Hey, them radical Baptists can be as weeeeirrd about the veracity of the bible as any JW. I say they found a genuine quote. Of course, the WT would not mention that the man is a BAPTISSST.
Who the hell is Dr. H.O.Phillips????
by Terry 26 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Earnest
1.How did the writer of the INSIGHT article become privvy to a letter by this doctor to the AMA?
Probably one of the WTS researchers came across it when looking for articles on the use of blood. I don't know, it was published for all to see so there isn't much mystery about that.
2.What is the nature of this Doctor's doctorate?
MD, from the University of Kansas.
jgnat : I say they found a genuine quote.
The quote is certainly genuine, jgnat, as the American Medical News confirmed in response to my query. He wrote the letter that was published in the AMA News of July 10, 1967 from Navajo, NM and his support for the accuracy of the Bible is not surprising as he was approved as a Baptist Bible Fellowship missionary in May that year. I cannot add a great deal more to my previous post but to say he married Maxine Mae Dale on December 27, 1942 and was apparently a family man with six children and twelve grand-children by the time of his death. Both he and his wife (who died on June 9, 2000) were buried on the Navajo reservation.
Earnest
-
Satanus
Baptist and missionary are the key words. The wt didn't mention them.
S
Ps, great researching, earnest!
-
-
-
Quotes
Earnest, am I correct that this was published in a "letters to the editor" section?
That would explain a lot; carries much less weight than the WT would have you believe.
For example, a magazine a read ("Skeptic") occaisonally prints letters to the editor that rail against rationality and are very mystical. They are printed both because (a) skeptics are supposed to be open minded and hear all arguments, and (b) they are quite comical and ridiculous.
~Quotes, of the "Letter To Myself" class -
Earnest
Earnest, am I correct that this was published in a "letters to the editor" section?
That would explain a lot; carries much less weight than the WT would have you believe.Quotes, I have confirmed with Nathan Natas, who kindly provided me with the scan of the letter and agreed I might post it, that it was published in a "letters to the editor" section of the AMA News. And I don't think the WT suggested otherwise. In the article in Insight Volume I, pp.631-632, it attributes the quote to Dr. Philips "in a letter to The AMA [American Medical Association] News".
Regarding June 12, 1967 issue...it is with a great deal of...unhappiness that I read the letter of [John E. Summers, MD], from California.
Obviously he is very far behind the times in his scientific studies. It is true that science is more or less based on a critical experimental approach to the mysteries of life, but it is not diametrically opposed to religion.
The best informed medical researchers now doing the best work are arriving at the conclusion that the Bible is a very accurate scientific book that we, today, are learning much about medicine and the mysteries of life. The facts of life, diagnosis, treatment, and preventive medicine as given in the Bible are far more advanced and reliable than the theories of Hippocrates, many still unproven, and some found to be grossly inaccurate.
Time will tell if the AMA medicine-religion program will be a boon to the medical profession; if not it will be dropped - but a trial at trying to make the AMA a better fraternity is not a step backward.
Navajo, N.M. H. O. PHILIPS, MD
The text highlighted in red is that part of the letter which is quoted in the Insight book as referred to in this thread. I don't think there is even a hint of misrepresentation.
Earnest