For Neologist, and anyone else affiliated with watchtower.

Neologist wrote:

Quote:

You continue to insist I must prove that transfused blood is used in the body as food when neither I nor the Watchtower Society have made that claim.

You have a poor memory. Back on page 4 of this thread you provided a quote from a Watchtower publication. The title of the article was:

Is a transfusion really the same as eating blood?

To show that it is, the article equates a blood transfusion with intravenous feeding.

But as I've pointed out over and over again this is a bogus claim. Transfused blood doesn't feed the body. Therefore comparing blood transfusions to intravenous feeding is inexcusable. The whole purpose for the comparision is to make it look like taking a blood transfusion is the same as eating blood.

Here's another quote:

Quote:

It is of no consequence that the blood is taken into the body through the veins instead of the mouth. Nor does the claim by some that it is not the same as intravenous feeding carry weight. The fact is that it nourishes the body. (The Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1961, p. 558)

One more:

Quote:

Each time the prohibition of blood is mentioned in the Scriptures it is in connection with taking it as food, and so it is as a nutrient that we are concerned with in its being forbidden. W58 9/15 575 Questions from Readers

If, each time the prohibition of blood is mentioned in the Scriptures it is in connection with taking it as food, then that includes Acts 15:29. Hence, the Watchtower is essentially saying that Acts 15:29 is prohibiting the use of blood as food. If transfused blood isn't used by the body as food then there is no basis for claiming Acts 15:29 forbids blood transfusions.

0 Replies

Against my better judgement:

Talkactive wrote:

. . . I believBy the way who have otherwise and then granted you with the idea, you announced here and started the whole discussion, in this forum, that a blood transfusion was equal to eat blood.

Morally equivalent.

Talkactive wrote:

I'm not going to physically kill members of the Gowerning Body or blow up the Watchtowers properties . . .

Thank you.

0 Replies

Equating blood transfusions with intravenous feeding is an attempt to make them look physically equivalent. I haven't seen you make the case that taking a blood transfusion is morally equivalent to eating blood.

Many JW's are now having their own blood put back in them during an operation or as part of an on-going therapy. This clearly shows that many JW's don't believe that having blood injected into their veins is the moral equivalent of eating it.

0 Replies

Neo is it you and Setanta whom has been responsible for this story, which has come into our part of the world:?

There was to friends one of them with the name Setanta, which was the owner of a car, and then there was his friend Neo which helped him, drinking "Brewskies", at Moes.

One day Setanta asked his friend Neo, after he has been at the shooting field with Moe and his M14, if Neo could help him controlling the direction lights, at his car!

Certainly said Neo positively as always, and placed himself in front of the car and at the same time Setanta placed himself, as the owner, behind the steering wheel, you know, he liked to have the crontroll behing the wheel and pushed the direction handle, and shauted with clamour to his friend Neo, through the cars open window Neo! Does it work? and he has to ask once again, because Neo didn' hear so well, Does it works?? Neo... rejoin, yes, no, yes no, yes no, yes, no yes, no, yes............

Sorry, maybe I have forwarded this story before, here in this forum, but wouldn't ones think that it will be fair, that all of us will or should have the same possibilities and are threatened equally, opposite those children which never get a change to survive and taste the life, in leak of medical treatments, at hands, but simply dies a painfull and premature death, because their parents has opened their doo and hearts and become members of the Watchtower Society, because they likes to worship God and believed their doctrines, because they convience them that they was appointed and was speaking on behalf of Jehovah!

Ps. Maybe Setanta have so much imagination, that he can replace a "P" with a "B" and excuse my mistypes and spellings, simply because I'm not a naivte American, by my birth, which nobody decide themself where to be born, be black or white, grow up in a poor or rich family, but we are all equal in God's eyes, that he also will be able to read "tribe" instead of "tripe".

Nevertheless, maybe he need the tripe to eat his tribe "God", maked of hays or straws, seen at the picture he kindly granted us with.

0 Replies

I was wondering whether I should relax Exclamation

However...

My anger is UP so much, and listening to so many intelligent people - talking SH!T...

I'm going to take the risk, of opening myself up on the site 2nite Rolling Eyes

Struggling...

wiv all da crap i is hearing...

{will give you the chance - 2 voicify yourselves - if my PC [politically correct] - behaves)

0 Replies

Thanks for the humorous interlude, Talk. We all need to lighten up. How about we meet at the Fair?

You can do it at a trot
You can do it at a gallop
You can do it at a rate
That your heart won't palpitate
Just don't be late
To the Puyallup

Source

0 Replies

I have popped back into this chat room Laughing

I felt it was important for me to say that everything is down to personal perspective and their experiences in their journeys through life...

