martinwellborne

Joined

• started 14 topics
• posted 115 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by martinwellborne

• 
  17

  100,000-year-old Human Skull Found

  by Legolas in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  100,000-year-old skull delights scientists.

  chinese researchers hail "greatest discovery since peking man".

  beijing - an almost complete human skull fossil that could date back 100,000 years has been unearthed in china, state media said on wednesday, hailing it as the greatest discovery since peking man.. last month's find in xuchang, in the central province of henan, was made after two years of excavation just as two archaeologists were leaving for the lunar new year break, the china daily said.. "we expect more discoveries of importance," li zhanyang, archaeologist with the henan cultural relics and archaeology research institute, was quoted as saying.. the fossil consists of 16 pieces of the skull with protruding eyebrows and a small forehead.. "more astonishing than the completeness of the skull is that it still has a fossilized membrane on the inner side, so scientists can track the nerves of the paleolithic ancestors," li was quoted as saying.. besides the skull, more than 30,000 animal fossils, and stone and bone artifacts were found.. "the pieces of the human skull showed up just when archaeologists were going home for the spring festival," the newspaper said, referring to the new year holiday which officially begins next month.. peking man was discovered in the 1920s near beijing and dates back roughly to between 250,000 and 400,000 years.. http://www.thestar.com/sciencetech/article/296725.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  martinwellborne

  prove it DOH!
• 
  19

  apostates outside assemblys ,i was told not to even look, did any of you

  by looloo in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ever want to speak to them , i was only a study but i thought it very odd and judgemental to not even look at them and i used to think what are they so scared of if they have the truth , i did not buy the satan stuff about them at all , cult , was what sprung to mind and started my doubts

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  martinwellborne

  i do remember a few standing outside with banjos. they seemed like hill billys to me.

  but i do remember thinking what have we to be scared of
• 
  19

  Auxiliary Pioneer ya lazy B*$tard$!!!

  by Open mind in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  for those who no longer get your monthly km, i thought i'd just share a little "encouraging" tidbit from the material scheduled for this week's service meeting (tm).. there's a 20 minute "regurgitate the paragraph" session entitled "pioneer or die" or something like that.

  i can't remember the exact title right now, but it was one of the most blatant "beat the sheep.

  you're not good enough" articles i've seen in quite a while.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  martinwellborne

  thx for all the encouragement Openmind. thx again
• 
  5

  Rotary

  by lrkr in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  any other "rotarians" out there?

  let me know your experiences.

  i just was "inducted".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  martinwellborne

  seem to be going round in circles here :-)
• 
  15

  When Life gets you down remember this

  by orangefatcat in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  funny thing now that i am no longer a jw ,thank god for that , i can't imagine how i ever had time to be a witness, here is the scheduled life of jw's which i copied from another site and give them the recognitions it deserves, http://www.escapefromwatchtower.com/mind.html.

  inundated with activity.

  b.. attending the ministry school andservice meetings.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  martinwellborne

  you had it easy, my interpretation was not that we had to read all the stuff. you were to STUDY it. sorry for shouting. it took me even longer, i was like a hamster on a treadmill.
• 
  36

  OPINION POLL: Dressing Up. Yay? Neutral? Yuck?

  by Open mind in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  something was wrapped around my neck at birth and it wasn't the umbilical cord.

  it was a neck tie!.

  because dressing up in a nice suit, good quality dress shirt (i own one), $50-$75 neck tie (my wife has purchased a couple for me that were in this price range.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  martinwellborne

  absolutely NO WAY. i cant believe i bought two shiny new suits last year for the meetings and now i aint going no more.

  anybody want to buy two nice suits?

  Mw
• 
  1

  Pet Blood transfusions

  by martinwellborne in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  this is the most comical answer to a question from readers w64 2/15 127/128.

  woulditbeaviolationofthescripturesforachristiantopermitaveterinariantogivebloodtransfusionstoapet?andwhatofanimalfood?mayitbeusedifthereisreasontobelievethereis.

  bloodinit?also,isitpermissibletousefertilizerthathasbloodinit?.

  1. 
• 

  martinwellborne

  sorry about the copy and paste of the question not coming out right. i am still a newbie
• 
  1

  Pet Blood transfusions

  by martinwellborne in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  this is the most comical answer to a question from readers w64 2/15 127/128.

  woulditbeaviolationofthescripturesforachristiantopermitaveterinariantogivebloodtransfusionstoapet?andwhatofanimalfood?mayitbeusedifthereisreasontobelievethereis.

  bloodinit?also,isitpermissibletousefertilizerthathasbloodinit?.

  1. 
• 

  martinwellborne

  This is the most comical answer to a question from readers w64 2/15 127/128.

  •

  WoulditbeaviolationoftheScripturesforaChristiantopermitaveterinariantogivebloodtransfusionstoapet?Andwhatofanimalfood?Mayitbeusedifthereisreasontobelievethereis

  bloodinit?Also,isitpermissibletousefertilizerthathasbloodinit?

  quote 1. " Since God’s law on blood has not been altered over the centuries , Christians today realize that they are bound by it"

  yes but the trouble for Jdubs is the WT position has changed and back flipped within a few decades.

  quote 2 "T o use blood for transfusion purposes, even in the case of an animal, would be improper. The Bible is very clear in showing that blood should not be eaten. It should not be infused,

  therefore, to build up the body’s vital forces, either in the case of a human or in the case of a pet or any other animal under the jurisdiction of a Christian.

  how did they make the jump from "the bible is clear... to therefore it should not be infused....?"

  hmm a mighty big reasoning gap there.

  here comes the paranoia

  quote 3

  In harmony with this, surely a Christian parent could not rationalize to the effect that a pet belongs to a minor child and thus this unbaptized child might, on its own, authorize a veterinarian to administer the blood.

  wow, to stoop so low!! how thick are these people?

  and here is the old fertiliser argument again..

  "But now, what about fertilizer that has blood in it? One who is going to show respect for God’s law on blood would not use it.......

  The objective was, however, that the blood should serve no useful purpose when thus disposed of. It was not placed on the ground with the thought in mind that it would serve as fertilizer.

  Paranoia again i am afraid. their reasoning being OH NO! plants might eat the blood!!

  sorry but the argument is full of old fashioned plant fertiliser. good old BS.

  MW
• 
  12

  HOW can a Jdub accept BLOOD FRACTIONS?? hmm?

  by martinwellborne in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  i thought the main thing with the blood issue was that it was to be viewed from god's point of view.

  not that it would be up to individual choice and conscience.

  my point that i am trying to get to is this, how can a jdub accept blood fractions if they want to view blood in the same light as god would.. am i making this clear?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  martinwellborne

  yes jace, exactly my point, i remember reading all the questions from readers since the fifties on blood, and all the brochures and references to try to reach what i thought would be a conscientious decision. anyway i

  was more confused by the end, especially when you research about blood as FERTILISER then it really gets crazy. blood is to be poured out on the ground was the WTs reasoning since it says so in leviticus17:13.

  yet to use blood as fertiliser. w64 11/15 680-683, on page 681 it says "Naturally, a Christian could not properly encourage persons to obtain blood goods rather than those free from blood and he could not advocate

  any misuse of blood." What are blood fractions if they are not a misuse of blood.

  This comment to was astounding on p682 of same article...

  "The Society does not endorse any of the modern medical uses of blood, such as the uses of blood in connection with inoculations. Inoculation is, however, a virtually unavoidable circumstance in some segments of

  society, and so we leave it up to the conscience of the individual to determine whether to submit to inoculation with a serum containing blood fractions for the purpose of building up antibodies to fight against disease.

  If a person did this, he may derive comfort under the circumstances from the fact that he is not directly eating blood, which is expressly forbidden in God’s Word."

  Doh, is this not the same as saying well it's ok to take a blood transfusion as it is not directly eating blood.

  MW
• 
  12

  HOW can a Jdub accept BLOOD FRACTIONS?? hmm?

  by martinwellborne in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  i thought the main thing with the blood issue was that it was to be viewed from god's point of view.

  not that it would be up to individual choice and conscience.

  my point that i am trying to get to is this, how can a jdub accept blood fractions if they want to view blood in the same light as god would.. am i making this clear?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  martinwellborne

  I thought the main thing with the blood issue was that it was to be viewed from God's point of view. Not that it would be up to individual choice and conscience.

  My point that I am trying to get to is this, HOW can a Jdub accept BLOOD FRACTIONS if they want to view blood in the same light as God would.

  Am i making this clear? To me it is hypocritical if a witness would accept blood fractions, knowing full well that they must have been donated to a blood bank by someone giving blood who has no regard for God's view of blood. Also how many times must they have walked by a blood donation station and turned up their noses thinking "how horrible to think what goes on in that place!" All the work by well trained

  To me the stand taken on this issue is wrong if they want to hold to the view that taking blood is wrong. How can they say that the main four parts are wrong to take but if you cut up those fourth parts into subsequent fourth parts etc it then becomes OK??

  DOH!

  SORRY IT MAKES NO SENSE!

  I think the reason for the HLC visits is to enforce this double standard viewpoint.

  mw