Refuting Watchtarded Reasoning - 1. "If a doctor tells you to abstain from alcohol, you wouldn't inject it..."

by Island Man 32 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • stockholm_Syndrome

    I like the reasoning - All JWs eat the remnant blood in meat--because it is not the lifeblood-lifeblood is poured out at slaughter----blood donors do not give their lifeblood -- you can have a transfusion as per meat remnant blood

  • anointed1

    Context decides the correct meaning, as Cofty, rightly brought out. But the problem with those who remained in darkness for a long time is that even when they are shown the light, they would still behave like the man in The Tale of Two Cities of Charles Dickens. He had been imprisoned for several long years. At long last, he was set free. Prison authorities led him out of his dark cell into the bright and beautiful sunshine outside. For a moment, he gazed at the blue sky and the bright sun -but his eyes were dazzled. He turned and walked back to his cell, covering his eyes with his hands. He had grown so accustomed to the darkness that he could not face the light any more! The dark cell seemed to him to be a secure haven.

  • Phizzy

    This is from long time Poster on here, and wise man, TD :

    " I've noticed that JW's will often go straight to page 71 of the Reasoning book and ask, "Consider a man who is told by the doctor that he must abstain from alcohol. Would he be obedient if he quit drinking alcohol but had it put directly in his veins?"

    This is a perfect opportunity to point out the grammatical error:

    "Depends. Let's say a husband and wife both go to the same doctor. The woman is told "You should abstain from alcohol throughout all three trimesters of your pregnancy. The man is told, "People like you with sensitive skin, should abstain from alcohol."

    The doctor said "Abstain from alcohol" to both the man and the woman, but was he talking about the same thing? (Of course not. In context, the wife was told not to drink it and the husband was told not to put it on his skin.)

    Could the wife still use cosmetics that contained alcohol on her skin? (Of course she could.) Could the husband still drink alcoholic beverages? (Of course he could. The two abstentions are completely unconnected.)

    You're taking a statement that was spoken two thousand years ago in connection with whether Christians should be circumcised and keep the Law along with its dietary rules, and pretending to me that it was spoken by an angel in an operating room!

    Could you please explain how that's an honest way to treat the Bible?"

Share this