Tertullian & June 15/00 WT on Blood

by hawkaw 37 Replies latest jw friends

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    In two paragraphs in the June 15/00 WT QFR on blood, Tertullian is quoted a few times in the 5th and 6th paragraphs on page 29. ( http://www.jwfiles.com/blood-WT6-15-00.htm

    I have been trying to find the exact quotes from Tertullian. I figured the WT used the "Ante-Nicene Fathers".

    I have searched through Roberts and Donaldson's "Ante-Nicene Fathers" arranged by volume (Vols 3 and 4 for Tertullian) at ( http://www.math.byu.edu/~smithw/Lds/LDS/Ancient-history-items/Early-Christian/Ante-Nicene-Fathers/

    or at ( http://tertullian.org/anf/index.htm

    But I can't seem to find the quotes.

    I was thinking that the quotes done by in the June 15, 00 WT are from Chapter IX, Apology, Part 1, (Found in Vol. 3 of the "Ante-Nicene Fathers".

    Am I right? Did the WT misquote or does anyone know where to look for the quotes.

    The reason I ask all of this is because Maximus and Marvin Shilmer brought up some good lies spewed forth by the WT (in http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=6288&site=3) regarding Professor Gorman and Tertullian.

    Thus, I just wanted to check for myself and confirm for myself that Tertullian taken out of context again.

    Hope someone can help me. BTW does any one else have a full printout of the Oct. 15/00 WT QFR that discusses blood and could they post it?

    Thanks in advance

    hawk

  • LDH
    LDH

    Hawk,

    If you write the society and 'ax' them, they will give you the reference. They may even include a copy.

    A very dear friend of mine about 15 years ago got sick of hearing the WBTS say that the UN said they were 'God's organization on earth' and wrote to them for proof.

    They sent her an exact copy of some article that was, in fact, part of the UN charter statement or some such.

    Of course, of all the things the UN has ever written, they focused on that one sentence and continue to use it and use it and use it.

    So it wouldn't surprise me that they 'quoted' Tertullian, but perhaps changed the meaning of his words in doing so.

    Lisa

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    Thanks Lisa (LDH) & again thanks for your other comments on what the real issues are instead of names on the other thread.

    I am, like you, unfortunately well aware of how the WT operates.

    I have read the version of Tertullian I presented above over a few times. I even went back to the June 1, 1990 WT QFR and read what the WT had to say about Tertullian back then. They quoted him twice in that QFR. One quote was bang on and the other was not. The WT of course took it out of context. This section of the Apology (IX), has to do with murder and not with "abstaining from blood".

    I will consider writing the "heros of the story" to see what they have to say.

    But again thanks for your help and if anyone else can be of some help I would appreciate it.

    hawk

  • Maximus
    Maximus

    I'm tied up this morning and don't have access to files, but got a phone call from someone who saw your post and suggested I check in.

    Here's a searchable site from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library:
    www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-03/TOC.htm

    The Gorman quote was bang on too, but a horrendous misrepresentation of the truth. Not even a "one could reasonably conclude that ..." The guy says it's an ancient HUNTING RITUAL. It's been an eye-opener for those who took the time to read it; my intent was to cross the t's and dot the i's yet make it
    readable. Someone asked me, Couldn't you put it in one paragraph? My answer, No, that would destroy what I've attempted to do. When the fall-out from the Dateline program begins, lots of folks will be asking more pointed questions about the blood policy.

    I share what must be your delight at discovering for oneself how deceitful they are, and I confess an awful sadness I felt. Followers following followers following followers. I'm no longer in line.

    Maximus
    Will look forward to your sharing the results.

    Edit: PS after reading the post above. If you write the Society these days, you will not be given a reference. They omit them in their publications. The writing formula is simple.
    Catchy opening lines, stating an issue.
    According to expert X,
    Professor Y says,
    and that's in agreement with Watchtower/Bible/Scriptural solution or position.
    Is it not?

