Could this possibly be true?!

by Frenchy 21 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  waiting

  Frenchy, I read the same post on H20.

  I believe the Society is trying to be politically correct in public while the poor ignorant publishers - with children - will still do what "their Bible trained consciences" guide them to do. And who has trained their consciences - since the Bible is quite silent on blood transfusions?

  Just like the Questions from Readers on voting in January, (and I heard a rumor that voting was worded such so that JW's would be allowed to vote in France - enough to try to change political views - and perhaps tax laws?) the rank and file JW will be kept in line by their elders and the strong, unspoken word, of the Governing Body of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Inc.

  In other words, everything has changed in public - nothing in private. I grew up that way - it is hypocritical especially in light that we are told that we have to follow them.
• 

  Frenchy

  Yes, waiting, I concur. I agree with you that this is what is happening. I wish it were not so, I hope that I am wrong but...
• 

  RedhorseWoman

  There was a discussion on Wit.net about the voting issue several months ago. Several people were asking about the implications.

  I was not surprised to read some of the responses applauding the Society for more or less putting one over on the worldly governments while changing nothing internally. The statements were made that even though the Society made voting a conscience matter, and thusly could claim to the "world" that JW's are DEFINITELY allowed to vote, a "mature Christian" would KNOW that voting was wrong and therefore the point was moot as far as they were concerned.

  It just boggles the mind. I spent years proudly explaining to anyone who asked that JW's were supporters of God's Kingdom and could therefore not participate in the functions of a worldy government run by Satan. Now, all that is bound up in all this rhetoric....just so the Society can pull the strings behind the curtain, but look okay to the world at large. >:(

  Edited by - RedhorseWoman on 28 May 2000 23:30:2
• 

  Frenchy

  Hello, Red. When I first read that thread about the blood I thought about that voting thing. Perhaps this is the way things are headed now. For a long time we have had two sets of rules. We have the ones written in our literature and the the rules that are REALLY followed. I've had some run-ins with C.O.'s and D.O.'s on that very same matter of printing one thing but doing something else.

  Evidently they feel that this is something that works well for them and they are expanding and capitalizing on it. I think that they are overlooking something very important here, though.

  The crowd that we have now is NOTthe crowd we had a generation (hey, you know what that word means!) ago. Publishers (what an awful name for worshippers of God!) today, in general, are not as totally devoted to the Society as their parents were. They are better educated and better informed today and now they have the internet.

  As an elder I've noticed a change over the past couple of decades of the 'judicial offenses' that are occurring and how there is a lot of 'hidden sin' that is going on. This is becoming more like all the other religions every day in the eyes of the Witnesses.
• 

  overthehillgrandma

  what is h2o?..I mean where is it?
• 

  Frenchy

  Here it is, granny:

  [url] http://www.hourglass2.org/wwwboard/hourglass2board.html[/url]
• 

  gringojj

  Thanks Frenchy!!!!!!!!!!!
• 

  Billygoat

  Wow. Talk about resurrecting an oldie, but a goody!

  Whatever happened to RedHorseWoman and Frenchy? I haven't seen them 'round in years.
• 

  blondie

  Obviously, an interpretation of the blood fraction change.

  Redhorsewoman is a moderator over on www.beliefnet.com acting as a moderator on the JW Debate Board.

  Blondie
• 

  Mecurious?

  Technically, if this is true: Then the 'rule' isn't being changed. "Blood transfusions are still wrong!" It's just that now we will not be df'ing people for doing it. This differs from the blood components in that this is now being called a matter of conscience

  Wish, I could tell that to my sister. But she's dead!

  Anyway, disfellowshiped or not, people will still be shunned and treated like a disfellowshiped person, so I don't see the difference. The only way lives can be saved from here on out is for the governing body to send a letter out to all the congregations; stating that blood is allowed without repercussions and also to apologize for all the lives that have been taken and destroyed.

  M'