Text Size
Mar 26
English Croatian Serbian Slovak Slovenian

Did God Allow Noah To Eat Meat?

The passage of Genesis 9:2-4 was the subject of great debate and controversy. After years of study and research and virtually leaving no stone unturned on the subject, to date I have not read a commentary on the passage which is worthy of a serious consideration. Generally it is argued that here we have the first biblical passage where God explicitly told Noah that he may kill any animal he wanted to in order to eat its flesh. Even vegetarians who abhor meat eating and who practice vegetarianism on ethical grounds admit that here we are faced with a biblical text which clearly sanctions the killing of animals and eating of their flesh. All they can say is that due to the fallen and corrupt nature of humanity God gave a “concession” concerning meat diet but it was not His ideal as in Genesis 1:30 where God ideally prescribed a completely vegetarian diet. But nothing can be further from the truth.

Main Menu

Who's Online

We have 14 guests online

Did Jesus Eat Fish?

 There is only one passage in the whole of the New Testament where it is explicitly and specifically said that Jesus actually ate meat. If this text is true and genuine and in fact inspired by the Holy Spirit, then it would follow that Jesus was not and could not have been a vegetarian. But if on the other hand it can be satisfactorily demonstrated that this passage in Luke 24 is actually a forgery, then it follows that Jesus must have been a vegetarian, since a lying hand felt a need to insert a lying passage in order to portray Jesus as a carnivorous being.

It Is Unnatural To Drink Milk PDF Print E-mail
Written by Administrator   
Monday, 04 May 2009 07:40




It is taken for granted that God created cattle so that we could eat their flesh and drink their milk. But this assumption is wrong. In this article I will not argue against meat eating since I have already done so in my book entitled Biblical Vegetarianism. Instead I will concentrate on milk and dairy products. You might not be aware that in the early centuries not all Christians drank milk and ate dairy products. In fact, in the 2nd century, Church Father Clement of Alexandria  wrote a treatise in which he endeavoured to prove that milk should not be consumed by those who follow the teachings of Jesus. Here is an extract from his treatise: 


“The blood is found to be an ORIGINAL PRODUCT in man, and some have consequently ventured to call it the substance of the soul. And this blood, transmuted by a natural process of assimilation in the pregnancy of the mother, through the sympathy of parental affection, effloresces and grows old, in order that there may be no fear for the child. Blood, too, is the moister part of flesh, being a kind of liquid flesh; and MILK is the sweeter and finer PART OF BLOOD...When there is parturition, the vessel by which blood was conveyed to the foetus is cut off: there is an obstruction of the flow, and the blood receives an impulse towards the breasts; and on a considerable rush taking place, they are distended, and CHANGE THE BLOOD TO MILK in a manner analogues to the CHANGE OF BLOOD INTO PUS by ulceration. Or if, on the other hand, the blood from the veins in the vicinity of the breasts, which have been opened in pregnancy, is poured into the natural hollows of the breasts; and the spirit discharged from the neighbouring arteries being mixed with it, the substance of the blood, still remaining pure, it becomes white by being agitated like a wave; and by an interruption such as this is changed by frothing it, like what takes place with the sea, which at the assaults of the winds, the poets say, ‘spits forth briny foam’. Yet still the essence is supplied by the blood. In this way also the rivers, borne on with rushing motion, and fretted by contact with the surrounding air, murmur forth foam.

The moisture in our mouth, too, is whitened by the breath. What an absurdity is it, then, not to acknowledge THAT THE BLOOD IS CONVERTED INTO THAT VERY BRIGHT AND WHITE SUBSTANCE BY THE BREATH! THE CHANGE IT [the blood] suffers is in QUALITY, not in ESSENCE...On pregnancy BLOOD PASSES INTO MILK BY A CHANGE WHICH DOES NOT AFFECT ITS SUBSTANCE, just as in old people yellow hair changes to grey. But again in summer, the body, having its pores more open, affords greater facility for diaphoretic action in the case of the food, and the milk is least abundant, since neither is the blood full, nor is the whole nutrient retained. If, then, the digestion of the food results in the production of blood, AND THE BLOOD BECOMES MILK, then blood is a preparation for milk...It is therefore evident, that the essential principle of the human body is blood. The contents of the stomach, too, at first are milky, a coagulation of fluid;  then the same coagulated substance is changed into blood; but when it is formed into a compact consistency in the womb, by the natural and warm spirit by which the embryo is fashioned, it becomes a living creature.

