Is Blood Now 'The Tail Wagging The Dog'? (page 2)

metatron

And let's add one more point: They can't reason on blood or discuss the subject with any depth.

Why? Because the whole topic is a neglected minefield waiting to explode. What was James quoting from in Acts 15? ( Leviticus!)

Does all milk contain blood? ( yes, white blood cells) If blood is sacred as a symbol of life, isn't sustaining life the point? ( yes!)

Can twins share a blood supply? ( yes)

Their lazy scholarship has created a doctrinal nightmare in which they seem to be confined to repeating "abstain from blood"

over and over again, with no other support offered, for fear of raising too many questions - that and depending on a mental picture

of blood as a gruesome totem to keep away reasoning about it.

The blood issue could even explain, in part, why the publications are so dumbed down. They must strongly discourage

thinking and reasoning generally, without pointing to the blood issue specifically.

If the 'Church and State' magazine contention results in any sort of increased reasoning or debate about the blood issue, beyond

the "abstain from blood" mantra, they could be in big trouble, lawsuit or not.

All it took was the evidence that James was citing Leviticus to make my Witness brain nearly explode, several years ago.

"You mean he was quoting the Law of Moses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" I can't be the only one to be liable to this same sort of

'sudden doctrinal decompression'!

metatron

TD

The blood issue could even explain, in part, why the publications are so dumbed down. They must strongly discourage thinking and reasoning.......

.........beyond the "abstain from blood" mantra.............

I love it! It requires a fair amount of "dumbing" to accept the mantra in the first place

Their "abstain from blood" mantra is not grammatical

What does would it mean to:

abstain from crankshafts?
abstain from sky?
abstain from shrubs?

There is no such thing as abstinence from an object.

cheezy

Witness kids were told they could go to college....................Suddenly, college is being demonized again.

You just can't let the little bastards get book-learning!

Seriously, good thread - great observations and reasoning. And I agree; life and death puts blood into a completely different category than any of the other dumbass dogma.

Ques: How did they get themselves into this conundrum in the first place and why? Just lack of foresight?

Axelspeed

Ques: How did they get themselves into this conundrum in the first place and why? Just lack of foresight?

Just my opinion...

I believe they seriously had/have a timetable to shed the blood doctrine. I think there have been definite signs of this happening over the last few years. But they would/will have a hard time saving face or preventing lawsuits. What happened? The internet. Information about the fallacies and problems with this doctrine began to surface and be circulated faster than they could shed the doctrine. The WT likes to control the amount and manner of information being released or changed so that the org can always be seen as the one at the forefront of the light. They must save face. I have in a previous post stated my belief about their embarassment about some of the old light, ...and about some of the current light that they can't shed fast enough. Since the internet puts them under a very scrutinizing eye, and pressures change on terms that are not there own terms...then all cards are pulled off the table.

Axel

rmt1

sir82

I believe they seriously had/have a timetable to shed the blood doctrine. I think there have been definite signs of this happening over the last few years.

I have my own little theory about this...

Back in October 2001, there was a "special meeting" called, and certain long-standing JWs were allowed to attend. The meeting was held in the Pontiac Silverdome, and most of the Bethel heavies and GB members healthy enough to travel were there.

Our old friend Maximus who used to post here indicated that the meeting would contain some sort of earth-shattering information.

As it turned out, the "special meeting" was little more than an infomercial for the special conventions held earlier that year. Virtually nothing of substance was said.

Why go to all the trouble & expense of renting out the facility, traveling, etc., for a meaningless meeting?

Here is my theory: The meeting ended up being held just about 1 month after 9/11/2001. I theorize they were going to roll out a new understanding of the blood doctrine, but then 9/11 hit, and put the "fear of God" into the Bethel hardliners. I think they used the occasion to force their viewpoint on the more liberal members, cancelled the blood doctrine revisions being planned, and hurriedly threw together a silly little program on how wonderful the conventions in Lithuania or wherever were. I think they had the impression that Jehovah had sent a "warning shot across the bow" by sending the planes into the towers so close to Brooklyn Bethel.

Lending support to this theory, 2001 was the year when the infamous "don't hand out those blood cards!" letter was received. New blood cards, printed in June 2001, had been printed and sent out, implying that autologous transfusions (storing and transfusing one's own blood) would now be permitted. Almost as soon as they were received by the congregations, another letter came saying to destroy those cards, and wait for replacement cards. The replacement cards had the more permissive language removed.

AlanF has a thread somewhere with a copy of one of those cards, which escaped destruction.

It seems to me that the increasingly hardline stance referred to Metatron in this and other posts stem from about that time frame.

I have absolutely 0 proof, nor even an inkling of any evidence for this. It is just a pet theory that certain events seem to support.

And of course, one would have to be a megalomaniac of the highest degree to think anything like that of 9/11. But take another look at the Isaiah books, the Daniel books, etc., if anyone doubts the enormous arrogance of the GB.

metatron

I've thought about the accelerated time scale of potential WT reform, too. I was concerned that they would become too fragile

to reform anything if they didn't reform quickly. Sadly, that may have happened. It may be too late if they feel threatened

on every side. Circle the wagons and hunker down in das FuehrerBunker. Where's Beth-Sarim, now that we need it?

If they dig in their heels about internet pressured change, what do they think will happen if they continue in the same stiff-necked

course? If pressures build up today, what does tomorrow hold - except an explosion?

I can just imagine these guys broke one day, with a few hundred publishers gathered around them, as they preach from a street corner

soap box - still claiming they have God's exclusive direction, still babbling about growth, still glorifying themselves, unreferenced

to reality. Never right and never in doubt.........

metatron

TD

I have absolutely 0 proof, nor even an inkling of any evidence for this. It is just a pet theory that certain events seem to support.

Fascinating nonetheless. Something derailed the liberal tack they were taking

garybuss

Good post! I like it. The Watch Tower is a "government" and the blood issue is a war. Like any leader fighting a war, the best way to justify a war, is to keep fighting it.

Sometimes wars are diversions to keep focus away from what really is going on.

No Apologies

Sir82, I like your theory. Back in 2001 I was just starting to lurk here, I remember all the speculation going on about this "special" meeting that was to be held. And then afterwards, the letdown when there was no "big news" announced. Deja vu, huh?

I can see where 9/11 may have been at least partly responsible for a shift towards a more hardline stance. Whether or not it the special meeting had anything to do with blood and the blood card fiasco... who can say?

No Apologies

Is Blood Now 'The Tail Wagging The Dog'?

Share this