BECAUSE the world is so complicated and there are so many individual perspectives. Sometimes it is hard for basic HUMAN entities to appreciate that Embarrassed

For that FACT - I offer my sincerest apologies. Solely for the reason that I have seen many things, and realise there are many different views in this world.

My only ISSUES was that this was a forum for "spirituality and philosophy" I felt it was important to stand up for one SIDE, but after re-evaluating and reviewing the MULTIPLE views that are on display. I felt it was important to retract MOST of my statements...

HOWEVER I feel it is so important for me to iterate that for a human being, when their mind is not projected on the airwaves and they have the limiting factors of personal experience, they do experience emotions. Yesterday my emotions were Twisted Evil

Today I will be more cautious... Cool

On that note I will give you a very basic view - a blood transfusion to help human life I completely agree with (unless the human is a sentiment being and would request the ability not to be alive)

If we're talking about consuming blood and all the implications that that is connected with, then I REFUSE to give my opinions on this website.

0 Replies

Quote:

Thanks for the humorous interlude, Talk. We all need to lighten up. How about we meet at the Fair?

Neo. Thanks, that sounds good, if it will be on a fair basis, without prejudice, based at doctrines and religius leaders misintrepretation and sanctions, but to be openminded, like adults, but mentally as children, continue in trying to learn more about Jehovah's personality, what His creation and the Bible has to teach and tell us, opposite the Amalekite, who gets killed, because he didn't knew Davids personality, Then we hopefylly can be more spiritual, generous, loving and emphatic persons with compassion, as Jesus shows us and by following his examples, then there will be a fair base for, that we can meet at the Fair!

At last I would like to send my greeting to Setanta, because both you and Neo gave me a challenge and a chance to get use of my knowledge, where Tele expand it in question of the Bible and the blood matter and in practicing my English, in written form, that was very strenghtening and positive with my eyes.

And to you Tele, I really enjoy your presens, experience and knowledge here, with regards to Watchtower Society's ban on blood, that it has nothing to do with what Jehovah command, what the Cration teach us and what comes forth in the Bible, was and gets more solely clear for me, that Medical treatments with blood or derivates, as a last change for sustain a life, is not a gross sin and a no-no. It should never have been a mix of science, religion and sanctions, based at changing doctrines, under religious leaders and lawyers hypocritical influence and manipulations, which has created death, pain and sorrow, for all those who have lost a Child, a sprose, rellative and a belowed one(s). I really hope it will be possible to see you very soon, face to face, since the planning is in progress.

The best we can give the death and the living who still is among us is the Sriptual hope as comes forth in John 17:3 and Revelation 32:8!

17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

To the very very last I like to quote from Johannes Moellehave a priest and poet:

"Sorrow is love that you can't express"!

There is no possibility more, so far, to met warm gentle eyes, hold a hand, a smile, a laugh, no caress, no gentle stroke and memories share more, when we loose one or more of our belowed ones, maybe and even worser our ofspring a child!

0 Replies

Let me go off topic here and give you some help in English rhetoric.

First on the benefits of SpellCheck:

It won't prevent you from using a wrong word (such as tripe vs. tribe) or a homonym, (such as to, too, two) but it will assure you that the words you use are recognizable parts of the English language. Then your English readers will have only to figure out which word you may have intended rather than simply assume you have a disorganized mental state.

Next a word about the English idiomatic expression of logical fallacies"

You completely missed Setanta's publication of the Straw man fallacy.

http://shagadelica.net/wp-content/pictures/_923strawman.jpg

Note how easy it would be for the boxer to defeat the false opponent he himself has created.

Your arguments are full of fallacious lines of reasoning and conclusions. Perhaps more practice is needed.

Here are some fine links for you to consider:
http://www.dianahsieh.com/misc/fallacies.html
http://www.cuyamaca.edu/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/intro_fallacies.asp
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#poetry

There are more; but this should give you some help. Tele could use a look as well.

In the meantime, forgive me for my disparaging remarks. But, in my defense, your logical flights of fancy from time to time deserve special recognition.

PS. After you are familiar with straight faced rhetoric, I will instruct you in satire and sarcasm.

0 Replies

Neo wrote:

Quote:

You completely missed Setanta's publication of the Straw man fallacy.

Did I, maybe it's because of I'm happy, not to belong, to his "God" and tribe and have anything in common, with his tripe!

Quote:

Your arguments are full of fallacious lines of reasoning and conclusions. Perhaps more practice is needed.

This is repeated postulate from your side, take it to a proof!

Do you still mean, that it was false that it was you Neo who stated, taking a blood transfusion was equal to eat blood? If so, you are amazing Neo!

Quote:

Then your English readers will have only to figure out which word you may have intended rather than simply assume you have a disorganized mental state.

There was one here, who asked me, if you really has a bad memory Neo, since you start at nearly zero every time, I could only show him the fact that you have forgotten who have started the topic, based on a Watchtower article? The only comment I got was a HM...You are wasting you time. Same conclusion Tele brought up for long time ago!

Neo may I ask you a personal question, not trying to insult you, you are neutral here, but better to understand how it comes? Seriously, do you have or had problems with the "Brewskis" or is it simply because you are scatterbrained, due to the match?

You have been so professional and effective educated, in question of historical events and procedures of the watchtower Society and in question of the Blood and derivates, that you should be ashamed, or maybe better to say, shame on you Neo, may Jehovah rebuke you!

Neo...the gong gong has sound and the match is over, even that you try to stand up after a clean knock out from Tele, or isn't it for your part? Your answer seems to be: yes, no, yes, no yes, no, yes ..........!

I do now better understand the reason for and why, you are so unfamiliarly with the Watchtower Society's historical background, flashing new light and rapidly changing doctrines. You do simply not understand and have the capacity to follow the speed in changes and since the blood doctrine isn't anchored in the Bible, you twist around, as by and after several punches and start to mentioning that Lawyers was involved at the Society, to determine whether Jehovah allow blood components or not???

It seems that you are really down, not only down but deep in the mud, as a matter of fact, like many others with you, totally confused about the Watchtowers manipulating and flickering light, due to a deathly blood doctrine. You don't even understand, how dangerous you are for yourself, by following the doctrines, you are even willing to distribute them to others, even you admit you don't understand, but find only another, that also blindly or maybe not either understand the issue to assist you, You are dangerous for yourself neo and others, When a blind leads a blind they fall in the same pit said Jesus, it seems unfortunately to be at all levels, as a cult like behaviour, between mostly of the members inside the Society. I must admit that I'm really happy, at your and your family behalf, that you not get cathed by Jim Jones or his fellow men!

So if your Doctor(s) diagnosis is, that you are going to die Neo and the only usable medical treatment, is blood or derivates hereof, you simply refuse everything and are willing to sacrifice your life, Have you ever thought of that committing suicide, when help is at hands, it maybe will be negative in the eyes of Jehovah? It seems for me, that you Neo are going to, and likes to test him, not me, based at doctrines you don't or refuse to understand and still act as you do here in this forum. Better be at the safe side, even I leave my family and they, hopefully also, will miss you, better abstain, and let the Watchtower's non Scriptural doctrine rule! I'm really sorry Neo........

I believe Neo, but I really don't hope, that your attend to the meetings, simply is a question of a social get - together, a positive one for you, rather than to make sure of everything and take awareness of what it's all about, you simply must have slept, in more than 30 years, during the sessions and mostly, if you have been Awake for a second or two, the Watchtower, rock you to sleep again and are dooing the thinking for you!

There was a frind he told me about a third person, who didn't understand, even simple things in life, and destroy everthing he touch. He said to me that he of course would forgive him time after time as long as he only would try to do things right. But he said hereafter, the problem was not that the person hasn't been granted with so many brain cells, in his life, but that he, at the same time, time after time was shameless, then he said to me, when it comes to this point, then everything stopped...The combination Neo, if you should wonder!

You denied the fact that thousands youngsters and minor aged persons has died due to the watchtowers blood doctrine. What a shame, it is for me the same to say, that holocoust is a fake, what a disrespect you show Neo, aginst all them who have been offered and mostly against their still living rellatives, when you got the article from Awake, where the Society admit that thousands have died a premature death because of the blod doctrine!!! Shame on you Neo, again may Jehova rebuke strongly!

The match is over Neo the Gong Gong maybe saved you this time...(your life at the hospital, in connection with your knee operation, really do hope so and it went well without blood or derivates?) but next time it maybe counts, but..

Not because of what you forward agains me Neo, but your denial leaves the impression that nobody have died and are going to die because of the Watchtower SSsociety's confusing blood doctrine, even you know it's the truth!! It is for me excatly the same, as and when, the new Nazis deny Holocaust, it's faked!. Not to compare but the backgrund, why????

0 Replies

Hello Tele!

Can I ask for your assistance to place a full copy of the Awake magazine, since I only have then in my language. A copy of the cover of the May 22, 1994 Awake and the page with the head, where it comes forth. In former times.... but also today.. the issue is blood.

0 Replies

Talkactive wrote:

Do you still mean, that it was false that it was you Neo who stated, taking a blood transfusion was equal to eat blood? If so, you are amazing Neo!

This is a perfect example of your straw man tripe. You continue to insist that I defend a proposition that was made neither by me nor by the article to which you refer; and you have repeatedly ignored the fact that the command to abstain from blood is not a simple dietary recommendation. Whether you eat, drink, inject or snort, it makes no difference.

How many times have I said that?

And if you wonder why I have paid little regard to your so-called historical background, it is because you have filled it with the same half truths, innuendos and misrepresentations. At least Tele has been willing to focus on a single issue.

BTW, you should try SpellCheck. It's that little button to the bottom right of the text box.

Oh, and here is another link for you regarding your Hitler/Nazi reference:

Godwin's Law states:

"There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress"

Additional source

0 Replies

Teles quotations:

Quote:

Neologist wrote:

Quote:
You continue to insist I must prove that transfused blood is used in the body as food when neither I nor the Watchtower Society have made that claim.

Tele quote:

Quote:
You have a poor memory. Back on page 4 of this thread you provided a quote from a Watchtower publication. The title of the article was:

Is a transfusion really the same as eating blood?

To show that it is, the article equates a blood transfusion with intravenous feeding.

But as I've pointed out over and over again this is a bogus claim. Transfused blood doesn't feed the body. Therefore comparing blood transfusions to intravenous feeding is inexcusable. The whole purpose for the comparision is to make it look like taking a blood transfusion is the same as eating blood.

Here's another quote:

Quote:
It is of no consequence that the blood is taken into the body through the veins instead of the mouth. Nor does the claim by some that it is not the same as intravenous feeding carry weight. The fact is that it nourishes the body. (The Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1961, p. 558)

One more:

Quote:
Quote:
Each time the prohibition of blood is mentioned in the Scriptures it is in connection with taking it as food, and so it is as a nutrient that we are concerned with in its being forbidden. W58 9/15 575 Questions from Readers

If, each time the prohibition of blood is mentioned in the Scriptures it is in connection with taking it as food, then that includes Acts 15:29. Hence, the Watchtower is essentially saying that Acts 15:29 is prohibiting the use of blood as food. If transfused blood isn't used by the body as food then there is no basis for claiming Acts 15:29 forbids blood transfusions.

Tele quoted again:

Equating blood transfusions with intravenous feeding is an attempt to make them look physically equivalent. I haven't seen you make the case that taking a blood transfusion is morally equivalent to eating blood.

Many JW's are now having their own blood put back in them during an operation or as part of an on-going therapy. This clearly shows that many JW's don't believe that having blood injected into their veins is the moral equivalent of eating it.

Jeremiah 7:31!

And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my heart.

Collosians 2:8-23!

2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

2:18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

2:19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.

2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

2:21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;

2:22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

2:23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

Matthew 12:9-12!

12:9 And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue:

12:10 And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.

12:11 And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?

12:12 How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.

Proverbs 26:11!

As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

Quotations from King James.

0 Replies

Teles quotations:

Quote:

Neologist wrote:

Quote:
You continue to insist I must prove that transfused blood is used in the body as food when neither I nor the Watchtower Society have made that claim.

Tele quote:

Quote:
You have a poor memory. Back on page 4 of this thread you provided a quote from a Watchtower publication. The title of the article was:

Is a transfusion really the same as eating blood?

To show that it is, the article equates a blood transfusion with intravenous feeding.

But as I've pointed out over and over again this is a bogus claim. Transfused blood doesn't feed the body. Therefore comparing blood transfusions to intravenous feeding is inexcusable. The whole purpose for the comparision is to make it look like taking a blood transfusion is the same as eating blood.

Here's another quote:

Quote:
It is of no consequence that the blood is taken into the body through the veins instead of the mouth. Nor does the claim by some that it is not the same as intravenous feeding carry weight. The fact is that it nourishes the body. (The Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1961, p. 558)

One more:

Quote:
Quote:
Each time the prohibition of blood is mentioned in the Scriptures it is in connection with taking it as food, and so it is as a nutrient that we are concerned with in its being forbidden. W58 9/15 575 Questions from Readers

If, each time the prohibition of blood is mentioned in the Scriptures it is in connection with taking it as food, then that includes Acts 15:29. Hence, the Watchtower is essentially saying that Acts 15:29 is prohibiting the use of blood as food. If transfused blood isn't used by the body as food then there is no basis for claiming Acts 15:29 forbids blood transfusions.

Tele quoted again:

Equating blood transfusions with intravenous feeding is an attempt to make them look physically equivalent. I haven't seen you make the case that taking a blood transfusion is morally equivalent to eating blood.

