|
Post by bane on May 18, 2010 9:25:08 GMT -5
Christians are commanded to ‘abstain from blood’ Acts 15:28, 29: “The holy spirit and we ourselves [the governing body of the Christian congregation] have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled [or, killed without draining their blood] and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!” (There the eating of blood is equated with idolatry and fornication, things that we should not want to engage in.) Is a transfusion really the same as eating blood? In a hospital, when a patient cannot eat through his mouth, he is fed intravenously. Now, would a person who never put blood into his mouth but who accepted blood by transfusion really be obeying the command to “keep abstaining from . . . blood”? (Acts 15:29) To use a comparison, consider a man who is told by the doctor that he must abstain from alcohol. Would he be obedient if he quit drinking alcohol but had it put directly into his veins? You are fond of just cutting and pasting aren't you? Is this what you do if someone you meet on the street starts asking you questions? It gives the impression that you have no idea why you believe what you do and you just google and cut/paste the first thing that pops up. I know that's not the case, but it looks that way. answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080818152001AAESrKFAnyway, I'll start out with the simple fact that basing an entire doctrine on one scripture and one scripture only seems a little dangerous to me. I can't think of any other teachings that are based on just one scripture alone with no other scriptures supporting it. Second of all, I'll point out that blood transfusions weren't even possible in Biblical times. It seems unlikely that the apostles would get together and decide to specifically ban a practice that wasn't even technically possible at the time or even thought of. Third of all, when you look at the context of the scripture it's dealing with idolatrous practices of the day like sacrificing animals to idols or strangling them to keep more blood in the meat. The first century Christian reading the letters sent out here would've taken from it that they were not to indulge in practices associated with idolatry. That is consistent with other scriptures that teach separation from the world. Furthermore, eating implies taking in nourishment. Getting a blood transfusion doesn't involve taking in nourishment at all. The alcohol analogy doesn't really hold because eating blood never enters the bloodstream as blood, nor is injected blood passed through the digestive tract at all. 1) There is more than just one scripture. You may have heard that Jehovah’s Witnesses do not accept blood transfusions. Have you ever wondered why? This Scriptural stand is often misunderstood. Sometimes people assume that Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse all medical treatment or that they simply do not value life. Nothing could be further from the truth. Jehovah’s Witnesses seek the best medical care available to them and their family members. However, they seek nonblood medical management. Why? Their stand is based on a fundamental law that God gave to mankind. Just after the Flood of Noah’s day, God gave Noah and his family permission to eat the flesh of animals. God imposed this one restriction: They were not to consume blood. (Genesis 9:3, 4) All humans of all races descended from Noah, so this law is binding on all of mankind. It was never rescinded. Over eight centuries later, God reaffirmed that law to the nation of Israel, explaining that blood is sacred, representing the soul, or life itself. (Leviticus 17:14) Over 1,500 years later, the Christian apostles commanded all Christians to “keep abstaining . . . from blood.”—Acts 15:29. To Jehovah’s Witnesses, it is clearly impossible to abstain from blood while taking it into the body in a transfusion. They therefore insist on alternative treatments. That Scriptural stand often results in an even higher standard of medical care. No doubt that is why many people who are not Jehovah’s Witnesses also request bloodless medical treatment.
|
|
|
Post by Angel Beast on May 18, 2010 9:32:26 GMT -5
So say you get shot, stabbed, or something and are losing a lot of blood and they need to put blood back into you to survive you're not going to accept?
