You misquoted me as I said His words can change the conditions in relations to us and I have shown you His words where His words did. Be blind to that, is your choice, but it is a false witness.
Is it LAWFUL to kill animals?
- Thread starter Daniel L.
- Start date
Why don't you apply what you are doing to this verse below;
Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
And say that the fall never happened? Everything after that verse is a lie?
@Daniel L. Previously you commented that God was Adam's father. Neither Adam or eve had parents. They were created not parented. They were created old enough to be parents them selves.
I believe because God set boundaries in the Garden of Eden to Adam to protect Adam by instructing not to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good & Evil, as that was God leading by example of what a parent does, without saying so.
His Words cannot change, His Law cannot change, Whom are you calling a "false witness"?
Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
Because God didn't say it shall be very good, but rather said: it was very good. But as for the food, He said: herbs shall be for food. And that cannot change, for ever. And it will end as it started, The Lion shall eat straw. It never changed.
Explained what had happened to the Old Covenant then.
Hebrews 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
That is proof that you are not understanding what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24:35. You have to discern with Him what topic in regards to His words applied to in Matthew 24:35 that will not pass away.
So you admit to what the lion eats now which defeats your presentation as if God's words had not changed after the flood for what the requirement for meat is that mankind was to live on, and it isn't herbs
The Word didn't change, neither the Law changed. The same Law that didn't change, was now written in their hearts
Jeremiah 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
The Law cannot change, murder will never be legalized.
Baruch 4:1 This is the book of the commandments of God, and the law that endureth for ever: all they that keep it shall come to life; but such as leave it shall die.
Psalm 119:89 For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.
160 Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.
Malachi 3:6 For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
1 Peter 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.
A lion that eats flesh is a lion without the knowledge of the LORD
Isaiah 11:9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.
It doesn't mean the LORD changed His Law, so lions could eat flesh, no. It means the knowledge of the Lord diminished, and withrew from the earth. The Law remains the same, but the lions's knowledge of the Lord is lesser, than it was before the flood. Same thing with humans.
Waggles
Loyal
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2015
- Messages
- 2,541
Your post is great storytelling but it is not scripture.
Scripture in both Genesis 1 and 9 does not prohibit the killing of animal life nor prohibit fishing and the eating thereof.
We see in Genesis 4 that Abel was killing sheep to bring as a sacrifice on an altar to God, and that Cain's offering of the fruit of the ground was not acceptable to God.
Looking at Genesis 2:15-17 ---adam was told that he could eat of every tree in the garden except that of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because in the day that he did he would surely die. And then in chapter 3, the serpent approached Eve with "has God indeed said.'you shall not eat of every tree of the garden'?" And Eve even told the serpent what God had told her? And if she even touched that tree she would die. But Satan continued to tell her that if she Did eat of it that tree ,, her eyes would be open and she would be like God , knowing good and evil. So she offered it to Adam ,too. As soon as they ate it, they saw they were naked and made a covering for themselves and they hid from God when they heard Him coming.
They lost their innocent and their intended immortality. They did eventually die.
But then ,in vs 22,the Lord God said that the man has become like one of Us to k ow good and evil. So they had to be kept from the tree of life so they would not live forever. They were sent out of the garden and a flaming sword which turned every way ,was guarding the way to the tree of life.
So they were being tested - would they believe God's Word or trust the serpent, Satan. Eve wanted it all and we've been dying ever since.
God also already had salvation planned for them. Same for us, if we realize our need For salvation and accept God's way for it.
We also have the ability for great good as well as great, unspeakable evil. Innocence would have been better.
Let me put it to you in this way. God said everything is good when he got done with creation. Is that not His word? Is that not true? How did it changed then because of the fall when everything is now not obviously good as He has said?
We agree to disagree then.
I agree but the point of my post was that Adam could see the setting of boundaries by the Lord with the consequences of punishment like parenting. It certainly would explain the origin of parenting.
Waggles
Loyal
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2015
- Messages
- 2,541
The origin of parenting began in Genesis 1:26-28 well before Adam and Eve were formed and separated from the world.
The origin of parenting has to exists for when Adam & Eve were created to establish the origin of parenting for them.
I am sure what you say is what God had intended but for the origin of parenting to be for Adam & Eve, is when they were alive to take it as an origin for parenting.
And although He did not mention their children per your reference, I do see your point as having dominion over the animal kingdom in setting boundaries for the animals somewhat, albeit, not quite the same thing as parenting their children in setting boundaries in caring for them, since obviously, there is more involved in parenting than just setting boundaries for their children.
The animals obviously at that time could take care of themselves but in relations to mankind, mankind was to have dominion over them. Children requires more than just boundaries.
It didn't change. The Word cannot change, it endures forever. Why do you keep insisting in speaking against Scripture? I've showed the verses already.
God saw that it was very good, all that He had made was very good. And that is still true, it won't change. Creation week was very good, all that He made was very good. He didn't say that it would be very good forever. In fact He told Adam he would die in the day he eats of the forbiden fruit. You have to understand what past tense is, God saw it was very good. But when he gave the herbs for food, He said: "shall be", which means forever, because His Word cannot change, He cannot change, His Law cannot change, Jesus Christ cannot change.
Yes, it does. Genesis 1:29. God gave Adam herbs and fruits for food, not animals. The will of God is that Adam eats herbs and fruits. If Adam were to eat animals, he would be working against the Will of God.
You have to decide if Abel was righteous, or if he killed sheep, because you can't have both, sacrificing sheep is "evil"
Ecclesiastes 5:1 Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil.
-The True God of Israel doesn't accept, "evil" blood sacrifices, they are an "abomination unto Him"
Proverbs 6:16 These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
-So, if Abel is righteous, and God hates blood sacrifices. Then, Abel didn't offer a blood sacrifice, neither did God accepted one. It leaves us with only one explaination, the father of lies.
1 John 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.
-If you remember "evil" in Ecclesiastes 5:1 is "evil" blood sacrifices. So to me, Cain is the murderer from the beggining, who offered an "evil" blood sacrifice, and God rejected this "abomination" of an offering. While Righteous Abel was within the Will of God, sowing the land, and offering herbs and fruits.
Irrelevant, they still have the same Father, regardless if the Father parented them or not, (which He did). But it doesn't matter, a Father is still a Father, regardless of His parenting. Adam and the animals have the same Father, which makes them brothers of the same Father. Which is why God didn't gave animals for food. Because they are brothers, and it is iniquity to kill your brothers.
Waggles
Loyal
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2015
- Messages
- 2,541
Genesis 4:2 And again, she bore his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, and Cain a worker of the ground.
3 In the course of time Cain brought to the LORD an offering of the fruit of the ground,
4 and Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat portions. And the LORD had regard for Abel and his offering,
5 but for Cain and his offering he had no regard. So Cain was very angry, and his face fell.
Thus scripture clearly teaches us that Abel killed sheep and/or goats.
Waggles
Loyal
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2015
- Messages
- 2,541
Debatable.
Genesis 1:29 is informative and teaches us that God has provided plants yielding seeds along with fruit trees for humans to eat - informing humans that these plants are safe to eat as opposed to the multitude
of other plants that they should not eat from.
This complements verse 28 in which God has provided animals, birds and fish for humans to have dominion over - again there is no stated prohibition against eating such.
And there is no doctrinal reason as to why humans should be suddenly allowed to consume flesh after the Flood.
I see, whom you want to serve. You have to ignore the Scriptures, even Jesus to believe that. But that is your decision.
Matthew 12:7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
It is against the Will of God, animals were not given for food. You can eat them, you have free will, but know that is not the Will of the Father.
Right, they weren't. The Word cannot change.
