Difference between revisions of "Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: This was moved out of the main article; it can be reworded and put back it at a later date: *''Example Argument Against Blood Transfusions:'' In a list of things that Christians were forb...) |
P.B. Pilhet (talk | contribs) m (added bit on neutrality; requesting discussion, please) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
*''Example Counter-Argument for Blood Transfusions:'' The Law only prohibits ''drinking'' blood, ''not'' blood transfusions, because (a) blood transfusions were not in existence in Biblical times (and therefore the Bible cannot say anything against them), and (b) drinking blood can be very unhealthy (hence why it was prohibited by God). However, blood transfusions are ''not'' unhealthy, and in fact have saved millions of lives. The argument from the "alcohol analogy" (above) is a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_analogy false analogy], because whether drinking alcohol or directly injecting it into one's body will have the same physical effect (both are unhealthy), whereas receiving a blood transfusion will have a different effect from drinking blood (the former is healthy, the latter is not). | *''Example Counter-Argument for Blood Transfusions:'' The Law only prohibits ''drinking'' blood, ''not'' blood transfusions, because (a) blood transfusions were not in existence in Biblical times (and therefore the Bible cannot say anything against them), and (b) drinking blood can be very unhealthy (hence why it was prohibited by God). However, blood transfusions are ''not'' unhealthy, and in fact have saved millions of lives. The argument from the "alcohol analogy" (above) is a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_analogy false analogy], because whether drinking alcohol or directly injecting it into one's body will have the same physical effect (both are unhealthy), whereas receiving a blood transfusion will have a different effect from drinking blood (the former is healthy, the latter is not). | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Neutrality == | ||
| + | |||
| + | I'm all for including information and arguments from the viewpoint of the Jehovah's Witnesses, but perhaps it should be done in another article (maybe titled something like, [[Jehovah's Witnesses (Jehovah's Witnesses Church viewpoint)]])? This article should be kept neutral, since most denominations do not except the Witnesss as a true Christian denomination. -- [[User:P.B. Pilhet|P.B. Pilhet]] / [[User talk:P.B. Pilhet|Talk]] 00:15, 11 May 2008 (PDT) | ||
Revision as of 07:15, 11 May 2008
This was moved out of the main article; it can be reworded and put back it at a later date:
- Example Argument Against Blood Transfusions: In a list of things that Christians were forbidden to do, since there was confusion because the Law had been abolished, the disciples said that Christians were supposed to abstain from blood. (Acts 15:28, 29) To illustrate: If a doctor told a man that he was to drink no more alcohol, would it be okay for the man to insert the alcohol into his veins? Hardly. Since God told man to abstain from blood, inserting it into your veins would not be abstaining from blood.
- Example Counter-Argument for Blood Transfusions: The Law only prohibits drinking blood, not blood transfusions, because (a) blood transfusions were not in existence in Biblical times (and therefore the Bible cannot say anything against them), and (b) drinking blood can be very unhealthy (hence why it was prohibited by God). However, blood transfusions are not unhealthy, and in fact have saved millions of lives. The argument from the "alcohol analogy" (above) is a false analogy, because whether drinking alcohol or directly injecting it into one's body will have the same physical effect (both are unhealthy), whereas receiving a blood transfusion will have a different effect from drinking blood (the former is healthy, the latter is not).
Neutrality
I'm all for including information and arguments from the viewpoint of the Jehovah's Witnesses, but perhaps it should be done in another article (maybe titled something like, Jehovah's Witnesses (Jehovah's Witnesses Church viewpoint))? This article should be kept neutral, since most denominations do not except the Witnesss as a true Christian denomination. -- P.B. Pilhet / Talk 00:15, 11 May 2008 (PDT)
