Many people who enjoy gluttony seek texts to justify their wrongdoings, and bind that the man who seeks to destroy his body by gluttony is also following the ways of God. Such people have the ability to nullify reasoning. For example, supposing there is a God who knows all things, and who has created man, such God knows the rules of health, and that health rules favor the proper functioning of the body. Now the good functioning of the body favors all understanding of the mind, that is, "sound mind in body are", determines that a bad diet, impairs the ability to think, and disrupts the mechanisms of the body.
A person who wants to eat a variety of foods without worrying about their health can become obese, and because they are obese they will have pressure problems, problems with diabetes, difficulty in mobility and others. Let's say we have two missionaries, one healthy and one who did not take care of his health and became obese, which of the two will be more fit mentally and physically? Remember that obesity also impairs proper brain function.
Now irrationally people use the text of 1 Corinthians 6:13 to say that God does not care about what is done with health. As the text says , " Food is for the stomach and the stomach for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them " 1 . With that text such personal irrationally imagines that one can eat anything. The point is that such people have stopped thinking, let's think for a moment in the text. " The food is for the stomachWe do not have to chew, salivate, then in the stomach reactions mainly occur with proteins, then we have the duodenum and emulsions with fat, then we have the various bile salts, then we have the intestine and When you eat the food disappear in the stomach, what is the purpose of the intestine? See that today we do bariatric operations and remove the stomach, so if you remove the stomach, you do not have to eat anymore? that the individual irrationally put the text of 1 Corinthians 6:13 to justify that eating anything is accepted by God, he did not even reason in the text.In average, these factors happen because many people participate in religious communities that do not teach to think,are like parrots that repeat the texts without thinking of the meaning.
If we use the minimum of intelligence we have that the " stomach is for the food, and the food is for the stomach " 1 , we also have that the food is for the intestine, the duodenum, the mouth, and for the body, since without food the body dies. The text says " The body is not for immorality, but for the Lord " 1, here it says that the body is not for immorality, so the body is also not for food? See the irrational person reads that food is for the stomach, and automatically its irrationality leads to saying that food is not for the body. Now food is for the body, the text did not say that food is not for the body, it says that food is for the stomach, but it does not say that food is only for the stomach. The irrational person likes to add something that is not in the text. Now the food is also for the body, and also for the stomach, and also for the gut, and also for the mouth. Now the body is not for immorality, and this does not determine that food is not for the body, but only determines that immorality is not for the body. The text says that the body is for the Lord. Now what body is for you? The term body is "2,3 , which comes from the radical "???? s?z?" 4 , which defines healing, saving, protecting 4 .
We have, for example, the text " God will annihilate both one and the other " 1 , but then will God destroy the stomach and the food? Then man will exist without stomach and there will be no food? Then man will have mouth, intestine, pancreas, heart, only God will do a bariatric operation, because he has no stomach, so he does not need food? The great problem of various religions is that they do not develop the act of thinking, and thus create people without reason. For example we have " To him who overcomes, I will give him to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God. " 5, now if God destroyed the stomach, and destroyed the food, then how will anyone eat something? No stomach, and stomach is the only food? The body is not? Why and what is the fruit of life doing that has not been destroyed?
Of course we have another text: " But I say unto you, that from this time on I will not drink of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new to you in the kingdom of my Father. " 6 Have not the fruits been destroyed? Was not the stomach destroyed? How will Jesus in the sky drink grape juice, as he drank in the holy supper if he has no stomach? Is there not even grapes? This is because the person does not seek to think about what he is reading and the consequences of his ideology.
Then how to understand the term " God, however, will annihilate both one and the other " 1 , for this we must understand the term to annihilate. The term is "???????? katarge?" 7 , which has two radicals, "???? kata" 8 , and "arge?
arg-eh'-o" 9 , we can find the application of the term in the verse " Then the end will come when he surrenders the kingdom to God the Father, when he has destroyed all dominion, and all authority and all power " 10 , then we have that verse says that all power will be destroyed? If we read in one of the radicals of the term we have " exceeding, X more excellent, mightily, more, natural X,8 , we must destroy every domain will also destroy the dominion of God? Not the issue is to turn the domain to be dominated by the correct. See that the food and the stomach will not be destroyed ceasing to exist, but transformed. " and we shall be changed " 11 , that is, the food and the stomach will be transformed into the purified case. So all the texts will work accordingly. That is, Jesus will drink grape juice, with a transformed grape, that will go to a transformed stomach, and one can eat of the fruit of life having a transformed stomach. In other words, when one correctly analyzes the verse, all the verses are united and so everything has meaning.