    M

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    Hi Max,

    Yes I have been in this site too and it contains the same ANF version that I have read and posted elsewhere. If you know of a different version the society uses let me know.

    I gotta Email you one of these day if you don't mind.

    And yes thanks for that Gorman quote. It was a dandy. I have read that piece and what Marvin wrote about ten times now and I just keep shakng my head. That is what started to click in my head about the June 15/00 WT QFR.

    hawk

    p.s. - thanks for your wrting the society warning.

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    Maximus and others,

    www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-03/TOC.htm

    (This is the version of Tertullian, Apology, Chapter IX in full for those who wish to compare with what is written in the June 15/00 WT. The first part deals with murder. Note the sentence about how the foetus (fetus) gets sustenance. The last part deals with incest etc.). If anyone knows of another version that gives the exact quote that is found in the June 15/00 WT let me know.

    "That I may refute more thoroughly these charges, I will show that in part openly, in part secretly, practices prevail among you which have led you perhaps to credit similar things about us. Children were openly sacrificed in Africa to Saturn as lately as the proconsulship of Tiberius, who exposed to public gaze the priests suspended on the sacred trees overshadowing their temple-so many crosses on which the punishment which justice craved overtook their crimes, as the soldiers of our country still can testify who did that very work for that proconsul. And even now that sacred. crime still continues to be done in secret. It is not only Christians, you see, who despise you; for all that you do there is neither any crime thoroughly and abidingly eradicated, nor does any of your gods reform his ways. When Saturn did not spare his own children, he was not likely to spare the children
    of others; whom indeed the very parents themselves were in the habit of offering, gladly responding to the call which was made on them, and keeping the little ones pleased on the occasion, that they might not die in tears. At the same time, there is a vast difference between homicide and parricide. A more advanced age was
    sacrificed to Mercury in Gaul. I hand over the Tauric fables to their own theatres. Why, even in that most religious city of the pious descendants of ¦neas, there is a certain Jupiter whom in their games they lave with human blood. It is the blood of a beast-fighter, you say. Is it less, because of that, the blood of a man?11 Or is it viler blood because it is from the veins of a wicked man? At any rate it is shed in murder. O Jove, thyself a
    Christian, and in truth only son of thy father in his cruelty! But in regard to child murder, as it does not matter whether it is committed for a sacred object, or merely at one's own self-impulse-although there is a great difference, as we have said, between parricide and homicide-I shall turn to the people generally. How many, think you, of those crowding around and gaping for Christian blood,-how many even of your rulers, notable for their justice to you and for their severe measures against us, may I charge in their own consciences with the sin of putting their offspring to death? As to any difference t in the kind of murder, it is certainly the more cruel way to kill by drowning, or by exposure to cold and hunger and dogs. A maturer age has always preferred death by the sword. In our case, murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the foetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is
    merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to the birth. That is a man which is going to be one; you have the fruit already in its seed. As to meals of blood and such tragic dishes, read-I am not sure where it is told (it is in Herodotus, I think)-how blood taken from the arms, and tasted by both parties, has been the treaty bond among some nations. I am not sure what it was that was tasted in the time of Catiline. They say, too, that among some Scythian tribes the dead are eaten by their friends. But I am going far from home. At this day, among ourselves, blood consecrated to Bellona, blood drawn from a punctured thigh and then partaken of, seals initiation into the rites of that goddess. Those, too, who at the gladiator shows, for the cure of epilepsy, quaff with greedy thirst the blood of criminals slain in the arena, as it flows fresh from the wound, and then rush off-to whom do they belong? those, also, who make meals on the flesh of wild beasts at the place of combat-who have keen appetites for bear and stag? That bear in the struggle was bedewed with the blood of the man whom it lacerated: that stag rolled itself in the gladiator's gore. The entrails of the very bears, loaded with as yet undigested human viscera, are in great request. And you have men rifting up man-fed flesh? If you partake of food like this, how do your repasts differ from those you accuse us Christians of? And do those, who, with savage lust, seize on human bodies, do less because they devour the living? Have they less the pollution of human blood on them because they only
    lick up what is to turn into blood? They make meals, it is plain, not so much of infants, as of grown-up men. Blush for your vile ways before the Christians, who have not even the blood of animals at their meals of simple and natural food; who abstain from things strangled and that die a natural death, for no other reason than that they may not contract pollution, so much as from blood secreted in the viscera. To clench the matter with a single example, you tempt Christians with sausages of blood, just because you are perfectly aware that the thing by which you thus try to get them to transgress they hold unlawful.12 And how unreasonable it is to believe that those, of whom you are convinced that they regard with horror the idea of tasting the blood of oxen, are eager after blood of men; unless, mayhap, you have tried it, and found it sweeter to the taste! Nay, in fact, there is here a test you should apply to discover Christians, as well as the fire-pan and the censer. They should be proved by their appetite for human blood, as well as by their refusal to offer sacrifice; just as otherwise they should be affirmed to be free of Christianity by their refusal to taste of blood, as by their sacrificing; and there would be no want of blood of men, amply supplied as that would be in the trial and condemnation of prisoners. Then who are more given to the crime of incest than those who have enjoyed the instruction of Jupiter himself? Ctesias tells us that the Persians have illicit intercourse with their mothers. The Macedonians, too, are suspected on this point; for on first hearing the tragedy of îdipus they made mirth of the incest-doer's grief, exclaiming, h9laune ei0j th\ n mhte/ra. Even now reflect what opportunity there is for mistakes leading to incestuous comminglings-your promiscuous looseness supplying the materials. You first of all expose your children, that they may be taken up by any compassionate passer-by, to whom they are quite unknown; or you give them away, to be adopted by those who will do better to them the part of parents. Well, some time or other, all memory of the alienated progeny must be lost; and when once a mistake has been made, the transmission of incest thence will still go on-the race and the crime creeping on together. Then, further, wherever you are-at home, abroad, over the seas-your lust is an attendant, whose general indulgence, or even its indulgence in the most limited scale, may easily and unwittingly anywhere beget children so that in this way a progeny scattered about in the commerce of life may have intercourse with those who are their own kin, and have no notion that there is any incest in the case. A persevering and stedfast chastity has protected us from anything like this: keeping as we do from adulteries and all post-matrimonial unfaithfulness, we are not exposed to incestuous mishaps. Some of us, making matters still more secure, beat away from them entirely the power of sensual sin, by a virgin continence, still boys in this respect when they are old. If you would but take notice that such sins as I have mentioned prevail among you, that would lead you to see that they have no existence among Christians. The same eyes would tell you of both facts. But the two blindnesses are apt to go together; so that those who do not see what is, think they see what is not. I shall show it to be so in everything. But now let me speak of matters which are more dear."

