shower thought entered my mind the other day... jesus christ.
as per doctrine.
is still alive in heaven right now correct?
Sea Breeze - nephesh ion Gen 35 refers simply to life. It is idiom for 'Rachel was dying'. There is absolutely no concept of a soul in terms of a conscious part of the person that survived death prior to the Babylonian exile. In the OT the soul IS the living person.
This is beyond dispute as I'm sure you know well.
shower thought entered my mind the other day... jesus christ.
as per doctrine.
is still alive in heaven right now correct?
If humans are spirit, soul, and body (something completely unknown to Israel) how can you reconcile that with the fact that we evolved from non-human ancestors?
Or do all living things have this tripartite existence?
10 " any israelite or any alien living among them who eats any bloodi will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people.
12 therefore i say to the israelites, "none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.
15 'anyone, whether native-born or alien, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then he will be clean.
That's the most muddle-headed illogical word-salad I have attempted to read in a long time.
And yet the Watchtower demands the death of children based on this sort of obfuscation.
happy birthday 2 me!!.
sunday is my 76th birthday and i know that you want to know how it "feels" to have outlived my usefulness, to have lost my natural beauty (being reduced to wrinkles and flab), and constantly walking into a room not knowing why i'm there.
you also are curious as to how i can continue to find a reason to live since none of my kids think my opinions have any possible value, most of my facebooks friends i wouldn't recognize if i tripped over them on my way into starbucks, and my monthly expenditure on bird treats exceeds u.s. spending on the military.
Happy birthday Terry
10 " any israelite or any alien living among them who eats any bloodi will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people.
12 therefore i say to the israelites, "none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.
15 'anyone, whether native-born or alien, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then he will be clean.
You conclude that permission is implied to go around eating dead unbled animals.
It is not implied - it is explicitly stated.
We don’t see that practiced by the Israelites in the Bible.
We absolutely do. Why else would Ezekiel the priest state that - unlike other Israelites - he hasn't eaten animals found already dead?
Also, there is no Bible evidence ( except for your assumption ) that whole blood inside or outside a living organism is not viewed as sacred to God.
No assumptions necessary. I laid out the evidence in the OP. You can keep obfuscating but you can't deal with the data can you?
Or that Christians have permission from God with impunity to consume the blood of another living organism just because the host is alive.
I never said that.
You have adopted exactly the same technique that the writer of the Watchtower use when dealing with awkward questions. They write lots and lots of words, none of which directly address the actual point.
10 " any israelite or any alien living among them who eats any bloodi will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people.
12 therefore i say to the israelites, "none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.
15 'anyone, whether native-born or alien, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then he will be clean.
However, “keep”ing with how Jews abstained from blood in the past and the noachide, there is no scriptural basis in not abstaining from blood in new ways of consuming blood.
Jews did NOT abstain from eating the blood of an animal found already dead. They had permission to go ahead and eat with impunity. They could sell the unbled animal to gentiles - so much for 'Noachide' law!
Despite this incontrovertible fact the Watchtower leadership continue to demand the sacrificial death of JW children.
pasting this page for hebrews 10:10 https://biblehub.com/parallel/hebrews/10-10.htm.
it speaks of jesus sacrifice for all ( as in all peoples ) or is it for all time?
( one time only).
Once for all time doesn't seem out of context to be fair.
The writer is contrasting the work of the High Priest who offers sacrifice again and again, day after day, with the single event of the death of Jesus.
pasting this page for hebrews 10:10 https://biblehub.com/parallel/hebrews/10-10.htm.
it speaks of jesus sacrifice for all ( as in all peoples ) or is it for all time?
( one time only).
pasting this page for hebrews 10:10 https://biblehub.com/parallel/hebrews/10-10.htm.
it speaks of jesus sacrifice for all ( as in all peoples ) or is it for all time?
( one time only).
10 " any israelite or any alien living among them who eats any bloodi will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people.
12 therefore i say to the israelites, "none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.
15 'anyone, whether native-born or alien, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then he will be clean.
The decision of Acts 15 was that gentile Christians should not be forced to keep the Law of Moses.
The Law already contained rules on the minimum that was required of foreigners who were resident in Israel. These restrictions can be summarised as idolatry, fornication and blood. - Lev. 17-18
A non-Jew would customarily carry small idols with them on travels. This was not acceptable while resident in Israel. A non-Jew might marry close relatives or otherwise behave in a way that was offensive to their hosts. The Law prohibited such conduct. A non-Jew might kill an animal and eat it unbled. They had to be told that this was not permitted in Israel.
However - even non-priestly Jews were permitted to eat an unbled animal found already dead. The only downside was that they were then considered unclean until they performed cleansing rituals. Moses encouraged them to sell such an animal to a foreigner rather than eat it so as to avoid temporary uncleanness.
So it was decided by the meeting at Jerusalem that no more than these simple restrictions should be imposed on gentiles who were becoming Christians so as make fellowship possible between Jewish and non-Jewish Christians.
Eating the blood of animals found already dead was never encouraged. It always resulted in uncleanness. It was prohibited for priests. But it was never a sin. It never resulted in punishment unless cleansing rituals were neglected. But exactly the same applied to a Jew who decided not to eat the animal but bury it instead.
Blood is only scared in the bible to the extent that it represents a life that has been taken. Every reference to blood in the Old and New testaments can be understood in this context.
When the Watchtower insists that a child's life should be sacrificed because blood is intrinsically sacred in every context it has an extraordinary burden of proof. It has failed totally to meet this burden resulting in guilt in the premature death of untold thousands. All because of a dangerous combination of stupidity and arrogance on the part of generations of ignorant leaders.
