A professor (Let's call him Dunlevy) at Columbia University was teaching
evolution to his biology class at the University.

NYPD received a phone call reporting a murder....at Columbia University that
very day.....The informant accused Prof Dunlevy as the perpetrator.....

When the detectives arrived they met with the informant that directed them
to the professor's office.... The informant then accused the professor of
murdering one of the his relatives. Dunlevy said..."I don't know what this
man is talking about."

The informant stated that they had dissected a frog that day...and asked
Dunlevy if it was true....... Dunlevy said "Yes, and so?" The informant
asked the Professor if he hadn't just taught that evolution "Proves" (Which
is circular logic) that we all evolved from slime, and at one stage or
another, we were either worms..frogs..or mosquitoes.....So...He, the
informant believed that this frog was his Great Grandfather X10000...and
attempted to file charges against Dunlevy.... The detectives shrugged their
shoulders and left.



"Jahnu" > wrote in message
...
>
> Jesus & vegetarianism
>
> So when we talk about changing one's life, giving one's time, life,
> energy, mind, resources to God and worship him with all one's heart
> mind soul, etc., well we all agree to that.
>
> To be non violent, not to kill others (humans and animals alike, not
> even for food (it is quite clear that the Early Christians were
> vegetarians, see below), we all agree on that. We are citizens of the
> spiritual world and we should not unnecessarily use our valuable time
> in mundane pursuits. Unless we give up material life and turn with
> great determination towards spiritual life our life will be a loss and
> end up in disappointment.
>
> On the other side when we start taking about the resurrection of the
> flesh and that Jesus died for our sins, well these are theological
> concepts that were superimposed on the teachings of Jesus from Paul on
> and really miss the point of his actual teachings to mankind.
>
> Quote from the book "Food for peace":
>
> Major stumbling blocks for many Christians are the belief that Christ
> ate meat and the many references to meat in the New Testament. But
> close study of the original Greek manuscripts shows that the vast
> majority of the words translated as "meat" are trophe, brome, and
> other words that simply mean "food" or "eating" in the broadest sense.
> For example, in the Gospel (Luke 8:55) we read that Jesus raised a
> woman from the dead and "commanded to give her meat." The original
> Greek word translated as "meat" is phago, which means only "to eat".
> So, what Christ actually said was, "Let her eat."
>
> The original Greek word for meat is kreas ("flesh"), and it is never
> used in connection with Christ. In Luke 24:41-43 the disciples offered
> him fish and a honeycomb and he took it (singular, we can guess which
> one). Nowhere in the New Testament is there any direct reference to
> Jesus eating meat.
>
> This is in line with Isaiah's famous prophecy: "Behold, a virgin shall
> conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. He shall
> eat butter and honey, so that he may know the evil from the good."
> (Isaiah 7:14-15) (this itself says that meat eating destroys all good
> discretion in man. It is quite typical, that the second part of the
> sentence is omitted in Matthew 1:23).
>
> Jesus rebuked strongly the pharisees with the words: "...and if you
> had known what it means: "I desire mercy and not sacrifice, ...you
> would not condemn the innocent," (Matthew 12:6) which clearly
> disapproves of the killing of animals, as this is a verse taken from
> Hosea 6:6: "I desire mercy instead of sacrifice, the knowledge of God
> more than burnt offerings..." (note: again the the 2nd part of the
> sentence is omitted in Matthew 12:6).
>
> He strongly opposed the custom of temple animal sacrifices, violently
> driving those who were selling oxen, sheep and pigeons and the
> money-changers out of the temple (John 2:13-15).
>
> His words: "...you shall not make my father's house a house of trade
> (which in earlier translations always was translated as "murders'
> den").
>
> We all know that according to Matthew 3:4 John the Baptist was
> refusing to eat meat. ("...and his food was wild locust (bean) and
> wild honey." (orig. Greek: enkris, oil cake and akris: locust/honey)
>
> But we never hear of the sheer overwhelming evidence which points to
> Jesus being a vegetarian: No less than seven of Jesus' twelve
> disciples refused meat food (the rest we do not know). This naturally
> reflects the teachings of Jesus, as: "...a servant is not greater than
> his master..." (John 14:16).
>
> The seven a
>
> 1. Peter, "...whose food was bread, olives and herbs..." (Clem. Hom.
> XII,6)
>
> 2. James: Church Father Eusebius, quoting the Churchfather Hegesippus
> (about 160 AD) is stating:
>
> "...But Hegesippus, who lived immediately after the apostles, gives
> the most accurate account in the fifth book of his memoirs. He writes
> as follow: '...James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the
> government of the Church in conjunction with the apostles. He has been
> called the Just by all from the time of our savior to the present day;
> for there were many that bore the name James.