    hawk

  • Maximus
    Maximus

    I gave up on finding the precise Watchtower quotation too. Even tried to paraphrase from the original. Not worth the effort now.

    Let me tell you how it works. A quotation is dug up somewhere by a compiler or writer, gets used---and used, and used, and used. No one takes a fresh look at context or accuracy. And by dint of its having been published in The Watchtower or a bound book, a product of the spirit-anointed faithful slave, it is not checked again. When you question it at the highest level in Writing, if you are not one of the club you will receive the answer, "Did we get it right between the quotation marks?"

    Funny. Freddy Franz used to privately encourage reading of the commentaries and Patristics, and I certainly know he did that with Ray, asking him to make sure of all things. I'm sure it's in Ray's book somewhere.

    I locked my address because of some particularly vicious mail that I'll not go into here. Soon as I can, I'll turn it back on today. Feel free to drop me a line; I'll keep it confidential.

    M

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    To hawkaw:

    I found the following stuff online (went out for a few hours and found you had posted much the same material but from a different website):

    http://www.tertullian.org/anf/index.htm

    THE WRITINGS OF TERTULLIAN
    PART ONE - APOLOGETICAL WORKS
    THE APOLOGY
    Translated by the Rev. S. Thelwall, Late Scholar of Christ's College, Cantab.