Further also, the child after birth IS NOURISHED BY THE SAME BLOOD. FOR THE FLOW OF MILK IS THE PRODUCT OF THE BLOOD; AND THE SOURCE OF NOURISHMENT IS THE MILK; by which a woman is shown to have brought forth a child, and to be truly a mother, by which also she receives a potent charm of affection...And that MILK is produced from BLOOD by  A CHANGE, is already clear; yet we may learn it from the flocks and herds. For these animals, in the time of the year which we call spring, when the air has more humidity, and the grass and meadows are juicy and moist, are first filled with blood, as is shown by the distension of the veins of the swollen vessels; and from the blood the milk flows more copiously. But in summer, again, the blood being burnt and dried up by the heat, prevents the change, and so they have less milk” [Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, The Ante Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2, pp. 219-222]. 


Clement argued that animal milk and other dairy products must not be eaten by humans since milk is in actual fact the CONVERTED BLOOD. Since God forbade the consumption of blood,  naturally milk falls in the same category. But was Clement right in claiming that milk is the product of the blood? Did he really know the chemistry of milk in order to build his argument? Those who know the composition of milk and how it is actually produced in the mammary glands of the mammals, cannot help but agree with the claim of Clement. In order for a cow [and any other mammal creature] to produce milk she first of all needs to consume food in order to boost her blood quantity. Andrew Langley in his book Dairy Produce gives us the following facts: 


“Unlike us, a cow has four stomachs. She swallows her food without chewing it, and stores it in the first two parts, the rumen and reticulum. Later on, the cow can bring up this ball of food, called the cud, and chew it up. This is called ‘chewing the cud’, and you will often see cows munching away for long periods without seeming to eat anything. Next, the food moves to the third stomach, or omasum, where the surplus water is drawn off, and then to the abomasum. Here, it is broken down by the stomach juices and passed through the intestines, where the goodness is absorbed into the blood. Much of it goes into keeping the cow herself healthy, but SOME IS CONVERTED INTO MILK. Above the udder are special cells called ALVEOLI and, as the blood passes through the tiny vessels around them, the goodness is extracted from it and made into droplets of milk. These droplets are stored in bladders above each of the four teats of the udder” [p9]. 


John Friend and Dennis Bishop in their book Cattle of the World give us the following information: 


“The udder that carries the milk is situated between the hind legs and suspended by strong ligaments from the pelvis and muscular wall of the belly. It is composed of four separate quarters, or glands. Each mammary gland is made up of tiny cells which manufacture milk. These cells are grouped into hollow spheres called ALVEOLI. Each alveolus has its own BLOOD SUPPLY and draws chemicals FROM THE BLOOD in order to CONVERT THEM into the quite different compounds present in milk” [p. 120]. 


Udder must be supplied with great quantity of blood if the cow was to have much milk. Please notice the writing of Malcolme Castle and Paul Watkins in their book Modern Milk Production: 


“Digested nutrients are utilized for the productive processes of growth and milk production. In mature animals, growth is a small item, but there are stages in the lactation when fat is either deposited or utilized in the body. Milk is synthesized in the alveolar cells of the mammary gland from the precursor substances in the blood by a series of complex processes. Some of the constituents of milk are transported UNCHANGED FROM THE BLOOD, whereas other constituents are unique products made only by mammary cells. On average, 90 per cent of the protein, 50 to 60 per cent of the fatty acids, and ALL THE LACTOSE are synthesized from precursors ABSORBED FROM THE BLOOD, and the remainder originates from the PLASMA [liquid substance of the blood]. 

To maintain the supply of precursors to the mammary cells of a cow yielding 20 kg milk per day a MINIMUM of 6 kg of BLOOD per minute flows through the udder; the equivalent of 9 t [tones] per 24 hours. The milk precursors may arise directly from the digestive tract, partly as modified products of digestion after passing through the liver, and partly after metabolic changes within the liver tissue. For example, acetic acid absorbed from the rumen passes through the liver with relatively little change, whereas in contrast, butyric acid is changed in the rumen wall and liver to b-hydroxybutyrate and other ketone bodies. Part of the popionic acid is changed in the rumen wall to lactic acid and utilized in the liver to form glucose. The main precursors of milk are thus acetic acid, b-hydroxybutyrate, glucose, amino acids and long chain fatty acids. Lactose in milk is synthesized mainly from the BLOOD glucose, a dificience of which will reduce the amount of milk secreted. Milk proteins are synthesized mainly from the free amino acids IN THE BLOOD. Milk fat arises from the fatty acids of the BLOOD TRIGLYCERIDES or is synthesized from acetate and b-hydroxybutyrate OF THE BLOOD PLASMA” [pp. 37-38]. 


