The first time I read it I threw up, the same there after until I had tears in my eyes.
... Well, when I read the magazines, I feel nauseous, too ...
magazines that advocate truth.
3 jehovah is "the god of truth.
" (psalm 31:5) his word, the bible, is a book of truth.
The first time I read it I threw up, the same there after until I had tears in my eyes.
... Well, when I read the magazines, I feel nauseous, too ...
a jw friend of mine said that durning the 1000 years of paradise earth, that animals will still die.
he said that they will die to be a reminder that any jw could die durning that time.
is this an official teaching?
My cat's not going to live forever with me in a paradise on Earth?!?!
That's it. I'm not going.
Seriously, though, the arbitrary nature of such a statement just makes me roll my eyes at what they presume to "know."
SLM
two quick questions to broaden my knowledge of witness doctrine, only for the sake of keeping up with what my in-laws believe.
either of these issues could, after all, come up someday ... (not that their beliefs will affect what we do, but it's nice to know from what direction the fights are coming.
1. circumcision -- clearly allowed, but is it required?
Thanks so much, Scully. That's so disturbing to me -- it defiles the marriage?! Being able to have a child, after desperately wanting one, is bad because the woman is just meant to be a baby-popper-outer? oy.
Also ...
One is the potential for ugly legal battles if the woman who gives birth wants to keep the baby. Whose baby is it, the woman who gives birth or the woman who provides the egg?
Granted, I'm only in my first year of law school, and we've not covered anything like this -- but I should think there wouldn't be nearly as many legal issues here as there would be in a traditional surrogacy, where the mother has a biological tie. It's for this reason that some agencies will only do gestational surrogacies and not traditional surrogacies. Surrogate mama hasn't any rights in such a case. Right? Yeah, she could try to run away with the baby, but that'd get her in a heap of trouble, breach of contract being near the bottom of her list of worries. (But then, I know very little about this, so I'm postulating.)
It also irks me when they use Leviticus and Deuteronomy to justify teachings, given that that's the old law and they pick and choose what they follow. -- That applies not just to Witnesses.
*sigh*
Thanks again!!
two quick questions to broaden my knowledge of witness doctrine, only for the sake of keeping up with what my in-laws believe.
either of these issues could, after all, come up someday ... (not that their beliefs will affect what we do, but it's nice to know from what direction the fights are coming.
1. circumcision -- clearly allowed, but is it required?
Hi everyone --
Two quick questions to broaden my knowledge of Witness doctrine, only for the sake of keeping up with what my in-laws believe. Either of these issues could, after all, come up someday ... (Not that their beliefs will affect what we do, but it's nice to know from what direction the fights are coming.)
1. Circumcision -- Clearly allowed, but is it required? Suggested? Left up to the culture? (I'm thinking of the fact that circumcision is much more prevalent in the US than in Canada or Great Britain) Have they any stated opinion on this at all? Seems like if they take all of those damned blood verses so seriously, they "should" remember the orders to circumcise, shouldn't they? (I personally don't have strong feelings about circumcision, though I lean toward opposition, but I'm not trying to start a debate. )
2. I read on a medical website (http://www.med.umich.edu/multicultural/ccp/jehovah.htm) that:
Gestational surrogacy is considered to be unacceptable.
... I didn't remember hearing that before. Is that doctrine, a conscience issue, or not true?
Curious minds want to know. Thanks as always!!
SLM
comments you will not hear at the 01-01-06 wt study (december 1, 2005 issue, pp.
22-26)(language).
"ten men out of all the languages of the nations will [say]: 'we will go with.
Your analysis and points are spot on, as always. I always read them, even though I don't often comment. :)
But the article itself seemed even more painfully boring than most WT articles. The whole pathetic thing could be summarized in three sentences: Prophecy said the word about Jesus would be spread in diverse languages. We preach in many languages. Therefore, prophecy has come true -- now go preach more.
And yet, they take how many pages to say that? To buttress it with useless filler? Yeah. It's a diverse world. Every religion, if they want to expand, has to tailor its message to the tongue of the target audience. But so does Pepsi-Cola. So does McDonald's. Yay globalism, we're using more than one language. What's so damn special about it, oh Watchtower?
Seriously, there is no way I could sit through a meeting like that and just smile and nod.
... But despite the boring article, your commentary is brilliant. Thanks for taking the time to write it.
SLM
120, I need practice ...
confirmed: man cleared of hiv
monday november 14, 02:47 am
the nhs has confirmed newspaper reports that a man diagnosed with hiv, the virus that can lead to aids, is no longer positive.a spokeswoman confirmed andrew stimpson had had a positive and a negative test for the virus - but she stopped short of saying he had been cured.doctors have urged mr stimpson, 25, to come forward for more tests.. he tested positive for hiv in 2002 but two further tests a year later both came back negative.. according to the news of the world, doctors said his case ','300','250','1','1',120895,78616,'0','226',185);return false;" onmouseout="if(typeof(prroll)=='function')prbexit(event);" shape=rect coords=1,185,300,250 href="#">was "medically remarkable".
Have to come out of lurkdom for this one ...
I waatched a film, were a woman adopted a baby with HIV antibodies and when she was two she didnt have them anymore she was clear. I always wondered if theis was a true story or not.
Every baby born to an HIV+ woman will test positive for HIV antibodies. It does not mean the child will necessarily develop HIV/AIDS. I know of at least one movie that does deal with that scenario ("A Place for Annie") -- and yeah, it's a very real possibility. As Black Sheep said, the test only checks for the antibodies, and the baby carries the mother's antibodies for (roughly) 18 months. Now, pregnant women with HIV or AIDS can take AZT combinations (e.g. Retrovir) or another drug to vastly reduce the chances of passing the virus on to the baby. I can't remember the stats off the top of my head, but it brings the chances down quite a bit. This is not the same thing as "curing" the virus; it prevents transmission to the baby in the first place.
As for this case in the news: my bet is that he is one of the rare (but not unheard of) people whose body is currently suppressing the virus. There are a lot of things wrong with the news article: it doesn't say what kind of test was done, it doesn't say why it's just going to the media now, after two years of apparently being negative, it says [in other articles] that doctors were "surprised" by his good health -- which is ridiculous, because most people are still in good health within a year after seroconverting. There are a lot of things that need to be addressed yet.
It would be awesome if this were a miracle from which researches could learn how to develop a better treatment and/or vaccine. But I can't help but wonder if this is one of those cases where the virus is lying dormant, with so few antibodies that the test currently isn't picking it up. I know people who were infected in the early 1980s who are still healthy and have never had a problem -- without any medication. They're rare, but they're there.
no sane, healthy, person would introduce them into their bodies.
I rather hope that healthy people don't take antiretrovirals like candy; the side-effects are dreadful. But for those who aren't healthy -- for those who aren't among the fortunate ones who can live healthy lives for decades without treatment -- they are quite literally a lifesaver.
Well. With that done, ironically enough, I'm heading off to do my volunteer work at the local AIDS Service Organization ...
peace and love, everyone --
SLM
.
i'll start........ saturday morning door knockers
Going door to door -- and that's about it, in my experience. When I mentioned Witnesses or something about my husband being raised without holidays, people are usually surprised. They don't really think about JWs that much, or just lump them in with everyone else.
Does sort of put a hole in their martyr theory, doesn't it?
.
over half my cong.
members have mental issues and are taking prozac or some other medication for depression or other mental problems.many are going or have gone to therapists... anyone have a similar situation?
Four female Witnesses and one male Witness that I know are on some sort of anti-depressant .. and yes, so are a lot of non-Witness friends of mine. It's not exclusive to them, and I'm wary about saying that external circumstances usually or always "cause" depression, given natural chemical imbalances and such. But as someone said, the whole "happiest people" thing makes the Witnesses' use of drugs hypocritical.
I've heard one of them say that "The World" causes the depression ... so it's not their fault. It's because they see the "truth" of how "horrible" the world is that she is depressed. It's because they see Satan's role that they are unhappy. They will be happier once this System Of Things is destroyed. (die! die! die! )
I don't know that that aligns with WT theory, but that was something she said about why she felt unhappy. Heck, if I believed there were nothing redeeming about life and that everything was evil and nothing was meant to be good, except a freaking religion, I'd be pretty depressed, too.
Fortunately, I'm not a fatalist.
SLM
just curious how different individuals have reacted to the though of celebrating holidays after they left the jws...?
any holidays you have more trouble with than others?
does halloween freak you out?
My husband is an inactive/faded Witness, so I'm sort of answering for him. :) He likes birthdays, Thanksgiving, Halloween, and Independence Day ... He's okay with Christmas, but it doesn't have any meaning for him, so I think he thinks the hooplah is overdone. As we're not practicing any religion and are decidedly not Christian -- and as we don't really like the commercialization of holidays for profits' sake -- we're not huge on Christmas. But we do have dinner with my family, and that's about it.
Easter? Nope. Valentine's Day? Not really. Other Hallmark-created holidays? I usually don't know when they are. :)
I think holidays are great because they're just another way to spend time with the people you love who might be far away; most people get the day off, so it's easier ot get together.
Just my thoughts.
SLM