JW Ben

Joined

• started 6 topics
• posted 68 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by JW Ben

• 
  34

  Blood Transfusions Kill Patients, Say Doctors

  by JW Ben in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  blood transfusions kill patients, say doctors .

  (picture: your health daily logo) february 11 1999

  london (nyt syndicate) -- blood transfusions given routinely to tens of thousands of critically ill patients may be killing them, doctors have found.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JW Ben

  Blood Transfusions Kill Patients, Say Doctors

  (Picture: Your Health Daily logo) February 11 1999 LONDON (NYT Syndicate) -- Blood transfusions given routinely to tens of thousands of critically ill patients may be killing them, doctors have found. Canadian researchers have found that giving extra blood, despite its essential role in maintaining life, can cause more harm than good in those who have been thought in greatest need of it. The unexpected finding, from a study of more than 800 critically ill patients,will deliver a serious blow to the idea of accident victims being stretchered into a hospital with a bag of life-giving blood suspended above them. Doctors had assumed that any means of boosting oxygen supply to the body's tissues in those who were seriously ill would improve their chances of survival. But the Canadian research shows that critically ill patients who received more blood were up to twice as likely to die as those who received less. In Britain, an estimated 800,000 patients receive blood transfusions each year, most after routine surgery, and demand for blood is rising. Using less blood would also save costs and conserve a scarce resource. The aim of a transfusion is to restore levels of hemoglobin, the oxygen- carrying constituent of red blood cells. Normal levels of hemoglobin range from 14 to 17 grams per deciliter. In the Canadian study, half of the 838 seriously unwell patients were given enough blood to raise their hemoglobin over 10 grams per deciliter, while the other half were restricted to only 7-9 grams per deciliter, half the normal level. One third of the restricted group received no blood at all. On average the restricted group received three units of blood (one and a half liters) less than the unrestricted group _ but more of them survived. Among patients under 55 and the less severely ill, those who received less blood (or no blood at all) were half as likely to die as those who received more. The only exceptions were patients with heart attacks and unstable angina (chest pain). Dr. Paul Hebert and his colleagues from the University of Ottawa say in the New England Journal of Medicine: "Our findings indicate that the use of a threshold...as low as 7 grams of hemoglobin per deciliter...was at least as effective as and possibly superior to a liberal transfusion strategy...in critically ill patients." It is well-known that giving too much blood or other infusions can cause heart attacks or water on the lungs because of the effort required to pump the extra liquid around the body. But the researchers found these factors could not explain the differences they found. In a commentary on the findings, Wesley Ely and Gordon Bernard of the Vanderbilt School of Medicine in Nashville, Tenn., say it is difficult to explain the harm caused by liberal transfusion. One possibility is that a transfusion, like a transplant, delivers a shock to the immune system. "Harmless" viruses in the blood may also be implicated. They say more trials are needed to determine the best treatment for critically ill patients. "With such knowledge, more physicians will be able to adhere to the dictum 'first do no harm,' and we will have a surplus of blood for transfusion rather than a shortage." Copyright 1999 The New York Times Syndicate. All rights reserved
• 
  69

  watchtower red flags

  by Ticker in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when i was studying and in the org i never did put two and two together becuase first off it was peer pressure and a young baptism age.

  i was indoctrinated as a child so i never got a chance to ever use sound reason and judgement toword the validity of the society's claims.

  but anywho i was thinking the other day about certain things that are obvious red flags and far fetched claims that the org makes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JW Ben

  Hello Annie and others,

  I realy can understand your points of view, and I understand why there is so much negativity, but somne of the information that comes out in this forum is based on missinformation and or missunderstanding of what the WTS acctually print.

  ****If someone DOES have a differing view, and it is VALID---wouln't it be hypocritical to keep it inside and let it bother them? What kind of "faith" is that?****

  The Bible is my bassis. The apostles had varring ideas on matters at times and arguged about them. They had to wait untill they were set straight. At times they had to be told many times. In the days of Jesus people did not form their own conclutions as to what to beleive they were "persuaded" to belive.

  All this critisicm would make a lot more sense if people did not beleive in the Bible. I am sure there are people here who do not, and that is fine with me. But for those here that claim to believe the Bible then the Bible is what should be the messuring stick. What happened in Bible times, exactly the same thing that is happening now. Followers of Jesus at times did not understand what he said. Some could not stick it out and stopped following him. Thats fine it is their choice. The apostles did not understand all that he said but did not run away because they did not like his teaching. I am sure we would not view them as hypocritical for staying with Jesus becayse they did not understand what or why he taught what he did. They came to understand in time. Even then they made mistakes. Why should we expect anything different today

  **Do YOU remember that the WTS says to "other religions" that if you see teachings that you think are in error, then you must not put your faith in that church any longer? ***

  I remeber what they say. Again i have to say what i did yesterday are we taking about doctrine such as no trinity, no hell etc etc or about changes in understanding on phrophecy and etc. Ther is a big difference. God wants us to worship him in truth. That is the truth of how hw is how Jesus is and moral codes. Understandings of words such as generation and time lines do not add or take away from the doctrine of the Bible. They help us keep in mind what it is Jehovah wants is is going to do. If you do not beleive in the Bible than this hole forum is a waist of time.

