"Glorfindel" > wrote in message ...
> pearl wrote:
> > "Glorfindel" > wrote in message ...
>
> >>Thank you, Pearl.
>
> > A pleasure. .
>
> Your posts are always a pleasure to read.

Awwww.. Likewise.

> >>As you show, there are Biblical verses which support
> >>vegetarianism, as there are Biblical verses which talk about meat-eating
> >>and animal sacrifices. Individual verses can be pulled out of the
> >>Bible, and it is useful to quote verses which support the position
> >>someone takes, of course. The Bible is the basis for Christian and
> >>Jewish ethics, and the Old Testament for Muslim ethics as well.
>
> > It appears that the Bible, both OT and NT, have been corrupted.
>
> Yes, I think that is so. The texts we find in the Bible were
> written or composed over thousands of years.

This is interesting.

Note that in the Book of Genesis 'Elohim' is The Creator.

'As far back as the 18th century, biblical scholars started to
recognize that the Pentateuch or Torah was riddled with
doublets, i.e., two versions of the same story, each complete
and self-contained. This would have been insignificant in itself,
but they also noticed that one of the versions invariably
identified the deity as Yahweh, while in the other account the
deity was Elohim. Recognizing that they were looking at a
riffling together of two older documents that had been written
independently, they called the author of the Yahweh stories
"the Jahwist," in German, or "Yahwist," in English, and for
convenience thereafter referred to him simply as "J." The
author of the Elohim stories became "the Elohist" or "E."
A little later, they came to the realization that the Elohim
stories were the work of two authors, one from the 8th
century B. C., who retained the "E" designation, and the
other a Levitical priest from the 7th century, who became
"the priestly author," or "P." When the author of
Deuteronomy was recognized as "none of the above," he
became "the Deuteronomist" or "D." Finally, in the late 20th
century, Richard Friedman of USCD demonstrated that the
person who combined the separate documents into a single
narrative, long thought to be the Priestly author, was in fact
a much later editor, whom he called "the Redactor" or "R."

While it is not unanimous, the most widely accepted dates
for the various authors are J, ca. 920 B. C.; E, ca. 770 B. C.;
D, 621 B. C.; P, 621-612 B. C. ; and R, 434 B. C. The
reasoning behind those dates is that J shows signs of having
been written during the reign of Rehoboam (ca. 922-915 B. C.),
whom he consciously flattered. E could be off by as many as
fifty years. D clearly wrote shortly before the "discovery" of
his book in Yahweh's temple in 621 B. C. (2 Kings 22:8-11).
P was written after D, which showed no awareness of P's
existence, while P referred to Assyria as an existing reality,
as he could only have done before Assyria's annihilation in
612 B. C. Since the Torah's final version, containing sections
not from J, E, D, or P, turned up in the hands of high priest
Ezra in 434 B. C., with no explanation of where it came from
or why Ezra suddenly changed the ritual for the feast of
booths from the formula in Deuteronomy to that in Leviticus,
the logical conclusion is that it did not exist seven years earlier
when a Deuteronomic booths was celebrated. Indeed, the
most logical assumption is that Ezra himself was R.
...'
http://www.infidels.org/library/maga.../205moses.html

> They cover several
> time periods, all of which are different from the way we live
> today.

'By the 12th century B.C.E., the Hebrews assumed an identity
unique enough in the archaeological record to become discernible
for the first time. In the mountains and plateaus of the northern
highlands of Canaan, from Jerusalem north to the Jezreel Valley,
the highland settlements, poor for their day, begin to show a single
distinguishing feature from other, similar highland settlements in
regions around them. There is little to go on - pottery shows an
impoverished lifestyle, with little decoration and use other than as
storage and cooking vessels. Yet one thing is clear - the bones of
pigs become absent from the archaeological record. The prohibition
on eating pork is therefore the oldest archaeologically supported
feature of Jewish culture. It is representative of the beginnings of
the transformation of the god "El" into "El-ohim," the god of gods,
the god of Israel.

We now know this Mesopotamian god as "El-ohim," and our
author "E," one of the earliest scriptorialists writing about this time,
first has El introducing himself to Abraham as "El Shaddai"
(El of the Mountain). He also appears as El Elyon, or El of Bethel
in other, non-canonized scripture, and his name is also preserved
in such Hebrew names as Isra-El and Ishma-El. The word Elohim
was originally a plural of El.2

To the south, from Bethel to the Valley of Beersheba, a similar
transformation is taking place. In this climatically and geologically
harsher place, a place with a much smaller and less settled population
with greater geographical isolation, the Canaanite god Yahweh is
being transformed by a culturally similar people of the land of Judah.
The unknown author known to scholars simply as "J" has his god
being familiar with and comfortable with Abraham, and he casually
appears to Abraham in Genesis 18, introducing himself as Yahweh.
But "J's" contemporary, author "E" in the north can't have God
being so casual, and first appears as a voice, commanding
Abraham to leave his people in Mesopotamia and settle in Canaan.3

Yahweh, in his transformation from a pagan Canaanite god to the
god of the Jews, becomes a cruel and vindictive god in the hands
of author "J." He commands Abraham to sacrifice his first born son,
an act which is not at all surprising given the nature of the pagan
religions of the time. Many of these pagan religions (and remember
that Yahweh got his start as a Canannite pagan god) considered
the first-born to be the seed of a god. Because of this, they were
often sacrificed to the god who presumably sired them.

