beauroberts

Originally posted by FMF
This is surely a point to be made in favour of saving lives with blood transfusions rather than a point in favour of banning it.

Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life.
The only blood that will bring us everlasting life is the shed blood of Christ Jesus.
God's prohibition on blood, setting it aside as something special, started with Noah and his family. Genesis 9:3-5 says, "Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you....Only flesh with its blood you must not eat. Besides that, I will demand an accounting for your lifeblood....'
If you believe the Bible, all of mankind are descended from Noah and his family, therefore this prohibition was placed on the entire human race.
We are all accountable.
Just as with Adam and Eve we can choose to respect that command or not.
God gave us free will. It's up to us to use it correctly or not.
Hopefully we will not make the same mistake Adam and Eve made.
For more free information about the Bible see www.jw.org

Originally posted by roigam
Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life.
The only blood that will bring us everlasting life is the shed blood of Christ Jesus.
God's prohibition on blood, setting it aside as something special, started with Noah and his family. Genesis 9:3-5 says, "Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you....Only flesh with its blood ...[text shortened]... ke the same mistake Adam and Eve made.
For more free information about the Bible see www.jw.org

I accept that you don't personally want to have blood transfusions because of your own superstitions ~ I get that, I really do ~ but you are unable to show how a ban on them is scriptural or even in accordance with Christian principle. If you can find some verses that are not about eating animals, about consuming animal blood or about blood sacrifice and instead show us some verses that ban life saving blood transfusions, then share these with us, rather than your personal mystical and paganism-tinged thoughts about blood.

Originally posted by roigam
Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life.
The only blood that will bring us everlasting life is the shed blood of Christ Jesus.

This is surely a point to be made in favour of saving lives with blood transfusions rather than a point in favour of banning it. Nobody claims that life saving blood transfusions will bring people everlasting life.

-Removed-

Do you think that maybe he needs to wear a yellow star on his person so that it's obvious to everyone "what he is"?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Do you think that maybe he needs to wear a yellow star on his person so that it's obvious to everyone "what he is"?

You are comparing divegeester's comments on this thread to the Nazis treatment of the Jews in the 1930's and 1940s?

-Removed-

If she has a forum philosophy at all, it might be 'I am as randomly and as dementedly scathing as I can be, therefore I am.' 😉

Originally posted by roigam
Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life.
The only blood that will bring us everlasting life is the shed blood of Christ Jesus.
God's prohibition on blood, setting it aside as something special, started with Noah and his family. Genesis 9:3-5 says, "Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you....Only flesh with its blood ...[text shortened]... ke the same mistake Adam and Eve made.
For more free information about the Bible see www.jw.org

"Blood transfusions are at best a brief extension of our life."

That, at best, is an after-the-fact rationalization. The commandment need not have any such rationale, it and all such is to be accepted without need for being 'made OK.'

That's at best. Devaluing the extension of mortal life devalues mortal life life itself.

I'm sure you didn't come to accept the command based on accepting the rationale given here.