Eduardo: Is 1990 Blood pamphlet "old light"?

by sf 20 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  sf

  Hello Eduardo,

  I just read your analysis thread. In it you made this statement:

  JWs don’t really use the blood brochure in field service (despite it being on the website), and given that it is at least 16 years old, it is probably due for a revision or replacement. But in the event that you can either entice a Witness to discuss it or if one brings the topic up, ...

  Just why would a jw NEED to be enticed, rather than gleefully wanting to discuss it with every person they come in contact with? Just as they do the everlasting life carrot...it is the first thing out of their mouthes at the door..."would you like to live forever...?". Blood issues are a matter of life and death. So why wouldn't this brochere be a core preaching tool, at the door?

  Why is it still on their site then? Why is it there for the public if jws don't use it any longer in their field misery? And why don't they use it in the preaching work, at the door??

  So you are saying it is old light and needs a new bulb?

  But sixteen years ago it was THE TRUTH, from Jehovah Himself, provided by the FDS.

  Why would it now need to be revised or replaced??

  Could it be because this very pamphlet CAUSED and EFFECTED many dead WT Children?

  The mere fact that it is STILL on their site, is clear indication, to me, that it is still THE TRUTH...from Jehovah Himself, provided by the FDS.

  Thank you for your time. I hope you can help me understand my inquiry here.

  sKally
• 

  Pistoff

  It most certainly is NOT considered "old light" if it is used in the most recent service meeting!
• 

  alamb

  Quote from the 1961 Blood Brochure: (nice choice of words here)

  News report have played on the ignorance and emotions of the public to misrepresent Jehovah's witnesses as a group of religious fanatics that ignore th pleas of their families to listen to the doctor, forbid proper medical care for their children, and would rather die than submit to the treatment recommended by medical science. Since Jehovah witnesses bear the name of God, this besmirching of their name has turned many persons against God and his Word as unreasonable and unloving.

  Under the heading Medical Viewpoints: Is the viewpoint of Jehovah's witnesses compatible with the findings of medical science? Apparently not, ...... (old light)

  Funny, the stance later changed.

  still reading.......
• 

  skeeter1

  The Journal of Church & State article goes through a bunch of the blood booklet's medical quotes, and a few of the historical and legal quotes. It compares these quotes with what the original, secular writers said. The blood pamphlet contained misrepresentations in 1990, and is still a misrepresentation in the December 2005.

  Eduardo, are you really just a mole for the Watchtower?
• 

  sf

  I am waiting for your reply to my first post then I would like your reply on this as well:

  Why did/ do they encourage consideration of alleged "old light" in making a decision in December 2005 KM?

  Thank you again for your time and consideration in my inquiries.

  sKally
• 

  Nathan Natas

  Song 162, second stanza:

  "Preach the word" in ev’ry season,

  Always ready to impart

  To each one who asks a reason

  For the hope within your heart.

  "Preach the word," though opposition

  Makes it out of season seem.

  Faithful be to your commission;

  Trust in God, who is supreme.
• 

  SWALKER

  Why is it still on their site then? Why is it there for the public if jws don't use it any longer in their field misery? And why don't they use it in the preaching work, at the door??

  SF...I haven't read your background info...but in the 40 + yrs I went door to door, I very rarely used any medical terms/illustrations about our views on blood...only the Bible. Only once did I ever give this booklet to a person...a pastor who was interested in it. Of which when I called back told me he disagreed with it. It wasn't something that we usually kept in our service bags...meaning that it was not regularly used. Do you have a witness background??? Sounds like you don't understand that it is not something we would go out and discuss on first calls. If it was brought up though, we certainly referred the people to our understanding of the scriptures on the matter.

  With all the advances in medicine...I'd say that the 1990 pamphlet is outdated and should be revised...hopefully with...it is now a conscience matter.

  Swalker
• 

  skeeter1

  
  SWALKER wrote that the blood booklet is outdated.

  Swalker, did you not read my post? Let me explain again.......I'll type real slow so you understand....Please read real slow so you comprehend.

  In 1990, the Society quoted alot of medical doctors, scientists, and courts in the blood booklet. The Journal of Church & State's ("JCS") article goes through those quotes and compares it to what these secular author's actually wrote in their medical journals, scientific papers, and court cases. The JCS article fills in all those " . . . " and other words that the Society left out.

  In 1990, THE BLOOD BOOKLET WAS RUBBISH. It does not matter if it is "outdated" today. Again, in 1990 the blood booklet misquoted the medical doctors, scientists, and courts original writings.

  In the 12/2005 Kingdom Ministry's view, the blood booklet is good enough to teach one's precious children. Try telling a court that it's outdated, after that KM article.
• 

  sf

  Swalker.

  I asked WHY it isn't a predominate piece of litter-ature at the door or in your car or in your briefcase or on your jw coffee table?

  WHY isn't it something the householder/ bible study see's first thing; such as the everlasting life carrot crap?

  All you did really is answer my questions with questions and also just emphasized what my inquiry is. I want/ NEED to know WHY the public does not see it UNTIL "their heart is in the right place"?

  And if, as you state, it is outdated...WHY IS IT STILL ON THEIR SITE AND ENCOURAGED IN THIS YEARS KINGDOM MISERY?

  As for my jw background....LOLOLOLOL!!! Choice morsels are in my posting history here. As young kids, my mom got sucked into this ROT. And she forced all of us to suck too. From the gate, I knew this fraud of a religion was rotten to its core. And I was only nine then.

  Let there be no doubts that I intend to spend the rest of my living days doing all I can DO to help bring the lies of this fraudulent book publishing corp, to NEW LIGHT. And for the last six years, since reading Rays book and studying the inner workings of this well-oiled machine, I've been doing just that.

  Respectfully, sKally
• 

  SWALKER

  Skeeter1...I was giving an opinion when I said that the booklet was outdated and that it needed revision...AND IN MY OPINION it should state that taking blood for adults is a CONSCIENCE matter.

  I didn't say that the WTS was going to do that or that they thought that or that they agreed with that. I have repeatedly said that they have misrepresented the entire blood issue all along.

  IMO---their view on not taking a transfusion is not based on scripture at all. They go back to Genesis to prove that blood was to be poored out on the ground....yes, if you took an animals life, you were to show respect to God as the Creator, and poor out the blood before eating the meat. IMO (which I have to keep stating) that was to show regard for the sanctity of life NOT THAT BLOOD WAS BAD. Therefore that would mean that it would not be WRONG to take a transfusion. IMO---It should be a conscience matter whether an adult wanted to be transfused or not. When it comes to children...I'd say to put that in the professionals hands and let the drs. do their jobs.

  The legal aspect of the essay needs to be thoroughly scrutinized and if any attorney(s) thinks it will hold up in court then I hope to see a lawsuit on the books soon. Is it o.k. with you, that we can have an opinion on this? Even if an attorney takes this on, is it o.k. for us to say what we think might happen?

  I thought O.J. was guilty...he got off.

  I thought Scott Peterson was guilty...he's on death row...

  I thought Robert Blake was guilty...he got off...

  I think the WTS is guilty about most issues....? stay tuned...

  Swalker