XPost: alt.religion.christian   
   From: sam@spade.invalid   
      
   James wrote:   
   > On Fri, 03 Oct 2025 17:05:04 -0700, Samuel Spade  wrote:   
   >   
   > >James wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> blood: What a Bible doctor wrote.   
   > >>   
   > >> Notice what was said to Noah:   
   > >>   
   > >> -- New King James   
   > >> Genesis 9:4  "But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its   
   > >> blood.   
   > >>   
   > >> Yes, before the Mosaic Laws came, God forbad Noah and his family to   
   > >> eat (drink) blood. That is how precious it is to God.   
   > >>   
   > >> Next notice the Mosaic Laws:   
   > >>   
   > >> -- New King James   
   > >> Leviticus 3:17  `This shall be a perpetual statute throughout your   
   > >> generations in all your dwellings: you shall eat neither fat nor   
   > >> blood.' ''   
   > >>   
   > >> So the eating of blood was reinserted into the Law Covenant.   
   > >>   
   > >> But Christians are not under the Law Covenant. They were done away   
   > >> with by Jesus' death.   
   > >>   
   > >> -- New King James   
   > >> Romans 10:4  For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to   
   > >> everyone who believes.   
   > >>   
   > >> -- New King James   
   > >> Colossians 2:14  having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that   
   > >> was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of   
   > >> the way, having nailed it to the cross.(stauros- an upright stake)   
   > >>   
   > >> So now we are past those Mosaic Laws and now are into Christianity. Is   
   > >> it there also? YES. Christians can't drink blood either. But there is   
   > >> more. The way Luke, the doctor, worded it, engulfs a lot more. Here is   
   > >> the Scripture:   
   > >>   
   > >> -- New King James   
   > >> Acts 15:20  "but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted   
   > >> by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from   
   > >> blood.   
   > >>   
   > >> Notice here he didn't say 'eat' blood, but to "ABSTAIN" from blood.   
   > >> Strong's Concordace defines what "abstain" found in translations as:   
   > >>   
   > >> "Strong's Ref. # 567   
   > >>   
   > >> Romanized  apechomai   
   > >> Pronounced ap-ekh'-om-ahee   
   > >>   
   > >> middle voice (reflexively) of GSN0568; to hold oneself off, i.e.   
   > >> refrain:   
   > >>   
   > >> KJV--abstain."   
   > >>   
   > >> Thus, besides drinking blood, Christians are to "refrain" from blood,   
   > >> such as getting a blood transfusion, etc.   
   > >>   
   > >> Sincerely James   
   > >> "LEARN FROM JESUS   
   > >> Violence Is Not the Answer   
   > >> Learn More". See jw.org (10/03/2025)   
   > >   
   > >Would you refuse a blood transfusion if it were the only way to save   
   > >your life?   
   >   
   > No. Ask any JW and you would get the same answer. We believe in   
   > following God's word over anything else.   
      
      
   Sounds like you meant Yes, you would refuse the transfusion.   
      
   I admire your adherence to principle.  Sometimes that gets taken too   
   far.  The Acts passage does not (IMO only) forbid transfusions.  You   
   have your own reading.   
      
      
      
   > >Would you refuse a blood transfusion for your child if it were the only   
   > >way to save his life?   
   >   
   > No. Just like parents send their children to war for a patriotic   
   > beliefs, or Christians with children in the past refused to worship   
   > the emperor, and were thrown to the lions, there are principles   
   > greater than our lives.   
      
   Again, you apparently mean Yes.   
      
   This is where most people would draw a moral line in the snow.  Do you   
   have a right to condemn a child to death who may not even understand the   
   situation?  Clearly it's not a legal right, and doctors often seek court   
   injunctions to administer transfusions to JW children over parents'   
   objections.   
      
      
   > If you are a Christian, would you curse God if it meant saving your   
   > life? Your child's life?   
      
   I'm an atheist, and there's no reason to curse someone who probably   
   doesn't exist.   
      
   The most common legal doctrine is that, eg, if someone is pointing a gun   
   to your head and ordering you to sign over your fortune, anything signed   
   under that kind of duress is void.  I'd expect the putative gods of most   
   religions would take that view, but some that some gods would take the   
   curse at face value and expect you to die instead.  Looks like your God   
   is in the latter group, right?   
      
   To answer your hypothetical question, though, yes and yes.   
      
   >   
   > Sincerely James   
   > "LEARN FROM JESUS   
   > Violence Is Not the Answer   
   > Learn More". See jw.org (10/05/2025)   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)