On pages 151 to 152 we read: 


Virtually all the major constituents [of milk] are synthesized in the udder from various PRECURSORS WHICH ARE ABSORBED SELECTIVELY FROM THE BLOOD...Water is the main constituent of milk and is secreted in association with water-soluble constituents of which the important quantitatively are lactose, sodium, potassium and chlorine. The amount of water secreted, and therefore the yield of milk, is related closely to the amount of lactose synthesized and secreted in the udder. Milk fat is a mixture of triglycerides containing both unsaturated and saturated fatty acids, and is derived from the fatty acids of the BLOOD TRIGLYCERIDES or synthesized from acetate and b-hydroxybutyrate of the BLOOD PLASMA. Lactose, termed milk sugar, is the only carbohydrate in milk and is PRODUCED MAINLY FROM THE GLUCOSE OF THE BLOOD...Vitamins are not synthesized in the udder, but are absorbed from the BLOOD”. 


Water is the main constituent of milk - 87.5%. Total solids in milk make up the final 12.5%. The total solids are made of fat 3.8% and non fat solids 8.7%. Non fat solids are: Nitrogen fraction 3.3%Lactose 4.6%Ash and Vitamins 0.8%. From Nitrogen fraction are derived: Non protein nitrogen 0.2% and Protein 3.1%.From Protein are derived:Casein 2.6%, Albumen and globulin 0.5%. It is easy to prove that milk of an animal was most definitely not intended for a human being. You must realise one fact. The cow or other female mammal does not simply produce milk so that you can drink it. No female mammal would ever produce any milk at all in her mammary glands unless she became pregnant and ACTUALLY GAVE BIRTH. The milk of a cow is exclusively produced so that her calf may be nourished by its mother’s milk. The milk in woman’s mammary glands is produced so that her little infant may be nourished. Not all milk is the same. The milk of a whale and a sea lion contains 40% fat. The elephant milk contains 20% fat. The milk of a woman contains 4% fat.


The milk of each mammal female is produced in a way that is best suitable for her offspring. When a young mammal animal is born it is fed exclusively on its mothers milk. No solid foods at all are consumed. The milk is a complex liquid which contains more than 200 compounds. These compounds form a non-liquid part of milk and are called milk solids. These compounds include proteins, fats, carbohydrates, vitamins and minerals. All the essential nutrients are present in milk of each mammal specie in order to adequately nourish and raise its own young. The young baby of each specie is able to digest lactose in milk while an adult cannot do so. For this reason many adults are allergic to milk and dairy products.Please notice the following quotation: 


“The body CANNOT DIGEST LACTOSE [also known as milk sugar], the major carbohydrate in milk, if lactase is not present in the small intestine. This enzyme is produced by all young mammals, including humans. But as the young grow up, there is a SIGNIFICANT  DROP IN LACTASE PRODUCTION. Researchers once believed that the fall in lactase levels was a response to dietary changes after weaning. More recently, however, they have found that lactase production slows in people of most ethnic groups regardless of how much milk is in the diet” [Health and Medical Horizons,  1995, p. 21]. 


Milk was intended for the young mammals only. For this reason the children are less affected by the lactose present in cow’s milk. When children reach adolescence and adulthood they become allergic and cannot tolerate lactose. Up to 80% of world’s population is allergic to cow’s milk. Please pay attention to the following statement: 


“Some individuals can’t drink milk because they are allergic to milk proteins. But many more have trouble drinking it because they simply do not have enough of the enzyme called lactase that breaks down the main sugar, LACTOSE, found in dairy products. Lactase deficiency does not normally affect YOUNG CHILDREN but is the MOST COMMON CAUSE of milk intolerance in ADOLESCENTS AND ADULTS. Researchers estimate that approximately 80 PERCENT OF THE ADULT POPULATION OF THE WORLD IS UNABLE TO DIGEST LACTOSE ADEQUATELY...When lactose-intolerant people consume milk, and milk products, in the usual amounts, they tend to develop such symptoms as abdominal cramps, gas, bloating, or diarrhoea within 15 minutes to three hours after eating. Some lactase-deficient individuals are sensitive even to very small quantities of dairy products...Most people who are sensitive to lactose can tolerate small amounts of milk - for example, the amount used in coffee - but not large quantities. Generally, one 8-ounce glass of milk, containing about 12 grams of lactose, will produce symptoms in those who are lactase deficient; 90 percent will have symptoms after drinking 32 ounces of milk” [Health and Medical Horizons, 1995, p. 258]. 


