by sinis 24 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
I do feel there might be some validity in the statement.
You see God breathed life into the nostrils of Adam.
Now what does blood do?, it carrys around oxygen to the parts of the body, and when you cut off that blood/oxygen/life supply, the affected body part dies very quickly, so in effect, yes, Life is in the blood and the blood gets that "life" from the lungs which is the very place God put it in the first place.
sorry for the empty post. I was on the wrong browser.
jwfacts. I know there is 'new light' on this. A few years ago they changed it. Question from Readers. Not sure how long ago but I remember reading it and having one of those 'Yes! I knew I was right about this!' moments.
Anyway, the problem here is that they have totally misunderstood this scripture. If a man killed a man then his life was forfeit, he had to pay with his life. If a man killed an animal, his life was not forfeit, he didn't have to pay with his own life. But he did have to pour the animals blood onto the ground recognising that animal's life came from God. The blood is merely a symbol of the life and not the life itself. With transfusions this becomes pointless because the blood is taken from a living person, no-one has to die.
What about the Hebrew Law where if a struggle happened and a pregnant woman was injured and the baby dies, it would take a life to make up for that babies life. Does this not show that the Hebrews viewed a unborn baby as already alive and as valid as a grown adult?
njy, that's another good point! That would argue against the belief that a still born baby would not be resurrected. The fetus was alive at one time.
This is what I like about this forum, we can actually discuss an issue without anyone arbitrarily expecting everyone else to accept their opinion as ultimate "truth."
