By: Martin Cisneros
The Hosea 2:18; Jeremiah 31:27-28 covenant amends the New Covenant and dictates that we give up animal exploitation for pleasure, profit, etc., etc. 1Corinthians 8:13 says that if meat grieves my brother, then I'll never eat it again. And thousands of Christians are deeply offended by animal eating Christians, and some sects of Buddhism and Hinduism will never ever be evangelized by flesh eating Christians. It's time for Creation to be set free from it's frustration, futility, and corruption and to enter into the liberties of the children of God, according to Romans 8:21.
Real Christians don't eat flesh, with the one exception of the Bread and Cup of Christianity. Proverbs says that a righteous man regards the life of a beast, while the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel. Are any of your "tender mercies" or anything you'd regard as "humane" that would be regarded as cruelty in the eyes of anyone else on earth? Then the Bible judges you as being wicked with that verse in Proverbs. Isaiah 30:23-26 says that the generation that would see the Twin Towers disaster would see God's attention beginning to turn towards the animals to show them mercy.
Hosea 2 says that those who were not His people will be His people, and all of that is in the context of the Hosea 2:18 covenant although I realize that St. Paul spiritualized the usage of that passage in Romans and found it to be a double-reference to both animals and gentiles. But it's primary meaning in Scripture is not set aside thereby. Mark 4:30-32 says that when the Kingdom of Christ is reaching maturity that the birds would be able to rest in the branches of it. Who can rest when their cousins are being roasted in some restaurant and especially by those who supposedly know the Covenant?
1Timothy 4 says that bodily exercise in abstaining from meat profits a little in this life. And if St. Paul said that discouraging marriage in that passage was demonic, in the way that many Christians try to interpret 1Timothy 4, then Jesus and St. Paul are both guilty of that because they both said that if there's any remote possible way that you can abstain from marriage, then it would be in your best interests. Consequently, since St. Paul merged his two statements in 1Timothy 4 together about marriage and abstaining from the flesh of animals; i.e. abstaining from human flesh and from animal flesh, then neither of them can be taken as unequivocally demonic as many Christians misread what may have been tongue in cheek by Paul who soon afterwards said that bodily exercise in these matters is profitable for this life, but don't stop there because pursuing the rest of godliness has promise for this life and the life to come. And Romans 14:21 says that it is good for Christians not to eat flesh and to drink alcohol. He put 'em in the same category as far as their effects on the body as well as their relative usefulness to the body. They're not. He says right there in Romans that it hinders the work of God.