Posts by EasyPrompt

81

Acts 15:29 - "keep abstaining from blood"

by aqwsed12345 in

for a christian, only the moral commandments of the old testament are binding (as they cannot change), but the various liturgical, social, and other so-called casuistic laws no longer apply to them.

this includes dietary habits, such as the prohibition of pork or fat, as well as the prohibition of blood.. take a look at the following verses: mt 15:11, mk 7:15-19, acts 11:7-9, 1 tim 4:3-5.. the jehovah's witnesses say that, yes, but in the acts of the apostles (15) the consumption of blood, idol meat, and strangled animals is also prohibited, meaning the new testament still forbids it.

for catholics, the council of florence settled this issue, stating that this apostolic regulation was only a temporary measure to facilitate agreement between jews and gentiles in the early church.

EasyPrompt

@Foolednomore...

The original language words for "blood" in the Bible were not referring to the white cells in milk.

God told the Israelites they were going to "the land of milk and honey" so obviously it's okay to drink milk.

There is also water in blood. And iron. And a whole bunch of other things. But you don't go around calling water "blood" or iron "blood".

Or, maybe you do, but I don't.🙂

@Fisherman...

"Abstain from blood."

In ancient times, the Jews abstained from certain foods that were legally unclean for them. If they were to eat a "fraction" of a lobster or a "fraction" of a lizard, they would still be breaking that law. We are not under any dietary laws as Christians, with the exception of abstaining from blood. Even taking in a "fraction" of blood that has been removed from another person is still breaking that law.

Haggai 2:13,14

"Hagʹgai then asked: “If someone who is unclean from contact with a dead body touches any of these things, will it become unclean?” The priests answered: “It will become unclean.” So Hagʹgai said: “‘That is how this people is, and that is how this nation is before me,’ declares Jehovah, ‘and that is how all the work of their hands is; whatever they present there is unclean.'"

It wasn't just "eating" unclean things under the Mosaic Law, but even touching them that made a person unclean. A person with a flow of blood was "unclean" under the Mosaic Law. Touching a person with a flow of blood could make someone ceremonially "unclean" under the Law.

We are not under the Mosaic Law. But the principles in the Law help us understand how to read Acts 15. "Abstain from blood" doesn't just mean "don't eat blood". Any blood that came out of a person was supposed to be disposed of, not reused. In the Law, even touching someone's blood made a person unclean. How much more so injecting it into their body, even a fraction of it, would be an abomination to the first century Christians!

"Abstain from blood."

"It matters...to every Christian that wants to obey God."

35

Help wanted finding images

by Lee Marsh in

i am working on a project that requires proofs that the wts did say it and jws believe and follow it.. i have found some but google is giving me a hard time with some things.. as i go i will post requests for various images.

they all must have a reference or at least post where i can find the reference and i will add it to the image.. both older and newer beliefs are welcome, especially flip-flops.. if you have something similar to what is already posted then more references the better.

i know there are images of the structure of the wts.

EasyPrompt

Articles on disfellowshipping and death...

from "Paradise Restored..." book, 1974...

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101972030?q=disfellowshipped+dead&p=par

from a 2014 Watchtower...

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2014844?q=disfellowshipped+dead&p=par

from "The Nations Shall Know..." book, 1971...

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101971016?q=disfellowshipping+dead&p=par

from a 1958 Watchtower...

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1958249?q=death+disfellowshipped&p=par

from the "Revelation Climax" book, 1988...

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101988010?q=death+disfellowshipped&p=par

from a 1981 Watchtower...

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1981689?q=disfellowshipped+die&p=par

81

Acts 15:29 - "keep abstaining from blood"

by aqwsed12345 in

for a christian, only the moral commandments of the old testament are binding (as they cannot change), but the various liturgical, social, and other so-called casuistic laws no longer apply to them.

this includes dietary habits, such as the prohibition of pork or fat, as well as the prohibition of blood.. take a look at the following verses: mt 15:11, mk 7:15-19, acts 11:7-9, 1 tim 4:3-5.. the jehovah's witnesses say that, yes, but in the acts of the apostles (15) the consumption of blood, idol meat, and strangled animals is also prohibited, meaning the new testament still forbids it.

for catholics, the council of florence settled this issue, stating that this apostolic regulation was only a temporary measure to facilitate agreement between jews and gentiles in the early church.

EasyPrompt

"Your commentary is moot and assumes the Bible proscribes blood transfusions. We JW believe it does. The issue is whether or not JW belief is only interpretation subject to error. If it is, the grounds for JW ban on BT is Biblically uncertain."

The JW belief doesn't matter. "It's Moo." 😆 Lol... Sorry, trying to be punny...

It's what Jesus said that matters.

"Eating" blood doesn't just mean literally "eating". It can also mean "taking in".

John 6:53-56

"So Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I will resurrect him on the last day; for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in union with me, and I in union with him."

When Jesus used the words "drink" and "eat" here he was not talking about literally "drinking" and "eating". He meant "taking in" his teachings and making them a part of ourselves.

Deuteronomy 12:23-25

"Just be firmly resolved not to eat the blood, because the blood is the life, and you must not eat the life with the flesh. You must not eat it. You should pour it out on the ground like water. You must not eat it, so that it may go well with you and your children after you, because you are doing what is right in Jehovah’s eyes."

Some people get all bent out of shape about taking in "genetic material" and thimerosal and formaldehyde in certain vaccines. Others are worried about getting an implanted microchip. Their consciences are uncomfortable putting things in their body that don't belong there.

It's good to train and listen to our conscience. But while the Bible doesn't specifically comment on whether or not putting those other objects in the body is right or wrong, it does say for sure that there is one "genetic material" that should never be taken into the body: blood.

John 6:56

"Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in union with me, and I in union with him."

Jesus was saying that a person "taking in" his teachings and making those teachings part of themself is "in union" with him.

"Taking in" blood in any way (whether whole blood or fractions of blood) and making it a part of your body is becoming "in union" with someone else by means of their genetic material. God said not to do it. The only blood that is authorized for use for salvation is the blood of the Christ.

Leviticus 17:11

"For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have given it on the altar for you to make atonement for yourselves, because it is the blood that makes atonement by means of the life in it."

44

Dearest Tec... re the Rich Man and Lazarus..

by AGuest in

jw
friends

the greatest of love and peace to you, dear one!.

thank you for your kind patience.

his request to have lazarus dip the "tip" of his finger in "water" and "cool" his "tongue," tells us: there is no water in the world of the dead.

EasyPrompt

Según Google Translate, diría "diez", ¡muy bien!😃😊

35

Help wanted finding images

by Lee Marsh in

i am working on a project that requires proofs that the wts did say it and jws believe and follow it.. i have found some but google is giving me a hard time with some things.. as i go i will post requests for various images.

they all must have a reference or at least post where i can find the reference and i will add it to the image.. both older and newer beliefs are welcome, especially flip-flops.. if you have something similar to what is already posted then more references the better.

i know there are images of the structure of the wts.

EasyPrompt

Perhaps in the written stuff, but they still call "apostates" mentally diseased in private discussions and from the platform and in talks. It's one of their favorite things - to mislabel somebody and then remove their "rights". In other words..."If a person is mentally diseased, then we don't have to show love, respect, justice, due process of law, etc..."

35

Help wanted finding images

by Lee Marsh in

i am working on a project that requires proofs that the wts did say it and jws believe and follow it.. i have found some but google is giving me a hard time with some things.. as i go i will post requests for various images.

they all must have a reference or at least post where i can find the reference and i will add it to the image.. both older and newer beliefs are welcome, especially flip-flops.. if you have something similar to what is already posted then more references the better.

i know there are images of the structure of the wts.

EasyPrompt

"Put Up a Hard Fight for the Faith" has a large section where David Splane says to avoid disfellowshipped "apostates" because spending time with them would be like drinking poison and an "apostate" is anyone who talks bad about the organization...