Dr. Jethro Kloss in his book: Back to Eden, The Classic Guide to Herbal Medicine, Natural Foods, and Home Remedies on p. 610 states: 


“For many people, drinking cow’s milk is like taking a poison. Half the invalids in the world suffer from dyspepsia and milk may be the cause. In some people, milk causes constipation, biliousness, coated tongue, and headache. All these are the symptoms of intestinal autointoxication. Soybean milk and nut milks are excellent substitutes and have practically the same nutritional analysis, but with the danger of autointoxication removed. A large number of adults, and some children as well, have either an absence or a deficiency of the enzyme lactase that is normally present in the intestinal tract. Lactase breaks down the lactose [the sugar in milk] to simple sugars so that they can be absorbed. If the milk sugar remains unchanged as it passes through the digestive tract, it causes gas, bloating, cramps, and diarrhoea. If you find that drinking cow’s milk or eating milk products causes you to have these symptoms, they should be eliminated from the diet”. 


Harvey and Marilyn Diamond state: 


“More dairy products are consumed in the United States than in all the rest of the world combined! In a survey by Grocer’s Journal of California in September 1982 it was reported that ‘Dairy products have the highest incidence of consumption of any major food category. Only six percent of Americans say they don’t consume milk in some form’. If dairy products are such good foods, and we in America eat more than the rest of the world combined, then it stands to reason that we should be experiencing the highest level of health as well.  As a matter of fact, the American worker leads the world in degenerative diseases, according to Richard O. Keeler, Director of Program Development for the President’s Council on Physical Fitness, reported in the Los Angeles Times in April 1981. As with protein, there is a colossal amount of information linking the consumption of dairy products to heart disease, cancer, arthritis, migrane headaches, allergies, ear infections, colds, hay fever, asthma, respiratory ailments, and a multitude of other problems, as documented by Hannah Ellen, Alec Burton, Viktoras Kulvinskas, F.M. Pottenger, Herbert M. Shelton, and N.W. Walker, among others” [Fit for Life, p. 81]. 


It is evident therefore that God never intended adults to drink milk of any kind. Milk was intended exclusively for the nourishment of the newborn mammalians. It is therefore unnatural to drink milk and eat dairy products and it is also opposed to the purpose of God. When we become fully aware just how is the milk obtained from cattle and other female mammals it becomes apparent that the method is cruel, unnatural and appalling. I have already stated that a cow - or any other female mammal - would not produce milk unless she became pregnant and actually gave birth. If you were to raise a young female calf and keep her in isolation from a bull she would simply not produce milk. Likewise, the infertile cow could never produce milk. Therefore it is evident that God intended for a mammal to produce milk only if it needs to raise its young. Man, however, has developed a system by which he now exploits the cattle by deceiving them and stealing the milk from their young. Please pay a special attention to the following quotation: 


“A cow would not produce milk at all unless it gave birth, so every year the cow is mated with a bull. She becomes pregnant, and the calf is born nine months later. As the calf grows inside its mother, her body gets ready to produce milk so that, as soon as the calf is born, she can BEGIN TO FEED IT. She can go on producing milk until the calf is ten months old. However, the farmer will allow the new-born calf to feed on its mother’s milk ONLY FOR THE FIRST FEW DAYS OF ITS LIFE. Then he teaches the calf to feed on other things. First it drinks a milky mixture from a bucket. Then it learns to take some solid foods, such as hay and little pellets of meal. Eventually it could be put into the field to eat grass like its mother. NOW THE FARMER CAN TAKE THE MOTHER’S MILK” [Food From Dairy and Farmland, Jacqueline Dineen, p. 6]. 


