Crazyguy I dealt with that question here...
There is no contradiction.
... 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.
Crazyguy I dealt with that question here...
There is no contradiction.
... 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.
Verse 15 says that anybody who eats an animal that dies of itself will be unclean until the evening. - Cofty
It does not say anybody. - Fishy
All persons, citizens or aliens, who eat what dies of itself or what has been torn by wild animals, shall wash their clothes, and bathe themselves in water, and be unclean until the evening; then they shall be clean. - Leviticus 17:15
Has it now got to the stage that you need to resort to bare-faced lies? By definition the phrase citizens or aliens covers absolutely everybody and anybody.
... 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.
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.
... 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.
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.
... 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.
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.
... 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.
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.
... 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.
The Bible is clear that God forbade Israel to eat dead animals
How can you eat an animal unless it's dead?
... 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.
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.
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.
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.
... 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.
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.