Press Release from Bethel

by Roamingfeline 12 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Roamingfeline

  Press Release from Bethel
  Thu Jun 15 20:22:08 2000

  Statement to the Media (June 14, 2000)

  An article published in the June 14, 2000, issue of a British newspaper has incorrectly publicized what it feels to be a major change in the religious doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses regarding blood transfusions.
  In order to correct the misinformation, Jehovah's Witnesses are providing the following statement.

  [Editorial note: the remainder of the press release is italicized]

  The Bible commands Christians to "abstain...from blood." (Acts 15:20). Jehovah's Witnesses believe that it is not possible to abstain from blood and accept blood transfusions. They have consistently refused donor blood ever since transfusions began to be widely used in civilian medical practice in the 1940s, and this scriptural position has not changed.

  If one of Jehovah's Witnesses is transfused against his or her will, Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe that this constitutes a sin on the part of the individual. This position has not changed.

  If one of Jehovah's Witnesses accepts a blood transfusion in a moment of weakness and then later regrets the action, this would be considered a
  serious matter. Spiritual assistance would be offered to help the person regain spiritual strength. This position has not changed.

  If a baptized member of the faith willfully and without regret accepts blood transfusions, he indicates by his own actions that he no longer
  wishes to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses. The individual revokes his own membership by his own actions, rather than the congregation initiating
  this step. This represents a procedural change instituted in April 2000 in which the congregation no longer initiates the action to revoke membership in such cases. However, the end result is the same: the
  individual is no longer viewed as one of Jehovah's Witnesses because he no longer accepts and follows a core tenet of the faith. However, if such an individual later changes his mind, he may be accepted back as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. This position has not changed.

  Jehovah's Witnesses seek quality medical care and accept medical alternatives to blood transfusions. Support is given to members to help them obtain medical treatment that respects their religious convictions.

  Contact: James N. Pellechia, telephone: (718) 560-5600
• 

  RedhorseWoman

  Yada, yada.....same thing.....slightly different slant....obviously to avoid any litigation that they feared might be coming from this.

  The change still means that now JW's can truthfully say that no one is {b]expelled from the organization for taking blood. This sounds much better to the world.

  However, the result is the same.....expulsion from the congregation and shunning....but this time it will be the person's own decision.

  The PR machine rides again. It once more comes down to, who cares what the Bible actually says or what God actually wants[/b], as long as the BOrg retains control, looks good to the world, and remains immune from litigation.
• 

  Maxee

  Throughout all my years as a loyal jdub I was constantly reminded that we should be no part of the world.
  I would like to put forward this question.
  IS the society now trying to conform with the world by stating that they do not expell members for taking blood? Making them sound more palatable. Doesn't it look like a softening and appeal to be accepted by the world? Are they contradicting themselves since we are to be in no way even similiar to mainstream religions?.Is this one step closer to them becoming part mainstream religion? Will they bringabout their own downfall and reveal themselves to be false prophets due to their own doctrinal changes?[8>]
• 

  compound complex

  Does the media always lie?

  Is persecution against "God's people" actually orchestrated by...?

  CC
• 

  jefferywhat

  man this thread is like 8 years old.......
  
  Talk about resurrection!!
• 

  compound complex

  YES! Let's talk ... about how the twisting of facts is never out of date!

  For the newbies and lurkers.

  CC
• 

  cognac

  Well, I've been here for 12 days so I'm glad it was brought up again.

  If one of Jehovah's Witnesses accepts a blood transfusion in a moment of weakness and then later regrets the action, this would be considered a
  serious matter. Spiritual assistance would be offered to help the person regain spiritual strength.

  who the h$ll do they think they are??? screw them. spiritual weakness??? Give me a freaken break. There explanation of david eating unlawful bread in mark 2 is such jump though hoops crap.. no, matter which way you slice it, the bible said it was unlawful bread, the societys crap out lies try to say it wasn't technically unlawful. Does "going beyond what is written" mean anything??? clearly, in certain instances, we can break laws as what JESUS stated. for crying out loud, crap...
• 

  compound complex

  Dear Cognac,

  Welcome and hurrah for you! I cannot but when I think of how any thread can resonate with an individual.

  Congrats on your discovery and may we all of us journey on together.

  CoCo
• 

  cognac

  thanks compound.

  just that spiritually weak part really sets me off.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  For cognac's sake- my thoughts:

  They say a person's own actions make them no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses, but they can
  change their mind and come back. They neglect to discuss the fact that they have to be
  reinstated, which is the same process that a DF'ed person goes through.

  They say a person in a moment of weakness could receive spiritual help. They neglect to mention
  that the primary source of that help would be from the judicial committee that won't DF them because
  they are willing to lose privileges and do as the JC tells them. They are willing to keep their mouth
  shut about their weakness, so as not to infect others with their dangerous thoughts.