Religion: pros & cons (Religion)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Friday, October 17, 2014, 21:55 (3688 days ago) @ dhw
edited by Balance_Maintained, Friday, October 17, 2014, 22:02

DHW: Acts 15:19-20 merely says people should abstain from idols, fornication, things that have been strangled, and blood. -
Yes, exactly. Abstain from blood. Abstain from things strangled. If the prohibition were merely against EATING blood, why the double statement to abstain from blood AND things strangled? The Jews recognized the latter, but why not the former? As for your statement regarding the Witnesses, as always, I make a distinction between the teachings of the organization and the personal thoughts and choices of individual people. Their official stance can be found here: http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200000774 Even they recognize that certain subtopics are going to matters of conscience, but whole blood is clearly against bible principles. -
>Hardly a commandment to sacrifice a life rather than submit to an advance in medical science that was unknown at the time. About 20 years ago, my wife nearly died through horrendous post-operative negligence, and was hovering between life and death for three days. She was saved by massive blood transfusions. You ask: “So, a simple question, if you would not eat something, would you mainline it into your bloodstream?” Yes of course I would, if it meant saving my life, my wife's, or anyone else's. So too would the Chief Rabbi, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Pope.
> -(Mat 16:25; Luke 9:24, 17:33; Mark 8:35) You know, you are correct in that that is what most people would do. Most people would do anything to save their life, even disobey God's laws. And that is exactly why those 4 scriptures above were written. The challenge made to Jehovah by Satan in Job 2:4 was explicitly this: "“Skin for skin. A man will give everything that he has for his life." Gods request of us was to "Be wise, my son, and make my heart rejoice, So that I can make a reply to him who taunts me." (Prov 27:11) If you break his law to save your skin, you are doing exactly what Satan said you would, if however, you remain faithful, you "make a reply to him who taunts" God. I don't expect you to agree, but it is all there for you to see, in clear black and white. -
> But I'm using this only as an illustration of the two points I raised earlier: 1) the bible is wide open to interpretation. I challenge your assumption that anyone who interprets it differently from you does so out of ignorance, malice or self-interest. 2) The bible is an unreliable moral guide.-Yet, at each interpretation I have shown you multiple scriptures that clarify the bibles position. You interpret it your way because it means you can justify saving a life, and do so by only taking those that support a personal view(Prov. 3:5). I understand it, but I disagree. I don't have a death wish, but I am not afraid of it either. I love life, and my family but I put my faith in God. But your dilemma is what was referred to in Mat 10:37. It is also the same challenge that Abraham faced with Isaac. -You may questions my morals because of that, but consider this. If I do not believe in hell, and I do believe in a resurrection, and I believe that Jehovah will keep his promises, then why should I be afraid of death.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.