i once heard it said that the only people who care about what the bible says are the village priest and the village atheist.
it seems to me most believers only care about "god's word" in very general terms and think it's all up to interpitation (religion a la carte ).. it the watchtower especially good at making agnostics and atheists because of their fundamentalism or is this true of many ex-religious groups?.
.
good question, I think any encouragement of serious indepth consideration of the bible leads to questioning of some sort.
For some, this ends up in not believing it at all, and even becoming atheist/agnostics
for others this leads to finding all kind of sophisticated excuses and explanations like JW or other apologists.
anna chapman was a russian spy in the usa.
she was 'caught' by the fbi in 2010, and soon afterward returned to russia in a 'spyswap.'.
tank girl!
from Russia with love
http://www.ardmediathek.de/tv/reportage-dokumentation/b%c3%b6ses-blut-kehrtwende-in-der-intensivm/das-erste/video?documentid=24921128&bcastid=799280.
for those who understand german (some parts are in english).
basically the german public tv station aired last monday a program about the danger of blood transfusions and a needed change of habits of hospitals and doctors, also about the resistance of giovernments and blood banks, touching even on financial interests.
good illustration cofty, totally agree
however, regardless of pro or con witnesses, the question in light of recent studies is:
Did the blood doctrine of JW cause more damage or more good ?
There are surley may thta died because of refusing blood, there are others however, who minimized the danger of sideeffects, especially by refusing blood transfusions, when they were not really necessary, which even in the long run, prevented death, while others who took blood, eventually died from those sideeffects.
Or as a simple example with fictious numbers: Lets say 1000 witnesse died, while they could have lived taking blood.
on the other hand lets say 20000 witnesses refused blood (because of religious reasons) when it was not really necessary, by using alternatives. The probability to develop some certain life threating conditions after surgery was lets say only 10% compared to 20% of those, who took blood.
Which means 10% of those 20000 , or 2000, surivived by not taking blood.
So because of blood doctrine we have 1000 dying, and 2000 lives saved.
Don`t get me wrong, I think from a religious standpoint the blood doctrine is heavily flawed, but the question is, if it was overall really more harmful than beneficial ?
http://www.ardmediathek.de/tv/reportage-dokumentation/b%c3%b6ses-blut-kehrtwende-in-der-intensivm/das-erste/video?documentid=24921128&bcastid=799280.
for those who understand german (some parts are in english).
basically the german public tv station aired last monday a program about the danger of blood transfusions and a needed change of habits of hospitals and doctors, also about the resistance of giovernments and blood banks, touching even on financial interests.
for those who understand German (some parts are in English)
Basically the german public TV station aired last monday a program about the danger of blood transfusions and a needed change of habits of hospitals and doctors, also about the resistance of giovernments and blood banks, touching even on financial interests. One Ameriacn doctor interviewed here, I think was even in the blood video of the org.
Many recent studies indicate strongly the high risk of transfusions and the fact, that they are often given unnecessary.
It goes viral among German witnesses right now, and comments will be coming like "Jehovah knows the best for us", "Obeying the GB for their wise direction is always beneficial for us" etc....
i realise that starting this thread may make me as popular as a ginger stepchild but was there any wts publication that you liked, or at least comfortably tolerated?.
my memory may be deceiving me but i think the greatest man book was pretty good, leaving out the gruesome detail of the crucifixtion and wts doctrine.. also, can anyone tell me the list of books that ray franz authored/co-authored?.
thanks.
commentary on James, quite good verse by verse explanation, hardly any stupid rules and only little weird doctrine stuff...
sorry for the caps but... this movie was incredibly amazing!
this film will probably win a lot of oscars.
more than an hour's worth of footage has been shot in 70mm so it is worth seeing it in imax.
seen it, great movie, touches on many aspects of modern physics, not all is consistent and proven, but still very interesting.
does a female kingdom publisher need to wear a head covering if she conducts a bible study in the presence of a male publisher?.
in a questions from readers item published in the watchtower of july 15, 2002, it was stated that a sister should cover her head if she conducts a bible study in the presence of a male publisher, whether he is baptized or not.
further consideration of the matter suggests that a modification to this direction is appropriate.. if the male publisher who accompanies the sister while she conducts an established bible study is baptized, the sister would certainly want to wear a head covering.
true spirituality is when you`re up to date with Jehovah direction regarding head covering....
actually how sad.....
there seems to be several discussions about a new 10 hour pioneer arrangement that was susposedly announced at the 2014 annual meeting.. i even called a couple who usually get invited each year and they said that there was nothing like that mentioned.
they just mentioned the "new" stuff had to do with the jw tv thing, the language app, the changes regarding gog of magog, the talents, the virgins, etc.
but absolutely nothing about 10 hour pioneers.. rub a dub.
got the same info from a seemingly reliable source at the local branch.
10 hours basic pioneer, it sounds soo ridicolous, but the source seems credible, it mentioned other changes, which are true.
Time will tell, but it seems more and more realistic....
we are responding the announcement by ashya king's father that he will allow.
blood transfusion if medically necessary.
those not familiar with the story can.
wow very interesting, even though some questions:
can we trust the media ? It often tends to quote out of context, or gives misinformation.
How will his congo react ? After all, it could be ground for a judicial comitee, he kind of opnely denies an important part of JW dogma.
Anybody knows witnesses who know this family ? Would be intersting what impact this article has locally.
http://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ .
"those who were baptized as jehovahs witnesses but no longer preach to others, perhaps even drifting away from association with fellow believers, are not shunned.
in fact, we reach out to them and try to rekindle their spiritual interest.".
end of mysteries is spot on, just think how an honest answer would be worded, maybe like this:
"While we hope that every former member repents and returns to us, we belive, it is Gods will to not even talk to them or greet them. This also applies within families, except necessary family responisbilities.
Oh, and if a member does not follow this counsel, he will be a former member soon also."
Maybe the PR could word it better, but this would be how it is really, any JW knows this...
the FAQ on JW.ORG are deliberately deceptive, no doubt...
