Posts by Fisherman

11

Any news on Blood?

by Fisherman in

i haven’t seen anything in the news lately and wt position remains the same, so no change.

except, that when there is massive blood loss, my family mds have told me that without a bt there is practically zero chance of pulling through—short of an act of god.

jw know this and have decided beforehand.

Fisherman

sanctity of the gift of life and the severe penalty for unjustly depriving another human of that gift
questionable (human) reasoning on what commands against eating blood might have meant in the context of modern medicine.

That is true IF wt directive is not coming from God as WT claims to be directed by holy spirit and the FDS, Jesus “brothers” on earth, the wife of Christ, kingdom heirs and kings in heaven, the seed. But if wt is the entity it claims to be -and JW are convinced that holy spirit directs “God’s organization”-then there is no way around the scripture because God is the source of wt decisions.

TD, you make a powerful argument even considering the argument that since wt has been wrong before, logically they can be wrong again —as you point out the variable of human error—but JW are mentally convinced.

11

Any news on Blood?

by Fisherman in

i haven’t seen anything in the news lately and wt position remains the same, so no change.

except, that when there is massive blood loss, my family mds have told me that without a bt there is practically zero chance of pulling through—short of an act of god.

jw know this and have decided beforehand.

Fisherman

I haven’t seen anything in the news lately and wt position remains the same, so no change. Except, that when there is massive blood loss, my family mds have told me that without a BT there is practically zero chance of pulling through—short of an act of God. JW know this and have decided beforehand. Since there is a considerable risk of infection and a potential risk of deadly infection or reaction although the other option is the big sleep, that fear of potential infection is very great. JW are not concerned about DF. That’s just propaganda from opposers. The big concern is the fear of infection. Figure a person is infected, after he will always regret not having trusted in God, and maybe he would have made it. That’s how people think. People remember AIDS shocking news, and now covid. So, JW mind frame doesn’t want to take any chances. Most important, JW believe that BT violates God’s law stated in Acts and unlike the Jewish principle of Pikuah Nephesh, there is no way around the scripture that JW interprets as proscribing bt. There are different arguments that challenge JW interpretation but the JW fds still stands on the same interpretation at present.

There have been very interesting threads on blood discussing some aspect of JW belief and practice in the past from TD, Marvin Shilmer, cofty and others, but those arguments are not persuasive because the JW position remains unchanged. Maybe I’ve said something that is incorrect or not exactly how JW are doing it but that’s what seems are JW beliefs. Without hesitation a JW will not accept blood treatment because JW believe that doing so displeases God.

23

freedom of speech and loss of rights

by enoughisenough in

i was thinking about freedom of speech after watching a clip about the jw suing kevin mcfree.

they wanted to take away his freedom of speech.

but in thinking about it, that is the way of the organization, save they want to control thought as well.

Fisherman

That cuts both ways.

It doesn’t. Conduct is or isn’t abuse of process not both. It is not up to each person where to draw the the line it is up to the courts to determine whether or not abuse of process is the case. When it isn’t the case feeling bad about it like in the cases I referenced doesn’t make it illegal.

23

The Gospel According to Jehovah's Witnesses

by Vanderhoven7 in

mark jones explains the watchtower gospel much better than i can.. "the good news that christians in the first century preached was the birth, death and resurrection of jesus christ; that all those who believed in him were saved and reconciled to god through the death of his son.. unfortunately jehovah’s witnesses) have been led to believe it is something bizarrely different.

the good news according to the watchtower society is as follows:.

the the good news (according to jehovah’s witnesses).

Fisherman

have a hard time reading any book other than the Bible.

Did you figure out what everything means all on your own? Or did you read a translation?

23

freedom of speech and loss of rights

by enoughisenough in

i was thinking about freedom of speech after watching a clip about the jw suing kevin mcfree.

they wanted to take away his freedom of speech.

but in thinking about it, that is the way of the organization, save they want to control thought as well.

Fisherman

By the way, they are very funny videos.

50

Are the teachings of JW—consistent?

by Fisherman in

i would belief so but if you can point something out, it can be discussed.. i don’t mean what jw taught in the past that they later realized was not correct and amended.

