The Watchtower are Right About Blood... (page 19)

cofty

Thank you Wm Draper and welcome to the forum

Fisherman - I'm off to bed but I leave you with the scenario in my last post above this one.

What are your options, and what are the legal implications in the light of the following?

‘And if any animal which you may eat dies, he who touches its carcass shall be unclean until evening. He who eats of its carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. He also who carries its carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. - Lev.11:38,39

Fisherman

Your frenetic proof-texting demonstrates little interest in real conversation.

Your remarks show that you do not like my post, but they do not address the post, only me.

I will try to answer your above question.

1. If I eat it. Death Penalty (Deuteronomy 14:21) “You must not eat any animal that was found dead. You may give it to the foreign resident who is inside your cities, and he may eat it, or it may be sold to a foreigner. For you are a holy people to Jehovah your God.

2. If I touch it. I have become unclean and must follow restoration steps (Lev 11:39)

3. If I bury it. I have become unclean and follow restoration steps (Lev 11:40)

4 I can have someone pick it up. No problem for me.

5 I can carry it back and sell it or give it away to some non jew. but I have become unclean and must follow restoration steps. Lev 11:40

6 I could eat some of the blood that got on my hand. Death Penalty-You must not eat any sort of blood.

There is no decree in the Law for an Israelite to eat dead animals only the merciful provision for restoration IF somehow they ate one. You assume that the provision intrinsically allows violating God's law. It does not.

cofty

If I eat it. Death Penalty - Fisherman

"He who eats of its carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening"

Deuteronomy was written forty years after Leviticus so let's presume our scenario occurs before Moses' speech.

Moses proposed a better option than eating the unbled animal. He encouraged them to sell it to a foreigner so as to avoid unnecessary uncleanness. However that does not negate the clear provision that eating the unbled animal resulted only in temporary uncleanness exactly the same as picking it up and burying it.

Your obvious dishonesty in ignoring this perfectly simple text makes productive conversation impossible.

You are a stereotypical closed-minded JW.

cofty

if somehow they ate one.

Laughable.

Fisherman

Your obvious dishonesty in ignoring this perfectly simple text makes productive conversation impossible.
You are a stereotypical closed-minded JW.

There you go again attacking me. drivel

Fisherman

When the THE LAW, I mean all 5 books was given not just the verses that you like. ALL of the laws applied not just the ones you like.

cofty

There is a presumption among JWs that avoiding blood at all costs is the most virtuous option. Even if there might be unresolved questions they feel that they will be rewarded for "doing the right thing".

It is strange that they don't see allowing a child to die for want of available medical treatment as at least potentially questionable ethically.

In every other aspect of life they are very aware of becoming "bloodguilty" by sharing some responsibility for another's death.

Why does this fear of bloodguilt not affect their decision to allow a child to die?

If a responsible adult is going to make such a monumental decision the evidence that it is the correct one needs to be watertight. There should not be the slightest glimmer of room for doubt.

The way Fisherman chooses to blithely ignore the clear statement of Lev.11:38,39 is chilling. He/she would approve of the death of a child based on such wilfully obtuse thinking.

Only somebody who had decided to allow a committee to do their thinking for them could be so morally blind.

cofty

‘And if any animal which you may eat dies, he who touches its carcass shall be unclean until evening. He who eats of its carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. He also who carries its carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. - Lev.11:38,39

william draper

Blood in scripture is shown to be something very special , not just a commodity , to save a life using blood if that is what it required surely would be OK , The business of blood collecting I believe would be quite questionable , where one is selling their blood . One donating blood to the known person receiving it surely would be doing a fine thing I believe , that is my opinion , especially if such is amongst family even more I believe , but ones should seek alternative if possible .

cofty

I mean all 5 books was given not just the verses that you like.

My explanation reconciles every reference to blood in all 66 books without exception.

You have resorted to risible intellectual dishonesty.

"if somehow they ate one."

The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

Share this