Genesis 6:21 and pre-flood food?

[Pudgy]

No it does NOT.

It speaks of an occasional snack or meal under dire need, but only for non Jews.

Carrion as a food “staple” is a statistical impossibility.

Even lions on an open prairie where they can range a 200 mile radius and more would starve. They have to eat every three days.

Statistically, most carrion will be poisonous because of the advanced stages of decay.

THAT’s WHAT CARRION IS !

[Many Miles]

25 minutes ago, Pudgy said:

Carrion as a food “staple” is a statistical impossibility. Even lions on an open prairie where they can range a 200 mile radius and more would starve. They have to eat every three days.

Statistically, most carrion will be poisonous because of the advanced stages of decay.

 

By "staple" I intended to convey common. When animals or humans get  hungry they look for food. We mainly eat to survive. If we have the option of being choosy then we might also defer to taste. But mainly we're trying to survive, especially was this so in the ancient world.

Early humans ate would they could live off of as best they could. When they happened upon carrion dead of natural cause if it was fairly fresh (e.g., less than 24 hours deceased) it would have been very edible if its skin were generally intact. Among large herd animals like the American Bison, when literally tens of millions of them roamed the western plains, it was not uncommon for ancient people to come upon hundreds or even thousands of them drowned in a stampeded to a river off a steep embankment. Of the flesh, it would be harvested and what was not eaten then could be dried for later use. This was the same way they stored vegetable matter for future nutrition.

Using fire to cook food was a means of making all foods even safer to eat, and by cooking food it also helped humans get more nutrition from the food they ate.

[Pudgy]

…

 

[Many Miles]

Here's a decent academic article addressing human use of carrion as food: https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/64/5/394/2754213

[Many Miles]

45 minutes ago, Pudgy said:

No it does NOT.

It speaks of an occasional snack or meal under dire need, but only for non Jews.

Please take a look at the title of this discussion. It's about pre-flood humans.

Prior to the flood there were no Jews as a people.

As for Deuteronomy 14:21, it was presented only to show that the Bible speaks (attests) to human eating of carrion dead of natural cause. Men like Elihu and Job and others like them were free to eat carrion dead of natural cause, they could even purchase it from a Jew if they wished.

[Many Miles]

34 minutes ago, George88 said:

What criteria do we use to determine the quality of processed meat? Can it be considered as neglected, decaying meat?

Could you provide an example of pre-flood humans consuming spoiled meat? It appears counterintuitive that they would not have taken precautions to properly handle the meat, such as preparing it immediately after a kill or upon discovering a carcass that was still edible. It stands to reason that humans would have been aware of the potential health risks associated with consuming rotten food, just as we are today.

You present Deuteronomy as evidence:

Is it possible that the words in Deuteronomy 14:21 could be misunderstood to imply that a devoted Jew, who is not a rabbi, can give away or sell meat from a deer that was hit by a car without having to bless it first? What if there was a sheep that accidentally fell off a cliff, and its Shepherd, who happened to be a Jew living in ancient Israel, that was bound by law yet not considered a Rabbi? It's fascinating how far we are willing to push our imagination.
 

Logical scriptural argument:

- If carrion was a kind of food eaten prior to the flood,

- Then carrion was stowed on the ark as food to be eaten by the human and animal passengers.

- Carrion was a kind of food eaten prior to the flood. “But this little fellow is essentially a scavenger, doing the work for which he was created: returning trash, garbage, and dead carcasses to the earth.” (Ref: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101992046?q=cockroaches&p=par , and Ps. 19:1)

- Carrion was stowed on the ark as food to be eaten by the human and animal passengers. Genesis 6:21 reads: “And on your part get yourself some of every kind of food that is eaten, and stow it with you, so as to have it for your eating and for theirs.” BLE(Ref: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/b/r1/lp-e/by/1/6 ) 

[Many Miles]

9 minutes ago, George88 said:

While your illustration may not provide concrete evidence of spoiled meat, it does serve as a reminder of the evilness of humanity and the reasons why God intended to destroy his creation. Although we can only speculate about the exact circumstances leading to God's decision, it serves as a cautionary tale about disobedience and carelessness with our lives. The fact that scripture describes specific types of edible foods suggests that humans were once closer to perfection than we are today, as we have a much greater capacity for imagination. 

George, 

Was it okay for early humans to feed their babies milk? 

if yes, why? 
 

if no, why?

[Pudgy]

3 hours ago, George88 said:

 … The fact that scripture describes specific types of edible foods suggests that humans were once closer to perfection than we are today, as we have a much greater capacity for imagination. 

That is the most insane conclusion I have read since last week’s Babylon Bee!

Although some scripture may be twisted into a pretzel to suggest a Snickers Candy Bar is nature’s most perfect food!

And just HOW do you know that less perfect people have a greater capacity for imagination?  

…. and describing edible foods is evidence of that?

YIKES!

[Pudgy]

…

 

 

[Many Miles]

12 minutes ago, George88 said:

What motivated you to shift the topic from spoiled meat to breast milk?

George,

Look at the title. This discussion is about pre-flood food.

So, my question to you remains:

 

Was it okay for early humans to feed their babies milk? 

if yes, why? 

if no, why?

[Many Miles]

7 minutes ago, George88 said:

There is no need to continue analyzing what has already been understood. While you may consider questioning someone's intelligence, that questioning is based on the sudden change from rotten meat to breast milk. Hence, my question persists as a lucid preoccupation.

Okay. I'll entertain your question asked of me in the hope that you will answer the question I asked of you.

You asked, "What motivated you to shift the topic from spoiled meat to breast milk?"

First, that question poses a falsehood. I have not shifted the topic from "spoiled meat" to milk.

In my second entry of this discussion I pointed to milk as a food item. Thereafter I pointed it out again, to you specifically. I raised this because of the subject matter, which is pre-flood food. My motivation is to examine the subject of what was used as food prior to the flood.

So nothing about my motivation has shifted. I'm still on the subject of the discussion.

So, my outstanding question to you remains, and is:

 

Was it okay for early humans to feed their babies milk? 

if yes, why? 

if no, why?

[Many Miles]

27 minutes ago, George88 said:

It is fallacious to believe that only you are entitled to ask questions. Such a conclusion lacks both logical reasoning and intuition. Enhance your knowledge on the subject to provide a truly intelligent response.

George, I have nowhere suggested that only am I entitled to ask questions. Where or how you came up with this notion is for you to explain. Just above I answered a question of yours. But, in response, my hope that you'd answer the extremely simple question asked of you was dashed by what appears to be abject refusal.

Was it okay for early humans to feed their babies milk? 

if yes, why? 

if no, why?