by dugout 46 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
transfusion of blood and eating blood was the same thing
Not a problem. You can concede that point and still show they are biblically wrong to accept a transfusion...
Doubtfully Yours - Please don't share your platitude with the relatives of dead JWs. One of the most ignorant things I have ever read on the forum.
@ OrphanCrow...
I'm still scratching my head over the Org's historical animosity towards the American Medical Association...
vidiot: @ OrphanCrow...
I'm still scratching my head over the Org's historical animosity towards the American Medical Association...
That's easy to understand.
Short version is this: Quack religion and quack medicine sleep in the same bed. And from that they give birth to baby quacks like the blood ban.
Long version is on this yuku thread which might clear up some of that confusion...or it might make you scratch your head some more...
http://exjehovahswitnessforum.yuku.com/topic/25042#.VvBHjeIrLre
baker:
In the Book "30 years a Watchtower Slave", William Schneil wrote that at one time the GB was considering to drop the Blood issue based upon Matt 15:17 alone, but that book was written over 30 years ago, and as yet no evidence of this stance has ever been noticed.
They figured out how to make money from it instead.
Frustration and anger belong to the one who does not realize the blood-refusing believer is incapable of critical thinking!
I can picture you sitting in the Hall, fuming. I doubt knowledge will help in the instance of simple minds which predominate in religious circles.
Criucial biological distinctions between "eating" blood and "transfusing" blood elude simple-minded believers.
They simply cannot comprehend the differences.
It is far easier for the simple-minded to dogmatically embrace the blood-refusal doctrine than for those with more than a couple of active brain cells.
Indoctrination runs deep. Definitely, upholding the JW blood stance is not for the faint of heart.
Stop the hating.
DY
DY: Stop the hating.
Hating???
No way will I EVER stop hating the murderous blood policy of the WT.
Methinks you are the one who needs to change and stop interpreting rational discussion of a superstition as hate directed against yourself. This isn't just about you.
let JWs be with their interpretation and reasoning of the text. This keeps coming up every so often; boring. - DY
The unnecessary death of children isn't boring. It is a scandal.
I remember talks in which we were told that, regarding blood, we needed to be careful when we were invited to eat, especially around other cultures, where we were not aware of food preparation. They exemplified some latin american cultures where certain whole birds are cooked with their blood still in them. We were also warned about cooking steak rare.
My question now would be, if cooking stake rare means eating blood, how is it that we are willing to eat blood if it is fully cooked? ( I do understand the red in rare steak is not technically blood)
cofty: The unnecessary death of children isn't boring. It is a scandal.
It is not just children who die from the WT blood policy.
In reality, it is women who are at the greatest risk of dying from the refusal of blood.
DY: Definitely, upholding the JW blood stance is not for the faint of heart.
No, it is for those who are willfully blind and willfully ignorant.
