My Explanation of Why They Got it Wrong About Blood Using Only the NWT

by cofty 203 Replies latest watchtower medical

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    The Fact that Rabbis have for centuries attempted to unpack and unravel the Tanakh makes the point that these writings are incomplete, vague, arbitrary and contradictory.

    One example I posted was that one text says you can sell dead animal for food, another says no. One text says unclean to touch a dead animal another says go ahead and use the fat.

    Nothing makes any sense to us, who can only try to surmise the process, the motives and the purpose of these works, and who are separated from the cultural peculiarities of the times of the Levite writers.

    Why were disease spreading locusts ok to eat (nuisance?) but not grasshoppers, delicious crabs or rabbits? Why giraffes ok to eat but not camels? (OCD?) Why ok to sleep with daughter but not granddaughter? (omission?) Why destroy a ceramic pot if it touches something ceremonially unclean but leather and wood are ok to keep? (pots are cheaper to make?) Why was it forbidden to eat fruit from a transplanted tree for 3 years then have to travel to Jerusalem to eat the fruit of the 4th year? (Sacred associations of trees with goddess and sun?) Why pork prohibition? (Philistines introduced them, Attis story?) Why is eating a swan or heron egg forbidden but not a goose egg? (???)

    These are the works that have had Rabbis wrangling for centuries. Now JWs are arguing about semantics and definitions to decode what medical treatment they can give their dying child.

    When does this lunacy end?

  • TD
    TD
    Convincing a believing JW of the absurdity of the whole mess is beyond my ability as a communicator, I'm, afraid. (I have tried)
  • cofty
    cofty

    Your efforts are much appreciated TD - and you too peacefulpete

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    Ditto

  • Vanderhoven7
    Vanderhoven7

    @Fisherman

    Do you think a JW farmer today who find one of his animals dead in the field should simply take a bath and change his apparel if he eats some of its unbled meat? Or would there be other consequences beyond those of the Mosaic law?

  • EdenOne
    EdenOne

    (Glad to see you back again, Cofty, I hope you're well.)

    I don't know if this POV has been addressed in this old and long thread, so excuse me if it had been touched before.

    It appears to me that the apparent double standard regarding the consumption of unbled meat in the torah may be resolved by evaluating the individual's responsibility on taking a life of an animal.

    If an Israelite would take a life, therefore "stealing" life from God, it would be an act of respect towards Yahweh to symbolically return the life to the divinity by wasting the blood to the ground without consuming it.

    However, if the (clean) animal was found dead already, the Israelite wouldn't be responsible for taking that life, and therefore, wouldn't have to symbolically return that life back to the ultimate life-giving god. He would not be guilty of capital sin, merely uncleanness.

    Therefore, the capital punishment would be deserved, not by the mundane consumption of the fluid in itself, but for the equivalent of the original sin, that is, appropriation of something that belongs exclusively to the divinity (either being the authority to decide what is right or wrong, or life itself). That who would eat unbled meat whose life he hadn't taken, wouldn't be regarded as guilty of the same level of transgression.

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    JW farmer today

    WT published an article to the world on that. Mosaic law fulfilled and Gentiles were never under that law. But JW cannot eat a dead animal or strangled because it was not bled based on Acts 15 as WT interprets the Bible. So a trapped animal or one hunted and not bled cannot be eaten by JW.

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete
    a trapped animal or one hunted and not bled cannot be eaten by JW

    But they can sell it to their neighbor? Can they donate blood if a nonJW needs it? Does their uncleaness last till 6pm? According to Leviticus someone who eats blood was to offer a guilt sacrifice and be forgiven. Is it your view that Jesus's sacrifice is less powerful?

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    they can sell it to their neighbor….

    TD answered that. To compel a definition cannot be fallacy or one of convenience but authoritative such as the legal definition of what is a human person or the religious definition of the Jews that a human embryo does not have a soul.

    TD use of the word fallusee is alluding to… same as Bible use of grammar

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    My questions were rhetorical to illustrate the can of worms this is.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit