it's been a while since the society has been specific about what kind of music to avoid hasn't it?.
the last i remember was when the said to stay away from rap and heavy metal.
that was a while ago.
I remember the first time I felt strongly against something said at an assembly. Evidently the DO had a hard on for Pearl Jam. "And what of this so called Pearl Jam, with its debased and aggressive lyrics and beat"
I just remember thinking, man this guy doesnt hava clue.
personally i believe that 607 is not the right date, but here is another point of view.. does 607 or 587 or 609 or 586 or 1914 really matter?
yes but only after you have a pivotal date.
5 starting from the pivotal date.
LOL mine too JTP, just from a different point of view.
Cheers,
IPSec
so i put it out to you who believe the wtbts is the agent used by god's channel on earth based on the belief that in 1919 (3 1/2 years after the gentile times ended in 1914, per pastor russell) they were appointed the fds.. what if it was proved that not 607, but 587 was the date jerusalem was destroyed?
would that affect your faith?
would it matter that the teaching of 1919 turned out to be false?
Hha good one stilla, thanks, I had no idea how easy it is to get all these degrees.
IPSec BS, M.C.P, MM emphasis on Jazz, M.L.S, PhD forestry.
blood transfusions kill patients, say doctors .
(picture: your health daily logo) february 11 1999
london (nyt syndicate) -- blood transfusions given routinely to tens of thousands of critically ill patients may be killing them, doctors have found.
Hey JWBen,
I dont believe myself the blood is the be all end all of medicine. I dont think anyone wants to have a blood transfusion. Right? I mean really. I'm not going to even say that blood transfusion save lives. I think all that stuff is irrelevant. One of the big things that got me at odds with the society is its Pharasiac legalism on the blood issue.
The bible is simple, abstain from blood. What does that mean? Well I think you need to answer that betwixt you and God. The WTS though has created a Talmudic hedge around God's word on this though. Only a Pharisee could come up with the current policy.
You can take hemaglobin, what is hemaglobin? Its basically a red blood cell without a cell membrane. Now why can I not have whole red blood cells but I can have hemaglobin?
If I drink a glass of raw milk (yuk, I hate milk) I drink a bunch of white blood cells but I cant have an injection of white blood cells
Why can I not have a transfusion of plasma, but I can have an injection of every single componant of plasma? See what I mean? Its a ridiculous policy.
Worst of all, why can I have all of these fraction therapys which come from thousands of blood donations, but I can be disfellowshipped for donating blood?
IPSec
transplants ?
cannibalism
many opponents of the wtbts have published information saying that the wts forbade organ transplants, and the reason given was that the wts said it was equal to cannibalism.
Hey JWBen,
Thanks for the post and your comments. Hope my comments dont seem antagonistic to you, if they do please take em with a grain of salt.
First I might mention, the WTS by saying that certain things are conscience matters, creates the false idea that according to the bible somethings are conscience matters and some are not. This position actually weakens to role of the conscience, by forbiding some things, making them out of the question, and allowing other things. All things are conscience matters. If I wear a pink shirt with yellow polka dots or if I take a blood transfusion, everything is a conscience matter. Now certainly somethings are more weighty or important than others, but all things are conscience matters.
This is where I feel the Society gets in to trouble with God. They become the conscience by making some things no nos and permitting other things. The witness conscience is only used when the Society says it can be used.
Secondly, Whether a transplant was safe are not at that time is not the issue.
And here again, it might be noted, that the stand of the Christian witnesses of Jehovah?that such transplants are in effect a form of cannibalism?proved a safeguard.
JWBen do you really think that a mature witness wouldnt have got the picture. Cannibalism=Bad disfellowshipping offense; such transplants=Cannibalism. If I'm wrong here let me know but this sentence can be rephrased. It should be noted that the stand of the Chrstian witness of Jehovah agains such transplants proved a safeguard. The rephrasing says the same thing. Transplants are wicked because they are a form of cannibalism and by the way unsafe.
It does not say a JW could not have a transplant.
It doesnt have to say it in so many words, we get the point easily.
The artificial valve was inserted successfully and the patient recovered.
JWBen this article has nothing to to with organ transplants. It is about replacing artifical valves. The mention of the doctor having done heart transplants is merely a recognition of his credintials as a surgeon.
Because of what I have reason to believe is the Creator?s view of organ transplants, I have serious reservations as to their Scriptural propriety.
?Although we have been able to replace all the components of the heart, the only part we cannot replace is the heart muscle . . . It seems that is a job for the creator . . . That seems to be the frontier beyond which we have not been able to advance.?
Again JWBen they are casting transplants in a negitive light saying its work only for the creator to do. A mature witness would have caught the drift.
Some Christians might feel that taking into their bodies any tissue or body part from another human is cannibalistic.
Yes because the watchtower indicated thats how they should feel.
The congregation judicial committee would not take disciplinary action if someone accepted an organ transplant
Now they clear where they stand completly, If this was how they always felt they why didnt they just say so.
Im a Christian, supose my conscience wouldnt be bothered by a full on blood transfusion? Would that defense hold water with the Society? How is that any different than my conscience not being bothered by an organ transplant? See they make the rules on what should bother your conscience. Saying you follow your conscience just means you follow their rules for the conscience.
You said you probably wouldnt respond but I hope you do JWBen. :)
Later man
IPSec
personally i believe that 607 is not the right date, but here is another point of view.. does 607 or 587 or 609 or 586 or 1914 really matter?
yes but only after you have a pivotal date.
5 starting from the pivotal date.
Im just saying if god cared whether or not we knew the date he'd a put the date in the bible. Interpretation of prophecy shouldnt depend on archeology, and it does for the dubs.
Are we really to believe that this prophecy could only be understood after the relevant archeological discoveries were made?
I'm sorry I'm probably not being as clear as I should. My main point isnt does the daniel 7 times prophecy matter. My question is should the interpretation of that or any prophecy depend on archeology. I believe the dub interpretation hinges on what history says rather than what can be internally determined from scripture.
personally i believe that 607 is not the right date, but here is another point of view.. does 607 or 587 or 609 or 586 or 1914 really matter?
yes but only after you have a pivotal date.
5 starting from the pivotal date.
This topic title has to be applauded. I am sure it was not set as bait for the unwary or 'spiritual food' for the gormless.
Bait? Ya. Spiritual food? I'd never presume to do that.
is not inconsequential where there is respect fpr historical accuracy
Absolutley. I'm not saying the debate is wrong. Im just saying if god cared whether or not we knew the date he'd a put the date in the bible. Interpretation of prophecy shouldnt depend on archeology, and it does for the dubs.
would you have not taken a transfusion?
would you make sure that your child was deprived of one, too?
would you have turned in your own family member to the elders?..........just how far would you have gone in showing allegiance to the cult?
I would have taken a bullet, no blood, turn in family member, yep. Shun my little sister, yep, did that, Gosh man that sucks.
IPSec
personally i believe that 607 is not the right date, but here is another point of view.. does 607 or 587 or 609 or 586 or 1914 really matter?
yes but only after you have a pivotal date.
5 starting from the pivotal date.
Personally I believe that 607 is not the right date, but here is another point of view.
Does 607 or 587 or 609 or 586 or 1914 really matter? No, I know it does if your whole theology is based on whether or not Christ began ruling some fabled intermediary kingdom before the real Messianic kingdom.
I focus this at guys like scholar and other proponents of the 607 date. Look, lets agree on a few things.
1. 539 BC is based purely on archeological evidence.
2. Without archeology there would be no basis for counting back to 607 or 587.
Now scholar, I know what you?re going to say, ?We can count the reigns of the kings of Israel up to 607 without archeology? But if that were the case I think that would be how the Society would do it. They start counting backward from the pivotal date of 539 BC. It is pivotal because it is historic. 539 isn?t proven by the bible, it is proven by history. You cannot reach 607 without 539, and you cannot reach 539 with out archeology. Am I right or wrong? Hey I'm just going by what the Society says right here.
*** si p. 282 Study Number 2?Time and the Holy Scriptures ***27 Pivotal Dates. Reliable Bible chronology is based on certain pivotal dates. A pivotal date is a calendar date in history that has a sound basis for acceptance and that corresponds to a specific event recorded in the Bible. It can then be used as the starting point from which a series of Bible events can be located on the calendar with certainty. Once this pivotal point is fixed, calculations forward or backward from this date are made from accurate records in the Bible itself, such as the stated life spans of people or the duration of the reigns of kings. Thus, starting from a pegged point, we can use the reliable internal chronology of the Bible itself in dating many Bible events. Yes but only after you have a pivotal date
*** si p. 285 Study Number 3?Measuring Events in the Stream of Time ***5 Starting From the Pivotal Date. The pivotal date for counting back to Adam?s creation is that of Cyrus? overthrow of the Babylonian dynasty, 539 B.C.E.
Ok here is the kicker.
What good is a prophecy that lives or dies; stands or falls based on archeology? Any prophecy of relevance, especially one this big should be provable internally. I?ve seen the bible coincide with history. I?ve seen history agree with the bible. But I?ve never seen a prophecy that can only be proven with the aid of a secular historic pivotal date. What good is the bible if you have to be a historian, archeologist, Hebrew and Greek scholar just to understand it? Are we really to believe that this prophecy could only be understood after the relevant archeological discoveries were made?
For a Christian, dates don?t matter. The law of the Christ does. So while I see you guys bat dates and archeology back and forth, none of it really is relative to faith.
Now if you want to be involved in a purely academic discussion of when Jerusalem fell, well that?s cool, but it?s just not relevant to being a Christian, it?s only relevant to the cult that builds its teachings around that date.
:)!!!!! Bye
there was a very well respected elder in my cong that i will call mr. r. this elder was a very zealous and pious jw and the po.
mr. r was of cuban descent and had extremely conservative veiws.
mr. r being the upstanding jw and elder had a very attractive wife and two cute kids.
There is an ocean of difference and you know it.
Yes, one wears a little white thingy on his collar and the other doesnt!!!
HEY AFIN Good to see ya
