by cofty 556 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
As a JW I would simply have replied that saving a sheep on the Sabbath was never against the Law. Jesus was showing that the Pharisees had gone beyond the Law. In the case of blood the law is very clear. There cannot be any compromise.
Ah! Now I see. To me, this principle Jesus introduced was enough to convince me differently about the Blood doctrine.
But I can definitely see a JW reacting the way you mentioned.
I have read lots of stuff by non-JWs and ex-JWs about blood. IMO most of it misses the point. None of it would have convinced me.
We need to think like a loyal JW and concede as much common ground as possible.
This approach takes the principle behind the law and shows why it would not apply to transfusions. This would have given me pause. Actually it did.
If an Israelite was to bleed an animal without killing it - as the Maasai do - and take the blood to the altar, the blood would have no sacrificial value for the simple reason that no life had been taken.
I think that one thought is enough to make a thinking JW think again. I'd rephrase it as a question to present this way to a JW:
If a Jew had bled some blood from an animal without killing the animal, would the extracted blood have been acceptable as a sacred sacrifice by God?
I have read lots of stuff by non-JWs and ex-JWs about blood. IMO most of it misses the point. None of it would have convinced me.
I think different things impact different individuals depending on circumstances, training, and a lot of other variables. Hence I think a range of information is helpful to help readers confronted with Watchtower's blood taboo, whether the individual is a JW or someone who's treating a JW, or someone else.
SAHS - Responded to that above.
In the mind of a JW saving a sheep was not defined as working on the sabbath according to Jesus. He was not permitting anybody to break the Law. He was condemning an abuse of the Law.
Jesus instructed his followers to keep the law.
If a Jew had bled some blood from an animal without killing the animal, would the extracted blood have been acceptable as a sacred sacrifice by God?
That is a good question Marvin. It would be an excellent opening gambit.
A pondering question ....
What if the ancient Hebrews knew that transfusing blood to another person would and could save that receivers life, would they do so, in spite of their perceived sacredness of blood ?
Hypothetically speaking.
That is the theme of the OP Fink.
Yes I am convinced OT Jews would transfuse for the reasons I gave.
