All Creatures Great and Small

[Ekklesian]

I completely agree. My point to Sub is that we end up deep in a “rabbit hole” (no pun intended) with the deontological argument of animal ethics.

Sure, but the entire topic itself is a rabbit hole. That’s my point. We agree that killing vermin is acceptable, but trust me there are those who don’t. If you don’t, check out some PETA articles like this one: https://www.peta.org/faq/what-about-insects-and-other-pests/

This isn't about 'animal ethics', or animal rights, or any of that Darwinistic, liberal anti-biblical B.S. It's about what is a biblically moral, or righteous engagement with nature, and whether or not sport hunting fulfills such. You and Mumbles offered much in the way of your personal feelings and cultural norms, and very little from a Christian frame of reference.

First, mankind is in rebellion against God, and as a result, nature is in rebellion against man. So the ugly necessity of dealing death where God's creatures have trespassed is a righteous engagement.

As a result of the Fall, some animals have become good for food. That is a righteous engagement,

When God created the animals, the sacrifices of the Temple were in view. When Adam and Eve sinned, God made clothes for them from animal skins. Animals as a resource and a living for man is a righteous engagement.

Animal sacrifice was a mode of making amends, and of communion, and of entering into covenant with God. This may be a stretch, but family bonding or fellowship on a hunting or fishing trip is a righteous engagement.

And though many sacrifices were burned, they weren't burned alive. They were killed first with a blade. They weren't clubbed to death. Every effort was made to keep pain and suffering to a minimum. And where death is dealt in a righteous engagement of nature, the same must be observed.

These are some of my thoughts. Hopefully this gets the discussion going on the right path.

 

[Ekklesian]

I think you’re making it more complicated than needed. To me, trophy hunting is hunting for the sole purpose of hanging an animal on the wall.

On the wall in a closet, or above the mantle at the lodge?

I think it’s unethical and I won’t do it. On the other hand, sport hunting is the opposite of what you said: it’s hunting with a defined set of rules and regulations in place for the enjoyment of it, which nearly always includes the consumption of the animal. https://www.nrahlf.org/articles/2019/1/6/sport-hunting-defined/

Now you're making more complicated. I was talking about the motivation.

 

[Ekklesian]

and you are a liar... .. if the case ransom made was all you said - then you would have a point....... but you brought far more into the argument than that... . you always do.... ...from the very start you offered irrelevant opinions and made lurid observations about the women that did nothing more than reveal the corrupt and putrid nature of what you really are...... ... and if you think i;m going to take lectures of what is or isn;t ladylike from an unregenerated creep who talks about the bodies of women and girls the way you do - then you are way out of your mind.......

and for the record... . i disagree with your interpretations of proverbs 12-10 ... especially in light of the fact that you - as a calvinist - believe the word "all" in john 3-16 does not really mean everybody in the world... but only those who God has elected...

so how are we supposed to believe that a scripture in proverbs that talks about a righteous man having regard for the life of "his" beast to mean he has that same regard for every beast in the world when it doesn;t even say "every" beast?.......even without being a calvinist i see it as referring to the beast that belongs only to him... (or her... ).. ... ...and also for the record the rejoneadoras i have followed the careers of since they were teenagers.. all take very good care of the horses and other animals they raise and train........

do you want to take it further?...... then explain how you seem to be perfectly ok with the idea of non-elect babies burning in hell but you have gone on a total tear jerking freak out campaign over the life and discomfort of an over grown spanish fighting bull?....... ....

and i am assuming you know the only reason those bulls even live as long as they do - and build the kind of muscle they have - is so they can fight in the arena ...... where - as i said before - they are are least given a fighting chance for life ..and even a chance for payback against the matadoras who aim to kill them?........ ....

if not for that fact then those bulls would have been unceremoniously marched into the slaughter house long ago and smashed in the head with a hammer - where... contrary to popular myth... a bull does not die right away... but rather falls to the ground and suffers a seizure until the lack of oxygen from inability to breathe causes him to die..... ...... that is the kind of "humanely killed" animal you are eating in your hamburger and frying on the grill for your steak...... but as long as it allows you to have sweet dreams at night then i guess it;s ok.... right?......

