I find Fishy's ostentatious displays of wilful ignorance to be very helpful.
Why would anybody risk their life or the life of their child based on this level of befuddled dogma?
The Watchtower are Right About Blood...
by cofty 556 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Fisherman
I'm going to let the sheer stupidity of the captioned statement shimmer in the air for the sake of posterity
Ok, but but you are only an advocate so your opinions and explanations and arguments as you see them are only your opinions and nothing more. You have to show relevance on this thread or link to another thread to support what you say.
-
Fisherman
cofty, you did not answer my questions.
-
-
-
WhatshallIcallmyself
Fisherman,
Cofty has answered your questions to a level any reasonable person would be satisfied with. I really cannot understand why you think he hasn't answered your questions fully. You are just restating your assertions and ignoring the obvious. Either you are wrong and the Bible doesn't contradicts itself with regards to eating animals that are found already dead or your are right and the Bible contradicts itself. I could care less either way but based on the explanations given by Cofty I think you are wrong. Context of scripture is crucial in these discussions and I feel you are not taking note of that.
-
Fisherman
Cofty has answered your questions to a level any reasonable person would be satisfied with.
Please show that an Israelite that deliberately ate a dead animal did not violate the law.
-
Fisherman
If an Israelite shepherd found one of his sheep that had died during the night would he be executed for burying it?
Living things die and there was a provision on the law for disposing of the dead. It was not forbidden to bury a dead sheep. It was forbidden to eat a dead sheep. -
lusitano o tuga
ok...just in some features!
but they mistaken anothers!
-
Saethydd
@Fishy
Why are you desperate to argue about this? Especially when you are clearly wrong? Do you get a kick out of a half-dozen people telling you that you're wrong?
You're completely ignoring the context of the scriptures concerning the topic being discussed. As far your proof goes, the fact that no scripture says that eating an unbled animal that has been found dead is to be punished with death is proof that's it wasn't a capital crime. That's how laws work. If execution isn't listed as the punishment, then they don't execute people for it.
Getting back to cofty's point, the fact that the case of an Israelite eating an unbled animal they killed themselves (capital crime) is handled differently than a case were an Israelite eats an unbled animal that was found dead (unclean state) proves that the point of pouring out the blood instead of eating it was to atone for the life the Israelite took.
So whether it was "against the law," as you seem determined to believe, or not is actually irrelevant to cofty's main point, which is that the blood being poured out is only a life or death matter when the creature was killed at the hands of an Israelite.