—unless you think and can show something like that is relevant.. i’ve spoken to a lot of believers from different religions.

i don’t want to bash any religion here under this topic but their beliefs are inconsistent and their reasons are sophistry and made up and grounded on circular reasoning.

Fisherman

the “faithful slave” itself was wrong about its own identity for most of its existence.

Hi SBF,

The unforgettable Marvin Shilmer detected that point and posted that many years ago. A lot of people didn’t even realize that and wonder how many do now. But Marvin said it in such a funny way, I couldn’t stop laughing. He was so funny. We had so many heated arguments on this forum but I highly esteemed him. What a loss to the JW organization.

23

The Gospel According to Jehovah's Witnesses

by Vanderhoven7 in

mark jones explains the watchtower gospel much better than i can.. "the good news that christians in the first century preached was the birth, death and resurrection of jesus christ; that all those who believed in him were saved and reconciled to god through the death of his son.. unfortunately jehovah’s witnesses) have been led to believe it is something bizarrely different.

the good news according to the watchtower society is as follows:.

the the good news (according to jehovah’s witnesses).

Fisherman

Van did you study the wt book Greatest Man and the latest revision on the 4 gospels?

23

freedom of speech and loss of rights

by enoughisenough in

i was thinking about freedom of speech after watching a clip about the jw suing kevin mcfree.

they wanted to take away his freedom of speech.

but in thinking about it, that is the way of the organization, save they want to control thought as well.

Fisherman

if you don't have an issue with someone misusing the courts to try and get someone's personal information --not because of an actual copyright issue, but to silence criticism-

A person’s feelings of what constitutes abuse of process may not be the case. However, anyone that feels wronged has the Courts opened to them. In the case I referenced about police running plates without having any legal grounds to do so was very surprising to me. It seemed to be abuse of authority but Scotus sided with police. Goes to show that what seems to be abuse may not legally be the case. I’m not advocating any sides here. Only showing the difference between feelings and what may be legal. You may feel that you have been damaged and you are free to feel that way but what a person os doing to make you feel that way may be perfectly legal and protected by law. That is the point.

23

freedom of speech and loss of rights

by enoughisenough in

i was thinking about freedom of speech after watching a clip about the jw suing kevin mcfree.

they wanted to take away his freedom of speech.

but in thinking about it, that is the way of the organization, save they want to control thought as well.

Fisherman

The method they are employing is unethical and legally questionable.

That’s what the courts are for. And the State Bar. If an act is legal and people don’t like it based on personal ethics, too bad. What prosecutors do for example is to threaten a defendant to plead guilty to lesser charges or face added charges whether or not those added charges will stick. They would need to be defended and very expensive to do so and there is a risk that a person can be convicted. A defendant doesn’t like that but the law says if is legal to do it.

If you want to me mess with someone’s copyright, that infringed person can pursue legal action. You can run but you cant hide from the owner. Don’t like it, sue them back.

50

Are the teachings of JW—consistent?

by Fisherman in

i would belief so but if you can point something out, it can be discussed.. i don’t mean what jw taught in the past that they later realized was not correct and amended.

—unless you think and can show something like that is relevant.. i’ve spoken to a lot of believers from different religions.

i don’t want to bash any religion here under this topic but their beliefs are inconsistent and their reasons are sophistry and made up and grounded on circular reasoning.

Fisherman

Thanks for your view UTR. I am not trying to be a WT apologists or defending WT under this topic. Obviously WT has classified the conduct you mention in your post compared to WT interpretation of the Bible. There are many other Bible interpretations on the subjects you described. Ultimately it is a person’s conscience and personal relationship with God that can allow a person to do the things you mention in your post, but those are the beliefs and religious practices of JW and a person that doesn’t live by those standards of conduct cannot be a JW. That is why some people choose not to be JW or come to the realization that they want to leave. However, the reasons the WT gives for the beliefs seem logical to me. I don’t know how many people posting here belong to other churches and like their beliefs, but for example, you mention in vitro fertilization with donated sp$rm. I am not criticizing what people feel is morally right here, but there is a reasonable moral argument against IVF and I don’t see how wt position on it is not valid.