In the same vein there is

The Liberation Diet Haven't read it, but heard him speak at Wise Traditions and wasn't impressed with his awkward use of Bible verses out of context to make them seem like diet advice.

The Maker's Diet Also haven't read it, but I hear it's a Jewish version.

Our diet works, it makes sense a diverse group of people would discover it through trial and error.

A buddy of mine put it simply: "Eat God's food, be healthy." That seemed to make the most sense to me in terms of my faith in Christianity. Stay away from the man-made stuff, at least for the most part, and we should be just fine.

I don't know what to think but I am interested in seeing how this discussion develops. I recently discovered that Tropical Traditions, as a business, is actively involved in promoting the Creationist agenda and have therefore stopped supporting them with my business. That was a very painful decision as I have been a loyal customer for years. I am fairly certain nothing I read here will change my mind about that decision (I cannot have my money going to further an idea I am so strongly against) but I would love to find some way to reconcile. at least to some degree, my beliefs and my lifestyle with those who believe very differently from me. I live in a very liberal area so I am not often challenged in this way so seeing things through a different lens is sometimes a huge challenge for me.

In the end though the goal of all of this is better health and if using a different language to support similar ideas gets people to make healthy changes I guess it's hard to find too much wrong with that.

Edit: I added this statement as a comment but it's off the main page now so thought I'd add it to my original post.

Just wanted to add that I have NO problem with anyone's personal beliefs. What got me with TT was that these are not simply personal beliefs but they are using their profits and the business name to actively encourage Creationism. Once they bring the business into it they bring ME into it because their business gets my money. I feel at least some duty and obligation not to support things that I truly don't agree with. They can do as they please but don't involve me thank you very much.

I like to look at the scientific evidence and then proportion my beliefs to that. It serves me well. If I assume a bias, even the paleo bias, I end up getting things wrong. Like eating grains. We are either smarter than god or god wants us to eat pathological foods. Or the other option. Probably that one.

this excellent article has been posted before:

http://www.reforminghealth.com/Wheat_and_the_Bible.pdf

The author knows how to properly exegete the relevant texts, and competently explain the historical circumstances surrounding the texts, etc. Highly recommended.

I love paleo (all the great food that I can have), but have had issues when talking with my more 'religious' friends,

I have had this issue at times, as well. On a related front, I was once an adament YEC (Young Earth Creationist) but have spent a considerable amount of time researching other views on the biblical narrative. I'm quickly arriving to the conclusion that the Genesis narrative, if for Christians taken as a divinely inspired record of true events and not just communal myths, doesn't really lend any details that rules out theistic evolution. And I mean in terms of evolution as generally consonant with the findings in several branches of science. Even moreso, the narrative seems to indicate it is merely dealing with a discrete but significant branch of human history; some details indicate the setting is a world already inhabited by human populations, and in fact presupposing the advent of farming techniques. The text's purposes is not to give a comprehensive snapshot of all history as it was, so I believe the debate is largely misguided.

For more info and healthy, informed discussion from Christians deeply involved in various sciences as well these questions, spend some time going through the journals and articles here:

http://asa3.org

As well as here:

http://www.genesisproclaimed.org/home.asp

So all this to say that since the biblical narrative is more narrow in its intent and content than many would believe, it is not a field guide to diet and nutrition. As wel,l the historical distance between then and now precludes comparisons to what probably were the available food sources then and our modern food sources.

.02

I'm not familiar with Body By God, but it sounds as though it may be similar to The Maker's Diet? I haven't read that yet either, but my friend that gave me the kick start to eating real food was quite enamored with it for awhile.

