the BIBLE is clear on being VEGETARIAN

Hey bhaktajan, check out this link, it was written by a UC Berkeley anthropologist (just the kind of person our friend keeps citing). “A hypothesis to explain the role of meat-eating in human evolution” , then look at any 0f the 248 citations (I did not find one in a skimming that rejected the thesis.

Some physical anthropologists (and a lot from our friend's alma mater) seem not to agree with his thesis: "I think all vegetarians need to talk to physical anthropologists who will quickly relieve them of any idea human beings were ever vegetarians." I wrote the author of the article, sure enough, she argues that human beings were primarily herbivorous (like pan paniscus or bongos) who slowly became primarily carnivorous due to ecology changes last ice age (fruits and vegetables slowly disappeared and fresh meat was better--caused less deaths--than carrion).

Thanks I will read it.

also:
A hypothesis to explain the role of meat-eating

When I first read this I immediately was reminded of a 'common conception' ... that went like this:

"Since after the War [WW2] since the Japanese adopted regular (red) Meat eating--- they started getting taller"

Now after what I learnt since those early years, I came to know of how it was that the Japanese adopted western ways faster than peter the Great ever could hope for. The Japanese purchased every commodity and mechanism and even TOP HAT & COAT TAILS and railraods etc etc etc ---This is when I surmise that, especially, the japanese Elite would start eating as much red meat etc as the "Western 'Adrmiral Perry' so displayed".

And then less than 90 years later the Japs had the moxie to Invade U.S. Hawaiian naval Base.

The Japs where more passionately driven than ever in there own past.

IWIWIWIWIWIWIWIWIWIWIWIWIWIWI

evolution

When I first read this I immediately was reminded of:

I do not believe Mankind evolved from Apes. Period.

OTOH, I do believe Mankind can certainly devolved into beastly states.

I believe Mankind is in the last of four ages [as per the Vedas] --thus I believe the Golden ages of mankind are recorded in few scriptures but inferred in all scriptures. Certainly Adam & Eve did not live in adobe Huts.

Ideal life in endorsed by Creation ---it is later that antropy & dessolution occurs with the passage of time.

In the beginning The all things where fresh and ideal.

Later the faculties become dis-ordered*.

[* aka, 'kali' -yuga]
 
When protein can be made to taste like meat humans will eat it like you vegetarians will do as you hypocritically call for others to give up the meat taste you too crave

ERZATS:
a] No craving IF the "higher Taste" is achieved. Apparentlly, this rule of thumb works brilliantly. The gumption to have the change of heart starts with facing the "Root of Lust" as I have been stated, Lust is a prelude to violence, meat inflames the lower chakras and is used as a concominant factor is seeking out copulation ... at least this is indeed statistically fleshed out as demonstrated in any Resturant TV Advert.
The lads are drinking beer & yelling at football matches whilst "sublimating"; and the resturant's pathos is the Social norm for "Courting a Woman" [where a Man pays the tab] ... of course the inuendos herein are legendarily known and celebrated in film and Fiction.

b] When being vegetarian: TEXTURES of food are lost when meat fish eggs are eliminated.

"Food combining" for the sake of gastronomical aesthetics reign supreme.

Faux meats made of the super high protein laden 'Gluten' allows a menu that includes a TEXTURE.

Soft, chewy, frosty, crispy, crunchy, ice-cy, creamy, mushy, etc etc.

This is what is being sought when you say "protein can be made to taste like meat" ---it's about expert cooking.

Speaking of expert cooking:
"to taste like meat"

---what does meat taste like? It tastes like the SEASONING. THE SEASONING. THE SEASONING. THE SEASONING.

Without THE SEASONING all food would would taste like cardboard! Dontcha know?

Next time you slide a sausage you love [my assumption] break open the casings and see THE SEASONINGS sprinkled throughout.
 
I do not believe Mankind evolved from Apes. Period.

bhaktajan - are you saying that you believe that Mankind was created in its current from by the Creator?

If so, this severely weakens your stance that humans are not "supposed" to eat meat. Why would humans have canine teeth and a longer short intestine if we weren't designed to have some meat in our diets? Why wouldn't we have a digestive system like pure herbivores have? (i.e. cows that chew their cuds and are very efficient at breaking down cellulose from plants). Why can humans run 26.2 miles straight without stopping, if not to be better hunters?

IMHO, humans definitely weren't "supposed" to be pure carnivores. But the scientific evidence that I've seen suggests we weren't "supposed" to be pure herbivores either... Hence, our omnivorous diets.
 
OK, I was thinking on the OP topic some more... How about this:

If the bible is so clear on being vegetarian, why did Jesus multiply the fish to feed to the masses? Why didn't he just multiply the bread?
 
bhaktajan - are you saying that you believe that Mankind was created in its current from by the Creator?

[COLOR="RoyalBlue"]My conjectured answer is Mankind was created in its current form by Progenitors ... who were not ape-like. I stated that in The bible If God created Adam & Eve there would also be Idylic and Ideal Living conditions and the Best "Standard of Living ever conceive-able" for the First Generation Of a what would thus be a defacto Royal Dynasty, starting with Adam ---with one underlying draw-back--- Adam & Eve were born in the Material World of Temporal Time & Space and material Energy.

I also conjecture that Humanity is devolving. Technology is NOT advancement nor does it even rank as "Knowledge" [as per the Veda's Definition of the word "Knowledge"].

The sages say:
"Knowledge" is knowing the difference between Matter & Spirit ---so as to avail one's self of Liberation from Samsara.

If the Veda's Definition of the word "Samsara" is of NO Importance to a person ---then they care not about "the Original Sin" that got them into "Samsara" in the first place ... and thus, again they will care not about stay perpetually in "Samsara".

[the Sanskrit Definition of the word "Samsara" is: "Cycle of Birth & Death"**.

**this is what the Soul does and how the Soul works in the material world.
[/COLOR]

humans are not "supposed" to eat meat.

Why would humans have canine teeth

Ans: Cutting into Apples. Comment: Then fangs would be even more Ideal. In fact any comparison between Man and an animal/critter/beast/crustation/insect ---short of Canniblism is alway a good and enliving thing to be re-assured with!


and a longer short intestine if we weren't designed to have some meat in our diets?

We DO HAVE the LONG INTESTINE for just the purpose of vegetarianism! The lion does not ---for the sake of avoiding self-induced-toxic-re-actions!

Do you feel to compulsion to argue the "Longer short intestine" debate again?



Why wouldn't we have a digestive system like pure herbivores have? (i.e. cows that chew their cuds and are very efficient at breaking down cellulose from plants).

Why can humans run 26.2 miles straight without stopping, if not to be better hunters?

[COLOR="rgb(65, 105, 225)"]26 miles runs ---so as to prepare for future births as hunters on a savanah, where tedium and and in-activity may be common until hunger pains develop? Like a Lion and his Pride does?

Would you not prefer that low-payed workers do it for you?

Why wait till the girls are in there late teens? Why yearn ---if we have trigger fingers?
[/COLOR]

IMHO, humans definitely weren't "supposed" to be pure carnivores.


Bad news ---I speculate that you are Not a Millionaire, so I speculate that you MUST WORK ---thus: I speculate that your "OPINION" is a result of "Behavioral Conditioning" IOW, you do and say and act according to the ways your propagated to do.

I speculate that this subject is on the outer-limits of your Intellect.
You don't have arguments except what Other Intellects propagated for the interests of private & commercial entities.


But the scientific evidence that I've seen suggests we weren't "supposed" to be pure herbivores either... Hence, our omnivorous diets.


I understand this POV ---it's very common. It is supported by atheists POVs and Bible preachers too.

But the simplist way to look at it is as an Humble Atheist that is concerned about avoiding "Un-desirable karma" whilst accumulating "Very desirable karma" ---considering that tastes will differ--- it is difficult teach old dogs new tricks, or any tricks to most animals.

Humans only attend to "desirable karma" & "un-desirable karma" ---for the sake of attending to the problem of "Samsara".

If "Samsara" is NOT important to a person ---they can justify any selfish and whimsical act on "Instant Gratification" whilst forsaking the concomitant "Instant Karma".

Not everyone's a Rocket Scientist.
But all Rocket Scientists are paid by tax payers.

Lastly,
I come to think that the Biblical Knowledge of the Book of Genesis was know ONLY by the ruling classes of that time"

if so,

"No criminal scorn or prosecution can be made against a civilian commoner for being found eating previously forbidden food stuffs. Those bible verses were imparted to lofty individuals so that They were informed. This is similar to what spurned Martin Luther's reformation ---to allow the common folks to know what is in the bible"

If I said,
"We are now in an era [kali-yuga] or quarrel & hypocracy" ---this doesn't imply that any and all free-men are free to be openly quarresome & hypocritical.

If we agree we are responsible individually for our own acts ---then, Karma & samsara are the University level subject matter for intellects.
 
Do you think it was immoral/unethical for Jesus to feed fish to 5,000 people?

Matthew 6:41-44

I speculate that this subject of the bible & vegetarianism is on the outer-limits of your intellect. You are ignoring parts of the bible that nullify your argument...
 
OK, I was thinking on the OP topic some more... How about this:

If the bible is so clear on being vegetarian, why did Jesus multiply the fish to feed to the masses? Why didn't he just multiply the bread?

Okay IowaGuy,

I would like to reply, but there are some technical language issues to address.

The Word Fish ---as re-translated from the original language (Greek? Aramaic? Hebrew? Latin?).

Are you provide the word that has been traditionally translated?

Did Jesus eat that very same "fish"?

[FYI: the words Trophe, broma etc are two Greek words that occur frequently in the NT that are translated as Meat, Nourishment, etc]

Didn't Elijah, said Christ would select the "honey" & Carob? ---[please correct me about this ---how did Elijah describe He who would Choose the "honey" & Locust Carob Bean bread" ---am I recollecting this incorrectly?]

John the Baptist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Early Jewish Christian sects
Among the early Judaistic Christian groups the Ebionites held that John, along with Jesus and James the Just—all of whom they revered—were vegetarians. Epiphanius of Salamis records that this group had amended their Gospel of Matthew, known today as the Gospel of the Ebionites, to change where John eats "locusts" to read "honey cakes" or "manna"


Articles from Truth For the Final Generation 1984

“His meat was locust and wild honey.”

“He ate the ‘locusts and wild honey’ found in the wilderness and drank the pure water from the hills.”

The word “locust” has more than one meaning. Apart from the species of the grasshopper family, it also means, according to the dictionary, the fruit of the carob tree (carob bean), which is very nutritious to the body.

“His diet, purely vegetable, of locusts and wild honey, was a rebuke to the indulgence of appetite and the gluttony that everywhere prevailed.”

“John (subsisted) upon a purely vegetable diet.”

30 min Delayed Reply above.

Timely reply below:
You are ignoring parts of the bible that nullify your argument...
It ain't My Argument ---it's a classical stance!
It's about yelling Fire to those still in the House that is on fire.
 
I'm no expert in the original Greek manuscripts, so hopefully someone can chime in as to the original greek word for "fish" used in the parable. Another passage to consider would be Luke 24:42-43, where Jesus eats a piece of "broiled fish" (this might possibly be a different Greek word than the fish parable?)

According to your logic, eating fish and/or feeding fish to 5,000 others would generate very bad karma for Jesus...
 
I'm no expert in the original Greek manuscripts, so hopefully someone can chime in as to the original greek word for "fish" used in the parable. Another passage to consider would be Luke 24:42-43, where Jesus eats a piece of "broiled fish" (this might possibly be a different Greek word than the fish parable?)

According to your logic, eating fish and/or feeding fish to 5,000 others would generate very bad karma for Jesus...

1] Yes it generates Karma. It's only considered bad ---when it causes "separation" from God or from the path toward God. Hence, the OP.

Bad karma is a re-action to acts performed that later cause dis-content.

If God can do it DOES NOT MAN CAN do it. Hence, the quagmire of the OP.
Yet, Indeed, God sets the standard for all the world to pursue. Hence, the double-quagmire of the OP.

2] No not for God. God is aloof from Karmic actions. God's Personage is the Summum bonum of all acts performed or sought out.

This OP is not my argument ---it is a major quagmire on the road past perdition.

Karma --both Good & Bad-- are both stumbling blocks to transcendence.

A rich man did good acts to accrue good Karma ---the wealth of the rich man causes his fall-down due to hubris.

Karma is mundane and impersonal and works like a face-less machine.
Karma is not Religion. Karma means Acts aka Works in the world of forms.

It is the spirit that breathes life that is the life-force.

God is outside the Material world. we souls are in the material world.

When we arrive back home, back to Godhead's eternal abode ---we'd have left confines of the Material world behind where time ticks exceedingly fine.

The Material world is like a watch, where we are cogs in a wheel, wondering & fearing when the spinning gears will ever stop ---God is the creator and wearer of that watch.
 
Found some references --just for academic purposes and for posterity:

"Many Bible scholars persist with the theory that Christ ate animal flesh, obviously swayed in their opinions by personal habits. The desire to accede to prejudice and uphold existing tradition has been a human characteristic for many centuries, but truth appears now even more important as man exerts his independence in so many aspects of life.
Respected Bible scholar Rev. V. A. Holmes-Gore has researched the frequent use of the word "meat" in the New Testament Gospels. He traced its meaning to the original Greek.
His findings were first published in World Forum of Autumn 1947. He reveals that the nineteen Gospel references to "meat" should have been more accurately translated as follows:

Greek No. of References Meanings
Broma 4 "Food"
Brosis 4 "the act of eating food"
Phago 3 "to eat"
Brosimos 1 "that which may be eaten"
Trophe 6 "nourishment"
Prosphagon 1 "anything to eat"


Thus, the Authorised Version (KJV) of John 21:5 'Have you any meat?' is incorrect. It should read: 'Have ye anything to eat?'

"Fish" is another frequently mistranslated word in the Bible. Its reference is often not to the form fish of swimming life, but to the symbol by which early Christians could identify each other. It was a secret sign, needed in times of persecution, prior to official acceptance of Christianity as a state religion.
The sign of the fish was a mystical symbol and conversational password deriving from the Greek word for fish, 'ichthus.' As such, it represented an acrostic, composed of leading letters of the Greek phrase, 'Jesous Christos Theou Uios Soter' 'Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour.'

Frequent references to fish are intended as symbolic of The Christ, having nothing to do with the act of eating dead fish. But the symbol of the fish did not meet with Roman approval. They preferred the sign of the cross, choosing to concentrate more on the death of Christ than on His brilliant life. Perhaps this is one reason only ten percent of his life record appears in the canonical scriptures. Most of His first thirty years is omitted.
How many worshippers go home from church and sit down to a feast cut from a once proud beast in defiance of the very commandments they have just been advocating?

Genesis 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.

Genesis 9:4. "But flesh with the life thereof, [which is] the blood thereof, shall ye not eat."

Genesis 9:5. "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."

Isaiah 1:11. "To what purpose [is] the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.

Isaiah 1:15. "And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood."

Isaiah 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."

Isaiah 7:15. "Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good."

Isaiah 66:3. "He that killeth an ox [is as if] he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, [as if] he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, [as if he offered] swine's blood; he that burneth incense, [as if] he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations."

Leviticus 17:10. "And whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people."

Leviticus 3:17. "[It shall be] a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood."

Matthew 3:4. "And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey."

Luke 8:55. "And her spirit came again, and she arose straightway: and he commanded to give her meat."

Luke 24:41. "And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?"

Luke 24:42. "And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb."

Luke 24:43. "And he took [it], and did eat before them."

John 4:8. "(For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.)"

Acts 9:19. "And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus."

Acts 27:33. "And while the day was coming on, Paul besought [them] all to take meat, saying, This day is the fourteenth day that ye have tarried and continued fasting, having taken nothing."

Acts 27:34. "Wherefore I pray you to take [some] meat: for this is for your health: for there shall not an hair fall from the head of any of you."

Acts 27:35. "And when he had thus spoken, he took bread, and gave thanks to God in presence of them all: and when he had broken [it], he began to eat."

Acts 27:36. "Then were they all of good cheer, and they also took [some] meat."

Acts 16:34. "And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house."

Romans 14:15. "But if thy brother be grieved with [thy] meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died."

Romans 14:17. "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost."

Romans 14:20. "For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed [are] pure; but [it is] evil for that man who eateth with offence."

Romans 14:21. "[It is] good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor [any thing] whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak."