>
> 'He was holy from his mother's womb; he drank no wine, nor strong
> drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head, he did not
> anoint himself with oil and he did not use the bath. He alone was
> permitted to enter the holy place; for he wore no woolen but linen
> garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple,
> and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the
> people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel in
> consequence of constantly bending them on his worship of
> God...'" (Eusebius, Church History II, Ch. XXIII,5-7, Nicene and Post
> Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Oxford, N.Y., 1890, Vol I,
> p.125)
>
> It is interesting that Hegesippus is saying that James, the brother of
> Jesus, was holy from his mother's womb on which would apply that Mary
> was not eating meat either and that she never fed him meat as a child.
> That being the case one would think it to be clear that the whole
> family of Jesus and naturally he himself was vegetarian. In that sense
> the statement of Churchfather Eusebius "he was holy from his mother's
> womb" is most indicative pointing towards the vegetarianism of Jesus.
>
> 3. Thomas: The apocryphal Acts of Thomas (Ch. 20), which actually were
> widely in use among early Christian sects, depict this disciple of
> Jesus as ascetic: "He continually fasts and prays, and abstaining from
> eating of flesh and drinking wine, he eats only bread, with salt and
> drink and water, and wears the same garment in fine weather and
> winter, and accepts nothing from anyone, and gives whatever he has to
> others."
>
> 4. Matthew: "It is far better to be happy than to have a demon
> dwelling with us. And happiness is found in the practice of virtue.
> Accordingly, the apostle Matthew partook of seeds and nuts, fruits and
> vegetables without of flesh. And John, who carried temperance to the
> extreme, ate locusts and wild honey..."
>
> (Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, II.I,16: On Eating)
> (Note here the strong hint of Clement towards the vegetarianism of
> John the Baptist.)
>
> 5. Matthias (who filled the place of Judas - Acts 1:21-26). His food
> as told by Church Father Clement of Alexandria was the same as
> Matthews. (Clement/Stromata III,4,26)
>
> 6. Andrew and 7. Jude: Andrew (Peter's brother in both flesh and
> faith) and Jude of Bethsaida, originally two of John the Baptists'
> followers, must have followed the Baptist's austere diet. (See above
> under Matthew)
>
> Paul also says: "...It is good neither to drink wine or eat flesh..."
> (Roman 14:20-21) though his commitment altogether seems altogether
> somewhat less categorical.
>
> Beyond that there are strong arguments of a similar nature by many of
> the Fathers of the early Church:
>
> "...How unworthy do you press the example of Christ as having come
> eating and drinking into the service of your lusts: I think that He
> who pronounced not the full, but the hungry and thirsty 'Blessed,' who
> professed His work to be the completion of His Father's Will, I think
> that he was wont to abstain, instructing them to labor for that 'Meat'
> which lasts to eternal life, and enjoying in their common prayers
> petition, not for flesh food but for bread only..." - Quintus
> Septimius Tertullianus (AD 155).
>
> This knowledge of Tertullianus was supported by fragments of the
> writings by the Apostolic Father Papias (AD 60 - 125).
> "...The unnatural eating of flesh is as polluting as the heathens
> worship of devils with its sacrifices and impure feasts, through
> participation in which a man becomes a fellow eater with devils..."
> (2nd century scripture Clemente Homilies - Hom. XII)
>
> Clemens Prudentius, the first Christian hymn writer exhorts in one of
> his hymns his fellow Christians "...not to pollute their hands and
> hearts by the slaughter of innocent cows and sheep..."
> Accordingly the Apostle Matthew, "partook of seeds, and nuts, and
> vegetables, without the use of flesh... is there not within a
> temperate simplicity, a wholesome variety of eatables, vegetables,
> roots, olives, herbs, milk, cheese, fruits?" - Churchfather Clement of
> Alexandria (Titus Flavius Clemens, AD 150 - 220)
>
> "...We, the Christian leaders, practice abstinence from the flesh of
> animals to subdue our bodies. The unnatural eating of flesh is of
> demonic origin." And about the early Christians: "...No streams of
> blood are among them. No dainty cookery, no heaviness of head. Nor are
> horrible smells of flesh meats among them or disagreeable fumes from
> the kitchen.." - St. Chrysostomos (AD 347-404)
>
> A most important purport to a controversy, much cherished and much
> cited by meat-eating Christians we find in the writings of the
> Churchfather Jerome (AD 340 - 420), who gave us the Vulgate, the
> authorized Latin version of the Bible still in use today.
