Posts by ScenicViewer

19

JW Pets and Blood

by Vanderhoven7 in

as a jw would you have allowed your pet to have a blood transfusion to save it's life?

.

what is the society's stand on this today?.

ScenicViewer

Quote from M.A.:

It is also noteworthy that Watchtower formerly prohibited organ transplants having cited them as cannibalism. This also led to the deaths of obedient faithful witnesses.

Watchtower has long said that blood itself is an organ, a liquid organ. When the prohibition on organ transplants was eliminated you would think that would have included ALL organs, including blood. But no.

To this day JWs can take any organ transplant there is except one - no blood.

Taking any organ transplant isn't considered to be eating or cannibalism except one - taking blood is eating.

I honestly think that most JWs are not aware of the blood/organ connection. When Watchtower speaks of organ transplants today it seems to be in a very negative tone, giving the impression transplants are off limits without saying so. This is likely to put off questions regarding this glaring contradiction.

19

JW Pets and Blood

by Vanderhoven7 in

as a jw would you have allowed your pet to have a blood transfusion to save it's life?

.

what is the society's stand on this today?.

ScenicViewer

Side point here.

I seem to remember an article from several decades ago, or it might have been in one of the blood booklets, that pets shouldn't be given food with blood in it because that would be a violation. That struck me as odd since animals in the wild often eat the blood of other animals naturally.

Using fertilizer with blood in it was a violation too.

Again, that's odd, since an animal killed for food was to be bled before the meat was eaten - the blood was to be "poured out onto the ground" - therefore it would naturally have become fertilizer.

Even as a fully believing Jehovah's Witness at the time these things didn't make sense to me. I should have paid better attention to my inner instincts.

So many man-made rules in the JW religion.

Edited to add:

The no-blood-transfusion policy is mainly based on the idea of not eating blood, which applied only to humans. Animals were not Biblically prevented from eating blood, so what is the scriptural basis for denying a blood transfusion for them? Go figure.

32

Can you list the positive points of being a JW as against the negative points of being a JW in your experience ?

by smiddy3 in

i was a twenty y/old when i converted to the jw religion and was a problem drinker and i was a chain smoker .when i was baptized at a circuit assembly a year later , my conversion and change in lifestyle was given as an example of the effectiveness of incidental witnessing to the audience.. so i can point to the 2 positives becoming a jw .. 1.i gave up smoking.

2.i gave up drinking for a while ,but because i still had association with my wife`s and my family who were not jw`s ,i learnt to control my social drinking when i started again.. and i have been a responsible drinker ever since ,even though i left the religion 29 years ago.. the negative points of being a jw in my 32 years of being one ?

are far too great to list here .. love to hear your thoughts..

ScenicViewer

I agree with Jan on the political issues.

JWs are required to follow the laws of the country where they live, as long as they do not conflict with God's laws. That being the case, why can't JWs have a say in what the laws are that they are required to obey? It just makes sense that they should be.

I think they should also have a say in who the elected officials are that make the laws that JWs are required to live under.

Just because you would vote for or against a particular law, or for or against someone who makes those laws, does not mean you are supporting 'Satan's world.' After all, it is Jehovah himself that requires Witnesses to be obedient to the laws of 'Satan's world.'

11

Watchtower LOSES copyright court case - humiliated!

by BoogerMan in

the org has been exposed for abusing dmca laws to hunt down and punish anonymous faders/jw's.. https://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/2022/05/watch-tower-drops-its-effort-to-identify-a-dissident-blogger-based-on-spurious-copyright-claims.html.

if you talk to a jw, tell them how wisely the "faithful slave is looking after the masters belongings.

" (matt.

ScenicViewer

To Kevin McFree:

Congrats on the court case, and I have to say that watching your Lego videos was absolutely one of the best things about being an ex-JW!

I hope you will post more videos at some point in the future, and I wish you all the best going forward.

33

Response to "The Flood is Real, Because ..."

by Simon in

i remember one of the flowchart responses to people questioning the biblical flood was something along the lines that "every culture has a flood story".. of course, nearly everywhere has flooded at one time or another and we know there are minor floods and then there are the 1-in-1000 year kind of weather event, that tend to get a mention (anyone from the uk will still talk about the summer of '76, and that's probably nothing in comparison to a decent flood).. but the inference is that the flood must be real, because every culture has a flood story.. the best response is "now do dragons".. because apparently, nearly every culture also has a dragon legend.. does it mean dragons exist?

some desperate jw may show their ignorance by suggesting that man lived at the same time as dinosaurs and they are what the stories were based on.

fun fact: stegosaurus was a fossil when t-rex was alive for longer than it's been since t-rex has been a fossil to us - we're talking old, and no overlap (ignore the map in the cover of the old green bible).. do jws still even bother trying to defend the cray-cray aesop-fable kind of ot beliefs?.

ScenicViewer

The flood story being taught world wide, therefore it must be true, is an example of the Watchtower organization cherry picking it's logic.

The flood is taught in many belief systems worldwide, so Watchtower says, 'Doesn't that prove the flood must be TRUE, blah, blah, blah. Don't we have the truth.'

But the same is true of the Trinity teaching, which is taught in many belief systems worldwide, so Watchtower says, 'Doesn't that prove the Trinity must be PAGAN, blah, blah, blah. Don't we have the truth.'

30

Anyone else remember the Awake saying this?

by BottanicPepper in

i may have put this in the wrong thread.

if so, i'm sorry.. my conundrum is this.... i am almost completely certain that an awake back in the 80's/90's mentioned a group of rock bands we shouldn't listen to and i seem to remember them actually naming guns and roses.. i can't find anything now, and i'm wondering if it's the mandela effect, or if it's another case of the cdrom versions of the awakes being doctored again.. does anyone else remember this?

or am i crazy?

ScenicViewer

I remember a Circuit Overseer mentioning Guns and Roses in one of his Kingdom Hall talks. Those names supposedly referred to the male and female sex organs, according to him.

I don't know if this was published in the Awake or other literature.

18

Pat Robertson makes one last ''doomsday prediction''

by RULES & REGULATIONS in

pat roberston,92, comes out of his million dollar mansion ( which his loyal followers paid for ) to continue his doomsday prediction.

pat needs to make one last appearance to show his followers he was right all along.

after all his failed predictions on his ''700 club,'' pat needs to show his followers that this ''doomsday prediction'' is a bible prophecy.

ScenicViewer

"Never heard of the bloke."

He was a very popular TV evangelist in the US, now retired. Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggart were popular at about the same time, also from the US. I actually thought that Robertson has passed, but he is 92 now.

4

What year did the Governing Body make cannibalism acceptable?

by Terry in

yes - it is a kind of "trick" question!the subject in question is really organ transplants which the dec. 22, 1949 p.20 awake!

called"wonderful and useful" ...until ...by the magic of new light suddenly became "cannibalism" on nov. 15, 1967, watchtower pp.702-704consequently, the answer to the question" what year did the governing body make cannibalism acceptable?

"can rightly be answered as: "the year the governing body made their own definition of cannibalism acceptable was mar.

ScenicViewer

That change (making organ transplants acceptable) sets up one of the biggest contradictions in the world of religion, and it is sitting right in the lap of Jehovah's Witnesses.

To this day Watchtower says that blood is an organ, a liquid organ, which is ok with me, in fact I'm glad they say that.

As it has stood since 1980 JWs can take any organ transplant there is - and it isn't considered eating, they won't be disfellowshipped for it, they don't have to meet in the back room of a Kingdom Hall with a Judicial group of elders, they won't be judged for it in any way, they are good to go, which is as it should be - except one. If they take the organ of blood, a transfusion, it is considered eating and it is a disfellowshipping (or disassociation) offense.

Go figure.

42

What are some of the weird teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses, past and present?

by Vanderhoven7 in

i just picked up a few from mark jones as follows:.

i see is that the vast majority of jws don't seem to understand what their religion actually teaches.. the more controversial or embarrassing doctrine - although still official doctrine that has never been rescinded - is just not talked about anymore in the magazines.

there are dinosaurs living on venus.https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/2fowhx/dinosaurs_on_venus/.

ScenicViewer

In line with the above post, I seem to remember that the Organization taught that the American Medical Association was an agent of the Devil. I'll see if I can find the reference.

42

What are some of the weird teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses, past and present?

by Vanderhoven7 in

i just picked up a few from mark jones as follows:.

i see is that the vast majority of jws don't seem to understand what their religion actually teaches.. the more controversial or embarrassing doctrine - although still official doctrine that has never been rescinded - is just not talked about anymore in the magazines.

there are dinosaurs living on venus.https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/2fowhx/dinosaurs_on_venus/.

ScenicViewer

Modern Doctors descend from magic practicing priests and Egyptian black magic. They are as demonic as the Clergy and Politicians.

(Golden Age, Aug 5, 1931, p 727, last two paragraphs)

Page 728 (Sorry about the yellow highlighting)