by hawkaw 68 Replies latest jw friends
Hey Hawk!
p.s. - waiting - hope it was worth the wait
Answer #1 - It's usually not.
Answer #2 - wait"ing" - as in "still am......"
Btw, what were you referring to, dear man?
waiting - still
ps - Thank you very much for the links. It makes it so much easier to save as a favorite - and then refer to. Each of the threads developed are well worth saving to file, which I've done.
Hi waiting,
Btw, what were you referring to, dear man?
I told you a few weeks ago in my Tertullian thread that I may have another one "cooking". Your comment back to me a few weeks ago in my Tertullian thread was:
Well, I'll be "waiting" patiently - and thus the meaning of my name - forever waiting on something or another.
Well the "Priestley deception" was "it". So like I said - I hope it was worth the wait.
Thanks
hawk
Here’s another related issue:
The Society offers the following counsel to parents:
w99 7/1 9 Parents, What Does Your Example Teach?
The Influence Exerted by Example
6 In addition to verbal instruction, example has a profound influence on young ones. Whether parents like it or not, their children are going to imitate them. It may please the parents—sometimes it may shock them—when they hear their children say things that they themselves have said. When both the conduct and the attitude of the parents reflect deep appreciation for spiritual matters, this exercises a positive influence on the children.—Proverbs 20:7.w96 12/1 12 Parents, Find Pleasure in Your Children
9 Parents, what kind of training stakes are you? For example, do you want your children to develop a balanced view of material things? Then you must set the right example by not pursuing all the latest gadgets or other things that you do not really need. If you choose to pursue material advantages, do not be surprised when your children copy you. (Matthew 6:24; 1 Timothy 6:9, 10) Indeed, if the training stakes are not upright, how can the sapling grow straight?
The basic point; that you can’t say one thing, but do another, and expect even a child to be fooled.
But how might a parent attempt to “recover” from such an error? One way might be to simply wield their power over the child. The Society comments on the likely results of trying to do so:
w99 7/1 10 Parents, What Does Your Example Teach?
11 Of course, imperfect parents are not always going to deal with situations in the best way. They will make mistakes. When children realize that, will it erode their respect for their parents? It may, especially if the parents try to gloss over their errors by harshly asserting their authority. But the outcome may be very different if the parents are humble and freely admit their mistakes. In this, they can set a valuable example for their children, who need to learn to do the same.—James 4:6.
In summary, then, the points seem to be:
1. That your teachings and actions must be consistent if you are to be respected
2. That resorting to power or authority when a mistake is made is not ultimately a successful course
With that in mind, consider these quotes from Study 31 of the Theocratic Ministry School Guidebook:
sg 110-1 21 Informative Material, Clearly Presented
9 Accuracy of statement. Jehovah’s witnesses are an organization of truth. We should want to speak the truth and be absolutely accurate in every detail at all times. This should be so not only as regards doctrine but also in our quotations, what we say about others or how we represent them, also in matters involving scientific data or news events.
10 Wrong statements delivered to an audience may be repeated and the error magnified. Inaccuracies that are recognized by an audience raise questions as to the authority of the speaker on other points, perhaps even calling in question the truth of the message itself. A newly interested person hearing such statements, and having heard a different view expressed on another occasion, might come to the conclusion there is disunity of thought among Jehovah’s witnesses and discontinue association without even revealing his reason.And:
sg 155-6 31 Convince Your Audience, Reason with Them
11 A word of caution. All evidence must be used honestly. Do not take a quotation out of context. Make certain that what you say is exactly what the authority you are quoting had in mind to say. Be specific in your references. Be careful of statistics too. Improperly presented, these can boomerang with devastating results. Remember the man who could not swim and who drowned in a stream that averaged only three feet in depth. He forgot about the ten-foot hole in the middle.
How does this relate to the subject under consideration? And, applying to the organization the very same counsel it gives to parents, where does that leave it in terms of deserved respect?
Hey Hawk,
Answer #1 - It's usually not.
Well, it's a good thing you're memory is better than mine! And, yes, your post was well worth waiting for. And I stand corrected. *sigh.*
I hate being around so many damned smart people. I'm not used to thinking this often.
Hey Nic
The WTBTS must hate being around so many smart people also. They keep writing things that come back and bite 'em in the rear. If they could make enough money from the meetings and conventions - they'd probably stop the mags - then people couldn't prove anything they said.
