Posts by Fisherman

15

Do Orthodox Jews reject blood transfusions ? because of the scriptures, they strictly believe ?

by smiddy in

this thought occured to me that orthodox jews take the bible/old testament scriptures very seriously regarding the blood issue raised in scripture .. and this is certainly borne out in regard to the bleeding of animals before eating them ,kosher food.. the orthodox jews are far more stricter than jehovah`s witnesses in this application / interpretation of scripture ,and i am curious as to how they interpret and understand these scriptures.. how do they view blood transfusions in the medical world.?.

and is it only the orthodox jews that are expected to only eat kosher food ?

how about the ordinary believing jew with their religion.do they also only eat kosher food ?

Fisherman

According to (orthodox) Judaism, pikuach nefesh does not justify murder or suicide or putting one's life at a greater risk than the person who's life is at risk -to save the person. An orthodox jew is not allowed to enter inside a church or reformed synagogue even to save a life (that is to say,the place where worship takes place. A Jew may enter a room of a reformed synagogue not used for worship.) Chillul hashem (idolatry, blasphemy, etc.) is never allowed even to save one's own skin.

Only 2 Jewish movements survived 70 CE 1. Christianity: based on salvation from Jehovah 2. Pharisaic Jews: based on salvation from Caesar (We have no king but Caesar!) Circa 70* the Pharisees (Rabbi Yohanan) made a deal with Caesar and settled in Yavneh where they adapted laws to fit modern Judaism without beth hamikdash, installing themselves as leaders. Interstingly, dna studies of Ashkenazi jews today show y chromsome comes from a few hundred middle Eastern men from the fertile cresent ( jews ) that married non jewish females no doubt converting them first. Acccording to the studies most Ashkenazi jews are between 23 percent to about 53 percent European (non-Jew dna)

*70 years after the birth of Jesus 40 years after Jesus began his public ministry

15

Do Orthodox Jews reject blood transfusions ? because of the scriptures, they strictly believe ?

by smiddy in

this thought occured to me that orthodox jews take the bible/old testament scriptures very seriously regarding the blood issue raised in scripture .. and this is certainly borne out in regard to the bleeding of animals before eating them ,kosher food.. the orthodox jews are far more stricter than jehovah`s witnesses in this application / interpretation of scripture ,and i am curious as to how they interpret and understand these scriptures.. how do they view blood transfusions in the medical world.?.

and is it only the orthodox jews that are expected to only eat kosher food ?

how about the ordinary believing jew with their religion.do they also only eat kosher food ?

Fisherman

According to Judaism, pikuach nepesh (life risk) overrides all (with some controversy) mitzvot except avodah zarah (commiting an act of idolatry.)

175

The facts on crucifixion, stauros, and the "torture stake"

by Leolaia in

finally, i will look at biblical and patristic evidence bearing on the crucifixion of jesus in particular.

we need to examine the earliest known descriptions of the kind of crucifixion adopted by the romans and the specific terms they used to refer to it.

apparently the society believes that crux still meant "stake" in the second century a.d., when tacitus composed his annals.

Fisherman

Numbers 21:9 NWT (compare with cross reference l )

21

Millions now living will never die (orginally "may" never die) was the WTS lying

by blondie in

jw
friends

this was first said in 1918 and adjusted to "will never die" in 1920. of course, the wts taught that the anointed had to die to go to heaven; but there was no great crowd teaching then, so they were talking about all non-anointed people on earth.

the wts members were known as bible students then and had been expecting the end in 1914 and it was adjusted.

one date that was stressed at that time was 1925. so i think they idea was that people living in 1918 would be alive to see the end in 1925, which of course did not happen.

Fisherman

JW are doctrinally correct about Bible teachings about the Millennium, etc. The reference WT publications on this thread show that JW have been off by time not doctrine.

Great post and links! Substantial.

7

child abuse the Australian Royal Commission

by zeb in

http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/case-study/636f01a5-50db-4b59-a35e-a24ae07fb0ad/case-study-29,-july-2015,-sydney.aspx.

the wt input is there toward the bottom of the page.

Fisherman

From ABC News:

UN Investigator Urges Review of Australian Secrecy Laws

http://abcn.ws/2dx2TX1

21

Millions now living will never die (orginally "may" never die) was the WTS lying

by blondie in

jw
friends

this was first said in 1918 and adjusted to "will never die" in 1920. of course, the wts taught that the anointed had to die to go to heaven; but there was no great crowd teaching then, so they were talking about all non-anointed people on earth.

the wts members were known as bible students then and had been expecting the end in 1914 and it was adjusted.

one date that was stressed at that time was 1925. so i think they idea was that people living in 1918 would be alive to see the end in 1925, which of course did not happen.

Fisherman

noted

41

what are your thoughts on this quote from the elders book?

by aboveusonlysky in

'in order to extend mercy, the committee must be convinced that the wrongdoer has a changed heart condition and that he has a zeal to right the wrong and is absolutely determined to avoid it in the future.'.

shepherd the flock page 91. i remember this is one of the first things that concerned me as an elder because it seemed to sound like a person is guilty until proven innocent rather than 'love believes all things', especially given the word 'convinced' appears in bold.. then in a training video one elder said something like 'unless we are convinced of repentance the shepherd the flock book says we must disfellowship'.

that was the begining of the end for me as i thought surely true christians would reason the other way round and show mercy wherever possible.. any thoughts?.

Fisherman

Imagine a court of law where they chose judges from window cleaners and painters

and jurors too who decide guilt or innocence.

14

Appealing a DF decision

by HereIgo in

i always found it interesting that one could appeal a disfellowshipping....if jehovah doesn't make mistakes, then there wouldnt be a need to "appeal" anything to begin with right?.

Fisherman

mengano already pointed out that many cases of df are rejected by ac.

41

what are your thoughts on this quote from the elders book?

by aboveusonlysky in

'in order to extend mercy, the committee must be convinced that the wrongdoer has a changed heart condition and that he has a zeal to right the wrong and is absolutely determined to avoid it in the future.'.

shepherd the flock page 91. i remember this is one of the first things that concerned me as an elder because it seemed to sound like a person is guilty until proven innocent rather than 'love believes all things', especially given the word 'convinced' appears in bold.. then in a training video one elder said something like 'unless we are convinced of repentance the shepherd the flock book says we must disfellowship'.

that was the begining of the end for me as i thought surely true christians would reason the other way round and show mercy wherever possible.. any thoughts?.

Fisherman

Noting like personal opinions about what constitutes repentance. Only someone who has an simplistic knowledge of human behaviour could write let alone believe such judgemental nonsense. This is the very reason uneducated men should not be put in positions of assessment and judgement of fellow humans.

You may not like this but in the JW org, sins are defined by the Bible as interpreted by the wt. The WT(governing body) governs the JW. When a JW member commits a sin categorized by wt as serious, such sinner is subject to a JC. The JC, like it or not, has power and authority over JW members granted to them by the wt to adjudicate cases involving wrongdoing by jw members. It does not make any difference how you feel about that. In a criminal case, a jury is given power and authority to decide guilt or innocence based on guidelines -not your feelings about juror's qualifications. Since, elders cannot read hearts, they have no way of knowing if a person in fact meets the requirements of biblical repentance but they also have guidelines from wt that they must follow. A judicial decision of a JC is not the personal opinion of an individual, there are 3 or more elders adjudicating the case and an appeals provision that will rehear and review the case if the decision is challenged. It is axiomatic -you don't have to be an elder judging a case- that if a person commits a wrong and confesses right away, it is an indication that the person has a desire to right the wrong, simple, and that is what repentance is all about. Also, this post asks for an opinion and mine is a s good as yours.

41

what are your thoughts on this quote from the elders book?

by aboveusonlysky in

'in order to extend mercy, the committee must be convinced that the wrongdoer has a changed heart condition and that he has a zeal to right the wrong and is absolutely determined to avoid it in the future.'.

shepherd the flock page 91. i remember this is one of the first things that concerned me as an elder because it seemed to sound like a person is guilty until proven innocent rather than 'love believes all things', especially given the word 'convinced' appears in bold.. then in a training video one elder said something like 'unless we are convinced of repentance the shepherd the flock book says we must disfellowship'.

that was the begining of the end for me as i thought surely true christians would reason the other way round and show mercy wherever possible.. any thoughts?.

Fisherman

One of the old-style elders in our cong was Jerry Decker

L&JD were very nice people and I agree with your views about JD -very compassionate and caring. He was in BB for a while and came back to do temp work but the man's character and temperament was as you describe. Fluent speaker too. Think he was in writing back in the 70's