That's fine. Maybe you could just answer the question?

But whose view conforms more to a Christian and Scriptural approach to our relationship with nature?

Yours or Ransom's?

 

[aleshanee]

That's fine. Maybe you could just answer the question?

your question is irrelevant..... where did ransom post scripture to support his view on what consitututes a christian relationship with nature?.... . according to what he said on the previous page he got his views on environmentalism by reading - Francis Schaeffer's Pollution and the Death of Man.

but even if there was scripture commanding us to maintain a specific relationship with nature - .. aka something akin to the views of peta or the spca - how does the life of a spanish or mexican fighting bull reflect having anything to do with nature?... .. they are raised in sheltered pens as juvelines and then in larger enclosures when fully grown. .. they don;t forage for food on their own, but are grain fed the entire time by man.... and fed very well too.... .... they have no relationship with nature and very little exposure to it... and thus are not a part of nature any more than we are....

in fact.... if a herd of that breed of cattle were placed in nature to survive on it;s own only a few of those bulls would ever reach maturity.... the rest would be killed while still juveniles by other bulls that viewed them as rivals...... that;s nature..... what we have produced in the spanish fighting bull is something totally removed from it....

 

[DrHuk&Duck]

This isn't about 'animal ethics', or animal rights, or any of that Darwinistic, liberal anti-biblical B.S. It's about what is a biblically moral, or righteous engagement with nature, and whether or not sport hunting fulfills such. You and Mumbles offered much in the way of your personal feelings and cultural norms, and very little from a Christian frame of reference.

First, mankind is in rebellion against God, and as a result, nature is in rebellion against man. So the ugly necessity of dealing death where God's creatures have trespassed is a righteous engagement.

As a result of the Fall, some animals have become good for food. That is a righteous engagement,

When God created the animals, the sacrifices of the Temple were in view. When Adam and Eve sinned, God made clothes for them from animal skins. Animals as a resource and a living for man is a righteous engagement.

Animal sacrifice was a mode of making amends, and of communion, and of entering into covenant with God. This may be a stretch, but family bonding or fellowship on a hunting or fishing trip is a righteous engagement.

And though many sacrifices were burned, they weren't burned alive. They were killed first with a blade. They weren't clubbed to death. Every effort was made to keep pain and suffering to a minimum. And where death is dealt in a righteous engagement of nature, the same must be observed.

These are some of my thoughts. Hopefully this gets the discussion going on the right path.

Well, this is an interesting article (https://bibleresources.org/hunting/) you can read. I guess the key part is this: “God looks on the heart and motives of men when it comes to how we treat His creatures and we shall be judged for it.”

I don’t feel a guilty conscience when fishing or duck hunting. I would, however, feel a guilt for engaging in canned hunts or trophy hunting.

I can only speak for the bull fighting from my perspective. As I said before, I wouldn’t do it (not that I’d ever be brave enough to), nor would I buy tickets to attend such an event, but that’s my conscience. Others have a conscience that won’t allow them to hook fish for fun, or shoot ducks for even food. I guess that activity is between them and God.

By the way, you’ve discounted the cultural component of all of this, but it can’t be completely discounted. For example, I’m 99% sure you’re a city slicker/suburban boy. Your views in rural areas of America (particularly in the South and West) would get you mocked and laughed at, and probably viewed as a tinker bell, but that’s not really your fault because we’re all products of our environments.

 

[aleshanee]

This isn't about 'animal ethics', or animal rights, or any of that Darwinistic, liberal anti-biblical B.S. It's about what is a biblically moral, or righteous engagement with nature, and whether or not sport hunting fulfills such. You and Mumbles offered much in the way of your personal feelings and cultural norms, and very little from a Christian frame of reference.

where is the phrase "all creatures great and small " found in scripture?.... where is any line from that poem/song found?.... .

cecil f alexander who wrote that poem said he based it on scripture found in genesis 1-31 and ecclesiastes 3-11.... . the song that uses those same lyrics is beautiful.... i love it..... 2 different musicians both with the last name of stevens ... (cat and ray - respectively).. wrote songs based on those same scriptures too..... they are catchy tunes... . but how does any of those 3 songs address the issues brought up in this thread?.. or the other thread?... ...

