beauroberts

Originally posted by FMF
This is surely a point to be made in favour of saving lives with blood transfusions rather than a point in favour of banning it.

Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life.
The only blood that will bring us everlasting life is the shed blood of Christ Jesus.
God's prohibition on blood, setting it aside as something special, started with Noah and his family. Genesis 9:3-5 says, "Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you....Only flesh with its blood you must not eat. Besides that, I will demand an accounting for your lifeblood....'
If you believe the Bible, all of mankind are descended from Noah and his family, therefore this prohibition was placed on the entire human race.
We are all accountable.
Just as with Adam and Eve we can choose to respect that command or not.
God gave us free will. It's up to us to use it correctly or not.
Hopefully we will not make the same mistake Adam and Eve made.
For more free information about the Bible see www.jw.org

Originally posted by roigam
I have no knowledge of how anyone treated BR.

Have you not read beauroberts posts in this thread?

You know it's funny, but suddenly you remind me of someone...

Originally posted by roigam
Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life.

So when my wife ended one a few years ago you feel it would have been if I'd have let her die as obviously the "brief extension to her life" is not of any value?

Originally posted by roigam
Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life.
The only blood that will bring us everlasting life is the shed blood of Christ Jesus.
God's prohibition on blood, setting it aside as something special, started with Noah and his family. Genesis 9:3-5 says, "Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you....Only flesh with its blood ...[text shortened]... ke the same mistake Adam and Eve made.
For more free information about the Bible see www.jw.org

I accept that you don't personally want to have blood transfusions because of your own superstitions ~ I get that, I really do ~ but you are unable to show how a ban on them is scriptural or even in accordance with Christian principle. If you can find some verses that are not about eating animals, about consuming animal blood or about blood sacrifice and instead show us some verses that ban life saving blood transfusions, then share these with us, rather than your personal mystical and paganism-tinged thoughts about blood.

Originally posted by roigam
Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life.
The only blood that will bring us everlasting life is the shed blood of Christ Jesus.

This is surely a point to be made in favour of saving lives with blood transfusions rather than a point in favour of banning it. Nobody claims that life saving blood transfusions will bring people everlasting life.

Originally posted by divegeester
I have a growing suspicion that riogam is a closet Jehovah's Witness. I have confronted hi on this more than once but he/she seems disinclined to respond.

Do you think that maybe he needs to wear a yellow star on his person so that it's obvious to everyone "what he is"?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Do you think that maybe he needs to wear a yellow star on his person so that it's obvious to everyone "what he is"?

You are comparing divegeester's comments on this thread to the Nazis treatment of the Jews in the 1930's and 1940s?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Do you think that maybe he needs to wear a yellow star on his person so that it's obvious to everyone "what he is"?

I find your comment ridiculous and offensive.

Originally posted by FMF
You are comparing divegeester's comments on this thread to the Nazis treatment of the Jews in the 1930's and 1940s?

Obviously she is; I will now have to add "nazi" to the growing list of abuse I'm having to endure from the so called Christians here.

And for what did I deserve that particular punch? Pressing riogam on clarity of his beliefs. He is here in this thread back handedly calling beauroberts a liar and yet I'm the "nazi" for questioning him.

Originally posted by divegeester
Obviously she is; I will now have to add "nazi" to the growing list of abuse I'm having to endure from the so called Christians here.

And for what did I deserve that particular punch? Pressing riogam on clarity of his beliefs. He is here in this thread back handedly calling beauroberts a liar and yet I'm the "nazi" for questioning him.

If she has a forum philosophy at all, it might be 'I am as randomly and as dementedly scathing as I can be, therefore I am.' 😉

Originally posted by divegeester
It's a shame this user never returned to the forum; as a JW he briefly brought a refreshingly honest perspective which you will immediately notice in quick scan through his posts. I suspect he was "shut down". He's still at RHP though.

@beauroberts

Dear Beauroberts,

I trust you are doing well and recovering from your disfellowshipment from the Jehovah's Witness, in fact I hope you are enjoying your liberation!

My point in bumping this thread is straightforward; please come back as you were the only JW we've met in this forum who does the religion any credit whatsoever.

That is all.

🙂

Originally posted by roigam
Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life.
The only blood that will bring us everlasting life is the shed blood of Christ Jesus.
God's prohibition on blood, setting it aside as something special, started with Noah and his family. Genesis 9:3-5 says, "Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you....Only flesh with its blood ...[text shortened]... ke the same mistake Adam and Eve made.
For more free information about the Bible see www.jw.org

"Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life."

That, at best, is an after-the-fact rationalization. The commandment need not have any such rationale, it and all such is to be accepted without need for being 'made OK.'

That's at best. Devaluing the extension of mortal life devalues mortal life life itself.

I'm sure you didn't come to accept the command based on accepting the rationale given here.