Supreme Court Blood Case - WTS LOSES

by skeeter1 168 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  The Almighty Homer

  Playing god can be empowering for a man cant it Spike, the murdering assholes of the JW organization once also

  told their followers to forgo organ transplants and vaccinations also killing many in doing so.

  The ignorant asshole power heads of the JWS drew this intellectually dishonest conclusion from the old Mosaic laws

  regarding the eating of blood, on the other hand their was a laid down law on the sanctity of life as transcribed by

  Jesus Christ.

  See what happens when corruption entwines itself with righteous power of corrupt men.

  Now the question has to asked why are there so many Christian based religions claiming to be the one and

  only true religion.

  The answer is obvious they all want the power of god, the JWS are not an exception to this rule by any means.
• 

  compound complex

  [...] and it has been shown on here muitple times that the scriptures do not address blood transfusions, and that this blood ban is obviously not of God. This leaves the GB guilty of murder in God's name.

  issacaustin

  While Rutherford swallowed some irrational rantings by Franz and Woodworth over the beginnings of the blood issue, he would not allow publication of FWF's "special knowledge" as "new light" in THE WATCHTOWER. The two mischief makers kept things stirred up and began convincing others, including Knorr. The author was told that now that "King Saul" [FWF] is dead, the leadership would like blood transfusions to be a matter of conscience and lay the blame for all the suffering at the feet of Franz and Woodworth. [see page 5]

  Perhaps the third time posted will be the charm, i.e., a post that garners a comment or two.

  Thank you.

  CoCo Persists
• 

  isaacaustin

  the first-hand account of a former gb member shows the WT leadership realizes their error. This further backs up that they are unable to make an immediate lift to this ban due to backlash and legal issues.
• 

  The Almighty Homer

  they are unable to make an immediate lift to this ban due to backlash and legal issues.

  Exactly isaacaustin, trying to explain this to a indoctrinate programed JW and its imposable

  to open their eyes and see the real truth of the matter.
• 

  isaacaustin

  yes Homer...it is like talking to a brick wall.
• 

  BluesBrother

  We each have free will and must use it responsibly.

  It buggs me the way that the J W movement uses this phase ( and it is not just our friend Spike, it is a party line from the WT)

  Free will is the exercise of a free conscience without punishment , anything else is a masquerade. Of course actions can have consequences . Smoking might kill you, If I drive my car into a wall, I get hurt, but that is a natural law not the decision of another man. If a gangster tells me that I have free will to give him my wallet , or not , but points toward his gun...that cannot be a free choice.

  If the Dubs say I have a free choice to accept blood or not , but if I do, they will disfellowship me , my family will shun me, every "friend" I ever had will avoid me...and by the way I am to be slaughtered "soon" and the crows will peck out my eyes...

  Is it a free choice??

  As that WT article said, it is best not to say"My religion forbids it, rather say instead " My Bible trained conscience does not allow it" (paraphrased fom memory)
• 

  Spike Tassel

  Whether the announcement is made that a particular individual is "now disfellowshipped", is "no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses", or is "NOT one of Jehovah's Witnesses" lies on the conscience of that one making such a statement, or concurring with it. Whether it accurately reflects Jehovah's position on the person in question is for Him to answers, as he chooses. Loss or gain of relationships depend on the individual dynamics involved.

  Either "yes" or "no" to any particular treatment ought to be the choice of the individual, its guardians, and those they deem as trust worthy. Full stop.
• 

  isaacaustin

  WHile you are right that God does not judge one on their loss of friends, family, or standing in an org...this also accentuates that the org has crossed the line on blood transfusions, and a whole array of issues. It goes beyond being on the conscience of the one making the announcement, or even the judicial committee...it goes so far as the leaders (GB) making the directives the captive elders follow. You are correct that the org is guilty on this. It also shows that one does not need to come to the org for salvation.
• 

  Spike Tassel

  Each one draws his own conclusions once again on the evidence before him, as he sees fit. Which of these conclusions is accurate will be a matter of determination, as each sees fit.
• 

  isaacaustin

  nice representation spike. You try to present it as though the JWs are in an open intellectual forum where the scriptures are the overriding factor in all they do, and they are to to according to their own Bible-trained consciences. This is far from reality. The WT is the final authority for JWs. If a JW has a doubt he is not to express it to anyone at all, other than his elders. He is instructed by the elders to leave that doubt on the back burner and wait for Jehovah to make the changes, if needed, thru his supposed org. A JW is not truly free to make his choices according to his own conscience- their are consequences if it goes against GB policy. The GB does not encourage (at least not in action) a Bible trained conscience but rather a highly sensitized conscience toward GB policy, which has put itself forth as coming direct from God.