  ***With this in mind---*how* could one be a "loyal" JW and see discrepancies in the beliefs? Why do you think the WTS is so gung-ho on presenting themselves as being "unified"? ***

  The beliefes are to do with the main teachings of the Bible.. eg no trinity etc. all the core things. There are many JWs can and do have varing ides on noncore subjects. Speaking in unity on all these things is an important part of being a Christian. If our personal understanding varies we do not cause dissunity by trying to convice every one that our way is right. The WTS is not dogmatic about their views either, but for the sake if unity not allowing every one to sprout thier own ides is a Biblical command. Agin the Bible has to be the meassuring stick if we belive it.

  ***What about the scripture that says to put your trust in NO MAN (which your "GB" is). Your relationship with GOD and Jesus is what every individual needs to work on.....and not "how to please the WTS by putting in hours and bigger time slips.***

  JWs understand that as well. Unfortunetly few really take it to heart. The WTS has continually encouraged JWs to check for themselves so that it becomes their own. Any JW that tries to please the WTS has not been listening to what the WTS says or has not understood what has been said.

  ***The WTS is not God, and God isn't equivalent to the WTS.***

  The WTS fully agree with you. They do not try to be God nor make themselves equivalent to him
• 
  15

  Why did they change the sterilization beliefs?

  by mkr32208 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i posted this on another thread but it suddenly seemed more important and i wanted to get some opinions!

  i was still a dub when sterilization changed from a consciences matter to a no-no.

  i remarked to my wife at the time that i thought the reason for this was a declining membership!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JW Ben

  I have done some reaserch on this matter, and in the Watchtower 1 December 1961 p. 735 there is a question from readers on this matter.

  No wgere did they say out right that serilization was wrong. However the article was not in favour of it. They used many Bible passages to say that the Bible standard was that the sex organs were sacride for example they say that in the Israelites time a man taht had his testcles squashed was not able to serve in the temple. (Deut 23:1)

  BUT they did not acctually say do not do. It was strongly talkewd down.

  In 1969 15 December p. 767 they again refer back to Deut 23 and say that is the only indaction in the Bible of Gods view of male sterilisation. Strongly recomend that a person think about that but do not say NO you can not have it done. but say a mature christian should consider theose things before making a decition.

  Awake 2 August 74 p 16 says deliberate unneccessar sterilzation would reflect a lake of respec for God

  Watchtower Marc 1 p 158 was a question asking if a man allowed himself or his wife to be strerilized could he be used in the cong, basicly they give several things to be considered and said if it does not offened any one it is up to the local body of elders to decide.

  After that it is a matter of conscience.

  In 1999 the question was asked agin and they remind the readers of the gift of chilkdre from God and say it should not be viewed lighty but as a serios thing to contemplate and it was up to the individual.
• 
  69

  watchtower red flags

  by Ticker in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when i was studying and in the org i never did put two and two together becuase first off it was peer pressure and a young baptism age.

  i was indoctrinated as a child so i never got a chance to ever use sound reason and judgement toword the validity of the society's claims.

  but anywho i was thinking the other day about certain things that are obvious red flags and far fetched claims that the org makes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JW Ben

  WHAT A REACTION!!!!

  Hey every one I never expected such a reaction. I have read through all of posts, but at this time i can not answer then all, because there were so many I can't remember what they all said. I am going to save this to disc and go through it again.

  First I want to make it clear on a few points.

  My first and complete loyalty is to my God Jehovah, not to an organisation or any man. My loyalty to the WTS only stretches as far as it complies with Gods word. I try not look at things from a human point of view, I always try to take the human aspect out of the matter and look at the spititual aspect. I can not at this time quote scritpure to back up what I say because I am in my office at work. (I am self employed tax accountant this is my quite time of year)

  I will admit that I am different to most JWs in that I am realistic. I accept that there has been and will be mistakes based on accounts in the Bible of "men of God" making huge mistakes but still being used. please see the web site homepages.picknowl.com.au/hepburn and you will find an essay on the use of organisations that has put things into persepective for me. Unfortunatley there are a lot of JWs that pretend to hang of every word the WTS prints but that is their problem not the WTS.

  Just for your information I am well aware of the UN and Bulgaria stuff ups, and have been scince the news broke. I keep a constant eye out on several anti JW sites. My personal view of that is that the men that are responsable for that will answer for that. The scriptures say that those that have been given more responsability more will be asked back from them.

  Some of you strongly disagree that the WTS want let JWs have their own ideas. I will find matterial that shows that they can. Remember i said that it is OK for a JW to have differing vies as long as they do not try to convince others that they are right. Again that is from personal experiance of talking in groups including elders where we have disscussed various aspects of phrophecy and had different opinion on a matter. No one tried to convince anyone else of their weay of thinking, and it is great to just discuss. The final out come is we juist say "well we eill just have to wait and see."

