Jump to content
The World News Media

Did Carnivores Exist Before the Flood of Noah's Day?


The Librarian

Recommended Posts

  • Member
On 12/26/2021 at 4:23 PM, Mr. Lifeson said:

I've been wondering about that for quite some time. I never understood why killing parts of God's creation was something that God would find acceptable. It makes zero sense to me.

What makes you think, the death of Abel was acceptable to God? Is that what you understand from @Srecko Sostar, If yes, I would ask this person the same question. That cause was made from man's imperfection. When did God create imperfect beings? Why would anyone blame God for man's imperfection?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 11.7k
  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

(bold mine) It explains that God can choose to see what he wants to see. In any case, even humans can predict a certain outcome based on certain behavior, how much more so a God who is a lot smarter t

blo·vi·ate /ˈblōvēˌāt/   verb  informal•US gerund or present participle: bloviating

I think everybody here is missing the point of Life, The Universe, and Everything. Yes, the WTB&TS is guilty of hundreds of sins over a hundred and more years, but the fact is that in a Unive

Posted Images

  • Member
3 hours ago, Dmitar said:
On 12/26/2021 at 6:23 PM, Mr. Lifeson said:

I've been wondering about that for quite some time. I never understood why killing parts of God's creation was something that God would find acceptable. It makes zero sense to me.

What makes you think, the death of Abel was acceptable to God? Is that what you understand from @Srecko Sostar, If yes, I would ask this person the same question. That cause was made from man's imperfection. When did God create imperfect beings? Why would anyone blame God for man's imperfection?

As usual Dmitar, and to the best of my observation, without exception, you have misunderstood Mr. Lifeson's concerns, as you misunderstand EVERYTHING.

Or, I could be wrong.

I hope Mr. Lifeson will clarify what he meant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
4 hours ago, Dmitar said:
On 12/27/2021 at 12:23 AM, Mr. Lifeson said:

I've been wondering about that for quite some time. I never understood why killing parts of God's creation was something that God would find acceptable. It makes zero sense to me.

What makes you think, the death of Abel was acceptable to God? Is that what you understand from @Srecko Sostar,

It is true that i have problematic grammar, but your confused conclusion is funny. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
6 hours ago, Dmitar said:

What makes you think, the death of Abel was acceptable to God? Is that what you understand from @Srecko Sostar, If yes, I would ask this person the same question. That cause was made from man's imperfection. When did God create imperfect beings? Why would anyone blame God for man's imperfection?

No, I'm talking about the animal sacrifices. From my understanding of Genesis, before Adam and Eve's disobedience, neither the humans nor the animals wanted to kill one another. Since they all lived according to God's Will before the fall, I assume that it was God' Will for humans and animals to not kill one another.

So what I don't understand is what exactly made God approve of humans killing animals and bringing their corpses to Him as a way of honoring Him. Did Abel come up with this idea on his own or did he learn it from his parents or from someone else? And whoever the first human that got the idea of killing animals was, why wasn't this human told by God that killing animals causes them suffering and is against God's Will?

Cain bringing grains to God is a bit more logical in the sense that they ate grains, so it was something along the lines of: "when us, humans, share food with each other, we enjoy our presence more, so maybe if I share food with The Being Who created me it will make This Being enjoy my presence more." So he brought grains, the food that he grew from the ground, to God. Granted, The Bible doesn't say that it was the best grains he had, so I understand why God would not regard Cain's offering. But the idea of bringing food to God is still grounded in logic, when compared to the idea of killing animals (which is basically destroying God's creation, bringing its remains to God, and telling God that you destroyed His creation as a means of honoring Him).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Mr. Lifeson;

Dmitar, although being able to read, does not correctly comprehend anything about anything, because his thinking processes are completely pre-programmed by a carefully crafted agenda which he is apparently duty bound to promote.

It’s a very common phenomenon for soft hearted people, and the evil people whose livelihood depends on that good hearted naïveté.

Life can only exist because it has something to eat … and for more than at least 200 million years there is inescapable HARD EVIDENCE that the God created Natural Order of all life is that there are two classes of animal life …. Predators …. And Prey. 
This is the case now, and has ALWAYS BEEN THE CASE.

When you accept this, only then will you understand Genesis, and a thousand other things, correctly.

Agenda driven thinking always subverts and corrupts logical thinking, and ALWAYS results in the wrong conclusions.

…. And a comprehensive totally screwed up world viewpoint filled with “inconsistencies”

.Regrettably, and with great embarrassment, I know this from experience.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

When you are a hammer, EVERYTHING looks like a nail.

I do not “like” it that all living things poop and pee, but willy-nilly …. that’s the way it IS.

But then again, trees pee oxygen and poop wood, which is very good.

The whole of life eats and drinks, and pees and poops, with ZERO inconsistencies.

I like That!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Mr. Lifeson said:

No, I'm talking about the animal sacrifices. From my understanding of Genesis, before Adam and Eve's disobedience, neither the humans nor the animals wanted to kill one another. Since they all lived according to God's Will before the fall, I assume that it was God' Will for humans and animals to not kill one another.