>
> The controversy is based on the fact that in Genesis 1:29 meat-eating
> is clearly forbidden, "...I give you every seed-bearing plant on the
> face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it.
> They will be yours for food..."
>
> However after the flood it appears that meat-eating is all of a sudden
> permitted: "...The fear and dread of you will fall upon all the beasts
> of the earth and all the birds of the air, upon every creature that
> moves along the ground, and upon all the fish of the sea; they are
> given into your hands. Everything that lives and moves will be food
> for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you
> everything. But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in
> it..." (Genesis 9:2-4)
>
> Writing in confutation of Jovinian, a monk of Milan, who abandoned
> asceticism, St. Jerome (died A.D. 440) holds up vegetarianism as the
> Christian ideal and the restoration of the primeval rule of life.
>
> St. Jerome says:
> "...He (Jovinian) raises the objection that when God gave His second
> blessing, permission was granted to eat flesh, which had not in the
> first benediction been allowed. He should know that just as divorce
> according to the Saviour's word was not permitted from the beginning,
> but on account of the hardness of our heart was a concession of Moses
> to the human race, (Matthew 9:8: "Moses permitted you to divorce your
> wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the
> beginning.") ...so too the eating of flesh was unknown until the
> deluge. But after the deluge, like the quails given in the desert to
> the murmuring people, the poison of flesh-meat was offered to our
> teeth. The Apostle writing to the Ephesians (Eph. 1:10) teaches that
> God had purposed in the fullness of time to sum up and renew in Christ
> Jesus all things which are in heaven and in earth. Whence also the
> Saviour himself in the Revelation of John says (Rev. 1:8; 22:13), "I
> am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending."
>
> At the beginning of the human race we neither ate flesh, nor gave
> bills of divorce, nor suffered circumcision for a sign. Thus we
> reached the deluge. But after the deluge, together with the giving of
> the law which no one could fulfill, flesh was given for food, and
> divorce was allowed to hard-hearted men, and the knife of circumcision
> was applied, as though the hand of God had fashioned us with something
> superfluous. But once Christ has come in the end of time, and Omega
> passed into Alpha and turned the end into the beginning, we are no
> longer allowed divorce (see Matthew 19:3-9), nor are we circumcised,
> nor so we eat flesh, for the Apostle says (Rom. 14:21), "It is good
> not to eat flesh, nor to drink wine." For wine as well as flesh was
> consecrated after the deluge." (Against Jovinianus, Book I,18)
> "The steam of meat darkens the light of the spirit... One hardly can
> have virtue when one enjoys meat meals and feasts..." - St. Basil (AD
> 320 - 79)
>
> Besides that contemporary heathen observers describe the early
> Christians as abstaining from meat:
>
> Pliny, Governor of Bithynia (where Peter preached) referred to the
> early Christians in a letter to Trajan, the Roman Emperor, as a
> ..."contagious superstition abstaining from flesh food..."
>
> Seneca (5 BC - 65 AD), stoic philosopher and tutor of Nero, describes
> the Christians as "...a foreign cultus or superstition (under imperial
> suspicion) who abstain from flesh food..."
>
> And Josephus Flavius says about the early Christians: "...They
> assemble before sunrising and speak not a word of profane matters but
> put up certain prayers... and sit down together each one to a single
> plate of one sort of innocent food..."
>
> The scholar E.M. Szekely claims to have recovered and translated from
> an old Aramaic scripture, "...Therefore, he who kills, kills his
> brother... 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 who
> so eats the flesh of slain beasts, eats of the body of death... Kill
> neither men, nor beasts, nor the food which goes into your mouth...
> For life comes from life, and from death comes always death. For
> everything which kills your foods, kills your bodies also. And your
> bodies become what your foods are, even as your spirits become what
> your thoughts are..." - E.M. Szekely, Gospel of Peace
>
> And Albert Schweitzer says: "...Ethics has not only to do with mankind
> but with the animal creation as well. This is witnessed in the purpose
> of St. Francis of Assisi. Thus we shall arrive that ethics is
> reverence for all life. This is the ethic of love widened universally.
> It is the ethic of Jesus now recognized as a necessity of thought...
> Only a universal ethic which embraces every living creature can put us
> in touch with the universe and the will which is there manifest..."
>
> Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801 - 90) says: "...Cruelty to animals is
> as if man did not love God... They have done us no harm, they have no
> power of resistance... there is something dreadful, so satanic in
> tormenting those who have never harmed us and who cannot defend
> themselves, who are utterly in our power..."
>
> Tolstoy and Dukhobor (Orthodox Russian Christian) were of the opinion
> that meat-eating is against the tenets of Christianity.
>
> His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Founder-Acarya
> of ISKCON (Hare Krishna Movement) concludes: "...There are many
> rascals who violate their own religious principles. While it clearly
> says according to Judeo-Christian scriptures, "Thou shalt not kill,"
> they are giving all kinds of excuses. Even the heads of religions
> indulge in killing animals while trying to pass as saintly persons.
> This mockery and hypocrisy in human society has brought about
> unlimited calamities..."
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>
> Paul's teachings and interpretations
>
>
> And it's absolutely amazing that Paul actually tells it himself:
>
> "...One man's faith (in the idea of salvation from the cross) allows
> him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith (in the cross) is
> weak, eats only vegetables..." (Roman 14:2)
>
> The smoking gun is right the It is Paul's concept of faith in the
> salvific nature of the cross, declaring the Torah obsolete which leads
> him to view the vegetarianism of the apostles as dietetic fanaticism
> of Nazarene Jewish origin and hence dispensable.
>
> Further proof are at hand. In fact the following statements make no
> sense whatsoever, unless we agree that Paul needed to convince a large
> section of early Christians, that there was no problem with eating
> meat.
>
> "Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food.
> All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that
> causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat or drink
> wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall. So
> whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and
> God..." (Rom 14:20-22)
>
> In other words it is O.K. to eat meat as long as nobody is offended
> and the community of Christians is not disturbed.
>
> He goes on:
> "If some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat
> whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience.
> But if anyone says to you, "This has been offered in sacrifice," then
> do not eat it, both for the sake of the man who told you and for
> conscience' sake-- the other man's conscience, I mean, not yours. For
> why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience? If I take
> part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of
> something I thank God for? So whether you eat or drink or whatever you
> do, do it all for the glory of God." (1 Cor 10:27-31)
>
> In other words as far as eating meat, even when offered in sacrifice,
> Paul had no scruples unless it is declared, that meat is offered in
> sacrifice. In this case do not eat it, to avoid to offend others.
>
> It is very clear: It needed to be saying that meat eating is allowed.
> There were Christians who are vegetarians. Beware of meat offered in
> sacrifice. Because besides the vegetarian Christians there were others
> who were less strict but who would not approve of the idea of eating
> meat offered in sacrifice. Meat eating in general is allowed,
> according to Paul:
>
> "Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of
> conscience, for, 'The earth is the Lord's, and everything in it.'"
> (1 Cor 10:25-26)
>
> Again, this makes no sense unless there must have been Christians who
> found it difficult to reconcile with their conscience to buy meat in
> the market.
>
> And again mo
>
> "As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is
> unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then
> for him it is unclean. If your brother is distressed because of what
> you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating
> destroy your brother for whom Christ died." (Roman 14:14-15)
>
> Later this point of view is reflected in Timothy, possibly addressing
> early Christian sects like the later banned Enkratites:
>
> "...They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain
> foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who
> believe and who know the truth. For everything God created is good,
> and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving..."
> (1 Timothy 4:3-4)
>
> So we can see that there was obviously a large group of people who did
> not agree with meat eating in general (hence he says don't let it be a
> matter of conscience to you when buying meat in the market).
> Definitely the issue was not about eating food offered in sacrifice,
> as made out by Christian theologians.
>
> The tensions between Paul are further reflected in the way how he
> addresses the disciples of Jesus. He makes it perfectly clear that
> their opinions are not what Paul is overly concerned with.
>
> He sarcastically describes the Apostles in Jerusalem (James, Peter) as
> "those Super Apostles", "those reputed to be the Pillars":
> "...But I do not think I am in the least inferior to those
> "super-apostles." I may not be a trained speaker, but I do have
> knowledge. We have made this perfectly clear to you in every way."
> (2 Cor 11:5-6)
>
> He clearly is preaching a different Jesus then the Apostles in
> Jerusalem. Hence he warns his followers:
>
> "...For if someone comes to you and preaches A JESUS OTHER THAN THE
> JESUS WE PREACHED, or if you receive a different spirit from the one
> you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put
> up with it easily enough."
> (2 Cor 11:4)
>
> "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other
> than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we
> have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you
> a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally
> condemned!" (Gal 1:8-9)
>
> "And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground
> from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with
> us in the things they boast about. For such men are false apostles,
> deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder,
> for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light." (2 Cor 11:12-14)
>
>
> www.krishna.com
> www.iskcon.org
> www.krishna.dk




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----