  As far as asking question during a meeting is concerned that, is not the place. It is not like a lot of churches where you tern up and do not know what the sermon is going to be about. We have all the matterial that the meetings are to cover, and it is personal time to reaserch or ask questions. Questions are encouraged but at a time and place for it. That is why JWs will dicsuss matters and and form opinions.

  It is true that the WTS leaves congrgational matters up to the elders, and I have known of cxasses where elderes here in my cong have had to apploagize for their acctions taken against an individual.

  I have also wittnessed several times whole bodies of elders being stood down and other elders asked to move in to the cong. IT DOES HAPPEN but not as quick as some of us woul like, and I say thank goodness because I would not want the responsability of judging. (if I had that responsabiulty hardly any one including myself would be left)

  Even in the first centry there was the apostle Peter how denied Jesus, spread false sayings, divided a cong, ethincaly but was still used to write parts of the Bible. How would you feel if some one in your cong or church decided to take sides with a certain ethnic group and to exlude others? Most of us would say where is the love? what kind of elder is this? this cant be from God. We are not told in the account if any walked away, but how much better for those that stayed.

  Just as the nation of Israel had its problems and the first centry congs had their problems God still used one organisation at a time to accomplish his will.

  Yes i know that there are problems and as I said I expect them. Any one that belongs to any religion and does nnot expect problems is deluding themselves and that includes JW. It is individual JWs that do not listen to instuctions that can not see that. Unfortunatley that seems to be the majority.

  I have personal issues with individuals and some of the WTS stuff. That is MY problem to deal with. From my experience on the nett and talking to ex JWs, born again christians and a swag of other people I am convinced that the group of people known as JWs are the clossets to the teachings of the Bible that any other group. I do not say that lighty. It may have been 3 years or so scince I participated in this forum but i read and particiopate in others when time allows. As I said earlier i am very realistic about my approach to religion, My eyes are wide open to the faults of individuals and organisations, I do not do things blindly.
• 
  69

  watchtower red flags

  by Ticker in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when i was studying and in the org i never did put two and two together becuase first off it was peer pressure and a young baptism age.

  i was indoctrinated as a child so i never got a chance to ever use sound reason and judgement toword the validity of the society's claims.

  but anywho i was thinking the other day about certain things that are obvious red flags and far fetched claims that the org makes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JW Ben

  Hi Pope, Yes I can understand where you are comming from. It does seem logical that to be a true religion then there should be no mistakes. Personally I see two different issues here. 1) when I think of religion I think of doctrin and way of life. For me truth in religion is what is taughtr (or not taught) about God, the universe, why we are here and where are we going, as well as moral code by which to live. What effect does it have on ones life. All these things come under what I see as religous worhpip of a God or dieity For me the Bible best expalins these things, and JWs best explain the Bible on these things. 2) then there are side issused that do not affect the religous issues of worhip. I do not see the aspects of prophecy (their understand of past, present, or future) as having anything to do with worship, but an understanding of Gods timetable. God never did anything with out warning first. He warned Adam and Eve of the consequeces of taking matters into their own hands. He warned of the flood. Noah preach for many years before the flood to warn his contemperies. The Isrealites were always warned before hand and given a chnce to change etc.. The prophecies relating to the end times are a warning for all mankind. The understanding of finner detail of a prohecy do not change religous worship, but continue to act as a reminder of the prophecy and its ramifications. So for me any extra detail or modification has nothing to do with religous teaching. Just going back to the effect a religion has on ones life, many have blamed JWs for having a bad effect, where as I would have to disagree becaise it is not the teachings of JWs but the way some in the group abuse those teachings. This refers to all including elders and others in possitions of responsability as well as those that leave. I speak from personal experience here of being "emotionally abused" by local elders because, they failed to follow instructions as set out in various publications. I have had issue with them not the Org. A good web site that helped me is homepages.picknowl.com.au/hepburn The information there helped me look past individuals and to see a wider picture.
• 
  69

  watchtower red flags

  by Ticker in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when i was studying and in the org i never did put two and two together becuase first off it was peer pressure and a young baptism age.

  i was indoctrinated as a child so i never got a chance to ever use sound reason and judgement toword the validity of the society's claims.

  but anywho i was thinking the other day about certain things that are obvious red flags and far fetched claims that the org makes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JW Ben

  Hi Pope,

  Yes I can understand where you are comming from. It does seem logical that to be a true religion then there should be no mistakes.

  Personally I see two different issues here.

  1) when I think of religion I think of doctrin and way of life. For me truth in religion is what is taughtr (or not taught) about God, the universe, why we are here and where are we going, as well as moral code by which to live. What effect does it have on ones life. All these things come under what I see as religous worhpip of a God or dieity For me the Bible best expalins these things, and JWs best explain the Bible on these things.

  2) then there are side issused that do not affect the religous issues of worhip. I do not see the aspects of prophecy (their understand of past, present, or future) as having anything to do with worship, but an understanding of Gods timetable.

