some jws have told me that blood transfusions cannot save lives in the case of catastrophic bleeding (for example, resulting from an auto accident) because blood cannot carry oxygen for 24 hours after it has been transfused.
is this in print in wt publications?
it must be, because i've heard it on multiple occasions from different jws.. i find it very hard to believe that such a statement is true.
The book I read was by Gene Church, it was the story of Dr Ron Lapin, a Israeli doctor who pioneered bloodless surgery. It is called "No man's blood" but is now out of print.
I remember a recording of Dr Lapin being interviewed on Australian radio. His first point was that he will attempt almost any elective surgery without blood but if you get yourself shot and your bleeding heavily there is nothing to be done for you without an immediate whole blood transfusion.
some jws have told me that blood transfusions cannot save lives in the case of catastrophic bleeding (for example, resulting from an auto accident) because blood cannot carry oxygen for 24 hours after it has been transfused.
is this in print in wt publications?
it must be, because i've heard it on multiple occasions from different jws.. i find it very hard to believe that such a statement is true.
I think the clue is in "stored citrated red cells". Perhaps somebody could clarify but I'm, fairly sure that fresh whole blood delivers the goods immediately.
I read a book by surgeon who was not a JW but very sympathetic to their cause and it was the first thing he said, that sometimes only an immediate blood transfusion will do and there is no alternative. He spoke particularly about traumatic blood loss as in the event of a gun shot wound or car accident. He insisted that anybody he treats accepts the reality of that. The book was called "No mans blood" but I can't remember the author.
It is rediculous of JWs to even talk about the medical merits or dangers of blood. Their position is born of religious dogma not science. Why cant they just have the balls to admit it?
wes and april started an exjw discussion board thinking simon would end this board...it attracted many new members and grew into a bit hit in the exjw world...but a funny thing happened they started to ask for funds to keep the site up and asked for donations they poured in and yet it was not enough they keep ask and the funds keep pouring in...month after month and yet it was never enough...then it dawned on the members they were just pocketing the money and holding the members hostage..."send money or the site will go down"...they kept sending and they kept pocketing the money.... .
avoid these people like the plage they will just rip you off and pocket the money....
it dawned on the members they were just pocketing the money and holding the members hostage..."Send money or the site will go down"...they kept sending and they kept pocketing the money...Avoid these people like the plage they will just rip you off and pocket the money...
Vilot - This is libel.
Where is your evidence of the amount of donations that have been received and how they have been used?
April and Wes work hard to keep the forum online, I do not believe they are making any profit at all.
It is a very good and supportive community, not nearly as busy as here, I enjoy the wide range of views, debate and experiences here but JWS provides a very valuable service. The automatic "Fraud" notices are as result of a switch of server this weekend.
Do you have an account at JWS? Under what name?
Provide evidence to back up your malicious attack or withdraw it and apologise.
does it sound fair to say that, 'all have sinned?
' when adam first sinned in the garden of eden, was all mankind alive now, with him when he committed his sin?
or many billions of others who have ever lived since adam sinned?
If perfect obedience is what is required of perfect creatures and the out come of disobedience is death, then God should have made them incapable of disobedience for their own good if he was the perfect example of love.
I can grasp the theistic objection to this that it was necessary that humans freely choose to obey.
My point is slightly different, if its possible for humans to freely choose good then what was wrong with A & E why did god not use his foreknowledge to see that coming?
The WT explanation that God is all knowing and yet didn't see it coming, is a case of special pleading that is full of paradoxes.
I agree. The strange claim of the borg that god can foreknow anything he wished but chooses no to, solves nothing. I used to puzzle over this one when I was a child
i realize whether you believe in god or the non-existence of god it has to be taken on faith since both positions are unknowable and unprovable.
however, i can understand faith in god as basically a hope for something better.
i can also understand agnosticism; admitting it's unknowable but still leaving the door open (perhaps the only intellectually honest option).
The "evidence" of God is all around us, what more is needed? - Sam Whiskey
I was worried you were serious for a moment then I noticed you put "evidence" in quotation marks. You almost had me there
does it sound fair to say that, 'all have sinned?
' when adam first sinned in the garden of eden, was all mankind alive now, with him when he committed his sin?
or many billions of others who have ever lived since adam sinned?
Even with my best theology head on (evangelical or watchtower) I can't imagine a reasonable answer to this dilema.
Was it at least theoretically possible for Adam and Eve to remain obedient?
If so, what was wrong with the particular Adam and Eve that god made?
Why did he not make a different Adam and Eve who would freely obey?
If not, then it was rigged and god is the willful author of all suffering.
Was gods sin one of commission or omission?
i found this crap cake while browsing a link on the facebook wt fan site.... .
"from a circuit overseer in georgia.... brother steve kormendi .
we had an interesting experience at our recent assembly.
oh my god! Their ability to tell fact from fiction is at the level of an infant. That is so sad
i realize whether you believe in god or the non-existence of god it has to be taken on faith since both positions are unknowable and unprovable.
however, i can understand faith in god as basically a hope for something better.
i can also understand agnosticism; admitting it's unknowable but still leaving the door open (perhaps the only intellectually honest option).
Its semantics. For me atheism is just an absence of belief in gods. It is not the same thing as a positive assertion "THERE IS NO GOD"
Dawkins refers to a scale of 1 - 7 where 1 is "I know there is a god" and 7 is "I know there is not a god". He puts himself at 6. In other words I can't assert he does not exist in the same way I can't assert there is not teapot in orbit around Jupiter but its not worth worrying about.
a few months ago there was a thread about a couple of elders at the mill hill bethel being disfellowshipped because they disagreed with some wt doctrine (i can't recall exactly what it was) and that several other betheliteswere under 'investigation'.
i haven't heard anything since, does anyone know anything more about this?.
borghater xx.
Fair comment believingxjw. I have known a number of jws who served out of love for god and as far as i could see no ulterior motive.
i'd like to think i look relaxed and cool.
but i'm aware that in reality i probably look like an idiot!
haha but by then i'm normaly too drunk to care.. does anyone have the same issue?.
stop stomping....unlock your knees, and hips. You won't look like a girl
This will be my mantra - Bedrocks, Saturday night woo hoo!