1 Corinthians 8:8. "But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse."

1 Corinthians 8:13. "Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend."

1 Corinthians 10:4. "And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ."

......but to try to tell deaf people of such things is not worth the time it takes to make them angry. How much can a blind man see, about as far as a lame man can walk.

Respected Bible scholar Rev. V.A. Holmes-Gore has researched the frequent use of the word "meat" in the New Testament Gospels. He traced its meaning to the original Greek. His findings were first published in World Forum of Autumn, 1947. He reveals that the nineteen Gospel references to "meat" should have been more accurately translated thus:

Greek Numbers of References Meaning
Broma 4 "food";
Brosis 4 "the act of eating food";
Phago 3 "to eat";
Brosimos 1 "that which may be eaten'
Trophe 6 "nourishment";
Prosphagon 1 "anything to eat";

Yes, the above is a cut n paste. It's an academic standard way of standing on the shoulders of others before me.
 
IMHO you're stretching it here, buddy.

You think that Luke 24:42-43 and Matthew 6:41-44, where people are hungry and Jesus is said to have broken up fish to feed to others, and eaten "broiled fish" himself, are really just symbolic? That they have nothing to do with eating actual fish?

I think it would be better for you to just get over the fact that Christ ate fish himself, and fed fish to others who were hungry. Even if this challenges some of your paradigms on vegetarianism, karma, etc...
 
IMHO you're stretching it here, buddy.

You think that "broiled fish" just symbolic?


Stretching is good exercise.

Being dyslexic [IOW un-able to read what is in front of your nose in B&W letters indicates a far-sighted-ness that requires a Guru of Optometry]

Frequent references to fish

Frequent references to fish

are intended as symbolic of The Christ


the Greek word for fish, 'ichthus' ---USED AS an acronym,
composed of the leading letters of the Greek phrase,

I-C-H-T-H-U-S
'Jesous Christos Theou Uios Soter'
'Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour.'​


welcome to the world of 'academia',
Bhaktajan

BTW, is your self in the restaurant business?
 
Why can't you accept the fact that Jesus ate fish or encouraged others to eat fish? As I'm sure you're aware, Buddha ate meat as well...

I am not in the restaurant business. I myself do not eat beef or pork and have not done so for the last 12 years. In fact, I don't eat any "commercially-raised" meat of any kind.
 
Why can't you accept the fact that Jesus ate fish or encouraged others to eat fish? As I'm sure you're aware, Buddha ate meat as well...

I am not in the restaurant business. I myself do not eat beef or pork and have not done so for the last 12 years. In fact, I don't eat any "commercially-raised" meat of any kind.

Saints do NOT eat Meat.

Yes, I grew up taking for granted that Christ ate meat ---I am an adult now.

Cow is Mother, Calf is child.

Tits are for Milk.

Eating mother is the fact YOU can't resist!

LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

And BTW [Dear Baby Jesus Help Me!], Buddha could have never ever eaten meat ---he was from a Brahmin Hindu Family, He preached Ahimsa [not the same as Gandhi's pacifism].

I guess [Dear Baby Jesus Help Me!],
{"As you may know, Pensky Industries are under investigation" ---oops wrong reply!}

As you may know, Buddha famously indeed ate some Pork ... accidently, by entrusting a low born to do the cooking . . . he then died as a result. ---correct me if I'm wrong, Please.

IMO, a case of the Good sopping-up all the bad into a vacuum vessel of Goodness.
 
Saints do NOT eat Meat. Yes, I grew up taking for granted that Christ ate meat ---I am an adult now.

Ummmm... "taking for granted" because that's exactly what the bible says he did???

You don't like the fact that the bible says Jesus ate fish, or multiplied the fish to feed others. Sounds like you have your answers witout even having to read the Bible. That's a very convenient way to approach the topic...

So let's try another piece of scripture: what would the "King Bhaktajan" translation/interpretation be for the scripture where Jesus tells the fishermen to cast their nets off the opposite side of the boat so that they catch more fish? (John 21:4-8) If Jesus was so anti-meat eating, why didn't he tell them to grow vegetables instead of helping them to catch more fish to eat?
 
Ummmm... "taking for granted" because that's exactly what the bible says he did???

You don't like the fact that the bible says Jesus ate fish, or multiplied the fish to feed others. Sounds like you have your answers witout even having to read the Bible.

