Huffington Post: When Is A Religion 'Extremist'? [Food for thought!]

by AndersonsInfo 66 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  biblexaminer

  Simon, we are not just talking about "some book"...

  It is a known fact that one's hemoglobin dropping below a certain level is lethal.

  JWs choose to stick to a teaching that they know kills. DEAD.

  It's not just some ambiguous writings that might be confused in the mind of a person with grey-matter-disease.

  This is a teaching, accepted by sane persons, based on a lie, and one that kills.

  It's not as if there's two ways to take it.

  1) Don't take blood transfusions

  2) God demands it

  3) It'll kill you.

  Your post does NOT reflect the realities.
• 

  Simon

  I said some book, as in, the same story from your illustration but delivered via a book, to show why your reasoning is crazy.

  You take mention of "some book" to mean the bible, launching into some rationalization of it as somehow scientifically sound and meant to be believed and followed, thus showing that you are probably crazy.
• 

  biblexaminer

  That's a pretty sad response.
• 

  biblexaminer

  Simon, if you think I am unjustified in my expression above, please note that when I said "some book" I was NOT making reference to the Bible. You are out in left field.

  My reference to "some book" was a take from your post.

  "if some eedjit reads a book"

  Here you try to reason, falsely, that the situation can equal "some eedjit [reading some] a book" in a generalization that does not fit the discussion.

  Your comparison is apples and oranges.

  Apples from Italy and oranges from Florida by the way.
• 

  Ruby456

  except that Jehovah witnesses believe that they get life from obeying commands against blood. important shift in emphasis. indeed they try everything to remain alive except the taking of blood.
• 

  Simon

  The fact remains that however the message is delivered, it's the responsibility of the consumer who choses to follow it. Otherwise you'd have the authors of fiction books being imprisoned due to the nuts who were "inspired" by their writings but who are in fact just nuts.

  It's ironic that on this topic you are promoting that their writings are lies and on other topics you are quoting from the bible as though it is absolutely proven fact when it too is just another book, just an old, crap one.

  You can't prove either. You have your opinions, I think they are wrong and your reasoning on this matter makes no sense and is unworkable. But using your reasoning, aren't the bible authors (and therefore god) guilty for all the wrong decisions people make based on following that crock of shit?
  
• 

  Ruby456

  bible examiner you have to consider what the intentions and motives are

  I know that activists are coming out with such reasoning - the kind you are suggesting - but what is the reality? how does the gov take their stance? how does the law take their stance.
• 

  Ruby456

  but there's a significant difference - slavery was allowed for economic reasons the JW stand on blood is a comittment to virtue (to put it in secular terms). it involves choice. slaves had no choice
• 

  cognisonance

  Chill Simon! Your responses on this site come off crass and pedantic more often than not. I used to enjoy this site, but I find your behavior and attitude to often be so demeaning to others. Why do this?
• 

  Ruby456

  I think we are all searching for a source of energy that we can live by without having to compromise the vision and worldview we want to see materialize. I think Simon does strive for coherence and consistency - if your arguments seem incoherent you better watch out. He seems to be committed to intellectual flourishing - so I would take what he is saying in that spirit.