Many things were only forbidden with the giving of the Torah. Heck Abraham married his own sister.
No violation of Torah there. Two different mothers.
Many things were only forbidden with the giving of the Torah. Heck Abraham married his own sister.
Let's avoid truisms like "He didn't" when I laid out a plethora of scripture outlining the ethics view that causing animals pain is bad in G-d's eyes.
Levites also were taught by Moses to kill them "in the way that I have shown you" keep upSay's the God who instituted animal sacrifices for sin?!?!?
Pain and suffering are a fact of life. Inescapable. I find this sort of reasoning born less of any clear command in scripture but of a cultural disconnect from agrarian life. Too often modern's and the urban types anthropomorphise animals leading to scewed approaches on such questions.
Hit and run here as I'm doing other stuff but...Nooooot a torah keeper here... or a hunter... but
so can i just...
Lev 17:13
And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall even pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust.
And Proverbs 12:27
The slothful man roasteth not that which he took in hunting but the substance of a diligent man is precious.
So being as how the Law codifies what must be done in the event of hunting, and does not prohibit hunting under any circumstances that I've ever seen, and calls a man lazy if he doesn't cook his kill...
I don't see how, if I were to keep torah, I would feel like the torah prohibited me from hunting except under duress and great need. Which commandment says that?
Then... since no-one can tell me that a humane kill involves ABSOLUTELY ZERO animal suffering. I honestly don't care how sharp the knife is or how trained the slaughterer. A needle prick is negligible suffering to me, but it is suffering nonetheless. Having my throat slit would be orders of magnitude worse..
Then the proper teaching should be that it is prohibited to eat meat, unless one eats the precise amount of meat ordained by one's rabbi/doctor to sustain life and the absolute least amount of meat necessary to keep the feasts. Doing more will cause the needless slaughter of animals and cause the suffering of animals who need not suffer or perish.
Unless one is allowed a certain sense of proportion, where one may learn that a certain amount of suffering is assumed in the manner that animals were given to us for food.
Gen 9:2-3
“The fear of you and the terror of you will be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.
There are methods of slaughter that I cannot say involve much terror. In many cases the whole idea is to cause the animal as little shock as possible. Not what I call terror.
Fleeing an adversary that you don't understand while wounded and bleeding out from an arrow wound. Now that's terror.
Being kind and humane to animals depends largely on ownership.
....A righteous man regards the life of his animal... Which of you shall have a donkey or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not immediately pull him out on the sabbath day?... What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?... Thou shalt not see thy brother's ox or his sheep go astray, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt in any case bring them again unto thy brother
I am not aware of any provision or responsibility given for the beasts of the field. You'll only be pulling a donkey out of a ditch if it's YOUR donkey. Or at the very least, your neighbor's donkey. If you see a wild donkey in a ditch on the Sabbath, I do believe that donkey will stay where it is.
A nod towards the spiritual principle
"He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathers not with me scatters abroad."
Jesus is kind towards HIS sheep. There is no provision for the sheep that refuse to gather to Him.
Nice try though. wow people be luvin them some huntin'!
It's not a logic issue.Hunting? Your logic would apply equally to farmed livestock. If suffering prohibits hunting then we'd all best be vegans because hunting is often less terrifying than the slaughter of livestock.
Even worse, hunting with bows and rifles is almost always leaders to quicker deaths with less suffering than normal predation by other wildlife.
Is God the author of suffering? Must the wolf become a vegan too? I see little air between your arguments and that of radical animal rights advocates.
absolute violation of torah brother,No violation of Torah there. Two different mothers.
Nooooot a torah keeper here... or a hunter... but
so can i just...
Lev 17:13
And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall even pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust.
And Proverbs 12:27
The slothful man roasteth not that which he took in hunting but the substance of a diligent man is precious.
So being as how the Law codifies what must be done in the event of hunting, and does not prohibit hunting under any circumstances that I've ever seen, and calls a man lazy if he doesn't cook his kill...
I don't see how, if I were to keep torah, I would feel like the torah prohibited me from hunting except under duress and great need. Which commandment says that?
Then... since no-one can tell me that a humane kill involves ABSOLUTELY ZERO animal suffering. I honestly don't care how sharp the knife is or how trained the slaughterer. A needle prick is negligible suffering to me, but it is suffering nonetheless. Having my throat slit would be orders of magnitude worse..
Then the proper teaching should be that it is prohibited to eat meat, unless one eats the precise amount of meat ordained by one's rabbi/doctor to sustain life and the absolute least amount of meat necessary to keep the feasts. Doing more will cause the needless slaughter of animals and cause the suffering of animals who need not suffer or perish.
