by Gill 20 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Which totally avoids the problem posed by the text. They forget that the pagans did not bleed the animals sacrificed in temple rituals.
Hello Leo,
How do you suppose the pagans killed a bull if they did not bleed it to death? I cant imagine clubbing an oxen to death or trying to strangle it. Do you know of records as to how they accomplished the task?
tor
From what I've read, the animals were killed by first giving blunt force trauma to the back of the head, and then when the animal has been knocked out, the throat is cut (cf. Maurus Servius Honoratus, Commentarius 12.120, Suetonius, Caligula 32). No one knows how often animals were burned before the blood drained out or how often priests waited for a complete draining before dividing up the carcass, but the Greeks and Romans certainly did not follow Jewish standards prohibiting the consumption of blood (cf. the Mithraic sacrificial feasts on the consumption of blood as a sacrament). And then there were the strangled animals that were put to death without proper draining for blood (from the point of view of Leviticus). The second-century Xenophon described strangled sacrifices in which the animal would be hung from a tree while killed with javelins being thrown into it (Ephesiaca, 2.13).
Yes, blood was to be spattered on the sides and top of alters in typical fashion in many of these sacrifices. Apparently the large animals like bulls were killed using axes. nasty stuff.
I just found an intersting detail about Greek procedure that called for the animal be willing to be sacrificed. Permission was given by the animal "nodding". This was achieved by pouring water on the animals head or giving them water to drink so that the head would rise in nodding gesture. Boy that reminded me of G.John's lamb of god being willing.
Did 'God' give specific instructions on how long to bleed the meat for or was it supposed to be just symbolic? Afterall, it must be totally impossible to remove all of the blood that is in circulation, surely.
Thanks Leo and Pete for clarifying that; interesting stuff!
Tor
Thankyou all! Some of the info was quite yukky however!
But, when God supposedly gave the 'bleeding' instructions for animals, was he requiring 'every last drop to be removed' or just a symbolic gesture amount?
...nowhere does the Bible say that believers may eat blood under any circumstances.
But God’s law does not require that every single drop of blood be removed. It simply states that the animal should be bled.
Contradiction?
M. J. - Thanks! This is what I mean! The draining of blood is only symbolic. The blood is inevitably still in the animal and still in the veins AND still being eaten to SUSTAIN AND MAINTAIN life!
So why No Blood Transfusions? We're all taking in blood all of the time anyway!
If God had wanted NO BLOOD to be eaten he would have insisted that we were all vegetarians......and we're not!
He would have given exact draining times for ex-sanguination for each animal, like he supposedly managed to give laws in minute details in the OT. Pigeons - 20mins Chickens - 21 mins Goats 40 mins Cows 4 hours and 30 mins! (Hey He seemed to be quite an obsessive god for small details to me....so why not!)
I rest my case. It's simply symbolic!
Cosmic --> Why would someone strangle an animal for food? Was this a common practice?
Some animals, such as rabbits, can be caught with a noose or snare that esentially suffocates the animal when they run through it and it tightens around their neck.
Others, such as muskrats and animals that live in marsh areas, are often caught with a snare that entangles their body. When the tide comes in, the animal drowns. Thus, it is not bled properly.
I'm sure there are other examples but these are two that come to mind.
Rub a Dub
Funny how when it comes to dietary guidelines the WTS takes license to make the blood prohibition all about a procedure and not about the blood itself.
But when the subject comes to transfusions the focus suddenly turns to the blood itself and has nothing to do with context or procedure.
