Malawi and MCP Cards?

[Many Miles]

12 minutes ago, Thinking said:

Thanks for this but let’s pull it apart ….what about the sentence where it says 

in harmony with that Law.

also the events that predated the Law …….

well that is what a number of us have been saying….( jehovahs view on blood and his attitude to blood all thru all the scriptures demands respect for blood ) even those predating the law…
I'm sorry for your personal pain in the past but I agree with the above and it’s basically what we have all been saying .

For myself I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree.

To be in harmony means no more than to be consistent with and not contrary to.

Here's something else the society teaches specifically about blood in relation to what predated Mosaic law vs. Mosaic law:

"At Deuteronomy 14:21 allowance was made for selling to an alien resident or a foreigner an animal that had died of itself or that had been torn by a beast. Thus a distinction was made between the blood of such animals and that of animals that a person slaughtered for food. (Compare Le 17:14-16.) The Israelites, as well as alien residents who took up true worship and came under the Law covenant, were obligated to live up to the lofty requirements of that Law. People of all nations were bound by the requirement at Genesis 9:3, 4, but those under the Law were held by God to a higher standard in adhering to that requirement than were foreigners and alien residents who had not become worshipers of Jehovah." (Ref Insight, blood, emphasis added)

Hence, were one to abide by Mosaic law they were also abiding by Gen 9, but everyone abiding by Gen 9 were not necessarily abiding by Mosaic law.

That's what the society teaches.

 

 

[Thinking]

8 minutes ago, Many Miles said:

To be in harmony means no more than to be consistent with and not contrary to.

Here's something else the society teaches specifically about blood in relation to what predated Mosaic law vs. Mosaic law:

"At Deuteronomy 14:21 allowance was made for selling to an alien resident or a foreigner an animal that had died of itself or that had been torn by a beast. Thus a distinction was made between the blood of such animals and that of animals that a person slaughtered for food. (Compare Le 17:14-16.) The Israelites, as well as alien residents who took up true worship and came under the Law covenant, were obligated to live up to the lofty requirements of that Law. People of all nations were bound by the requirement at Genesis 9:3, 4, but those under the Law were held by God to a higher standard in adhering to that requirement than were foreigners and alien residents who had not become worshipers of Jehovah." (Ref Insight, blood, emphasis added)

Hence, were one to abide by Mosaic law they were also abiding by Gen 9, but everyone abiding by Gen 9 were not necessarily abiding by Mosaic law.

That what the society teaches.

 

 

Yes we are held to a higher standard…you are very confusing ….we are under Christ’s law now wether gentile or Jew.

[George88]

6 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I made clear at least twice how I felt about blood and was told, ‘Not a problem, easily accommodated, we do it all the time. Just sign here and here.’ Then, on the operating table, in comes the anesthesiologist who says, ‘I see you’re a Witness. If it should turn out that you need a transfusion, will you accept one? Or would you rather die?’

An Elder had a similar experience with his daughter. The doctors persuaded my dear friend to give his daughter an operation to correct a spinal defect. They assured him and his wife of decades of dedication to Jehovah that the operation was routine. They agreed to the process. When they started the operation a complication unfolded, they immediately came out encouraging the parents to accept a blood transfusion to level the blood loss. The heart of parents losing their 15-year-old daughter came to a realization, and they agreed to that life-saving procedure, a parent's will or faith. 

They gave the daughter over 30 units of blood and despite all that, she died at the table. 

[Many Miles]

8 minutes ago, Thinking said:

Yes we are held to a higher standard…

So, just so I'm perfectly clear, you believe Christians are bound to provisions of the Mosaic law when it comes to blood abstention?

[Thinking]

3 minutes ago, George88 said:

An Elder had a similar experience with his daughter. The doctors persuaded my dear friend to give his daughter an operation to correct a spinal defect. They assured him and his wife of decades of dedication to Jehovah that the operation was routine. They agreed to the process. When they started the operation a complication unfolded, they immediately came out encouraging the parents to accept a blood transfusion to level the blood loss. The heart of parents losing their 15-year-old daughter came to a realization, and they agreed to that life-saving procedure, a parent's will or faith. 

They gave the daughter over 30 units of blood and despite all that, she died at the table. 

Oh my goodness…..it is a fear of all parents and surgeons and all medical people put such fear into such parents…what a calamity….i hope the recovery spiritually as I know they won’t ever recover from her death,

But Jehovah shows great love and mercy such one's just as he did to Peter..I sincerely hope the elders dealt with them in as Jesus would have…what a sad sad story.

[Thinking]

3 minutes ago, Many Miles said:

So, just so I'm perfectly clear, you believe Christians are bound to provisions of the Mosaic law when it comes to blood abstention?

No..by Christ's Law.

What you are doing here is clouding the blood issue in tangled webs and murky water with the fog of words so as to mislead.

Your arguments don’t make sense Miles….its and emotional issue in modern days times but it’s not all that hard to work out.

[TrueTomHarley]

36 minutes ago, Many Miles said:

But you characterized the occurrence as "occasional". How many times need I ask to get an answer of what you mean by that? If you can't quantify it then how to do characterize it as you have? So what does your characterization mean? 

When Jehovah’s organization was confronted with Covid and the vaccine campaign, and all the controversy generated, they tracked those whom they found easiest to track—those among their worldwide circle of full time servants. This informal survey indicated to them that any risk of vaccinate was quite low, acceptable in view of the risk of Covid which seemed quite high. Soon we began hearing of how most of those at Bethel had gotten vaccinated. 

Since then I have read, from the worldwide population, how ‘died suddenly’ is now a thing. Did they always?  A book by that name charts insurance company data to discover a significant, statistically most unlikely, spike in sudden unexplained deaths in otherwise healthy people, often the young, which coincides exactly with the time period in which vaccines began to be mandated for those employed in large companies.

There is no doubt that the worldwide statistical pattern shows this. Yet I look around the congregations and circuit and if it shows up, it is not so marked as to be noticeable to me.

It is probably similar with blood transfusions. You asked my personal experience. I gave it. I don’t know the overall pattern. I accept when you and others say some have died that you are not lying. As with Thinking, however, there does appear to be a lot of “fearmongering” (her word) to make the situation appear worse than it is.

[Many Miles]

Just now, Thinking said:

No..by Christ's Law.

You're not answering the question I'm getting at. Let me rephrase it:

Does Christ's Law require Christians abide by provisions of the Mosaic law when it comes to blood abstention?

[Many Miles]

3 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

There is no doubt that the worldwide statistical pattern shows this. Yet I look around the congregations and circuit and if it shows up, it is not so marked as to be noticeable to me.

It is probably similar with blood transfusions. You asked my personal experience. I gave it. I don’t know the overall pattern. I accept when you and others say some have died that you are not lying.

I think you've answered my question. Thanks.

What you state about it being noticeable is interesting. On this issue there are mortality statistics available, but these are likely not understood for what they say to the average person. This is because "cause of death" is usually attributed to underlying cause rather than an intermediate cause, when had the intermediate incident been different the death would have been avoided.

If you had to name a primary medical issue leading to mortality related to blood, what would be your top five?

[Thinking]

7 minutes ago, Many Miles said:

You're not answering the question I'm getting at. Let me rephrase it:

Does Christ's Law require Christians abide by provisions of the Mosaic law when it comes to blood abstention?

You are not listening…..because you don’t like what I am saying .

We are under Christ law….we therefore abstain from blood…..what is it you want me to say?

[JW Insider]

I've weighed in on the blood issue discussions before, but I don't feel competent to add anything of value. Just opinions. Miles seems to have given it more thought and had more direct experience with it, so I'm glad to hear him out.

It happens too rarely these days but now and then someone stops by ready to share and discuss information in more depth on a topic. I'm always happy for that even if I end up with nothing to offer, or end up being unconvinced about a position, because I always learn something.

I'm not sure exactly what Miles' position is but I'd like to go back and catch up with what's going on in this topic.

And why is the blood topic in a discussion that started out about Malawi anyway?

[Many Miles]

Just now, Thinking said:

We are under Christ law….we therefore abstain from blood…..what is it you want me to say?

I want to understand what you're saying.

When it comes to what is expected of Christians:

1) When it comes to abstaining from blood, are we expected to abide by provisions found in Mosaic law?

2) When it comes to abstaining from blood, are we expected to abide by requirements predating Mosaic law?

3) Or, When it comes to abstaining from blood, are we expected to abide by something else that's different than either of those two things?