Who Are They?

[mee]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

Thanks Pico but now I am more confused than ever. So JW's believe in the old law but not the new law that abrogates the old? Mee (who I believe is Chrstian?) also says that Christians must avoid blood, which also seems to ignore the newer law? Hmmm, I might try to play around with the theory of relativity instead, it's much easier to understand.

Could the verses about blood not be read as "do not eat/drink blood" (ie cook your meat)?

Jehovahs witnesses know that Jesus put an end to the old law , and Jesus brought in a new covenent, and that was to love God and neighbor ,but as we can see , when the older men were disputing about circumcision, there was a bit of dispute as to if christians had to get it done or not . and when the older men got togeather with the HOLYSPIRIT , they came back from the disscussion with these NESSESARY THINGS that still had to be observed .
For the holy spirit and we ourselves 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 and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper. Good health to YOU!"acts 15;29-28...........this law about blood goes back to Noahs day , and is still binding for christians . notice it mentions abstaining from blood AND from things strangled (not bled)so its not just about eating unbled meat , it is about abstaining from blood .
Jesus said that the whole Law hung upon the two commandments, to love God and to love one’s neighbor. (Mt 22:35-40) loving God means we are inline with his thinking , and abstaining from blood is still binding on christians

 

[Saltmeister]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

So God did a really crap job in the first place and then changed the rules to make things easier.

Maybe we are made in his image after all.

There's a theory . . . that God gave us rules and laws on purpose to show their limitations -- that they could never possibly represent our true attitudes all the time. What came before was much like an educational lesson that served to prepare pupils for the next level. The Gospel was meant to be a paradigm shift to a more free-thinking, down-to-earth, naturalist attitude, a liberation from restrictive dogma -- from a highly structured religion to a religion with no essential structure.

 

[mee]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

There's a theory . . . that God gave us rules and laws on purpose to show their limitations -- that they could never possibly represent our true attitudes all the time. What came before was much like an educational lesson that served to prepare pupils for the next level. The Gospel was meant to be a paradigm shift to a more free-thinking, down-to-earth, naturalist attitude, a liberation from restrictive dogma -- from a highly structured religion to a religion with no essential structure.

But the real purpose of the Law was, as stated by the apostle Paul, "to make transgressions manifest, until the seed should arrive." It was a "tutor leading to Christ." It pointed to Christ as the objective aimed at ("Christ is the end of the Law"). It revealed that all humans, including the Jews, are under sin and that life cannot be obtained by "works of law." (Ga 3:19-24; Ro 3:20; 10:4) It was "spiritual," from God, and "holy." (Ro 7:12, 14) At Ephesians 2:15 it is called "the Law of commandments consisting in decrees." It was a standard of perfection, marking the one who could keep it as perfect, worthy of life. (Le 18:5; Ga 3:12) Since imperfect humans could not keep the Law, it showed that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." (Ro 3:23) Only Jesus Christ kept it blamelessly.—Joh 8:46; Heb 7:26.

 

[Tao_Equus]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

There's a theory . . . that God gave us rules and laws on purpose to show their limitations -- that they could never possibly represent our true attitudes all the time. What came before was much like an educational lesson that served to prepare pupils for the next level. The Gospel was meant to be a paradigm shift to a more free-thinking, down-to-earth, naturalist attitude, a liberation from restrictive dogma -- from a highly structured religion to a religion with no essential structure.

Well then he clearly failed twice

 

[Saltmeister]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

Well then he clearly failed twice

Maybe it's just that we're still in the process of graduating. We keep failing and don't progress fast enough. Each new generation brings in a bunch of new, naive people and the process starts all over again. They re-learn what we discovered in life and make the same mistakes as we did. Not necessarily a case of a bad teacher. Bad students. We're slow learners because we copy others instead of thinking for ourselves. It's no wonder we fail the test/exam so often.

 

[Muslimwoman]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

a lot has to do with setting apart the chosen people based on god's laws, which the messiah would be born under. it also has to do with god speaking to people in the context of what was going on at the time. there were pagan rituals where people drank blood. so one way god set his chosen people apart from pagans was for them not to drink blood, among other practices. one of the reasons behind it are that god uses blood for his special purposes that deal with life and atonement of sins and does not want it to be mixed with pagan rituals.

strictly for informational purposes: mainstream christianity does not consider jw's as christian, but rather a cult.

Thank you Blazn, I think I am getting the hang of it, albeit slowly.

I can understand that G-d doesn't want us to use blood for rituals or drink it, I am just having a problem seeing how it refers to a medical practice, developed so recently.

 

[Muslimwoman]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

no.... no no no....... no.
*bangs head agaisnt desk.* lol....

Now you understand why my Latin teacher used to throw the board rubber at me so often. For an intelligent woman I just fail to 'get it' sometimes.

2. Mee is a JW and a christian.

My sincere apologies Mee, I didn't realise you are JW.

3. JW's do not ignore new laws, they acknowledge any law that god has given that is "active" and applies to them.

Sorry you will have to give me a timeline. So did Peter receive his message from G-d (that nothing was unclean) before or after the verses about blood?

Maybe I should just forget this and simply accept that JW's don't believe in using blood for anything other than pumping around the body it was created in?!

While you are talking aboot acts have a little look MW at Acts 15:28-29 and Acts 21:25

I am so sorry but these verses just do not seem specific. My gut tells me they are referring to a forgotten practice that was seen as the norm then but we know that wasn't transfusion and I have never read anything about early Christians drinking blood (and you can be sure if there was the Muslim sites would have mentioned it by now). I can certainly see where JW's get the idea from, having looked at the verses but it just feels that there is something missing from the picture - sorry, just my view.

 

[BlaznFattyz]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

...it just feels that there is something missing from the picture - sorry, just my view.

if a loved one was about to die and needed blood to live, it would simply be a question of saving your fellow man or allowing them to die. however, i know for a fact, god wishes us to choose life and take care of each other. love comes first, everything else has to give into it if necessary. i think that may be the missing part.

 

[Pico]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

Thank you Blazn, I think I am getting the hang of it, albeit slowly.

I can understand that G-d doesn't want us to use blood for rituals or drink it, I am just having a problem seeing how it refers to a medical practice, developed so recently.

One thing about interpreting scripture that causes a lot of confusion in people is to understand who the book was written to/for, who it was written by, and the context of the society and the times.

As BlaznFattyz said, the context had nothign to do with blood transfusions.

 

[mee]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

if a loved one was about to die and needed blood to live, it would simply be a question of saving your fellow man or allowing them to die. however, i know for a fact, god wishes us to choose life and take care of each other. love comes first, everything else has to give into it if necessary. i think that may be the missing part.

Its not a case of allowing a loved one to go without medical help ,it is a case of having all help available , exept one aspect, and that is Gods law on blood, many people have been told that they will die if they dont have blood, and here they are still around . it is not like we are saying ...we refuse ALL treatment .... it is just one thing ,and that is blood , to be honest the blood issue is not an issue in this day and age because there are many things out there to be used instead of blood . many years ago the medical people refused to treat some of Jehovahs people ,because they refused one part of their treatment. and because of refusing to treat these people ,in some cases they may have died because of BAD TREATMENT ......... and in a way that is pursucution . but in most cases not having blood did not mean that they died ,infact the medical people have learned that treating without blood is in most cases much better for a patient , and the recovery is much better without blood . and after all in many cases people who have blood still die .Gods law is always right , and even in an emergency it is not right to disregard the Almightys law. here is an example of those who disregarded Gods law in an emergency,
(1 Samuel 14:32) And the people began darting greedily at the spoil and taking sheep and cattle and calves and slaughtering them on the earth, and the people fell to eating along with the blood........................ this happened because they were very tired and they thought it was alright to disregard the blood law . but it was a sin ...............

 

[mee]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

As BlaznFattyz said, the context had nothign to do with blood transfusions.

more up to date ways of killing people in war or terriosim were not around many years ago , so does that make it ok to kill people because it is around to day ?, because the bible says not to kill, the bible also says to abstain from blood , but man has invented blood transfusions. but Gods law still stands .

 

[Pico]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

more up to date ways of killing people in war or terriosim were not around many years ago , so does that make it ok to kill people because it is around to day ?, because the bible says not to kill, the bible also says to abstain from blood , but man has invented blood transfusions. but Gods law still stands .

God specifically said not to commit murder. He also said not to consume blood, which is what i'm pretty sure the context is referring to.

But to each his own. Paul said that eating meats is not bad in itself, but if one person thinks it's sin, then it is sin to them. They choose not to eat meat because they wish to honor the Lord. And should not be condemned for it.