  God never did anything with out warning first. He warned Adam and Eve of the consequeces of taking matters into their own hands. He warned of the flood. Noah preach for many years before the flood to warn his contemperies. The Isrealites were always warned before hand and given a chnce to change etc..

  The prophecies relating to the end times are a warning for all mankind. The understanding of finner detail of a prohecy do not change religous worship, but continue to act as a reminder of the prophecy and its ramifications.

  So for me any extra detail or modification has nothing to do with religous teaching.

  Just going back to the effect a religion has on ones life, many have blamed JWs for having a bad effect, where as I would have to disagree becaise it is not the teachings of JWs but the way some in the group abuse those teachings. This refers to all including elders and others in possitions of responsability as well as those that leave. I speak from personal experience here of being "emotionally abused" by local elders because, they failed to follow instructions as set out in various publications. I have had issue with them not the Org.

  A good web site that helped me is homepages.picknowl.com.au/hepburn The information there helped me look past individuals and to see a wider picture.
• 
  69

  watchtower red flags

  by Ticker in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when i was studying and in the org i never did put two and two together becuase first off it was peer pressure and a young baptism age.

  i was indoctrinated as a child so i never got a chance to ever use sound reason and judgement toword the validity of the society's claims.

  but anywho i was thinking the other day about certain things that are obvious red flags and far fetched claims that the org makes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JW Ben

  It has been a lond time since i visited this site, I first came hwere just after it opened. and i just came on in for a look and had to respond to this.

  You have raised some intersting questions BUT.... They are not valid

  1) Where on earth did you ever get idea that most of the remnant live near Pensylvania? The remnant are all over the earth. When a man is chosen to be on th GB he comes from the part of the earth where he lives. In the city where I live in Australia I have personally known about a dozen that have claimed to be of the remnant. The GB has members from several countriies.

  2) yes Jehovah does not change. He has had the Bible written for us but dose not speak directly to any human. It is up to us to learn what he has written. Truth never changes, but mans perseption of it does. JW doctrins ( no trinity, hell, imortal soul; paradise earth, only few go to heaven etc) have not changed. Some aspects of their understanding of prophecy have changed nothing wrong with that because they are trying to understand what a prophecy means and how it relates to the world. That why Jesus said we had to dig for undertsanding as we would for Gold. None of the changes they make affect the way we view God, or his purpose for us. Understanding the way a word is used eg "generation" does not chnage the fact that Gods purpose is still on task. It means that they have a broader understanding of the way a word was used and how it could fit into prophecy. The apostles that walked and talked with Jesus missunderstood things that Jesus said. Peter even shot his mouth of over someting that went out to all the belivers at that time, but Jesus never said what Peter thought he said (Read the last chapter of John) yet Peter was still used by Jesus

  3) You evedently are under a misconception here. Of course JWs are alowed to have their own ideas if they do not agree with the WTS. and they are allowed to talk about it. The Bible shows that the apostles had their own ideas at times. But in time they were corrected. The only time a JW should get into trouble about having his own ideas, is if they try to convince others they are wrong and not the WTS. ( Sometimes a body of elders in a particular congo do not listen to the instructions given and will act when they should not, that is their fault not the WTS .)

  4) of couse they have jargon that they understand. So do lawyers, and doctors and enginneers, and architecs and other religous groups. Their Jargon is not offensive nor hard to underdstand. You have some strnge ideas on what is required. They do not say 10 hrs a month witnessing or meetings a week are necessay for salvation. Where do you get these ideas from? perhaps you were not paying attention when we are told to just do your best according to your circiumstances. There are many many JWs that, because of their circumsatnces, can not get to 5 meetings a week and can not spend 10 hrs a month and they are in good standing with their congs. It is the continued negelcting to meet together (Hebrews 10) for no good reason that the Bible says we should not do not the WTS. Jesus commanded all his followers to preach. The 10 hrs is a month is not a burden and is not a rule, it is only for men that are to recive extra responsability as it is a way of demonstrating that they are in a possition to accept greater responsability.
• 
  33

  witness response to mind control information

  by D wiltshire in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  that is bad !!

  dave, has jehovah's witnesses society proved itself by what it teaches, to love man and god and wife and child and to act for the betterment of all?

  which one of these ways mentioned does the society use?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JW Ben

  The first part to the essay I am writting.

  This essay is NOT finished yet

  JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES

  AND

  MIND CONTROL

  On the Internet, there are several articles designed to influence readers that Jehovahs Witnesses are under the "control" of the "Watchtower Society" and its "Governing Body". For me, the article that had the most initial influence is one called "A Study of the Persuasion Techniques Used by Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower"

  The opening words of this article state "The Watchtower Society utilises manipulative techniques and environment to recruit and maintain their membership. According to Robert Lifton (1961)...... there are eight criteria that are used to evaluate if the environment that people have been subject to has been a mind control totalist environment. The Watchtower was found to utilise each of these criteria to varying degrees in their indoctrination process."

