Hello metatron,
thanks for the topic. A sharp observation
concerning the missing issues:
"blood transfusion " and " masturbation".
I wonder if ...the legal aspect prevails
as in the case of 'blood transfusion'.
Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp
MacHislopp
JoinedPosts by MacHislopp
-
20
The Assembly and What Wasn't Said
by metatron infeel free to correct me but i am utterly unable to find any trace of the blood issue or mention of masturbation in the.
new book for kids released at the assembly.
it certainly deals with other issues that require instruction such as birthdays,.
-
-
-
4
JESUS COMING (S) ?
by MacHislopp inw89 4/1 p. 10 hear what the spirit says to the congregations ***
what the spirit says to the congregations
let the one who has an ear hear what the spirit
-
-
MacHislopp
Hello everyone,
first of all a great thanks to Somebody, for digging out
this gem:
*** w89 4/1 p. 10 Hear What the Spirit Says to the Congregations ***
Hear What the Spirit Says to the Congregations
“Let the one who has an ear hear what the spirit
says to the congregations.”—REVELATION 3:22.
The information on pages 10 to 21 was presented at the Divine Justice District Conventions of Jehovah’s Witnesses during 1988 as the opening talks of the symposium entitled “The Appointed Time Is Near.”
*** w89 4/1 pp. 11-12 Hear What the Spirit Says to the Congregations ***
6 But these messages to the seven congregations have an even wider application. At Revelation 1:10, John says: “By inspiration I came to be in the Lord’s day.”
This verse is an important key to unlocking the understanding of Revelation. It indicates that it applies primarily to “the Lord’s day,” which began when Jesus became King in 1914.
This understanding is confirmed by Jesus’ messages to the seven congregations. In them we find expressions such as these words to Pergamum: “I am coming to you quickly.” (Revelation 2:16; 3:3, 11)
After 96 C.E., Jesus did not ‘come’ in any significant way until he was enthroned as King in 1914. (Acts 1:9-11)
Then, in fulfillment of Malachi 3:1, he ‘came’ again in 1918, when he came to Jehovah’s temple to judge first the household of God. (1 Peter 4:17)
He will ‘come’ once more, in the near future, when he “brings vengeance upon those who do not know God “and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus.”—2 Thessalonians 1:7, 8; Matthew 24:42-44.
I'm sure that things are getting a bit confusing, because according to the WTBS Inc's statement, published in "The Watchtower" 1st April 1989, page 11, paragraph 6 - official world wide teaching - presented at the " Divine Justice " District Conventions of JW's during the year 1988 , Jesus came already ...a number of times ...i.e.
***FIRST TIME :
" ...After 96 C.E., Jesus did not ‘come’ in any significant way until he was enthroned as King in 1914. (Acts 1:9-11)
***SECOND TIME :
" .. in fulfillment of Malachi 3:1, he ‘came’ again in 1918, when he came to Jehovah’s temple to judge first the household of God. (1 Peter 4:17)
and of course , He 'll come a ...
***THIRD TIME :
....He will ‘come’ once more, in the near future, when he “brings vengeance upon those who do not know God “and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus.”—2 Thessalonians 1:7, 8; Matthew 24:42-44.
Among the many thoughts and Scriptures ,which could be used to raise questions on this 'particular ' aspect of the
teaching , there is the text in 1st Corinthians 11: 26
which says :"
26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. (NIV)
26 For as oft as ye shall eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye shall tell the death of the Lord, till that he come [ye shall show the death of the Lord, till he come]. (WYc)
26 For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come. (DARBY)
26 for as often as ye may eat this bread, and this cup may drink, the death of the Lord ye do shew forth -- till he may come; (YOUNG)
26 Every time you eat this bread and drink from this cup you tell about the Lord's death, until he comes again. (WE)
Naturally , this Scriptures begs the question:
" If Jesus did arrive already, do we have still to continue to announce/remember His death?
Any comments are welcome.
J.C.MacHislopp
-
16
Why have Jehovahs Witnesses disfellowshipped for apostasy, some who still
by gumby infound an intresting article in looking for something else.
see why you are all dirty bastards!.
questions from readers w. 86' 4/1 page 30-31. o why have jehovahs witnesses disfellowshipped for apostasy, some who still profess belief in god, the bible, and jesus christ?.
-
-
MacHislopp
Hello Gumby,
Thanks for your interesting post. I would like to add, as a reminder,
this material that I did post a few months ago.
I) Legalistic teminology from the WTBS Inc.
*** w98 3/15 pp. 18-23 Living Up to Christian Dedication in Freedom ***
“Where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom.” —2 CORINTHIANS 3:17.
JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES believe that their religion will last forever. They therefore anticipate serving God “with spirit and truth” for all eternity. (John 4:23, 24) As free moral agents, these Christians have made an unreserved dedication to Jehovah God and are determined to live up to it. To that end, they rely on God’s Word and on his holy spirit. As they wholeheartedly pursue their course of Christian dedication in God-given freedom, the Witnesses show due respect for the role of governmental “superior authorities” and make proper use of legal means and provisions. (Romans 13:1; James 1:25) For instance, the Witnesses use the Watch Tower Society as a legal instrument—one of many in various lands—to enable them to accomplish their work of helping fellow humans, especially in spiritual ways. But the Witnesses are dedicated to God, not to any legal agency, and their dedication to Jehovah will last forever.
2 As servants dedicated to God, Jehovah’s Witnesses are obligated to follow Jesus’ instructions to “make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them.” (Matthew 28:19, 20) This work will continue until the end of the system of things, for Jesus also said: “This good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.” (Matthew 24:3, 14) Each year, printing plants of the Watch Tower Society and similar legal bodies supply Jehovah’s Witnesses with millions of Bibles, books, brochures, and magazines for use in their worldwide preaching activity. These legal entities are therefore invaluable in helping dedicated servants of God to live up to their dedication to him.
3 Someone may argue that the way the Witnesses speak about the Watch Tower Society—or more often just “the Society”—indicates that they view it as more than a legal instrument.
Do they not consider it to be the final authority on matters of worship? The book Jehovah’s Witnesses—Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom clarifies this point by explaining: “When The Watchtower [June 1, 1938] referred to ‘The Society,’ this meant, not a mere legal instrumentality, but the body of anointed Christians that had formed that legal entity and used it.” The expression therefore stood for “the faithful and discreet slave.” (Matthew 24:45) It is in this sense that the Witnesses generally used the term “the Society.” Of course, the legal corporation and “the faithful and discreet slave” are not interchangeable terms. Directors of the Watch Tower Society are elected, whereas Witnesses who make up ‘the faithful slave’ are anointed by Jehovah’s holy spirit.
4 In order to avoid misunderstandings, Jehovah’s Witnesses try to be careful about how they express themselves. Instead of saying, “the Society teaches,” many Witnesses prefer to use such expressions as, “the Bible says” or, “I understand the Bible to teach.” In this way they emphasize the personal decision that each Witness has made in accepting Bible teachings and also avoid giving the false impression that Witnesses are somehow bound to the dictates of some religious sect. Of course, suggestions as regards terminology should never become a subject of controversy. After all, terminology is of importance only to the extent that it prevents misunderstandings. Christian balance is required. The Bible admonishes us “not to fight about words.” (2 Timothy 2:14, 15) The Scriptures also state this principle: “Unless you through the tongue utter speech easily understood, how will it be known what is being spoken?”—1 Corinthians 14:9.
God’s Spirit Reduces the Need for Rules
5 “All things are lawful; but not all things are advantageous,” noted the apostle Paul. He added: “All things are lawful; but not all things build up.” (1 Corinthians 10:23) Paul obviously did not mean that it is lawful to do things that God’s Word expressly condemns. Compared to the some 600 laws given to ancient Israel, there are comparatively few explicit commands regulating Christian life. Hence, many matters are left to individual conscience. A person who has made a dedication to Jehovah enjoys the freedom that results from guidance by God’s spirit. Having made the truth his own, a Christian follows his Bible-trained conscience and relies on God’s direction by holy spirit. This helps the dedicated Christian to determine what will “build up” and be “advantageous” for himself and others. He realizes that the decisions he makes will affect his personal relationship with God, to whom he is dedicated.
6 A Witness demonstrates that he has made the truth his own by commenting at Christian meetings. At first, he may recite what is stated in the publication being studied. In time, however, he will progress to the point of expressing Bible teachings in his own words. He thus gives evidence that he is developing his thinking ability, not merely repeating what others have said. Framing thoughts in his own words and expressing correct words of truth in a heartfelt way will bring him delight and show that he is convinced in his own mind.—Ecclesiastes 12:10; compare Romans 14:5b.
7 Jehovah’s Witnesses are motivated by love for God and their fellow humans. (Matthew 22:36-40) True, they are closely knit together by the bond of Christlike love as a worldwide association of brothers. (Colossians 3:14; 1 Peter 5:9) But as a free moral agent, each one has personally decided to declare the good news of God’s Kingdom, to remain politically neutral, to abstain from blood, to avoid certain types of entertainment, and to live by Bible standards. These are not decisions forced upon them. They are decisions that fall within the framework of a way of life freely chosen by potential Witnesses before they ever take the step of Christian dedication.
Accountable to a Governing Body?
8 The Bible clearly shows that true Christians do not serve God under coercion. It says: “Jehovah is the Spirit; and where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom.” (2 Corinthians 3:17) But how can this fact be harmonized with the idea of a “faithful and discreet slave” with its Governing Body?—Matthew 24:45-47.
9 To answer this question, we must keep in mind the Scriptural principle of headship. (1 Corinthians 11:3) At Ephesians 5:21-24, Christ is identified as “head of the congregation,” the one to whom it is “in subjection.” Jehovah’s Witnesses understand that the faithful and discreet slave is made up of Jesus’ spiritual brothers. (Hebrews 2:10-13) This faithful slave class has been appointed to provide God’s people with spiritual “food at the proper time.” In this time of the end, Christ has appointed this slave “over all his belongings.” Its position therefore merits the respect of anyone claiming to be a Christian.
10 The purpose of headship is to preserve unity and ensure that “all things take place decently and by arrangement.” (1 Corinthians 14:40) To achieve this in the first century, a number of anointed Christians from the faithful and discreet slave class were chosen to represent the entire group. As subsequent events proved, the supervision exercised by this first-century governing body had Jehovah’s approval and blessing. First-century Christians gladly accepted the arrangement. Yes, they actually welcomed and were grateful for the fine results it produced.—Acts 15:1-32.
