Here is a summary, I may post the entire thing later when he sends it to me. I can post it under my name, after all I have nothing to lose.
Jehovah Witnesse teaching:
(Blood = Life) + (Life = Sacred) > (Blood = Sacred)
Problems:
- The sacred life is chayim, but blood represents the nephesh
- Nowhere does the Bible justify the prohibition by the sacredness of life
- "Sacred" is not "taboo". The sacredness of life means that we cannot shed, not eat, blood.
Suggestion:
(The nephesh is in the blood) + (A killed nephesh is asked back 'nephesh for nephesh' ) > (Blood shed in death is asked back 'blood for blood')
Genesis 9:2-6 would have been God?s way to allow the slaughter of animals without giving life away:
'Just pour the blood of the animal on the ground, and I will not ask it back ?but human blood will always be asked back?.
The blood of a killed creature is a debt that must be shunned.
Arguments:
- Throughout the Bible, the symbolism of blood and nephesh is linked to 'nephesh for nephesh' accountings
- The cases of blood drinking in the Bible show that the accounting for the killed nephesh is upon the drinker
- It explains why we must drink Christ's blood
The "blood" that Christians should abstain from would be what that word most commonly designates in the Bible: blood shed in death, like in the biblical expressions "The avenger of blood" or "I am clean of the blood of all men."
His arguement is that full information about how the bible views blood should be presented, and it should be up to individual witnesses to make up their own mind. That never should disfellowshipping or disassocation be used to punish those who wish to take blood to save their or their loved ones life. His paper is quite lengthy but full of good information, and I'll post it as soon as I can get the whole thing from him.
I have told him to just back off and evaluate the situation and then determine how best to proceed so he will not be faced with consequences he is ill equipped to deal with at this point.