as the jewish holy day of shavuot (pentecost) begins this weekend, the reform judaism site publishes an interesting article entitled "judaism teaches: question authority, think for yourself.".
the article employs a jewish doctor's recollection of a jw patient who refused blood and died as an example of how both religious traditions greatly differ on how they see and apply god's law.. shavuot is the day jews recall god's giving the law to israel.
the article is significant in that it demonstrates how jews see the giving of the law as a call to questioning authority, including divine revelation itself whereas the death of the jw patient is contrasted as a slavish interpretation that misses the point behind jewish scripture.. for more see the article at:.
It seems to me that the above quoted paragraph is leading the reader to conclude that blood should not be eaten (BT) because it represents Christ's shed blood. That is qualified by "Guided by the Living God"
By the way, as a side point, the basis for such conclusion is: Leviticus 17:10-12. The WT did not make up the teaching.
arguing with those who reject scientific evidence can be like arguing about football; just as angry and passionate, but the goalposts keep moving, and one team doesn't exist.. read more here....
You need a lot of faith to believe in the theory of evolution.
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/crime/article39058014.html#1.
church shouldn't have divulged child-porn suspect's alleged confession, attorney says.
elders in the jehovah’s witnesses church violated the confidentiality of steven lindhorst of paso robles when they told police about an alleged confession he made regarding child pornography, according to a defense motion.. .
No color is needed to remind anyone how despicable child abuse is. We know that.
The following applies to the US
But state law does not trump the Constitution or Federal Law-Take cannabis for example.
Note the interesting article linked below on reporting child abuse: should an attorney report child abuse and breach confidentiality?
http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3201&context=dlj
State Child abuse reporting Laws Bulletin below.
https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/clergymandated.pdf
At this point though, it is not known with certainty whether or not the elders in the case posted on this thread actually reported any confidential talk of the confession to a governmental prosecuting agency. It would be monumental if they did, but very unlikely.
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/crime/article39058014.html#1.
church shouldn't have divulged child-porn suspect's alleged confession, attorney says.
elders in the jehovah’s witnesses church violated the confidentiality of steven lindhorst of paso robles when they told police about an alleged confession he made regarding child pornography, according to a defense motion.. .
Elders in the Jehovah’s Witnesses church violated the confidentiality of....
Very interesting and informative post, Listener! Thanks. The related article does not state all of the facts about what exactly those Elders said and did but only the accusation against such "Elders." Nevertheless, if it turns out to be true that the Elders revealed church confidential information (a confession) to the police, it would seem to me that it would destroy JW confession to the Elders for good and the seeking of spiritual help. Why would anyone want to come forward anymore? Even if these Elders acted on their own without the WTS, why should anyone risk taking a chance and confess? So, I am very skeptical to believe that the Elders in fact violated "church-penitent" confidentiality, but we will see if that actually happened. Please keep us posted if you hear anything more. And thanks again for this great post!
twelve years ago, i submitted this comment to the jwd board, relating to the practice of disfellowshipping young people from the congregation:.
"i am angry at the way jehovah's witnesses treat their most precious endowment; their young, developing, stumbling, exasperating, questioning, experimenting, growing offspring.. at the very most urgent time in their young lives; when they need the most reassurance, nurturing, patience, understanding and forgiveness, witness parents, under the direction of their congregation elders and governing body, toss thousands of these young ones out into the cold, cruel world, allowing them to virtually self-destruct.. many of these castaways are still in their teens.. there is no excuse, biblical, human, parental or otherwise to shut off all the guidance resources these young ones have ever known.
the human wreckage of this disgusting practice is astronomical.
I think that if an elder is having family problems, he needs to give more attention to his family. Personally, I do not see how I could kick my child out if he was having problems or got df, I would devote my time to try to help my child and cater to his needs. The way the congregation is set up though, it is a disgraceful thing to be deleted and that is one reason why some men choose to kick out their kids- in order to keep their position. But I suppose that if an adult child is just determined to sin and just refuses to submit to parental love and guidance there comes a point where it is just too painful to have the adult child live in the house, but the decision to kick out the adult child (age 25+) should not depend on pressure of being fired from a position in the congregation. The fact is though that a man is pressured to throw out his son or be fired from his position in the church if the son is determined to sin. But if the son tries to repent that is a different story, but it may still may be better for the elder to quit and to spend more time with his family.Too bad though because the way the congregation is set up, when a man is deleted, it usually does not turn out good for him either because it is a disgraceful thing even though the man is doing a noble thing by stepping aside to assist his family.
does anyone know of any good scriptures or reference articles that i can show an elder to hopefully have him stop intervening in a family issue?
i already told him that i am the head of the house and that they're usurping my headship but they didn't seem to get the message.
usurping my headship but they didn't seem to get the message
im sorry if this has been addressed, i have not seen any topics on this yet.. the wt for today seems to state, quiet plainly, that preaching work is done.
para 14,15 the question asks:.
"what proves that jehovahs witnesses have fulfilled jesus' prophecy with regard to the scope of the work?".
You are trying to figure out if the wt is implying that the the preaching work is complete. WT knows what they mean, the reader can only guess because wt does not plainly say so. Or will the wt ever officially declare that the preaching work is complete?
In some previous threads I posted that 100 years of preaching and announcing that there is a new sheriff in town must cover it. Most people did not accept the message and convert to JW or at least support the movement somehow-but after 100 years, such are likely dead -and now preach to their descendants and then to their descendant's descendants for another 100 years or more? I doubt it very much. Something must give within this year or next year at most. The JW have preached in every nation on earth and the jw message is international -on the internet.
so if the idea is promoted that god doesn't want anyone to be destroyed, why does he make it so confusing for people to learn about him?.
why are there thousands of differing religions?.
why has "his only true organisation" even taught so many varying doctrines?.
Usually, the reason that God attacks is to defend His friends (those that love Him) -that is what happens at Armageddon. God also attacks in the ironic form of abandoning those that have left Him- to their enemies, for example: God abandoned the northern ten tribe kingdom of Israel to the Assyrians.
as the jewish holy day of shavuot (pentecost) begins this weekend, the reform judaism site publishes an interesting article entitled "judaism teaches: question authority, think for yourself.".
the article employs a jewish doctor's recollection of a jw patient who refused blood and died as an example of how both religious traditions greatly differ on how they see and apply god's law.. shavuot is the day jews recall god's giving the law to israel.
the article is significant in that it demonstrates how jews see the giving of the law as a call to questioning authority, including divine revelation itself whereas the death of the jw patient is contrasted as a slavish interpretation that misses the point behind jewish scripture.. for more see the article at:.
*** w04 6/15 pp. 20-21 pars. 7-8 Be Guided by the Living God ***I called shortly after the 2004 article came out because it seemed to be a departure from previous treatments on the subject. I was told very candidly that the teaching is an interpretation based on what the Bible has to say on blood. I asked if I was correct in understanding that JW's view it (transfusion) as an act of disrespect towards the Ransom and was told, yes. TD
as the jewish holy day of shavuot (pentecost) begins this weekend, the reform judaism site publishes an interesting article entitled "judaism teaches: question authority, think for yourself.".
the article employs a jewish doctor's recollection of a jw patient who refused blood and died as an example of how both religious traditions greatly differ on how they see and apply god's law.. shavuot is the day jews recall god's giving the law to israel.
the article is significant in that it demonstrates how jews see the giving of the law as a call to questioning authority, including divine revelation itself whereas the death of the jw patient is contrasted as a slavish interpretation that misses the point behind jewish scripture.. for more see the article at:.
I fear we've reached an impasse, my friend. I've corresponded twice (Once by voice, once by letter) with the JW parent organization on this subject and what I'm reading above is very much at odds with what I was told.
TD, I do not know what you have asked the WT and I do not know what they have stated to you. Here is what they publish:
"The Bible commands that we not ingest blood. So we should not accept whole blood or its primary components in any form, whether offered as food or as a transfusion........""Why does God command us to abstain from blood?
There are sound medical reasons to avoid blood transfusions. More important, though, God commands that we abstain from blood because what it represents is sacred to him ......."
( Above quotes are from WT publication posted on JW website: "What does the Bible say about Blood Transfusion."
