Handling the Word of God aright!
that ye may learn in us the lesson of not letting your thoughts go above what is written, that ye may not be puffed up one for such a one against another.
1 Cor 4:6
The purpose of this discussion is to assemble the various scriptures that shed light on Antediluvian society's eating habits after Adam's sin. An attempt at not going beyond what is written will be rigorously enforced. If the reader deems that I have failed, please let me know where and how with scriptures.
Of course, if Archeology ever got its priorities together and looked at the available evidence unbiasedly, then perhaps it might provide such testimony. That is not likely to happen in a world ruled by Satan.
The few things we are told about the diet of Adam and Eve are from following scriptures.
Gen
1:29, And God said, Behold, I have given to you every seed-bearing herb sowing seed which is upon all the earth, and every tree which has in itself the fruit of seed that is sown, to you it shall be for food. (AB)
2:16, And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: (KJV)
3:19, In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou shalt return to the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou [art], and to dust shalt thou return. (Webster)
But after they sinned, Bible readers know that God cursed the ground of the earth. In Gen 3:17-19, we see,
. . . cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; 18Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; 19In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (KJV)
The garden of Eden diet included bread, "seed-bearing herb sowing seed", and "every tree which has in itself the fruit of seed." Once the ground had been cursed, it had an immediate effect on their diet. Human nature being what it is, the following question is natural: Is it then in accord with human nature to fight with a ground that doesn't produce food and for a person to go hungry when a fat chicken is within reach, perhaps walking right by? There is really no point to the question. It's simply against human nature not to go for such a chicken in best KFC style. The old Charlie Chaplin movie proved that point, when Charlie even started believing his friend was a chicken!
Even the fact that God taught them that it was alright to kill animals is an indication in itself. That it was alright to do so for the sake of clothing themselves was of itself an invitation to kill for food when hungry. That is of course an opinion, but is it a baseless opinion?
Genesis 3:21 And the Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.
As it states, God made sure that life would be hard and that people would have to work hard to grow food from the ground.
Thus when we read that the general population in a sense were demon inspired to the degree evidenced in the scripture quoted below, we start seeing what reasonably might be true in regard to man's Antediluvian diet.
And God seeing that the wickedness of men was great on the earth, and that all the thought of their heart was bent upon evil at all times (Genesis 6:5, DRC)
These wicked people would not care about what God had told Adam and Eve to eat. Thus, the eating of meat would be no great evil and badness considering what they were doing to each other. The Holy Word of God nowhere states that the offspring of Adam and Eve kept on exclusively eating non-meat. (Genesis 2:16-17, Genesis 3:17-19)
As to the technological development of these early people, we see that already in Gen 4:22 people were familiar with copper and iron. This necessitates familiarity with fire, very hot fire, and to make bread one must have an oven and more fire.
Tubal-Cain; he was a smith, a manufacturer both of brass and iron
Coming back to the prior subject, there are scriptures that provide us with a probability that they were meat eaters. Here a sidestep is necessitated! When has Jehovah ever issued pointless prohibitions. Never ever! Would a society make a law not to steal if there were no thieves about? No. Has Jehovah ever told us not to build houses on the moon, or has he ever told us not to enter the heavenly holy places. Why not! Because such prohibitions would be ridiculous since they serve no purpose!
In a similar vein, to demonstrate the logic behind this, why do you think that Paul in the qualifications for Elders and ministerial servants commanded that each should have only one wife? Obviously, because some Jews who had converted and had become Christians had more than one wife! Hence, Paul made sure that those who would be setting an example in the Christian congregation would only be good examples in having but one wife!
Divine prohibitions are not pointless. This we must understand
Why then did Jehovah command Noah and his family to not eat blood with the flesh?
Genesis 9:3-4, And every thing that moveth and liveth shall be meat for you: even as the green herbs have I delivered them all to you: 4Saving that flesh with blood you shall not eat. (DRC)
Perhaps, they were already eating both blood and flesh. No one can show that they didn't already eat blood before the deluge or during the one year in the Arch; likewise, no one can show that they did. Except! There is no law without a reason! Those who disagree should try to answer the following:
why did God make the Israelites divide animals into clean and unclean? For the sake of eating naturally. The division of clean and unclean animals that Noah obviously was aware of —
had nothing to do with some animals being cleaner or dirtier than other animals – it was not because some animals took more baths than others.
The only explanation for the distinction Noah was aware of — is the motivation for eating them! Jehovah didn’t have to teach him which were clean or unclean when he spoke about that subject; Noah already knew this perhaps from prior personal or ancestor-given revelations. Why would he have need for such knowledge if he didn't eat meat?
Genesis 7:1-3, And the Lord said to him: Go in thou and all thy house into the ark: for thee I have seen just before me in this generation. 2 Of all clean beasts take seven and seven, the male and female. 3But of the beasts that are unclean two and two, the male and female. Of the fowls also of the air seven and seven,the male and the female: that seed may be saved upon the face of the whole earth. (DRC)
Not only did Noah know which animals were clean and unclean. God told him to take many more clean animals into the Ark. Why? Did they serve as a food source during that one year?
There are just too many unknowns. Such as, do not forget that Abel was a sheepherder. His ability to readily kill — an ability that most city folks do not have—could be taken as an indication that he was a meat eater.
How would he know that the “fatty pieces” would be the best? (Gen 4:4) Experience perhaps! If he had never killed and eaten an animal such knowledge would be mysterious!
Thus as is plainly seen,
the probability that pre-flood people ate meat from this presentation is nigh certain. But a near miss is still a miss! Therefore, the above realities do not constitute proof that antediluvian people ate meat; neither do they prove the reverse, that they didn't. This is an example of trying to handle the word of God aright.
2 Timothy 2:15, Give diligence to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, handling aright the word of truth. (ASV)
1 Corinthians 4:6, Now these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes; that in us ye might learn not to go beyond the things which are written; that no one of you be puffed up for the one against the other. (ASV)
We must be careful not to go around creating false stories that cannot be proved and that violate that which is holy. (1 Timothy 4:7) Let us always strive to handle the Word of God aright and not going beyond what is written, neither adding nor subtracting from it so as not to anger our heavenly Father.
Revelation 22:18-19, I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto them, God shall add unto him the plagues which are written in this book 19and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life, and out of the holy city, which are written in this book. (ASV)
The information here then stresses the fact that in regard to the Antediluvian's diet, we are ignorant as to what it was! The Bible does not contain conclusive evidence pro or con as to the eating of meat.
There are some Archaeological discoveries pointing in one direction, but this too seems to be of such kind that each individual has to decide upon it since the world of science frowns upon the Biblical concept of a world-wide flood.
