JWs eating any meat from a normal supermarket or butchers are therefore in conflict with the bible's law on blood.- cofty
1 Corinthians 10:25
Elders/Ex-Elders: Question about Blood
by JWdaughter 20 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
Fisherman
-
Lee Elder
Resources here: http://ajwrb.org/bible
-
Steel
I read a commentary about Acts 15 chapter once saying the whole abstain from blood, sacrifices to idols and adultery was about gentile Christians to avoid Roman pagan festivals. Everyone drinking blood, toasting zues and later having an orgy.
That's it. That's all its about.
Translating that into denying your child or yourself medical care takes a special type of stupid. You literally would have to have the same moral compass of an abortion doctor or serial killer.
-
-
Fairlane
As an unbeliever,if i invite a jw for a meal and they accept, if i serve blood sausage (black pudding) according to 1st cor' 10:27 would they be ok to eat (if they wished) without fear of contradicting their view on blood consumption ?
-
Steel
Comfy
If you think my explanation is bizzare can you explain why the council in Jerusalem had needed to explain to gentile converts to keep their pants on?
Are gentile converts allowed to murder, steal etc?
Context
-
cofty
if i serve blood sausage (black pudding) according to 1st cor' 10:27 would they be ok to eat - Fairlane
No they wouldn't. Since they would know that the meat was made with blood they could not eat it knowingly.
If you think my explanation is bizzare can you explain why the council in Jerusalem had needed to explain to gentile converts to keep their pants on? Are gentile converts allowed to murder, steal etc? Contex - Steel
I explained it some detail in the link I provided for you...
A more succinct version here does not discuss Acts 15...
You obviously didn't bother to read them. Here is an extract of the section on Acts 15...
By the way it's "Cofty".
Only by properly understanding this Old Testament background of the laws concerning blood can the key text at Acts 15 in the New Testament and its significance for Christians be properly understood.
A fact often overlooked by modern Christians is that they’re religion began as a Jewish sect. The burning issue in the early church, that almost divided it in its infancy, was whether gentile believers could be acceptable without complying with the full requirements of the law.
In Galatians 2 Paul recounts how tension between Jewish and gentile believers led him to go up to the apostles in Jerusalem to settle the matter. In Acts 15 we appear to have a historical account of what Paul is referring to in this letter. A summit meeting is held involving a large number of believers including some of the elders and apostles as well as Paul and Barnabus.
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the Law of Moses." Acts 15:2
So here is the problem; it is offensive to Jewish Christians that some of their brothers are ignoring the basic requirements of the law including circumcision. This did not just have theological implications; it was an obstacle to the unity and fellowship of the early church. A Jewish Christian could not, in good conscience, have fellowship with an uncircumcised person.
The solution that was finally adopted was a stroke of genius.
It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell. Acts 15:28,29
So where did the meeting come up with this particular set of requirements for gentile believers? Why no injunction against murder? What about theft, drunkenness and lying? This verse is not a new set of commandments for Christians; it is a restatement of those things that had always been required to maintain fellowship between Jews and gentiles.
The question of how Jews and gentiles could live together peacefully and what was required of non-Jewish residents in Israel was already established in the Law. In Leviticus 17 and 18 these very same prohibitions which could neatly be summarized as idolatry, blood and fornication, are set out as being those things that a foreigner must adhere to while living amongst the Israelites. They were not required to be circumcised, and to stipulate they were to abstain from murder or theft would have been to state the obvious. The crimes that a foreigner were likely to commit, perhaps without even understanding their offensiveness to their Jewish hosts, were these three things, idolatry, fornication and eating blood.
The words of James who proposed the content of the letter sent out to the congregations leaves us in no doubt about the reason for its contents.
"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath." Acts 15:19-21
How can there be any room for doubt that these things are not about fundamental laws but about how to maintain unity under the specific circumstances of the early congregation?
Finally, the letter requires Christians “abstain from food sacrificed to idols” but in 1Cor 8 Paul explains clearly that a brother who eats food sacrificed to idols commits no sin but does risk stumbling his brother. The language Paul uses there is identical to the wording of the Acts 15 letter. -
Fisherman
*** w92 10/15 p. 30 Questions From Readers ***
RE: 1 Co10:25
“Everything that is sold in a meat market keep eating, making no inquiry on account of your conscience”?
No. Those words at 1 Corinthians 10:25 refer to meat that might have been from an animal sacrificed at an idol temple.
