Transplantation of Blood?
First Prev
of 15
Next Last

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#1 Nov 17, 2012
-

Here the question for discussion:

- Did God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
little lamb

Brunswick West, Australia

#2 Nov 17, 2012
Noah was told not to eat the soul- the BLOOD

Noah didn't have medical hospitals and blood remedies even around..His command was simple and direct.." it was enough for him and mankind for thousands of years.

The Law in Leviticus again reinforced the fact that Blood was not to be eaten..again the Law was applicable to the generations under the Law covenant, because blood products and transfusions were not an issue for those generations

But today with these things coming into play, Jehovah covers them in the new covenant

, because the new covenant becomes all embracing stating emphatically " Keep abstaining from BLOOD"

And the operative word is abstain...it covers all situations to do with blood

How great is Jehovah, not leaving us helpless on this topic.

So now the new covenant covers any argument Marvin on the Blood issue...Its the one in force through the BLOOD of CHRIST.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#4 Nov 17, 2012
-

From post 2[1]:
little lamb wrote:
Noah didn't have medical hospitals and blood remedies even around.


You don’t need hospitals to use blood for medicinal ends. The ancients used everything around them to help remedy disease and relieve pain. Animal material was no exception.

So, do you care to answer the question asked?

As you say, Noah was to abstain from eating blood…

So, and again:

- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?

If you think yes, can you prove it?

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:

1. Post 2: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
little lamb

Brunswick West, Australia

#5 Nov 17, 2012
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
-
From post 2[1]:
<quoted text>
You don’t need hospitals to use blood for medicinal ends. The ancients used everything around them to help remedy disease and relieve pain. Animal material was no exception.
So, do you care to answer the question asked?
As you say, Noah was to abstain from eating blood…
So, and again:
- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?
If you think yes, can you prove it?
Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:
1. Post 2: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
It doesn't matter today Marvin and your question is irrelevant because the new covenant commandment DOES COVER it " keeping on ABSTAINING from BLOOD.'

And we are under the new covenant...its all embracing to us.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#6 Nov 17, 2012
-

From post 5[1]:
little lamb wrote:
It doesn't matter today Marvin and your question is irrelevant because the new covenant commandment DOES COVER it " keeping on ABSTAINING from BLOOD.'
.
And we are under the new covenant...its all embracing to us.
All embracing? Are you sure about that?

Does abstain from blood mean…

- abstain from looking at blood?

- abstain from thinking of blood?

- abstain from touching blood?

- abstain from testing blood?

- abstain from fractionating blood?

- abstain from smelling blood?

If “abstain from blood” is “all embracing” then none of us “abstain from blood”.

So why not take a serious crack at answering the question at issue?

Again:

- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?

If you think yes, can you prove it?

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:

1. Post 5: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
little lamb

Australia

#7 Nov 17, 2012
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
-
From post 5[1]:
<quoted text>
All embracing? Are you sure about that?
Does abstain from blood mean…
- abstain from looking at blood?
- abstain from thinking of blood?
- abstain from touching blood?
- abstain from testing blood?
- abstain from fractionating blood?
- abstain from smelling blood?
If “abstain from blood” is “all embracing” then none of us “abstain from blood”.
So why not take a serious crack at answering the question at issue?
Again:
- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?
If you think yes, can you prove it?
Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:
1. Post 5: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
You are being facetious..abstain...To refrain from something by one's own choice

Caring for the wounds of others may bring one in touch with blood..but it is not willfully sought ,and neither is the blood used in anyway but one inadvertently comes into contact because of caring and bandaging hurt ones.

In the good Samaritan, he placed wine and oil on the wounds..not blood products.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#8 Nov 17, 2012
-

From post 7[1]:
little lamb wrote:
You are being facetious..abstain...To refrain from something by one's own choice.
My last response to you is not being facetious. The questions I asked challenge your proposition that “abstain from blood” is “all embracing”.[2]

Now, if you don’t mind, and taking your latest rendition of abstain to mean ‘refrain by choice,’ how about answering for your “all embracing” assertion:

Does abstain from blood mean…

-[refrain by choice] from looking at blood?

-[refrain by choice] from thinking of blood?

-[refrain by choice] from touching blood?

-[refrain by choice] from testing blood?

-[refrain by choice] from fractionating blood?

-[refrain by choice] from smelling blood?
little lamb wrote:
Caring for the wounds of others may bring one in touch with blood..but it is not willfully sought ,and neither is the blood used in anyway but one inadvertently comes into contact because of caring and bandaging hurt ones.
.
In the good Samaritan, he placed wine and oil on the wounds..not blood products.


Wine was another product used by ancients for topical medicinal remedy. But my question to you is about topical transplantation of blood; not wine.

And, you are wrong about the ancients and use of blood for medicinal remedy. Using blood to help cure disease and/or relieve pain was a common remedy among the ancients. These ancient uses of blood are partly responsible for modern hematological medicine.[3-4]

Now, how about taking a serious crack at answering the question at issue:

- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?

If you think yes, can you prove it?

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:

1. Post 7: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

2. Post 6: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

3. You can read more about this use of blood in the article “Historical Medicinal Uses of Blood” available at: http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com/2010/01/his...

4. MacKinney, Animal Substances in Materia Medica, Journal of the History of Medicine & Allied Sciences: January 1946, pp. 149-170.

___
little lamb

Australia

#9 Nov 17, 2012
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
-
From post 7[1]:
<quoted text>
My last response to you is not being facetious. The questions I asked challenge your proposition that “abstain from blood” is “all embracing”.[2]
Now, if you don’t mind, and taking your latest rendition of abstain to mean ‘refrain by choice,’ how about answering for your “all embracing” assertion:
Does abstain from blood mean…
-[refrain by choice] from looking at blood?
-[refrain by choice] from thinking of blood?
-[refrain by choice] from touching blood?
-[refrain by choice] from testing blood?
-[refrain by choice] from fractionating blood?
-[refrain by choice] from smelling blood?
<quoted text>
Wine was another product used by ancients for topical medicinal remedy. But my question to you is about topical transplantation of blood; not wine.
And, you are wrong about the ancients and use of blood for medicinal remedy. Using blood to help cure disease and/or relieve pain was a common remedy among the ancients. These ancient uses of blood are partly responsible for modern hematological medicine.[3-4]
Now, how about taking a serious crack at answering the question at issue:
- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?
If you think yes, can you prove it?
Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:
1. Post 7: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
2. Post 6: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
3. You can read more about this use of blood in the article “Historical Medicinal Uses of Blood” available at: http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com/2010/01/his...
4. MacKinney, Animal Substances in Materia Medica, Journal of the History of Medicine & Allied Sciences: January 1946, pp. 149-170.
___
Have to leave you here reiterating your innocence..and trying to justify a position at odds with the new covenant commandment " "keep on abstaining from blood"

Its an attempt to excuse and find a loop hole...

But is definitely against the FAITH as expressed by the Apostles and older men

And we are told " everything not out of FAITH is sinning."

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#10 Nov 17, 2012
-

From post 9[1]:
little lamb wrote:
Have to leave you here reiterating your innocence..and trying to justify a position at odds with the new covenant commandment " "keep on abstaining from blood"
Its an attempt to excuse and find a loop hole...
But is definitely against the FAITH as expressed by the Apostles and older men
And we are told " everything not out of FAITH is sinning."
If you’re unwilling to answer questions that challenge your propositions then your propositions are no more than untested idle opinion.

If you want to continue this discussion…

Here: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:

1. Post 9: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#11 Nov 17, 2012
Thirdwitness,

How about you?

- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?

If you think yes, can you prove it?

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
Thirdwitness

United States

#12 Nov 18, 2012
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
Thirdwitness,
How about you?
- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?
If you think yes, can you prove it?
Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
Hmm. Let me see. Hmmm.

Tell me about it. Show me that Noah would've used blood. Show me the nutrients that transplanted blood supplies.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#13 Nov 18, 2012
-

From post 12[1]:
Thirdwitness wrote:
Tell me about it. Show me that Noah would've used blood. Show me the nutrients that transplanted blood supplies.


Nourishment is anything that helps sustain the body.

Noah would’ve used blood to treat his body because God taught humans to do just that: use animal material to take care of human needs.(Genesis 3:21)

The ancients used animal material—including blood—to treat a wide range of disease and as pain relief for certain conditions.(See:“Historical Medicinal Uses of Blood” available at: http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com/2010/01/his...

Back to the question asked:

- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?

If you think yes, can you prove it?

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:

1. Post 12: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

“Truth is where you find it”

Since: Jun 11

Milton, PA

#14 Nov 18, 2012
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
-
Here the question for discussion:
- Did God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?
Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
Here is the question you should be asking. Why did God isolate blood as something to restrict in any way? If you can answer that question from the bible, that will go a long way in understanding the situation involving blood use as a food item, or as a medical device, or any other use that it might b e put to.

If you can't answer that question in a meaningful way, then all of your postulations on the subject are valueless. Merely conjecture.

sidgi

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#15 Nov 19, 2012
-

From post 14[1]:
sidgi wrote:
Here is the question you should be asking. Why did God isolate blood as something to restrict in any way? If you can answer that question from the bible, that will go a long way in understanding the situation involving blood use as a food item, or as a medical device, or any other use that it might b e put to.
.
If you can't answer that question in a meaningful way, then all of your postulations on the subject are valueless. Merely conjecture.
sidgi
God pointed to blood obtained by slaughter as something that should not be eaten with flesh of the slaughtered animal because obtaining that food was at the cost of life. True, it was the life of an animal and not human, but it nevertheless it was life taken by slaughter.

In the same decree God also addressed taking human life by slaughter. If a human slaughtered another human then the killer’s life was forfeited.

In each instance there was consequent to taking life by slaughter. If animal life, the animal’s blood could not be eaten. If human life, the killer forfeited his own life.

The common denominator in these two is life. Life is to be treated respectfully.

The prohibition on eating blood obtained by slaughter stands as an everlasting object lesson to forever remind humans that life is sacred and should not be treated disrespectfully.

__________

Now,

Do you care to take a stab at the question of this discussion:

- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?

If you think yes, can you prove it?

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:

1. Post 14: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

“Truth is where you find it”

Since: Jun 11

Milton, PA

#16 Nov 19, 2012
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
-
From post 14[1]:
<quoted text>
God pointed to blood obtained by slaughter as something that should not be eaten with flesh of the slaughtered animal because obtaining that food was at the cost of life. True, it was the life of an animal and not human, but it nevertheless it was life taken by slaughter.
In the same decree God also addressed taking human life by slaughter. If a human slaughtered another human then the killer’s life was forfeited.
In each instance there was consequent to taking life by slaughter. If animal life, the animal’s blood could not be eaten. If human life, the killer forfeited his own life.
The common denominator in these two is life. Life is to be treated respectfully.
The prohibition on eating blood obtained by slaughter stands as an everlasting object lesson to forever remind humans that life is sacred and should not be treated disrespectfully.
__________
Now,
Do you care to take a stab at the question of this discussion:
- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?
If you think yes, can you prove it?
Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:
1. Post 14: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
Is you conscience that seared that you can't answer the question I asked, but continually have to twist things to suit your mantra? I asked why God put restrictions on blood. That's all. I will even start your answer for you, if you have one. It was because.....

sidgi

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#17 Nov 19, 2012
-

From post 16[1]:
sidgi wrote:
Is you conscience that seared that you can't answer the question I asked, but continually have to twist things to suit your mantra? I asked why God put restrictions on blood. That's all. I will even start your answer for you, if you have one. It was because.....
sidgi


Dearest sidgi,

I did answer your question.

You asked[2]:
sidgi wrote:
Why did God isolate blood as something to restrict in any way?


I answered[3]:
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
The prohibition on eating blood obtained by slaughter stands as an everlasting object lesson to forever remind humans that life is sacred and should not be treated disrespectfully.


__________

Now,

Do you care to take a stab at the question of this discussion:

- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?

If you think yes, can you prove it?

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:

1. Post 16: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

2. Post 14: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

3. Post 15: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

“Truth is where you find it”

Since: Jun 11

Milton, PA

#18 Nov 19, 2012
As far as the point of your discussion, it is no different in it's ignorance as any of the others you've started on the topic of blood. I just thought if you could demonstrate the purpose of God's putting the restrictions on blood, it might lend some credence to your position. Without that, your posting is void of foundation. If you don't know the answer, you don't really know anything, as what you purport to know, can't be measured by it. Come on, tell us please.

sidgi

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#19 Nov 19, 2012
-

More from post 16[1]:
sidgi wrote:
Is you conscience that seared that you can't answer the question I asked, but continually have to twist things to suit your mantra? I asked why God put restrictions on blood. That's all. I will even start your answer for you, if you have one. It was because.....
sidgi


… It is because life is sacred and should therefore be treated respectfully.[2]

__________

Now,

Do you care to take a stab at the question of this discussion:

- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?

If you think yes, can you prove it?

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:

1. Post 16: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

2. Post 15: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

“Truth is where you find it”

Since: Jun 11

Milton, PA

#20 Nov 19, 2012
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
-
From post 16[1]:
<quoted text>
Dearest sidgi,
I did answer your question.
You asked[2]:
<quoted text>
I answered[3]:
<quoted text>
__________
Now,
Do you care to take a stab at the question of this discussion:
- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?
If you think yes, can you prove it?
Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:
1. Post 16: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
2. Post 14: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
3. Post 15: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
It is as I thought. you don't know why at all. you've just given some smarmy one size fits all swipe at an answer hoping to satisfy onlookers. It just doesn't cut it. God allows men and animals to die all of the time. It is quite more than what you've offered as an answer, and that is the problem. You don't really know anything, because you are satisfied with your own conclusions, and haven't bothered to look, to see what God's position is. Explain the principle behind His position.

sidgi

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#21 Nov 19, 2012
-

From post 20[1]:
sidgi wrote:
It is as I thought. you don't know why at all. you've just given some smarmy one size fits all swipe at an answer hoping to satisfy onlookers. It just doesn't cut it. God allows men and animals to die all of the time. It is quite more than what you've offered as an answer, and that is the problem. You don't really know anything, because you are satisfied with your own conclusions, and haven't bothered to look, to see what God's position is. Explain the principle behind His position.
sidgi


What part of…

… It is because life is sacred and should therefore be treated respectfully.[2-3]

don't you understand?

__________

Now,

Do you care to take a stab at the question of this discussion:

- Does God’s decree of Genesis Chapter 9 prohibit Noah from nutritional transplantation of blood for medical remedy of disease and/or pain that was administered topically like an ointment?

If you think yes, can you prove it?

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com
__________
References:

1. Post 20: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

2. Post 19: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

3. Post 15: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 15
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
In Tartarus While Dwelling in Heaven? 2 min TempleMicrowave 14
Who Created JW's? 5 min dlmacoop 115
Gog and Magog After The Thousand Years 8 min TempleMicrowave 46
Is August Eclipse a "sign" in the Bible? 16 min RedhorseWoman 26
Trump apologizes then reverts back to course. 26 min RedhorseWoman 152
Let's try this again, 144,000 ONLY? No jw has b... 29 min PrufSammy 1,058
New Today music thread 36 min GreatSouthbay4040 1,690
Why the NWT is the best ever! 2 hr dlmacoop 784
Trinity...why does it matter?! 5 hr Frindly 1,070
More from around the web