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on May 18, 2010 9:57:06 GMT -5
You are fond of just cutting and pasting aren't you? Is this what you do if someone you meet on the street starts asking you questions? It gives the impression that you have no idea why you believe what you do and you just google and cut/paste the first thing that pops up. I know that's not the case, but it looks that way. answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080818152001AAESrKFAnyway, I'll start out with the simple fact that basing an entire doctrine on one scripture and one scripture only seems a little dangerous to me. I can't think of any other teachings that are based on just one scripture alone with no other scriptures supporting it. Second of all, I'll point out that blood transfusions weren't even possible in Biblical times. It seems unlikely that the apostles would get together and decide to specifically ban a practice that wasn't even technically possible at the time or even thought of. Third of all, when you look at the context of the scripture it's dealing with idolatrous practices of the day like sacrificing animals to idols or strangling them to keep more blood in the meat. The first century Christian reading the letters sent out here would've taken from it that they were not to indulge in practices associated with idolatry. That is consistent with other scriptures that teach separation from the world. Furthermore, eating implies taking in nourishment. Getting a blood transfusion doesn't involve taking in nourishment at all. The alcohol analogy doesn't really hold because eating blood never enters the bloodstream as blood, nor is injected blood passed through the digestive tract at all. 1) There is more than just one scripture. You may have heard that Jehovah’s Witnesses do not accept blood transfusions. Have you ever wondered why? This Scriptural stand is often misunderstood. Sometimes people assume that Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse all medical treatment or that they simply do not value life. Nothing could be further from the truth. Jehovah’s Witnesses seek the best medical care available to them and their family members. However, they seek nonblood medical management. Why? Their stand is based on a fundamental law that God gave to mankind. Just after the Flood of Noah’s day, God gave Noah and his family permission to eat the flesh of animals. God imposed this one restriction: They were not to consume blood. (Genesis 9:3, 4) All humans of all races descended from Noah, so this law is binding on all of mankind. It was never rescinded. Over eight centuries later, God reaffirmed that law to the nation of Israel, explaining that blood is sacred, representing the soul, or life itself. (Leviticus 17:14) Over 1,500 years later, the Christian apostles commanded all Christians to “keep abstaining . . . from blood.”—Acts 15:29. To Jehovah’s Witnesses, it is clearly impossible to abstain from blood while taking it into the body in a transfusion. They therefore insist on alternative treatments. That Scriptural stand often results in an even higher standard of medical care. No doubt that is why many people who are not Jehovah’s Witnesses also request bloodless medical treatment. First of all, as I pointed out earlier, getting a blood transfusion is not eating blood. The blood doesn't pass through your digestive system at all. If you eat a bloody steak, that blood does pass through your digestive system, a blood transfusion does not. You're not eating blood in any way shape or form in a blood transfusion. Second of all, it seems a bit hypocritical to me to speak of how sacred blood is as it represents life while watching people die as they refuse blood transfusions that could save their lives. The Watchtower society admits that people have died while refusing blood transfusions. How is that not hypocritical? Third of all, can you not respond to anything with cutting/pasting from another site? As I said, it really makes it look like you have no clue how to respond and are just googling for answers. I'm sure that's not the case, but it looks that way.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jul 3, 2024 19:50:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2010 13:02:46 GMT -5
Roman Catholic.
|
|
|
Post by bane on May 18, 2010 13:12:40 GMT -5
1) There is more than just one scripture. You may have heard that Jehovah’s Witnesses do not accept blood transfusions. Have you ever wondered why? This Scriptural stand is often misunderstood. Sometimes people assume that Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse all medical treatment or that they simply do not value life. Nothing could be further from the truth. Jehovah’s Witnesses seek the best medical care available to them and their family members. However, they seek nonblood medical management. Why? Their stand is based on a fundamental law that God gave to mankind. Just after the Flood of Noah’s day, God gave Noah and his family permission to eat the flesh of animals. God imposed this one restriction: They were not to consume blood. (Genesis 9:3, 4) All humans of all races descended from Noah, so this law is binding on all of mankind. It was never rescinded. Over eight centuries later, God reaffirmed that law to the nation of Israel, explaining that blood is sacred, representing the soul, or life itself. (Leviticus 17:14) Over 1,500 years later, the Christian apostles commanded all Christians to “keep abstaining . . . from blood.”