The latest Watchtower position on Blood - comments welcome

by Nickolas 56 Replies latest members private

  • Nickolas
    Nickolas

    The conversation alluded to at the beginning of this thread has taken a bit of a wrong turn this evening. When I brought up the fact that hemoglobin is now allowed (more accurately, not disallowed) the response was skepticism. When I then said that even bovine hemoglobin was allowed the response was bald incredulity. Where on earth did I read that? I must have got the disinformation from one of the apostate sites. So, I got out the computer, went onto www.watchtower.org and keyed in "bovine blood" in the search field, bringing up the relevant information.

    JW: Well there's no way I'll use that stuff.

    Me: But it says here it's not banned.

    JW: It says there that it's a matter of conscience.

    Me: Is there any other thing scriptural the Society allows Witnesses to interpret for themselves?

    JW:

    Me: So, the way I read it, in 1999 taking hemoglobin was banned and in 2000 it is not banned. How many people died before 2000 because they believed that taking blood products went against God?

    JW: Maybe nobody.

    Me: Not what I'm reading. I don't think it would be too difficult to find evidence of people dying. Fact of the matter is it says here that hemoglobin, even from cows, is now ok for transfusion. The Society has made a doctrinal change.

    JW: No, it says it is a matter of conscience. They don't say it's ok.

    Me: They don't say it is forbidden, though, and at one time they did. I mean, you thought it was banned, correct? I'm also reading that there's some dissention in the rank and file about the blood doctrine. Have you ever heard of the AJWRB? Look at this website ...

    JW: Well, I'll tell you, they won't be JWs for long if they're found out. They're not real JWs if they are promoting this apostacy.

    Me: They consider themselves to be real JWs.

    And then the conversation abruptly ended. The Witness got up and just walked away. I called out asking if the conversation was over and got an angry "that's right" response.

    I didn't even get a chance to get out the heavy artillery. I was using a mild tone of voice, was not confrontational and stuck to the facts. One step forward, two back.

  • 3dogs1husband
    3dogs1husband

    I'm 2 steps back today aswell with my JW.

  • Mary
    Mary
    And then the conversation abruptly ended. The Witness got up and just walked away. I called out asking if the conversation was over and got an angry "that's right" response.

    Quite a common occurance. I had the same thing happen to me a few weeks ago on Facebook. I said something to OldFlame's mother who came on his site saying about how only the Witlesses preach like the first century Christians. I dispelled that notion pretty quick using the bible and the Society's own publications. She refused to respond to what I said claiming it was because I was an 'ex-Witness'. In reality, it was because she had no rebuttal to what I said.

    It sounds like this is what you're encountering right now. After all, as Witnesses, we are 110% convinced that we and we alone had 'the Truth' and it is shocking when someone can point out discrepancies that go against what we've been brainwashed to believe. Especially when you use the Society's own literature as they can't exactly scream "apostate literature". Good news is maybe that this JW needs some time to absorb what you've told her. I can almost guarantee that she's thinking about it and will continue to think about it........Let us know if there are any further developments.....

  • Nickolas
    Nickolas

    Good news is maybe that this JW needs some time to absorb what you've told her. I can almost guarantee that she's thinking about it and will continue to think about it........Let us know if there are any further developments.....

    for the record, I have not alluded to the individual's gender. Thanks, Mary. I hope you are right, and I will.

  • Mad Sweeney
    Mad Sweeney

    You triggered the cult personality's defenses, Nick. It happens. If you know the person well, try to speak with the authentic personality and regain his/her confidence. If you are a danger to the cult personality, it will rise up and resist further discussion.

    Good luck.

  • Mary
    Mary
    for the record, I have not alluded to the individual's gender.

    D'OH! Sorry, I somehow thought it was a 'she'.

  • Nickolas
    Nickolas

    2+2, if you've been reading my other posts, Mary.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit