Bane admits that Christians are to abstain from "eating blood".

by moshe 144 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • TD

    The fallacy of equivocation, which is what Bane has committed here could just as easily be done with the final abstention in the Decree, "Fornication"

    Would anyone seriously suggest that marital sex and adultery were equivalent acts because they both would fall into the more generic category of "Sex"? Is all sex in any context illicit?

    That's a ridiculous question, but it is exactly what Bane has done with blood.

    By regressing to a more generic category that both the consumption of blood and the transfusion of blood would both fall into, (i.e. Taking in) he's not only shown his complete and utter disrespect for the Bible, he's seriously suggesting that all uses of blood are illicit.

    As with the example of sex above, that idea is contradicted by nature itself. When blood and its respective components carry oxygen, remove wastes, fight infection, maintain hemostasis, etc. these are nothing if not legitimate uses of blood and it would be pointless for creatures of flesh and blood to argue otherwise.

  • wasblind

    TD, i just love reading your post

  • moshe

    Thank you TD for cutting to the chase here, and for all the good comments from everyone. Even, Bane, who has shown us just how feeble-minded a JW can be when it comes to sorting out a WT human inspired directive and he couldn't muster one coherent rebuttal.

    Pisstoff has made a good point that fornication/adultery was a forgivable offense, otherwise King Solomon would have paid the ultimate price for his fun. If blood and fornication were used together in Acts 15, did the writer imply that the sins were equivalent? Who knows what the Bible writers meant, without letters of understanding to sort it out? Even Jesus was plain that breaking the Sabbath laws to rescue an animal was not a violation of the letter of the law. It appears that, if we redlined all the "fallacies of equivocation" in the WT study articles, not much would be left for the JWs to study on Sunday. Bane and other JWs are so used to following the WT's false reasoning that they get bewildered when the same illegal lines of argument don't work on us. They think they have made a good rebuttal, but they haven't and they are too weak-minded to understand the train wreck of WT doctrines they are following.

    Fornication/adultery implies the destruction of a marriage, while a blood transfusion creates no harm for anyone, not the donor, not the doctors/nurses and not the patient. Fornication/adultery is an act of selfishness, but a blood transfusion is an medical procedure for keeping people alive. I don't see how that could be a shelfish act or one that could be considered sinful and worthy choosing death over life.

    A sad JW no-blood ritual suicide case.-

  • peacedog
    Eating blood, taking it in......that would mean putting it in your veins too

    "that would mean"?? Oh..... You mean according to your cult masters.... Cuz we all know it's not in the Bible.

    Question: Why is "taking it in" via transfusion forbidden while "taking it in" via organ transplant is not forbidden?

    So funny...No one commented on my video.

    Lol. I suspect no one watched it.... What is it, professional wrestling? So 14 year olds still watch that stuff, huh?


    3) The "superb rap" that Bane did to Outlaw (I think it was Outlaw).....Paulapollos

    Don’t read into it too much

    I hear you rappin but I think I heard enough

    Your stuff is dead and outdated

    top notch to the top, I’m rated

    while you still freestylin and apostating

    I’m cold I know, I gotta reason to be

    20 years old, and no one seems to see

    that I’m worth my weight in gold and kicking your B´s

    Now take that apostates!.....Bane

    My poem entitled..


    Bane ain`t sane.....Cuz his brain took a train..

    The train ran off the track.....Bane won`t get his brain back..

    It`s the Crazy House for Bane.....Where he posts to our site..

    He only posts in the day......Cuz they lock him up at night..

    Jehovah,Apostates and Satan.....Haunt him in his dreams..

    He`s locked in a room.....So no one hears his screams..

    Bane will wake in the morning.....And leave his rubber room..

    He hates the Straight Jacket .....It never comes off too soon

    Then he`ll write or dance.....If he gets a notion..

    Bane Writes like he Dances..Bane is Poultry in Motion..

    The End..

    Banes poetry doesn`t have a Chicken..So I win!..

    .......................... ...OUTLAW

  • Paulapollos


    I think you win!


  • moshe

    OutLaw, you crack me up! Poultry in motion!!


  • Paulapollos

    How ridiculous that a group of people should frankly read a portion of scripture, take it out of context, and apply it in a way that has cost hundreds, if not more, lives.

    Once again, the Society show that sound Biblical scholarship, textual integrity, and cultural awareness are absolutely unimportant to them - rather, what is important is that the Society "show themselves" to be "different to Christendom", by coming up with interpretations of Scripture that make them stand out from their co-religionists. It doesn't seem to matter how many lives are ruined, or how unsound and fundamentally idiotic such positions are - all that matters is that the Societys' claim as the sole arbiter of truth, and the ethnocentrism and exclusivity of the Society is reinforced. And if people do die? Well, they'll get resurrected, so...........that's the kind of heartless attitude they engender.

    I have to say that the whole idea of blood fractions reminds me of the petty legalism of those who used to believe that actions under the law could earn God's favor. The whole notion of legalism means that in reality, you end up making more and more laws, more and more "principles", for more and more hypothetical situations. Beware the leaven of the Pharisees, indeed.


  • brotherdan

    I haven't read through this whole post, so I don't know if anyone brought up Ray Franz's argument on this. He reasoned with it this way.

    Q. What does blood symbolize?

    A. Life

    Q. Why do we not eat blood?

    A. It does not show respect for life. The blood belonged to God

    Q. Which is more important, the symbol, or the reality?

    A. The reality

    He then goes on to reason that marriage is something that is also sacred to God. We symbolize our dedication to our mate by our wedding ring. But which is more important? Our spouse. So what if we would die unless we removed our wedding ring? Would we rather sacrifice the reality (our spouse) instead of the symbol (the ring)? To value the ring over our spouse would be ridiculous and wrong.

    We should view blood in the same way. We respect it. We don't eat it. It is something that belongs to God because the life is within. However, if we lose our life over it, how does that show any more respect to life? Does that not show a disrespect for life?

  • Billy the Ex-Bethelite
    Billy the Ex-Bethelite

    BANE: "Billy for an ex bethalite you must have been kicked out for being so dense. READ the entire page before posting. I already addressed what you asked."

    I REread the entire page and found that you had not answered these questions. Simple, direct questions deserve simple, direct answers. It's a simple "yes" or "no".


    Aren't platelets a blood fraction? What about white blood cells?

    It would be more encouraging for any of the friends that might be reading this if you would answer the simple questions before you start insulting me. Um, yeah, it makes it look like you don't know the answer to the questions. For the sake of all the readers that want to learn from your vast knowledge, we'll keep this really simple:

    Are platelets a blood fraction? YES or NO

    Are white blood cells a blood fraction? YES or NO

Share this