First, mankind is in rebellion against God, and as a result, nature is in rebellion against man. So the ugly necessity of dealing death where God's creatures have trespassed is a righteous engagement.

glad you agree...... so when are you signing up to help?.......

As a result of the Fall, some animals have become good for food. That is a righteous engagement,

have you ever worked in a slaughter house?..... ever butchered a recently killed animal for food?.... have you ever even worked in a butcher shop carving sides of beef or other animals into steaks or cutlets?..... .i am pretty sure you grilled a steak before.. . what was going through your mind at that moment?......

When God created the animals, the sacrifices of the Temple were in view. When Adam and Eve sinned, God made clothes for them from animal skins. Animals as a resource and a living for man is a righteous engagement.

again... have you personally taken part in any action that created leather out of an animal skin?.... ..would you even know where to begin?......

Animal sacrifice was a mode of making amends, and of communion, and of entering into covenant with God. This may be a stretch, but family bonding or fellowship on a hunting or fishing trip is a righteous engagement.

and i not only fully agree with this but have experienced it myself on hunting and fishing trips i have gone on with my adopted family... .. my whole reason for wanting to learn archery and get a hunting license years ago was so i could be closer to my dad and create a stronger bond with him.... people who have been on a forum a long time might remember i actually wrote posts on the old fff about it while i was actually trying to learn archery and going out on those first hunts..... ... so to me it;s not a stretch at all..... i have lived it....

And though many sacrifices were burned, they weren't burned alive. They were killed first with a blade. They weren't clubbed to death. Every effort was made to keep pain and suffering to a minimum. And where death is dealt in a righteous engagement of nature, the same must be observed.

and once again... have you ever taken part yourself in any of these afore mentioned righteous engagements that took the life of an animal?....... do you know how to do it without causing pain to the animal or at least keeping pain to a minimum?.....if you do then please instruct those of us who hunt from your vast experience in this area....

These are some of my thoughts. Hopefully this gets the discussion going on the right path.

we can discuss it until the cows come home.... (no pun intended).... but until someone either proves that an angry bull in a bull fight is anything other than enraged in a way that has flooded him with adrenaline and stifled pain.... or can prove that hunting animals with a gun is somehow less painful and less traumatic than taking one down with a well placed arrow shot.. then it;s all just speculation and high minded accademics..... ..

but i agree it would be great to have a discussion about it on the right paths...... .i just don;t see how resorting to rigthteous indignation and holier than thou condemnations of those who disagree will get us there.... i also don;t see how it does any good to have those conversations with non-hunters or those largely opposed to it or sickened by the practice..... but i could be wrong.... so please.. do proceed....

 

[DrHuk&Duck]

Empathy is a difficult thing to acquire, even for the best intentioned. Both of my grandfathers grew up in rural North Carolina with farms. One of their childhood chores included having to occasionally slaughter cows and pigs.

On the other hand, my dad also grew up in a rural area, but his chores didn’t include having to slaughter animals. He had a milk cow and a couple horses, but unlike his dad, he didn’t grow up on a working farm. At best, it was more gardening and a couple recreational animals. He once witnessed a cow of his uncle’s being butchered and he said it was one of the worst experiences of his life. The sound the cow made when getting its neck sliced has stuck with him for decades. Would it have the same effect on my grandfather? Probably not, because he grew up being required to do that activity with no choice as a kid.

I spent half my childhood in a somewhat rural area (what we referred to as “the country”) and half in a semi-suburban area (sort of a neighborhood on the edge of the country). By time I came along, there was no farm at all. The closest thing to a farm in my childhood was ten acres (mostly woods) with a very small backyard garden, a couple dogs, and a chicken coop we had for several years that was used solely for eggs. I’ve never even witnessed a cow or pig slaughtered. So, I really have zero empathy for animal slaughter.

In a lot of ways, my story probably mirrors much of America (minus those who are multi-generational big city people.) I think it’s unrealistic for folks who grew up in metropolitan areas to really judge those from cultures they know nothing about and have no experience with. The same is true with people who grew up in the slums and ghettos. It’s easy to judge them for their actions, but if we grew up in a ghetto around drug dealers, gangs and the worst schools known to man, we’d probably have a different perspective in life. My two cents….

 

[Ransom]

where did ransom post scripture to support his view on what consitututes a christian relationship with nature?.... . according to what he said on the previous page he got his views on environmentalism by reading - Francis Schaeffer's Pollution and the Death of Man.

I was summarizing my views and how I was persuaded of them. Schaeffer himself, of course, was eminently scriptural, and grounded his opinions on ecology in the creation mandate.

 

[aleshanee]

Empathy is a difficult thing to acquire, even for the best intentioned. Both of my grandfathers grew up in rural North Carolina with farms. One of their childhood chores included having to occasionally slaughter cows and pigs.

On the other hand, my dad also grew up in a rural area, but his chores didn’t include having to slaughter animals. He had a milk cow and a couple horses, but unlike his dad, he didn’t grow up on a working farm. At best, it was more gardening and a couple recreational animals. He once witnessed a cow of his uncle’s being butchered and he said it was one of the worst experiences of his life. The sound the cow made when getting its neck sliced has stuck with him for decades. Would it have the same effect on my grandfather? Probably not, because he grew up being required to do that activity with no choice as a kid.

I spent half my childhood in a somewhat rural area (what we referred to as “the country”) and half in a semi-suburban area (sort of a neighborhood on the edge of the country). By time I came along, there was no farm at all. The closest thing to a farm in my childhood was ten acres (mostly woods) with a very small backyard garden, a couple dogs, and a chicken coop we had for several years that was used solely for eggs. I’ve never even witnessed a cow or pig slaughtered. So, I really have zero empathy for animal slaughter.

In a lot of ways, my story probably mirrors much of America (minus those who are multi-generational big city people.) I think it’s unrealistic for folks who grew up in metropolitan areas to really judge those from cultures they know nothing about and have no experience with. The same is true with people who grew up in the slums and ghettos. It’s easy to judge them for their actions, but if we grew up in a ghetto around drug dealers, gangs and the worst schools known to man, we’d probably have a different perspective in life. My two cents….

i heard all those sounds your grandfather described when i was 10 years old.... the sound of flesh being ripped open and internal organs spilling out and hitting the floor.. the sounds she made both consiously - subconciously... when i witnessed the murder of my natural sister by her boyfriend... he had gone into a meth induced rage at the kitchen table...

it;s all part of the memory of that night that has haunted me ever since..along with the memory of her screams... until she stopped screaming and he let her fall to the floor....the unnatural way she fell... the sounds she made as she was dying.... the overwhelming smell of it all.... then the sound of him screaming and crying when he realized what he had done.... ... i remember it all clearly.... along with the sounds of my own screams as i huddled in the corner with my knees up under my chin.... ....

that was the night i first met the paramedic who would become my adopted dad... ...i have told that story in much greater detail on the fff before and i am not going to tell it again here... i only recount it now to say yes... memories like that follow you forever.... in many ways they mold you - especially when it happens in your childhood.... ...

but there is also another reason i mention it.... many people - mostly my friends, but even a few on the fff years ago - have asked me how i can still hunt and kill animals - even helping to butcher them after witnessing all those things as a child?.... and the only answer i have for them is i don;t know....

however... i do know i don;t associate the wild pigs we hunt and butcher with a human - especially with not my sister... ... and it was almost a decade after the incident where she was murdered before i started hunting with my adopted dad ... i didn;t just jump right into it... i had a lot of time to grow - to be raised loved and nurtured by him... taught how to see things..... ... plus we are also very careful in how we make a kill and also do the butchering.. ..there is a world of difference in what we do with the wild pigs and what was done to her.... you have to be able to understand that difference and see all the parts of an animal as just that - parts.... ..like car parts for lack of a better comparison... there was never a human soul there that has recently departed.... ... not even a pet with a name.... ..it was.. as many have said... an animal given to man by God for the purposes of providing food..

but that;s me.... i can;t impose my beliefs .. likes or dislikes.. ways in which i see or do things onto other people.. ..i don;t expect them to be able to do the things i can do... .and i also will not accept them telling me or trying to shame me into not doing something just because they cannot do it.... .we all have to make and live with our own choices...... ....