—Acts 15:29. To Jehovah’s Witnesses, it is clearly impossible to abstain from blood while taking it into the body in a transfusion. They therefore insist on alternative treatments. That Scriptural stand often results in an even higher standard of medical care. No doubt that is why many people who are not Jehovah’s Witnesses also request bloodless medical treatment. First of all, as I pointed out earlier, getting a blood transfusion is not eating blood. The blood doesn't pass through your digestive system at all. If you eat a bloody steak, that blood does pass through your digestive system, a blood transfusion does not. You're not eating blood in any way shape or form in a blood transfusion. Second of all, it seems a bit hypocritical to me to speak of how sacred blood is as it represents life while watching people die as they refuse blood transfusions that could save their lives. The Watchtower society admits that people have died while refusing blood transfusions. How is that not hypocritical? Third of all, can you not respond to anything with cutting/pasting from another site? As I said, it really makes it look like you have no clue how to respond and are just googling for answers. I'm sure that's not the case, but it looks that way. Do you say the same things about idolatry or fornication? Abstaining from blood is just that. To abstain. And like I said before these questions have come up a million times. If something was written before which better explains it, I will surely cut and paste it. I could write the same thing in my own words but that would take time away that I just don't have. I do work as I am sure you do too. Even individuals who do not personally view the Bible to be the inspired word of God must acknowledge that it has much to say about blood. From the first book of the Bible through to the last, “blood” is mentioned more than four hundred times. Certain Bible verses are especially pertinent to the question of sustaining life with blood. Let us briefly examine them: The Bible record shows that early in mankind’s history the Creator and Life-Giver expressed himself on the issue of blood. Right after the global flood, when God first granted humans the right to eat animal flesh, he commanded Noah and his family: “Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to you. Only flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.”—Genesis 9:3, 4. First of all, the Creator was providing a dietary regulation at a time when mankind was making a new start. (Compare Genesis 1:29.) God showed, however, that in killing animals for food more was involved than diet. That was because the blood of a creature represented its life or its soul. Thus, some Bible translations render Genesis 9:4 as: “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.”—Revised Standard Version; Moffatt. So this divine regulation was not merely a restriction on diet, such as a doctor’s advising a patient to avoid salt or fat. The Creator attached a highly important moral principle to blood. In pouring out all the blood that reasonably could be drained out, Noah and his descendants would manifest their regard for the fact that life was from and depended upon the Creator. But let us examine this matter further. The above-quoted scripture applies to animal blood. Would the same principle apply to human blood? Yes, with even stronger force. For God went on to say to Noah: “Besides that, your blood of your souls shall I ask back. . . . Anyone shedding man’s blood, by man will his own blood be shed, for in God’s image he made man.” (Genesis 9:5, 6) Now, if animal blood (representing animal life) was of sacred significance to God, obviously human blood had a sacred significance of even greater value. Persons complying with these divine directions would not be shedding the blood of (killing) humans, nor would they be eating either animal or human blood.
|
|
|
Post by BCizzle on May 18, 2010 13:35:45 GMT -5
To me, religion is inherently intolerant, and as such, I want nothing to do with any of them.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on May 18, 2010 16:38:13 GMT -5
Do you say the same things about idolatry or fornication? Abstaining from blood is just that. To abstain. So the context in which it is said doesn't matter at all? And as I said, it makes it look like you have no clue what you're talking about and are simply googling for answers. It's like someone asking you a question in person and you hand them a pamphlet or a book. That's not what people are looking for. Again with the cut/paste job from Yahoo answers. Of course it doesn't directly address any of the points I was making because it's not addressed to me. It's a random, generic answer directed at someone else's question. In this case it's responding to the question "where does the Bible say blood transfusions are wrong?" I'll point out (as other people who responded to the question pointed out) that the Bible doesn't ever even mention blood transfusions. This is probably because blood transfusions didn't even exist in Biblical times. I'm reluctant to even respond to this because I know I won't get a response from you at all. I'll just get a response from some random poster on the Interwebs.
|
|
The Mountain King
Main Eventer
the artist formerly known as FL<O>
Joined on: Feb 19, 2008 17:51:45 GMT -5
Posts: 3,222
|
Post by The Mountain King on May 18, 2010 17:57:38 GMT -5
Its really all the same, with a few exceptions. i although hate people who claim to be athiest, or satanist, and not know anything about them, just to be cool
|
|
|
Post by bane on May 18, 2010 22:55:01 GMT -5
But it proves the point does it not? Bible says nothing about Cigarettes being wrong either, nor the taking of drugs but yet we can extrapolate from the verses that both shouldn't be done by Christians.
|
|
Dexter Morgan
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 8, 2008 15:30:18 GMT -5
Posts: 3,130
|
Post by Dexter Morgan on May 18, 2010 23:10:51 GMT -5
But it proves the point does it not? Bible says nothing about Cigarettes being wrong either, nor the taking of drugs but yet we can extrapolate from the verses that both shouldn't be done by Christians. I think BANE that your missing what Hulk is saying. He doesn't want someone's answer to a different question. He wants you IN YOUR OWN WORDS) to answer the questions that he himself asked. You seem to be getting answers from others. Why not give your own? That is what Hulk is trying to say to you.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jul 3, 2024 19:50:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2010 2:06:09 GMT -5
Here's something to consider: Liberals complain about their hatred of religious dogma, but when they gain the following of the masses, they become just as dogmatic and closed-minded as the religious people they complain about.
I believe it's completely ridiculous to claim that the human race is here for no reason; that's even crazier than the wildest religion. It would also justify basically any type of action, because if we're just an accident, anything goes. Some people claim that basic human morality and government can serve to keep order, but what about corrupt morality and corrupt government? The Unabomber thought the technological system of the world was evil and therefore justified to himself the murdering of innocents; Joseph Stalin believed in the absolute evil of capitalism and used Soviet force to justify the murder of many in an attempt to make sure Soviet Communism survived.
|
|
|
Post by bane on May 19, 2010 2:09:54 GMT -5
But it proves the point does it not? Bible says nothing about Cigarettes being wrong either, nor the taking of drugs but yet we can extrapolate from the verses that both shouldn't be done by Christians. I think BANE that your missing what Hulk is saying. He doesn't want someone's answer to a different question. He wants you IN YOUR OWN WORDS) to answer the questions that he himself asked. You seem to be getting answers from others. Why not give your own? That is what Hulk is trying to say to you. These are my answers. I believe exactly what the bible says. I believe every word I cut and paste.
|
|
Dexter Morgan
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 8, 2008 15:30:18 GMT -5
Posts: 3,130
|
Post by Dexter Morgan on May 19, 2010 2:47:32 GMT -5
I think BANE that your missing what Hulk is saying. He doesn't want someone's answer to a different question. He wants you IN YOUR OWN WORDS) to answer the questions that he himself asked. You seem to be getting answers from others. Why not give your own? That is what Hulk is trying to say to you. These are my answers. I believe exactly what the bible says. I believe every word I cut and paste. Okay but put them into your own words. It's like if you asked me why I was agnostic. I would tell you my reasons, not copy and paste someone elses. He is trying to see why YOU feel this way not some guy on google. We know you believe what the guy is saying but give your own explanation don't use other people's answers.
|
|
|
Post by bane on May 19, 2010 11:18:42 GMT -5
It's actually not from Google. Jehovah's witnesses have our own literature based on the Bible that we all use to share scriptural truth. I have never googled anything. We have a CD rom that all of us use. People that are posting answers to other people's questions are getting info from there. It is invaluable source of info. I don't have all the answers. I cannot remember every single scripture.
And again, if the answer was written better before, why not cut and paste? I don't see where I have not answered something. What have I not answered?
|
|
|
Post by The Champ is Here! on May 19, 2010 11:55:17 GMT -5
It's actually not from Google. Jehovah's witnesses have our own literature based on the Bible that we all use to share scriptural truth. I have never googled anything. We have a CD rom that all of us use. People that are posting answers to other people's questions are getting info from there. It is invaluable source of info. I don't have all the answers. I cannot remember every single scripture. And again, if the answer was written better before, why not cut and paste? I don't see where I have not answered something. What have I not answered? Its not that you haven't answered, its that you can't articulate your beliefs yourself, you rely on a cut and paste response
|
|
|
Post by bane on May 19, 2010 12:58:06 GMT -5
It's actually not from Google. Jehovah's witnesses have our own literature based on the Bible that we all use to share scriptural truth. I have never googled anything. We have a CD rom that all of us use. People that are posting answers to other people's questions are getting info from there. It is invaluable source of info. I don't have all the answers. I cannot remember every single scripture. And again, if the answer was written better before, why not cut and paste? I don't see where I have not answered something. What have I not answered? Its not that you haven't answered, its that you can't articulate your beliefs yourself, you rely on a cut and paste response Sure I can. But why when the people on this board don't believe me anyways? I thought I was praised alot for being articulate in the opening pages of this explaining my beliefs rather well. But SOME people keep asking the same questions. It gets tiring typing out the exact same answers over and over again. Cut and pastes DO explain the point. I don't see why anyone's pantys are in a bunch.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on May 19, 2010 13:17:03 GMT -5
It's actually not from Google. Jehovah's witnesses have our own literature based on the Bible that we all use to share scriptural truth. I have never googled anything. We have a CD rom that all of us use. People that are posting answers to other people's questions are getting info from there. It is invaluable source of info. I don't have all the answers. I cannot remember every single scripture. And again, if the answer was written better before, why not cut and paste? I don't see where I have not answered something. What have I not answered? It's like this. In my experience talking to religious people there are always a certain number in any religion who have no clue what they believe or why. (And I don't exclude my own denomination from this.) They may have no idea what they believe, or they may have simply memorized canned answers and have the ability to spit them up on command. If you question their canned answers, they simply spit up another canned answer. If you question their canned answers enough, they have no ideas because they've never spent the time studying the Bible at all. I've seen this with a lot of Jehovah's Witnesses. I can point out where Jesus is Jehovah in the Bible and they have no response. They either spit up some more canned responses asking me to refute this scripture or that scripture, but they make no attempt at all to respond to any scriptures I present. Why? Because they can't. They really have no clue what they believe or why they believe it. All the know is the canned answers that were drilled into their heads so they can't respond to any questions in any meaningful way. They've never studied the Bible. They've just studied the JW literature and can spit up anything from it on command. Teh Duderino mentioned he's an agnostic and if I asked him why he would be able to give me reasons why. I wonder if you could give me legit reasons why you're a JW without having to refer back to some canned responses. If you've never studied your faith and your best response is something from a CD, then it seems to be that your faith isn't real to you. Why should I accept it and make it real to me? And I'm not just directing this at you 'cuz I've met many other Christians who are the same way. They may claim to believe something, but they have no Biblical foundation that they can point to. 2 Tim 2:15 - Study to show yourself approved to God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (AKJV) 1 Pet 3:15 - Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, (NIV)
|
|
|
Post by arnanderson on May 19, 2010 14:32:29 GMT -5
Here's something to consider: Liberals complain about their hatred of religious dogma, but when they gain the following of the masses, they become just as dogmatic and closed-minded as the religious people they complain about. The '60's counter culture would disagree with you. I don't think I have ever heard of a athiest starting a war based on their beliefs. I don't think it is ridiculous that some people believe that we are here for anything other then to just be here, and multiply, and to do the very best one can do. And to say that it is more ridiculous then any of the wildest relgion is ridiculous in itself. Look at some relgions where they would sacrifice themselves or other human beings in the name of God. Or that people choose not to accept a blood transfusion and would rather die. Those type of things are just stupid! I believe in God, but I do share a open mind on those who do not and there reasonings on why.
|
|
|
Post by bane on May 19, 2010 15:05:31 GMT -5
It's actually not from Google. Jehovah's witnesses have our own literature based on the Bible that we all use to share scriptural truth. I have never googled anything. We have a CD rom that all of us use. People that are posting answers to other people's questions are getting info from there. It is invaluable source of info. I don't have all the answers. I cannot remember every single scripture. And again, if the answer was written better before, why not cut and paste? I don't see where I have not answered something. What have I not answered? It's like this. In my experience talking to religious people there are always a certain number in any religion who have no clue what they believe or why. (And I don't exclude my own denomination from this.) They may have no idea what they believe, or they may have simply memorized canned answers and have the ability to spit them up on command. If you question their canned answers, they simply spit up another canned answer. If you question their canned answers enough, they have no ideas because they've never spent the time studying the Bible at all. I agree with that. People today just take their parents religion. They have no idea if it is based on scripture.I've seen this with a lot of Jehovah's Witnesses. I can point out where Jesus is Jehovah in the Bible and they have no response. They either spit up some more canned responses asking me to refute this scripture or that scripture, but they make no attempt at all to respond to any scriptures I present. Why? Because they can't. They really have no clue what they believe or why they believe it. All the know is the canned answers that were drilled into their heads so they can't respond to any questions in any meaningful way. They've never studied the Bible. They've just studied the JW literature and can spit up anything from it on command. They are not canned answers. You cannot answer my questions at all. I have posted many things here about how Jesus cannot be God. You ignore them and move onto something else. Again my FIRST post...Habbakuk. God cannot die. Yet Jesus died. Therefore JEsus isn't God. You ignore this and point to some Zechariah scripture which really proves nothing. How Jesus didn't know things the Father knew which if he were God, would know...Hundreds more I am leaving out...
But I wasn't always a JW. I was nothing. I started studying the Bible with witnesses for years before I became one. I didn't inherit it. I made the concious decision to become one. I have seen people like you for 16 years. People that pretend to be interested in JW teachings all the while just waiting to try and tear it down with foolish false teachings about Jesus being God or other things. You are not the first I have dealt with. You came on seemingly interested and it's turned into this. I have posted the reasons I believe a certain way. If you don't like them, sorry. Try and find someone else to stumble. Because it seems you knew what I was going to post before even getting into it with me. You have tried to do this with others I believe.Teh Duderino mentioned he's an agnostic and if I asked him why he would be able to give me reasons why. I wonder if you could give me legit reasons why you're a JW without having to refer back to some canned responses. If you've never studied your faith and your best response is something from a CD, then it seems to be that your faith isn't real to you. Why should I accept it and make it real to me? And I'm not just directing this at you 'cuz I've met many other Christians who are the same way. They may claim to believe something, but they have no Biblical foundation that they can point to. 2 Tim 2:15 - Study to show yourself approved to God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (AKJV) 1 Pet 3:15 - Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, (NIV) It also can come to a point when one realizes that they are throwing their pearls before swine...
|
|
|
Post by Lemmy on May 19, 2010 15:11:31 GMT -5
Dave Grohlism. That's my religion.
|
|