11 The value of such an arrangement still exists. Presently, the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses is composed of ten anointed Christians, all with decades of Christian experience behind them. They offer spiritual direction to Jehovah’s Witnesses, as did the first-century governing body. (Acts 16:4) Like the early Christians, the Witnesses gladly look to the mature brothers of the Governing Body for Bible-based direction and guidance in matters of worship. Though members of the Governing Body are slaves of Jehovah and of Christ, as are their fellow Christians, the Bible instructs us: “Be obedient to those who are taking the lead among you and be submissive, for they are keeping watch over your souls as those who will render an account; that they may do this with joy and not with sighing, for this would be damaging to you.”—Hebrews 13:17.
12 Does the position of oversight that the Scriptures assign the Governing Body mean that each of Jehovah’s Witnesses must render to it an account of his works? Not according to Paul’s words to Christians in Rome: “Why do you judge your brother? Or why do you also look down on your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God . . . Each of us will render an account for himself to God.”—Romans 14:10-12.
13 Is it not true, however, that individual Witnesses are expected to report their preaching activity? Yes, but the purpose of this is clearly explained in a Witness handbook, which says: “Early followers of Jesus Christ took interest in reports of progress in the preaching work. (Mark 6:30) As the work prospered, statistical reports were compiled along with accounts of outstanding experiences of those having a share in preaching the good news. . . . (Acts 2:5-11, 41, 47; 6:7; 1:15; 4:4) . . . How encouraging it was for those faithful Christian workers to hear reports of what was being accomplished! . . . In like manner, Jehovah’s modern-day organization endeavors to keep precise records of the work being done in fulfillment of Matthew 24:14.”
14 The Governing Body is a loving provision and an example of faith worthy of imitation. (Philippians 3:17; Hebrews 13:7) By their adhering to and following Christ as a model, they can echo Paul’s words: “Not that we are the masters over your faith, but we are fellow workers for your joy, for it is by your faith that you are standing.” (2 Corinthians 1:24) By observing trends, the Governing Body draws attention to the benefits of heeding Bible counsel, offers suggestions about applying Bible laws and principles, warns of hidden dangers, and provides “fellow workers” needed encouragement. It thus discharges its Christian stewardship, helps them to maintain their joy, and builds them up in faith so that they can stand firm.—1 Corinthians 4:1, 2; Titus 1:7-9.
15 If a Witness makes decisions on the basis of Bible counsel offered by the Governing Body, he does so of his own volition because his own study of the Bible has convinced him that this is the proper course. Each Witness is influenced by God’s own Word to apply sound Scriptural counsel offered by the Governing Body, in full recognition that decisions he makes will affect his personal relationship with God, to whom he is dedicated.—1 Thessalonians 2:13.
Students and Soldiers
16 But if decisions as to conduct are a personal matter, why are some of Jehovah’s Witnesses disfellowshipped? Nobody arbitrarily determines that the practice of a particular sin requires disfellowshipping. Rather, this action is Scripturally required only when a member of the congregation unrepentantly engages in gross sins, such as those enumerated in the 5th chapter of First Corinthians.
Thus, while a Christian may be disfellowshipped for practicing fornication, this occurs only if the individual refuses to accept the spiritual assistance of loving shepherds. Jehovah’s Witnesses are not alone in following this Christian practice. The Encyclopedia of Religion notes: “Any community claims the right to protect itself against nonconforming members who may threaten the common welfare. In a religious setting this right has often been reinforced by the belief that the sanction [of excommunication] affects one’s standing before God.”
17 Jehovah’s Witnesses are students of the Bible. (Joshua 1:8; Psalm 1:2; Acts 17:11) The program of Bible education provided by the Governing Body might be compared to a school curriculum outlined by a board of education. Although the board is itself not the source of the material being taught, it does set up the curriculum, determine the method of instruction, and issue necessary directives. If anyone flagrantly refuses to live according to the requirements of the institution, creates difficulties for fellow students, or brings disgrace upon the school, he can be expelled. The school authorities have the right to act for the benefit of the students as a whole.
18 Besides being students, Jehovah’s Witnesses are soldiers of Jesus Christ, instructed to “fight the fine fight of the faith.” (1 Timothy 6:12; 2 Timothy 2:3) Naturally, persistent conduct unbecoming a Christian soldier may incur divine disapproval . As an individual endowed with freedom of choice, a Christian soldier can decide as he wishes, but he must bear the consequences of his decision.
Paul reasons: “No man serving as a soldier involves himself in the commercial businesses of life, in order that he may gain the approval of the one who enrolled him as a soldier. Moreover, if anyone contends even in the games, he is not crowned unless he has contended according to the rules.” (2 Timothy 2:4, 5) Mature Christians, including those of the Governing Body, remain wholly at the disposal of their Leader, Jesus Christ, keeping “the rules” so that they can win the prize of life everlasting.—John 17:3; Revelation 2:10.
19 Do not the facts make clear that Jehovah’s Witnesses are servants of God, not slaves of men? As dedicated Christians enjoying the freedom for which Christ set them free, they let God’s spirit and his Word govern their lives as they serve unitedly with their brothers in the congregation of God. (Psalm 133:1) The evidences of this should also erase any uncertainty about the source of their strength. With the psalmist, they can sing: “Jehovah is my strength and my shield. In him my heart has trusted, and I have been helped, so that my heart exults, and with my song I shall laud him.”—Psalm 28:7.
[Study Questions]
1. To whom are Jehovah’s Witnesses dedicated, and why do they use legal agencies?
2. Why are the Watch Tower Society and similar legal agencies greatly appreciated by Jehovah’s Witnesses?
3. In what sense did Jehovah’s Witnesses formerly use the term “the Society”?
4. (a) How do many Witnesses express themselves so as to avoid misunderstandings? (b) Why should we be balanced as regards terminology?
5. How is 1 Corinthians 10:23 to be understood?
6. At Christian meetings, how can we demonstrate that we have made the truth our own?
7. What decisions have been made freely by servants of Jehovah?
8. What question needs to be clarified?
9, 10. (a) How does the principle of headship apply in the Christian congregation? (b) What did following the principle of headship necessitate in the first-century Christian congregation?
11. How should the present-day Governing Body be viewed?
12. To whom must each individual Christian render an account?
13. Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses report their preaching activity?
14, 15. (a) How does 2 Corinthians 1:24 apply to the Governing Body? (b) On what basis must individual Christians make personal decisions, in recognition of what fact?
16. Although decisions regarding conduct are a personal matter, why are some disfellowshipped?
17, 18. How might the propriety of disfellowshipping be illustrated?
19. Having examined the facts about Christian dedication, of what can we be sure?
[Picture on page 19]
The first-century governing body preserved unity of doctrine
[Picture on page 23]
Around the world, Jehovah’s Witnesses enjoy the freedom for which Christ set them free "
°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°
II) The history of baptisimal questions.
OLD ONES:
*** w73 5/1 p. 280 Baptizing Follows Discipling ***
If you feel the same about serving Jehovah God and taking Christ’s yoke upon you, we suggest that you consider the following two questions, which are asked of candidates for baptism:
(1) Have you repented of your sins and turned around, recognizing yourself before Jehovah God as a condemned sinner who needs salvation, and have you acknowledged to him that this salvation proceeds from him, the Father, through his Son Jesus Christ?
(2) On the basis of this faith in God and in his provision for salvation, have you dedicated yourself unreservedly to God to do his will henceforth as he reveals it to you through Jesus Christ and through the Bible under the enlightening power of the holy spirit? "
* NEW ONES :
*** w85 6/1 p. 30 Subjecting Ourselves to Jehovah by Dedication ***
At the close of the convention baptism talk, the baptism candidates will be in position to answer with depth of understanding and heartfelt appreciation two simple questions that serve to confirm that they recognize the implications of following Christ’s example.
The first question is:
On the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, have you repented of your sins and dedicated yourself to Jehovah to do his will?
The second is:
Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with God’s spirit-directed organization? "
Having answered yes to these questions, candidates are in a right heart condition to undergo Christian baptism.”
III) Legalistic 'attitude ' of the WTBS Inc.'s attorney :
Many years ago ( early 1990s ), ' brother ' Philip Brumley , in his function as "Counsel " (attorney), for the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. wrote, concerning the Society's legal right to disfellowship a person, the following :
"I represent the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., the parent organisation of the congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses throughout the United States."
C. Relation between the Congregations and its members.
It is axiomatic that the essenceof the relationship of a religious society with its members is held by the courts to be the agreements of the parties, and generally, a profession of faith , adherence to the doctrine of the religious society and submission to its government. 76 C.J.S. Religious Societies. "
11 (1952). A party having voluntarily assented to become a member of a congregation thereby subjects himself or herself to the existing rules and procedures of said congregation and cannot deny their existence. All who unite themselves to such a voluntary religious organisation do so with the implied consent to this government and are bound submit to it…"
Quite strong, legalistic words which call for some observations:
° Many years ago the term " religious, religion" etc. was referred
exclusively to the false " worship "….but today the recognition of " beeing an organized religion " brings, in many countries…numerous a d v a n t a g e s !
° In all these words, where is Jehovah, Jesus Christ etc.,
° I do not remember having see any of this , in any of the WTBS ' publications avalaible to the general public, nor in the 'KS ' - the manual for …elders only!
By the way, the latest mention of the grounds, motives for the disfellowshipping action are mentioned the above posted article from the " w98 3/15 22 Living Up to Christian Dedication in Freedom "
As one can see this article does not mention any of the things stated by the WTBS Inc. 's attorney Philip BRUMLEY.
Also none of this kind of ' reasoning ' is mentioned in articles dealingwith …" …those desiring to be baptized. " and particularly in the part mentioning : " " review …the questions …" elders to review with the publisher the questions on pages 175 to 218 of Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry."
IV) WTBS Inc. congregation's procedures for 'umbaptized publishers' :
*** w96 1/15 17 Jehovah's Sheep Need Tender Care
9 As an unbaptized publisher progresses spiritually, he may make a dedication to God in prayer and want to be baptized. (Compare Mark 1:9-11.) He should make his desire for baptism known to the congregation’s presiding overseer, who will arrange for elders to review with the publisher the questions on pages 175 to 218 of Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry.
The four parts into which the questions are divided may be covered in three sessions by three different elders if possible. If they agree that the unbaptized publisher has a reasonable understanding of Bible teachings and qualifies in other ways, they will tell him that he may be baptized. As a result of his dedication and baptism, he becomes ‘marked’ for salvation.—Ezekiel 9:4-6.
*** w89 1/15 17 How Baptism Can Save Us
9 Jehovah’s Witnesses do not follow unscriptural writings, such as that just quoted, but elders do hold discussions with those desiring to be baptized. Why? To make sure that these persons are believers who meet divine requirements and who have made a dedication to Jehovah. (Acts 4:4; 18:8; 2 Thessalonians 3:2)
Discussing questions in the book Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry helps to determine whether a person qualifies for baptism . If some points are not clear to him, or he has not brought his life into harmony with divine standards, the elders are pleased to render spiritual assistance."
*** w88 6/15 28 Becoming an Ordained Minister-God's Way
To help the new believer further, Christian elders arrange to meet with him and spend time reviewing the basic teachings of the Bible. This, for one thing, assures the elders that the prospective Christian has acquired an accurate knowledge of God’s purposes. And, of course, the review proves most helpful to the student. As needed, certain matters that were not correctly understood are clarified."
V) Important questions to be asked , with theaim to receive , reasonable and Scriptural based answers:
° At which moment the " candidate for baptism " is told of the possible implications derived from - becoming a baptized member " i.e. the full impact of what happens in " s h u n n in g " or even in " di s f e l l o w s h i p p i n g " ???
° Would the elders … clearly let him/her understand fully the
consequences of becoming" a person to be shunned " or a disfellowshipped person"???
°Does the " student" understand fully the implication of allowing the congregations' elders to make a ' Congregation’s Publisher Record card ' in his/her name???
VI) In case of doubts… review the article below :
*** w88 11/15 17 Helping Others to Worship God
9 The two elders will inform the student that when he qualifies for and shares in the field service, he may turn in a field service report and a Congregation’s Publisher Record card will be made out in his name.
This will demonstrate his affiliation with the theocratic organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses and his submission to it . (This would also be true of all others turning in field service reports.)
The discussion should also cover Bible counsel, such as is outlined on pages 98 and 99 of Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry. Hence, this would be an appropriate time for the student to obtain a personal copy of that book."
VII) Concerning the above article, more questions need to receive, reasonable and Scriptural based answers:
Does the " s t u d e n t " understand, grasps the implication
of the THREE key words :
1) AFFILIATION 2) ORGANIZATION 3)SUBMISSION.
It is possible that a vast numbers of "prospective brothers and sisters " were and still are left with the idea that " members are free to leave any time they want; the door is open " … in reality , it is not so !
VIII) To avoid any 'misunderstanding ' it is important, and vital
- before - future decision to review c a r e f u l l y :
-
*** w86 4/1 30-1 Questions From Readers
Questions From Readers Why have Jehovah’s Witnesses disfellowshipped (excommunicated) for apostasy some who still profess belief in God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ?
Those who voice such an objection point out that many religious organizations claiming to be Christian allow dissident views. Even some clergymen disagree with basic teachings of their church, yet they remain in good standing. In nearly all the denominations of Christendom, there are modernists and fundamentalists who greatly disagree with one another as to the inspiration of the Scriptures.
However, such examples provide no grounds for our doing the same. Why not? Many of such denominations allow widely divergent views among the clergy and the laity because they feel they cannot be certain as to just what is Bible truth. They are like the scribes and Pharisees of Jesus’ day who were unable to speak as persons having authority, which is how Jesus taught. (Matthew 7:29) Moreover, to the extent that religionists believe in interfaith, they are obligated not to take divergent beliefs too seriously.
But taking such a view of matters has no basis in the Scriptures. Jesus did not make common cause with any of the sects of Judaism. Jews of those sects professed to believe in the God of creation and in the Hebrew Scriptures, particularly the Law of Moses. Still, Jesus told his disciples to “watch out . . . for the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” (Matthew 16:11, 12; 23:15) Note also how strongly the apostle Paul stated matters: “Even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to you as good news something beyond what we declared to you as good news, let him be accursed.” Paul then repeated that statement for emphasis.—Galatians 1:8, 9.
Teaching dissident or divergent views is not compatible with true Christianity, as Paul makes clear at 1 Corinthians 1:10: “I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.” (New International Version) At Ephesians 4:3-6 he further stated that Christians should be “earnestly endeavoring to observe the oneness of the spirit in the uniting bond of peace. One body there is, and one spirit, even as you were called in the one hope to which you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all persons.”
Was this unity to be achieved and maintained by each one’s independently searching the Scriptures, coming to his own conclusions, and then teaching these? Not at all! Through Jesus Christ, Jehovah God provided for this purpose “some as apostles, . . . some as evangelizers, some as shepherds and teachers . . . until we all attain to the oneness in the faith and in the accurate knowledge of the Son of God, to a full-grown man.” Yes, with the help of such ministers, congregational unity—oneness in teaching and activity—could be and would be possible.—Ephesians 4:11-13.
Obviously, a basis for approved fellowship with Jehovah’s Witnesses cannot rest merely on a belief in God, in the Bible, in Jesus Christ, and so forth. The Roman Catholic pope, as well as the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, professes such beliefs, yet their church memberships are exclusive of each other.
Likewise, simply professing to have such beliefs would not authorize one to be known as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Approved association with Jehovah’s Witnesses requires accepting the entire range of the true teachings of the Bible, including those Scriptural beliefs that are unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses.
What do such beliefs include?
That the great issue before humankind is the rightfulness of Jehovah’s sovereignty, which is why he has allowed wickedness so long. (Ezekiel 25:17)
That Jesus Christ had a prehuman existence and is subordinate to his heavenly Father. (John 14:28)
That there is a “faithful and discreet slave” upon earth today ‘entrusted with all of Jesus’ earthly interests,’ which slave is associated with the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. (Matthew 24:45-47)
That 1914 marked the end of the Gentile Times and the establishment of the Kingdom of God in the heavens, as well as the time for Christ’s foretold presence. (Luke 21:7-24; Revelation 11:15–12:10)
That only 144,000 Christians will receive the heavenly reward. (Revelation 14:1, 3)
That Armageddon, referring to the battle of the great day of God the Almighty, is near. (Revelation 16:14, 16; 19:11-21)
That it will be followed by Christ’s Millennial Reign, which will restore an earth-wide paradise. That the first to enjoy it will be the present “great crowd” of Jesus’ “other sheep.”—John 10:16; Revelation 7:9-17; 21:3, 4.
Do we have Scriptural precedent for taking such a strict position? Indeed we do! Paul wrote about some in his day: “Their word will spread like gangrene. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of that number. These very men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred; and they are subverting the faith of some.” (2 Timothy 2:17, 18; see also Matthew 18:6.)
There is nothing to indicate that these men did not believe in God, in the Bible, in Jesus’ sacrifice. Yet, on this one basic point, what they were teaching as to the time of the resurrection, Paul rightly branded them as apostates, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship .
Similarly, the apostle John termed as antichrists those who did not believe that Jesus had come in the flesh. They may well have believed in God, in the Hebrew Scriptures, in Jesus as God’s Son, and so on. “
Should still exist some doubt, take a…closer look at this:
*** w52 2/1 p. 79 Jehovah’s Theocratic Organization Today
***POINTS TO APPRECIATE
10 Jehovah God deals with his people as a servant class. He does not feed each one individually nor does he appoint an individual over them. No individual student of God’s Word reveals God’s will or interprets His Word. (2 Pet. 1:20, 21) God interprets and teaches, through Christ the Chief Servant, who in turn uses the discreet slave as the visible channel, the visible theocratic organization.
And this:
*** w52 2/1 pp. 79-80 Jehovah’s Theocratic Organization Today ***
11 We must show our understanding in these matters, appreciating our relationship to the visible theocratic organization, remembering the fate of those like Korah and Achan and Saul and Uzziah and others who forgot the theocratic order. Are we assigned as individuals to bring forth the food for the spiritual table? No? Then let us not try to take over the slave’s duties.
We should eat and digest and assimilate what is set before us, without shying away from parts of the food because it may not suit the fancy of our mental taste. The truths we are to publish are the ones provided through the discreet-slave organization , not some personal opinions contrary to what the slave has provided as timely food.
Jehovah and Christ direct and correct the slave as needed , not we as individuals. If we do not see a point at first we should keep trying to grasp it, rather than opposing and rejecting it and presumptuously taking the position that we are more likely to be right than the discreet slave.
We should meekly go along with the Lord’s theocratic organization and wait for further clarification, rather than balk at the first mention of a thought unpalatable to us and proceed to quibble and mouth our criticisms and opinions as though they were worth more than the slave’s provision of spiritual food.
Theocratic ones will appreciate the Lord’s visible organization and not be so foolish as to pit against Jehovah’s channel their own human reasoning and sentiment and personal feelings.
12 Now some may ask, Should we accept as from the Lord and true the food provided through the discreet slave, or should we withhold acceptance until we have proved it for ourselves? If we have gained our present understanding of the Bible by feeding at the table set by the slave, if we have been thereby freed from false doctrines and built up in the clean and undefiled worship of God and given a new world hope, we should have some confidence in the slave’s provisions. After being nourished to our present spiritual strength and maturity, do we suddenly become smarter than our former provider and forsake the enlightening guidance of the organization that mothered us? “Forsake not the law of thy mother .” (Prov. 6:20-23.-
Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp
"Ab Uno disce omnes " (Virgilius , Eneide, II , 65)
-
7
Some confusing events of 1918 and 1919.-
by MacHislopp injust as a reminder enjoy the trip beginning in the year 1950 and ending in
the year 2001.
w50 4/15 p. 119 servants feed the flock ***
-
-
MacHislopp
Hello everyone,
these few lines just to thank you for your comments
and appreciation - Wannaexit, Noumenon, Peacefulpete -
Somebody: many thanks for your precious addition
i.e. the quote from the w. 01/04/1989,...great stuff !
Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp
-
7
Some confusing events of 1918 and 1919.-
by MacHislopp injust as a reminder enjoy the trip beginning in the year 1950 and ending in
the year 2001.
w50 4/15 p. 119 servants feed the flock ***
-
-
MacHislopp
Hello everyone,
Just as a reminder …enjoy the trip beginning in the year 1950 and ending in
the year 2001.