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I don’t hunt or fish but love steak, chicken and seafood. I kill all varmints within my ‘sphere of influence’. My grandmother protected black snakes because they killed rats and mice.

God’s creatures are not created equal.

 

[subllibrm]

I don’t hunt or fish but love steak, chicken and seafood. I kill all varmints within my ‘sphere of influence’. My grandmother protected black snakes because they killed rats and mice.

God’s creatures are not created equal.

By seafood are you talking about ocean fish and crustaceans? Or do include freshwater delicacies such as panfish, turtle and frog legs? I like the occasional fish (usually cod) and chips meal at a restaurant. But they don't come close to a mess of fried bluegill!

 

[ALAYMAN]

Leviticus [9] These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. [10] And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: [11] they shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination. [12] Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

Heathens, the whole lot of you!

 

[DrHuk&Duck]

But they don't come close to a mess of fried bluegill

I agree. Bluegill are about the only freshwater fish I’ll eat, other than the occasional catfish. I might keep a small bass once a year.

 

[subllibrm]

I agree. Bluegill are about the only freshwater fish I’ll eat, other than the occasional catfish. I might keep a small bass once a year.

My brother was a big fan of catfish. I won't throw one back or turn down an offer of it for dinner. At the same time they are not on my list of fish to target.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

By seafood are you talking about ocean fish and crustaceans? Or do include freshwater delicacies such as panfish, turtle and frog legs? I like the occasional fish (usually cod) and chips meal at a restaurant. But they don't come close to a mess of fried bluegill!

I’m more of a flounder, shrimp, crab and lobster guy.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Leviticus [9] These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. [10] And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: [11] they shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination. [12] Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

Heathens, the whole lot of you!

And my wife wears britches!

 

[subllibrm]

I’m more of a flounder, shrimp, crab and lobster guy.

Gotcha. My one aunt was adamant that haddock is the king of seafood while another insisted that a crab cake always places first. One in southern Maine the other in Baltimore. I'll let you figure out which chose which.

 

[abcaines]

Don't watch the sacrifice scene of Apocalypse Now...

BTW, A real water buffalo was actually slaughtered in that scene. No fake special effects.

 

[ALAYMAN]

And my wife wears britches!

Bet she wears mixed fabrics like wool and linen too. <tsk tsk tsk>

 

[aleshanee]

i love flounder shrimp crab and lobster ..... never had bluegill.... or bass other than sea-bass... in my opinion turtles can stay in their shells and frog legs can stay on the frogs that were born with them... .. ... but none of those seafoods can come close to smoked marlin - red snapper - boiled tako (aka he'e or octopus)... prepared with kimchee poke' style.... .... and are put to shame by fresh ahi...(seared or raw either one)....with wasabi sauce....

and by fresh i mean caught - hauled out of the water ..and cut into while it;s still flapping it;s tail... eaten on the spot...... ... if any of you had been in hawaii back when i worked on the fishing boat you could have caught the ahi yourself (in the form of juvenile tuna called shibi) with hand held poles as we circled the weather bouys.... then i would have prepared it in the boats galley... .... it would have been a nice snack to chew on while the deck hands put lures on the lines - prepared the outriggers and set them out to try and bring in one or more of the big four.... ... marlin - tuna - ono - and mahimahi.... .. ......

but if you are like most mainlanders you would have wanted the ahi either fully cooked or at least heavily seared.... .and i would have done that too..... we had a farily well stocked galley...... i really miss that job.... the pay was terrible but it was still a lot of fun....