A different thought on the blood issue..... perhaps ?

by Homerovah the Almighty 5 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  Homerovah the Almighty

  Something about the blood issue that has been circulating my brain that I would like to express and maybe see what you folks think ?

  Correct me if I'm wrong all opinions will appreciated !

  The observation that the JWS have taken the laws of the use of blood out of the old Mosaic laws from the old covenant

  which true Christians today are not under since they are under the new covenant established by Christ which he created himself when

  he physically appeared here on earth. ?

  Possibly they may have thought about changing it at one time but their lawyers cautioned them on what would result in doing so. $$$
• 

  leavingwt

  JWs insist that they are not living under the Mosaic Law. They will point to the book of Acts for support of their views on "abstaining" from blood.
• 

  blondie

  This is WTS take on that:

  *** w61 9/15 p. 555 par. 6 Respect for the Sanctity of Blood ***Of course, Christians are not under the law covenant made with Moses as mediator. That law covenant passed out of existence, having fulfilled its purpose, when the new covenant was made over the blood of Jesus Christ. Does this mean that the restrictions on the use of blood have passed away too? Not at all! Because what the law covenant had to say about refraining from the eating of blood merely emphasized the requirement that is set forth in the law God gave to Noah, and that is binding upon all mankind. To set this matter straight in the minds of all Christians, both Jews and Gentiles, none of whom were any longer under the Law, the Christian governing body at Jerusalem directed their attention to the obligations that devolved upon them in this matter, saying: "The holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep yourselves free from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper."—Acts 15:28, 29.
• 

  leavingwt

  Interestingly, the Law allowed Jews to sell unbled animals to non-Jews.

  Question: If the command given to Noah is binding upon all mankind, why would it be acceptable to sell unclean meat to non-Jews?

  No JW has answered that question to my satisfaction. (The dilemna reminds me of JWs who accept blood fractions, but refuse to donate blood.)
• 

  Homerovah the Almighty

  Thanks for your comments ! and Leavingwt thats an interesting point you've made

  The law as it is expressed in the scriptures was more than likely put down regarding the making of a blood sacrifices

  and of course the eating of blood.

  The attempt to heal someone back to good health and perhaps to save someones life as the example the Christ showed

  should be kept aside from those other actions with the use of blood, shouldn't it ?

  Its like the JWS have created their own laws outside of what is written in the bible and totally disregarded Jesus's commandment to love one another as his greatest commandment.

  I like the way the GB member who wrote that article used the wording the Governing Body of Christians from the bible to further instill and support their own devised power.

  Power in mens minds can certainly be irrational and dangerously stupid when you look at the perspective to what these men have done.

  Maybe what they should really be called or addressed, is the Governing Body of Judges and lawyers for Jehovah , that would really make for a more accurate title.

  It may have or not passed their minds on changing this policy at one time such as their other policies were changed like organ transplants.

  One thing that can be assured that the GB members have always got their lawyers at arms reach to discuss certain matters you can be confident of that.
• 

  glenster

  The JWs leader's stance is that their version of the blood verses of Act 15
  is defined by context, including OT context. Context goes against establishing
  that (pp.12-42 at the next link), so the authority switches to the 12 or so GB
  leaders having divine guidance. Evidence goes against establishing that, so the
  shunning rules are stretched to make sure those with the evidence aren't around
  long to cut back on profits.
  http://www.freewebs.com/glenster1/gtjbrooklynindex.htm

  The law doesn't require that something be true to be printed. What would
  improve things is something to popularize the facts of the case.