Posts by Fisherman

25

Eating of blood prohibition specifically not forbidden for non-Jews

by peacefulpete in

deut 14:21 you shall not eat anything that has died a natural death; give it to the stranger in your community to eat, or you may sell it to a foreigner.

for you are a people consecrated to yhwh.... it seems quite self evident the ritual of blood letting prior to eating meat was understood by the deuteronomist as binding only on jews..

Fisherman

And from things strangled

The Christian blood injunction does not prohibit eating un-bled dead animals that died on their own. However, if it was possible to extract the blood from such animal, it would be a sin for a Christian to eat that blood according to said injunction same as it would also be a sin to eat the blood-if it was possible to extract some of it-from an animal that was properly bled, because the blood -either dead or alive or slaughtered - represents the life of that animal to God. In other words, the blood is still sacred. According to the injunction, it would also be sinful fir a Christian to eat a strangled or an unbled animal. According to a WT article, there is a distinction between the blood of a slaughtered animal and an animal that died on its own. What is that distinction?

54

What changes are on the way?

by insearchoftruth in

i was listening to the co talk to my wife’s congregation on sunday and pretty much the complete talk was justifying doctrinal and organizational changes and pretty much preparing the ‘rank and file’ for upcoming changes.

anyone on hear have any insight of what ‘new light’ is coming in the future?.

Fisherman

537 BCE-70 years= 607 BCE

WT has always explained that Babylon fell in 539 not 537 and that the 70 years did not start until after Gedaliah was assasinated also that Jews did not leave Babylon in 539 and it took time to get there and that the land lay desolate until the first Jew set foot on eretz Israel in 537– But that is all extrapolation. We do know, however, —because it is a historical fact—that Babylon fell in 539. Although I believe that WT extrapolation is correct, it cannot be proven. The pivotal date 539 though is fact and God’s word says land desolate 70 years.—That we know.

The Reference Bible refers ( or referred if this has been changed ) to the end of the Gentile Times as circa 1914 and not 1914. 1914 is based on 537.

Simply put, 539-70 is 609. Ball park, circa, around = 607 and 1914. 537 is not a “historical date” although 539 is.

25

Eating of blood prohibition specifically not forbidden for non-Jews

by peacefulpete in

deut 14:21 you shall not eat anything that has died a natural death; give it to the stranger in your community to eat, or you may sell it to a foreigner.

for you are a people consecrated to yhwh.... it seems quite self evident the ritual of blood letting prior to eating meat was understood by the deuteronomist as binding only on jews..

Fisherman

and it therefore cannot reasonably be argued that the blood of such is sacred. -

According to the HS, blood is intrinsically sacred on its own to God and it’s sacredness does to depend on being used for animal sacrifices to atone for sins.

distinguishable from the consumption of blood

That is not the case because in the HS blood could not be used or stored because of its symbolic sacredness. Also, whether or not blood is digested in the stomach, the recipient of a BT consumes blood by using it inside his body and in time absorbing it. There is usage and benefit from the blood of another creature by the transfused.

The Christian injunction to “keep abstaining from blood” cannot be invalidated and does not grant permission to use blood for any reason. The tension is not whether or not the injunction means medical use or any use of blood but whether God allows violating it to save a life.

25

Eating of blood prohibition specifically not forbidden for non-Jews

by peacefulpete in

deut 14:21 you shall not eat anything that has died a natural death; give it to the stranger in your community to eat, or you may sell it to a foreigner.

for you are a people consecrated to yhwh.... it seems quite self evident the ritual of blood letting prior to eating meat was understood by the deuteronomist as binding only on jews..

Fisherman

And they were not guilty of violating God`s law ? and went unpunished ?

1Sam 14:32. Here is how WT sees it in a questions from readers article:

“So they may have been making some attempt to drain the blood. (Deuteronomy 15:23) Yet, in their exhausted, famished state, they did not hang up the slaughtered carcasses and allow adequate time for normal blood drainage.”

