Am I reading this right?

by RedhorseWoman 28 Replies latest jw friends

  • Lady Lee
    Lady Lee

    Just so you know

    This thread was started in May 2000.

    I think the policies have changed since then - yet again so who knows what the flavor of the week is

  • Mysterious

    Meh I didnt even look at the original date. Grumble bump..

    Im sure if there was such 'new light' I would have heard it from my father, he does skim the questions from readers usually in an attempt to drudge up any scandal.

  • CatOnARoof

    Id like to read more about it. Are they really trying to slowly change their doctrine? this seemed to be one of the major issues. Does anyone know a good article?

  • Wasanelder Once
    Wasanelder Once


    Published in 1977.


  • Jehovah Saves
    Jehovah Saves

    10 “‘As for any man of the house of Israel or some alien resident who is residing as an alien in YOUR midst who eats any sort of blood, I shall certainly set my face against the soul that is eating the blood, and I shall indeed cut him off from among his people. 11 For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for YOU to make atonement for YOUR souls, because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul [in it]. 12 That is why I have said to the sons of Israel: “No soul of YOU must eat blood and no alien resident who is residing as an alien in YOUR midst should eat blood.” 13 “‘As for any man of the sons of Israel or some alien resident who is residing as an alien in YOUR midst who in hunting catches a wild beast or a fowl that may be eaten, he must in that case pour its blood out and cover it with dust. 14 For the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood by the soul in it. Consequently I said to the sons of Israel: “YOU must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood. Anyone eating it will be cut off.” 15 As for any soul that eats a body [already] dead or something torn by a wild beast, whether a native or an alien resident, he must in that case wash his garments and bathe in water and be unclean until the evening; and he must be clean. 16 But if he will not wash them and will not bathe his flesh, he must then answer for his error.’”

  • Little Drummer Boy
  • Amber Rose
    Amber Rose

    Would someone tell me what happens to the milk on the third day. I don't want to wait that long to find out. Also, I might barf if I got close to a glass of milk that had been sitting out for three days. So, what happens!

  • Lady Liberty
    Lady Liberty

    Remember, why was blood to be poured out instead of eaten?? It was because it represented life. And blood is sacred to God because of it. So to eat it would seem to be disrespectful would it not?

    Remember too, in Bible times they had no way of using blood to save the sacred life that it represents, however today, we have the ability to use the sacred blood and save a sacred life. Someone illustrated it like this to me:

    The house is on fire, the husband rushes into the bedroom and there lies his lovely wife asleep, completely unaware she is in danger. Instead of saving her life, he grabs her wedding ring that is sitting on the nightstand beside her. And she dies because he rushed in and saved the wedding ring that symbolised their marriage, instead of saving her, the actual person.

    How crazy would that be? Now look at blood again. Did not the sacraficing and blood represent a constant reminder to the Isrealites as to how imperfect they were and how in need they were of a savior? Pouring out the blood was done to forshadow the blood poured out by Christ Jesus.

    Personally I could not eat blood because I feel it would be disrespectful to Jehovah because it represents life. Using it as a life saving liquid organ however is not the same as being nourished by it as you would by taking food. Why would Jehovah disapprove of saving the actual life, rather then letting it die because of blood for which life represents?? It doesn't make sence.

    I recall a scripture where there was a battle taking place and the soldiers needed food, yet they were not able to bleed the animal because they were in the middle of this battle. Jehovah excused them and they were unclean I believe for a short period of time. Now..why would Jehovah excuse them? Because he knew the blood although eaten was not done out of disrespect, but was done in order to fortify the soldiers so they could continue to be strong and live. So it was in a sence "lifesaving" was it not??

    My Grandfather died because of the ever changing blood policy! He was a wonderful man who we all dearly miss!! I deeply resent the fact that this policy has changed! The very fact that it IS changing is proof that the whole blood policy is not directed from Jehovah at ALL! I can be confident this is true because he tells us he does NOT CHANGE. So the whole "new light, old light" is just a excuse to change a man made policy. If it was from Jehovah to obstain from blood, then even fractions would be wrong. They would not have softened, because once wrong in Jehovahs eyes, always wrong in Jehovahs eyes. As the Bible clearly says to pour the blood out. To even get a fraction you have to have stored blood. It cannot be manufactured without blood. The very fraction that the Witness is allowed to take, no matter how small, came from blood that was stored. You cannot make a fraction without it. It is part of blood!!

    So one day the Society will no doubt make it a matter of conscience, and all those who have lost there loved ones like we have... well..I guess the Societys attitude will be it's just too bad!! How many more people have to die before it changes? How very scarey it is!! Pray more wake up!!


    Lady Liberty

  • Lady Liberty
    Lady Liberty

    Dear Jehovah Saves,

    WELCOME to the forum!


    Lady Liberty

Share this