Originally posted by Proper Knobyeah he did!
He did, finally, answer this on the previous page -
'No my objection is not whether it is safe or not, but based on a religious principle (abstain from blood) and philosophical (the right of self determination) , safety of procedure is meaningless in this context.'
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNot millions at all .........maybe 1000's ? but not millions and I bet as medical technology gets better that number would be even less ......I admit and agree there is a small risk for one receiving a blood transfusion but I would wager that people die going to the dentist or getting their tonsils pulled so do we altogether not go to the dentist anymore ? No
FMF the apostate, bwahahaha, he cannot be trusted and neither can cabbagejeester
answer the question,
have thousands and possibly millions of people died as a direct or indirect consequence of blood transfusions?
Manny
Originally posted by menace71robbie has shown himself to be unwilling/unable to discuss or defend his posts about the level of safety (or otherwise) of blood transfusions. He has essentially admitted that he has been spamming the thread [the "safety of procedure is meaningless in this context"] and I deduce that this has been him trying to deflect attention away from the issue of human sacrifice (and the JW stance on it) which was raised by the OP.
Not millions at all .........maybe 1000's ?
The principle in the New Testament was that Gentiles and Jews were becoming one in the Christian Faith ...And the Abstain from blood was to appease the Jewish Christians. I would a step further and say one could actually eat food and not be sinning at all ....The principle of Christian Liberty is that all things are permissible in there place but not all things beneficial......
1 Timothy 4 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Apostasy
4 But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, 2 by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, 3 men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude; 5 for it is sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer.
Colossians 2:16--
16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day— 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.
Colossians 2:20----
20 If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, 21 “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” 22 (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? 23 These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence.
These scriptures refute the JW doctrine of don't touch blood or technically any food and there are more....The other principal which Paul teaches is not to destroy your brothers conscience in the matter of things like this ....as some have faith that they may do all things
Manny
The Heart of Man Matthew 15:15----
15 Peter said to Him, “Explain the parable to us.” 16 Jesus said, “Are you still lacking in understanding also? 17 Do you not understand that everything that goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and is eliminated? 18 But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders. 20 These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile the man.”
Jesus says it is not what enters the man that defiles but comes out of the heart
Manny
Originally posted by menace71what is it about
Not millions at all .........maybe 1000's ? but not millions and I bet as medical technology gets better that number would be even less ......I admit and agree there is a small risk for one receiving a blood transfusion but I would wager that people die going to the dentist or getting their tonsils pulled so do we altogether not go to the dentist anymore ? No
Manny
hundreds of thousands up to millions of farmers and peasants were infected with HIV through participation in state-run blood collection programs in which contaminated equipment was reused!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV/AIDS_in_China
that is difficult to understand? did I make that up, is it fictional, uncorroborated, a fantasy, tell us Manfred my friend, on what is your estimation of, and I quote, 'thousands', based upon, for you have provided no link, no substantiation, no corroborating evidence, I say to you, you simply made it up.
I will hear your confessions now.
Originally posted by menace71on the contaray the reasoning that you seem to be haviong diffculty with is this,
The principle in the New Testament was that Gentiles and Jews were becoming one in the Christian Faith ...And the Abstain from blood was to appease the Jewish Christians. I would a step further and say one could actually eat food and not be sinning at all ....The principle of Christian Liberty is that all things are permissible in there place but not all th ...[text shortened]... e in the matter of things like this ....as some have faith that they may do all things
Manny
if the Bible states that its forbidden to eat blood or drink blood then on what basis is it permissible to inject it intravenously? that eating is not the same as injecting, wow.
'One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much' - Luke 16:10
Here is the simple reasoning and logic, if someone forbids you to drink whisky would you then conclude that it is permissible to inject it into your veins? No then your assertions regarding the stance of Jehovash witnesses and the use of blood is overturned and your arguments refuted,
tell us why if its not permissible to drink or eat something (and the Bible clearly states that it is not) why it is permissible to inject it into your body? (that eating drinking and injecting are not the same is simply not going to hold, because clearly injecting is much more serious and much more deadly) otherwise your assertions of apostasy and not upholding biblical standards completely without foundation.
In other words those who say that eating and injecting are not one and the same thing are straining out the gnat and gulping down the camel - thank you Jesus
I will hear your confessions now.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieInjecting blood into your veins can, and does save people lives. Injecting whisky into your veins will almost certainly kill you. That is the difference.
on the contaray the reasoning that you seem to be haviong diffculty with is this,
if the Bible states that its forbidden to eat blood or drink blood then on what basis is it permissible to inject it intravenously? that eating is not the same as injecting, wow.
'One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much' - Luke 16:10
Here ...[text shortened]... g out the gnat and gulping down the camel - thank you Jesus
I will hear your confessions now.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieignore.
what is it about
hundreds of thousands up to millions of farmers and peasants were infected with HIV through participation in state-run blood collection programs in which contaminated equipment was reused!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV/AIDS_in_China
that is difficult to understand? did I make that up, is it fictional, uncorroborated, ...[text shortened]... roborating evidence, I say to you, you simply made it up.
I will hear your confessions now.