    The translation can be found here:

    http://www.tertullian.org/anf/anf03/anf03-05.htm#P253_53158

    Chapter IX
    How many, think you, of those crowding around and gaping for Christian blood,-how many even of your rulers, notable for their justice to you and for their severe measures against us, may I charge in their own consciences with the sin of putting their offspring to death? As to any difference in the kind of murder, it is certainly the more cruel way to kill by drowning, or by exposure to cold and hunger and dogs. A maturer age has always preferred death by the sword. In our case, murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the foetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to the birth. That is a man which is going to be one; you have the fruit already in its seed. As to meals of blood and such tragic dishes, read-I am not sure where it is told (it is in Herodotus, I think)-how blood taken from the arms, and tasted by both parties, has been the treaty bond among some nations. I am not sure what it was that was tasted in the time of Catiline. They say, too, that among some Scythian tribes the dead are eaten by their friends. But I am going far from home. At this day, among ourselves, blood consecrated to Bellona, blood drawn from a punctured thigh and then partaken of, seals initiation into the rites of that goddess. Those, too, who at the gladiator shows, for the cure of epilepsy, quaff with greedy thirst the blood of criminals slain in the arena, as it flows fresh from the wound, and then rush off-to whom do they belong? those, also, who make meals on the flesh of wild beasts at the place of combat-who have keen appetites for bear and stag? That bear in the struggle was bedewed with the blood of the man whom it lacerated: that stag rolled itself in the gladiator's gore. The entrails of the very bears, loaded with as yet undigested human viscera, are in great request. And you have men rifting up man-fed flesh? If you partake of food like this, how do your repasts differ from those you accuse us Christians of? And do those, who, with savage lust, seize on human bodies, do less because they devour the living? Have they less the pollution of human blood on them because they only lick up what is to turn into blood? They make meals, it is plain, not so much of infants, as of grown-up men. Blush for your vile ways before the Christians, who have not even the blood of animals at their meals of simple and natural food; who abstain from things strangled and that die a natural death, for no other reason than that they may not contract pollution, so much as from blood secreted in the viscera. To clench the matter with a single example, you tempt Christians with sausages of blood, just because you are perfectly aware that the thing by which you thus try to get them to transgress they hold unlawful.12 And how unreasonable it is to believe that those, of whom you are convinced that they regard with horror the idea of tasting the blood of oxen, are eager after blood of men; unless, mayhap, you have tried it, and found it sweeter to the taste! Nay, in fact, there is here a test you should apply to discover Christians, as well as the fire-pan and the censer. They should be proved by their appetite for human blood, as well as by their refusal to offer sacrifice; just as otherwise they should be affirmed to be free of Christianity by their refusal to taste of blood, as by their sacrificing; and there would be no want of blood of men, amply supplied as that would be in the trial and condemnation of prisoners.

    The bolded stuff is parallel to the WT quote. I suspect that the quote is taken from a different English translation, which may be listed here:

    http://www.tertullian.org/works/apologeticum.htm

    The Loeb Classical Library has fairly modern translations; perhaps that's where the WT quote is from.

    AlanF

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    AF,

    Sorry to take sooo long to respond back. I was stuck in court on fri. and had a very buzy weekend.

    Thanks for the information and I will look into the Loeb Classical Library. I have yet to find the exact quote that the WT used but I will keep looking.

    I am slowly reading the Apology by Tertullian for the first time. Very interesting stuff.

    I keep reading chapter IX over and over and how Tertullian talks about how wrong it is to sacrifice children and that Christians don't do that sort of thing, including abortion. I read where he talks about human blood used to nourish the fetus. Then I keep thinking of that May 22, 1994 Awake! Magazine that shows those 26 innocent little witness children who were scarificed by the WTS in the name of God.

    Hawk (www.ajwrb.org)

  • chasson
    chasson

    But Tertullian at this time, was he not a montanist ?
    And not an orthodox christian ?

    Bye

    Charles

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit