Inviting djeggnog to discuss the blood doctrine

by jgnat 317 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    http://es-la.facebook.com/profile/pic.php?oid=AQDOPAmEoFUfdA4j1FLatNYmnIYrazy_tVcfr1voQDOf6YrygsrGGjrwUECsfFEjqQU&size=normal&usedef=1

    DJEggNogg

    that you've never been one of Jehovah's Witnesses, so I wouldn't exactly expect you to understand the mindset of a Christian,

    That was your comment to Jgnat..You are the one,that doesn't have the mindset of a Christian..

    The WBT$ has removed Jesus as your Mediator..

    As a JW,you follow the "WBT$ Anti-Christ Organization" for Guidance..

    You are no longer a Christian..You are a WatchTard..

    @TD, but there is no one here that can outthink me,..

    You don`t think..

    The WBT$ thinks for you..

    I have Socks that are Smarter than You..

    How so? We don't make transfusions look scary at all.

    WE?..

    You don`t do Shit..

    The WBT$ makes a decision..You follow it.

    End of story..

    ........................ ...OUTLAW

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    http://es-la.facebook.com/profile/pic.php?oid=AQDOPAmEoFUfdA4j1FLatNYmnIYrazy_tVcfr1voQDOf6YrygsrGGjrwUECsfFEjqQU&size=normal&usedef=1

    DjEggNogg..

    I have One more Thought for you..

    I realize your Head may Explode but,I`m going to Chance it..

    Rolf Furuli is a JW,with Expertise in Linguistics..

    Quoting him as an Expert in any Other Field,is WatchTarded..

    ....................... ...OUTLAW

  • moshe
    moshe

    I have asked this question of many JWs, "will a blood transfusion save the life of a starving man?"They hate that question (never heard it before, so they don't have a canned WT answer for it) and they usually try to avoid giving an answer.

    The answer, "no", explains why blood transfusions have nothing to do with the OT Bible prohibitions against eating blood- and it explains why Jewish Rabbis see so religious conflicts with blood transfusions, either. Transfused blood has no food/calorie value for the body.

    The WT publications, to my knowledge, have never mentioned that the Jews accept blood transfusions (the GB ignores that fact) or tried to explain why the Jewish reasoning is flawed- they don't, because they can't-- and 100% of JWs I have talked to, have never thought about the Jews and how they view blood transfusions. It's always a, "I didn't know that" moment for them Anyway, the OT Bible was given to the Jews, so they should have the right to decide how the blood laws are to be interpreted today. You can get a blood transfusion on the Sabbath in a Jewish hospital , given to to save a life, but the elevator stops on every floor, so nobody has to push the button, which would break the do-no-work Sabbath laws.

    I have one more thing to say-

    The blood fractions dogma that JWs look to as God's law- how did they get it? I am sure there was a meeting of the GB to consider the change, but how did the issue even come up for a vote? Oh, they got the idea from the Faithful and Discreet Slave? Well, we know that didn't happen- this was a closed door meeting, not a meeting of a thousand anointed JWs who all had the same spiritutal revelation- "hey, by golly, change to blood fractions, that is what we gotta do".

    Getting that out of the way, the GB made the decision without consulting the F&DS, which is contrary to their own WT folklore. Next, we get down to the meeting- just what happend? Maybe, very likey indeed, some of the GB wanted to drop all prohibitions on blood transfusions-- GOD told them it was the right thing to do- but they were not in the majority- 2/3 maybe?- so they reached a compromise- they came up with the confusing blood fractions scheme and there were enough votes to pass that change.

    What could this mean to a JW? Well, it means to me, that (if they have a conscience) some members of the GB likely wanted to drop all WT blood dogmas. Could this change the mind of a JW, whose child needed a blood transfusion after an accident, if they knew that the conscience of some of the GB think that blood transfusions are not against God's laws? Suppose just one thinks this way? Don't JWs have a right to know that their Jehovah does not speak with one voice in this matter of life and death?

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    But they do set me off, so to speak, but whenever I'm righteously indignant or angry with someone, I can and will say some mean things, for despite my many typos, I have mastered the art of using words to anger, inflame, insult someone that deserves in return what he or she gives. Jesus would call those deserving "fools" and "hypocrites," and I'm sure our Lord was more artful in his choice of words when he felt a point needed to be made, but none of these other artful phrases are included in any of the gospel accounts written about him. I do have Christ's mind on matters, so hopefully I'll make some of what I say to the ignorant and foolish among us proud.

    You say you cannot be hurt by words and you choose to hurt others with your words. You should be listening to these people in your life that are referring to you as "mean."

    To you language is "mere words." The mistake I suspect you make often is that you expect others to feel the same way as you, especially when it comes to this Language Code you seem to have. It sounds effortless for you to not be bothered by strong language and it very well may be. It's illogical to expect others not to be effected by strong language and that's what it's implied by you choosing to use mean-spirited language against others.

    You are so proud of your actions in relation to how Jesus fought off his foes with harsh language. It's truly astonishing, to me, that you have him as such a role model in your life while completely ignoring how he generally treated people. I think it's safe to say that you are the polar opposite of Jesus minus his doomsday message.

