by cognac 25 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
it states to abstain "from things strangled".
I have raised this issue myself. It doesn't say anything about animals. I think people assume it to be animals. The dictionary has other definitions for strangled.
Four commands in the Acts, one regarding blood and another presumably regarding blood. Why would there be two when they could be combined as one?
DJK
I'm not completely sold on these verses at Acts 15:20,28,29 meaning it was just to keep harmony with Jews and Gentiles. I can see that meaning in those verses but also another one. For example v28 says "we have favoured no further burden except these necessary things" then goes to list those things in v29. To me that can mean that they arent going to add Circumcision to the list of burdens or necessary things and those things listed in v29 are burdens not simply some things to keep harmony. *Also when reading v19,20 it can mean that the "decision not to trouble those of the nations turning to God" was simply not to add circumcision to the list which was given in v20. Why is fornication listed? Surely thats not something they had to refrain from to keep the peace? As to the exact meaning of blood in these verses I dont know.
Lets be clear though I do not support a ban on blood transfusions. I'm just putting across my problem with those verses in Acts. I need explaining why:
1 Fornication is on the list to avoid if its a list of things purely for keeping harmony. (I dont buy that thats permanent but the others arent argument because why havent they listed murder unless that is what is meant by blood but it would still leave the same problem of why is the list made up of temporary and permenant laws)
2 v28 where it says no futher burden ie implying v29 are burdens and v19 explaining why theres no circumcision in the list in v20*
Even if I believed these alternative explanations I still wouldnt believe in not having blood transfusions for other reason as has already been touched on in this thread. However when reading these verses my mind has both conflicting arguments going on and I cant settle on anything definite. Would anyone care to offer reasons why I should accept one explanation and reject the other?
edited to say I've posted this elsewhere as I feel I may be hijacking this thread as its not exactly what the op was asking, sorry.
1. Fornication is on the list to avoid if its a list of things purely for keeping harmony....
The reference to fornication is problematic, but viewing the Decree as a definition of normative conduct for Christians (Like the Didache) probably raises as many questions as it answers. (e.g. No mention of theft, murder, etc. )
It's been hypothesized that the reference to 'fornication' is more specific than modern readers realize, being primarily a reference to marriage pairings among the gentiles that offended the Jews. (e.g. Marriage to a niece or half-sister)
We'll probably never know though...
I don't know, I never really studied Greek, but I do know something about blood. It is really not as clean and safe as you might have expected, there is lots to be said about what it does to your body. Even when it works well it has smaller side effects not always noticable but when it goes wrong it can mess up your life in more ways than you might have been aware of.
Even if I believed these alternative explanations I still wouldnt believe in not having blood transfusions for other reason as has already been touched on in this thread. However when reading these verses my mind has both conflicting arguments going on and I cant settle on anything definite. Would anyone care to offer reasons why I should accept one explanation and reject the other?
I agree with you, its difficult to really say one way or another... That's why I think it should be a conscious matter and not a defellowshipping offense...
I think a different meaning to the word fornication would make a lot of sense and yes it should be a matter of choice wether we want blood or not without repracussions but that probably wont happen anytime soon if ever. I would love to see it though and the effects it would cause.