  So straight away, before the potential reader starts to analyse this material, they are given a "positive" and "assertive" point of view in favour of the idea that mind control is used. For me, this in itself, is a form of manipulation to get the reader to agree with the writer's ideas. He sets the stage for what is to follow and by using such language and copious "authoritative" quotes, the reader is easily lead to agree with him. I mention this so that when we read other peoples material. ( Including what I have written here ), it may be prudent and advisable to try not to be persuaded by the thoughts of the reader without doing other research to get a balancing view. Do not take for gospel what is written even if it does sound authoritative.

  In the quote above the writer refers to a Robert Lifton and his criteria for mind control. The eight criteria that Robert Lifton uses are ..... .(NOTE only a brief description is given here)........

  MILIEU CONTROL

  the control of the environment and human communication within the environment and control of the communication includes itra-personal control, information and itra-personal thought control.

  MYSTICAL MANIPULATION

  contriving events to give the impression they originate mystically or are a blessing from God.

  LOADING THE LANGUAGE

  the use of a vocabulary peculiar to the group or changing the meanings of words to suit the ideas of the group.

  DOCTRINE OVER PERSON

  the belief of a groups ideology is all important, whether it aligns with reality and experiences or not.

  THE SACRED SCIENCE

  here the organization or group proclaims it alone has absolute truth, scientifically, psychologically and morally, and there is no valid alternatives.

  THE CULT OF CONFESSION

  members are encouraged to confess nonconforming thoughts, feelings, and actions to the group as an act of self surrender and a display of loyalty to the groups ideas.

  THE DEMAND FOR PURITY

  the absolute goal is purification according to the groups criteria.

  THE DISPENSING OF EXISTENCE

  its members are part of the elect who are walking in the truth, while all others are in the dark and therefore are not worthy to exist

  The author of the article also uses the theories of Steven Hassan who wrote a book entitled "Combating Cult Mind Control."

  In this essay I am not going to go into detail of all these theories. This is just the start to get something on my site relating to the subject. At this stage I want to give an overview of a Biblical response to the idea of Mind Control.

  First, something about the author of that article that took my interest. The Original article ( it has been updated ) started by saying that it was "A research report submitted to ........... College, Adelaide by ............... , as the Directed Study Project component for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in Christian Counselling......" According to his paper his contact at that time were visits over "four months a young Jehovah's Witness has been visiting me in the hope of converting me. He has shown me articles that have, at face value, been very impressive, and given persuasive, complicated, factual and philosophical arguments to justify his beliefs."

  I mention the above for the following reasons

  1. he evidently prided his "higher" education
  2. he evidently is a "Christian".
  3. And I wondered if he ever told the young JW he was being "used" for research.

  From his article, it would appear as if he had a copy of the 1995 Watchtower CD library, because he quotes from it, evidently to give an "authoritative" presentation. He also use's quotes from several books by EX JWs and others writers. It would also appear, from the way that he expressed himself, that he misunderstood some of the beliefs and writings of JWs. (some of them will be discussed in later updates of this material)

  Something else that bothered me, was the way he presented the whole argument. If he never "claimed to be Christian" ( as it appears he is, by getting a degree in "Christian Counselling" ), I could fully understand his point of view. For me, the reasoning he uses would make more sense if they originated from an atheist" or "communist", because of their general distain for religion. I found that the people that shouted the loudest about JWs using mind control claimed to be "Christian"

  It is a possibility that, like a lot of people, he takes the idea of the gift of "free will" from our creator to mean we have "absolute" free will. But that is another topic.

  In his reasoning ( along with others that say they are Christians ) I would have expected him to show scripturally why JWs were under the influence of a "dangerous" mind control situation. Instead no Scriptures are used ( except in quotes from the Watchtower Publications ) and he uses copious quotes from EX JWs and "cult experts" and "mind control experts", most of whom do not put into context JW beliefs.

  Having said that now down to my response.

  The next portion is set out as a Question and Answer discussion between myself, and, someone that holds to the idea of "mind control" ( This discussion as presented below never took place, but, it is based on conversations that I have had )

  QAre Jehovah's Witnesses under the influence of Mind Control

  A To that specific question, I must give a resounding YES , and, at the same time a very definite NO

  QHey!! you seem a bit confused. How can you say bothYES and NO?

  A The NO is in relation to the kind of mind control that essay was trying ( very effectively mind you ) to portray. The YES, is that Jehovah's Witness use their "free will" to voluntarily come under the "mind control" as set out in the Bible .

  QAt this point, you just agreed with the idea that JWs are under mind control. However, you try to justify your position by saying that this is in regard to the Bible, we, though, say it is to an "organization". By the way, where does the Bible talk about being under "mind control" ?

  A I can understand your reluctance to set aside what others have to say in regard to JWs being controlled by a group of men in Brooklyn, New York, but I am asking you now to try to see things the way we do. I am not asking you to "agree, or, "conform" to the way we see things, just understand them so that you can be in a better position to determine if the "mind control" I refer to is "evil", or, "beneficial".

  I would like you to consider a few texts with me. I will not use the New World Translation but

  the Revised Standard Version (RSV) and the New International Version (NIV) The Living

  Bible (LB) Today's English Version (TEV) Phillips Modern English (PME) Jerusalem Bible (JB)

  New English Bible (NEB). Authorised Version 1769 (AV). Young's Literal Translation 1898

  (YLT). Weymoth New Testament 1912 (WEY). Rotherham Bible 1902 (Roth). Revised Webster

  Bible 1995 (RWEBS). Unless stated otherwise all bold and italics and underlining in the

  following texts are mine.

  Rom 12:2 Do not be conformed to the world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable. RSV

  ...... Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind NIV

  ...... Let God transform you inwardly by a complete change of your mind TEV

  ...... Don't copy the behaviour and customs of this world, but be a new and a different person L.B.

  ...... Let God remake you so that your whole attitude of mind is changed PME

  ...... let your behaviour change, moulded by your new mind JB

  ...... but let your mind be remade NEB.

  The Greek word for "MIND" in the above is "noose". According to Strings word No. 3563 this word means "intellect by implication mind, understanding". This same word is used at 1 Corinthians 2:16 which says, "we have the mind of Christ" (KJV. TEV. NIV JB. RSV.) "we have the thoughts of Christ" (PME) and "possess the mind of Christ" (NEB)

  What that is telling JWs, is, that when we accept Christ as our saviour, and decide that we want to follow him, a change has to occur in us. We have to stop copying the behaviour, customs pattern and attitude of the world and transform, change, make new our minds and thoughts to comply with Gods will as patterned by his son Jesus.

  ( This, in effect is the bases of my reply. Are JWs being transformed by the Bible or by an "organization"? Only you, the reader can make that decision for yourself, based on what you read here and on other sites. )

  Another interesting Greek word that bears heavily on this discussion is "phroneo" Strongs Word No. 5426 and means "to exercise the mind, i.e. entertain or have a sentiment or opinion; by implication to be (mentally) disposed (more or less earnestly in a certain direction):interns. To interests oneself in (with concern of obedience): set the affection on"

  Please note a couple of ways the word is used, as they have a bearing on why JWs "insist" on every one teaching the same things without personal opinion. ( Please notices the highlighting of the teaching. This is to emphasis that point. If we see things differently to the "society" we do not teach personal opinion but stay by what the "society" teach) This is particularly the case of Philippians 4:2. The other texts are mentioned to give a balance as to how the same word for mind is used.

  Romans 12:16 Be of the same mind. (KJV) Have the same concern for all alike (TEV) Live in harmony (NIV; RSV) Work happily together (LB)

  Philippians 2:5 let this mind be you, which was in Christ Jesus (KJV) the attitude you should have is this..(TEV ; LB and NIV. say similar) have this mind among yourselves (RSV) in your minds you must be the same as Christ Jesus ??? let your bearing towards one another... (NEB)

  Philippians 4:2 That you be of the same mind in the Lord (KJV) please with the Lords help quarrel no more (LB) to agree with each other (NIV) I beg you by name to make up your differences(PME) Come to agreement with each other (JB)

  From all those examples on the use of the word MIND, JWs see that the apostles were telling those first century Christian that wanted to be "footstep followers" of Christ, that they needed a change of ("intellect" or "understanding") belief in the way they lived, and entertain the sentiments become mentally disposed and to interest oneself in (the concerns) of the Christ. They had to stop their quarrelling and differences of opinions and come into line with the thinking of Christ. This change included what one believed in before ( the audience Jesus spoke to were predominantly Jewish. This meant that they had to change from the ideas taught by their religious leaders at that time to the ones taught by Jesus ) as well as ones way of life.

  If that was the case back then, then if people wanted to follow the Christ today and be "Christian", should not those ones speak in agreement with each other without divisions? To get this "mind of Christ" or this new intellect or understanding, effort and time is needed, usually from a teacher who can persuade an individual to accept this new way of thinking.

  QThere, you agree with me, youdouse persuasion techniques in recruitment of new JWs, you just said that a teacher has topersuadean individual.

  A In the Biblical sense, YES. The words persuade (d) (ing) are used several times in the Bible. There are two Greek words that are translated so as to mean persuade. First, Strongs word No. 3129 means to understand learn, and 3982 To convince (right or wrong) confidence, obey trust persuade- yield. Lets look up some texts that use 3982

  Acts 18:4 talking about Paul "And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath and persuaded the Jews and Greeks" ( KJV) The TEV LB and NEV use the word "convince" The NIV; PNE; RSV; AV; DBY; ROTH; RWEBS; use the word "persuade". The BBE says "turning". The WEY says "tried to win over" and the J.B says "convert"

  Acts 19:8 "Disputing and persuading the things concerning the Kingdom of God" (KJV;AV) "persuading" (LB) "trying to convince" (TEV) "arguing persuasively" (NIV; JB) "reasoning and teaching" (BBE)

  Other texts to look up are Acts 26:26; Acts 28:23; Romans 14:14; 2 Corinthians 5:11.

