- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 120150
23 Sep 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieDo you obey all OT law or just the bits that fit? (forget about interpretation for a moment)
did you not see the wonderful illustration? please tell me if you are told to abstain from eating blood, why injecting it intravenously then becomes acceptable.
Doctor, Manfred you must not drink alcohol, ok Doctor that's fine, ill inject it intravenously! is that we you are saying? who is the one stretching the principle, you or I?
23 Sep 10
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't think that is a fair comparison for when would this and for what reason would this hypothetical alcohol be injected in to this person? A blood transfusion is for a very specific reason. Loss of blood. So your argument there is not a good analogy. It's not like the person receiving the blood transfusion is a blood thirsty person. (well physically they are blood thirsty)who wants to disobey God. Thats the big disconnect. Also the instinct to live is a God placed instinct.
did you not see the wonderful illustration? please tell me if you are told to abstain from eating blood, why injecting it intravenously then becomes acceptable.
Doctor, Manfred you must not drink alcohol, ok Doctor that's fine, ill inject it intravenously! is that we you are saying? who is the one stretching the principle, you or I?
Manny
23 Sep 10
Originally posted by Conrau KYes sir..I'm duped to the gills. I'm just a dumb mindless robot who's been programend to believe nuttin but what the big Watchtower in the sky tells me to believe and do... Wait..hang on for a minute! They told me to breath..Whew! Glad I follow those instructions.
Not really. I think your organisation is scum. I am sure you have ensnared others with this specious reasoning. You tell them that blood transfusions carry multiple risks. You explain to them that there are alternative blood fractions (although I am sure you omit to mention that blood fractions also have risks.) You tell them that most cases do not require ...[text shortened]... of gullible people into thinking that you have saved their lives. It is really quite disturbing.
23 Sep 10
Originally posted by Conrau Kand i think the organisation which continues to provide your ongoing education has wasted the lives of countless thousands of young persons through acts of paedophilia, has killed more persons in war than almost any other, was instrumental in helping the Nasiz come to power to kill and exterminate thousands of innocents persons is the most reprehensible organisation on earth, full of unadulterated filth! unless you have anything constructive to say, do not bother me again with your petty petitions and vulgar reasoning, you could not even bring yourself to condemn the killing of thousands of innocents through blood transfusion, but sought to justify it, to diminish its consequences and denigrate the lives of those who were killed as if it were a natural consequence, in the immortal words of daffy duck, your truly despicable!
Not really. I think your organisation is scum. I am sure you have ensnared others with this specious reasoning. You tell them that blood transfusions carry multiple risks. You explain to them that there are alternative blood fractions (although I am sure you omit to mention that blood fractions also have risks.) You tell them that most cases do not require ...[text shortened]... of gullible people into thinking that you have saved their lives. It is really quite disturbing.
23 Sep 10
Originally posted by galveston75Tell me who the Sadducees where? Or the Pharisees? The Maccabees? Or the Essenes? The Greeks and Romans who lived among the Jews in that day. I don't think you know your history outside of what the WT tells you. I think RC does but not you.
Context man..context.
Actually this comment was made while Paul and Barnabas were back in Jerusalem and with the congregation there and they we're discussing some points. Once they decided the correct view on these point a letter was sent to the Brothers in Antioch which was in Turkey.
"With the great influx of non-Jews, the question arises whe ...[text shortened]... tion.” (15:28, 29) The encouragement of this letter causes the brothers in Antioch to rejoice.
Manny
23 Sep 10
Originally posted by menace71You know Manny every challenge you put in Robbies and my face we have completely WITH SCRIPTURES answered you. I'm not here to be tested and I'm tired of you and the others changing the subject once you can't find the answers biblically. Yes you all have tons of opinions but rarely respond with the Bible to back them up.
Tell me who the Sadducees where? Or the Pharisees? The Maccabees? Or the Essenes? The Greeks and Romans who lived among the Jews in that day. I don't think you know your history outside of what the WT tells you. I think RC does but not you.
Manny
And for your information I can pull up more history, stats, and facts on any subject in the Bible then you could ever dream of.
23 Sep 10
Originally posted by menace71the bible states quite clearly, abstain from blood, at what point are you overriding that command, establishing your own prerogatives and ultimately dispensing with it in the case of blood transfusion? for that indeed is what you are now doing. If that is what the dictates of your conscience are telling you, then so be it, as for me personally, i would not want to deliberately contravene the commands of God, knowing what he has stated in his word of truth, even if it meant my life. I have a fervent and very real belief in the resurrection and no amount of temporary suffering can diminish that belief.
I don't think that is a fair comparison for when would this and for what reason would this hypothetical alcohol be injected in to this person? A blood transfusion is for a very specific reason. Loss of blood. So your argument there is not a good analogy. It's not like the person receiving the blood transfusion is a blood thirsty person. (well physically the ...[text shortened]... d. Thats the big disconnect. Also the instinct to live is a God placed instinct.
Manny
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 120150
23 Sep 10
Originally posted by menace71You read my mind.
If you disobey in even one point of the law you are guilty of the whole law!!
Manny
This whole 'blood' thing, irrespective of interpretation, is a principle that is under the Law, which brings death; rather the law of the spirit of Life that is found in Christ Jesus.
23 Sep 10
Originally posted by divegeesterno for it was reiterated to the Christians after the death of Christ, after the law had been nullified, in the book of acts to be precise.
You read my mind.
This whole 'blood' thing, irrespective of interpretation, is a principle that is under the Law, which brings death; rather the law of the spirit of Life that is found in Christ Jesus.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
23 Sep 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI have no idea what you are talking about. Was this post intended for this thread?
and i think the organisation which continues to provide your ongoing education has wasted the lives of countless thousands of young persons through acts of paedophilia, has killed more persons in war than almost any other, was instrumental in helping the Nasiz come to power to kill and exterminate thousands of innocents persons is the most reprehensi ...[text shortened]... as if it were a natural consequence, in the immortal words of daffy duck, your truly despicable!