Thou Shalt Not Kill (no killing whatsoever)

"The exact Hebrew wording of this biblical phrase is lo tirtzack. One of the greatest scholars of Hebrew/English linguistics (in the Twentieth Century) -Dr. Reuben Alcalay - has written in his mammoth book the Complete Hebrew /English Dictionary that "tirtzach" refers to "any kind of killing whatsoever." The word "lo," as you might suspect, means "thou shalt not."

Many Bible scholars persist with the theory that Christ ate animal flesh, obviously swayed in their opinions by personal habits. The desire to accede to prejudice and uphold existing tradition has been a human characteristic for many centuries, but truth appears now even more important as man exerts his independence in so many aspects of life.

Respected Bible scholar Rev. V.A. Holmes-Gore has researched the frequent use of the word "meat" in the New Testament Gospels. He traced its meaning to the original Greek.

His findings were first published in World Forum of Autumn, 1947. He reveals that the nineteen Gospel references to "meat" should have been more accurately translated thus:

Greek word, number of references and actual meaning.

Broma 4 "Food"

Brosis 4 "The act of eating"

Phago 3 "to eat"

Brosimos 1 "That which is eaten"

Trophe 6 "Nourishment"

Prosphagon 1 "Anything to eat""

The exact Hebrew wording of this biblical phrase is lo tirtzack. One of the greatest scholars of Hebrew/English linguistics (in the Twentieth Century) -Dr. Reuben Alcalay - has written in his mammoth book the Complete Hebrew /English Dictionary that "tirtzach" refers to "any kind of killing whatsoever." The word "lo," as you might suspect, means "thou shalt not."

Many Bible scholars persist with the theory that Christ ate animal flesh, obviously swayed in their opinions by personal habits. The desire to accede to prejudice and uphold existing tradition has been a human characteristic for many centuries, but truth appears now even more important as man exerts his independence in so many aspects of life.

Respected Bible scholar Rev. V.A. Holmes-Gore has researched the frequent use of the word "meat" in the New Testament Gospels. He traced its meaning to the original Greek.

His findings were first published in World Forum of Autumn, 1947. He reveals that the nineteen Gospel references to "meat" should have been more accurately translated thus:

Greek word, number of references and actual meaning.

Broma 4 "Food"

Brosis 4 "The act of eating"

Phago 3 "to eat"

Brosimos 1 "That which is eaten"

Trophe 6 "Nourishment" "


http://www.thenazareneway.com/thou_shalt_not_kill.htm


i am currently a hunter and carrion eater. "thou shalt not kill" weighs ever increasingly on my mind, and vegetarianism has long been a subject that i frequently ponder. eating meat that you sacrifice/kill yourself is much more humane, and sane, than eating prepackaged carrion from the supermarket.

ewoks. primitive cultures that necessarily depend on eating animal flesh and utilization of animal parts.


evolution. retardation. sacrificed seminal fluids. people on autopilot.

The moment your morality is not set in stone and imposed from up above, you never have to reconcile that dictate with your moral intuitions. It sounds simple, though quite the opposite is true. Thinking for oneself is hard. Making moral choices is, too. Living with the outcomes is also not easy. Should life be easy?

Easy ways through morality and ethics do exist, if one is willing to give up one's autonomy as a moral agent and thinker and arguably therefore all of one's dignity as a human being, deserving to be the serf one is willingly becoming at that point. Most go by those paths. Some still retain some of their humanity, enough to come to question how to obey the great master and his eternal law, though staying obedient is still what they wish.

At this point I shall echo the great Christopher Hitchens and his final words in an article about the ten commandments:

In short: Do not swallow your moral code in tablet form.

This evidence is contrary to literally every other bit of research I've ever seen on the topic, and flies in the face of thousands of years of established scholarship and tradition. If you want to be a vegetarian or a vegan, that's your decision for whatever reasons you make it. This "scholarship" however remains suspect until corroborated a couple of other times by respected scholarly bodies.

I'll have to go back to that day when President Clinton asked if a blow job was sex. In other words, define Killing...but wait...define it as it was defined in Moses times!

edit - One more thought...define killing vs murder in Moses times. It is then that we can discuss how YOU will interpret what You want it to be defined as. Words have changed meaning over time and so has the way people define words.

My philosophy is simple, if it feel wrong, it probably is!

A little off subject here but what I can see from this discussion is that different people interpret the same teachings according to their own moral compass. I can see why this is attractive and I've done it myself for years but something makes me feel uncomfortable about it.

Is anything 'right' or 'wrong' or are all things ok given the right circumstances? I'm sure that Hitler thought that what he was doing was 'right'.

I know that the 'black and white' way of seeing the world is frowned upon by many but, to me, there are such things as 'right' and 'wrong'.

Hey ho.

I think its a powerful adjunct to working with increasing 'pure compassion' as demonstrated perhaps best by ahisma - driving that particular compassionate contemplative transformation of perception outwards from the inner mind to outer world as demonstrable action. The struggle of it though is probably the act of awareness and application - neither of which is possible for human's to do perfectly!!

So while it's integral to my personal Jedi path as an attribute of connection with empathy to all life (to avoid suffering wherever possible as mindfulness of life having freewill, not a judgement about my dietary/survival needs), I find it important (for me) to remember its not as an act of sacrifice for spiritual merit/reward/piety, instead as an exercise to be applied wherever applicable to develop greater compassion and the resulting benefits from that.

Ecthalion wrote: A little off subject here but what I can see from this discussion is that different people interpret the same teachings according to their own moral compass. I can see why this is attractive and I've done it myself for years but something makes me feel uncomfortable about it.

Is anything 'right' or 'wrong' or are all things ok given the right circumstances? I'm sure that Hitler thought that what he was doing was 'right'.

I know that the 'black and white' way of seeing the world is frowned upon by many but, to me, there are such things as 'right' and 'wrong'.

Hey ho.

i feel this

ghost dog wrote:

Ecthalion wrote: A little off subject here but what I can see from this discussion is that different people interpret the same teachings according to their own moral compass. I can see why this is attractive and I've done it myself for years but something makes me feel uncomfortable about it.

Is anything 'right' or 'wrong' or are all things ok given the right circumstances? vehicles of madness thought that what they was doing was 'right'.

I know that the 'black and white' way of seeing the world is frowned upon by many but, to me, there are such things as 'right' and 'wrong'.

Hey ho.

i feel this

30+ days of vegan

I am a recovering omnivore and I keep falling off of the wagon. However, to control my desire for feeding on the carcass of poor innocent animals packaged at the grocery stores, I change my diet to vegan and raw veganism for 30+ days every year starting today January 2. I have been doing this since 1993. I also refrain from consuming alcohol during this time.

Now as I write this I noticed ants on my chair next to me. This brings me to ponder this topic further. Are insects included in this law?

You should go back to the Bible and reread the Greek and Hebrew texts and find all the other references pertaining to "kill"/"murder". There are a number of words which are used differently- some are considered justified by God, while others are not. I think you'll find that the piece you are citing is giving half truths to support their point of view rather than taking an actual analytical position to determine its meaning. After all, the 10 Commandments came before Leviticus 11- which outlines clean and unclean animals to consume.