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/2021Convention/pub-co-r21_137_VIDEO

This video, about from minutes 25-30, Stephen Lett says associating with "apostates" is like eating from a garbage can and you shouldn't let such disfellowshipped ones in your home or spend any time with them at all.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/2021Convention/pub-co-r21_149_VIDEO

In this "morning worship", Robert Ciranko says to stop associating with disfellowshipped ones...

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODPgmEvtMorningWorship/pub-jwb-099_11_VIDEO

Stephen Lett says anyone who exposes the governing body is like a "stranger" and an apostate from Satan and not to listen to them...

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/StudioTalks/pub-jwb-090_2_VIDEO

35

Help wanted finding images

by Lee Marsh in

i am working on a project that requires proofs that the wts did say it and jws believe and follow it.. i have found some but google is giving me a hard time with some things.. as i go i will post requests for various images.

they all must have a reference or at least post where i can find the reference and i will add it to the image.. both older and newer beliefs are welcome, especially flip-flops.. if you have something similar to what is already posted then more references the better.

i know there are images of the structure of the wts.

EasyPrompt

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/402011524?q=mentally+diseased&p=par

12

So, What's Been Going On In Watchtower Land Since January 2023?

by JW GoneBad in

so what's been going on in wt land since january 2023?.

recap and summary of events most jehovah’s witnesses are not aware of:.

1) pennsylvania attorney general statewide investigation of jehovah’s witness elders' child sex abuse cases.

EasyPrompt

...what's next?

The government bans WTBT$ and takes all their stuff.

26

Exes: Would You Rat On A Current JW?

by NotFormer in

it's an interesting thought.

if you are an ex jw, presumably dfed, and you see a current jw in good standing engaging in behaviour that would concern their elders, would you pass on that information to interested parties?

do accusations from exes and other outsiders carry any weight?

EasyPrompt

It depends.

If they (the elder body) want to disfellowship the person anyway and they're looking for a reason to get rid of them, then, yes, they (the elders) would grab it up (the testimony of an exJW) in a heartbeat.

If they don't want to disfellowship the person because the person supports the GB/FDS/elder "system", then it doesn't matter if an exJW has evidence of adultery, abuse, whatever - the elders will protect wrongdoers if it is convenient for them.

It's just like the Barabbas vs Jesus thing in the Bible. They let off the hook who they want to let off the hook. They "kill" who they want to "kill". It has nothing to do with justice or due process of law.

1

The Limits on Taking Your Brother to Court

by NotFormer in

hypothetical: a jw murders someone and the victim's spouse (also a jw) calls the police.

the spouse and the perpetrator are the only witnesses, and the perp is admitting nothing.

could the person who calls the police be disciplined for not calling the elders first?

EasyPrompt

I don't know about the "murder" situation, but I can speak about the "domestic assault" situation.

If the spouse (a JW) calls the police for help regarding abuse by the JW mate, the elders will frown upon it.

If the state prosecutes the perp and part of his restrictions are to be out of the home for a year, the elders will penalize the victimized spouse by withholding her "privileges" in the congregation and shun her socially (even though she is not disfellowshipped).

Even if the state says the perp isn't allowed to talk to the victim while the state restrictions are in place and the perp isn't allowed in the house, the elders will insist that the perp is still "head of the house" and will attempt to "deal with the victim" only through the perp.

The elders will also give aid to the perp so he has lawyers and they will also support the perp if he cuts off or restricts finances to the victim and any of their children.

If the victimized spouse attempts to make a fresh start in another congregation, Bethel will tell the elders of that new KH to send the victim back to the original congregation "to work on her marriage" even while the state restrictions are still in place.

When the victim allows the perp back home, if he is really mad and takes vengeance for having been arrested by continuing to be verbally abusive and threatening, the elders will support him even if they have video/audio of the verbal abuse as well as witnesses. Then the elders will disfellowship the victim if she continues to ask for help. But the elders will overlook anything the perp does (alcohol abuse, adultery, smoking, swearing, etc) as long as he "bows" to the elders.

It is the same if a victim reports an abusive person in the congregation, especially a perp on the elder body. The more the victim tries to get help, the more they will be silenced, restricted, and eventually disfellowshipped if they don't stop asking for help or warning others about what is going on in the congregation.