AutoElectNG:


I will never stoop so low as to attack a person when I want to make a point...I will face the facts and the facts alone....I will also respect freedom of choice, diversity and the right to be different....I will never denigrate a person or people for not towing my line or a cause I am sympathetic to....That's my promise

Hairyrapunzel:


Now it's ad hominem. Lol

It's obvious you don't know jack about ad hominem.

You brought out an isolated verse in a chapter. Leveticus 3:17. You called it sucker punch and o called you out that the verse talked about animals only never once did it refer to humans.

Meaning You just assumed while the whole chapter talked including the verse you quoted talked about animals, lamb and goat.

It's like you hated my reply for bringing out this fact.
You that has being ARGuING FROM SILENCE NKO?
There is no fallacy in my thinking.
It's your thinking that contains all the fallacies.

You say you are a genius whereas all conclusions you reached are based on assumptions/speculation.


Next, you brought out leveticus 17: 11 and 14 which you wanted me to take in isolation again and I called you out.

One verse talked about the use of the blood as atonement on the altar and the other one talked about the what to do with animals or bird you hunt for food. I called you out on these and told you the verses never talked about humans and it was a figment of your own imagination.

I don't know what you were trying to drive at you quoted another verse in isolation Ezekiel 18:4 and I said it had no bearing with what was being discussed.

Maybe you feel I have to agree with your assumed conclusion which are never seen in the Bible. I don't know but I am not daft. The Bible is front of me and I have the right to read a whole chapter.

Your organization has never hurt me. I just can't bear to see people lying on the bible.
I have a contrary opinion and you are saying is ad hominem.

Or was it because I said Nathan knorr was an illiterate? He was of course. He made a law that has killed and is still killing jws in 1945 a time when medical practice was just beginning in USA. The war just ended and the USA just began to get major secrets from Germany.

He had no access to accurate research data as this was not done then (research in medicine was also beginning), no internet, no DVD etc. And you say this is ad hominem?

You really need to find what ad hominem really is. Nathan knorr will always be part of this argument as he was the originator of this belief system. You can't wriggle your way out of this by tagging my statement ad hominem.

You want to force me to believe your and agree with a misconception? No I can't.

Hairyrapunzel:




I attacked you because I pointed out the fact that you drew your conclusion from isolated phrases in a verse two times?
No be only attacking the arguer.
Do you know peacefullove called said I wasn't an intellectual one time?
Let me tell you why. I caught him when he removed a word on purpose 2 or 3 times from a verse so as to justify his assumption. I called him out for it and called him a deceitful person.


You can't use agbari for me cos it won't work. You quoted phrases in isolation for me and expect me not to go to the Bible (the word of God) and not read the whole chapter?
It's only robots/zombies and daft people that will swallow something like this and agree with it.

Leveticus 3 and 17 only talked about blood of animals used as food and sacrifice. It talked about rituals that follow killing animals and birds during Moses time only.
The only humans involved where the ones who killed the animals, the priests who did the sacrifice and aarons sons who were priests. Nobody killed a human being and nobody ever used a human beings blood.

Sorry o I can't come to a conclusion based on what was never there in the first place.

AutoElectNG:


I have through nearly all your posts in the Religion Sector of Nairaland

You are not a true intellectual who genuinely wants to know and to argue for what he believes in

You are not up and about the superiority of your argument

You are driven by hate

Someone has pointed this out to you before, but you cannot and will not see it

When I have time I will take on your arguments and highlight the fallacies therein, I have time for just one today

As someone suggested maybe that religion did something to hurt you and you cannot even hide that you are deeply biased

If you did go to school, which I strongly assume you did, you would appreciate the distinction between attacking a person and addressing an issue

I have taken the liberty to either remind you or school you, whichever applies

Hairyrapunzel:


How am I biased? Lol
Has anything I said deviated from what the bible said?
See me see wahala.

You that is an intellectual has been forcing us to come to a conclusion based on what the bible didn't ever mention Nko?