I consider myself a WAPFer, though I mostly eat in line with Primal (lacto-paleo). I don't consider grains to be inherently evil- but most of us have become so damaged over the years that grains certainly do us no favors. We no longer properly prepare grains to reduce their anti-nutrients, we blast them with nasty pesticides and herbicides and many are gmo, and our modern wheat is not what they ate in Biblical times (they ate Emmer wheat- aka Farro- and Einkorn, which have a different sort of gluten and much lower amount, spelt is actually after the Bible, though not long after). I never liked legumes except for peanuts, and avoiding sugar isn't hard if you're not eating baked goods. :-)

As for problems when discussing Paleo with your religious friends, I recommend sticking to the science of it, rather than the evolutionary principle. When my mother brought up the argument of grains being eaten in the Bible, I said something along the lines of "Wine is in the Bible too, but you wouldn't tell a recovering alcoholic that they can have wine because it's Biblical, would you? There are some things that are fine for healthy people, but I'm not healthy."

If you know why you eat the way you do, stick to those reasons. The name is just a convenient way to sum up how you eat. "I'm Paleo", "I'm vegetarian", "I'm meatatarian", "I'm a Real Foodie". If you aren't sure why you're eating paleo, then I recommend doing a little experimenting to find out what your body responds best to. Cut out one element for 2 weeks to a month, no cheating at all, then re-introduce it. You may find that you do better on The Perfect Health Diet, or following this Body By God. Or, maybe you do better on strict Paleo or Primal. Once you know for certain how your body reacts to certain foods, it'll be a lot easier to explain to friends. "Oh no, black beans and rice really screw up my digestion! Please pass the Kerrygold and marrow!"

Just quote Genesis 4: 2-5:

"And again [Eve] brought forth his brother Abel. And Abel was a shepherd, and Cain a husbandman [farmer]. And it came to pass after many days, that Cain offered, of the fruits of the earth, gifts to the Lord. Abel also offered of the firstlings of his flock, and of their fat: and the Lord had respect to Abel, and to his offerings. But to Cain and his offerings He had no respect: and Cain was exceeding angry, and his countenance fell."

One thing you may run into, especially among Catholics and others who use a Communion host made of wheat flour, is the "If wheat was good enough for Jesus, it should be good enough for you" argument. To which the response is, "Wheat has changed a lot in 2000 years, becoming much higher in gluten. Also, people then didn't subsist on junk like Wonder Bread, Mac-and-Cheese, and Coke, damaging their metabolisms and setting themselves up for auto-immune reactions. If you've got a time machine, so I can go back and tell my mom to never feed me unsoaked/unsprouted grains, vegetable oils, or more than a little sugar, then maybe at 40-years-old a bite of wheat bread won't hurt me."

It is possible to get whatever information from scripture that fits your worldview with the appropriate filtering. I would think that the guy came up with his dieting concept first, and then post hoc found all the pieces of scripture that would fit.

First of all the paleo diet is based on research and evolution. The author of this book denies evolution and and has done no research. Secondly he bases his diet advice on the skewed interpretation of a thousands year old book written by an agrarian culture. Is it a good dietary decision to start with that base, and then skew it even more by saying "This is good advice, I only have to leave out the bread"?

It might be a good approach if you have to convert someone who has trained himself to be unreasonable. Then you can say: "God said so". In return he will tell you that God told you not to eat the fat of animals. (Leviticus 7:23).

I haven't heard of it, but I do see a lot of parallels between what Adam ate and Paleo. I have unique views of creation/evolution within the parameters of my Christianity, but I definitely believe Paleo can be reconciled with the Bible, and Christianity.

Whatever gets people there. The devastating effects of high sugar, high grains, low fat and overly industrialized food warrants just about any kind of tactic you think might be successful. Religion makes me queasy and the fact that there are people who need it to decide if something is good or not annoys me, but I'm happy if it makes moving towards less grains, less sugar and more fat accessible to a good chunk of people. I know I came to paleo through WAPF, so I wouldn't dismiss something that allowed grains outright. It's a big step in the right direction.

edit: also, there is a heavy interest in going gluten free and grain free for health among WAPF -ish people that has nothing to do with "Paleo", and this would probably expose them to that.