cofty

Joined

• started 464 topics
• posted 24,957 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by cofty

• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Lev. 17 speaks about restoration not about permission - Fishy

  Verses 13 & 14 state very clearly that anybody who hunts an animal for food and does not bleed it will be cut off. I presume you understand that to mean capital punishment. There is no provision for "restoration".

  Verse 15 says that anybody who eats an animal that dies of itself will be unclean until the evening. Nobody gets stoned to death. The only requirement is to have bath and change clothes.

  Why is there a difference if as you assert, the blood of an animal that dies of itself is just as sacred as one that has been killed?
  

  I will keep asking you that underlined question until you answer it.
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Leviticus said you could eat and only be unclean till evening , Deuteronomy was a peice of propaganda written much later and it clearly contradicts what was written in the earlier book. - Crazyguy

  I strongly disagree. There is no conflict between Lev.11 & 17 and Deut.14 regarding blood.

  
  
  
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Ex 22:31 You should prove yourselves holy people to me, and you must not eat the flesh of anything in the field that has been torn by a wild animal....

  I have explained Ex.22 many times. It is about an animal torn by a wild animal.

  It is very dishonest of you to continue to use this verse to support your case.
  
  
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Why did God allow those not under the law of Moses to eat an unbled carcass when God forbade mankind to eat animals that were not bled? Gen 9:4 Only flesh with its life—its blood—you must not eat.

  I would love you to answer that question.
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  The Bible is clear that God forbade Israel to eat dead animals

  How can you eat an animal unless it's dead?
  
  
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Why did God allow those not under the law of Moses to eat an unbled carcass when God forbade mankind to eat animals that were not bled? - Fishy

  Not only that, the law permitted Israelites who were under the Law to eat an unbled animal found already dead. The question of why is precisely what I have been answering in detail for the past two years.

  You have yet to offer any possible answer.

  For forty years after permission was given in Lev.17 the verse you keep quoting in Deut,14 did not even exist. Leviticus 17 was not qualifying Deut.14 it was the other way round! This is crucial and you need to deal with it.

  As usual you have completely ignored facts and just keep on repeating the same dogma.

  
  
  
• 
  205

  Mathematically Measuring Evolution.

  by towerwatchman in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  mathematically measuring evolution.. when judging relationships in terms of morphological characteristics we will always be bound by the subjective.

  morphologically one cannot exactly measure the distance between two organisms strictly in mathematical terms.

  using the standard method of taxonomy we cannot quantify the difference between a horse and a mouse, or know which is closer mouse to cat, or mouse to fish.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  The amino acid sequence and the nucleotide sequence of cytochrome c beautifully confirms and refines the tree of life.

  What a strange topic for a creationist to raise. I can only assume it is an attempt to poison the well with one of the best examples of evidence for common ancestry.
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Earlier you asked why someone would eat an animal found dead. If you think about it the answer is obvious.

  A sheep or cow was a very valuable asset to its owner. Finding it dead would have been a significant loss. Obviously they would want to salvage something if possible. In Leviticus God said that whatever they decided to do it had to be included in the long list of normal things that resulted in uncleanness. Either burying or eating the remains had exactly the same consequences. I'm sure then the decision would largely be based on the condition of the carcass and how long it had been dead.

  40 years later the circumstances of the nation were changing. Now they were going to be settling down in towns and villages and living among foreigners. Keen to encourage ceremonial cleanness Moses now encourages them to choose a better option of selling the carcass to a foreigner. That way - assuming the buyer collects - they don't have to touch or eat the carcass and avoid becoming unclean.

  Nowhere in any scripture is the sacredness of blood mentioned in connection with eating an animal found already dead.

  This is the anomaly you have still not attempted to explain.
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Just to be clear because I know how good you are at missing the point. For the first 40 years after the Law was given the following three texts were the ONLY references to eating an animal found already dead.

  If an animal that you are allowed to eat dies, anyone who touches its carcass will be unclean till evening. Anyone who eats some of its carcass must wash their clothes, and they will be unclean till evening. Anyone who picks up the carcass must wash their clothes, and they will be unclean till evening.
  Lev.11:39,40
  

  Anyone, whether native-born or foreigner, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then they will be clean.
  Lev.17:13-15

  Direct Aaron and his sons to deal carefully with the sacred donations of the people of Israel, which they dedicate to me, so that they may not profane my holy name; I am the Lord. Say to them: ... That which died or was torn by wild animals he shall not eat, becoming unclean by it.
  Lev.22:2,8

  For four decades these were god's only instructions regarding eating an unbled animal found dead.
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Why would such a person do that or how could he do that when the law forbade it?

  As I have explained multiple times the Law did not forbid it.

  The only verse you can point to to try to support your assertion is Deut.14:21 but I have fully explained the context of that verse.

  You have still to make any attempt to explain why both Lev.11 and Lev.17 makes a clear distinction between eating an unbled animal that has been killed and one that was found dead. One was a crime, the other a temporary inconvenience.

  But there is one other important point you also need to explain. Moses' admonition to sell a dead animal to a foreigner was not given until 40 years after the law recorded in Leviticus.

  If eating an unbled animal found dead was a crime as you assert, why did it take god four decades to mention that?