paul from cleveland

Joined

• started 48 topics
• posted 645 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by paul from cleveland

• 
  29

  JW Science Quote (2-5)

  by TD in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in his 1898 novel, war of the worlds, h.g.

  wells depicted the earth under attack by a race that had evolved past the need of eating to obtain nourishment.

  these beings, in fact, had no digestive organs of any sort:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  paul from cleveland

  TD, What I gather from your post is that, to God, the sacredness of life is more important than the sacredness of blood so when it comes down to an issue between the two, we should choose life. We know this because of all the other laws God has made regarding life and how important it is to him. It is taking the blood issue in the context of the whole bible. Like was mentioned before, the life itself is more important than the symbol of it.

  However, some of your post is too hard to understand:

  Consequently, apart from serving as a good example of how the inductive fallacy of hasty generalization can be coupled with the deductive fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantiam, their hypothesis would be worthless.

  Would you please explain the first part of your post, about the reasoning methods JW's use, in simpler language?
• 
  29

  JW Science Quote (2-5)

  by TD in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in his 1898 novel, war of the worlds, h.g.

  wells depicted the earth under attack by a race that had evolved past the need of eating to obtain nourishment.

  these beings, in fact, had no digestive organs of any sort:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  paul from cleveland

  thanks leavingwt, I understand the point. I agree with that.
• 
  29

  JW Science Quote (2-5)

  by TD in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in his 1898 novel, war of the worlds, h.g.

  wells depicted the earth under attack by a race that had evolved past the need of eating to obtain nourishment.

  these beings, in fact, had no digestive organs of any sort:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  paul from cleveland

  TD, I appreciate your trying to reason with me. I'm being sincere when I say that I really can't see the point the way you're explaining it to me. To me it just seems like a technicality that ignores the principle of the law. In my mind it's like saying that the scripture that condemns 'men who lie with men' wouldn't apply if they had sex standing up.

  I have changed my mind on this issue, however, because of the point Agonus made:

  Throwing away a human life in deference to the "sancticty of blood" is making the symbol of life (blood) more important than the gift of life itself.

  It's like a lightbulb went off in my head. Maybe that's the same point you were making but I just couldn't get it from the way you explained it.
• 
  29

  Did You Have Any Positive JW Leanings When You First Came Here?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  were you ever somewhat projw when you first came to this site?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  paul from cleveland

  Of course, though, I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong about everything.
• 
  29

  Did You Have Any Positive JW Leanings When You First Came Here?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  were you ever somewhat projw when you first came to this site?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  paul from cleveland

  I have positive JW leanings. In fact I still believe most of what they teach is true. No trinity, no hellfire, paradise earth, etc. I believe the kingdom that Jesus talked about is a real government. I think true Christians would be politically neutral and united in doctrinal belief, like they are. I believe disfellowshipping is scriptural. I don't believe in evolution and I do think Adam and Eve are real.

  I basically believe everything except their interpretation of the ransom. I believe the way Russell taught it, that virtually everyone will be saved. That Jesus' death is truly a 'ransom for all'. (This article essentially outlines what I believe, except for a few details: http://www.biblestudents.com/ransom_00001_1.cfm )

  I also can't get used to the idea of 'counting time'. As far as contributions toward the cause, we're not supposed to let our 'right hand know what the left is doing' right? I think donating your time to the preaching work is in the same catagory as donating money. That issue by itself, though, wouldn't keep me away.
• 
  29

  JW Science Quote (2-5)

  by TD in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in his 1898 novel, war of the worlds, h.g.

  wells depicted the earth under attack by a race that had evolved past the need of eating to obtain nourishment.

  these beings, in fact, had no digestive organs of any sort:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  paul from cleveland

  Throwing away a human life in deference to the "sancticty of blood" is making the symbol of life (blood) more important than the gift of life itself.

  That makes total sense.
• 
  29

  JW Science Quote (2-5)

  by TD in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in his 1898 novel, war of the worlds, h.g.

  wells depicted the earth under attack by a race that had evolved past the need of eating to obtain nourishment.

  these beings, in fact, had no digestive organs of any sort:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  paul from cleveland

  The issue was respect for the sanctity of life. Though Biblical laws on blood changed over time, showing respect for life never has. Is refusing blood in a life or death situation showing such respect?

  Aeiouy, This argument seems to make the most sense to me. Thank you.
• 
  35

  The worldwide unity of Jehovah's Witness

  by paul from cleveland in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  everything i read on this website and elsewhere indicates that the witness are extremely united in doctrine and practices worldwide.

  when i'm reading comments here, i have no idea whether the person is posting from the us or some other part of the world (unless they say so).

  everyone's experience seems to be the same wherever they live.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  paul from cleveland

  bethlites would take food and supplies from inventory, sometimes even money, for themselves or their families but didn't think it was "stealing" because they weren't attacking someone to get it. Also, others didn't seem to understand that prostitution is fornication. They figure that if she was willing and he paid, it was just business.

  Now, if this is true, it would be the real kind of difference I'm talking about.
• 
  29

  JW Science Quote (2-5)

  by TD in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in his 1898 novel, war of the worlds, h.g.

  wells depicted the earth under attack by a race that had evolved past the need of eating to obtain nourishment.

  these beings, in fact, had no digestive organs of any sort:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  paul from cleveland

  If transfusions are okay then why isn't it okay to take the blood in through your mouth? What difference does it make which orafice you use? Are transfusions okay because you skip the digestive system? What is it specifically about your mouth that makes it wrong to take in blood this way? Also, doesn't the bible say that the blood is supposed to poured out onto the ground? To me, the burden of proof would lie on the person claiming there is somehow a difference.
• 
  35

  The worldwide unity of Jehovah's Witness

  by paul from cleveland in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  everything i read on this website and elsewhere indicates that the witness are extremely united in doctrine and practices worldwide.

  when i'm reading comments here, i have no idea whether the person is posting from the us or some other part of the world (unless they say so).

  everyone's experience seems to be the same wherever they live.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  paul from cleveland

  I wonder if AllTimeJeff noticed any differences when he was in Cameroon.