By denying a calf its God given food - its mother’s milk - man violates the law of nature and the Law of God. It is cruel, it is wrong, it is shameful! When we learn the fact that the cow is actually in control of her own milk and that man must resort to unnatural methods in order to obtain her milk, the act becomes even more gruesome.John Friend and Dennis Bishop give us the following facts: 


“Milk is secreted into the hollow center of the alveolus and drains out through a tiny duct. This connects with other ducts before flowing into the udder cistern from which it can be drawn off through the teat. Within each teat is a small cavity called the teat, cistern and the only barrier preventing the flow of milk from the udder is the teat sphincter muscle at the tip of the teat. When the milking of cows first began, it was realized that SOME FORM OF STIMULUS WAS NEEDED BEFORE THE ANIMAL WOULD LET DOWN ITS MILK. If the cow’s own calf was kept NEAR HER then SHE WOULD RESPOND BY ALLOWING HER MILK TO FLOW, even if the youngster was not suckling. A problem arose if the calf died,  but this was overcome in a variety of ways. One way was to present another calf, SMEARED IN URINE FROM THE DEAD ANIMAL, so that the cow would recognize the smell and adopt the calf. A SECOND TRICK WAS TO DRESS THE SUBSTITUTE CALF, OR EVEN A SMALL BOY, IN THE SKIN OF THE DEAD CALF. The cow smelled the pelt, licked it, and soon submitted quickly to the milking routine. Although similar ruses are still used when getting cows to adopt calves, modern milkers no longer need to go to such lengths to obtain milk. Dairy cows today RESPOND TO OTHER STIMULI” Cattle of the World, pp. 120-121]. 


God intended the cow to feed its own young. By instinct the cow would not let down her milk if her own calf was not near her. Man has to resort to unnatural methods in order to DECEIVE the cow and then STEAL her milk. In the process he causes the young calf to suffer by DEPRIVING IT OF HIS NATURAL RIGHT - the milk of its own mother given to it by God Himself. There are millions of cows worldwide which are kept specifically for milking purposes. These cows once they give birth to their young ones are milked on regular basis. At the first opportunity they are ARTIFICIALLY INSEMINATED so that they would again give birth nine months later so that they would continually manufacture milk which the greedy and corrupt man would steal from them and subject their young ones to cruelty. Many calves are aborted before they are even born since the cows were artificially inseminated for the purpose of manufacturing milk only. The artificial insemination process is itself UNNATURAL and PERVERSION.


They subject bulls to actual MASTURBATION or make them have intercourse with ARTIFICIAL COWS with ARTIFICIAL VAGINAS. They freeze the sperm of a bull they specifically choose and then at a later date they use this sperm of a single bull to inseminate thousands of cows. This is not natural and God most certainly does not sanction this abominable system. If you drink milk and eat dairy products you do not only violate God’s will and the natural laws He set in motion, but you also deprive the calf of its natural food and manifest your support of artificial insemination and other cruel and unnatural processes. Are you aware that no animal in its natural habitat drinks milk after its weaning age? Nature dictates that all mammals be weaned at an early age. Please notice the following quotation: 


“Arguing the pros and cons of eating dairy products would prove futile, so once again you will have to rely heavily on your own common sense in making a decision. Lets get right to it. I will ask you a question that I wish for you to answer strictly from common sense. Cows don’t drink cow’s milk, so why do humans? What in the world are humans doing drinking cow’s milk? If a grown cow was offered milk, it would sniff it and say, “No, thanks, I’ll have the grass”...No animals drink or want to drink milk once they are weaned. Of course, I am not talking about domesticated animals, who have been perverted from their natural inclinations. During the initial phase of life it is the invariable practice of ALL MAMMALS to take THE MILK OF THEIR MOTHERS; then they are weaned and spend the remainder of their lives sustained by other foods. Nature dictates that we are to be weaned at an early age. Humans, on the other hand, teach that after a mother has performed her nursing, THE COW SHOULD TAKE OVER. In other words, there is ONE mammal on earth, THAT SHOULD NEVER, EVER BE WEANED; humans” [Fit for Life, p.81-82]. 