I hope I didn't sin against you by your wish to honor the Lord by not having blood transfusions. If so, I am sorry.

 

[mee]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

God specifically said not to commit murder. He also said not to consume blood, which is what i'm pretty sure the context is referring to.

But to each his own. Paul said that eating meats is not bad in itself, but if one person thinks it's sin, then it is sin to them. They choose not to eat meat because they wish to honor the Lord. And should not be condemned for it.

I hope I didn't sin against you by your wish to honor the Lord by not having blood transfusions. If so, I am sorry.

yes you are correct in saying that we should not consume blood that is Gods law , but in Acts 15;28-29 it says to abstain from blood AND from strangled things , if it just meant dont eat things that have not been bled why put abstain from blood as well . dont worry you did not offend me back in bible times many meat markets used to sell the left over meat that had been offered up in sacrifices to other Gods (paganGods), and christians could buy this meat without it worrying their concience. it had been bled so it was ok , but if it had not been bled that was a different matter

 

[BlaznFattyz]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

Its not a case of allowing a loved one to go without medical help ,it is a case of having all help available , exept one aspect, and that is Gods law on blood, many people have been told that they will die if they dont have blood, and here they are still around . it is not like we are saying ...we refuse ALL treatment .... it is just one thing ,and that is blood...
(1 Samuel 14:32) And the people began darting greedily at the spoil and taking sheep and cattle and calves and slaughtering them on the earth, and the people fell to eating along with the blood........................ this happened because they were very tired and they thought it was alright to disregard the blood law . but it was a sin ...............

based on this interpretation of scripture, jw's would allow a loved one to die rather than giving them blood. like i said, and where i think a jw's faith in their organizations interpretation is misguided, is that love comes first and everything else has to give into it if necessary. when david was hungry he ate the bread from the temple; on the sabbath when men were dying, jesus healed them; when told not to talk to certain tribes or told keep their religion confined, jesus said to spread the gospel to all people so all may have eternal life. it does not undue gods law, rather it takes into account the priority of life, and the love that sustains it, and it is justified by the greater good. like an ambulance, it goes thru red lights, but that doesnt permanently undue the laws of the road or give an ambulance driver a free pass to get to burger king by going thru red lights, rather it gets the sick person to the hospital quickly in that emergency. you are mixing the distancing of gods people from drinking blood and pagan rituals with blood transfusions and saving lives.

 

[Muslimwoman]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

Mee may I ask you whether Jehovah's Witnesses study context and timeline in the scriptures? By that I mean, whether G-d was specifically speaking about a given people or time. Or do you simply accept the entire sripture as for all people, for all time?

I only ask because in Islam there are so many verses in the Quran which refer specifically to the Muslims at the time but not allowed following that time. There are also many verses that can easily be taken out of context if you just look at the verse but when you read the whole chapter the context of the verse changes so much.

 

[mee]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

i think a jw's faith in their organizations interpretation is misguided, is that love comes first and everything else has to give into it if necessary. quote]
many people think many things , but LOVE OF GOD is the prime thing and God says to abstain from blood , that is why Jehovahs witnesses stick to Gods word , they do not pick and choose what they will stick to, they take the bible as Aurthority, even if it goes against the grain of this world . sticking to Gods ways is always benefical to a person . Jehovah knows what is best for us, and even though scientists are learning many things about blood the creator knows better than anyone. i was reading some interesting medical things about blood . here is what some medical people are realizing

Scientists are now studying the effect of transfused blood on the body’s defense, or immune, system. What might that mean for you or for a relative who needs surgery?
When doctors transplant a heart, a liver, or another organ, the recipient’s immune system may sense the foreign tissue and reject it. Yet, a transfusion is a tissue transplant. Even blood that has been "properly" cross matched can suppress the immune system. At a conference of pathologists, the point was made that hundreds of medical papers "have linked blood transfusions to immunologic responses."—"Case Builds Against Transfusions," Medical World News, December 11, 1989.
A prime task of your immune system is detecting and destroying malignant (cancer) cells. Could suppressed immunity lead to cancer and death? Note two reports.
The journal Cancer (February 15, 1987) gave the results of a study done in the Netherlands: "In the patients with colon cancer, a significant adverse effect of transfusion on long-term survival was seen. In this group there was a cumulative 5-year overall survival of 48% for the transfused and 74% for the nontransfused patients." Physicians at the University of Southern California followed up on a hundred patients who underwent cancer surgery. "The recurrence rate for all cancers of the larynx was 14% for those who did not receive blood and 65% for those who did. For cancer of the oral cavity, pharynx, and nose or sinus, the recurrence rate was 31% without transfusions and 71% with transfusions."—Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, March 1989.​