"It would have to be different, however, if those Christians knew that meat from strangled animals (or blood sausage) was one of the choices at local shops. They would need to exercise care in choosing what meat to buy. .... Or Christians might inquire of a reputable butcher or meat merchant. If they had no reason to believe that certain meat contained blood, they could simply buy and eat. Paul also wrote: “Let your reasonableness become known to all men.”..... That could apply to the matter of buying meat. Neither Israel’s Law nor the decree of the first-century Christian governing body indicated that God’s people had to go to great lengths in inquiring about meat, even becoming vegetarians if there was the slightest doubt about blood being in available meat."The wt decided back in the 70's that blood used from slaughtered animals, etc was not the responsibility of Christians buying such bled meat. I have not heard of any change.
=====================================================================================
w78 6/15 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
"How concerned should a Christian be about blood in food products?
God said to Noah, and thus to the whole human family: “Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. . . . Only flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.” (Gen. 9:3, 4) Thus, true worshipers should want to avoid eating meat with blood left in it or other foods to which blood has been added.
This may call for a degree of care. For example, in some lands animals usually are strangled, or killed in some other way that leaves the blood in them. Where this is the local practice, Christians usually buy only from merchants, butchers or farmers who are known to sell meat from animals that have been bled properly.
However, federal regulations on the slaughtering of animals in many countries, as for example, in the United States, require that animals be properly bled. Hence, Christians in these areas have little need for concern. They may freely eat meat that is sold in markets or that which is served in restaurants. (Compare 1 Corinthians 10:25, 26, where the reference is to meat that had been offered to idols: “Everything that is sold in a meat market keep eating, making no inquiry on account of your conscience; for ‘to Jehovah belong the earth and that which fills it.’”) However, there may be a need to make inquiry about meat from animals killed locally, such as meat from “wild” animals, whether obtained from a hunter, a butcher shop or a restaurant.
But what about food products that may contain blood or some blood component, such as plasma protein?
Some governments require that producers list the ingredients on the label of processed food. Christians who have checked labels over a period of time may have noted that in their area blood is practically never used in foods. Hence, they may rightly have limited their reading of labels only to such times when there is some reason to believe that blood might have been added to an item.
However, recently the Federal Republic of Germany passed a law allowing meat companies to use, without listing it on a label, up to 2 percent (or, in some cases, 10 percent) dried blood plasma in “wieners, frankfurters and similar products including pâte and roulade . . . meatballs, meat stuffings, fricassee, ragout, meat in lard, . . .” What is the conscientious Christian to do in such cases?
He could make inquiry of the butcher or the producer. It is reported that in response to such inquiries, some producers in one Scandinavian land readily gave assurance that blood is not an ingredient in their processed meats; they do not want to lose business. But, in some places, Witnesses who inquired of butchers or meat producers were given vague or questionable replies. It may be noted that, even if the law permits companies to add some blood without stating it, this does not necessarily mean that all or even most of them do so.
Therefore, Christians, individually, must decide what to do. The consciences of some may move them to avoid anything about which they have serious questions or to make such inquiry as is needed to settle their consciences. (Rom. 14:23) In instances where it does not seem possible to get absolute information through reasonable inquiry, other Christians may conclude: ‘Where there is no substantial reason for me to think that blood is present or there is no definite way that I can determine it, I can with a clear conscience “keep eating.”’ They should, however, consider the conscientious feelings of others, even as Paul counseled.—1 Cor. 10:28-30; Rom. 14:13-21.
True Christians ought not to be indifferent about blood. They should do what they can to avoid a clear violation of God’s law. A deep respect for that law is of central importance. By doing all that they reasonably can to “keep themselves . . . from blood,” God’s people manifest appreciation for the sanctity of life and of the blood representing it.—Acts 21:25." -
BluesBrother
Your logic and reasoning are fine.
So, but for blood transfusions, how are JWs abstainig from eating blood?
Only because the "Slave Class", in whatever form it has taken since the 1940's, has deemed it so - that's all.
It is a human decision to apply the Biblical rules on eating blood to medical transfusions. I know of no other group that does this . In fact it is even more of a human decion now that most fractions of blood are permitted , by human decree.
I once attended a special meeting conducted by the head of the U K Hospital Liaison Committee. With great solemnity he emphasised that the Governing Body had decided that only these fractions were permitted.....and that was that.
-
Vidiot
JWdaughter - "Am I the only person that thinks that point in particular is hypocritical?..."
Par for the (WT) course, really.