*** w50 4/15 p. 119 Servants Feed the Flock ***
REGATHERING SCATTERED FLOCK
21 The facts that have come to pass in “the cloudy and dark day” of this twentieth century show beyond all doubt that the complete fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy has taken place in our day. Jehovah has gathered the “remnant” of his people out of the far countries of Christendom where they were scattered. Over them God has set up “my servant” Christ Jesus the Greater David, and this “one shepherd”, the Chief Shepherd, is feeding them . For some time prior to A.D. 1918 the preparing of the Lord’s way was going on and then suddenly the Lord came to his temple, there to take account with his servants rewarding those that had been faithful and punishing the unfaithful. This is described for us by Jesus in his great prophecy on “the end of the world” in Matthew 24:42-51. As Malachi foretold, it would be a time of fiery judgment and one that would last for some time, until all the evil servants were purged and cleaned out from among the Lord’s remnant.—Mal. 3:1-3.
*** w51 4/1 p. 215 Commissioning of Witnesses in the Time of the End ***
This glory the Son shows forth when Jehovah sends him as His “messenger of the covenant” to the temple for judgment work. As it is written: “The Lord, whom ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom ye desire, behold, he cometh, saith Jehovah of hosts. And he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi, and refine them as gold and silver; and they shall offer unto Jehovah offerings in righteousness.” (Mal. 3:1, 3, AS) At his glorious coming to the temple in 1918 he took up the work of judging and cleansing his devoted remnant upon the earth, that these might go for him and for Jehovah with the “pure language”.
*** w60 7/15 p. 436 The Awake “Faithful and Discreet Slave” ***
20 As we now know, this watchman class of the “faithful and discreet slave” was being cleansed for still greater watchman service in the turbulent years to follow their restoration in 1919. Previously , in the spring of 1918, Jehovah came to his temple of earthly Christian servants for inspection and cleansing . (Mal. 3:1-3) The many bad ones were disfellowshiped by Him and sent away. A loyal remnant were permitted to go through the fiery test where Jehovah and his Messenger, Christ Jesus, (1) tested them by organization arrangements on their loyalty to Jehovah’s organization rather than to human leaders, (2) tested them by service instructions and provisions as to their zeal and devotion to Jehovah’s worship and witness work, and (3) tested them by revealed truth as to their love of it. What a fiery time it was!—See You May Survive Armageddon into God’s New World, pp. 303 to 305.
*** w72 2/1 79 Fully Accepting the Challenge of Jehovah's Service
JEHOVAH IS DISPLEASED WITH HIS WOMAN
The Naomi remnant came into a condition like that, particularly in the year 1918, when they were, in a sense, exiled from Jehovah God’s favor. In that year Jehovah God came to his temple suddenly, accompanied by the messenger of the covenant, the Lord Jesus Christ.
He examined the remnant here upon earth ; he was displeased with them. (Mal. 3:1, 2)
For a time they were not fully accepting the challenge of Jehovah’s Kingdom service that had opened up to them.
They were holding back, through fear of man and were not properly keeping themselves “unspotted from the world.” (Jas. 1:27, Authorized Version)
Therefore Jehovah let them go into bondage to Babylon the Great and her political associates.”
°°°°(ka “God’s Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached “ )
published by the WTBS Inc. New York in 1973
*** ka chap. 12 pp. 231-232 Increasing the King’s Belongings ***
45 The parable of the “talents” pictured that when the traveler returned from abroad he would settle accounts with them. This meant an inspection of them . Quite logically, with that turn of events in the spring of 1919, it would be the due time for the heavenly “master of those slaves ” to inspect them. But what account could they render with respect to his “talents” that had been committed to the slave class? Any increase that they may have gained prior to the climax of wartime persecution in 1918 seemed to have been wiped out. They were as if they had no figurative “talents” in their possession at all. If, now, they were to show any increase in their Master’s “talents,” they must produce this increase in the postwar period and render such increase of his belongings to him in the future. They must be given a new and further opportunity to ‘do business’ with his precious “talents.” This is just how it worked out historically, due to the merciful considerateness of their heavenly Master.
*** ka chap. 17 pp. 349-351 The “Slave” Who Lived to See the “Sign” ***
TIME OF INSPECTION BY THE SLAVE’S MASTER
38 Without a question of doubt, it was a real time for inspection of the Master’s “slave” class. All the facts of the case argue that the Master came for the work of inspection at the time. Such a thing was to be expected according to the prophecy of Malachi 3:1-5. Of course, the sectarian churches of Christendom had made a wartime record for themselves, an open record that had a heavy bearing on their claim to be disciples and slaves of Jesus Christ. Could they, by even their latest record down till 1919, prove that they themselves were the composite “faithful and discreet slave” class of the heavenly Lord and Master, Jesus Christ? He as Judge would indicate what his findings were by the way he thereafter dealt with the hundreds of religious sects of Christendom. Appropriately, now, our attention focuses upon those sincere, Bible-studying Christians who, during World War I, were persecuted for their obedience to Christ and who became “objects of hatred by all the nations” on account of Christ’s name. Since they also came under divine inspection, what did the Master show to be his decision on them?
39 According to Jesus’ illustration, how did the master who appointed the slave return to his house? Was it in great rage in order to destroy the house? Or was it to enjoy his homecoming and to see how things had been going on during his absence? His return to his house was a peaceful one. He did not come to engage in the “war of the great day of God the Almighty” at Har–Magedon. (Revelation 16:13-16) Rather, he wanted to make sure that his domestic affairs were in the right condition. Had his appointed slave done as he was assigned to do, namely, give to the “domestics” their “food at the proper time”? The master needed to make an inspection.
40 The serving of food, the right sort of food, at the proper time was the issue. It had to be according to this that a decision must be rendered by the returned master. Well, then, what about that body of Christians internationally hated and persecuted? (Matthew 24:9) Down to 1919 C.E. they had endeavored to give “food at the proper time” to the “household of faith” or the “domestics” of the heavenly Master. They did this despite interference by persecutors and the warring nations. Not only was the regularity in serving the spiritual food a problem, but the quality of the food itself was to be considered. In this respect the body of hated, persecuted Christians, who always sought to be faithful slaves of Jesus Christ, met the test. During the years of the world conflict they had not joined Christendom or pagandom in preaching the war propaganda submitted by the political governments. They persisted in preaching the Bible message for the time and in advocating a Christian adherence to Bible principles for everybody.
41 What, then, did the heavenly Master decide regarding these obedient slaves of his? He was not influenced by their unpopular, persecuted position in the war-mad world, for he had foretold such a hard experience for them during his invisible parousia or “ presence.” Did he find that body of Christian slaves disregarding the unpopularity of the world and seeking to be pleasing to their Master by doing what he had appointed to be done during his absence? He must have found them so, according to the way the inspection, begun in 1919, has affected his decision since. His actions, his dealings with his Christian slaves, speak louder than words.
*** w74 9/15 pp. 557-558 Is Christianity Dying? ***
Nevertheless, after the war , by 1919, there was still a faithful group that saw the need to proclaim the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ for the purpose of inspection and judgment. These the Lord raised up and infused with zeal and energy never to be stifled again by their enemies! By 1922 they had made preparations to announce that the King Jesus Christ had taken his power in the heavens and would soon free mankind of all oppressors. It was to be a worldwide work!
*** w75 2/1 pp. 78-79 A Fine Reward for Faithfulness ***
Well, shortly after his resurrection, Jesus had gone to a “distant country,” into heaven itself and into the presence of his Father, Jehovah God. After a time of sitting at His right hand awaiting God’s appointed time, Jesus received kingly power over the world in 1914. (Heb. 10:12, 13) Then, in 1919, after a period of inspection, came the time for the Master to reward his faithful “slave.” Finding this servant class indeed thoroughly faithful in feeding the household of faith, Jesus gave the “slave” a new status. The “slave” had been feeding the “domestics,” but now had a greatly enlarged position over “all [Christ’s] belongings.” This included much more than previously.
*** w83 9/15 pp. 19-20 “One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism” ***
19 “One body” is the Christian congregation, of which Jesus is the “head.” (Ephesians 1:22, 23) The individual anointed members of this united congregation would all receive the same spiritual food. To that end, their “master” appointed a collective “faithful steward” class, the body of anointed Christians on the earth since Pentecost 33 C.E. Since the “master” found the remaining ones of this body faithfully and discreetly giving out “food supplies ” when he arrived for inspection in 1919, he appointed them “over all his belongings. ” (Luke 12:42-44) The facts show that since 1919 this “steward” has faithfully cared for these “belongings.”
*** w89 6/1 p. 19 Be Clean in Mind and Body ***
16 The prophecy of Malachi shows that anointed Christians on earth in the time of the end would be refined, or purified, for temple service. History shows that this refining began in 1918. Since 1919 the anointed remnant have “certainly become to Jehovah people presenting a gift offering in righteousness,” and their gift offering is “gratifying to Jehovah.” (Malachi 3:3, 4
*** w90 3/15 14 'The Faithful Slave' and Its Governing Body
§21
In 1918, when Jesus Christ inspected those claiming to be his slaves, he found an international group of Christians publishing Bible truths for use both inside the congregation and outside in the preaching work.
In 1919 it truly turned out to be as Christ had foretold: “Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. Truly I say to you, He will appoint him over all his belongings.” (Matthew 24:46, 47)
*** w93 5/1 17 Expanded Activities During Christ's Presence
6 From the time Christ’s presence began and down to 1918, the slave class, despite unpopularity, persecution, and even some confusion, had been seeking to give timely food to the domestics.
This is what the Master found when his inspection began.
The Lord Jesus was pleased, and in 1919 he pronounced that faithful approved slave class happy.
What was the slave’s delightful reward for doing what his Master had appointed him to do? A promotion! “
*** w98 5/15 p. 15 Christian Faith Will Be Tested ***
21 As World War I drew to a close, some of the Bible Students faced another test of faith—whether they would maintain strict neutrality as to worldly military affairs. (John 17:16; 18:36) Some did not. So in 1918, Jehovah sent “the messenger of the covenant,” Christ Jesus, to His spiritual temple arrangement to cleanse the small group of His worshipers from worldly blemishes. Those who were committed to displaying true faith learned from the experience and moved forward, zealously continuing to preach.”
(°) Isaiah’s Prophecy –Light for all Mankind Vol.II (pub. 2001)
*** ip-2 chap. 27 p. 397 Jehovah Blesses Pure Worship ***
Ezekiel’s vision depicts Jehovah as entering the temple and demanding that all traces of immorality and idolatry be removed. In the modern-day fulfillment of these prophecies, there was an important spiritual development in 1918 in connection with Jehovah’s worship. Jehovah and Jesus evidently made an inspection of all of those claiming to represent pure worship. That inspection led to the final casting off of corrupt Christendom. For Christ’s anointed followers, the inspection meant a brief period of refinement followed by a swift spiritual restoration in 1919.—1 Peter 4:17.
Well, that’s all for now. Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp
-
33
Comments You Will Not Hear at the 7-13-03 WT Study
by blondie incomments you will not hear at the 7-13-03 wt study
reviewer comments will be in black or parentheses.
wt quotes will be in red or quotations
-
-
MacHislopp
Hello Blondie,
Just a few words to congratulate you. A nicely written comment,
logical and with many thought provoking points. May I add
that the theme should have been : " Jimmy ...will fix it!"
Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp
-
144
LANDMARK DECISION - Vicki Boer vs Watchtower Society
by Uzzah inas most are aware, vicki boer has been long awaiting a decision to be handed down in a case she started against the society in canada.. the decision was handed down today.
as with any 55 page decision, it will take some time for the legal experts to hash it over and decipher what was said.
but, in a nutshell..... vicki won.
-
-
MacHislopp
Hello Vicki,
These few lines to tell you that many in Europe, although far away, are near to you in these extremely difficult and stressing moments of your life.
The Canadian’s Court decision could be a beginning of a new way, to unmask publicly and to condemn all the guilty ones involved in “ child abuse”, and as in your case including all those protecting/sheltering etc. the “ child abusers”.
We do hope that similar cases, implicating the WTBS Inc., in the United States, Great Britain, France, and the rest of Europe will all have similar outcome.
What really makes an impact and stands out , in the Judge decision is:
[170] In my opinion…. Furthermore it was a life dominated by the influence of the Jehovah's Witness faith. she had been forbidden to devlop relationships with anyone outside the faith and had been trained to obey the elders without question.
Refusal to follow the direction of the elders was not an option if she wished to stay within her religion; and abandoning her religion would also constitute an abandonment of her family, friends and community, at a time in her life when she was emotionally dependent and fragile. Disobeying the elders was literally inconceivable to the plaintiff at the time.
[171] As I have noted above, the relationship between Ms Boer and the Jehovah's Witness elders was not as dependent as was the case with the children in the residential school in FSM v Clarke supra..
… That is because of the pervasive nature of the Jehovah's Witness religion's presence in teh everyday lives of its adherents, the specific religious requirement of obedience, and the direction to avoid worldly ways and social interactions outside the faith.
[172] The plaintiff's dependence and powerlessness developed as a direct result of the teachings of the defendant Wath Tower. She was brought up in that faith to accept the word of the elders unquestioningly. Independent thought was not permitted. She was taught not to trust anyone outside the faith and she followed that direction.
….The elders were, therefore, not only aware of her dependence and vulnerability, they were responsible for it.
As some others in this Board, already commented, many of us have been waiting for a long time, to have someone from the outside, and above all, a judge, realize what really goes on inside a Jehovah’s Witnesses ‘ congregation with respect to :
****the relationship between elders and the floc k,
and
what the religion itself expects and demands from its members.
I wish all the best for the future to you and your family, and please
keep us informed of any other development, including any form
of help that you may need .
Admiring your courage, your endurance and your keen sense of justice,
in the midst of much pain and sorrow, receive my sincere and
appreciative greetings,
James Charles MacHislopp
-
48
WTBS' Financial Empire...the tip of the iceberg!
by MacHislopp inwatchtower bible & t
watchtower bible & t
watchtower bible & t
-
-
MacHislopp
Hello everyone,
Just as a reminder, for some and as a new item for others, here below some more
more informations concerning the financial empire of the WTBS Inc.:
(from the link http://kent.steinhaug.com/boe/money.htm )
The WTB&TS of Britain had net assets of UKP22,238,672 approx. US$33,000,000)at August 31, 2001.
Of this, approximately UKP20,400,000 (approx US$30,600,000) was in the form of investments in fixed interest securities and short term deposits. During the year, the restricted fund "Congregation Deposit Loan Fund" was closed down, and the funds reallocated to general usage. The purpose of this fund was to "pool funds from connected congregation charities and seek to pay better rates of interest to them than would be available locally." The congregations approval was required and obtained for this reallocation. In effect, the Society "suggested" that money donated for a specific use (benefit of congregations) be absorbed into general funds, with which the Society can do whatever they like. Given the high control environment of the Watch Tower, this effectively demonstrates the artificiality of the WT's facade that specific dona tions can have their uses restricted to accomodate the donor's wishes.
The Trustees' report confirms that the London printing facilities are not to be enlarged.
The IBSA has net assets of UKP46,034,097 (approx US$69,000,000) at August 31, 2001.
Combined with the WTB&TS of Britain, this gives the two main British charities combined net assets of approx. UKP68,200,000 (approx. US$102,000,000).
The market value of land and buildings held by the IBSA is UKP42,681,000 (approx. US$64,000,000).
"The Kingdom Hall Trust" acts as "Custodian Trustee holding the title to freehold and leasehold properties acquired as places of worship for congregations in England and Wales. All new properties purchased are held in the name of the Trust. An ongoing programme of transferring title of existing places of worship from local trustees to the Trust is in progress and will take some years to complete."
It should be noted that all expenses relating to the Trust are met by the congregations. Also, "the congregations are individually responsible for the financing and mortgage commitments, rents, rates, taxes ans all other outgoings." In short, the WT gets the title, the congregations get the expenses. Gouge par excellence!
The total value of the freehold properties held in trust was approx UKP46,765,000 (approx. US$70,000,000).
°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°
II: THE HENRIETTA M. RILEY TRUST.
The H M Riley Trust is a U.S. trust that has the Watchtower Society as the sole beneficiary. Basically, it is a vehicle to make income for the Watchtower, using assets left by Henrietta Riley. The income generated by the trust is transferred to the Watchtower by means of a "donation". For the year ended April 30, 2002, the trust generated income of $1,740,127 and donated $1,945,645 to the Watchtower. In comparison, for the 2001 year the trust generated $2,939,731 in income, and donated $3,285,050 to the Watchtower. The difference between income and expenditure is made up by realising gains on the assets held.
The income of the trust is from two main sources. The majority is from "oil and gas royalties." The trust also has almost $2 million of investments in various stocks and other vehicles.
Figure 1: Front page of HM Riley Trust form 990, year ended April 30, 2002
Figure 2: Second page of form 990, HM Riley Trust year ended April 30, 2002, showing primary purpose as "support Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society"
Figure 3: Extract of investment listing of HM Riley Trust, April 30, 2002
(see http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/11/54708/1.ashx )
- Many thanks , again, to Expatbrit
-
Then from this :
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=H+M+Riley+Trust
you'will see that in the year 1999 the " H.M. RILEY Trust " which has been listed n° 45, out of the "Top 50 Michingan Foundations" donated in the fiscal date i.e. 04/30/1998 the sum of 3,593,248 USA Dollars
to the " Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society ".-
°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°
Still concerning the "Financial Empire" of the WTBS Inc.
for all those who have never seen "pictures " of WTBS Inc.,
properties it is not too late to take a nice ...guided trip .
This is the link : http://members.shaw.ca/theotrip/index.htm
The pictures have been taken by Stan and July Milosevic.
(Many, many thanks to them).
You'll be able to see vast property in Montreal (Canada);
the Canadian Bethel in Georgetown, Ontario;
many of the WTBS 's buildings in Brooklyn;
the Patterson Inn, the Patterson Educational Center;
the Watchtower Farms in Wallkill, New York;
and various Kingdom Halls in Canada and USA.
All the land and the buildings, surely represent a value
of billions of USA dollars, and as you mind get's numb
by these astronomical figures, remember these WTBS' quotes:
*** w92 8/15 24 Preaching in Maputo-Mozambique's Intriguing Capital! ***
Theocratic Advancement Despite Obstacles
Today, there are more than 50 congregations in and around Maputo city. However, there is not a single Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses to be found. Why is that so? Because of poor economic conditions, the congregations have not been able to build even though some have owned land for a number of years.(*)
(*)
w92 8/15 25
The fact that congregations do not have Kingdom Halls at their disposal does not stop their progress. In most cases, more than double the number of publishers attend the meetings
*** w92 8/15 24 Preaching in Maputo-Mozambique's Intriguing Capital! ***
If a man is fortunate enough to find a job here, the average wage is from
$20 to $30 per month ".
*** w92 8/15 24 Preaching in Maputo-Mozambique's Intriguing Capital! ***
"Another congregation of 59 publishers regularly has more than 140 in attendance. They normally meet on an open terrace. But during rainy weather, the congregation squeezes into the two rooms of a small apartment. The overflow from the audience spills into the hallway, the kitchen, and the balcony. Once again, one cannot help but notice the appreciation and attentiveness as everyone, including many youths, follow the program intently. "
Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp
P.S. As soon as I’ll get more informations, I’ll post them.
-
42
Official Blood Document for Legal Purposes
by AlanF inbelow are scans for the two-page document that jehovah's witnesses give to legal authorities to state their official policy on blood.. page 1:.
page 2 can be found here, but is too large to comfortably include as an image: http://home.attbi.com/~alanf00/images/med_alt_p2.jpg.
alanf
-
-
MacHislopp
Hello everyone,
above all many thanks to AlanF , for digging out and presenting this
great piece of evidence, published by the WTBS Inc.
Many have already commented , giving well thought points and
real sharp observation, which shows again, that this forum acts
as a 'thinking tank' to dissect and expose the double talk and
devious ways of the mighty WTBS Inc.
Btw, the document looks like a 'revised version ', dated
April 2002. I have never seen a similar one before and I do
believe that it is used only among the HCL in the United States.
These below, are imho, the most outstanding points,
that have been hightlighted:
Waiting:
"...refusing to take blood stance was NOT a medical response.....
.....but a scriptural response only.
NOT ACCEPTABLE
PERSONAL DECISION
He is being TOLD by the WTBTS in writing that he CANNOT take some blood components. NO personal decision in the matter. "
City Fan:
" ...cryoprecipitate which contains a small amount of plasma is in the personal decision list but plasma itself is in the not-allowed list. That doesn't make sense to me!"
Pathofthorns:
"It looks like by clearly listing what is acceptable and what is not, they are avoiding the obvious question as to why some parts of blood are acceptable and others are not. The chart makes it clear that they are not "abstaining from blood" since it is plainly obvious where these fractions come from.
and:
By simply dictating to the members what is acceptable and what is not, they avoid having to explain the reasoning behind a policy that makes no sense. "
Rocketman:
'The "not acceptable" part takes it out of the realm of personal decision'
Hawkaw:
The stupid part is that they do accept white blood cells in peripherial blood stem cell autographing procedures as well as white blood cells that are transplanted with organ transplants.
... also accept whole blood bone marrow.
...also accept whole blood when hemodilution, heart lung and other techniques that connect the patient to a machine via a tube are employed.
Some techniques like hemodilution store the blood before transferring it back into the patient.
and:
" Where in the bible does it say blood is considered to be whole blood, red blood cells, white blood cells, plasma and platelets but blood is not all the fractions of red blood cells, white blood cells, plasma and platelets."
Metatron:
"We need to emphasize - as the document shows- that , for Witnesses, refusing blood is not voluntary.
It is ordered or demanded by the Watchtower Society , using the hostage arrangement known as "disassociation".
Sam Beli:
"....much of what is on page two has nothing directly to do with replacing lost blood, either because of hemorrhage or because of disease that has interfered with the normal blood manufacturing processes of the body"
and:
"They claim that the Bible guides all of their conduct, so let them explain from the Bible the do's and don'ts. "
.
joy2bfree:
I'm surprised no one else has commented on this statement of theirs "Any technique that involves blood storage".
All products of blood, whether whole blood or the "fractions" that are allowable are STORED. You don't drip it straight from soneone into another human.
"... this rule null and voids all their silly rules on blood."
Bluesbrother:
"Nowadays I am amazed at the highhanded attitude of the WTS , This is their definition of acceptable and unacceptable and the congs, like the sheep they say they are, meekly follow."
Manon :
"These forms are designed with the intention to manipulate the thinking of the carrier it's a form of mind control. They are a reminder, token, object referral of the conditions/specifications that are acceptable to the "society". The personal decision aspect is deceiving "NOT ACCEPTABLE" is in bold type they are telling you how and what you should already be thinking."
Now just as a reminder let's read some of their publications on the matter,
focusing on the WTBS Inc's claim of:
"... Christian must make his own conscientious decision before God."
and:
" Their sincere, conscientious stand should be respected."
***" "The Watchtower" 1964 November 15th pages .680-3
Employment and Your Conscience ***
The Society does not endorse any of the modern medical uses of blood, such as the uses of blood in connection with inoculations. Inoculation is, however, a virtually unavoidable circumstance in some segments of society, and so we leave it up to the conscience of the individual to determine whether to submit to inoculation with a serum containing blood fractions for the purpose of building up antibodies to fight against disease. If a person did this, he may derive comfort under the circumstances from the fact that he is not directly eating blood, which is expressly forbidden in God's Word. It is not used for food or to replace lost blood. Here the Christian must make his own decision based on conscience. Therefore, whether a Christian will submit to inoculation with a serum, or whether doctors or nurses who are Christians will administer such, is for personal decision. Christians in the medical profession are individually responsible for employment decisions. They must bear the consequences of decisions made, in keeping with the principle at Galatians 6:5. Some doctors who are Jehovah's witnesses have administered blood transfusions to persons of the world upon request. However, they do not do so in the case of one of Jehovah's dedicated witnesses. In harmony with Deuteronomy 14:21, the administering of blood upon request to worldly persons is left to the Christian doctor's own conscience. This is similar to the situation facing a Christian butcher or grocer who must decide whether he can conscientiously sell blood sausage to a worldly person."
*** "The Watchtower " 2000 June 15th, page 31 Questions from Readers ***
Do Jehovah's Witnesses accept any medical products derived from blood?
The fundamental answer is that Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept blood. We firmly believe that God's law on blood is not open to reform to fit shifting opinions. Still, new issues arise because blood can now be processed into four primary components. In deciding whether to accept such, a Christian should look beyond possible medical benefits and risks. His concern should be what the Bible says and the potential effect on his relationship with Almighty God.
The key issues are quite simple. As an aid to seeing why that is some consider some Biblical, historical, and medical background.
As transfusions of whole blood became common after World War II, Jehovah's Witnesses saw that this was contrary to God's law and we still believe that. Yet, medicine has changed over time. Today, most transfusions are not of whole blood but of one of its primary components: (1) red cells; (2) white cells; (3) platelets; (4) plasma (serum), the fluid part. Depending on the condition of the patient, physicians might prescribe red cells, white cells, platelets, or plasma. Transfusing these major components allows a single unit of blood to be divided among more patients. Jehovah's Witnesses hold that accepting whole blood or any of those four primary components violates God's law. Significantly, keeping to this Bible-based position has protected them from many risks, including such diseases as hepatitis and AIDS that can be contracted from blood.
However, since blood can be processed beyond those primary components, questions arise about fractions derived from the primary blood components. How are such fractions used, and what should a Christian consider when deciding on them?
Blood is complex. Even the plasma which is 90 percent water - carries scores of hormones, inorganic salts, enzymes, and nutrients, including minerals and sugar. Plasma also carries such proteins as albumin, clotting factors, and antibodies to fight diseases. Technicians isolate and use many plasma proteins. For example, clotting factor VIII has been given to hemophiliacs, who bleed easily. Or if someone is exposed to certain diseases, doctors might prescribe injections of gamma globulin, extracted from the blood plasma of people who already had immunity. Other plasma proteins are used medically, but the above mentioned illustrate how a primary blood component (plasma) may be processed to obtain fractions. *
*Footnote: See Questions From Readers in "The Watchtower" of June 15, 1978 , and October 1, 1994. Pharmaceutical firms have developed recombinant products that are not taken from blood and that may prescribed in place of some blood fractions used in the past.
Just as blood plasma can be a source of various fractions, the other primary components (red cells, white cells, platelets) can be processed to isolate smaller parts. For example, white blood cells may be a source of interferons and interleukins, used to treat some viral infections and cancers. Platelets can be processed to extract a wound healing factor. And other medicines are coming along that involved (at least initially) extracts from blood components. Such therapies are not transfusions of those primary components; they usually involve parts or fractions thereof. Should Christians accept these fractions in medical treatment? We cannot say. The Bible does not give details, so a Christian must make his own conscientious decision before God.
Some would refuse anything derived from blood (even fractions intended to provide temporary passive immunity). That is how they understand God's command to 'abstain from blood.' They reason that his law to Israel required that blood removed from a creature be 'poured out on the ground.' (Deuteronomy 12: 22-24) Why is that relevant? Well, to prepare gamma globulin, blood-based clotting factors, and so on, requires that blood be collected and processed. Hence, some Christians reject such products, just as they reject transfusions of whole blood or of its four primary components. Their sincere, conscientious stand should be respected.
Other Christians decide differently. They too refuse transfusions of whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets, or plasma. Yet, they might allow a physician to treat them with a fraction extracted from the primary components. Even here there may be differences. One Christian may accept a gamma globulin injection, but he may or may not agree to an injection containing something extracted from red or white cells. Overall, though, what might lead some Christians to conclude that they could accept blood fractions?
SUGGESTED QUESTIONS FOR THE DOCTOR
· If you face surgery or a treatment that might involve a blood product, ask:
· Do all the medical personnel involved know that, as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I direct that no blood transfusions (whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets, or blood plasma) be given to me under any circumstances?
· If any medicine to be prescribed may be made from blood plasma, red or white cells, or platelets, ask:
· Has the medicine been made from one of the four primary blood components? If so, would you explain its makeup?
· How much of this blood-derived medicine might be administered, and in what way?
·
· If my conscience permits me to accept this fraction, what medical risks are there?
· If my conscience moves me to decline this fraction, what other therapy might be used?
· After I have considered this matter further, when may I inform you of my decision?
·
Questions From Readers in "The Watchtower" of June 1, 1990, noted that plasma proteins (fractions) move from a pregnant woman's blood to the separate blood system of her fetus. Thus a mother passes immunoglobulins to her child, providing valuable immunity. Separately, as a fetus' red cells complete their normal life span, their oxygen-carrying portion is processed. Some of it becomes bilirubin, which crosses the placenta to the mother and is eliminated with her body wastes. Some Christians may conclude that since blood fractions can pass to another person in this natural setting, they could accept blood traction derived from blood plasma or cells.
Does the fact that opinions and conscientious decisions may differ mean that the issue inconsequential? No. It is serious. Yet, there is a basic simplicity. The above material shows that Jehovah's Witnesses refuse transfusions of both whole blood and its primary blood components. The Bible directs Christians to 'abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from fornication'. (Acts 15:29) Beyond that, when it comes to fractions of any of the primary components, each Christian, after careful and prayerful meditation, must conscientiously decide for himself.
Many people would be willing accept any therapy that seems to offer immediate benefit, even a therapy have know health risks, as is true of blood products. The sincere Christian endeavors to have a broader, more balanced view that involves more than just the physical aspects. Jehovah's Witnesses appreciate efforts to provide quality medical care, and they weight the risk/benefit ratio of any treatment. However, when it comes to products derived from blood, they carefully weigh what God says and their personal relationship with our Life-Giver. Psalm 36:9.
What a blessing for a Christian to have such confidence as the psalmist who wrote: Jehovah God is a sun and a shield; favor and glory are what he gives. Jehovah himself will not hold back anything good from those waking in faultlessness. O Jehovah., happy is the man that is trusting in you! Psalm 84: 11, 12.
Now concerning tthe following questions:
· Has the medicine been made from one of the four primary blood components? If so, would you explain its makeup?
· How much of this blood-derived medicine might be administered, and in what way?
a "Friend" on the 4th June 2000, made these comments:
If the physician says, "This treatment contains 1 red cell" would you object to it? Would elders have a judicial case?
If the physician says, "This treatment contains 100 red cell" would you object to it? Would elders have a judicial case?