If you observe mammals in the wildlife you would not see zebra nursing off a giraffe. Nor would you see a lion nursing off an elephant. Why then do humans alone nurse off a cow or some other mammal? When do you suppose man began to milk animals and drink their milk? Do you think God instructed Adam and showed him how to milk a cow? Genesis 1:20-30 explicitly states that God prescribed strictly a VEGETARIAN diet not only to humanity but all creatures that He created. God most certainly did not authorise Adam to kill animals for their flesh or to even milk them in order to eat their milk. Since Adam was not the one who began to milk animals, who then, when and why did begin to exploit animals to his own advantage? No one can tell for certain when this abominable practice began, but we have engravings on caves and other ancient plates left by the ancient Sumerians plainly stating that they were taught how to milk the animals by the gods.Please notice the following statement: 


“Sheep and goats were apparently the first animals utilized for milk, for legends of Sumerian origin tell how the gods taught men to drink milk from ‘their pure sheepfolds’ [Collier’s Encyclopedia, Vol. 7. p. 648]. 


These ‘gods’ were the fallen Sons of Elohim who are also known as Watchers. They married the daughters of men and became the fathers of giants. They introduced all sort of evil and perversion in this world. There are texts in the Bible which clearly sanction the eating of milk and dairy products. But the same Bible also sanctions other abominations: polygamy, wars and practice of slavery, killing of animals for food and sacrificial rites, monarchy, etc., which Jesus, James, and all other Ebionites flatly rejected. They agreed with Jeremiah that the Jewish Pentateuch was corrupted and falsified by the lying pen of the scribes [Jeremiah 8:8]. How could we even think that God could possibly have sanctioned and condoned these barbaric practices? If God really sanctioned the killing of animals and the milking of mammals or the shearing of sheep - why then do we find the following text in the Bible portraying God as saying: 


“You are doomed, you shepherds of Israel! You take care of yourselves, but never tend the sheep. You drink the milk, wear clothes made from the wool, and kill and eat the finest sheep. BUT YOU NEVER CARE FOR THE SHEEP...instead you treated them cruelly...I, Adonay Yahweh, declare that I am your enemy. I will take my sheep away from you and never again let you be their shepherds; never again will I let you take care only of yourselves. I will RESCUE my sheep from you AND NOT LET YOU EAT THEM” [Ezekiel 34:2-10]. 


“Act the part of the shepherd of a flock of sheep THAT ARE GOING TO BE BUTCHERED. Their owners kill them and go UNPUNISHED. They sell the meat and say, Praise Yahweh! We are rich! Even their own shepherds have no pity on them” [Zechariah 11:4-5]. 


Now Christian preachers will try to convince you that these texts are allegorical - that is, they should be applied spiritually. They will tell you that the sheep represent the Israelites while the shepherds their leaders. So as far as they are concerned the leaders are guilty for killing the Israelites and not the shepherds for killing sheep and drinking their milk. But this argument will not hold water. Every parable must first of all have its physical and literal application and only then can it be used to convey a symbolic or spiritual lesson. When Jesus used parables to convey his spiritual message the parables had to have a physical meaning and application first of all, if the audience was to understand its spiritual implication. These texts first of all must be applied physically and literally. Otherwise there can be no spiritual application unless we first comprehend the significance of the physical. It is generally assumed that animals were created so that man can exploit them to his own advantage. This supposition is wrong. When Adam was created he neither killed animals for food nor did he drink milk, eat dairy products or make clothes from wool. Adam was a VEGETARIAN. He could not have milked cows or other mammals because they simply had no milk. Neither Eve nor animals were created pregnant. God blessed all living creatures and gave them a command to multiply. All living creatures became pregnant AFTER they were created. Do you realise the significance of this fact? Cows did not produce milk until they actually gave birth. Therefore even if Adam wanted to drink milk he could not have done so until at least the first calf was born. Another fact you need to realise.


Mammals produce milk only when they need it to nourish their offspring. As soon as their young ones are weaned - the mothers CEASE TO LACTATE. Therefore nature itself teaches us that cows produce milk in order to feed THEIR young and not HUMANS or other specie. Most people find it perfectly normal to exploit cows and steal their milk from calves. Very few find this practice gruesome and abominable. Just because humans are more advanced and capable of exploiting animals that does not mean that what they do is in tune with NATURE - that is, the LAW Yahweh set in MOTION! Suppose “aliens” invaded out planet who are more advanced than our civilisation. Suppose they would be fond of HUMAN MILK and flesh. Suppose they would send human babies to slaughterhouses and WOMEN to DAIRY FARMS. Would you then think that their action can be justified just because they are more advanced than humans? There is very little difference between what the “aliens” would do to humans and what humans do to animals. When you really understand the nature of God - His perfect character, love and absolute justice - then you also realise how abominable humans are when they slaughter and exploit wonderful creatures God created to LIVE and SHARE this planet with us. You might think that the comparison I have given is absurd. You might think that nobody with high intellect would practice cannibalism. But don’t bet your life on it. In this day and age - yes, among the “civilised” human beings aborted human babies are sold and eaten in restaurants as SPECIAL DELICACIES. The following is quoted from EXPOSURE - The Magazine Of Future Developments: 


HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES IN CHINA - Aborted Babies Being Cannibalized - China’s huge abortion industry, fed by country’s brutality coercive population control program, has reportedly spawned a shockingly gruesome side market: the consumption of the bodies of aborted babies as food. The Hong Kong Eastern Express published the findings of reporters from its sister magazine Eastweek, last April 12. The reporters spoke to doctors and others in China who matter-of-factly described favorite recipes and extolled the “health benefits” of consuming the bodies of children killed by abortion...the human embryo-as-food trade is not illegal or underground in China. The Eastweek reporters were given specific directions on the best type of body to use and the best way to cook HIM or HER. Dr. Zou Qin expressed a preference for the children of “young women, and even better, the first baby and a male,” and claimed to have eaten 100 bodies in the past 6 months. She continued with a detailed explanation of how to prepare them: “I wash them with clear water until they look transparent white and then stew them. Making soup is best”...The reporters also found fervent advocates of the “health benefits” of eating unborn children. A female doctor at Shenzhen’s Sin Hua Clinic told them, “They can make your skin smoother, your body stronger, and are good for the kidneys”. Another man told the Eastweek reporters that he used to consume human placentas for health reasons, but gave them up when he began eating aborted babies. According to the UPI report, the man bragged that he cooked the bodies and “added ginger, orange peel, and pork to brew a soup which reported cleared up his asthma”. Usually, they are not eaten raw, but are cooked in a soup-like mixture, according to several doctors who were also quoted in the story...


According to Zia Qin, “The women who receive abortions here don’t want the foetuses. Also, the foetuses are already dead [when we eat them]. We don’t carry out abortions just to eat the foetuses”. Sound familiar? That’s the same argument used by Sen. Ted Kennedy, Rep. Joseph Kennedy, and cohorts, to justify FOETAL RESEARCH. So, what’s the difference? The Chinese are cooking them. We’re cannibalizing their body parts, turning them into human chop shops. And during the Presidential campaign, Clinton used the same logic as Dr. Zou Qin, almost verbatim, when he was asked whether he supported experimenting on human foetuses. Foetal research is going to help people and relieve their suffering, Clinton said, and besides, they’d only go to waste, so why not put them to good use? No one bothered to ask him: at what cost? In fact, one of Clinton’s first acts after being sworn in as president was to revoke the ban on using tax dollars to fund medical experimentation on unborn children. That’s right: your hard earned money is being used to pay for it. But, when foetal research is reported in the press, it’s with a positive spin. If you see it on the network news, it’s usually a story that relates the new and exiting advances being made allegedly in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. The film footage typically shows sufferers who have been restored to some measure of good health after undergoing treatment that involved the injection of foetal brain cells into their damaged brains. [In truth, there have been next to no examples of long term improvement, let alone recovery]. Not one word about the tiny human beings who were used, without their consent as donors.


Like the Chinese, scientists in America prefer older, more developed foetuses for their purposes. In the world of western medical research, full term foetuses are more desirable too, because the organs are more developed. So, before we get our high horse and start pointing at the Chinese in disgust, let’s remember what we tolerate in the United States. In the end, the blame, doesn’t rest solely with the American researchers who do the grisly deeds. It also rests on the people who allow it to happen, by looking the other way. If your inflamed by what’s going on China, take some of the indignation and use it to end cannibalism on our own soil. Speak for those who have no voice” [Liz Townsend and Katlen Howley]. 


Cannibalism may disgust you. But don’t forget that to a vegetarian, eating animal flesh is just as revolting. A baby of a cannibalist is brought up on human flesh and regards his way of life as NORMAL. Gradually it develops appetite for human flesh. The same is true of babies brought up on animal flesh and milk. Gradually they accept it as NORMAL. Man can train himself to eat any diet he wants.  To a vegetarian however - both practices are UNNATURAL and REVOLTING. Louis A. Berman quotes the following incident in his book Vegetarianism and the Jewish Tradition:


“The Andes crash of 1972 represents a recent and well documented case of cannibalism. Disaster struck a plane flying from Montevideo to Santiago, carrying fifteen young rugby players and twenty-five of their friends and relations, for a series of games. When the plane crashed among the peaks of the Andes, seven died from the crash or from avalanche that struck the fuselage. Thirty-two “survived seventy days in the bitter heights of the Andes by eating the flesh of their dead companions”. One survivor of the crash died of starvation because he could not bring himself to eat human flesh. Tannahill reports: The crash victims passed from revulsion to acceptance, and then to enjoyment of their new diet...They even began to develop gourmet tastes, favoring the brains and lungs...relishing the piquant flavor of flesh that had begun to decay” [Tannahill, Flesh and Blood, pp. 174-175]. 


The pre-deluvian civilisation was destroyed because it adopted the ways of the fallen Watchers. The Watchers introduced evil in this world. They taught men how to kill animals for food and eat their fellow men. They taught men how to produce alcoholic beverages and drink milk from certain animals. They also introduced sexual perversion among men. God destroyed the pre-deluvian world for the same sins now taking place in this world. This time, however, God will permanently destroy ALL BLOOD-THIRSTY HUMANS who prefer UNNATURAL over NATURAL. He will not allow EVIL to rise the “second time” [Nahum 1:8-9]. When Jesus lived on this earth he practiced absolute vegetarianism. This fact is documented elsewhere in my writings. Here however I want to refer to one text written in the Aramaic version of the Gospel of the Holy Twelve, attributed to the lips of Jesus: 


“For of the FRUITS OF THE TREES AND THE SEEDS OF THE HERBS ALONE DO I PARTAKE, and these are changed by the Spirit into my flesh and my blood. OF THESE ALONE AND THEIR LIKE SHALL YE EAT WHO BELIEVE IN ME, AND ARE MY DISCIPLES, for of these, in the Spirit, come life and health and healing unto man. Verily I say unto you, in the beginning, all creatures of Eloah did find their sustenance in the herbs and the fruits of the earth ALONE, till the ignorance and the selfishness of man turned many of them from the use which Eloah had given them, to that WHICH WAS CONTRARY TO THEIR ORIGINAL USE, but even these SHALL YET RETURN TO THEIR NATURAL FOOD, as it is written in the prophets, and their words shall not fail.” 


Jesus was a strict vegetarian and he also demanded that all those who believe in him and follow him adopt the same diet. Jesus maintained that the ignorance and selfishness of men corrupted and perverted the original way of life that God prescribed for all creatures. He insisted that yet once again will this vegetarian diet be implemented in this world as the prophets spoke. Prophets Isaiah wrote of these times and said the following: 


“The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the suckling child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice’s den. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of Yahweh, as the waters cover the sea” [Isaiah 11:6-9]. 


In that day every creature will return back to its original way of life - just as God  prescribed in the beginning. Then there will be no slaughterhouses, no dairy factories, and no killing and destroying - for the earth will be full of the KNOWLEDGE OF GOD. Now people do all sort of abominations and violence to their fellow creatures simply because they do not know God and what He stands for. But then people will know God and will finally learn to implement His Holy Law in their lives. Did you notice that Isaiah said that SUCKLING child will lead the wild animals and the WEANED child will play beside the hole of a snake? Isaiah knew the difference between SUCKLING and WEANED children. But we today do not know the difference. I hope that after reading this article you will come to realise that it is not right to steal milk from the  calves or other mammals and that you will leave the milk to infants. For even Paul, the founder of the Christian Church states that milk belongs to the “babes” while solid foods to the “adults.”               

Comments (3)Add Comment
written by Chris, April 22, 2011
will have to show this to my mom.. that heathen!
Thank you! :)
written by Jeni, October 21, 2012
I have to thank you, so very much, from the bottom of my heart..for this website and all the truth it tells...truth that I was seeking. I became a Vegetarian in January 2012, intent on working towards going Vegan. I became Vegan in the beginning of this month (October 2012), and I will never go back to consuming even a little meat, or dairy. As a Christian as well, my heart always told me that Yahweh was a Vegan, but the bible contradicted that and it tore me up inside. Thanks to you and your efforts, and articles, that Yahweh in fact was Vegan, my heart is happy and my soul at ease. So, again, thank you! Please keep this site going and the life-changing articles coming. Peace be with you, Jeni
written by dominick virgilio, November 26, 2012

Write comment

Last Updated on Saturday, 03 August 2013 10:51