54

What changes are on the way?

by insearchoftruth in

i was listening to the co talk to my wife’s congregation on sunday and pretty much the complete talk was justifying doctrinal and organizational changes and pretty much preparing the ‘rank and file’ for upcoming changes.

anyone on hear have any insight of what ‘new light’ is coming in the future?.

Fisherman

Thev can change 607 BC to 586 which is the actual year of overthrow of Theocracy from Jerusalem,

Simply put: 539-70=609, not 586.

35

Isn’t JW’s teaching of “the abomination that causes desolation” wrong?

by Abraham1 in

what “the abomination that causes desolation” mentioned in mathew 24:15 means could be understood only by close followers of jesus because it was part of his personal discussion with them.

by stopping to greet those whom they consider as “their enemies” jws are identifying themselves as “pagans,” according to jesus.

(mathew 5:43-48) thus they cannot correctly understand what the abomination that causes desolation” that would appear as part of signs of “last days.”.

Fisherman

The whole point of a cross is to reflect on Jesus' death and resurrection.

Not scriptural.

And the obfuscation is focusing on the cross, or a bullet, or poison, or a rope, or a tree, or a gun, or a sword… Besides the reasons posted why the cross may be abominable to God, another reason is its previous use in pagan worship.

25

Eating of blood prohibition specifically not forbidden for non-Jews

by peacefulpete in

deut 14:21 you shall not eat anything that has died a natural death; give it to the stranger in your community to eat, or you may sell it to a foreigner.

for you are a people consecrated to yhwh.... it seems quite self evident the ritual of blood letting prior to eating meat was understood by the deuteronomist as binding only on jews..

Fisherman

See the topic posted by cofty on the sacredness of blood and the discussions posted on that thread.

One interesting point is that when an Israelite ate a dead animal that died of natural causes, he was not bloodguilty for doing so. Therefore, what about taking a pint of blood from an animal or human without killing anybody and consuming the blood putting it into a person’s vein for medical reasons, is such blood sacred to God or is it the same as that of a dead animal?

35

Isn’t JW’s teaching of “the abomination that causes desolation” wrong?

by Abraham1 in

what “the abomination that causes desolation” mentioned in mathew 24:15 means could be understood only by close followers of jesus because it was part of his personal discussion with them.

by stopping to greet those whom they consider as “their enemies” jws are identifying themselves as “pagans,” according to jesus.

(mathew 5:43-48) thus they cannot correctly understand what the abomination that causes desolation” that would appear as part of signs of “last days.”.

Fisherman

Anything can be an idol.

But when the “cross” is idolized ( which is the subject here ) it may be abominable to God because not only is it used to torture people sadistically but it has become the symbol of Christianity deflecting from the foundation, Jesus. And, instead of focusing on God and the meaning of Jesus’ death, people worship the cross and miss the whole point of the Bible writers that I mentioned in my previous point.

35

Isn’t JW’s teaching of “the abomination that causes desolation” wrong?

by Abraham1 in

what “the abomination that causes desolation” mentioned in mathew 24:15 means could be understood only by close followers of jesus because it was part of his personal discussion with them.

by stopping to greet those whom they consider as “their enemies” jws are identifying themselves as “pagans,” according to jesus.

(mathew 5:43-48) thus they cannot correctly understand what the abomination that causes desolation” that would appear as part of signs of “last days.”.

Fisherman

n the cross of our Lord Jesus

The implication is the execution of Jesus ( compare 1 cor 2:2 ) resulting in salvation and not the instrument of his execution. It is obvious poetic language since unlike in the “old testament” Christianity is not about rituals and paraphernalia. Christ is the fulfillment of all that.

35

Isn’t JW’s teaching of “the abomination that causes desolation” wrong?

by Abraham1 in

what “the abomination that causes desolation” mentioned in mathew 24:15 means could be understood only by close followers of jesus because it was part of his personal discussion with them.

by stopping to greet those whom they consider as “their enemies” jws are identifying themselves as “pagans,” according to jesus.

(mathew 5:43-48) thus they cannot correctly understand what the abomination that causes desolation” that would appear as part of signs of “last days.”.

Fisherman

The cross may be an abomination to JWs, but not to God.

A torture device that is also an idol.