  Paul had to "convince - persuade" "new converts" by reasoning with the people from Gods word (Acts 17:2; 18:4 18:19). Paul, like Jesus, used every day examples or illustrations as their "technique" in "teaching" or "persuading" their listeners to believe what they had to say. Jesus was well known for his teaching ( persuasion ) abilities by using illustrations that his audience could relate too. Some times he used illustrations that sorted out the motive as to why people followed him. The best example of this is recorded at John 6:54 56. Many stopped following him because his speech was repugnant to them.

  Today JWs use simple word and picture illustrations to demonstrate what the Bible teaches. Most of these are powerful in that they can effect the way we feel or think about a subject ( Just as Jesus did ). So, I Must ask a question here for you to answer to yourself.

  If a person claims to be a footstep follower of Jesus, is it wrong for them to teach in the same manner that he did?

  The powerful persuasion and convincing techniques that Jesus and his disciples used changed the very personalities and way of life of those that let themselves willingly be influenced by "the Word of God" Take these texts as examples. Ephesians 4:20-24 " 20 But YOU did not learn the Christ to be so, 21 provided, indeed, that YOU heard him and were taught by means of him, just as truth is in Jesus, 22 that YOU should put away the old personality which conforms to YOUR former course of conduct and which is being corrupted according to his deceptive desires; 23 but that YOU should be made new in the force actuating YOUR mind, 24 and should put on the new personality which was created according to Gods will in true righteousness and loyalty ." (NWT) I used the NWT here because I think it is more easily understood, but for comparison here are some other versions

  1. and ye did not so learn the Christ, 21 if so be ye did hear him, and in him were taught, as truth is
  in Jesus; 22 ye are to put off concerning the former behaviour the old man, that is corrupt according to the desires of the deceit, 23 and to be renewed in the spirit of your mind, 24 and to put on the new man, which, according to God, was created in righteousness and kindness of the truth.(YLT)
  22 to put away, in regard to your former mode of life, your original evil nature which is doomed to perish as befits its misleading impulses, 23 and to get yourselves renewed in the temper of your minds and clothe yourselves 24 with that new and better self which has been created to resemble God in the righteousness and holiness which come from the truth (WEY)
  22That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to
  the deceitful lusts; 23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; 24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. (AV)
  2. That ye were to strip off as regardeth the former behaviour the old man, who corrupteth himself

  according to his deceitful covetings,23 And were to be getting young again in the spirit of your mind,24 And were to put on the man of new mould, who, after God, hath been created in his truthful righteousness and loving kindness. (Roth)

  This "new personality", " new man ", " new and better self ", " new mould " had some dramatic effects on people 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 "What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit Gods kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit Gods kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of YOU were. But YOU have been washed clean, but YOU have been sanctified, but YOU have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God ." (NWT)

  Some in that congregation came from past lives that were not pleasant but by being taught ( persuaded ) and accepting the knowledge of Christ their personalities were transformed.

  QI believe that by the grace of our Lord people can change, and I can see what you are trying to say, and, to an extent I follow your reasoning as to the need to be taught especially in relation to the personalities of some of those mentioned in 1 Corinthians.

  But JWs use manipulative methods such as changing word meanings to suit their doctrines, even going as far as to produce your own Bible with many word changes. They use fear of dissfellowshiping to keep control. They have to turn in members that are doing wrong. If a family member is disfellowshiped, they can never have any contact with them again. They have to report each month what they have done in door knocking or they get into trouble. They can not have freedom of conscience to celebrate birthdays of Christmas. You can not read any other material besides the Watchtower publications. You are told what you can and can not do for entertainment, you are told how to dress, you can not understand the Bible without the Governing Body and if you see something in your Bible reading that is different to what is taught you can be disfellowshiped for it, and, you follow a "false prophet" because the Watchtower has set many predictions that have never come true. That is not to mention all the orthodox teachings you reject such as the Trinity, Hell, immortal soul to name a few.

  If those things do not add up to Mind control then there is something wrong with our society. God gave us free will to choose what we want to do and all those things show that JWs do not have free will.

  A Y es, I understand how you can start to think that there is some form of mind control especially when some of things you mention above are so different to practices in other religious groups. Lets go through some of those points one at a time.

  QOK, let's start by looking at the way you have produced your Bible. When we look at your Bible we can see that you have added words and taking words out.

  A To what Bible are you comparing the New World Translation to?

  QMost people that I know used the old King James Bible and your New World Translation is quite different to that Bible. I read an article on the Internet about JW's and mind control and they said that about your Bible, and I quote, "The WT has subtly changed meanings of both contemporary terminology and biblical terminology. The Watchtower does not deny its alteration in language but rather proclaims that it uses 'pure language' taught by Jehovah (WT 15/8/1981:28-29). In Genesis 1:2 in their New World Translation, they translate 'ruach' 'active force' instead of 'spirit' to justify their doctrine that the Holy Spirit is a force, not a person of the Godhead."

