You wrote: "The fractions are becoming an issue because many JW feel to take a fraction will cause them to lose out on ev life."
This what we see too. If the Society wants Witnesses aggregate to embrace taking blood fractions, we aren't seeing it. We see Witnesses refusing all blood and blood products and even saying no to dialysis.
The mature Witness people see taking blood medical treatment as a mortal sin. When a Witness looks in the mirror, they see a person who does "not take blood in any form". It's an identity issue.
Witnesses I know don't refuse blood because taking blood is a shunning offence, they refuse the blood treatment because they think it's a loss of salvation sin.
BIG ELDERS MEETING ON THE BLOOD ISSUE! SHOCKING CHANGES AFOOT!?
by Gill 58 Replies latest jw friends
-
garybuss
-
Quandary
So true Gary-
I can't tell you how many of the old timers are saying NO to everything on their card. It's absolutely horrifying how willing they are to kiss their lives good bye because of a very stupid human interpretation of a scripture-
Q
-
Odrade
otherwise, they are just learning to explain it in such a way that the flock thinks they get it.....
I agree 100% with this analysis. I had occasion last year to see a rough draft of some materials that were meant to "sort out this blood mess." The multipage article written was very articulate, and explained clearly, (though with a JW slant) how they were defining the breakdown of "fractions." It was complete with an additional 4 page spread of full color illustrations and diagrams that looked like it came out of at least a H.S. level biology textbook. (This whole draft was researched and written by a woman, btw.)
When the new articles on Blood and fractions came out this year, I figured it was her article and research. Imagine my surprise when nearly a month later I received scans of this magazine and it was the same old drivel, reworded. Disgusting. I really thing that at least the article I saw would have given many people the green light to accept fractions (including hemoglobin substitutes,) but what they actually printed really made very little change. Just more legalistic maneuverings and meanderings.
-
AudeSapere
Odrade wrote: It was complete with an additional 4 page spread of full color illustrations and diagrams that looked like it came out of at least a H.S. level biology textbook. (This whole draft was researched and written by a woman, btw.)
I'm curious about who the woman writer may be. If you know, please pm me.
-Aude.
-
Odrade
I do know to a certainty. I just don't want to put it out on the board for general consumption, especially as it did NOT end up being the article used, and also I have no way to confirm it. Suffice to say, she is quite well connected at Bethel.
-
sass_my_frass
I don't think JWs understand that they are now "allowed" more choices and older JWs are sticking with "no blood, no blood" and avoiding anything they aren't sure of, scared they will be df'd (not realizing that even that part of the blood policy has been changed to taking a transfusion is an act of disassociating yourself--nothing is in the public WT publications).
Most JWs would also refuse any blood component just because they find the whole concept gross and would be afraid of catching something. The good thing for WBTS is that they can put the 'it's okay to accept XYZ' in print and avoid any liability claims for a death caused by refusal of those components, by insisting that the deceased had known for years that this is a personal choice.
-
Gill
Good point Gary on the older JWs refusing all blood fraction treatment.
My mother told me that the Society had allowed fractions for the 'spiritually weak members of the congregation' but as for her and my father they will be refusing absolutely every treatment that might even have any fraction of blood in it at all!
They have chosen to die should they have a 'bleeding episode'!
Whose fault is that? Is it theirs for being so foolish as to blindly follow every verbal fart that eminates from Brooklyn. OR is it 'Brooklyn's' fault for producing such total nonsense in the first place and linking compliance with Everlasting Life?
I'd have to say a bit of both, but mainly the Crooks of Brooklyn for coming up with such BS and insisting on pain of Shunning that their slaves follow them.....to the death and literally!!
The Blood Issue has become an embarrassment to the WTBTS! It may well become a financial death blow to them should a JW grow the balls to sue their Masters asses, for lying to them, misleading them and demanding martyrdom from them all for a simple mistranslation and misunderstanding of an old Jewish/Catholic book!
-
metatron
Here's a near certainty: whatever is decided will be dominated by legal concerns. They don't care about ethics or who bleeds to death
and they must fear the emergence of future liabilities as the western world grows less tolerant of their cultish attitudes.
metatron
-
skeeter1
Is this conference isolated to the Isles, or is it worldwide? If it's isolated to the Isles, I do not foresee any big changes in the blood issue. American JWs would find out very fast, and feel duped. Changing a religious doctrine in one part of the world and not the other may open the Society for more legal problems. A belief can't be different in the US versus England. Imagine if a US JW dies from following the blood ban that is now lifted in England. That US family has a ton of legal ammunition to lay against the Society....including fraud and misrepresentation. And, we all know that the US is sue happy.
If there is a big change, the Society will do the "the Crown is after the JWs, so we had to change our official stance....but just in England/Ireland/Scotland" type of argument (aka similar to the voting and army service requirement).
But, why include Ireland? Ireland is not under English rule, so a big announcement that was necessitated on defense against the Crown would not be logical. Hmmmm.
In short, I do not think the Society would be so stupid as to make a big change & isolate it to just one part of the world.
If you know of meetings that are held worldwide, then we have something afoot. Or, if it appears simultaneously in the Watchtower, then we have a big change.
Skeeter
-
IronClaw
What is still hypocritical about the whole thing is (and even my wife has no answer to it): is that Its "OK" for a witness to accept blood fractions which come from blood that some "worldly" person was kind enough to donate in the first place. NOW ask why a witness cant give blood???? In other words, It is OK for a witness in an emergency to accept blood fractions from blood to save his neck, but NOT OK to reciprocate and donate blood to help someone else in need! Do you smell "Double Standard" here?
The Claw.