I agree I may not be an intellectual but I am not a gullible person.
Because you see I am giving Bible verses you cry ad hominem. You must show me how i attacked you.

People will always hold contrary opinions. I don't believe what's not in the Bible. You don't imagine doctrines and think outsiders will not know that you are imagining things.

I know how painful it is to discover that the isolated phrases you believed to be talking about humans was never referring to them. It's devastating but with time you will get to understand that I was right about the Bible all along.

You are even ashamed to point to the phrases and verse that point to the animals. I have done that for you.

You will sit down and see that what was important to God was:
1. The life of humans: nobody should murder or slaughter or kill humans in this case you will not see their blood to pour on the floor or to use as sacrifice neither will you use their flesh for food or sacrifice. Don't even cause the death of another human being.

2. The blood of animals: it signified the lives of animals that are killed and slaughtered by humans for food and sacrifice. In this case you will see their blood to pour on the floor.

Leveticus 3 and 17 only talked about ritual done by Israelites on animals and birds being slaughtered for food and sacrifice

Hairyrapunzel:


Now it's ad hominem. Lol

It's obvious you don't know jack about ad hominem.

You brought out an isolated verse in a chapter. Leveticus 3:17. You called it sucker punch and o called you out that the verse talked about animals only never once did it refer to humans.

Meaning You just assumed while the whole chapter talked including the verse you quoted talked about animals, lamb and goat.

It's like you hated my reply for bringing out this fact.
You that has being ARGuING FROM SILENCE NKO?
There is no fallacy in my thinking.
It's your thinking that contains all the fallacies.

You say you are a genius whereas all conclusions you reached are based on assumptions/speculation.


Next, you brought out leveticus 17: 11 and 14 which you wanted me to take in isolation again and I called you out.

One verse talked about the use of the blood as atonement on the altar and the other one talked about the what to do with animals or bird you hunt for food. I called you out on these and told you the verses never talked about humans and it was a figment of your own imagination.

I don't know what you were trying to drive at you quoted another verse in isolation Ezekiel 18:4 and I said it had no bearing with what was being discussed.

Maybe you feel I have to agree with your assumed conclusion which are never seen in the Bible. I don't know but I am not daft. The Bible is front of me and I have the right to read a whole chapter.

Your organization has never hurt me. I just can't bear to see people lying on the bible.
I have a contrary opinion and you are saying is ad hominem.

Or was it because I said Nathan knorr was an illiterate? He was of course. He made a law that has killed and is still killing jws in 1945 a time when medical practice was just beginning in USA. The war just ended and the USA just began to get major secrets from Germany.

He had no access to accurate research data as this was not done then (research in medicine was also beginning), no internet, no DVD etc. And you say this is ad hominem?

You really need to find what ad hominem really is. Nathan knorr will always be part of this argument as he was the originator of this belief system. You can't wriggle your way out of this by tagging my statement ad hominem.

You want to force me to believe your and agree with a misconception? No I can't.

Hairyrapunzel:


At least in blood transfusion people don't get to eat the human being who donate blood. Bible was specific on what to eat and not eat.






At least this verse only talks about animals to be used as food. Not once does bible makes reference to the medical procedure called blood transfusion. So we all agree that its just an assumption that is also a speculation made by jws.



You even have to lie on early Christians not using WHOLE BLOOD even for medical reasons.
Read about history of blood transfusion you will see that early Christians did not even know jack about blood transfusion.
Why lie about blood transfusion done in the time of the early Christians and you don't even have a reference.

Is this how you guys cook up stories just to make your doctrines look like it was mentioned in the bible?
I know jws first banned all forms of blood in 1945. They even banned vaccination and organ transplant around the same time.

But you know what? They banned vaccination for 13yrs and organ transplant for 26years.

Do you know that currently your leaders don't ban all components of blood? That it is just whole blood they ban?
Bible says abstain from blood and your leaders translate blood to whole blood transfusion?
Bible didn't even talk of components or fractions of blood to be accepted. Yet your leaders made a list of fractions to be accepted. Who is deceiving who.

Do you know your leaders added white blood cells and platelets as fractions their members can accept 2 years ago?

Do you know that these fractions/components of blood are gotten from blood donated by wordly, wicked, evil,unrighteous people? people who you consider pagans and satan worshippers?

You guys The so called followers of jehovah can never donate blood to save yourselves or another person yet you accept components of blood from blood donated by Satan worshippers.

Your leaders are masters of cherry picking.

Just say it's what your leaders want and not what the bible says. Stop blaming non biblical doctrines/beliefs on the bible.





The US army last time I checked has not stopped doing blood transfusion. You are making a false impression about a situation. They adopted something doesn't mean they abandoned blood transfusion. Read things with sense.
Do you know when your so called bloodless surgery and medicine fails the last resort is blood transfusion?




Still johns Hopkins has never abandoned blood transfusion.
Do you know there are indications and contraindications to bloodless surgery?
Always read with sense.

Meanwhile FDA banned polyheme and hemopure (from cow blood) that jws were championing because of deaths it caused. Think of the number of jws used as lab rats that died before the ban.

Every drug or medical procedure has a propensity for producing adverse effects. Don't come here to lie about things that your leaders are illiterate about.

Hairyrapunzel:


Blood is sacred to your God. Whether animal or human. Yet life of animal and humans are not sacred to your jehovah. Very funny. Your jehovah is very very funny. He can allow humans take the lives of animals for food while he also prefers humans taking their own lives because of blood transfusion ban since 1945 by watchtower organization.
He has made a symbol more important than what it represents.
Your jehovah no dey joke with blood of animal or humans yet he loves playing kalo kalo with human and animal life. Very interesting.





At least you have come here to open up to us that your religion has been assuming since 1945.




You guys love using this rubbish analogy.
Let's analyse.
Your physician will not allow you to use nicotine because it's of no health importance neither is it feasible putting nicotine in needle. Nicotine doesn't save life. On the other hand blood transfusion can be prescribed by physicians. It saves live its a medical procedure. Doctors don't joke with blood transfusion because it's real.

SO TEY YOUR LEADERS USE UNREAL SITUATIONS TO TRY TO JUSTIFY WHY REAL SITUATIONS ARE BAD. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF PROPAGANDA AND IT'S DECEITFUL.

JUST KNOW THAT NO PHYSICIAN WILL PRESCRIBE NICOTINE TO TREAT ANY AILMENT WHEREAS BLOOD TRANSFUSION IS CALLED A MEDICAL PROCEDURE.



Why then do we have to commit suicide obeying your leaders when Jesus has already paid the ransom sacrifice for man's salvation. If Jesus has done the work why do you feel you have to kill yourself or children because you are obeying jehovah?




Did Jesus give you internet to browse nairaland and jw.org?



But Jesus didn't say humans should refuse blood transfusion. Nathan knorr made the law in 1945 for his followers.



Jehovah or Jesus didn't ban blood transfusion after all in the Bible. Nathan knorr banned it in watchtower magazines in 1945.


Jesus didn't make any law on blood transfusion ban. Nathan knorr made the law in watchtower magazines in 1945. You are obeying Nathan knorr the illiterate.



Jesus or jehovah never banned blood transfusion so it's your man made non biblical law. You decided to obey your leaders law since 1945 because he made it compulsory.



At least we are not Jesus Christ. You said Jesus paid the ransom sacrifice for man yet you want to pay your own ransom for yourself. Jesus didn't refuse blood transfusion. Stop imagining what's not in the Bible and making it your law.



At least God didn't say we should abstain from the medical procedure called blood transfusion. It's Nathan knorr that made the law in 1945.


