The Mosaic law states that the Israelites were not allowed to eat dead animals or one torn
The Law says the EXACT OPPOSITE.
The 'penalty' was take a bath.
And yet you would prefer a child dies.
My Explanation of Why They Got it Wrong About Blood Using Only the NWT
by cofty 203 Replies latest watchtower medical
-
cofty
-
Fisherman
The 'penalty' was take a bath.
Similarly for Christians if they sin there is no “penalty” for mur$er, eating blood, or any other forgivable sin.
And yet you would prefer a child dies.
No. You conclude that. The issue here is whether or not the act of eating a dead animal is wrong, not the penalty for the Acts. Applying eating dead animals to blood transfusions is a cofty theory that Blood is only sacred to God after life is taken and derivatively (from God’s point of view,) people can go around eating dead animals, and eating blood from living animals or humans just as long as their life wasn’t taken for the same reason the blood in a blood transfusion is meaningless sort of speak to God.
-
cofty
It is impossible to hold a rational conversation with an ideologue.
-
Fisherman
Another point to consider about eating a dead animal is that the person was unclean until evening and that wasn’t easy. Then he had to go through the ordeal of a ritual (mikveh) and that wasn’t easy either. By the time it was all over, he was hungry again so he goes back and eats another piece. And then he has to go through the same ordeal again and again and again every time he ate some dead animal. Even if he wasn’t hungry, he had to be careful not to accidentally touch it or any of his family members either or anybody else or they would spend all their time of day in an unclean state and taking ritual baths. Suppose the entire nation made a practice of this as cofty suggests, the entire nation would always be unclean and at the mikveh day in and day out an unholy nation all day long.
I figure that there were Gentiles conveniently not so far away that would buy the dirty thing off their hands so they could get rid of it asap and didn’t have to touch it so they didn’t have to go through that ordeal. “Take this unclean thing away away from here.”
(Jews are not allowed to violate the Sabbath so a Jew will seek assistance from a “Shabbos Goy” when needed to kindly do things that violate the Sabbath such as turning ithe lights because Gentiles don’t have to observe the Sabbath. a SG is not paid because that would violate the Sabbath but appreciation is shown maybe by giving him some food etc.)
-
cofty
Then he had to go through the ordeal of a ritual (mikveh) and that wasn’t easy either.
Have a bath & change your clothes - done.
Kill and eat an animal unbled and YOU DIE
Eat an animal found already dead and YOU WILL HAVE A BATH
How can you return the life of the animal to god if you didn't kill it? This is why there was no penalty. It's so bloody obvious! Countless children have died because of the stubborn dogmatism of people like you.
-
Fisherman
This is why there was no penalty.
1954 WT that I cited explains that the penalty for eating a dead animal was washing your garments, the state of uncleanness for the rest of the day and the ritual bath.
-
cofty
the penalty for eating a dead animal was washing your garments
Does that sound to you like the penalty for a crime?
DEATH was the penalty for disregarding the law on blood!
Having a wash was the PROCEDURE to become ritually clean. Exactly the same procedure if you buried the dead animal. Was that also a penalty?
Procedures for cleanness were also requires after having sex or giving birth. Was it a crime to make love to your spouse or give birth?
And yet the Watchtower does impose the death penalty on children!
Come on you are more intelligent than to fall for that facile reasoning - surely!
Kill and eat an animal unbled and YOU DIE
Eat an animal found already dead and YOU WILL HAVE A BATH
-
peacefulpete
Lev 20:18 If a man lies with a woman during her menstrual period and has intercourse with her, he has laid bare the source of her flow and she has uncovered it. The two of them shall be cut off from the people.
Lev 15:24“’If a man has sexual relations with her and her monthly flow touches him, he will be unclean for seven days; any bed he lies on will be unclean.
Same book, evidently different hands and views.
-
Vanderhoven7
Lev 20:18 If a man lies with a woman during her menstrual period and has intercourse with her, he has laid bare the source of her flow and she has uncovered it. The two of them shall be cut off from the people.
Lev 15:24“’If a man has sexual relations with her and her monthly flow touches him, he will be unclean for seven days; any bed he lies on will be unclean.
Commentators agree that in the first case (20:18), both husband and wife were aware menses had started before engaging in intercourse, whereas in the second, (15:24), they were not i.e. her flow had not yet started and was probably precipitated by the sexual act itself.
“There are no research studies that demonstrate a definite relation to having sex and altering the start date of menses. That said, it is well known that orgasms (associated with intercourse, or without) cause contractions within the uterus as part of the autonomic response associated with that event....In theory, those contractions may precipitate the start of menses. For women that engage in penile-vaginal intercourse, semen causes the cervix to soften slightly, due to a type of chemical called a prostaglandin that is present within the ejaculate. This, coupled with orgasm, could potentially lead to the start of a period.”
-
peacefulpete
Lol..Vanderh..., you'd make a good Rabbi.