake without guilt.

"If man were to eat a solely raw diet"

That's more an Essene belief isn't it?

"why was Jesus constantly offering cooked foods/meats to people, enabling the disciples of large catches of fish?"

I don't know. The people of the day probably ate a mostly cooked diet. Jesus was just joining them where they were at? The disciples were given large catches of fish as was written, "all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered" Gen 9:2, again going back to Noah's day... The apostle Paul wrote that all was allowed though not all was beneficial (healthy), the fine points of diet left up to us...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2010 08:36PM by loeve.

I think something that all true prophets have understood is that the masses are generally not ready for the highest Law; that the masses must be given "baby steps" to move them higher. This is why Moses offered the transitional kosher diet, why the Essene Jesus offered the raw vegetarian diet, and why Arnold Ehret offered his own transitional diet.

To be honest, I grew up within Judaism so I am not that familiar with the specifics of the NT Gospels (I've never studied them), however if Jesus ever did offer people fish I would imagine it was because it is "less bad" than meat, and not because he was specifically endorsing its consumption.

I've only skimmed some Essene and Nazarene websites, a convert to Catholicism myself. We have readings from the Old and New Testaments at our services. I've read and studied the Hebrew Bible but not the wider Jewish texts. Jewish dietary laws sound quite a step up over 'anything goes'. In effect, there are so many protected species under the Torah.

> I think something that all true prophets have
> understood is that the masses are generally not
> ready for the highest Law; that the masses must be
> given "baby steps" to move them higher. This is
> why Moses offered the transitional kosher diet,
> why the Essene Jesus offered the raw vegetarian
> diet, and why Arnold Ehret offered his own
> transitional diet.
>
> To be honest, I grew up within Judaism so I am not
> that familiar with the specifics of the NT Gospels
> (I've never studied them), however if Jesus ever
> did offer people fish I would imagine it was
> because it is "less bad" than meat, and not
> because he was specifically endorsing its
> consumption.

In the NT gospels Jesus said he had not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it, and fish and meat continued to be legal though you don't see Jesus 'multiplying' or offering meat like he does fish. He doesn't say much about it but his actions might give the impression that fish is "less bad" than meat, though not in any sense bad in itself. Half his disciples were fishermen. His favorite, John, was a fishermen and wrote major books of the NT, and so it sort of follows the Bible will have some fish stories, maybe a little like cattle figured in the books of the sheperd, Moses.