What do such studies suggest regarding transfusions? In his article "Blood Transfusions and Surgery for Cancer," Dr. John S. Spratt concluded: "The cancer surgeon may need to become a bloodless surgeon."—The American Journal of Surgery, September 1986............................ but as i mentioned earlier its not really the health issue , but its about obedience and love of God .

 

[mee]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

Mee may I ask you whether Jehovah's Witnesses study context and timeline in the scriptures? By that I mean, whether G-d was specifically speaking about a given people or time. Or do you simply accept the entire sripture as for all people, for all time?

I only ask because in Islam there are so many verses in the Quran which refer specifically to the Muslims at the time but not allowed following that time. There are also many verses that can easily be taken out of context if you just look at the verse but when you read the whole chapter the context of the verse changes so much.

there are many prophecies in the bible that came true in former times ,but those prophecies also have a major fulfillment for our time .Ancient BABYLON was destroyed , and again the BABYLON THE GREAT spoken of in the book of revelation will be destroyed never to be found again. and the command for Gods people is to flee from her and get out of her... revelation 18;4.. this BABYLON THE GREAT has a worldwide influence , and she is symbolically known as a harlot , this harlot is the WORLDWIDE EMPIRE OF FALSE RELIGION many things are happening in this time of the end .Also Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 C.E but there is a major fulfillment for our day

 

[17th Angel]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

Mee may I ask you whether Jehovah's Witnesses study context and timeline in the scriptures? By that I mean, whether G-d was specifically speaking about a given people or time. Or do you simply accept the entire sripture as for all people, for all time?

Yes.

Now you understand why my Latin teacher used to throw the board rubber at me so often. For an intelligent woman I just fail to 'get it' sometimes.

Noooo..... We all fail to get it most of the time.

My sincere apologies Mee, I didn't realise you are JW.

lol.....

Sorry you will have to give me a timeline. So did Peter receive his message from G-d (that nothing was unclean) before or after the verses about blood?

Maybe I should just forget this and simply accept that JW's don't believe in using blood for anything other than pumping around the body it was created in?!

That would probaly be the best idea lol..... That is pretty much how I look at most of religion... There is a simple answer to most of the questions or there is the redicuoulsy long stupid answers that cause more confusion and issues... Things should be yes or no.... Black or white... lol. Here is the most simple answre..... "Yes"... To keep is simple but with slightly more explination look at Gen 9:...4? lol.... This is even before Peter, this is the MAIN guidelines for Adam and Eve.... And should be for all mankind....

I am so sorry but these verses just do not seem specific. My gut tells me they are referring to a forgotten practice that was seen as the norm then but we know that wasn't transfusion and I have never read anything about early Christians drinking blood (and you can be sure if there was the Muslim sites would have mentioned it by now). I can certainly see where JW's get the idea from, having looked at the verses but it just feels that there is something missing from the picture - sorry, just my view.

So we have the "soul" but I also think we have the other value of blood... Ask yourself "What did Jesus apprently give for our freedom?" His...... ? B _ _ _ _.

 

[Neemai]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

because the bible says not to kill, the bible also says to abstain from blood , but man has invented blood transfusions. but Gods law still stands .

"Not to kill, and to abstain from blood."

Wouldn't a Vegetarian diet be just as applicable to the above statments?

Why avoid blood transfusions, but then kill and eat animals whose meat contains blood?

...?

Neemai

 

[BlaznFattyz]

Re: Jehovah witnesses.

many people think many things...that is why Jehovahs witnesses stick to Gods word, they do not pick and choose what they will stick to, they take the bible as Aurthority, even if it goes against the grain of this world...

The Watchtower Society has officially notified its members (see diagram from 6-15-04 Watchtower) that they may now use hemoglobin (red cells without the membrane) - the largest of all blood components which transports oxygen throughout the body.

seems more like jw's stick to the watchtower's word, and they take the watchtower as authority, doesnt it? scary to think they you will totally believe everything they say.