If the physician says, "This treatment contains 1000 red cell" would you object to it? Would elders have a judicial case?
If the physician says, "This treatment contains 10,000 red cell" would you object to it? Would elders have a judicial case?
And the list could go on and on.
I would like also to remind Waiting comments, 26th June 2000:
I also have noticed, like you, that the Society writes a lot about
"some have concluded",
"some have allowed their consciences".....
Well, who determines who is right?
The "some have concluded" or the "some have not concluded?"
The majority rules? Where does the GB fit into that scheme? Who counts the votes?
and this:
*** w00 10/15 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
Hence, we do not donate blood, nor do we store for transfusion our blood that should be ‘poured out.’ That practice conflicts with God’s law
*** w00 10/15 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
For example, during certain surgical procedures, some blood may be diverted from the body in a process called hemodilution. The blood remaining in the patient is diluted. Later, his blood in the external circuit is directed back into him, thus bringing his blood count closer to normal. Similarly, blood that flows into a wound may be captured and filtered so that the red cells can be returned to the patient; this is called cell salvage. In a different process, blood may be directed to a machine that temporarily carries on a function normally handled by body organs (for example, the heart, lungs, or kidneys). The blood from the machine is then returned to the patient. In other procedures, blood is diverted to a separator (centrifuge) so that damaging or defective portions of it can be eliminated. Or the goal may be to isolate some of a blood component and apply that elsewhere on the body. There are also tests in which a quantity of blood is withdrawn in order to tag it or to mix it with medicine, whereupon it is put back into the patient."
Now, old on and let's go for a little time travel:
*** w58 8/1 478 Questions from Readers *
One of Jehovah’s witnesses who claims to be of the anointed remnant recently went to the hospital and took a blood transfusion, voluntarily. Should she be allowed to partake of the emblems of bread and wine at Memorial time?—R. J., United States.
We, of course, regret with you that this sister who professes to be one of the anointed remnant took a blood transfusion voluntarily during her stay in the hospital. We believe that she did the wrong thing contrary to the will of God.
However, congregations have never been instructed to disfellowship those who voluntarily take blood transfusions or approve them.
We let the judgment of such violators of God’s law concerning the sacredness of blood remain with Jehovah, the Supreme Judge. The only thing that can be done in the cases of individuals like this is to view them as immature and therefore not capable of taking on certain responsibilities, hence refusing to make certain assignments of service to such ones.
Since an individual is not disfellowshiped because of having voluntarily taken a blood transfusion or having approved of a dear one’s accepting a blood transfusion, you have no right to bar this sister from the celebration of the Lord’s Evening Meal. As an anointed member of Christ’s body she is under orders and command by Christ Jesus to partake. Whether she is unfaithful as to what she professes to be by virtue of taking the emblems of the Lord’s Evening Meal is something for Jehovah God to determine himself. His judgment begins at the house of God. It is not for you or anyone serving the Memorial emblems to act as the judge, but to allow the emblems to go to anyone in the audience as these are passed along in the normal manner of letting each one have the opportunity to partake."
Please remember the WTBS'' claim :
"... Christian must make his own conscientious decision before God."
and:
" Their sincere, conscientious stand should be respected."
Let's advance in time, and we arrive in the year 1961, i.e. only 25 months later and we get this:
*** w61 1/15 63-4 Questions from Readers ***
In view of the seriousness of taking blood into the human system by a transfusion, would violation of the Holy Scriptures in this regard subject the dedicated, baptized receiver of blood transfusion to being disfellowshiped from the Christian congregation?
The inspired Holy Scriptures answer yes. About the middle of the first “Christian” century the twelve apostles of Christ met with the other mature representatives of the congregation at Jerusalem to determine what should be the Scriptural requirement for the admission of non-Jews into the Christian congregation. The twelve apostles and other representative men of the Jerusalem congregation as met together on this occasion to decide this vital question were Jews or circumcised proselytes, and, as such, they had been up until Pentecost of A.D. 33 under the prohibition contained in the Mosaic law against eating or drinking the blood of animal creatures. In that Mosaic law at Leviticus 17:10-12 God said to the Jews: “As for any man of the house of Israel or some temporary resident who is residing for a while in your midst who eats any sort of blood, I shall certainly set my face against the soul that is eating the blood and I shall indeed cut him off from among his people. For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for you to make atonement for your souls, because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul in it. That is why I have said to the sons of Israel, ‘No soul of you should eat blood and no temporary resident who is residing for a while in your midst should eat blood.”’
Those Jewish Christians had now come under the new covenant that had been validated by the pouring out in death of the blood of Jesus Christ, the Mediator between God and men. What, then, was their decision as to the requirements to lie imposed upon Gentile believers for admission into the Christian congregation? The decree setting forth their decision replies: “The apostles and the older brothers to those brothers in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia who are from the nations: Greetings! . . . For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep yourselves free from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things killed without draining their blood and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!” (Acts 15:23-29) Thus for all Christian believers the apostolic decree under the guidance of God’s holy spirit declared that among the things necessary for them was the keeping of themselves free from blood and from things killed without draining their blood. Years later that decision was still in force upon Christians according to Acts 21:25. That decision has never been revoked, because it is God-given and still applies to Christians today who are dedicated, baptized believers, faithfully following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ, who was born a Jew over 1900 years ago.
Under God’s law as mediated by the prophet Moses toward the nation of Israel those Jews or circumcised proselytes who violated God’s prohibition against eating or drinking animal blood were to be cut off from his chosen people. According to the apostolic decree as handed down by that conference in Jerusalem, the Christian congregation was under obligation to do a similar thing toward those who ate or drank animal blood. Blood transfusions were not in vogue in apostolic days. Nevertheless, although the twelve apostles and their fellow members of the Jerusalem congregation may not have had such a thing as the modern blood transfusion in mind, yet the decree handed down by them included such a thing in its scope. The medical profession today admits that blood transfusion is a direct feeding of the blood vessels of the human body with blood from another person or other persons that the practitioner of blood transfusion says is necessary for the survival of the recipient.
God’s law definitely says that the soul of man is in his blood. Hence the receiver of the blood transfusion is feeding upon a God-given soul as contained in the blood vehicle of a fellow man or of fellow men.
This is a violation of God’s commands to Christians, the seriousness of which should not be minimized by any passing over of it lightly as being an optional matter for the conscience of any individual to decide upon.
The decree of the apostles at Jerusalem declares: “If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper.”
Hence a Christian who deliberately receives a blood transfusion and thus does not keep himself from blood will not prosper spiritually.
According to the law of Moses, which set forth shadows of things to come, the receiver of a blood transfusion must be cut off from God’s people by excommunication or disfellowshiping.
If the taking of a blood transfusion is the first offense of a dedicated, baptized Christian due to his immaturity or lack of Christian stability and he sees the error of his action and grieves and repents over it and begs divine forgiveness and forgiveness of God’s congregation on earth, then mercy should be extended to him and he need not be disfellowshiped. He needs to be put under surveillance and to be instructed thoroughly according to the Scriptures upon this subject, and thereby be helped to acquire strength to make decisions according to the Christian standard in any future cases.
If, however, he refuses to acknowledge his nonconformity to the required Christian standard and makes the matter an issue in the Christian congregation and endeavors to influence others therein to his support; or, if in the future he persists in accepting blood transfusions or in donating blood toward the carrying out of this medical practice upon others, he shows that he has really not repented, but is deliberately opposed to God’s requirements. As a rebellious opposer and unfaithful example to fellow members of the Christian congregation he must be cut off therefrom by disfellowshiping. Thereby the Christian congregation vindicates itself from any charge of connivance at the infraction of God’s law by a member of the congregation through blood transfusion, and it upholds the proper Christian standard before all the members of the Christian congregation, and keeps itself clean from the blood of all men, even as the apostle Paul did who promulgated to the various Gentile congregations the apostolic decree handed down at Jerusalem.—Acts 20:26."
Let's advance a litlle more, up to the year 1964 :
*** w64 2/15 127-8 Questions from Readers ***
Would it be a violation of the Scriptures for a Christian to permit a veterinarian to give blood transfusions to a pet? And what of animal food? May it be used if there is reason to believe there is blood in it? Also, is it permissible to use fertilizer that has blood in it?
The psalmist declared at Psalm 119:97: “How I do love your law! All day long it is my concern.” Such a love of God’s law and a concern for it would surely cause a dedicated servant of God to avoid any violation of God’s law whatsoever. God’s law on blood is very clear. Blood is not to be used as food and, when withdrawn from a body, it is to be poured out on the ground. (Gen. 9:3, 4; Lev. 3:17; Deut. 12:16, 23, 24; Acts 15:20, 28, 29) Christians certainly would not wish to do anything in violation of Jehovah’s law on blood. Love for God and for the righteous laws and principles of his Word calls forth that response from them in matters pertaining to blood.
Since God’s law on blood has not been altered over the centuries, Christians today realize that they are bound by it. Please note, however, that it is not fear of some reprisal that moves them to comply with Jehovah’s law on blood. They do not obey God’s law simply because violation of it might result in the imposing of sanctions by the Christian congregation of which they are a part. They love what is right.
Furthermore, because of their love of God’s law they will not rationalize or seek ways in which it appears possible to circumscribe it with seeming impunity.
How, then, must we answer the question, Would it be a violation of the Scriptures for a Christian to permit a veterinarian to give blood transfusions to a pet? By all means, to do so would be a violation of the Scriptures. To use blood for transfusion purposes, even in the case of an animal, would be improper. The Bible is very clear in showing that blood should not be eaten. It should not be infused, therefore, to build up the body’s vital forces, either in the case of a human or in the case of a pet or any other animal under the jurisdiction of a Christian.
In harmony with this, surely a Christian parent could not rationalize to the effect that a pet belongs to a minor child and thus this unbaptized child might, on its own, authorize a veterinarian to administer the blood. No. The baptized parent bears the responsibility, for that parent has authority over the child and over the pet and should control the entire matter. That is the parent’s obligation before God.—Eccl. 12:13, 14; Jas. 4:17.
What, then, of animal food? May it be used if there is reason to believe there is blood in it? As far as a Christian is concerned, the answer is No, on the basis of principles already mentioned. Therefore, if a Christian discovers that blood components are listed on the label of a container of dog food or some other animal food, he could not conscientiously feed that product to any animal over which he has jurisdiction. He could not conclude that doing so would be excusable, for this would not be a case of an animal killing another animal and helping itself to the blood of that creature. No, this would be a direct act on the part of the Christian, making him responsible for feeding blood to a pet or other animal belonging to him.
