so someone has ideals and are willing to die for what they believe in. This is a sacrifice to God, I guess that is how they look at it. But what bugs me is why is it okay for men to sacrifice their life for Bush's believes and that is so noble.
they get a brass band and a 12 gun salute and a folded flag.
They are willing to die for what they belief in the USA and that is okay. And their not even sick.
But some religious person, dies for some belief or somthing he feels is morally wrong and then he is this monster.
To me that is a double standard, what do you think?
If sacrificeing life in war is okay, because they believe in it, then I mean what the heck?
2007-04-12 03:28:13 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
When we refuse to accept blood as a medical treatment, we do it because it is a command from God. He knows what is best for us. I agree with you regarding people going to war.
It is ok to kill if government leaders tell them to or make them feel guilty if they don't.
As Christians, we will never take up arms against anyone, so we will never be guilty of taking the life of someone's husband, father, brother or sister. How many who go to war can say that?
We have a deep respect for Jehovah and his laws, including his law to abstain from blood.
We have faith like that of Abraham, who was willing to sacrifice his dear son, Isaac and would have done so, had Jehovah's angel not stopped him. We obey our God no matter what, even if it means losing our life now, for we know that if we die, we have the assurance that we will be resurrected back to life.
Apparently, not many have that kind of faith. Jehovah's Witnesses will never willfully disobey his laws just to prolong their life for a few years. If we die, we want to die faithful.
I have been a Jehovah's Witness since 1975 and there is no better way of life.
Thank you for your question.
2007-04-12 03:50:09 · answer #1 · answered by Micah 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No. there is not any longer something in the Bible that talks about it. For my JW acquaintances in spite of the indisputable fact that, they have equipped their pretend doctrine round it. regrettably, they're incorrect for most causes. a million.First the passage in Leviticus is about eating blood of animals, more often than not those for sacrifice. 2. no matter if it continues to be a commandment, then i'm able to assure you that each and each and every JW broke it. Who hasn't tasted their own blood as a baby at the same time as getting a small reduce, nostril bleed etc. that can lead them to to blame. 3. No JW can convince me that in some unspecified time sooner or later of their existence, they have not eaten a hamburger or some meat that became no longer one hundred% completely cooked and blood loose. to blame. 4. that's surely fantastic to me that JW's have easily enable their own little ones DIE before permitting a blood transfusion!! 5. we are no longer below the regulation, yet grace, yet the JW's have made it regulation. nicely, I were given information for them...they better functional keep each and each and every of the regulation, in the adventure that they experience which will benefit them righteousness. In that they have got not and ought to't then they're lost....only Christ's shedding of his blood has set us loose from the regulation.
2016-11-23 14:30:34 · answer #2 · answered by russ 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
BTW you're rambling and your question is completely different from your explanation.
Christian Scientists don't accept blood. Not to be confused with real Christians despite the title. They don't believe in real physical disablities but that it's a mental thing. It is a cult started in 1845 from someone who felt was given "divine inspiration from God". Yea right! To each his own however your beliefs will have an impact on your afterlife.
As for the soldiers you may disagree with the war on terror and feel if we make nice they will as well. Yea right!! : ) However you might want to remember that they chose that career. There isn't a draft right now. If you listened to Fox news or something other and branched out beyond the politics of the liberal media you'd find out that we are doing a lot of good there. Remember the faces on the playing cards? Most are dead or captured. You may not know but the war with Islam has be going on for centuries. When they are willing to "die for what they believe in" and it takes out innocent lives then they need to be removed from society. Pretty simple!
Why don't you talk to a soldier who has returned and ditch your hate for them and direct it in the right direction towards the violent Islam religion.
2007-04-12 03:48:43 · answer #3 · answered by Kelly R 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Jehovah Wittiness refuse blood. But I think the real case in your question was to put down the war. Nobody likes war. Was it right for these terrorist to use planes as bombs in our country. Part of the Islams want to take over here. That means that you would not have the freedoms you have now. You wouldn't been able to post this question. You don't have to like Bush but at least he's preserving our rights to be Americans and keep all our freedoms. Martin Luther King dyed for what he believed as a religious man. And he isn't thought as a monster. He has his own holiday. Your symbolism didn't work out to good.
2007-04-12 03:40:57 · answer #4 · answered by norielorie 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
If it's a grown up person who is responsible for themselves then they can throw away their life over any cause they want. However, it is a different matter if they decide to take others with them, and it is indefensible if they refuse medical treatment to their child or someone else in their care who cannot make decisions for themself.
2007-04-12 03:36:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't mind it if an adult Christian who doesn't believe in blood transfusion refuses a donation. They are standing up for their personal belief.
What bothers me is when an adult Christian stands up for their personal beliefs through their child(as in won't let the doctors give the child a transfusion, insulin, whatever) before he or she is old enough to make up their minds about what they want to believe. Martyr yourself if you want to, but not your child.
2007-04-12 03:37:33 · answer #6 · answered by K 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Are you talking about the terrorist suicide bombers? Their own religion thinks they're nuts!The Muslims you see walking around in America don't think they should Kill Christians, or anyone! It's the same with the KKK, they say they are Christians, but they are crazy! We (Christians) don't support that garbage! War is a whole different senario. We are defending our own country from attack. We have the right to do that. Our soldiers want to fight to keep their Parents, spouses and children free. Do you think there's something wrong with that?
2007-04-12 03:37:11 · answer #7 · answered by Teresa 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I'm very confused as to what exactly you're asking? What does refusing blood have to do with the war in Iraq?
2007-04-12 03:33:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
They are letting their young children and babies die from something as simple as a blood transfusion. It is the parents choosing to let them die, where did the child have a say or choice in it? Sacrificing is not OK under any circumstance and once again with war you are talking about adult. These parents are good parents but their choice to allow their children to die rather than give them a blood transfusion is morally and ethically wrong. And they are misinterpreting the bible, the bible says not to drink blood but says nothing about blood transfusions. Anyone who would let their own child die rather than give them a blood transfusion is negligent and a murderer.
2007-04-12 03:36:01 · answer #9 · answered by Mariah 5 · 1⤊ 6⤋
I like your thinking. You're beginning to realize what, sadly, only about 2% of the world actually has the capacity to understand.
2007-04-12 03:32:38 · answer #10 · answered by pancakes & hyrup 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