fearnotruth22
JoinedPosts by fearnotruth22
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
fearnotruth22
1914 is a fundamental teaching. The basis for many other doctrines Dont think that it can be abruptly touched without affecting the whole structure, hence it will stay until time passes and facts forces the change (assuming that the gt wont come : ), just as in 1914 when Armageddon did not come then , forced another change. However it aint over until the fat lady sings and bros have not given up hope that armygedon will come "soon"
The SocietY's reaosns for emduring with 1914 is that it is a conclusion based on Biblical pivotal dates which can be trusted far more than science. Bible is right no matter what science says
-
-
-
fearnotruth22
In the meantine, according to present medicine, blood transfusion is sometimes the only lifesaving treatment, I hate the thought of having someone elses blood mixed with mine and inside my body, so if science can come up with alternative blood treatment during these situations, no problem remaining a jw on this issiue. Is there any Wt artticle stating that sometimes blood is the ONLY lifesaving choice in some cases,All of the publications I remmember studying state that blood is never the lifesaving choice and that alternative treatments are the same or beterr or safer.
The Wt has exposed careless medicine and tainted blood, and I have known indiciduals wjho have been infected and chronically harmed with tainted blood, I would raether die very fast than slowly like these people I know with hepatitis or aids, or who knows what.
Infections and chronic harm caused directly by the infusion of blood aside, it is great to be alive and medical science has been a friend to humanity and should not be vilified. I think that it is the intention of the Md forcing a transfusion on an individual to keep him alive and not for a sinister reason. JW docs give blood to nonjws I heard. If blood treatments were in fact harmful as far as docs know, how can a jw doc in good concience transfuse anybody at all knowing that it will cause harm.One has to keep the proper perpective as to the issue that Jw's do not refuse blood because of medical reasons but foe religious beliefs and such beliefs are justified with blood causing harm. People forget about the rligious reasons and focus on the medical reaosons convinced that the risk of blood transfusion is too great and the medical reasons taughy by the WTconvinces the individual to reject blood on religious grounds, but being convinced of the medical dangers. The average Jw believes that blood treatment is always contraindicated and that alternative blood will do the trick. But if the average joe publisher knew for a fact and understood that blood was the "best thing for you" under cetain situations and that the medicine was safe and effective and no harmful or permanent side effects then joe or josephine publisher with these facts in mind would be more favorably inclined to accept blood in life and death situations for their son or number one.
It pains me deeply if any bro had to die needlessly because of doctrine.
I would like to see a documented case of any individual that was harmed because of not accepting a vaccine because of Wt teaching.
-
-
-
fearnotruth22
One of my concerns is about the doctrinal position on blood transfusions. It seems that because of the gradual changes on this doctrine up to allowing minor blood parts, that the WT very likely has decided that blood transfusions is a medical proceedure that is an individual's choice of treatment and not a violation of "bible teachings" enjoined upon christians and it is just a matter of time before the WT chnges their position, as there is a pattern of change relating to Wt position on medical treatments as the Innternet has compiled this showing again and agaon change.
Too bad for Science, it has only been right 100 percent of the time. If this change does occur making blood transfusions a "matter of concience" and Science is right again, and religion has to make another adjustemnt as to what is moral as it relates to Science, in my opinion the credibility of the WT when it gives medical advice will be shattered. I am interested of anyone has any official information as to what the WT actually believss about blood, and if the reason why blood use is still restricted. Is it because of the impact that such a change will have on the org, or is the blood position a sincere one?
There was an insiduous doctrinal change in an Awke mag in the past entitle "EARTHQUAKES AND YOU". The WT previously taught that earthquakes were pasrt of Jesus" compositite sign" as the INsight book comments that frequency and magnitude of earhquakes since 1914 exceeds all previous generations. however the Awake article insidiously adjusts that teaching conceeding that the eartquakes experienced after 1914 were not any greater in frequency or magnitude than ever before, as documented facts show forcing the change. Prior to this article all publications dealing with this subject taught that 1914 gen has had more earhquakes that ever before. This doctrinal change has probably slipped by the average bro and nver studied in any WT study article. The Awake article does say that earhquakes in our time has caused more damge than ever before and insists that hence it part of the sign but explains it so equivically as the new generation definition.But the point is that there is a change forced because of what scientific fact shows Any insiduous changes noted and posted by any of you sharp readers is greatly appreciated.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
22
The silent cancer in the organization
by truthseeker incancer is one of the worlds biggest killers.
some people discover they have cancer early and they can have it quickly removed and be cured.
others are not so lucky.
-
-
fearnotruth22
Sounds like a no 2 talk. Thank the Ministry school.
-
42
How to resign as an elder?
by IT Support in.
does anyone have any tips how to resign as a jw elder without being disfellowshipped or disassociated?.
thanks.. ken
-
-
fearnotruth22
It sems to me that if you truly are an elder, you would be clever enought to know that you dont need to be df or da to stop serving or to step aside.
-
18
Are the witnesses less sincere today?
by freedom96 ini was ready larcs thread talking about the way it used to be.. started to think, as time has gone by, with all the changes the organization has made, are the witnesses less sincere today than they were perhaps 40 years ago?.
i was two when my mom got baptized, so all i knew growing up was the watchtower.
i remember some of the 70's, and all of the 80's.
-
-
fearnotruth22
In times past the world was simpler and so was the org. People were more niEVE back then, and even though you also had sharpies and clever cookies in the org in ancient wt history, for the most part the great majority of the bos were not so cautious as serpents as they are today. Today exists a complicated end game of chess, and every move requires careful thought and planning.
Not that the bros were more sincere back then; the bros mean well today too, but back then they were more gulible, as people were also in general more gulible during those times when dogs were tied with strings of sausages. That cannot be done today, dogs have wisened. As a rule, the bros are still sincere in their beliefs.but a more cautious approach has been taken because "Caesars" sword is sharper, and there are smaller loopholes in the legal nets,
What I have observed though, is that motives have changed, and so have the more experienced and savy new generation of Jw's. Less and less humanity and "fellow feeling"; people are in it more for themselvses. At least that is what it seems to me.