This veggie thing is an interesting topic.  The primary problem with eating
less meat is that it takes more time in preparation.  My family has found
that we feel better and are in general more healthy when we eat less meat.
When we start (yet again) on this type of regimen, we do OK for 2 or 3
weeks, and then fall back to our old evil ways!

But it is clear to me that when we take the WoW at its exact wording (as
interpreted by me, of course :-) we do gain more blessings.  This is a good
prompting for me - we shall go back to eating less meat.  it's also cheaper!
I'll let you know when we are translated.


Marc A. Schindler wrote:

There's been a lot of discussion about this. My own opinion is that, given
patterns of the day, the sentence is parsed better with a comma after
"used". In
other words, it *does* restrict meat to only times of winter or hunger.  The
phrase "not be used only" is anachronistically late 20th century. Otherwise
appears to be self-contradictory, unless you're living mostly in times of
and hunger. In any case, I don't think it's a big deal, but it certainly
isn't a
justification for vegetarianism, as good an idea as vegetarianism may be
(but for
others, not me!)

"John W. Redelfs" wrote:

> After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:
> >So exactly what does (paraphrasing from memory) the following mean: "eat
> >meat sparingly and only in the winter" ?
> That is not what it says.  It says,  "Eat meat sparingly and they should
> not be used only in times of winter or hunger."  To me that clearly means
> that we should not limit our use of these things to winter or hunger.  But
> that we are to eat meat sparingly at all times.

///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///      ///

This email was sent to:

Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!

Reply via email to