Why should we be transformed, should we eat any food to destroy the body? Now if everything will be transformed so that we take care of this body? We have the text " So whether you eat or drink, or should do, anything else, do all to the glory of God. " 12 . Let's therefore think, something that many people when citing texts do not. If you eat and drink for the glory of God how you do it. An irrational would think that a feast with drunkenness, and food at a feast would be to the glory of God, but that is not God's glory, eating food that does ill health is not to the glory of God. Only an irrational would imagine that people seeing a person destroying their health with unhealthy food is something to the glory of God.
An irrational person always thinks of the excuse to cancel something, for example if I say that eating unhealthy foods is to destroy the body, then the irrational automatically idealizes that prostitution is not, to say that go against what was said about food, now prostitution is destruction of the body, and poor nutrition as well. Anything that is not good is bad, the point is that the irrational want only to go against the general view of what is good. What We Have " As for the rest, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, whether there be any virtue and if there be any praise, think on these things. " 14, so the act of nourishing properly is a good thing, and not only nourishing but all things, being kind, working, responsible, everything.
The irrational ones imagine that the concept of sin is only for one kind of bad action, but not " He who knows how to do good and does not do it, commits sin ", 15 the view of sin is in everything that is not good. So if I know that one food is good and another is bad, if I eat the bad rather than the good then according to the text 15, I commit sin. The irrational man to go against determines another concept, that if I eat a tomato, this will have pesticide, so I will not eat. Now the text about destroying the stomach, or food is linked to that tomato and all food will be transformed, but the text says to do the best, that is, if I have the ability to eat the best and healthiest food possible, in the greatest possible time of life, then I am following the correct, even knowing that such food is not the perfect food that will be in Heaven.
Just as if I do something that I think is good, it may be bound to some inner error, so will I stop doing good to only do evil? Logic that no, man should try to do the best he can be in actions, whether in food, in thought, or in everything. The point is that the irrational always seek to find an excuse that can never be thrown into the generic. So they are biased. Such things happen because of desire, and pleasures. For example, is it good to take care of health, feed yourself with the best foods that you can get, have a diet with all the necessary nutrients?
Of course, those who seek their pleasures will seek in everything to justify their evil deeds, because of their desires. Already imagined the irrationalities exposed by them, I determined some histories that such irrational people seek. The first would be a Christian who was arrested and given flesh to eat, and only flesh. Is such a Christian going to lose himself by eating meat? Now sin is not in eating the flesh, the sin is in having the right to choose the best and choose the worst. Now between eating meat and dying of hunger, life is better, so eating meat is better than dying of hunger. Soon the person did not sin because he made the best decision.
What is totally different between this in front of the individual a restaurant with healthy vegetarian concepts, and a churrascaria, in which the individual decides between the healthy or greasy, now the person has sinned by eating meat? Of course she did not sin because she could have chosen the best and opted for the worst. This is a sin, for " He who knows how to do good and does not sin commits sin " 15 , see that sin is not always in the food, but in the decision. For eating meat instead of dying is correct, eating meat for pleasure as it does not want a healthy choice is a sin.
See that sin always occurs in decisions, whatever they are, a good decision is not sin a bad decision is sin. But even after all these analyzes, the slave of his pleasures will never free himself from his concepts to go to the best, which is easy for any child to know. But the pleasures make such decided irracinais people, as the text " Because time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but having itching to hear nice things, heap to themselves teachers after their own desires " 16 .
Novidades, e respostas das perguntas de nossos colaboradores
Visite o nosso canal youtube.com/buscadaverdade e se INSCREVA agora mesmo! Lá temos uma diversidade de temas interessantes sobre: Saúde, Receitas Saudáveis, Benefícios dos Alimentos, Benefícios das Vitaminas e Sais Minerais... Dê uma olhadinha, você vai gostar! E não se esqueça, dê o seu like e se INSCREVA! Clique abaixo e vá direto ao canal!