Mis-translated Bible terms infavor of meat eating?

[bhaktajan]

pathetic

To be aware of others sufferring & enjoyment dynaism ---hence, pathos.

Pathos without ethos is bestialism.

 

[bhaktajan]

Is there any science that supports this claim?

“Over 28 times more likely to get anal cancer”

[youtube]d0ANiu3YdJg[/youtube]
YouTube - It's Never Just HIV

When you get HIV, it’s never just HIV. You’re at a higher risk to get dozens of diseases, even if you take medications. Like osteoporosis, a disease that dissolves your bones; and dementia, a condition that causes permanent memory loss; and you’re over 28 times more likely to get anal cancer. It’s never just HIV. Stay HIV free. Always use a condom.



###########################
Oy! Am I guilty of non-sequitors again?
​

 

[bhaktajan]

Isaiah spoke to the Book of Isaiah.

"And the fruit bearing trees and seeds will be meat for you" -- from The Book of Genesis, as spoken by __________ .

Cain and Abel fought over ____________ , while God watched out for fouls.

 

[McBell]

“Over 28 times more likely to get anal cancer”

[youtube]d0ANiu3YdJg[/youtube]
YouTube - It's Never Just HIV

When you get HIV, it’s never just HIV. You’re at a higher risk to get dozens of diseases, even if you take medications. Like osteoporosis, a disease that dissolves your bones; and dementia, a condition that causes permanent memory loss; and you’re over 28 times more likely to get anal cancer. It’s never just HIV. Stay HIV free. Always use a condom.



###########################
Oy! Am I guilty of non-sequitors again?
​

Rather interesting that you cannot provide support for the foundation of your argument.

One wonders why you would think it should even be considered, let alone accepted.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Exactly. Fish.



I don't stand for anything here, other than accuracy. I have a M.A. in classical languages and an M.A. in biblical studies and spent years in grad school after getting my masters in a biblical studies program (NT focus). As a result, I am very good at reading greek, from homeric greek to hellenistic greek, and I can read hebrew (but not nearly as well).

:bow::bow: I wish I did.

 

[Harmonious]

It took me a second to realize what, in the name of all that is pink and fuzzy, that you were talking about. I figured it out.

"And the fruit bearing trees and seeds will be meat for you" -- from The Book of Genesis, as spoken by __________ .

See, this is a BAD TRANSLATION.

"Behold, I have given you every seed bearing herb, which is upon the surface of the entire earth, and every tree that has seed bearing fruit; it will be yours for food."

See, the Hebrew word there is לְאָכְלָה

L'ach'la. Translation: For eating.

Not meat, food. In a general way.

Cain and Abel fought over ____________ , while God watched out for fouls.

You know... It never actually says WHAT Cain and Abel fought over.

 

[bhaktajan]

Rather interesting that you cannot provide support for the foundation of your argument.

One wonders why you would think it should even be considered, let alone accepted.

Post like these say nothing and fill-up the threads with valueless comments.

1 You don't "wonder"
2 "One wonders" does not pass for a thesis paper.

You are all in the midst of a world war ---and you're all haplessly subsidising it with each of your actions.

I do not accept the opinion of Non-Zionists nor atheists nor crazy-makers that post on the internet.

FYI, my posts make others think diligently and then cause them to do real and proper research work.

your welcome,
Bhaktajan

 

[bhaktajan]

See, this is a BAD TRANSLATION.

"Behold, I have given you every seed bearing herb, which is upon the surface of the entire earth, and every tree that has seed bearing fruit; it will be yours for food."

But you don't seem to be a "Foo_".

1] I know what it says in my Bible ---I paraphrased it and it is nonetheless vebatim.

Bhaktajan: Cain and Abel fought over ____________ , while God watched out for fouls.
Harmonius: You know... It never actually says WHAT Cain and Abel fought over.

2] Again, I know what it says in my Bible ---I paraphrased it and it is nonetheless everyone knows they fought over whose offering of was superior to the other.

Otherwise, you have just said that age old 'Cain & Abel' fight was over "nothing in particular" ---and for that its non-specificity ---is worthy of its reknowned recitation?

 

[McBell]

Post like these say nothing and fill-up the threads with valueless comments.

1 You don't "wonder"
2 "One wonders" does not pass for a thesis paper.

You are all in the midst of a world war ---and you're all haplessly subsidising it with each of your actions.

I do not accept the opinion of Non-Zionists nor atheists nor crazy-makers that post on the internet.

FYI, my posts make others think diligently and then cause them to do real and proper research work.

your welcome,
Bhaktajan

So you are acknowledging that your claim is completely without merit?
Or are merely trying to deflect attention from the fact that you refuse to support the foundation of your argument?

 

[Harmonious]

But you don't seem to be a "Foo_".

Whatever that means.

1] I know what it says in my Bible ---I paraphrased it and it is nonetheless vebatim.

Perhaps. But I gave you a verbatim translation. I KNOW the Hebrew, and I'm not playing with a poor translation. The translation I cut and pasted was from the Judaica Press translation.

I gave you what it says.

כט. וַיֹּאמֶר אֱ־לֹהִים הִנֵּה נָתַתִּי לָכֶם אֶת כָּל עֵשֶׂב זֹרֵעַ זֶרַע אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי כָל הָאָרֶץ וְאֶת כָּל הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר בּוֹ פְרִי עֵץ זֹרֵעַ זָרַע לָכֶם יִהְיֶה לְאָכְלָה:

My own translation:

And God said, "Behold I have given to you all seed grass, seed that (will be) fruit of all the ground, and all trees that are in it; fruit of the trees (that) seed to you will be for eating.

THAT is verbatim. Not what someone who had an agenda had to translate.

2] Again, I know what it says in my Bible ---I paraphrased it and it is nonetheless everyone knows they fought over whose offering of was superior to the other.

Actually, we don't know that.

Jews commonly understand that to mean that because we don't know what they fought about, the topic under discussion was really irrelevant. The only relevant point about it is that it came to blows.

One idea of what they argued about is who they were supposed to marry.

Fighting over who brought the superior sacrifice would be patently silly, as God approved of one over the other. That argument would have been with God.

It could have been Cain taking out his frustration with God on Abel. That would make sense. But remember: Cain was the one who offered the grain offering. Abel is the one who offered the animal. And Cain is the one who killed Abel.

Otherwise, you have just said that age old 'Cain & Abel' fight was over "nothing in particular" ---and for that its non-specificity ---is worthy of its reknowned recitation?

Yup. The argument itself was irrelevant. The fact that they fought is the main point, and the fact that in that fight, Cain killed Abel - that is the germane topic of the story.

 

[bhaktajan]

So you are acknowledging that your claim is completely without merit?
Or are merely trying to deflect attention from the fact that you refuse to support the foundation of your argument?

You are posting replys that IMO are worthless.

That should not make you feel worthless; but it should enliven you ---for when you do know a subject matter, you could be a teacher; rather than a drop-out.

Do your homework yourself and report back with it for review.

 

[McBell]

You are posting replys that IMO are worthless.

That should not make you feel worthless; but it should enliven you ---for when you do know a subject matter, you could be a teacher; rather than a drop-out.

Do your homework yourself and report back with it for review.

Thats it?
That is all you have in support of the foundation of your argument?
Petty childish attempts at insult and ego masturbation?

Now that's funny.

 

[bhaktajan]

Thats it?

Is what it? Where's your notes? How do I understand your position? What have you been asking? What question is there you are asking?
Upon what are you debating, with what issue? Must you look up to re-read what this thread is about?
Please share your two pence.

Petty childish attempts at insult and ego masturbation?

Yes, you took it right out of your own mouth.

And, don't you find it exhuasting to always use the term "ego masturbation"?

 

[Rakhel]

Chabad.org
Genesis 1:29. And God said, "Behold, I have given you every seed bearing herb, which is upon the surface of the entire earth, and every tree that has seed bearing fruit; it will be yours for food. כט. וַיֹּאמֶר אֱ־לֹהִים הִנֵּה נָתַתִּי לָכֶם אֶת כָּל עֵשֶׂב זֹרֵעַ זֶרַע אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי כָל הָאָרֶץ וְאֶת כָּל הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר בּוֹ פְרִי עֵץ זֹרֵעַ זָרַע לָכֶם יִהְיֶה לְאָכְלָה:


This site Translation Hebrew English
translates
לְאָכְלָה
to food

This site translated Hebrew Translation
translates
לְאָכְלָה:
to food

And this site: English to Hebrew Translation תרגום לאנגלית

Do you need more?

 

[bhaktajan]

Chabad.org
Genesis 1:29. And God said, "Behold, I have given you every seed bearing herb, which is upon the surface of the entire earth, and every tree that has seed bearing fruit; it will be yours for food. כט. וַיֹּאמֶר אֱ־לֹהִים הִנֵּה נָתַתִּי לָכֶם אֶת כָּל עֵשֶׂב זֹרֵעַ זֶרַע אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי כָל הָאָרֶץ וְאֶת כָּל הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר בּוֹ פְרִי עֵץ זֹרֵעַ זָרַע לָכֶם יִהְיֶה לְאָכְלָה:


This site Translation Hebrew English
translates
לְאָכְלָה
to food

This site translated Hebrew Translation
translates
לְאָכְלָה:
to food

And this site: English to Hebrew Translation תרגום לא×*גלית

Do you need more?