Thanks to you both.
waiting
Great stuff Nic,
Keeping in mind I am not a JW, I have a question - when was Study 31 published and taught?
hawk
Hawk,
"Study 31" was a chapter in the Theocratic Ministry School Guidbook published in 1971. Although this book is slated to be replaced early next year, the information Nic quoted (From studies 21 & 31) is still considered to be "current" (....an interesting JWism in and of itself)
Tom
Being nothing but an average jw, I can barely make heads or tails out of this medical conversation.And I seriously believe that's what the WTBTS is betting on - the average jw just won't understand the implications and will do the Biblical Safe thing - abstain from blood. Period.
I was wondering how long before someone made this point. The bottom line is that most dubs will stay away from blood period. The elders have enough wiggle room to DF anyone they don't like because of it.
Thank you for the orange and orange peel illustration. Very clear.
Slipnslidemaster: "But at my back I always hear Time's winged chariot hurrying near."
- Andrew Marvell
Hi SnSM
The elders have enough wiggle room to DF anyone they don't like because of it
Does the word "it" mean "blood"? If one takes blood nowdays there is no disfellowshipping. A JW is automatically DAed if he/she knowinglying and without regard takes blood through certain transfusions - since April 2000 (published in the press but not published in any WT article to the R&F). That is why people like Dr. Sam Muramoto publish articles in medical journals trying to at least wake up the medical community about confidentiality. Lee Elder has told me that almost 50% of JWs change their minds and will accept banned blood products when, in the right atmosphere, the physican explains the "goods".
hawk
Edit Addition 11/07/01
"The Bottom line is" that little innocent kids are needlessly dying and its gotta stop!
Hey Hawk,
If you're that kind of guy - I've added a click to a joke thread going on - and I've just posted a joke about the Unitarian Universalist Church.
Is that the same church Priestley founded? If not - still a funny joke.
... http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=2942&page=9&site=3
Btw, I'm originally from Indiana. We say "you guys" for everybody, even all women in a group. Been in South Carolina for 20 years. Learned to say "y'all" real fast - dead giveaway for being a Yankee.
Definitely no offense taken.
waiting
Let's be very clear about penalties for blood transfusion. While it seems to be a distinction without a difference, i.e., you get shunned for BOTH DF (disfellowshipping) and DA (disassociation), it's important to note who is the responsible party. And to look at WHY the Society changed its policy.
If you are DFd, the organization does it through its local representatives the elders. If you are considered DA, you have done it to yourself in the eyes of the Society. The hierarchy now wants to wash its hands and say they are not responsible, you are. Reduces potential liability, right? YOUR decision to follow "God's standard," WHICH MAY CHANGE.
Another step in the blood policy evolution, much like alternative service. Meanwhile innocent lives are lost. The Society can't present clear reasons for their policy but they can state it and enforce it. And tell you to wait on Jehovah if you don't like it. (Just like they did with alternative service and other issues.)
A baptized JW who unrepentantly receives a blood transfusion (meaning an infusion of anything not an approved blood product or fraction) is now officially treated as having disassociated him/herself, after certain modified judicial proceedings.
How does this work? What is published below is taken from the Society’s letter read from the CO to US bodies of elders, no copies, notes only. (Hopefully no responsibility.)
‘We wish to make an adjustment in the current standing on blood transfusions. True Christians avoid blood transfusions. On rare occasions some have accepted them. In the event a brother or sister does so, two elders should be assigned to find out if they did so willingly. If it is determined that they did so willingly, a committee of three brothers (not a judicial committee) should be assigned to get the facts and determine the attitude of the individual. If the person who accepted a blood transfusion sincerely regrets his decision, he would not qualify for privileges [commenting, talk assignments, aux pio, prayer] within the congregation for a period of time. The committee may also make an announcement to the congregation:
‘"The elders have handled a matter having to do with-------------. You will
be glad to know that spiritual shepherds are endeavoring to render assistance."
‘If the person willfully and unrepentantly rejects God’s standards, and makes
statements to the effect he would continue in his course and advocates it to
others, thus he has chosen to disassociate himself from the congregation.
The following announcement would be made to the congregation:
‘"By his chosen course [name] has shown that he no longer desires to be one of Jehovah’s Witnesses."’
The following is not medical conversation, but for those interested in thinking things through:
What happens when Elder X visits Publisher Y in the hospital and sees a red bag hanging? Say he asks the obvious question, "What’s that?" and Publisher Y responds: "What you see in that bag is permitted by my Christian conscience."
Dilemma for Elder X: Does he try to take a sneak peek at the medical records? Find out from a "loyal" JW or unwitting secretary in the hospital?
Medical confidentiality looms large as an issue.
There are new rules that set national standards for protecting the privacy and distribution of Americans' personal health records and establish fines and criminal penalties for violations of those standards.
Snoops, watch out. You are at risk--legally.
Hope the above is helpful to y'all, yez, youse, what---ever. Or to the one person who may have read it.
Maximus
