Acts 15
The apostles establish four cardinal ordinances for new Gentile converts, "That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication..."
One of the cardinal doctrines of the Jehovah's Witness religion comes from this 'blood' provision and they derive from this that one cannot receive blood transfusions.
Yet they also find in Paul's letters Paul's plain teaching of the permissibility of eating meats sacrificed to idols, which Paul outrageously defends, wherewith he undermines the of the ordinances, which he has no right to do.
How can they remain consistent by strongly emphasizing the 'blood' provision and yet denounce the first proposition? It seems that to maintain consistency they must abide by all four laws or dismiss them all.
And how does the Word remain infallible once it's recognized that Paul taught against apostolic counsel in Acts 15?
So clearly, where Paul's teachings are found, so also are errors.
The original law was not to eat blood. The JW is again incorrect because they work on the SABBATH.
ReplyDeleteRead the story about a real Prophet of GOD who only did part of what he was told to do [Chapter 13, I Kings].