I saw this and thus logged on.

This verse has now been translated twice by posters . . . and Why are you working on this verse???????????????????????????????????????????

This verse along with the posted translations *Support my position*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't see how this verse denies my position.

I am a vegetarian who states that the Bible gave directions to be Vegetarian.
Get it?

My meantioning this verse as saying "this shall be for meat" ---ironnically hasd nothing to do with meat per se ---I was paraphrasing the Version/Translation I knew as a kid ---thus when I had cited this verse, some post back, I meant 'Food' as in food stuffs.

I was not speaking about the word Meat versus food in this genesis verse.

Yet it was my contention that the bible traditionaly is translated using the word "Meat" where "Food" is the proper translation ---This was my contention.

I would ask those interested to check the words that DO SAY "MEAT" and to confirm that "Meat" is the proper translation.

Please note:
Language acquires connotations both vinacular & colloquialisms that define usages that are formal vs informal; or, secular vs spiritual; and there is the understanding that meanings can change over time or be more recently coined or used with extreme rarity ---thus a concordence-like approach is required; cross-referencing various usage to determine the historical use of a words' meaning is more difficult than citing the first entry listed on a web site by a stranger motivated by un-known provanance.

 

[Harmonious]

I saw this and thus logged on.

This verse has now been translated twice by posters . . . and Why are you working on this verse???????????????????????????????????????????

This verse along with the posted translations *Support my position*!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't see how this verse denies my position.

The reason we keep focusing on this particular verse is that it is the ONLY one you listed that actually speaks about being vegetarian.

All the verses you listed thereafter don't say what you want them to mean.

I am a vegetarian who states that the Bible gave directions to be Vegetarian.

Yup. And that is how God wanted humanity to live. Until after Noah and his family and the animals disembarked from the ark.

Then, God specifically gave permission to humanity to eat animals.

If you want to say that it is a higher form of existence to be vegetarian, an argument can be made. But it is no means the only argument to make.

God would not have given the Jews laws explaining which animals are kosher for Jews to eat, and the incredibly complex laws detailing the process of kosher slaughter and meat preparation, and of keeping milk and meat separate, if God never intended for people to eat meat.

God gave permission to humanity to eat meat when Noah and his family stepped off the ark, with the only caveats being that the animal is dead first and that people don't eat blood. (I wouldn't go to the extreme of including transfusions, like the J-Witnesses, as eating blood means eating and drinking.)

The Jews were given quite a few more caveats, but we have God's blessing to eat meat, in the post-dilluvian world.

Get it?

My meantioning this verse as saying "this shall be for meat" ---ironnically hasd nothing to do with meat per se ---I was paraphrasing the Version/Translation I knew as a kid ---thus when I had cited this verse, some post back, I meant 'Food' as in food stuffs.

I was not speaking about the word Meat versus food in this genesis verse.

Yet it was my contention that the bible traditionaly is translated using the word "Meat" where "Food" is the proper translation ---This was my contention.

I would ask those interested to check the words that DO SAY "MEAT" and to confirm that "Meat" is the proper translation.

Please note:
Language acquires connotations both vinacular & colloquialisms that define usages that are formal vs informal; or, secular vs spiritual; and there is the understanding that meanings can change over time or be more recently coined or used with extreme rarity ---thus a concordence-like approach is required; cross-referencing various usage to determine the historical use of a words' meaning is more difficult than citing the first entry listed on a web site by a stranger motivated by un-known provanance.

Well and good.

But you know... I'm trying to figure out why you are telling people who live according to the Bible HOW we are supposed to do so, just because you have a theory you happen to like.

I've translated all of the verses you brought forth and explained them as I understand them. You did nothing but mock me, which I still don't understand your motivation in that. But your belief system doesn't match ours (i.e. those who work within a belief system that incorporates the verses you brought).

Unless you came to show up, point fingers, and say, "You fools! You don't even understand your own texts!" I'm really not sure of your point in bringing this concept to light.

You have mentioned the idea that not eating meat is intended to make people less aggressive. You haven't really given anything useful to make people change our beliefs. Especially because other people don't believe in your theory and you've done nothing but mock the alternative to your suggestion.

 

[bhaktajan]

other people don't believe in your theory

Where is "karma" mentioned in the OT Bible?
Where is "use of modernity" mentioned in the OT Bible?