Since jehovah is the only source of life and has the right to determine how man should treat blood, why would an illiterate ban the medical procedure blood transfusion amongst his followers in 1945. It's obvious jehovah didn't decide on that a man called Nathan knorr did.


It's a kind of medical procedure. Whether it's holy grail or not isn't your concern



You want to lie about a situation to paint a bad picture of the procedure abi? Normal watchtower way. Always saying bad things about blood transfusion. It's not new.
Let me give you a shocker. I have transfused over 200 children and no one died. They are all doing fine till today.



Last last blood transfusion ban isn't in the Bible after all. You can take components of blood from blood donated by worldly people whereas you say blood transfusion is bad. Soon your gb will allow whole blood since they have allowed all the fractions. Lol

AutoElectNG:


Your first response is to my post on this thread is riddled with ad hominem attacks....beginning with accusing me of lying about blood transfusion and early christians, when I never mentioned blood transfusion, I am a trained wordsmith, I use my words carefully, I said consume I didn't mention transfuse, it is documented in history books what the greeks and romans did with blood, and how christians refused to use blood that way be it as food or as medicine

Don't be deceived....I am trained to handle arguments....so I can never condescend to attack people....I just don't have the time for you yet....when I do I will catalogue all your attempts to run away from issues and attack people, this is a good example of page 2, which is proof you may need to revise your understanding of attacking people instead of addressing issues

Hairyrapunzel:



I addressed all your points. How did I attack you? That I have contrary opinion to your non biblical doctrine is now attacking you?
List the attack points out I am waiting

Hairyrapunzel:

So gb that says they are imperfect, uninspired and fallible and can err in doctrinal matters and organizational direction are saying they are Jesus and moses?

Explain gb worshipper. You teach that Catholics shouldn't be united under the leadership of the pope because that makes it a false religion whereas you are united under the leadership of 8 old imperfect, uninspired and fallible men who reside in new York and you describe it as the sign that you are the one true religion? You guys in your cult are really hilarious.

Hairyrapunzel:


How many times will I treat this issue? Why are you ashamed of telling us to read the whole leveticus chapter 17?

Now I have I'll character just because I returned your sucker punch showing you that the last verse you mentioned of leveticus 3 had preceding verses talking only about animals for sacrifice.

I no you didn't expect it. In my church we don't conclude or make doctrines from assumptions based on a phrase from an isolated verse in a chapter.

We always take into consideration all the verses in the whole chapter.

AutoElectNG:


Your first response is to my post on this thread is riddled with ad hominem attacks....beginning with accusing me of lying about blood transfusion and early christians, when I never mentioned blood transfusion, I am a trained wordsmith, I use my words carefully, I said consume I didn't mention transfuse, it is documented in history books what the greeks and romans did with blood, and how christians refused to use blood that way be it as food or as medicine

Don't be deceived....I am trained to handle arguments....so I can never condescend to attack people....I just don't have the time for you yet....when I do I will catalogue all your attempts to run away from issues and attack people, this is a good example of page 2, which is proof you may need to revise your understanding of attacking people instead of addressing issues

Hairyrapunzel:


Put your comments and my replies side by side if you don't have anything to hide. I am waiting for the attack

AutoElectNG:


I have promised to list when you left addressing the issue to attacking people

But I must put bread on the table first

And by the way, I will not attack you, that is not my style

I will only address the facts in issue no more no less

So the use of the word attack above by you doesn't apply to me

AutoElectNG:


I have promised to list when you left addressing the issue to attacking people

But I must put bread on the table first

And by the way, I will not attack you, that is not my style

I will only address the facts in issue no more no less

So the use of the word attack above by you doesn't apply to me

Seun:
Once upon a time, there was a man in a snake-infested town who lived with his beloved, playful, fearless, tomboyish daughter who for some reason had no natural fear of snakes. For her protection, he warned her against touching, playing with, staying close to, or even eating snakes, dead or alive. He basically warned her to abstain from snakes in any way, shape or form, so that no harm would come to her.

One day, while her father was away on family business, she was bitten by a deadly cobra and rushed to the hospital. Luckily, they had some cobra antivenom and wanted to administer it to her, but she rejected it. When asked why, she explained that from her biology class, she knew that antivenom was produced from snake venom, therefore she could not accept the antivenom because her father warned her to abstain from snakes. So she died.

Question: When her father returned to his dead daughter, do you think he was happy that she chose to die instead of potentially indirectly technically violating his instruction to abstain from snakes, which was actually intended to protect her life?

elshanAutos:
Did she keep to her fathers warning initially? How did the cobra bite her?

AutoElectNG:


Leviticus 3:17 is the sucker punch....I am a busy man...otherwise I would have responded to the s goings on here....this verse doesn't say animal, and its choice of words makes it all compassing, animal or human pour it out, don't ingest orally or intravenously

Nice job

alBHAGDADI:
Stop usingbflawed analogy.

Blood transfusion is not consumption. Scroll up to see where I explained it to your fellow JW OneJ

Emusan:


I known you will twist it but I won't allow that.

Do you drink the blood of Jesus as a covenant practice or the covenant stopped after Jesus established it?

Let's see whether the holy communion you've been partaking with JWs all these while are in vain.

I know if possible for you people you can tell us that the verse doesn't include Jesus blood.

The person explained nothing.
The verse says ABSTAIN never specified whether to touch or inject, you're the one who differentiate it.

Abstain also mean avoid contact.... just proof me wrong on that first.

Seun:

She kept his warnings. The cobra snuck into the house, hid under the fridge, and bit her while she was sweeping. Not that it matters.

Barristter07:



Na how you take run from the other thread be this.

Show what is flawed in the analogy ?

Seun:
Once upon a time, there was a man in a snake-infested town who lived with his beloved, playful, fearless, tomboyish daughter who for some reason had no natural fear of snakes. For her protection, he warned her against touching, playing with, staying close to, or even eating snakes, dead or alive. He basically warned her to abstain from snakes in any way, shape or form, so that no harm would come to her.

One day, while her father was away on family business, she was bitten by a deadly cobra and rushed to the hospital. Luckily, they had some cobra antivenom and wanted to administer it to her, but she rejected it. When asked why, she explained that from her biology class, she knew that antivenom was produced from snake venom, therefore she could not accept the antivenom because her father warned her to abstain from snakes. So she died.

Question: When the man returned to his dead daughter, do you think he was happy that she chose to die instead of potentially indirectly technically violating his instruction to abstain from snakes, which was actually intended to protect her life?

Barristter07:


Covenants are established by blood . Read your Bible. This Jesus represented with wine.



Context is key to understanding. Does. abstain from unstrangled meat means do not touch an unstrangled animal or do not consume it ?



Apply thinking ability, it will help you Sir

Hairyrapunzel:


Jesus wine (blood) is figurative while David's water (blood) is literal. David poured real blood of his men on the floor.
When you want to defend your non biblical doctrine you say Jesus own is figurative while David's own is literal. Whereas bible did not say o.



Abstain means everything consumption, eating and contact, touch all of them. Abstain could be anything. When you want to defend your non biblical doctrine you say and abstain is consume.
.
Does abstain from fornication mean do not consume fornication?

Barristter07:



Well done Bro. Good morning

Barristter07:


Covenants are established by blood . Read your Bible. This Jesus represented with wine.



Context is key to understanding. Does. abstain from unstrangled meat means do not touch an unstrangled animal or do not consume it ?



Apply thinking ability, it will help you Sir

Hairyrapunzel:

Shame or fear did not allow you even attempt answering the question. Did he ask you if covenants are established by blood? Read the question below


Do you drink the blood of Jesus as a covenant practice or the covenant stopped after Jesus established it?


He didn't say covenant are not established by blood and you know this. Soon you will accuse him of saying this.

Emusan please don't let him off the hook easily he should answer your question.