Unless one is allowed a certain sense of proportion, where one may learn that a certain amount of suffering is assumed in the manner that animals were given to us for food.
Gen 9:2-3
“The fear of you and the terror of you will be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.
There are methods of slaughter that I cannot say involve much terror. In many cases the whole idea is to cause the animal as little shock as possible. Not what I call terror.
Fleeing an adversary that you don't understand while wounded and bleeding out from an arrow wound. Now that's terror.
Being kind and humane to animals depends largely on ownership.
....A righteous man regards the life of his animal... Which of you shall have a donkey or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not immediately pull him out on the sabbath day?... What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?... Thou shalt not see thy brother's ox or his sheep go astray, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt in any case bring them again unto thy brother
I am not aware of any provision or responsibility given for the beasts of the field. You'll only be pulling a donkey out of a ditch if it's YOUR donkey. Or at the very least, your neighbor's donkey. If you see a wild donkey in a ditch on the Sabbath, I do believe that donkey will stay where it is.
A nod towards the spiritual principle
"He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathers not with me scatters abroad."
Jesus is kind towards HIS sheep. There is no provision for the sheep that refuse to gather to Him.
animals being scared of man doesn't equal man hurting them for fun or sport...
the hunting in the verse you mentioned is trapping as was the tradition in ancient Israel, that's why it's qualified with "fowls".
Many verses allude to the bird caught in a bird trap in psalms and such... i.e. humane hunting
Funny that was my major at school, rocket science (we called it differently though)Thank you for the context.
Have you ever killed a sheep?
Slaughter plants are run by the lowest skilled labor available. It is not hard to humanely kill an animal. And anything lovingly killed at home will endure far less stress than going through the packing plant. Especially if you personally raised the animal.
I haven't hunted in years. But I have killed most of my own meat for over a decade. The hardest part for most people isn't the mechanics, its the emotions. This isn't rocket science.
Yes you're right, it's late by me and I was thinking just that Israelites as an agricultural society did not really need to hunt so I assumed too much in calling it for sport perhaps?Most hunters I know eat their kill. I've only known one who would not eat his own kill, but he gave the meat to others who could make use of it. Are they allowed to hunt, kill and eat, but not enjoy it?
That Hebrews hunted with traps can be found in ANE texts; not just Hebrews but other surrounding societies.I can't find any translation that backs up your assertion here.
A word study of tsuwd H6679 sees the usage of this word in a little more broad light than you're making it appear.
Years ago I heard a neat sermon at a non-denominational spirit-filled church.Rocket Scientist. Funny.
Nature as designed by God is far crueler than most people can conceive.
Welldone on your cheerleading! goooo team goy!Well done.
Yes, net fishing is allowed just like trapping is allowed (ancient style not big metal break their leg modern trapping). If you can produce some data that fish experience more pain than mammals/birds then you may actually have something there.Wait a minute! Jesus would fish. Fish asphyxiate while struggling and gasping for breath. So was Jesus causing undue suffering to fish?
Yes, net fishing is allowed just like trapping is allowed (ancient style not big metal break their leg modern trapping). If you can produce some data that fish experience more pain than mammals/birds then you may actually have something there.
Otherwise, I'm not buying it.
Welldone on your cheerleading! goooo team goy!
Trapping an animal in Biblical times would usually mean snaring. Snares do NOT hold an animal nicely until the hunter comes along to quickly and humanely slaughter them. They are one of the most horrible ways for an animal to be treated. If you set a line of snares and then check them the next day, you'll find animals that have been trapped for hours and have spent all that time trying to free themselves. Each movement draws the snare tighter. They will be badly injured from the snare itself, and also have torn at their own bodies with their teeth while trying to break the snare. As soon as you find them you kill them quickly - to stop the suffering that you yourself have caused with the snare. This is not a humane way to hunt by any stretch of the imagination - but it is an effective way when you have no other alternative and need to put food on the table.the hunting in the verse you mentioned is trapping as was the tradition in ancient Israel, that's why it's qualified with "fowls".
Many verses allude to the bird caught in a bird trap in psalms and such... i.e. humane hunting
Rather, we are simply told to not eat the blood, and to pour the blood out upon the ground (Lev 17). We are not told specifics of HOW we are to do that, only that we must do it. As @Slumberfreeze pointed out, we are specifically told that we may pour the blood out after an animal has been hunted or trapped (Lev 17:13). This is not about a method of slaughter - it is about not eating blood.