Yet Elohim in the north continues to be a much more subtle god,
who directs the affairs of men by revelation of the voice, hidden
from the view of mere mortals. There is a tension among these
peoples, both of whom identify themselves as culturally decendants
of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. One people, perhaps, but two gods.
......'
http://www.bidstrup.com/bible.htm

Jeremiah Chapter 7
30 For the children of Judah have done that which is evil in
My sight, saith the LORD; they have set their detestable
things in the house whereon My name is called, to defile it.

Isaiah Chapter 1
10 Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give
ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.
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. 12 When ye come to
appear before Me, who hath required this at your hand, to
trample My courts?

> Those texts were picked out from all the available texts,
> especially texts about the life and ministry of Jesus, by a group
> of human beings, who had their own agendas.

And anyone who disagreed with them was an heretic!

'Medieval Sourcebook:
Bernard Gui on the Albigensians

An experienced inquisitor describes the Albigensians

It would take too long to describe in detail the manner in
which these same Manichaean heretics preach and teach
their followers, but it must be briefly considered here.

In the first place, they usually say of themselves that they are
good Christians, who do not swear, or lie, or speak evil of
others; that they do not kill any man or animal, nor anything
having the breath of life, and that they hold the faith of the
Lord Jesus Christ and his gospel as the apostles taught.
They assert that they occupy the place of the apostles, and
that, on account of the above- mentioned things, they of
the Roman Church, namely the prelates, clerks, and monks,
and especially the inquisitors of heresy persecute them and
call them heretics, although they are good men and good
Christians, and that they are persecuted just as Christ and
his apostles were by the Pharisees.

Moreover they talk to the laity of the evil lives of the clerks
and prelates of the Roman Church, pointing out and setting
forth their pride, cupidity, avarice, and uncleanness of life,
and such other evils as they know. They invoke with their
own interpretation and according to their abilities the
authority of the Gospels and the Epistles against the
condition of the prelates, churchmen, and monks, whom
they call Pharisees and false prophets, who say, but do no.
....
From the Inquisitor's Manual of Bernard Gui [d.1331],
early 14th century, translated in J. H. Robinson,
Readings in European History, (Boston: Ginn, 1905),
pp. 381-383
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/gui-cathars.html

> The Bible didn't
> come down to us direct from heaven on golden tablets.


http://www.thenazareneway.com/essene...tm#BookOfMoses

> So, while
> I believe the texts found in the Bible are inspired by God and show
> us something of the way God wants us to behave, I think we have to
> interpret them through an understanding of who wrote them down and
> why.

Indeed.

'.. explained by Peter in The Clementine Homilies
and Recognitions. After pointing out various passages
in the Torah that are false pericopes, Peter declares:

"For the scriptures have had added to them many
falsehoods against God. The prophet Moses having
by the order of God delivered the true law... it was
not long before the written law had added to it certain
falsehoods contrary to the law of God.... If, therefore,
some of the scriptures are true and some false, for
good reason our Master revealed to us the mystery
of his saying 'Be ye wise money changers', inasmuch
as in the scriptures there are some true sayings and
some spurious."

.... Peter concludes:

"Wherefore, Clement, my spiritual son, beware of
those scriptures which portray God as... fond of
burnt animal fat, bloody animal sacrifice and war....
For if God is portrayed as loving war, what sort
of 'God' is that?"
...
http://www.essene.org/Essene_Scriptures.htm

> I think there are other texts which are also inspired by God
> and can also show us something of the way God wants us to behave.

http://www.thenazareneway.com/from_e...ea_scrolls.htm

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
> >>However, Christians who are not Biblical fundamentalists or literalists
> >>go more on the *meaning* of the Bible as a whole, and it is clear to
> >>me, as to other Christian vegetarians, that the Biblical message,
> >>especially of Jesus, is about service, self-sacrifice, and mercy.
>
>
> > But mostly, to the majority, service and mercy to fellow humans.
>
> Yes, that's true. But it doesn't have to be true. We can help
> change that, I think.

I think so too.

> >>Animal liberation/rights and ethical vegetarianism are more in keeping
> >>with Christian ethics than use of animal products as they are produced
> >>today in most cases.
> > ....
> > http://members.tripod.com/jbrooks2/T...ist_Index.html
>
> >>Have you read Linzey at all? He is excellent on Christian support for
> >>rights of animals and Christian reasons for vegetarianism.
>
> > Well I've read, and also published on my site, this article
> > by Linzey- http://www.iol.ie/~creature/Letting_Be.htm .
>
> It's ALL good.

Very good.