  A Actually, there are two different issues represented in that quote. The first is the "translation" of the word 'ruach' and the other is his linking of the phrase " 'pure language' by Jehovah" Note, he refers his readers to a Watchtower article to support his conclusion. The "pure language is described in that article as " What, then, is this change to a "pure language"? It is a turning to the message of truth, the refreshing "good news," the "pattern of healthful words," that speaks in praise of Jehovah and his righteous purposes by Christ Jesus. (2 Tim. 1:13) This "pure language" unifies them. And it testifies that, in the epoch-marking year 1914, "the kingdom of the world did become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king forever and ever." (Rev. 11:15) Taking this message upon their lips, true Christians worldwide "call upon the name of Jehovah" in dedication, harmoniously rendering him "sacred service." As the only truly united people on earth, they go to the homes of the people, heralding forth the "good news" of Jehovahs established kingdom. Thus they serve Jehovah "shoulder to shoulder." (Matt. 24:14; Rom. 12:1) Are you one who has thus separated yourself from the world, to serve God zealously in dedication to Him? It is by thus working along with Jehovahs organized people that you may "get away safe."Joel 2:32; see also Hosea 14:1, 2; Hebrews 13:15."

  That is getting away from the point at hand so , for now, lets just look at the translation of the word "ruach". In the King James version this Hebrew word "ruach" appears 378 times and is used in various ways. For instance it is translated asspirit 232 times, wind 92, breath 27, side 6, mind 5, blast 4, vain 2, air 1, anger 1, cool 1, courage 1, plus 6 other ways. According to Strongs Conordance the meanings of "ruach" are as follows..

  1) wind, breath, mind, spirit

  1a) breath

  1b) wind

  1b1) of heaven

  1b2) quarter (of wind), side

  1b3) breath of air

  1b4) air, gas

  1b5) vain, empty thing

  1c) spirit (as that which breathes quickly in animation or agitation)

  1c1) spirit, animation, vivacity, vigour

  1c2) courage

  1c3) temper, anger

  1c4) impatience, patience

  1c5) spirit, disposition (as troubled, bitter, discontented)

  1c6) disposition (of various kinds), unaccountable or uncontrollable impulse

  1c7) prophetic spirit

  1d) spirit (of the living, breathing being in man and animals)

  1d1) as gift, preserved by God, Gods spirit, departing at death, disembodied being

  1e) spirit (as seat of emotion)

  1e1) desire

  1e2) sorrow, trouble

  1f) spirit

  1f1) as seat or organ of mental acts

  1f2) rarely of the will

  1f3) as seat especially of moral character

  Strongs works do add another and final meaning,
• 
  33

  witness response to mind control information

  by D wiltshire in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  that is bad !!

  dave, has jehovah's witnesses society proved itself by what it teaches, to love man and god and wife and child and to act for the betterment of all?

  which one of these ways mentioned does the society use?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JW Ben

  Last part of the message that did not come through.

  Remember this article is not finished

  Strongs works do add another and final meaning, but not based on word meanings as above. He uses his theological "bias" or background to specifically link the word to the doctrine of the Trinity.

  Q

  Alright so the word ruach can mean "active force". But what about the other changes?

  A

  I will prepare a more detailed look at that for you. ( see....

  QAlright lets skip over that.One of the things that show you are under mind control is disfellowshiping. This puts fear into JW members to conform to Watchtower policies or lose their friends and family. You can not think any think different or let your conscience be your guide in relation to celebrating holidays such as Christmas or Easter. You have to believe all that the society tells you to believe.Do JW's have a scriptual basis for dissfellowshiping (excommunicating) someone from their midst?

  A

  Yes we believe that we do. Now I am not going to ask you to agree with me on these texts but I will give you the Biblical reason as to why some are disfellowshiped. First, when some one becomes a JW they understand what the teachings are in relation to those holiday celebrations. Witnesses are not allowed to be "baptised" on an emotional high. They must understand the basic "doctrines" before baptism. If an individual finds that there is a teaching that they do not agree with or understand why such a line is taken, they are not disfellowshiped. However, if such a person starts to undermine the faith of others but spreading their doubts or by teaching something contrary to the organisation, action will be taken.

  Q

  Yeah right. I've read many accounts on the internet where JWs have been disfellowshiped just for not believing something in the Watchtower.
• 
  59

  WT Says Jehovah a mistake

  by garybuss in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  "as to the old testament name of god, certainly the spelling and pronunciation "jehovah" were originally a blunder.

  (the bible in living english, 1972, p.7, watch tower bible and tract society of pennsylvania) .

  what's the deal?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JW Ben

  I have not read all the posts, but that particular Bible, I have it at home and have not yet looked for that quote, was printed by the WTBTS but not written by them. It was published under lisence as the purchased the rights.

  THe WTBTS have long recognised that the English form "Jehovah" is not the original way of saying the name, but then again neither is the English version of "Jesus" or Joshua", but they are accepted as being close and when they are used we recognise who is being spoken about, so the use the name "Jehovah" because it was widely recognised as the name of the Hebrews God before JWs were even thought of.

  If we accept Jesus etc why not accept the English Jehovah?