Gozz

Joined

• started 13 topics
• posted 626 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Gozz

• 
  47

  Platlets...can WTBTS policy be defended?

  by joel in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  if this topic has been addressed already...sorry...just ignore it.... if not...i would like to hear from those who would defend this policy....or who see the inconsistencies in the views on blood but the wtbts.. .

  the following is something i read on at another site.

  there is no question that the watchtower's blood policy needlessly kills jw children.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gozz

  Logical,

  it seems to me that your poisition is a bit harder than the official position of JWs on the subject of blood. Unless I am mistaken, you would rather that no blodd be taken at all - no albumin, no immunoglobin, no haemophilia factor VIII etc etc...That, if I am correct, would indeed be a 'better' position with regard to current JW teaching, as it would harmonize practice with teaching/ But would it have a scriptural basis?

  That the Mosaic Law, stringent as it was, allows that blooded meat (rather, unbled meat) be sold to gentiles (who are themselves descendants of Noah and thus under Noachian law) and also that an Israelite could eat such meat under certain conditions with the penalty being simple cleansing makes some point... I do not think it is necessary to rehash the arguments of the bloodreview site.
• 
  11

  Of Tacking and New Light

  by Gozz in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the subject of 'new light' holds some fascination for me.

  and i have sought a wide spectrum of views to really understand the concept.

  proverbs (4:18, i think) says the path of the righteous on gets lighter and lighter; pastor russel (or some very old literature)reaffirmed this inspired thought by stating that 'new light' never contradicts 'old light', only that it makes things clearer.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gozz

  Frenchy,
  but I've never read Prov. 4:19(?!). And I've checked my copy of the bible and it's as you quoted. I've always wondered at that scripture and it's application. I think it'll be just right to do a reading of Proverbs Chapter 4. The empahsis does however seem to be on 'path' rather than 'light'. Hmn.
• 
  11

  Of Tacking and New Light

  by Gozz in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the subject of 'new light' holds some fascination for me.

  and i have sought a wide spectrum of views to really understand the concept.

  proverbs (4:18, i think) says the path of the righteous on gets lighter and lighter; pastor russel (or some very old literature)reaffirmed this inspired thought by stating that 'new light' never contradicts 'old light', only that it makes things clearer.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gozz

  The subject of 'New Light' holds some fascination for me. And I have sought a wide spectrum of views to really understand the concept. Proverbs (4:18, I think) says the path of the righteous on gets lighter and lighter; Pastor Russel (or some very old literature)reaffirmed this inspired thought by stating that 'New Light' never contradicts 'Old Light', only that it makes things clearer. However, in view of the various total reversals in JW teaching, the 'Tacking' explanation was invented to explain the changes. In tacking, it is said, a sailor manipulates the sails and goes back and forth, right and left, while all the while making progress towards the shore or destination. I have heard others use this to explain the changes that have been made, but it doen't sound sound. Isn't it just easier to accept that mistakes have been made because humans were overzealous or jumped ahead in reading Jehovah's mind?

  *Don't know if this has been discussed before; if so, kindly refer.
• 
  47

  Platlets...can WTBTS policy be defended?

  by joel in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  if this topic has been addressed already...sorry...just ignore it.... if not...i would like to hear from those who would defend this policy....or who see the inconsistencies in the views on blood but the wtbts.. .

  the following is something i read on at another site.

  there is no question that the watchtower's blood policy needlessly kills jw children.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gozz

  Logical,

  beyond the inconsistencies in the current teaching and practices of the WTB&TS with regard to the subject of blood lies the actual requirement of what the scriptures reveal God demanded from Noah. The arguments have being well articulated in the bloodreview link above. Noahchian Law, which applies to all the human family and is binding does not show anything that would have prohibited Noah from, say, accepting a blood transfusion. Only that Noah could not eat the blood of animals he killed for food. The law that blood be poured on the ground is Mosaic, and was binding on those under the Law Covenant.

  The official policy of JWs on the subject of blood remains baffling to me. Reconciling the policy with the current practices leads nowhere for me. You do not accept the whole but you may accept part of the whole. And there is the inevitable moral question: a JW will not donate blood, but would use fractions from donated and processed blood by others. Whenever one is reminded of what volume of whole blood is required to meet the albumin requirement of the average JW in need of albumin, I shudder and wonder what Jehovah is thinking about the policy and practice. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth, and a big pain in the heart.

  Edited by - Gozz on 15 January 2001 3:14:22
• 
  34

  No longer associated with this group

  by yeldell2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i had no idea you were ex-witnesses when i registered here.

  continue to send me e-mail anyone from this group.

  steps to contact the administrator of this site, with this information.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gozz

  Thanks Path and Larc.

  Y'see, many faithful and conscientious JWs wanting to know more about the Organization are visiting sites on the Net. I had personally told a few friends about Obed's site. It was a good place to engage in meaningful discussions. The site is now dead, and many are flocking to others. Though seekers of truth, many such JWs will not tolerate using inflammatory words about Brooklyn - in fact, I think none of us should; if they are wrong then we do not want to be like them.

  Now, a motive for many who post here is to help others begin to think freely, not necessarily to stop associating with JWs, but to let them out of the bondage of 'works' and rather unscriptural teachings. They may still wish to remain JWs. Showing respect for them will be a way to show love, that we do not disapprove of what their decisions are, that they have a right to such. But that we also have a right to enlighten.

  JAVA, I understand that's not your way, so please do take all in good faith. I have said a few annoying things before myself, after coming to a realization of what was really going on; sometimes, anger and annoyance and a discomfitting sense of betrayal grab me then I go over the edge...It'll be good to keep everything within limits, so that some would not be distracted from the real issues at hand.
• 
  34

  No longer associated with this group

  by yeldell2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i had no idea you were ex-witnesses when i registered here.

  continue to send me e-mail anyone from this group.

  steps to contact the administrator of this site, with this information.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gozz

  May be Patricia's been ordered to stop interacting on the Net. That's fine enough. She might have been found out and then wants to retrace her steps. That's okay. One thing I've learnt here and elsewhere is that truth will out. Many (including me) get distressed by the things we've come to know.

  JAVA, I know all about freedom of speech, and also that you post interesting views, but y'see, calling the men at Brooklyn farts is below the belt.
• 
  72

  When should you Disassociate yourself?

  by happytobefree in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i have been having discussion with my sister (relative), who is an active witness, about writing a letter of disassociation.

  the reason being is that i have not attended the meetings in over a year and it's been 4 years since i have went out in the jw ministry.. i going to try to sum this topic up.

  my sister think that i should not da myself because i have not done any immoral act in her thinking.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gozz

  When I left Xtiandom to become a JW, I was encouraged by my conductor to write a letter of dissociation. I refused. I never did. Even then, it just didn't make sense to me. It's the heart that matters. And the disadvantages were clear: my friends and family would see it as an act of aggression; so why not let sleeping dogs lie. Writing a formal letter will probably create a gulf between you and your own, and several other JW, you'll become estranged from them for no other reason that you no more agreed with them. If I had a friend in your situation, I'll say don't write a letter, the gains are much more, you keep your relationships. I find it hard that God will disapprove of that.
• 
  13

  WTBTS & Child Abuse - by Friend @ H20

  by waiting in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  posted by friend <mailto: [email protected]> [friend] on january 09, 2001 at 17:38:54 {bwzcy8br/qhxal3hj3h2ognjr4br/g}: .

  what is revealed about the societys motivations regarding the reporting (or not) of child abuse?

  it is revealed that the society wants to keep reports of child abuse very private within jw circles.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gozz

  Friend has been an advocate of reform for official policies that have otherwise gone awry. His discussions on the subject of blood and other issues on witnet were insightful. They were respectfully delivered, and he continues to assist those who have, by virtue of interacting on the Net, suffered shock and something akin to betrayal with the organization they have always known. Blood is a little different from the child abuse thing. This one elicits anger and hatred from well-meaning and reasonable people. It is unimaginable and almost unbelievable...
• 
  36

  No longer a need for a mediator?

  by ianao in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  (sorry to interrupt your peaceful day).. i just had an interesting talk with a jw friend of mine.

  during this talk i was explaining to him why i was reluctant to be baptised a jw.

  we got into many lengthy discussions on various topics.. one thing we discussed was jehovah (duh!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gozz

  RR,
  sorry to take you back again. And don't want to nitpick.
  The issue is touchy, that is, that the FDS is mediator between the greatcrowd and Jehovah. I'm sure many JWs will disagree with that. I'm yet to see them imply it. People may draw their own wrong conclusions, but I know Brooklyn won't claim that. It'll be suicidal. I'll take any elder/speaker up on it anyday without fear.
• 
  36

  No longer a need for a mediator?

  by ianao in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  (sorry to interrupt your peaceful day).. i just had an interesting talk with a jw friend of mine.

  during this talk i was explaining to him why i was reluctant to be baptised a jw.

  we got into many lengthy discussions on various topics.. one thing we discussed was jehovah (duh!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gozz

  RR,
  I'm actually yet to see any explicit statement as to the FDS being mediator between the great crowd and Jehovah. I don't think that's official teaching. Do you have any references?
  Thanks