Please Suggest An Answer to This Conversation Stopper

maputo95

Please Suggest An Answer to This Conversation Stopper: I sent the first statement and he responded with the 2nd statement:

Equivocation :

The Bible forbids "taking in" blood

This is FALSE LOGIC-BIG TIME!!!

LOOK UP "EQUIVOCATION

Please let us discuss History and Theology in a friendly and logical manner.

Stop cutting hairs !!!

Abstain from blood _ end of story

How you take it in doesn’t matter – blood is blood , whether it’s thru mouth or into vein

Heroin can be ingested in mouth and in vein

End of story

No more discussions on this please and don’t’ keep berating my beliefs (which are bible-based)

teel

I'm sorry to say, but a JW will never consider a logical argument that goes against what the FDS says. Your friend responded to your "false logic" statement with just reinforcing the equivocation.

A good try would be beating him in his own game: you use equivocation too. "Abstain" could be interpreted as completely staying away from, and the quote doesn't specify whose blood you must stay away from. So "abstain from blood" = "drain yourself completely of blood". End of story.

aSphereisnotaCircle

Abstain from blood _ end of story

How you take it in doesn’t matter – blood is blood , whether it’s thru mouth or into vein

And yet anyone who has eaten meat, has eaten blood.

And so his diffinition of "obstaining" does not apply here.

Black Sheep

He's a cult member. He doesn't care what the Bible says, or what Jesus says, or even what Jehovah says, for that matter, so arguing with him from a Bible is a waste of time.

If you want to extract him from the cult, you need to get him to work out, for himself, that his religious leaders were not selected, by Jesus, in 1919, to be God's sole channel of communication. As long as he believes that, you can't change his mind on anything, anyhow.

Have fun

Chris

Heaven

The ultimate adherence to 'abstain from blood' would be for all JWs to drain the blood from their bodies. The funny thing is, you won't find one such person willing to do this. When your body does not have enough blood coursing through it's veins, it needs to be replenished or you die. This is fact. If you do not replenish needed blood in your veins and this procedure is available to you, then you are committing suicide. How does this reconcile with the Bible?

Also...ask this person how the 'abstain from blood' scripture, as interpretted by the JWs, supports Leviticus 12-14 which states that one is not to eat blood because 'the life of every creature is its blood'.

The interesting little factoid most JWs don't know is that up until the 1950s, they were allowed to have blood transfusions. The No Blood Policy was Fred Franz's brainchild. Again, why people use abstract words as specifics is beyond me. The Bible is clear -- do not eat blood. It does not say do not replenish your life fluids if you need to.

LUKEWARM

Ask him: Why people get disfellowshipped for taking Platelets (that make up about 5% of blood) but taking Hemoglobin (makes up about 15% of blood) is a conscience matter?

leo999

Hi Maputo ,

Ask him if he is a vegan . As unless he eats only kosher meat and avoids milk which can contain white blood cells he is not abstaining from blood , so is a hypocrite .Anyone knows that it is impossible to drain all blood from a carcass , only the life blood is poured out , by slitting the throat . Anyone that eats meat consumes some blood .

Have him reason on Lev 17 :15 , where an alien or a native Israelite could eat a dead animal , which hadnt been bled . The command was to wash not be put to death . Is a Blood transfusion to save life , taking 'dead blood' which is freely given in anycase .Are the scriptures talking about an animals life blood being poured out to show respect for life and for the animal being killed .

Leo999

chickpea

http://www.ajwrb.org/index.shtml

associated jehovah's witnesses for reform on blood

they have answers, but like was already said,
a cult mind is hard to crack through

poppers

No more discussions on this please and don’t’ keep berating my beliefs (which are bible-based)

Ask him why it's OK for JWs to advise potential converts to question their current belief structure - most likely they are bible-based as well. In that light, ask why questioning his bible-based beliefs are off limits. Besides that, beliefs are just that, beliefs, and it doesn't matter where they come from - any belief should be open for investigation. Somehow people have his notion/belief that if it derives from a "sacred book" they are untouchable. Among themselves, don't they "berate" householders who choose to believe differently? And if they themselves don't berate them do they give tacit approval to others who do with their silence?

Chalam

Hi maputo95 and welcome!

This might help from the ESV Study Bible

Acts 21:25as for the Gentiles. The Jerusalem elders reminded Paul of the requirements for Gentile Christians agreed upon in the Jerusalem council (15:28–29). This was to assure Paul that they wanted to avoid giving unnecessary offense to either believers or unbelievers among the Jews. They were not asking Paul's Gentile converts to embrace the Jewish laws beyond those minimal requirements, nor were they requiring Jewish believers to observe OT ceremonial laws (see Gal. 2:11–12; 4:10). « Less

The phrase "among the Jews" makes complete sense. You would not hang out with Messianic Jews (Jewish Christians) and eat bacon and black pudding (made from pigs blood), that would be offensive. Aslo, as the notes point out, neither are Christians to come under the Jewish law.

Blessings,

Stephen

Please Suggest An Answer to This Conversation Stopper

Share this