Is English not your first language?
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
cofty, Lev 17 shows a distinction between the blood of an animal slaughtered for food and the blood of an animal found dead.
Yes.
My question for you is - why?
I have asked you about a dozen times. All you do is repeat the 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
How many times do I have to ask the same simple question Fishy? I even sent it to you by PM.
-
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
Fishy...
Lev.17: 13 & 14 state very clearly that he who hunts an animal for food and does not bleed it will be "cut off".
Verse 15 says that he who eats an animal that dies of itself will be unclean until the evening. The only requirement is to have bath and change clothes.
Why is there a difference if the blood is sacred in the way JWs believe it to be?
"God commands that we abstain from blood because what it represents is sacred to him."
-
315
Atheism = self defeating.
by towerwatchman inatheism = self defeating.
first may we define our terms.
the word atheism comes literally from the greek, alpha the negative and theos [for god], therefore “negative god” or there is no god.
-
-
cofty
@stephenmyers complaining that natural selection does not explain the origin of DNA is like complaining gravity doesn't explain rainbows.
DNA proves that all living things evolved from a common ancestor over millions of years
The origin of life is another topic.
-
315
Atheism = self defeating.
by towerwatchman inatheism = self defeating.
first may we define our terms.
the word atheism comes literally from the greek, alpha the negative and theos [for god], therefore “negative god” or there is no god.
-
-
cofty
In relation to DNA "information" is nothing but a metaphor. -
205
Mathematically Measuring Evolution.
by towerwatchman inmathematically 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.
-
-
-
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
Fishy...
Lev.17: 13 & 14 state very clearly that he who hunts an animal for food and does not bleed it will be "cut off".
Verse 15 says that he who eats an animal that dies of itself will be unclean until the evening. The only requirement is to have bath and change clothes.
Why is there a difference if the blood is sacred in the way JWs believe it to be?
-
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
Acts 15
The background to this text was a dispute that threatened the unity of the early church. The first christians did not initially abandon Judaism to form a new religion. The separation was gradual as they were thrown out of the synagogues for preaching Jesus as the Jewish Messiah.
As the good news spread to gentiles a disagreement arose about whether these new christians should be required to get circumcised and keep the Law. A council was arranged at Jerusalem to settle the matter. Their decision appealed to a provision of the Law that satisfied both parties. In ancient Israel it was not necessary for a foreigner to adopt Judaism by becoming a proselyte. They could live at peace with their Jewish hosts as long as they observed a few necessary laws.
Leviticus mentions the need for foreigners to adhere to a few basic requirements of the Law such as avoiding idolatry, fornication and the misuse of blood. This is the formula adopted by the Jerusalem council. They decide not to burden gentile christians beyond the need to observe these "necessary things".
This then was not a new set of laws invented for christians, it was an instruction to adhere to those minimum requirements of the Mosaic Law that were incumbent on alien residents in Israel, "For in every city, for generations past, Moses has had those who proclaim him, for he has been read aloud every sabbath in the synagogues.” - Acts.15:21
The instruction to abstain from blood is the same law that required a foreigner in Israel to bleed an animal killed for food but permitted him to eat an unbled animal found already 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
One being sacred and the other not so sacred according to cofty
Not according to me - according to Lev.17
Verse 13 & 14 states very clearly that he who hunts an animal for food and does not bleed it will be "cut off".
Verse 15 says that he who eats an animal that dies of itself will be unclean until the evening. The only requirement is to have a bath and change clothes.
Why is there a difference if the blood is sacred in the way JWs believe it to be?