Shalom Place Community Shalom Place Discussion Groups General Discussion Forums Christian Spirituality Issues Spirituality & Hunting SeasonGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Spirituality & Hunting Season | Login/Join |
Indeed there is much evidence to support the fact Jesus was a vegetarian, allthough it has been supressed by the church for years. Evidence please? I'm just not aware of the great vegetarian debates that have ever shaken Christendom and give your conspiracy theory on this one about one in a million chances of being true. JESUS was from Nazareth, and all the citizens there were vegetarians. Evidence? Especially since several of his discipes were fishermen, and Jesus was very well acquainted with the ways of shepherds and sheep. From the bible; disciple "Master if there come to us any that eat flesh shall we recieve them "? Jesus " Let such abide in the outer court till they cleanse themselves from these grosser evils for till they percieve and repent of these, they are not fit to recieve the higher mysteries" That's not in the Bible. Calvin, you seem to have a big need for Jesus to be a vegetarian, and I'm wondering why? And even supposing he was (which I doubt), there's no doubt that the early Church permitted meat-eating, and that's before things like a censoring Magisterial hierarchy could have been involved somehow (which I also doubt). Why not just state the advantages of vegetarianism without all the conspiracy theories about Christians? That would be more effective. Phil | ||||
|
Good that some of you here ask questions rather than make assumptions, unlike most Americans. Heh! Be kind to people (and Americans). We're animals too! | ||||
|
Calvin... While I don't agree that Christ was vegetarian you have posed a good question - is it wrong to take a life to sustain life. You need to remember though that vegetarians take life to sustain life just as those of us who indulge in the occasional steak do. Plants too are living organisms. We take life to sustain life every day. We take the life of bacteria to sustain our health. We kill the mosquitos to prevent malaria etc. We spray for gypsy moths to protect our forests. Is this wrong? Then there is the issue of cloning for the purpose of growing stem cells to benefit those in need of organs etc. Again, taking life to sustain life. Same basic question. Life after all is life and who is to say that one form of life is of greater value than another. You see if you follow your reasoning to its logical conclusion you end up in all kinds of trouble. I do believe it is wrong to take a life - any life unnecessarily or wantonly but we - each living creature lives off and through and for each other. Life gives to life so that life can live. Peace, Wanda | ||||
|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Phil: [QB] Indeed there is much evidence to support the fact Jesus was a vegetarian, allthough it has been supressed by the church for years. Evidence please? YES I WILL INCLUDE THE EVIDENCE BELOW, I HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS SUBJECT WITH PEOPLE FOR YEARS, ALLTHOUGH YOU MADE A GOOD REPLY, I HAVE HEARD IT ALL BEFORE, SO I WILL TRY AND ANSWER AS BEST I CAN, AND SUPPORT MY STATEMENT WITH FACTS. I'm just not aware of the great vegetarian debates that have ever shaken Christendom and give your conspiracy theory on this one about one in a million chances of being true. From the bible; disciple "Master if there come to us any that eat flesh shall we recieve them "? Jesus " Let such abide in the outer court till they cleanse themselves from these grosser evils for till they percieve and repent of these, they are not fit to recieve the higher mysteries" That's not in the Bible. WELL THIS WAS TAKEN FROM THE ESSENE NEW TESTAMENT, WHICH WAS TAKEN FROM THE BIBLE, TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM SAYING FIRST YOU HAVE TO COME TO THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION THAT THE BIBLE HAS BEEN DRASTICALLY ALTERED AND CHANGED, ALLTHOUGH SOME OF IT HAS BEEN LEFT INTACT. Calvin, you seem to have a big need for Jesus to be a vegetarian, and I'm wondering why? And even supposing he was (which I doubt), there's no doubt that the early Church permitted meat-eating, and that's before things like a censoring Magisterial hierarchy could have been involved somehow (which I also doubt). Why not just state the advantages of vegetarianism without all the conspiracy theories about Christians? That would be more effective. WELL I'LL BE DISCUSSING BOTH SUBJECTS, WHAT IS COMMON SENSE TO ME IS MAY BE A LITTLE HARD TO COMPREHEND FOR SOMEONE NEW TO THE SUBJECT. HERE IS A GREAT EXCERT TO SUPPORT WHAT I AM BASICALLY STATING - excert from document on the ESSENES... When the soldiers of the Roman Emperor "Constantine the Great" were sent to confiscate all copies of the original Essene-Christian New Testament (Constantine had forcibly seized control of the Christian Church, changed the manuscripts, and created a State-run religion), some brave Essene-Christian monks went to India and deposited a copy of the authentic Essene-Christian New Testament in the Mystery School library of a Buddhist monastery. (Several centuries later the manuscript was moved from the Indian Buddhist monastery to a monastery