Of course, if there is no indication on the label of a package of animal food that the product contains blood, a Christian might conclude that it could be used. Still, his conscience might trouble him. In that case he should put his conscience to rest by making reasonable inquiry and acting in accord with the information he receives, for a Christian surely desires to have a good conscience before God.—1 Pet. 3:21.
But now, what about fertilizer that has blood in it? One who is going to show respect for God’s law on blood would not use it. True, according to the Mosaic law, blood when taken from a body was to be poured out upon the ground and covered over with dust. (Lev. 17:13, 14) The objective was, however, that the blood should serve no useful purpose when thus disposed of. It was not placed on the ground with the thought in mind that it would serve as fertilizer. Hence, no Christian farmer today could properly spread blood on his fields to fertilize the soil, nor would he use commercial fertilizer containing blood. Such blood use would be a commercializing on something that God has reserved for himself. It would be a violation of God’s Word.
Servants of God have been told in the Scriptures what is to be done with blood. So they know that they would be held responsible by Jehovah for any misuse of blood over which they might have control. What is more, because they love God they are prompted to observe the laws and principles of his Word. Thus they are moved to keep Jehovah’s law on blood even in ways that might appear to some to be insignificant. They do not view compliance with it as an encumbrance, for they hold in remembrance the words of 1 John 5:3, which states: “For this is what the love of God means, that we observe his commandments; and yet his commandments are not burdensome.”"
Now let's jump to the year 1997:
*** bq 3 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood ***
*** bq 4-5 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood *** The Religious Basis
7 Most doctors view the use of blood essentially as a matter of medical judgment, much as their daily decisions about using certain medicines or surgical procedures. Other persons may view the position of Jehovah’s Witnesses as more of a moral or legal question. They may think in terms of the right to life, authority to make decisions about one’s own body, or the civil obligations of the government to protect the lives of its citizens. These aspects all bear on the matter. Yet the stand taken by Jehovah’s Witnesses is above all a religious one; it is a position based on what the Bible says.
8 Many persons may wonder about the validity of the above statement. They are aware that numerous churches support the use of blood, establishing blood-bank programs and encouraging the donation of blood. Accordingly, the question logically arises:
What does the Bible say about humans taking blood into their bodies?
*** bq 12 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood ***
29 The command to ‘abstain from blood’ was not a mere dietary restriction but was a serious moral requirement, as is seen by the fact that it was as serious to Christians as ‘abstaining from idolatry or fornication.’
*** bq 16-17 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood ***
And down through the centuries this requirement has been recognized as “necessary” for Christians. Thus the determination of Jehovah’s Witnesses to abstain from blood is based on God’s Word the Bible and is backed up by many precedents in the history of Christianity.
*** bq 18 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood ***
Similarly, the decree that Christians must ‘abstain from blood’ clearly covers the taking of blood into the body, whether through the mouth or directly into the bloodstream.
*** bq 18-19 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood ***
49 Persons who recognize their dependence on the Creator and Life-Giver should be determined to obey his commands. This is the firm position that Jehovah’s Witnesses take. They are fully convinced that it is right to comply with God’s law commanding abstention from blood.
In this they are not following a personal whim or some baseless fanatical view. It is out of obedience to the highest authority in the universe, the Creator of life, that they refuse to take blood into their systems either by eating or by transfusion.
*** bq 20 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood ***
Hence, despite the immediate cost, those Christians obeyed the apostolic decree to abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from fornication and from blood. Faithfulness to God meant that much to them.
*** bq 20
54 Today it means that much to Jehovah’s Witnesses also. They rightly feel a moral obligation to make decisions about worship for themselves and for their children. For that reason, Jehovah’s Witnesses are not looking for anyone else, whether a doctor, a hospital administrator or a judge, to make these moral decisions for them. They do not want someone else to try to shoulder their responsibility to God, for in reality no other person can do that. It is a personal responsibility of the Christian toward his God and Life-Giver.
*** bq 24 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood *** The Doctor’s Role
65 We have seen that, because of their strong religious beliefs, Jehovah’s Witnesses avoid both food that contains blood and medically administered blood.
*** bq 29-30 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood *** 29
Relieving Doctors of Liability
76 Doctors are in a difficult position in treating any serious case, for failure to use all available procedures may involve them in a malpractice suit. Jehovah’s Witnesses, however, are willing to bear the responsibility for their refusal to accept blood transfusion. They will sign legal waivers that relieve the medical staff and hospital of any concern about suits, in the event that harm be attributed to their operating without blood.
77 The American Medical Association has recommended a form entitled “Refusal to Permit Blood Transfusion” for patients who will not accept blood because of religious beliefs. It reads: “I (We) request that no blood or blood derivatives be administered to ._____._____._____._____._____._____._____._____._____._____ during this hospitalization, notwithstanding that such treatment may be deemed necessary in the opinion of the attending physician or his assistants to preserve life or promote recovery. I (We) release the attending physician, his assistants, the hospital and its personnel from any responsibility whatever for any untoward results due to my (our) refusal to permit the use of blood or its derivatives.” 30 This document is to be dated and signed by the patient and by witnesses present. A close relative such as a mate or parent (in the case of a child) could sign the form too.
78 The willingness of Jehovah’s Witnesses to accept personal responsibility regarding their stand on blood is further shown by the fact that most of them carry a signed card requesting “No
Blood Transfusion!” This document acknowledges that the signee realizes and accepts the implications of refusing blood.
*** bq 41 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood ***
111 Consequently, whether having religious objections to blood transfusions or not, many a person might decline blood simply because it is essentially an organ transplant that at best is only partially compatible with his own blood."
*** bq 48-9 Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood ***
138 Does this brief consideration of only some of the medical risks of blood mean that Jehovah’s Witnesses object to transfusions primarily for medical reasons? No, that is not the case. The fundamental reason why they do not accept blood transfusions is because of what the Bible says. Theirs is basically a religious objection, not a medical one. "
For the sake of clarity, let's remember that in 1972, we were reminded of a Scriptural examination, made after the first blood bank was established in the USA:
*** w72 8/15 502 God Readjusts the Thinking of His People ***(°)
For example, the issue over blood began to arise particularly after 1937, when the first blood bank was established in Chicago, Illinois. Christian witnesses of Jehovah who became ill were faced with the question, Should I accept this form of therapy? Is it in harmony with God’s Word? A prayerful examination of the Scriptures was made, revealing God’s will in the matter."
Of course if we really examine the WTBS’ writing we realize that only many, many years after “… A prayerful examination of the Scriptures was made, revealing God’s will in the matter." A new attitude was shown:
*** jv 183 13 Recognized by Our Conduct ***(book published in 1993 )
Why Blood Transfusions Are Refused
The respect for life shown by Jehovah’s Witnesses has also affected their attitude toward blood transfusions. When transfusions of blood became an issue confronting them, The Watchtower of July 1, 1945, explained at length the Christian view regarding the sanctity of blood. "
and :
(p.184) "… Consistent with that understanding of matters, beginning in 1961 any who ignored the divine requirement, accepted blood transfusions, and manifested an unrepentant attitude were disfellowshipped from the congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses."
Yet , only few years later in 1997 , this clearly stated "understanding " wasn't given to doctors present at a meeting at the Complutense University in Madrid - Spain - :
*** w97 2/15 20 Bioethics and Bloodless Surgery ***
Another question on the minds of several doctors related to group pressure. What would happen, they wondered, if a Witness wavered and accepted a blood transfusion? Would he be ostracized by the Witness community?
The response would depend on the actual situation, for disobeying God’s law certainly is a serious matter, something for the congregation’s elders to examine. The Witnesses would want to help any person who has undergone the traumatic experience of life-threatening surgery and who has accepted a transfusion. Doubtless such a Witness would feel very bad and be concerned about his relationship with God. Such a person may need help and understanding. Since the backbone of Christianity is love, the elders would want, as in all judicial cases, to temper firmness with mercy.—Matthew 9:12, 13; John 7:24
.
“Won’t you be reassessing your ethical stand before long?” asked a professor in bioethics, who was visiting from the United States. “Other religions have done that in recent years.”
The stand of the Witnesses respecting the sanctity of blood is a doctrinal belief rather than an ethical viewpoint subject to periodic review, he was told. The clear Biblical command leaves no room for compromise. (Acts 15:28, 29) Violating such a divine law would be as unacceptable to a Witness as condoning idolatry or fornication."
Alas, even this kind of "understanding" effective since 1961, was modified
recently in the year 2000, more precisely on June 16 th 2000 with a letter from
the WTBS Inc. to all Hospital Liaison Committees .
Its 4 th § states:
"If a baptized member of the faith wilfully and without regret accepts a blood
transfusion, he indicates by his own actions that he no longer wishes to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses. The individual is no longer viewed as a member of the Christian congregation because he no longer accepte and follows the Biblical
prohibition to a bstain from blood.
However , if such an individual later changes
his mind, he may be accepted back as one of Jehovah's Witnesses."
Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp
P.S. Incidentally another great puzzle is this statement :
*** g99 8/22 p. 31 Are Blood Transfusions Really Necessary? ***
LAST November the above question was raised in a newspaper article written by Dr. Ciril Godec, chairman of urology at Long Island College Hospital, in Brooklyn, New York. He wrote: “Today blood would probably not be approved as a medication, since it would not fulfill safety criteria of the Food and Drug Administration. Blood is an organ of the body, and blood transfusion is nothing less than an organ transplant.”
So if “… blood transfusion is nothing less than an organ transplant…” why it is not a matter for which a “… Christian must make his own conscientious decision before God." and not before men ???
-
23
Blood and Ron Rhoades
by Marvin Shilmer inron rhoades on blood
for about 15 months i held an on-again off-again discussion with an apologist for the watchtower bible and tract society named ron rhoades.
in this discussion rhoades goes to great lengths in his attempt to authenticate the wts doctrinal position on blood.
-
-
MacHislopp
Hello Marvin,
thanks for the interesting information.
I'll download the lot...digest it and come back with some comments.
Personally I do belive that Scully, Jourles, AlanF and Hawkaw gave
already plenty ...to think about.
Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp