Zone1 God's Covenant with Noah

[DukeU]

Wow, talk about inverting the truth. I have been saying repeatedly that as Christians we should want to honor God's perfect will and true intent for all creation... and to obey His commands to be merciful, which is stated throughout the bible. So I'M not the one arguing with God, you are! And you have yet to address any specific point I've made.

But as Carl said, I also don't want to get into yet another lengthy debate on this topic. I've been in so many debates on this topic, and it usually goes the same way. The response ALWAYS boils down to "We are allowed to do it"....which completely ignores the fact that just because we CAN do something (and even that is debatable) doesn't mean that we should.

Are you perfect?

Striving for perfection and achieving it are two different things.

Remove the plank from your own eye, and you will see clearly to remove the speck from mine.

 

[DukeU]

You are not leaning on scripture.

Should I post it again?

Here you go.


3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

 

[DukeU]

She speaks the truth. You lack understanding because of your cultural indoctrination

I can read and comprehend.

 

[buttercup]

Are you perfect?

Striving for perfection and achieving it are two different things.

Remove the plank from your own eye, and you will see clearly to remove the speck from mine.

Nope, I'm not perfect and never said I was.

But if I have the choice between cruelty or mercy.... why would I choose cruelty? Why would any Christian choose that?

 

[DukeU]

Nope, I'm not perfect and never said I was.

But if I have the choice between cruelty or mercy.... why would I choose cruelty? Why would any Christian choose that?

Killing an animal and eating it is not cruelty.

If it were, God would not have instructed us to do it.

 

[buttercup]

Should I post it again?

Here you go.


3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

You are continually ignoring everything that is being said.

Let me try this one more time. That scripture you keep pointing to is NOT God's perfect will. AT BEST it was a concession to the hard-hearted selfishness of mankind. Again, God's perfect will is made clear both in the beginning and in the end.

So your entire argument rests on "We are allowed to, so I'm going to do it."

You still haven't answered the question: what should sincere, practicing Christians aim for: God's perfect will or God's permissive will?

 

[buttercup]

Killing an animal and eating it is not cruelty.

If it were, God would not have instructed us to do it.

If someone slit your throat, hung you upside-down to bleed to death, because they wanted to eat your dead body.... when they didn't have to.... would that be cruel? Yes or no?

 

[DukeU]

You still haven't answered the question: what should sincere, practicing Christians aim for: God's perfect will or God's permissive will?

We should aim for perfection, but as you stated, you are not perfect.

So, why would you expect me to be?

 

[DukeU]

If someone slit your throat, hung you upside-down to bleed to death, because they wanted to eat your dead body.... when they didn't have to.... would that be cruel? Yes or no?

That would be against God's instruction, so yes.

Murder is clearly wrong as stated in God's word.

 

[buttercup]

We should aim for perfection, but as you stated, you are not perfect.

So, why would you expect me to be?

Ok, thank you! I truly appreciate your honest answer. But just because we're not perfect doesn't mean that we should never at least try to honor God's perfect will. In my experience, going vegan wasn't / isn't even hard to do.... it's so easy these days. The hard part is seeing the callousness toward animals and the absolute horror show they go through on a daily basis because of humans.

Anyway, I gotta go now, I haven't even eaten dinner yet. Hopefully Carl can continue here, since he and I have the same view on this topic.

 

[DukeU]

Ok, thank you! I truly appreciate your honest answer. But just because we're not perfect doesn't mean that we should never at least try to honor God's perfect will. In my experience, going vegan wasn't / isn't even hard to do.... it's so easy these days. The hard part is seeing the callousness toward animals and the absolute horror show they go through on a daily basis because of humans.

Anyway, I gotta go now, I haven't even eaten dinner yet. Hopefully Carl can continue here, since he and I have the same view on this topic.

Things that are easy for you may be hard for others.

My favorite meals all include some kind of meat, and I can't see myself giving it up.

But, like you, I absolutely love animals.

Me and the wife have many that we care for, from cats and dogs, to goats and horses.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

You are continually ignoring everything that is being said.

Let me try this one more time. That scripture you keep pointing to is NOT God's perfect will. AT BEST it was a concession to the hard-hearted selfishness of mankind. Again, God's perfect will is made clear both in the beginning and in the end.

So your entire argument rests on "We are allowed to, so I'm going to do it."

You still haven't answered the question: what should sincere, practicing Christians aim for: God's perfect will or God's permissive will?

It's like arguing that divorce is good and you should divorce for the least little offence. He's only interested in arguing

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Anyway, I gotta go now, I haven't even eaten dinner yet. Hopefully Carl can continue here, since he and I have the same view on this topic

I'm not in the mood to argue with anybody
My OP was simple. I wrote it to answer the common misconception that this covenant God made with Noah after the earth as we knew it was completely destroyed, applied to modern man who has access to more food than humanity ever had, should still be eating the carcasses of His creation. I say NO!

 

[BreezeWood]

Was God's covenant with Noah intended for all Mankind ...

a temporary heavenly acquittal ...

noah was simply the last before the conflagration would have been the permanent end of humanity - the heavens chose rather to destroy the evil before its final triumph giving humanity a second chance - for which there would not be heavenly intervention again till the final judgement.

 

[DukeU]

I say NO!

And you are entitled to your opinion.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

And you are entitled to your opinion.

How generous of you

 

[Quantrill]

Carl in Michigan

The Noahic Covenant was given to Noah and his seed after him. In other words it was to all of mankind. (Gen. 9:9) "And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you."

It is an 'everlasting covenant'. (Gen. 9:16) "And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth."

Quantrill

 

[MostBoringManInTheWorld]

Ok, thank you! I truly appreciate your honest answer. But just because we're not perfect doesn't mean that we should never at least try to honor God's perfect will. In my experience, going vegan wasn't / isn't even hard to do.... it's so easy these days. The hard part is seeing the callousness toward animals and the absolute horror show they go through on a daily basis because of humans.

Anyway, I gotta go now, I haven't even eaten dinner yet. Hopefully Carl can continue here, since he and I have the same view on this topic.

Bon appetit!

 

[Hafar1014]

Was God's covenant with Noah intended for all Mankind 4,000 years after the Flood, or was this for NOAH and the special circumstances he found himself under?

From a project I'm working on:

**Chapter 5

A World Without Fields, Orchards, or Stores**

Section 5.1 — Imagining the World After the Flood

When readers picture the end of the flood, they often imagine something close to the world we know today: animals grazing, plants growing, and Noah stepping out into a functioning ecosystem. Scripture, however, gives us reason to believe the reality was far harsher and far more fragile.

Genesis tells us the flood did not simply wash the earth clean; it undid creation itself. The separation of land and sea was reversed. Vegetation was destroyed. Topsoil was stripped away. What emerged from the waters was not a garden but a wounded planet.

There were no grain fields waiting to be harvested. No orchards heavy with fruit. No stored seed reserves. Noah and his family stepped into a world where survival itself was uncertain. The ark preserved life, but it could not preserve agriculture.

This matters, because ethical decisions in Scripture are often made within the context of necessity, not abundance. To read God’s words to Noah as though they were spoken in a stable, agricultural society is to miss the desperate reality of the moment.

Section 5.2 — Why Agriculture Could Not Yet Exist

Farming is not immediate. Even under ideal conditions, it requires prepared soil, seeds, seasons, and time. After the flood, none of these were guaranteed.

The earth had been submerged for months. Seeds in the ground would have rotted. Trees take years to mature. Vineyards take even longer. The idea that Noah could simply plant crops and wait is inconsistent with both Scripture and basic agricultural reality.

Genesis 8:22—“While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest… shall not cease”—is not a description of the present, but a promise for the future. It signals that predictable agricultural cycles were being re-established, not that they already existed.

In other words, God is not endorsing a preference for meat; He is responding to a world in which plant food was temporarily unavailable. This distinction between permission and preference is crucial for interpreting what follows.

Section 5.3 — Survival Permission Is Not Moral Ideal

In Genesis 9:3, God says, “Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. And as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything.” This verse is often treated as a universal endorsement of meat consumption for all people at all times.

But Scripture itself does not support that reading.

Throughout the Bible, God regularly permits actions He does not delight in because of human limitation or circumstance. Divorce is permitted because of hardness of heart. Monarchy is allowed despite God’s warnings. Warfare is regulated without being celebrated.

The flood covenant fits this pattern. God meets humanity where it is—hungry, vulnerable, and facing extinction—and allows what is necessary to preserve life. The presence of restrictions immediately following this permission, particularly the prohibition against consuming blood, suggests restraint rather than enthusiasm.

If eating animals were God’s original or ideal plan, it would not appear first as an emergency measure after a global catastrophe.


Section 5.4 — The Covenant Is Addressed to Noah, Not a Modern World


It is easy to forget that Genesis 9 is spoken to specific people in a specific moment. God speaks directly to Noah and his sons, survivors of a cataclysm unlike anything humanity has experienced since.


To apply this covenant uncritically to people living in a world of grocery stores, refrigeration, global agriculture, and plant-based abundance is to ignore the massive difference in context.


Modern humans do not eat animals because we must in order to live. We eat them because we prefer to. That distinction carries moral weight.


When necessity disappears, moral responsibility increases. The question shifts from “What is allowed?” to “What best reflects God’s character?” A concession made to preserve life in a broken world cannot be automatically elevated to a timeless ethical ideal.

Section 5.5 — Reading Genesis 9 in Light of Eden and the Kingdom

Scripture does not begin with Genesis 9, nor does it end there. It begins in Eden, where God gives plants for food and declares creation “very good.” It ends in a restored Kingdom where violence ceases and harmony is renewed.

Genesis 9 sits between these two bookends—not as a destination, but as a detour through a fallen world.

When we read Noah’s permission in isolation, it appears definitive. When we read it within the full arc of Scripture, it appears temporary. God’s trajectory moves away from violence, not toward it; toward restoration, not accommodation.

The question for Christians, then, is not whether eating animals is ever permitted. The question is whether continuing to do so—when survival no longer demands it—aligns with the world God originally created and the Kingdom Christ proclaimed.

Its an allegory taken from the end of the ice age called the
The end of the last ice age was briefly reversed by a,1,300-year cold snap known as the Younger Dryas (c. 12,900–11,700 years ago), caused by massive glacial meltwater floods disrupting Atlantic ocean currents. Named after the Dryas octopetala flower, it brought rapid cooling before final warming into the Holocene.

Key Facts About the Younger Dryas

• Time Period: Roughly 12,900 to 11,700 years before present (approx. 12,800–11,600

 

[the watcher]

The covenant said that he wouldn't destroy with water again. He didn't say anything about fire.