Many JW's are now having their own blood put back in them during an operation or as part of an on-going therapy. This clearly shows that many JW's don't believe that having blood injected into their veins is the moral equivalent of eating it.

Jeremiah 7:31!

And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my heart.

Collosians 2:8-23!

2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

2:18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

2:19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.

2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

2:21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;

2:22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

2:23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

Matthew 12:9-12!

12:9 And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue:

12:10 And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.

12:11 And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?

12:12 How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.

Proverbs 26:11!

As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

Quotations from King James.

0 Replies

The article I quoted was from the book Reasoning on the Scriptures, published in 1989. The articles you cite date from 1961 and before. I can't explain the wording of the earlier texts, or how accurately they reflect the medical understanding of that day. Nevertheless, the command to abstain from blood is clearly explained by the citation I provided.

0 Replies

Neo wrote:

Quote:

The article I quoted was from the book Reasoning on the Scriptures, published in 1989. The articles you cite date from 1961 and before. I can't explain the wording of the earlier texts, or how accurately they reflect the medical understanding of that day. Nevertheless, the command to abstain from blood is clearly explained by the citation I provided.

I don't know Neo, but it seems for me, that we are talking about feelings, and a faith, built up at blind trust to son of men, rather than what the Bible really tells and the Creation show us, e.g. that twins, two individuals, from one or two eggs, share the same blood via the Festus, from your side.

Is it possible for Jehovah to violate his own law? Answer the question, with a yes or no!

You can't discuss feelings and obviously not credulousity!

What ones can do is to discuss facts!

Whether the article is from Reasoning on the Scriptures or it's from another Watchtower publication, it has its origin from the Governing Body and mirror the teachings of the Society, where Tele have documented, without any doubt, what the Watchtower Society's stands for and have teached in their whole history, whether you have been a member or not in a specific time period, but the understanding.

Neo you was a member in 1994 and in the Awake from 22 May you are fully aware of that the Watchtower Society confirm that thousands of minor age have died. Are you denying the facts and reality?

The teachings and intensions, from the Watchtower, has always been to take a blood transfusion was equal to eating the blood.

If they, as they claims to do, teach Bible Standards, why do they then admit derivates, if it is a question of equivalent morality?

Are an Organisation who claims, to speak as God's mouth and claim to teach Bible standards, not committed to administrate that those who belongs to Jehovah, follow Bible standards, which they have enforced by threats and sanctions in all their lifetime, by punishing members to follow Gods word, if not they will be disfellowshipped and shunned, by the Society interpreted and patented truth!

Otherwise, it seems to me that they are adopting the Christianity's behaviour, e.g. accept that homosexuals to be yoked together, in the churches and with their blessings opposite 1 Corintians 6:9-10?

Can we now also commit little adultery, as long as it's only petting....like the derivates and maintain ar good standing in front of Jehovah, even that the blood and adultery really are a no-no?

Tele have improved here above any doubt, that the Watchtower Society have that, biological fact has improved, but the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witness continue, because a total capitulation in question of the blood will result in that there will be filled anymore lawsuits against them for murder.

They properly also continue their murder doctrine, simply because, the evil Organisation, they have created themselves, count's more for them together with numbers, than love, compassion and their concern for the, rank and file, lives, as Jesus stated in the versus I quoted you with. Keeping their doctrines and rules means more to them than lives! Matthew 23:23!

23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

0 Replies

Talkactive wrote:

. . .
Neo you was a member in 1994 and in the Awake from 22 May you are fully aware of that the Watchtower Society confirm that thousands of minor age have died. Are you denying the facts and reality?
. . .

I have a copy of that magazine and the only article I can find with any reference to blood is one titled Contaminated Blood Given to Hemophiliacs which documents the infection and death of many hundreds in several countries including the US. The contamination dated back to the early 1980s and continued even after a sterilization method was found.

Perhaps you are referring to a different issue?

0 Replies

I just dropped by to say that i've come to my senses, and now realize that you, Neo, are a dangerous lunatic fringe bible-thumper, and that i shouldn't associate with you . . . Geeze, i hope nobody thinks we're friends . . .

. . . uhm, can i have another cup of coffee before i go?

0 Replies

Why certainly. And can you please explain to me why I can't stop talking to these fine fellows?

0 Replies

ER, T&T. Perhaps you were actually referring to the 6/15/2004 Watchtower magazine which has a pretty fair explanation of the blood issue. I must warn you, however, that it is rational.

Pay particular attention to page 22, ¶ 13 to page 24 ¶ 19.

I'll quote it for anyone who'll take the time to read it.

0 Replies

For Neologist, and anyone else affiliated with watchtower.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know