Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While what you say is technically correct, you didn't say enough to put it into proper perspective. Worldwide, there are ~60 people who die each year due to transfusions. However, the are over 900 people who die each year because needed transfusions were refused. Just in the United States, 4.5 million people will need a transfusion every year. The chance of experience a problem like that would be on the order of 0.001%. The chance of being hit by lightning is probably higher.
but what is the "proper perspective?" I was saying it in a way that I see it. I didn't feel that I needed to go into great details. in order to give the reasons why I... wouldn't do it. my point was to show that there was enough reason to scare me into NOT taking it in. so even if I wasn't a Jws, I still wouldn't do it
Early Christians could "save themselves" by eating blood sausages when brought before Roman authorities. Refusing likely meant a trip to the arena or death by some other means. JWs refuse blood transfusions and some say they could instead save themselves by accepting blood transfusions. Early Christians chose not to just as JWs choose not to. Could it be early Christians viewed blood as being more than just about food, health, dietary laws, etc similar to how JWs view blood today? So I don't see how the method of administration, IV or oral, would change that position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade
So, you do not see a difference, when it comes to preserving life?
Did not Christ Jesus give his blood for you? Or, are you actually eating his flesh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd4me
"For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it." Jesus-Matthew 16:25
These early Christians could have saved their lives in regards to blood. They would also have broken God's commandments.
You are not loosing your life to save it by refusing to receive blood? Instead, you are acting out of ignorance, while comparing it to a blood sausage that goes through your digestive system. The blood that runs though your veins and arteries is what gives you life, not that which goes through your stomach?
Words off a tv show doesn't prove it.
Any one repentant gets forgiveness with wisdom involved as well. that's Gods plan--Do you condemn it. Or is your sins less than theirs to Gods view that you condemn them?
You are not loosing your life to save it by refusing to receive blood? Instead, you are acting out of ignorance, while comparing it to a blood sausage that goes through your digestive system. The blood that runs though your veins and arteries is what gives you life, not that which goes through your stomach?
Well alright then. But, if I'm going to die anyway just let me die with my dignity intact. That's all I ask. Look, I'm not the judge of anyone. I can't make decisions for those who believe differently. That's not my place.
Well alright then. But, if I'm going to die anyway just let me die with my dignity intact. That's all I ask. Look, I'm not the judge of anyone. I can't make decisions for those who believe differently. That's not my place.
What I can't understand is why you can't see the difference between the gift of life from a donor who is able and willing to give it without suffering harm and taking that life from a helpless and unwilling animal.
Early Christians could "save themselves" by eating blood sausages when brought before Roman authorities. Refusing likely meant a trip to the arena or death by some other means. JWs refuse blood transfusions and some say they could instead save themselves by accepting blood transfusions. Early Christians chose not to just as JWs choose not to. Could it be early Christians viewed blood as being more than just about food, health, dietary laws, etc similar to how JWs view blood today? So I don't see how the method of administration, IV or oral, would change that position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade
So, you do not see a difference, when it comes to preserving life?
Did not Christ Jesus give his blood for you? Or, are you actually eating his flesh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd4me
Well alright then. But, if I'm going to die anyway just let me die with my dignity intact. That's all I ask. Look, I'm not the judge of anyone. I can't make decisions for those who believe differently. That's not my place.
The problem is thinking the scriptures are speaking of literal, historical, natural things
There are signs in the scriptures that should alert us to the spiritual, symbolic and to leave our natural “religious” “parents” and learn from a variety of the writings that have been left to us - what I am reading at the moment is the early church Fathers which are “apostolic” which use the same “signage” and terminology as in the scriptures
The problem is thinking the scriptures are speaking of literal, historical, natural things
There are signs in the scriptures that should alert us to the spiritual, symbolic and to leave our natural “religious” “parents” and learn from a variety of the writings that have been left to us - what I am reading at the moment is the early church Fathers which are “apostolic” which use the same “signage” and terminology as in the scriptures
I agree with you that Scriptures are not always referring to literal things. The 24 hour literal days of creation. The teaching of hell in Mark and Luke because we have other scriptures to guide our thinking or early copies of the Bible that don't use the word "hell," etc. There are other examples.
However, it appears to be a matter of historical record that Romans would engage in various tests to discover Christians brought before them. One such test was offering blood products. If Christians refused they would put their lives in jeopardy. If you have blood products made from poor unwitting animals and if it were simply dietary prohibition why would they risk their lives then?
Well alright then. But, if I'm going to die anyway just let me die with my dignity intact. That's all I ask. Look, I'm not the judge of anyone. I can't make decisions for those who believe differently. That's not my place.
What I can't understand is why you can't see the difference between the gift of life from a donor who is able and willing to give it without suffering harm and taking that life from a helpless and unwilling animal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