The issue is "lessing the karmic burden" especially for the clean-up crews:

Small miseries, like small debts, hit us in so many places, and meet us at so many turns and corners, that what they want in weight, they make up in number, and render it less hazardous to stand the fire of one cannon ball, than a volley composed of such a shower of bullets.
Rudyard Kipling

For the sin they do by two and two they must pay for one by one.
Rudyard Kipling

He wrapped himself in quotations - as a beggar would enfold himself in the purple of Emperors.
Rudyard Kipling

"For All We Have and Are"

For all we have and are,
For all our children's fate,
Stand up and meet the war.
The Hun is at the gate!
Our world has passed away
In wantonness o'erthrown.
There is nothing left to-day
But steel and fire and stone.

Though all we knew depart,
The old commandments stand:
"In courage keep your heart,
In strength lift up your hand."

Once more we hear the word
That sickened earth of old:
"No law except the sword
Unsheathed and uncontrolled,"
Once more it knits mankind,
Once more the nations go
To meet and break and bind
A crazed and driven foe.

Comfort, content, delight --
The ages' slow-bought gain --
They shrivelled in a night,
Only ourselves remain
To face the naked days
In silent fortitude,
Through perils and dismays
Renewd and re-renewed.

Though all we made depart,
The old commandments stand:
"In patience keep your heart,
In strength lift up your hand."

No easy hopes or lies
Shall bring us to our goal,
But iron sacrifice
Of body, will, and soul.
There is but one task for all --
For each one life to give.
Who stands if freedom fall?
Who dies if England live?

Rudyard Kipling

 

[bhaktajan]

You did nothing but mock me, which I still don't understand your motivation in that.

I would be so obliged to you to cite me where I had mocked you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YscPEiVeGjY&feature=player_detailpage

and you've done nothing but mock the alternative to your suggestion.

Are a Zionist, as I am.
Are you Hasidim?
My sincerity trumps your dis-comfort; sorry about that.

 

[McBell]

Is what it? Where's your notes? How do I understand your position? What have you been asking? What question is there you are asking?
Upon what are you debating, with what issue? Must you look up to re-read what this thread is about?
Please share your two pence.

Since you seem to have serious problems keeping up with the conversation:

Flesh eating begets violence and non-compassion and the illogic fantasy of obtaining peace in an enviroment of butcher-based society.

Is there any science that supports this claim?

Wow, such air-tight logic? Or flailing in the dark?

Allow me to remind you of how the mother of invention was driven by neccessity to make advances in military technologies ---How Ironic that you asked.

Is that your way of saying "no"?

You forced it down hill from there with nothing but nonsense, irrelevant bull ****, and petty childish name calling.

Needless to say your credibility is shot.

 

[bhaktajan]

Is there any science that supports this claim?

Yes. The actuarial tables are not in my possession.
The documentation for the "Scientific-Methodised" PROOFS are certainly evident in proprietary records of Old-Money Insurance & Re-Insurance Companies [ie, "International Shipping" insurance tabulations]

BTW, "Is there any science that supports this claim?" ---managed to neglect to cite the "claim".

I suppose The "Claim" is:
"meat eating begets violence"
The tables of documentation is an open book for they who shall see the evidence:

Choose an epoch, say, the 20th Century, and then measure the "Pound-for-Pound Exchange Rate" of animal flesh for human life. It may be argued to include into the summation of the "PPER", the weight of sheer rubble of destroyed edifices & mechanisms too, for those constructions were wrought via the sweat of one's brow.

Therefore prepare thee to cut off the flesh.(335)
Shed thou no blood; nor cut thou less, nor more,
But just a pound of flesh
( . . . )
But in the estimation of a hair,—
Thou diest and all thy goods are confiscate.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
back-on-task:

I defer to the instructions I have recieved:
Regarding, "Thou shall not Kill, or, Thou shall not murder" ---in Hebrew the word used here is, "murder".

I apollogise.
I have mis-stated the scholarly position of in my contention. I spoke from memory ---since I am a vegetarian for several decades, I presumed I remembered the arguement correctly.

There is debate put forth by senor mentors of mine and the arguement is weather this is the proper rendering of the word murder (ie: homocide).

I will scan 2 page and will post the documentation.

.................................................
Until then, to whom ever it concerns, I proffer this challenge, predictated on the quoted definition below, :

Lo tirtzach very distinctly means "do not murder."

Thus, Using Hebrew only, please us the define, in one sentence, the word, "Lo tirtzach"?

Furthermore, what is the a] Root, and, b] ethmology of the the word, "Lo tirtzach"?

Toda raba,
Bhaktajan

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::
BTW, my 'religious teachings' forbade me to desuade others religious leanings --but rather, to encourage them in 'Devotion to God' within their own tradition.

Gita 3.26:
So as not to disrupt the minds of non-believers, attached to the fruitive results of prescribed duties, a learned person should not induce them to stop work. Rather, by working in the spirit of devotion , he should encourage them in all sorts of devotional activities.