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.
martinwellborne
JoinedPosts by martinwellborne
-
15
When Life gets you down remember this
by orangefatcat infunny 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.
-
-
-
36
OPINION POLL: Dressing Up. Yay? Neutral? Yuck?
by Open mind insomething 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.
-
-
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 inthis is the most comical answer to a question from readers w64 2/15 127/128.
woulditbeaviolationofthescripturesforachristiantopermitaveterinariantogivebloodtransfusionstoapet?andwhatofanimalfood?mayitbeusedifthereisreasontobelievethereis.
bloodinit?also,isitpermissibletousefertilizerthathasbloodinit?.
-
-
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 inthis is the most comical answer to a question from readers w64 2/15 127/128.
woulditbeaviolationofthescripturesforachristiantopermitaveterinariantogivebloodtransfusionstoapet?andwhatofanimalfood?mayitbeusedifthereisreasontobelievethereis.
bloodinit?also,isitpermissibletousefertilizerthathasbloodinit?.
-
-
martinwellborne
This is the most comical answer to a question from readers w64 2/15 127/128.
•
WoulditbeaviolationoftheScripturesforaChristiantopermitaveterinariantogivebloodtransfusionstoapet?Andwhatofanimalfood?Mayitbeusedifthereisreasontobelievethereisbloodinit?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 ini 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?
-
-
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 ini 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?
-
-
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
-
94
I think the noose just tightened a bit.
by 5go inwe had an interesting local needs.. first it clearly stated if you are not making all the meetings you will not make it in to the new system period no exceptions.
they twisted the story of the red sea to make an example.
saying you can not disobey once, or else you be left stuck in the bottom of the red sea.. from now on the elders will be making shepherding calls on those that are not attending regularly.. also, it was stated that if you know of any not attending regularly.
-
-
martinwellborne
the noose may have tightened but my neck is no longer in the loop
-
75
If You Were Wrong About The JWs, Maybe Your Current Beliefs Aren't True
by serotonin_wraith inif you're here, it's likely you were once fooled by what the jws believe.. back then, i expect you thought you were smart.
you thought you could tell if you were being lied to.
yet, they got past your mental defenses and sucked you in.. knowing this, how can you be sure your current religious beliefs are true?.
-
-
martinwellborne
hmm, faith??
Thomas Jefferson said..."Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong."
good on him
-
4
talk of the town
by martinwellborne indear all.
talking to my mother today, who is still a witless, it seems everybody is so surprised that i plus wife and kids have decided we aint going anymore.
doh?.
-
-
martinwellborne
yes, journey, my mother is very direct too. it's a shame for her now since i am so like her.
MW
-
27
Have you ever intentionally said crazy things from the platform?
by B_Deserter inlike have you said stuff that is just outright insane like "each and every one of us should be ready and willing to die for the society" purely in the hopes that you'd turn someone off?
i imagine for most of us trying to fade that would be the most difficult thing to do, but some people are really good at shutting down and just going with a flow, too.. .
i ask because it's the only possible explanation i can come up with for some of the really bat-shit insane stuff i've heard come from the podium.
-
-
martinwellborne
my "crazy" thing was actually an answer to a wt study question. i said, "would it not be great to have an apostle in the congo???
yet jesus reprimanded them, because they were not kind to children, they tried to say you are bothering us too much.
yet the past thursday night's meeting was all about how there is too much noise from children in the kingdum hell, too many toys, too many kids running around.
it makes my blood boil.
MW