in Tibet.) IT WAS THAT MANUSCRIPT -- The Gospel of the Holy Twelve THAT WAS TRANSLATED BY REV. GIDEON JASPER OUSELEY IN THE 1880's. The Gospel of the Holy Twelve IS THE AUTHENTIC NEW TESTAMENT OF JESUS, the version that existed before the manuscripts were tampered with. It includes many of the New Testament stories and teachings modern Christians are familiar with, BUT IT ALSO INCLUDES MANY IMPORTANT TEACHINGS OF JESUS WHICH WERE LOST FOR NEARLY 2,000 YEARS, such as: VEGETARIANISM, REINCARNATION and the FEMININE ASPECT OF GOD. Rev. Gideon Jasper Ouseley, translator of The Gospel of the Holy Twelve, was born in England in 1835 and died there in 1906. Having discovered the manuscript via direct help from Christ Jesus and holy angels (the description of that blessed help is provided in our Mystery School Lessons), Rev. Ouseley translated it over a several year period in the 1880's. Rev. Ouseley was not only a GREAT SCHOLAR, he was also DEEPLY SPIRITUAL: like the ancient Essenes, he was vegetarian and abstained from both alcohol and tobacco, and spent several hours each day in prayer and meditation. He once said, "the direct cause of poverty, bad health and social misery is flesh-eating, alcoholic drinking and tobacco smoking." He said that "the abolition of flesh-eating is the only effectual means of the world's redemption, whether as regards men themselves or the animals." In our day, recent books like Diet For a New America, by John Robbins, have proven Rev. Ouseley to be correct. But in his own day, Rev. Ouseley was severely persecuted for his beliefs. He was forced to leave the Church of England -- in which he was an ordained priest -- after he released his translation of The Gospel of the Holy Twelve. Several attempts were made to assassinate him. His house was twice set on fire. People often threw rocks at him. But he bravely continued to preach and teach about the Essene Jesus, and to circulate The Gospel of the Holy Twelve. Now some words in regard to another holy scripture of Essene Church of Christ: THE ESSENE GOSPEL OF PEACE (a four-book-set). Dr. Edmond Bordeaux Szekely was chosen by Christ to bring to light The Essene Gospel of Peace. In the early 1920's, while doing research in the secret archives of the Vatican, Dr. Szekely discovered ancient Essene manuscripts. Much to the dismay of the Vatican (the Vatican is the seat of authority of the Catholic Church), Dr. Szekely refused to keep quiet. He published the Essene manuscripts in a four book set titled, The Essene Gospel of Peace. When Dr. Szekely published the Essene manuscripts he had discovered, HE WAS BANISHED BY THE VATICAN AND ALL OTHER ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN AUTHORITIES. Why? Because they don't want their comfortable boats rocked by the radical waves of the Essene Jesus! Can you imagine the orthodox authorities trying to explain to their congregations that Jesus was a vegetarian and taught reincarnation? | ||||
|
YES I UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE CHAIN OF LIFE. MANKIND HAS MADE THE GRAVEST MISTAKE IN SUPPORTING THE ANIMAL HOLOCAUST, AND HAS BROUGHT UPON ITSELF THE WORST KIND OF KARMA. MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE HORRORS OF THE ANIMAL CONCENTRATION CAMPS RAN BY MCDONALDS AND THE MEAT INDUSTRY. CHEERS Calvin | ||||
|
BUT IT ALSO INCLUDES MANY IMPORTANT TEACHINGS OF JESUS WHICH WERE LOST FOR NEARLY 2,000 YEARS, such as: VEGETARIANISM, REINCARNATION and the FEMININE ASPECT OF GOD. Hmm. The REAL New Testament was sheltered away in a Buddhist Monastery and, just by coincidence, this version supports vegetarianism and reincarnation. Double hmmm. I've gotta go with Phil on this. Shout the virtues of vegetarianism from the rooftops but it's a little late to be re-writing history me thinks. | ||||
|
WELL A HUMAN LIFE HAS A LOT MORE VALUE THAN THE LIFE OF AN ANIMAL, WHICH HAS MORE VALUE THAN SAY A PLANT. Okay, if you're willing to stipulate that as the truth, then if it's okay for, say, a tiger to eat a deer then what is the moral problem with people (a supposed higher form) eating a deer? The only argument I could see would be that we as humans are capable of recognizing that it is morally wrong - a tiger isn't. But then I'd also have to conclude that the tiger is doing something morally wrong too - only he or she doesn't know it. But there ARE some animals that HAVE to eat meat to survive. And there are also certainly situations and cultures (Inuits) that have to eat meat to survive as well. I'd be much more comfortable with people promoting the absolutely humane treatment of animals and promoting the moral and health benefits of vegetarianisml But to wrap the entire contents of Christianity up in it seems more suited to promoting YOUR morality. I'm glad you feel better when you don't eat meat. And I have to tell you that it's the God's truth that if I avoid certain vegetables (wheat and corn) and eat only chicken, fish and my "good" vegetables that I feel much better. | ||||
|
. . . Why? Because they don't want their comfortable boats rocked by the radical waves of the Essene Jesus! Can you imagine the orthodox authorities trying to explain to their congregations that Jesus was a vegetarian and taught reincarnation? Of course! What else could have possibly motivated the Vatican except power, security, and other malevolent motives?  Now Calvin, I've read your posts, visited the web sites you referred us to, and am definitely not convinced. Please recall the point I made several times, which is that the early Church had no restrictions on meat-eating (and no teaching on reincarnation). None of the writings of the early Fathers (pre-Constantine) mentions either the mandate to vegetarianism, and the discussions on reincarnation by Origen were never really accepted. The writings of the Essenes have certainly not been banned; they're part of the Dead-Sea Scrolls, which have been heartily accepted and studied by the Church. In my library, I possess a collection of all the writings of the early Church, including all the early gospels--apocryphal and canonical. There is no gospel of the Essenes listed, and none of the other early gospels say anything about vegetarianism or reincarnation. All pre-dated Constantine. Some were discovered only last Century. You must understand that Christianity is and always has been more than what any of its books report about it. Prior to any written tradition, there is the lived experience of the Christian community and its oral traditions, out of which come the writings. There is absolutely nothing in this oral tradition about mandatory vegetarianism nor reincarnation. There is also no record anywhere of this having been repressed. Rejections of teachings like reincarnation do not constitute repression of something Jesus taught, but a sense by the Christian community that this teaching doesn't mesh with what Jesus taught or intended. So, there you have it; I can't make it any clearer. What you're implying, of course, is not only that you think vegetarianism is a good thing, but that Christians are somehow unfaithful to the teaching of Jesus for not promoting it. This just can't be supported, and blaming the Vatican for supposedly repressing material that qualifies your position doesn't cut it either. Your persistence in this is starting to feel like a kind of judgmental proseletizing. I don't really want that kind of thing going on here. Phil | ||||
|
Calvin, Thanks for coming over to sp to share your views about Jesus and vegetarianism. I have been reading much of the url you mentioned about Essene Fruitarianism of Jesus. I don't think you are proselytizing. Phil asked you for evidence and I think you did your best to provide it. Thanks for the quotes, too. I went to askjeeves.com and posed the question: "Was Jesus a Vegetarian?" and came up with some interesting links, including one with the same title as my question. Anyone interested in this discussion might want to check them out. I understand how you could feel upset about Christians. If you have listened to Pope John Paul II, you will hear him apologizing for our misdeeds. From Galileo to Bruno to Joan of Arc to the inquisition to the witch trials and on and on, you will see that we, like any other group or religion, have our problems, too. However, most of us are not intolerant bigots who try to shove our perspective of reality down the throats of others. As far as your fruitarian url goes, I found some positive and negative points. I do not think that just becoming a vegetarian automatically brings one into divine communion with God. I also don't think it makes one more evolved or puts one above others in any way. I didn't like the part where the author was emphasizing the ecstatic gifts (siddis like clairvoyance, etc.) that one receives as one becomes closer to the realization of divine union.(p.9) Most religions say it is far too easy to get caught up in those gifts and loose sight of the goal.I tendtothink service to others is more indicative of divine union. I liked the emphasis on compassion and found nuggets of truth that fit quite well with things I've learned in Christianity. For me, the danger of both sides of this issue is when people refuse to let it be open-ended, without a definitive answer. I'm reading material on both sides that is quite thought provoking. Thank you Phil for the space to discuss this issue. Thank you Calvin for presenting an opposing viewpoint.....and thanks to everyone who has contributed to this interesting discussion. qt | ||||
|
For me, the danger of both sides of this issue is when people refuse to let it be open-ended, without a definitive answer. A greater danger is viewing two sides of an issue as being equally true because there happen to be two sides. It's often the case that one side is right, and the other is wrong. I know that flies in the face of political correctness and what-not, but sometimes there really is a definitive answer to questions, as indeed there is in this case. Viewing the responses I have given from Christian history as being no more credible than what Calvin has presented seems pretty ludicrous, uraqt. All my humble, but correct, opinion on this matter, of course.  Phil | ||||
|
Brad as to your question about what a tiger eats. He eats flesh because this is his prescribed diet from God. His body functions better on a diet of flesh, whereas a human body was meant to consume most foods, but not flesh. To me vegetarianism is just common sense, and yes there are plenty of places in the bible to support vegetarianism.
 | ||||
|
Uraqt thanks for your support. The following is a famous story put forth by Prabhupada, a great spiritual leader. The general moral here is that most people can only relate to thier own terms and have difficulty relating to things outside their known field. Enjoy ! The analogy has been given of Dr. Frog. A frog often lives in a well. The well is one meter wide, it's in the middle of a field and above the well is a tree. Our Dr. Frog has spent his whole life in that well. He has no experience beyond that one meter diameter well. But he has seen so much through the hole in the top of his well! Sometimes he sees nice blue sky and trees with green leaves, sometimes he sees clouds in the sky, sometimes rain comes through the top of his well, sometimes the leaves from the tree fall into his well. So Dr. Frog has experienced many things, he's seen so much. As a result of all of his observation he has been able to come up with his own particular universal view, "The universe according to Dr. Frog." He doesn't know there is any more than he has seen. He has only seen what is visible through the hole in the top of his well, so he thinks that's all there is, he thinks that's the universe. He has developed so much philosophy, so many theories to describe what is happening in his universe. But what can he see? So what is the value of his conclusions? His conclusions are useless. The difficulty is if somebody comes from outside to tell him about the actual universe he won't be able to understand it because it's outside the scope of his world. One day another frog hopped into Dr. Frog's well. This frog had not been confined to a one metre wide well for his whole life, he had travelled quite a bit, he'd even seen the Pacific Ocean. So he tried to explain to Dr. Frog, "My dear friend, I have seen such a vast mass of water, it is called the Pacific Ocean." So Dr. Frog said, "Yes. Please explain it to me." But he was thinking in terms of the water in his well, so he thought, "Perhaps it's twice as big as my well, perhaps three times as big as my well, maybe it is even five times bigger." In this way he tried to understand the Pacific Ocean but it was impossible because he can't even conceive of the greatness of the Pacific Ocean. Our scientists are something like Dr. Frog. They are confident they have a clear understanding of the universe around them. After all they have such big expensive equipment, they get so many big grants from the government and they have so many respectable predecessor scientists who have put forward so many nice hypothesises which they now accept as facts. They think they are well situated, but what have they seen? We know this planet is only one of so many planets in the universe. Even within this universe we are insignificant. The creation of the Supreme Lord consists of not just one universe but of unlimited universes. In the Vedic literature the number of universes is compared to a bucket full of mustard seeds. If you look at a mustard seed you will find it is a very small seed. A whole bucket of mustard seeds is a huge quantity, millions and millions. So universes are clustered together like this and our planet earth is only one tiny fragment of one of the smallest universes. But our "Dr. Frog" scientists think they understand how things are going on. They think one day they will be able to control everything. One day they will be able to make it rain when they want, they will make man live forever, they will be able to do anything they like. However, in reality, their knowledge is comparable to Dr. Frog's knowledge of his universe. Of course there may be some glimmer of truth in some of the scientific theories but they are all full of defects: the tendency to make mistakes, the tendency to cheat, the problem of being illusioned and the difficulty of the senses being imperfect. These defects are present in all of our so-called scientific theories. Calvin | ||||
|
THE INFO ON THE EARLY CHURCH SUPPORTING VEGETARIANISM WAS SUPPRESSED IN A WAY A NEWCOMER LIKE MYSELF IS BEING SUPPRESSED. NOW IF I HAD THE TIME I COULD WREAK HAVOC HERE LIKE I HAVE DONE ON OTHER BOARDS, BUT I'M BEING NICE. SO HERE IS SOME INFO TO SUPPORT WHAT YOU ARE ASKING - Calvin, I hear your threat and am warning you that I ban people who "wreak havoc here." I see in your profile that you list yourself as a "terrorist." If you've come here to disrupt, then know that this gives little credibility to the points you're trying to make: "Jesus the peaceful vegetarian," whose cause is being furthered by a cyber-terrorist! Fine day! I might mention that your IP address has been logged with each of your posts and I've written them down. You're not as hard to track down as OBL. Please note that your posts have been left intact. Those who wish to further pursue what you've proposed have the resources you've recommended. As you've published no email address, they can send you private messages if they want to dialogue with you. All fine with me, and I wish you the best with it. I'm closing this thread, however, as it's become a pointless discussion in which one is asked to give equal footing to esoteric/occult resources and the Bible/Church teaching. Sorry, but those "rules for engagement" are untenable. Phil | ||||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Shalom Place Community Shalom Place Discussion Groups General Discussion Forums Christian Spirituality Issues Spirituality & Hunting Season