God to Israel - "If you hunt an animal and eat it unbled I will have you stoned to death. If you eat an unbled animal that died of itself I will insist you take nice warm bath and put on a clean robe."
Explain the reason for the difference Fishy.
Posts by cofty
-
556The Watchtower are Right About Blood...
by cofty in... 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.
-
-
-
556
The Watchtower are Right About Blood...
by cofty in... 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.
-
-
cofty
Lev 17:15 shows a distinction between the blood of a slaughtered animal ( for food)and one found dead. - Fishy
Yes exactly.
Why?
It was not permission for Israel to go around eating dead animals with impunity
I would not call being asked to take a nice bath and put on clean clothes any sort of penalty.
Absolutely no punishment at all for eating an unbled animal found already dead. That is the definition of impunity.
But you still have refused to answer my question....
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... 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.
-
-
cofty
Crazyguy I dealt with that question here...
There is no contradiction.
-
556
The Watchtower are Right About Blood...
by cofty in... 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.
-
-
cofty
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.
-
556
The Watchtower are Right About Blood...
by cofty in... 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.
-
-
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... 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.
-
-
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... 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.
-
-
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... 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.
-
-
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... 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.
-
-
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... 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.
-
-
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.