That's a very convenient way to approach the topic...

Thank you IowaGuy for boiling down to the marrow the issue ---by using direct citations of Scripture.

Let me confess that as I read your words my heart missed a beat, the blood rushed to my head, i held my breathe as I read on ... then ... you quoted the WRONG Chapter/Verse!

Where's the (scriptural) fact? "the fact"
Where's the (scriptural) mention? "Jesus ate fish"
Where's the (scriptural) statement? "in the Bible"

Hmmm? Just to 'another' piece . . .
So let's try another piece of scripture: what would the "King Bhaktajan" translation/interpretation be for the scripture where Jesus tells the fishermen to cast their nets off the opposite side of the boat so that they catch more fish? (John 21:4-8)

If Jesus was so anti-meat eating, why didn't he tell them to grow vegetables instead of helping them to catch more fish to eat?

"Jesus tells the fishermen to cast their nets off the opposite side of the boat" ---Be Fishers of men by a change of Heart ---and turn the other cheek ---{as per the context of the piece of .scripture'.}

In regards to "Farmer's Almanac's" Insights to fishing techniques & agrarian homesteading politics and policies ---Jesus hasn't seemed to say too much.

So let's try another piece of scripture: what would the "King Bhaktajan" translation/interpretation be for the scripture where Jesus tells the fishermen to cast their nets off the opposite side of the boat so that they catch more fish? (John 21:4-8) If Jesus was so anti-meat eating, why didn't he tell them to grow vegetables instead of helping them to catch more fish to eat?

Thank you for enrolling me in a re-fresher course.

So... Christ has Died on the Cross, was buried, and rose again to heaven, but, first Christ made a few stops to say farewell to His noble compatriots ... Jesus apparently, from these few verses is in Spirit (non-mortal) body made visable to the Men.

It would seem that:
a] Never does it say "Jesus ate Fish" ---neither does He Eat bread. But surely, the entire retinue of fishermen (and local folks??? ---was there a famine mentioned prior to this text herein?

b] the entire issue of the "Fish Diet" or the "Fish Monger's Employment Status" seems therciary to the topic in these Verses.

Christ has risen from the dead!
So the lesson whence forward involves commentary of the cottage industry of Fishing?

It was a moment of Communion ---replete with additional words from Christ's lips.

I do not see how "Fish" has anything to do Occupational nor the Gastronomic Instructions on "Fishing".

BOTH, "Be Fishers of men ---whilst keeping your station in life"


Investigate for your self ---let us give thanks for those Aramaic & Greek Scribes ... and the Italian and Old English Scribes ... that we owe so much thanks to for transmitting these 4th hand translations by a Un-known Publisher and Editor ... and finally the Web-master that posts these English Chapter & verses ... So I can relay this cut-n-paste:

JOHN 21:1-3
1 After these things Jesus showed Himself again to the disciples at the Sea of Tiberias, and in this way He showed Himself:
2 Simon Peter, Thomas called the Twin, Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two others of His disciples were together.
3 Simon Peter said to them, “I am going fishing.” They said to him, “We are going with you also.” They went out and immediately got into the boat, and that night they caught nothing.

JOHN 21:4-8
4 But when the morning had now come, Jesus stood on the shore; yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus.
5 Then Jesus said to them, “Children, have you any food?” They answered Him, “No.”
6 And He said to them, “Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some.” So they cast, and now they were not able to draw it in because of the multitude of fish.
7 Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his outer garment (for he had removed it), and plunged into the sea.
8 But the other disciples came in the little boat (for they were not far from land, but about two hundred cubits), dragging the net with fish.

JOHN 21:9-14
9 Then, as soon as they had come to land, they saw a fire of coals there, and fish laid on it, and bread.
10 Jesus said to them, “Bring some of the fish which you have just caught.”
11 Simon Peter went up and dragged the net to land, full of large fish, one hundred and fifty-three; and although there were so many, the net was not broken.
12 Jesus said to them, “Come and eat breakfast.” Yet none of the disciples dared ask Him, “Who are You?” -knowing that it was the Lord.
13 Jesus then came and took the bread and gave it to them, and likewise the fish.
14 This is now the third time Jesus showed Himself to His disciples after He was raised from the dead.


JOHN 21:15-17
15 So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Feed My lambs.”
16 He said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Tend My sheep.”
17 He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus said to him, “Feed My sheep.

JOHN 21 BIBLE STUDY - Online Bible Study of John Chapter 21
 
Thank you IowaGuy for boiling down to the marrow the issue ---by using direct citations of Scripture.......
Where's the (scriptural) fact? "the fact"
Where's the (scriptural) mention? "Jesus ate fish"
Where's the (scriptural) statement? "in the Bible"


Well, of course, the scripture where Jesus ate the fish (which appears in all English translations of the bible except the King Bhakatajan version) is Luke 24:42-43.

42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.

"Broiled fish" seems pretty specific here, but maybe that's just my reading of it... You can find your own meaning in pretty much any scripture in the bible, but, my friend, you're going to have a tough sell convincing Christians that Jesus didn't eat meat (and that the bible is clear on being vegetarian) when the scripture says that Jesus himself ate a piece of broiled fish...
 
IG, that passage pretty much reads the same in all the versions I have access to from Peshitta to KJV. It is not really possible to argue for vegetarianism on the basis of the "literal world" (the word, unless you just say Luke is not, or that passage is not, canon).

However, the psychological and physical benefits of vegetarianism are independent of that, as is whether or not vegetarianism can be accepted as a Christian way of believing.
 
Well, of course, the scripture where Jesus ate the fish (which appears in all English translations of the bible except the King Bhakatajan version) is Luke 24:42-43.

42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.

"Broiled fish" seems pretty specific here, but maybe that's just my reading of it... You can find your own meaning in pretty much any scripture in the bible, but, my friend, you're going to have a tough sell convincing Christians that Jesus didn't eat meat (and that the bible is clear on being vegetarian) when the scripture says that Jesus himself ate a piece of broiled fish...

a] IowaGuy, you are correct!

b] Eee gads! I hope you are wrong . . . so he we go . . .

The reason I bring up the academic vetting of scriptural translations (what to speak of concils of medeviel editors) is because such exacting scrutiny occurs within my own sect. It is routine to research the original texts.

So again, we can narrow down the search to this Chap/Verse ... Luke 24:42-43 ... The Greek? The Aramaic? Hebrew? Latin?

One must assign a clerk to obtain those texts and let's look at the original langauge whence, the Likes of Henry the VIII, may have abridged for secular reasons.
 
. . . so he we go . . .

It is routine to research the original texts ---word for word ---sanskrit to english.

That's why there are Bhagavad-gitas that one can 'sware-by', while other bhagavad-gitas are just 'made for show' ---by a University Majorette.

So again, we can narrow down the search to this Chap/Verse ... Luke 24:42-43 ... The Greek? The Aramaic? Hebrew? Latin?

One must assign a clerk to obtain those texts and let's look at the original langauge whence, the Likes of Henry the VIII, may have abridged for secular reasons.

What dya expect? I couldn’t stand the wait.

First the Isaiah prophecy:

Isaiah 7:14,15:
“Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, ayoung woman shall conceive, and bear a s on, a shall call his name immanuel”.
“Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good”.
Ergo, as per the rendering below of Luke 24:41-43 take note of the inclusion of the words ‘and of a honeycomb’and also, take note of the word ‘it’:

Luke 24:41-43:
And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he (Jesus) said unto them (his disciples), ‘Have ye here any meat*”? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of a honeycomb. And took it, and did eat before them.
A] * the Greek word used here is ‘brosimos’ –‘eatable’.

---my research staff has informed me that the Greek word ‘it’ used here is “In the Singular”.

B] As per Isaiah 7:15 --- The singular-tense of the Greek word ‘it’ confirms an obscure specificity that “fulfilled-the-prophecy”, that Christ would be known as:
“Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good”.

C] I have posted above many of the known Greek words that later where propagated as “Meat” ---please re-visit this list while making your next visit to Greek Church nearest you.


NOTE:
The Codex Sinaiticus = Earliest Existing Greek manuscript of the New Testament ---written in 331 AD ---six years after the Council of Nicaea, the first of many ecumenical Councils ---before which time there are no known codified or popularly read NT scriptures ---any editorial bias would certainly be caused by social pathos of the time, as it still occurs.
 
Back
Top