So what I don't understand is what exactly made God approve of humans killing animals and bringing their corpses to Him as a way of honoring Him. Did Abel come up with this idea on his own or did he learn it from his parents or from someone else? And whoever the first human that got the idea of killing animals was, why wasn't this human told by God that killing animals causes them suffering and is against God's Will?

Cain bringing grains to God is a bit more logical in the sense that they ate grains, so it was something along the lines of: "when us, humans, share food with each other, we enjoy our presence more, so maybe if I share food with The Being Who created me it will make This Being enjoy my presence more." So he brought grains, the food that he grew from the ground, to God. Granted, The Bible doesn't say that it was the best grains he had, so I understand why God would not regard Cain's offering. But the idea of bringing food to God is still grounded in logic, when compared to the idea of killing animals (which is basically destroying God's creation, bringing its remains to God, and telling God that you destroyed His creation as a means of honoring Him).

I take it as axiomatic that we have a truncated account of the period of time prior to the flood even including the few centuries post flood. All anyone can do is speculate and perhaps use ancient people accounts as a possible source for speculation. You could look at the talmudic speculations on these. You could read Maimonides. I would start w/the CGS (Christian Greek Scriptures) and take anything Jesus affirmed or those closely associated w/him as having an interpretational vector on these things. Another thing is that we often see Jehovah allowing, though not prescribing behavior and know that a given act may not be desirable or it might be desirable, Jehovah at at least at the point of time when it's described as being done considered it(the act) significant enough in the scheme of things to intervene w/a voice from the heavens or a prophet affirming or denying it's action.

Do you have any scriptures prescribing the disposition of the dead? Nope. Just that you're unclean if you touch a dead thing or person. So when we read that these followed certain burial practices it wasn't as far as we know (unless there are some as yet undiscovered scriptures outlining the proper burial of the dead) something Jehovah prescribed, just what these people did based on what they thought about Jehovah and what they thought of the dead and their future, if any.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 12/27/2021 at 3:28 PM, xero said:

Often people who are full of themselves (confusing this w/holy spirit) go on and on playing bible-ping pong

You describe the Governing Body of JWs very well in this sentence above. :) And the Leaders of the Watchtower have been doing this for over a hundred years.  They play ping pong with scriptures, changing their view of interpretation. They play ping pong with their predictions for Armageddon. They've played ping pong with the 'blood issue' and fractions. 

In fact they ping pong with people lives. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
9 hours ago, Mr. Lifeson said:

No, I'm talking about the animal sacrifices. From my understanding of Genesis, before Adam and Eve's disobedience, neither the humans nor the animals wanted to kill one another. Since they all lived according to God's Will before the fall, I assume that it was God' Will for humans and animals to not kill one another.

So what I don't understand is what exactly made God approve of humans killing animals and bringing their corpses to Him as a way of honoring Him. Did Abel come up with this idea on his own or did he learn it from his parents or from someone else? And whoever the first human that got the idea of killing animals was, why wasn't this human told by God that killing animals causes them suffering and is against God's Will?

Cain bringing grains to God is a bit more logical in the sense that they ate grains, so it was something along the lines of: "when us, humans, share food with each other, we enjoy our presence more, so maybe if I share food with The Being Who created me it will make This Being enjoy my presence more." So he brought grains, the food that he grew from the ground, to God. Granted, The Bible doesn't say that it was the best grains he had, so I understand why God would not regard Cain's offering. But the idea of bringing food to God is still grounded in logic, when compared to the idea of killing animals (which is basically destroying God's creation, bringing its remains to God, and telling God that you destroyed His creation as a means of honoring Him).

The idea of sacrificing to the god/s is not unusual, because people sacrificed to the god/s, because they want god/s to protect them or help them. To some extent, this is about bribery. Sometimes it is a way of thanking the god/s.
One aspect of why people made sacrifices is that they did not understand the laws of nature. Because they felt helpless or felt some debt to the Unknown. That is how god/s of all kind came into being.
The idea that people are obliged to make sacrifices to god/s does not exist in the initial (Bible) descriptions of the relationship between God and man (Adam, Eve, Abel, Cain ...).

WTJWorg explains that the most important reason why God rejected Cain’s sacrifice was that he had no faith, and Abel had. Meat and bloodshed also play a role, but WTJWorg publications do not claim that this was the sole reason.

But giving material or symbolic or spiritual or physical sacrifices to God should not be a practice in which the relationship between God and man should be developed. After all, it is said that God himself said and had it written in the Bible that obedience is more important to him than sacrifice.

The thought of having to kill someone to please God is terrible, frightening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
16 hours ago, Pudgy said:

As usual Dmitar, and to the best of my observation, without exception, you have misunderstood Mr. Lifeson's concerns, as you misunderstand EVERYTHING.

You seem to be at odds with yourself as a nonintellectual animal. Perhaps learning from a real dog, you can get a straight forward question. Real dogs just obey without thought of mind of what the owner really needs, just wants. However, you seem to be an extremely rude and obnoxious person pretending to be an animal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...




  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,670
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Apolos2000
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.