    He didn't have anything against "stupid people" in fact it was the unlearned that he wanted to teach and he used kind words. The ones he rebuked were the ones that he knew were lying straight to his face. He never called anyone out in a mean-spirited way because of innocent ignorance, he invited them into his circle and cared for them.

    Plus why do you think Jesus gives you the right to treat people so poorly anyway? Jesus could read hearts so when he spoke harshly to anyone it was 100% deserved. You nor anyone on this planet can even come close to that kind of figure when "talking down " to others. We don't know jack crap when it comes to their motivations nor should we try to figure it out and use it against them.

    It's obvious that you have used the Bible and Jesus to licence yourself to speak down to others. You are confident and you implicitly trust your intellect and that's a good thing. It's also a powerful thing and it's the reason you have become so articulate and learned. But how do you use it? You squander it as you use the energy to fill up your missles of slander creating a a life of hate towards the world around you.

    Get off your high horse immeidately and you'll see very helpful results for yourself and the people around you.

    -Sab

  • TD
    TD
    I see no reason why we shouldn't have that "interesting discussion" to which you are here referring.

    Okay. Here's a thumbnail sketch of the scenario. Your child is feeling a little run down one evening, but that's nothing unusual when children play hard in a hot, dry climate like Phoenix. Rest and hydration are all they need. But the next morning you're alarmed to see that the child is semi-conscious and the pillow is stained with blood. The child's feet, ankles and lower legs are now covered in petechiae and the mucus membranes are a mass of blood blisters --A textbook case of acute thrombocytopenic purpura.

    At the emergency room, you're told that the child's platelet count has fallen to <1. A platelet count of <10 is considered life threatening. The medical staff does not want to reflexively transfuse platelets because ATP is facially indistinguishable from ITP and a transfusion of platelets can aggravate ITP in the long term. But a sudden drop in blood pressure would indicate internal bleeding and the medical staff would have no choice either way.

    This is not a case of injury or terminal illness. One and only one blood component has neatly been removed from the child's system and consequently, symptoms and indications are very clear.

    My objections to the JW teaching on blood and reasons why I think the JW responses to the situation above were inadequate are primarily Jewish in nature and not things you would likely accept. But I do believe you would recognize that evitable loss of life is a very serious thing. When a child with a dangerously low platelet count is vomiting their own blood, it would be extremely important that the parent who refuses to authorize the recommended treatment is not simply speculating on what God might want. From King Saul to Uzzah, the Bible gives enough examples of people who violated one of God's commands based on what they had speculated God would want. They were all punished.

    In this regard, I don't think that JW's are on solid ground. Some try to invoke the incomplete predicate "απεχεσθαι...και αιματος" apart from the context that completes it as an independent construction. I hope you're not among them, because this approach violates basic rules of grammar in both languages.

    JW's with academic qualifications in this area avoid that pitfall and some, like Rolf Furuli for example, have produced some very elegant reasoning. But it is fatally marred by speculation. I'm not necessarily looking for a classical Aristotlean three-point syllogism here, but the gap between the consumption of blood and the transfusion of blood needs a more substantial bridge than gut feeling.

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    http://i1.ytimg.com/i/hpFjPH-3fuEOW-HQAfYD-w/1.jpg?v=67baa2

    DjEggnogg.. VS.. TD..

    .......................... ...OUTLAW

  • Mary
    Mary

    Here's another scenario for eggnog to contemplate: A family member is diagnosed with a horrifying form of leukemia called Myelodysplasia and he's in the advanced stages of it. Basically, his bone marrow has been completely destroyed by his being exposed to various toxic chemicals over the years, most notably, benzene. With the bone marrow unable to make new blood, and with his present blood count being composed of immature cells, his counts are way too low. His red count is at 80, his white count and platelets drop to 1/10th of what they should be and nothing but a stem cell/bone marrow transplant will be able to save his life.

    In order for this to work though, his present bone marrow has to be destroyed by chemotherapy and then at the right time, the matched stem cells from a donor (in this case, his sister) are given to him which will regenerate into normal bone marrow which will start producing normal cells again. In order for him to survive the chemo treatment, he's going to need multiple blood transfusions to keep him alive until the treatment has been administered.

    Unfortunately, this man is a Jehovah's Witness and he's been taught his entire life that God would rather see him dead rather than accept blood from another human being, even though no one was slaughtered or killed in order to obtain the needed blood. If he accepts a blood transfusion to try and save his life, he will be murdered by God at Armageddon and will never get a resurrection---his eternal salvation is in jeapordy. Not only that but if he takes the transfusion, he'll be completely shunned by fellow family members and life long friends---in fact, everyone he loves will look through him as though he does not exist. This man has been forced into a horrifying situation: Either accept the required transfusions now and be able to continue to live, or refuse and come face to face with his own mortality. Coming face to face with your own mortality is easier said than done and only those who have had to do it, can fully understand what it's like to know you could be dead within a few months.

    The man decides (against the Oncologists' advice) to forego the transfusions as he doesn't want to disobey Jehovah. He begins to find it difficult to breath as his lungs aren't getting enough oxygen and he's running on half a tank. He starts sleeping alot more, some times 12 or 13 hours. He turns white and cannot be around other people because he might catch something from them and since he has virtually no white cells left, his body cannot fight off even the simplest of viruses.

    One night he goes into convulsions and is raced to the hospital. They're not the most competent bunch and thinking he has an infection in his lungs, they pump him full of a bag of very unstable antibiotics that have not been diluted properly. Normally this would not cause that much of a problem in a healthy person, but in this case, it goes straight to the weakest point in his body: his lungs. He's gone so long without adequate oxygen that the cells in his lungs are beginning to die and they become inflamed and show up completely white on an X-ray. Even without the antibiotics being adminstered, he's in serious trouble. In a nutshell, he's slowly suffocating to death due to lack of oxygen and will most likely have a heart attack within another month or two. However, with the unstable and undiluted antibiotics being administered, it goes directly to his lungs and slowly burns them. He's put into a coma and put on life support. Over the next 30 days, the mis-administered drug finishes him off and liquifies his lungs. He never regains conscienceness and dies with his broken hearted wife at his side and never really recovers from it. His elderly parents do what no parent should ever have to do: they bury their own child.

    This has happened because the cult he belongs to, likes to play God with peoples lives. Rather than admit that they have been wrong for the last 50 years in their bizarre interpretation of dietary laws written for another group of people thousands of years ago, they instead stubbornly try to insist that they are right and the rest of the world is wrong. They teach that a loving God would rather see the above-scenario play out rather than let someone try to save their own life by accepting a blood transfusion from a willing donor because it's just so 'risky' to accept a blood transfusion and there are 'other things that can be used'.

    djeggnog, your blind devotion to an outdated man-made law and lack of understanding of human nature is pathetic and nauseating to anyone who reads your bullshit tripe. If the Governing Body said tomorrow that it was okay to accept transfusions, you'd suddenly get anmesia over all the crap you've spewed on the subject and fully back them in anything they said on the matter. In other words, you're not interested in 'truth', you're only interested in being a 'yes man' to a bunch of senile old thugs who wouldn't glance in your direction or give you the time of day if you needed it.

  • The Finger
    The Finger

    This is just a passing thought. But it seems better to be a weak JW than a strong one. If you give in to having blood. (I know some who have) you can be forgiven. You may not even be removed as an Elder, a moment of weakness in an illustrious career.

    Even if you died after having blood. There is the resurrection and God knows you would have repented later.

    However if you are a strong witness. It's just a pat on the back. See the loved one soon.

    Forgiveness is a marvelous thing.

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    You have judged me as a possible second-rate Christian, djeggnogg, but I beg your indulgence to value my questions and comments on their own worth, rather than their source. I have gleaned from your post those comments and related to the question of the day.

    My chief complaint, which I'll repeat here, is that the prohibition on blood is strictly a religious choice. If God had not commanded the prohibition, Jehovah's Witnesses would readily accept blood transfusions. Do you agree with this?

    "..it is possible that many of us today will not succumb to the same illnesses to which our loved succumbed were we willing to accept the treatment that the latest medical technology has produced that was not available to those that have died." You make my point for me. A JW religious prohibition must be obeyed whether it is fatal or not. Making it less dangerous by medical advances does not change the quality of the prohibition.

    "So you are of the opinion that there are those among Jehovah's Witnesses that do not accept blood transfusions for strictly religious reasons?" - I would assume all of them...unless they have been led to believe that there are "scientific" reasons to avoid the risk of transfusion.

    "Do you also opine that among these that there are those that abstain from blood without being fully aware of the potential consequences of their doing so? Like who, for example, @jgnat?" My husband for one. He does not fully understand the consequences and hopes the decision will be taken out of his hands.

    "...those that both know and can articulate why they are unwilling to accept blood transfusions -- is a foolish one, then what we are doing cannot possibly have a scriptural foundation since the Creator of the earth and all of the living creatures in it isn't a foolish God." - Another possible explanation is that a misguided congregation misunderstood a bible precept, and have imposed an unbearable prohibition on it's people. Not God's fault at all.

    "What "pseudo-scientific 'reasons'" do Jehovah's Witnesses teach with respect to the repugnance they feel about disobeying God and using blood in any other way than He directs in His word in view of our appreciation of it as being something sacred to our God?" - you've mentioned one of them - the fear of the transfusion itself and the possibility of acquiring a donor's disease like hepatitis.

    (me) "They make transfusions look scary!" (he) "How so? We don't make transfusions look scary at all." (me) There are risks associated with any transfusion, which you have already mentioned.

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    Unfortunately, this man is a Jehovah's Witness and he's been taught his entire life that God would rather see him dead rather than accept blood from another human being

    I would suspect that DJ completely agrees with "God" on this point. That's the basis of his entire argument no matter how many words he chooses to use to explain it with.

    If he truly needed a blood transfusion to survive DJ would take death for himself or anyone in his household whom he makes the decisions for. He will not budge because he believes that God does prefer you "asleep in death" rather than accepting blood. He is a hypothetical murderer and I think if he was given the chance he'd make himself an official killer with the weapon of doctrine.

    -Sab

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit