Question: Why was it ok to sell unbled meat to a foriegner for them to eat?

by Lady Liberty 44 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Mary

  You couldn`t even yell at your own parents without being taken outside the city gates and stoned.

  What's interesting about this observation, is that in the class I took on Archaeology and the Bible, the teacher (an Orthodox Jew), outlined the procession that would have been necessary for any parent to actually stone their children to death for disobeying them. It was purposely a very long trek and the feeling is that by the time they actually reached the outer gate, cooler heads would have prevailed. There is even a growing feeling that it is unlikely that the Israelite parents actually took such a drastic step, except perhaps in extreme circumstances when the child was so evil and so rebellious that they were deemed a threat to the community.

  But the law on blood has no death penalty!

  Like the other situation above, there was a law against eating blood that was punishable by death. However, this would have been referring to casually eating blood in everyday life, which would be showing a great disrespect for The Law and would basically be like giving God the finger. Ss was quoted above, in life and death situations, there was no punishment for eating blood, if it would save a persons life.

  Only in jw-land.

  Yep. Only Jehovah's Witnesses view letting your child die rather than accept a blood transfusion as "showing respect for the sanctity of life." While there are certainly risks to taking a transfusion, when the alternative is death, it's not a difficult choice. Besides, the laws in the Hebrew scriptures on blood, it's talking about hygiene and dietary laws----not human blood.
• 

  Hellrider

  Mary:

  Thanks for clarifying. What I meant was that unrepentant intake of blood (without going thru the cleansing-ritual, bathing and washing of clothes) - could result in the death penalty. But by following the cleansing-rules, it would all be a-ok after a few hours.. What the jws don`t understand is the complexity of the OT-law: It wasn`t just about the "rules"/"laws" in themselves, it was how one conducted oneself to these laws - even when it became necessary to break them. It was just as much about respecting the LAW as such (and show this respect - in a ritualistic manner - in the case of blood by going thru the cleansing ritual - which was used when breaking many of the other laws as well, for example the sexual ones), not just the individual rules! There are laws, there are exceptions to the laws, there are rules for making atonement when breaking the law, rules for atonement when in "grey zones", rules for atonement when taking advantage of a "loop-hole", etc. The jws have, in their ignorance, reduced this complexity into a life-death-scenario, something the LAW never required in the first place. The death penalty was, as you point out, reserved for severe cases.
• 

  garybuss

  It's interesting to me that the Witnesses hold to the spirit of the Jewish kosher dieting laws while ignoring the letter of the same law. That is, the spirit, or idea of the blood part of the dietary law was to drain the blood from the meat to be eaten. The letter of the law is the way to do that.
  
  The letter of the law gives specific directions on how to kill the animal, how to soak the meat, and how to trim the fat and how to cook the meat in addition to how to keep a kosher kitchen with proper preparation of cooking pots and pans.
  
  The law also prevented mixing foods such as drinking milk with a meal of the meat from the kind of animal the milk came from. The law required the keeping of the Sabbath and prevented the people from traveling over a set distance on the Sabbath. The Jewish people would keep a second home near the outer limits of the travel boundaries so they could legally double their allowable Sabbath travel distance.
  
  The law was specific on the keeping of the festivals but Witnesses ignore these even though the Jesus texts show Jesus willingly keeping the festivals. He's in the temple for the Festival of Lights indicating to me he might not have had any problem with decorative lights on December 25th.
  
  
• 

  Lady Liberty

  He's in the temple for the Festival of Lights indicating to me he might not have had any problem with decorative lights on December 25th.

  Wow!! Interesting points Gary!! Thank you all so much for your insight!!

  Sincerely,

  Lady Liberty
• 

  UnConfused

  Lady Liberty, Mary, HellRider -- terrific stuff. I might have to codify these thoughts and scriptures into an official anti-no blood diatribe.
• 

  Shazard

  Also interesting part is Lev 11: 39 If an animal that you are allowed to eat dies, anyone who touches the carcass will be unclean till evening. 40 Anyone who eats some of the carcass must wash his clothes, and he will be unclean till evening. Anyone who picks up the carcass must wash his clothes, and he will be unclean till evening.
  
  As you see... not a big deal about eating unblead meat.
• 

  moomanchu

  The rule against eating unbled meat of animals not killed by humans clearly falls under the mosaic law. Either that or the god of the old testament is a hypocrite.

  Then there is the Noahic everlasting covenant for all humans to abstain from blood, but that isn't in effect when there is a buck to be made by God's chosen people.

  During the summer vacationing season blood bank levels can drop very low. The last time I checked the kingdom hall wasn't doing blood drives like other churches do. Do your part and donate who knows an apostate could save the life of a JW who needs blood fractions.

  Hypocrites? yup!
• 

  blondie

  My question to any "true believing" jw, since the scriptures show that God's people could sell blood to a non-Jew, why is it that jws cannot sell or donate blood to a non-jw?

  If

  *** w04 9/15 p. 26 Highlights From the Book of Deuteronomy ***

  14:21—Why could the Israelites give to an alien resident or sell to a foreigner an unbled dead animal that they themselves would not eat? In the Bible, the term "alien resident" could refer to a non-Israelite who became a proselyte or to a settler who lived by basic laws of the land but who did not become a worshiper of Jehovah. A foreigner and an alien resident who did not become proselyteswere not under the Law and could use unbled dead animals in various ways. The Israelites were permitted to give or sell such animals to them. The proselyte, on the other hand, was bound by the Law covenant. As indicated at Leviticus 17:10, such a person was forbidden to eat the blood of an animal.

  *** w04 12/15 p. 30 Do You Remember? ***

  Why could an Israelite sell an unbled dead animal to a foreigner?A foreigner or an alien resident who did not become a proselyte was not under the Law. So an Israelite was permitted to give or sell such animals to him. (Deuteronomy 14:21) But a proselyte was bound by the Law and would not eat the unbled meat of such an animal. (Leviticus 17:10)—9/15, page 26.

  Is the Law the one the WTS refers to the same when they say is a "law" at Genesis 9:6 which the WTS applies to all humans, not just to the Israelites/Jews, so that the non-Jews mentioned in Leviticus are subject to this "law"?

  (Genesis 9:3-7) . . .. 4 Only flesh with its soul—its blood—YOU must not eat. 5 And, besides that, YOUR blood of YOUR souls shall I ask back. From the hand of every living creature shall I ask it back; and from the hand of man, from the hand of each one who is his brother, shall I ask back the soul of man. 6 Anyone shedding man’s blood, by man will his own blood be shed, for in God’s image he made man. 7 And as for YOU men, be fruitful and become many, make the earth swarm with YOU and become many in it."

  *** w95 1/15 p. 6 Treasure the Real Life ***The Law given to the Israelites required abstinence from blood. (Leviticus 17:13, 14) Christians are not under the Mosaic Law. But they realize that the command not to eat blood predated the Law; it had earlier been given to Noah after the Deluge. (Genesis 9:3, 4; Colossians 2:13, 14) This command applied to all the offspring of Noah, from whom all nations of the earth have descended. (Genesis 10:32)

  Good example of WTS "logic."

  Blondie
• 

  Lady Liberty

  As a JW you never compare the scriptures against each other. Now it is so amazing that we could have ever been so blind!!

  Sincerely,

  Lady Liberty
• 

  Mary

  An interesting point to all this, is that even if Christians and more specifically, the "Great Crowd" were under the Mosaic Law, there would still be no basis for letting your kids die rather than take a blood transfusion. I spoke to three different Rabbi about what the modern Jewish perspective is when blood transfusions became part of modern day medicine. They took it very seriously and debated, read the scriptures, the Torah and the Talmud and they all came to the conclusion that the ban on eating the blood of a dead animal had nothing to do with the transfusing of human blood in order to preserve life. They even point to the scriptures showing that in dire circumstances, their ancestors did eat meat that was not properly bled if it meant saving their lives.

  Of coure, the Governing Body simply sneer at anything modern day Jews say. After all, it's only their history, their language and their customs we're talking about right? How on earth would Jews be able to interpret the Hebrew Scriptures better than the goons at Bethel?