A Voice in the
Wilderness

site navigation

free newsletter

March 31, 2010

Return to: Q/A's
Q/A Topics:
Loving Everybody?

READER QUESTION:
How can one answer someone who goes on and on that God is love and we have to love one another. This is an attribute, love, of God but not the marshmallowy love they go on about.

VW ANSWER:
At the website a couple of links: But doesn't the Bible say that 'love' saves? - Q/A Do it in love - And also the upcoming June article "the Christian's Citizenship"

What is more loving than to "snatch" someone out of the fire; even at the risk of one's own life to do so? (Ju1:23, Jn15:13) And if someone is trapped, what is required to extricate them from the fire? Supposing they are the victim of a crime where somebody shackled them, the flames are closing in, but there is no key or tool to break the shackles, but there is an object by which to chop off their arm or leg, and thus get them free? What did Jesus say?

    Mt 5:30 And if your right hand snares you into sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, and not your whole body be cast into Gehenna.
In the case of apostates it's not so much an absence of "love", but what is the "focus" of our love? They want to "tear down walls" of doctrinal differences, and EVERYBODY LOVE ONE ANOTHER. They call 'everybody' their "brothers and sisters". (Even the parts guy at the Honda shop where I got a little seal/grommet for the 'Wing this past week was calling all his customers, "brother"...a 'brotherhood' of bikers?) But if they have abandoned "Doctrine", they are not our True "brothers" or "sisters"....in Christ. And Jesus said we can serve only One Master. (Mt6:24) We are NOT to "love the world" (1Jn2:15) John is quite clear that, if we love the world, we do NOT love the Father.

So the question is: Do we love -them- and their apostasy? or... Do we love God? We cannot love both. When John speaks of love, it is "love of the brethren" (1Jn3:14) Peter says the same thing. (1Pt1:22) Jesus' command to love one another was in the context of His "disciples"... Believers. (Jn13:35)

On the other hand, David speaks of "hate" and "enemies"... of those who hate God. (Ps139:21-22) (If we were meeting in a room I would ask us all to look up these passages, and we would read them together. While I don't always take up the space to paste them in here... please look them up and read them)

Yes....they will love each other...because they are not In Christ. Believers will love one another because we -are- in Christ. But it is a spiritual fact that the world and those of Christ are at "enmity" with each other (Ja4:4, Jn15:19, Rom8:7, 1Co2:14, Jn17:14, 1Pt4:4, etc); just as God and satan are at enmity with each other. If God and satan are enemies, so will be their followers with each other.

So... if they make the observation that a Believer, in their eyes, is lacking love (for them)... such a statement is actually an acknowledgement on their part that the Believer is not one of them. In other words, the Believer is apparently living such a life that is obviously distinct (by definition: "holy") from their apostasy. The Believer in such a case should rejoice. Apparently the holiness is -real- enough that it is being noticed... it is a testimony: both -for- God, and -against- their apostasy. Being, as Jesus said, "Lights" in the dark world, which "exposes/reproves" their apostasy. (Mt5:14, Eph5:11)

It's not that there isn't love. It's that the Believer's love is toward God. Theirs isn't. What they love (rebellion against God), the Believer hates. What the Believer loves (faithfulness to God's holiness), they hate. And as such...

    "Can two walk together except they are agreed?" (Am3:3)

[Top]


Blood: raw meat?

READER QUESTIONS:
The other day i was browsing through your website and i stumbled across a response to a question about drinking blood i believe. From what i read many people in satanic cults perform rituals in where they drink blood, but my question to you about the writing is in regards to cooked meats. My father moved to North America a while back and when he came here he noticed that when people ordered their meats lots of times they would come still red all the way through blood dripping on the plate. Where he came from, meats were always cooked through. So what i am wondering is, those steaks that come back rare, medium rare or medium with still a red color in the center, does eating them mean that we are drinking blood? If consuming those raw pieces of meat is un-biblical, what about sushi? is not sushi raw as well? you might know more about that than me, since you were born in Japan. There is an example that comes to mind, in Spain they eat whats called 'morcilla' and basically what it is, is fried pigs blood cooked with rice, garlic and other ingredients that are shaped into a sausage...since the pigs blood is cooked is that wrong?If you could explain to me what the bible has to say about eating meat and the way it should be cooked that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you,

VW ANSWER:

ITEM:
So what i am wondering is, those steaks that come back rare, medium rare or medium with still a red color in the center, does eating them mean that we are drinking blood?

VW:
I believe so. I never eat meat that way. And everytime there is a 'scare' and the government starts quarantining meat due to ebola or whatever other things, I mutter back at the TV (the news that is reporting the matter)... "JUST COOK IT!" (Stop wasting resources!)

When Saul's men were eating the spoils "with the blood" (1Sam14:33), the solution was to set up a stone, light a fire, and 'cook' the meat.

ITEM:
Is consuming those raw pieces of meat un-biblical?

VW:
I believe so.

ITEM:
what about sushi? is not sushi raw as well?

VW:
Actually, "sushi" is the little rice cake that is wrapped and stuffed. I believe "sashimi" is the raw fish. Thus sushi might -contain- sashimi, either draped on the top, or as part of what is stuffed inside....is how I understand it. Thus also, sushi does not contain, by definition, raw fish....but it can...and often does.

When I pick from a sushi bar, I try to pick what I can see (or presume) does not have 'raw' fish. I am no expert in the 'art' of preparing sushi....but I've seen some documentaries that tell how an expert chef will prepare extremely poisonous fish (apparently a 'delicacy' in Japan) in a way that it does not kill people....but if he doesn't prepare it JUST SO, that the eater will die. As a child, when -in- Japan, I remember eating 'raw' fish (I think, carp) (that is....the whole fish on the plate, head, entrails, fins, scales) only one time. And at that, I seem to remember eating only a couple of bites. Lots of rice stuffed in the mouth, and a tiny piece of the fish, after being dipped in a hot sauce. I did not like it. We were 'visiting' someplace where it was served, and that was a one-time-only event for me. However....I do not know the specifics about blood in fish. I also only eat fish 'cooked'. I like 'kippered' salmon....which seems (close as I can tell) to be a 'smoked' (?) process....and I've never sensed the presence of fresh blood in it. (Although, the place I used to buy it no longer carries it, and haven't been able to find it anyplace else in town... Snacking on kippered salmon is waaaay yummier than a piece of candy!!!)

ITEM:
There is an example that comes to mind, in Spain they eat whats called 'morcilla' and basically what it is, is fried pigs blood cooked with rice, garlic and other ingredients that are shaped into a sausage... since the pigs blood is cooked is that wrong?

VW:
Personally, I would put that in the same category as British (?) "blood pudding". God's command was to -drain- the blood, pouring it out on the ground (De15:23) and cook the meat. I don't think 'collecting' the blood and preparing -it- follows those guidelines.

ITEM:
If you could explain to me what the bible has to say about eating meat and the way it should be cooked that would be greatly appreciated.

VW:
At the website, clicking on TopicSearch and scrolling down the 'left' box to "blood" will result in some limited mentions, if you use your browser's Ctl-F feature within those articles. Searching with "raw" or "rare" also gives limited results. It seems this subject has been mostly touched on "in-passing".

Since I don't know the scientific ramifications, I don't know how to tell somebody else when blood is blood, and when it ceases to be blood. I do for myself according to conscience. Paul speaks of personal decisions regarding foods (1Co6:13, 1Ti4:3, Col2:21-23) and also that meat is meat (1Co8:4, 9:4, 10:25-26), even if the heathens had offered it to idols....since idols are nothing, and meat is meat.

Insert: After the rest of this item was mailed, a subscriber who is a hunter replied with some explanations of 'hanging' and 'cooling' meat, 3 to 4 days, to drain the blood. Thus... that the cooked (red) 'juices' are (allegedly) not "blood". And also that -cooking- does not make any blood cease to be blood. But he did not answer how Saul's men, then, cooking the meat, 'solved' the problem of them eating "with the blood". Even though Saul was rebelling against God, one would think that he knew the Kosher custom. Thus, I still have to say that "I don't know" the physiological ramifications.

But the matter of the 'blood' goes back even before Moses. God spoke to Cain about Abel's blood "crying" up from the ground. (Ge4:10) But the first actual -law-, that is recorded, came to Noah after the flood. There seems to be a subliminal -cult- today that holds to what they call the "Noahide Laws". I don't know everything that is on their list. But from Scripture it is clear that God mentions the blood. (Ge9:1-6) Both in the matter of human murder; and of eating animal flesh and its blood.

Thus, to my own mind: if something is being brought out, still swimming in the red liquid, and the meat is still red, and you poke it with a fork and more red liquid comes squishing out....such meat has not been adequately 'cooked'. It is still IN ITS BLOOD. The way I understand the matter, such a serving should not be eaten until the blood has been thoroughly cooked out of it. I would rather gnaw on something that's OVER-cooked, than slurp the blood juices of something that was merely lightly seared. That's my 'take' on the matter.

But Paul also wrote Romans ch14. What is another person's understanding of -when- blood ceases to be blood. They eat "in faith". But if they go contrary to what their heart knows, in faith....

    "...whatever is not out of faith is sin" (Rom14:23b)

[Top]


Return to: Q/A's