What is an overview of Christian viewpoints on why God sanctioned eating meat after the fall if veganism was already the pre-fall standard?

score:2

Accepted answer

Background information regarding the state of humanity prior to the flood: The depravity and ungodly lifestyles of the entire world at that time were enough to cause the Lord to “regret that He had made man” (Genesis 6:1-6).

Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight, and the earth was filled with violence. And God saw the earth, and behold, it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth (Genesis 6:11-12).

Noah, on the other hand, is described as a “preacher of righteousness” (2 Peter 2:5), suggesting he had spent years warning his friends and neighbours what the Holy God was about to do. No one listened. After the flood waters had receded God told Noah that it was permissible to eat animal flesh (but not to consume the blood).

You ask: Why did God eventually sanction animal-based diets after the fall? Was it for nutritional reasons or something else?

The Bible does not say. A Christian scholar (of the Reformed Protestant persuasion) by the name of Matthew Henry presents “the Magna Charta—the great charter of this new kingdom of nature which was now to be erected, and incorporated, the former charter having been forfeited and seized.” Here is a relevant paragraph from his commentary:

  1. A grant of maintenance and subsistence: Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you, v. 3. Hitherto, most think, man had been confined to feed only upon the products of the earth, fruits, herbs, and roots, and all sorts of corn and milk; so was the first grant, ch. 1:29. But the flood having perhaps washed away much of the virtue of the earth, and so rendered its fruits less pleasing and less nourishing, God now enlarged the grant, and allowed man to eat flesh, which perhaps man himself never thought of, till now that God directed him to it, nor had any more desire to than a sheep has to suck blood like a wolf. But now man is allowed to feed upon flesh, as freely and safely as upon the green herb. Now here see, (1.) That God is a good master, and provides, not only that we may live, but that we may live comfortably, in his service; not for necessity only, but for delight. (2.) That every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, 1 Tim. 4:4. Afterwards some meats that were proper enough for food were prohibited by the ceremonial law; but from the beginning, it seems, it was not so, and therefore is not so under the gospel. Source: https://www.christianity.com/bible/commentary.php?com=mh&b=1&c=9

I have no idea what other Christian denominations think about this, and time does not permit me to investigate further. Suffice to say that sometimes, when the Bible is silent on a matter, we simply do not need to know. Curiosity and speculation are normal, but ultimately unsatisfying.

Further on in the commentary, Henry notes that although God had granted man dominion over animals, yet they were subjects to the Creator, and under the restraints of his law. Henry’s commentary goes on to discuss the Noahic covenant in Genesis chapter 6. He concludes:

Noah lived to see two worlds, but, being an heir of the righteousness which is by faith, when he died he went to see a better than either.

Additional information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Henry

https://www.gotquestions.org/eating-meat-with-blood.html

https://www.gotquestions.org/dominion-over-animals.html

https://www.gotquestions.org/Noahic-covenant.html

Upvote:-1

I have wondered if God allowed meat after the flood because there was not a better option at this point in history. Man had become so corrupt that the destruction of almost every living thing was necessary, though not ideal. It had to happen for mankind to continue. Likewise, allowing meat was a necessary allowance predicated on mankind's inability to do better at this point. This exhibits Gods incredible grace and patience to allow mankind to exist until Christ would come and restore creation.

Also, it could be, based on the Genesis account of all animals living on plants, and the image in scripture of the lion laying down with the lamb in a redeemed creation, that God's ideal is nonviolence, which would logically exclude the eating of meat.

One last bit of conjecture; when God used animal skins to cloth Adam and Eve, rather than God killing an animal to do it, it could be that an animal died because death entered into the world when sin entered. It could have been an accident, a violent attack by another animal or a disease. No violence on God's part would have been necessary.

More post

Search Posts

Related post