I am fighting back
You Apostate! YOU HERETIC! You will not have everlasting life if you "bring your fellow man to ruin" in this way!
Just kidding.... but get used to it... that is just a lil taste of what will be coming.
Love the Graphic.... I am a Graphic Design Artist as well, also do alot of painting murals.
Kat Newmas offers his services free of charge
here is what the pamplet says. on the inside some info is my comments some comments are from the forum.Lets look at the blood issue. It is one of the most touchy subjects for Jehovah’s Witnesses.
First lets start with where do they stand on the blood issue. Lets look at a quote from their own Watchtower:
w90 6/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers: ***A pregnant woman has an active mechanism by which some immune globulin moves from the mother's blood to the fetus'. Because this natural movement of antibodies into the fetus occurs in all pregnancies, babies are born with a degree of normal protective immunity to certain infections.
It is similar with albumin, which doctors may prescribe as a treatment for shock or certain other conditions. Researchers have proved that albumin from the plasma is also transported, though less efficiently, across the placenta from a mother into her fetus.
That some protein fractions from the plasma do move naturally into the blood system of another individual (the fetus) may be another consideration when a Christian is deciding whether he will accept immune globulin, albumin, or similar injections of plasma fractions. One person may feel that he in good conscience can; another may conclude that he cannot. Each must resolve the matter personally before God.
Now this says if your conscience allows you can accept blood fractions. The Watchtower's reasoning goes like this: Since medical researchers have proven that certain blood fractions naturally cross over from the mother to her fetus, it is ok to accept these fractions. Again, as long as these fractions naturally move from one individual to another, it is between God and yourself as to whether or not you will accept these fractions.
Now on the other hand, we have another situation where a natural movement occurs between individuals. I cannot quote from one of the Society's publications on this matter because no references exist. The Society either chooses to ignore this medical fact or simply cannot acknowledge it due to legal implications. This other natural movement is twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome.
What is twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS)? Here is a brief explanation from the TTTS Foundation: Twin to Twin Transfusion Syndrome (TTTS) is a disease of the placenta. It affects identical twins during pregnancy when blood passes disproportionately from one baby to the other through connecting blood vessels within their shared placenta. One baby, the recipient twin, gets too much blood overloading his or her cardiovascular system, and may die from heart failure. The other baby, the donor twin, does not get enough blood and may die from severe anemia. The babies are normal. The abnormalities are in the placenta.
TTTS is a medical fact. Medical researchers know that it exists. Do the affected babies merely share proteins from the plasma? No. They share the same WHOLE BLOOD between each other. How does this compare to the Society's explanation of a natural movement of blood fractions from one individual to another, mother and fetus? Using their own logic, the principle is the same. The same whole blood is shared between two different individuals. Many witnesses have further backed up the Society's claim saying that Jehovah cannot break his own laws when it comes to blood. "Since Jehovah allows blood fractions to pass naturally from mother to child, it is ok to accept these same blood fractions when needed," they say. When witnesses are confronted with medical evidence relating to TTTS, they dare not sing the same tune. Why is that? If they find out and then accept that whole blood can be naturally passed from one individual to another, this one-fact tears down their entire belief system in regards to the blood doctrine. No other belief in their spiritual arsenal is as deadly as the blood doctrine and they know it.
One more point I would like to bring up is the donating of blood. Here is the current stance and reasoning on blood donation:
*** w00 10/15 pp. 30-31 Questions From Readers ***
However, such collecting, storing, and transfusing of blood directly contradicts what is said in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Blood is not to be stored; it is to be poured out_returned to God, as it were. Granted, the Mosaic Law is not in force now. Nevertheless, Jehovah's Witnesses respect the principles God included in it, and they are determined to `abstain from blood.' Hence, we do not donate blood, nor do we store for transfusion our blood that should be `poured out.' That practice conflicts with God's law.
The Society's explanation is fairly simple. Under the Mosaic Law, all blood was to be poured out upon the ground. Even though the Mosaic Law is not in force today, witnesses still abide by the principle of that law. Remember that word - principle. With this understanding, it is clear why witnesses do not donate blood. They feel that although not under the old law covenant, they still adhere to the principle of having their blood return to the earth if removed from their body. That is the entire basis for refusing to donate their own blood.
Now, let us take this same principle a step or two further. First, a witness needs to be asked whether or not this same principle should be applied to everyone on the earth. Their answer will be a most definite YES. It may even be followed up with a comment such as, "Besides, just look at all of the problems we have today with tainted blood supplies and diseases spread by transfusions." If the witness answered in the affirmative to whether or not all blood should be poured out upon the ground, ask them, "How is it possible then, under that same principle, to accept blood that has been donated and stored which was not 'poured out' upon the ground," so to speak? Here, the Society places a double standard on their principle. On one hand, the Society says it is ok to accept blood fractions which have been donated from whole blood, the same blood that in principle should have been 'poured out,' but on the other hand, they say that you must not donate any blood at all because it must be 'poured out' if it leaves your body. This principle seems to be lacking in coherence. What is the bottom line? It is ok to accept blood products that are taken from donated and stored blood given by worldly people. It is not ok to donate your own blood for the same purpose.
These two topics cannot be addressed by ANY witness. Their response can only be one of two things:
Write the Society for the answers, or,
Wait on Jehovah for clarification.
In the meantime, hope to God that you do not end up in the hospital staring death in the face debating whether to stay faithful to the organization on the blood doctrine or finally accepting the needed blood products to sustain your life.
Thank you for reading I will be putting more topics up. if you like this copy please feel free but please e-mail me if you do so I know to put a new one up.
(Thought I would put my name didn’t you)
and on the back it states that i am not an opostate)
I was raised a Jehovah’s Witness. I am not a Jehovah's witness anymore. I was never disfellowshipped nor disassociated. I merely left. Also I am NOTan apostate. To prove this definition of an apostate is.
One who has abandoned one's religious faith, a political party, one's principles, or a cause.
Now to Prove I am not an Apostate my religious faith when I was a JW was that god exists Jesus died for us/our sins, and one day god will do away with Satan and rid the world of what is bad and everyone will be happy. And anyone who follows what the bible tells us will share in this happiness.
My religious faith has not changed.
My principles are still the same.
My cause as a Witness was to tell others about god’s word, encourage others to read the bible and to promote what I believed in.
My cause has not changed.
And I was never part of a political party.
So in no way do I fit the definition of an apostate.
This information is research of my own and other peoples theses are a combination of facts, quotes and what I feel is right/logical. Believe what you want I am just here to inform.
the format of the pamplet is musch better (I will be working on making it in html format so it can be used on the web)
oh and by the way i am lv4fer's son incase any of you know her.
Sorry the last post about was supposed to be sent by me the computer automaticly logged in as my mom and i didn't relize it. but that is what is in the pamplet.