by JW Ben 40 Replies latest watchtower medical
JWBen,
As far as transplants are concerned I personaly do not see the WTS forbidding it. They pointed out Bible principles and left up to the individual to decide. If others read into thier comments that it was forbidden, I suggest that it was either their consciernce agreeing with the Bible principles presented or they did not read the article clearlyand carefully enough. I will stick by my conclution that it was up to the individual.
This statement is a case study in cognitive dissonance.
HS
The Bible spells out the missuse of blood. That is plain. but just where it becomes OK is a grey area. With the Israelites they had to bleed the animal, but small amounts of blood remained in the carcass. They could eat that, as long as they did the bleeding process. At what point did they decide that the animal had been bleed sufucuantly? They were not told that, just poor out the blood. That was the law - to pur out the blood. Every one doing so would have to decide at what point the blood was poured out.... did they stop as soon as the blood stopped running, or did they wait until no more dripps fell on the ground... did they then flush out the vanes with water... how far should they have gone? So they had to decide when to stop, and fro each individual that would be a different time.
Thanks Ben as that is a very good point. The law is simple, dont eat blood. Human perception makes for grey areas. Its ok when the individual conscience is involved in making the descision. The trouble lies in someone else becoming the conscience. I dont remember any bleeding process prescribed in the bible, do you? Not in the Pharisaical sense.
Example: How much is sufficiant bleeding for a carcass? Pharisaical law would convolute the simple godly principle. You end up with a whole proceedure for bleeding an animal properly, but miss the point, respect for blood. The individuals conscience also becomes lost because they must abide by the conscience of the law maker.
Example: The blood issue. The godly principle is simple, abstain from blood. The Pharisaical law of the society is: Abstain from this, this, and that, but this, this, this, and that are conscience matters. They lose the godly principle in the law. Abstain from blood, becomes convoluted by their own ideas. The grey areas that they percive become the issues by which we are supose to make a consciencious descision. Instead of simply, abstain from blood. Its as I stated in another thread to you, the Society becomes the conscience. You must make a descision based on their conscience, not yours.
IPSec
My father died because he obeyed them
Coffee,
I am so sorry for your loss.
Jeannie
As far as transplants are concerned I personaly do not see the WTS forbidding i
Listen. There were folks df'd for transtplants pre 1980. Look into it. Ask. That's why when it became a "conscience matter" in 1980 they printed an article to let people know that it was now cool. OK?
It's called "New light". If it were'nt a Df'ing offense before, no need for new light, see? Teh old light would be fine.
Coffee,
I am sorry about your Dad, he let the GB be his conscience with deadly consequences. If you have seen JWBen's other post about 'Blood Transfusions' you'll understand why I can identify with you. My Mom died, because her body was starved of oxygen, she too let the GB influence her conscience.
Like you, I still have a very hard time dealing with that. There is simply no way I will ever believe (again) that life to God is considered so trivial and unimportant. JW's want to make this 'academic' arguement a matter of life and death. I just wanted my Mom to live.
Sincerely, Rabbit
JWBen,
Here is another example of true life & death reality. A baby in Dallas just died...his parents are JW's and refused a blood transfusion. The baby died while the hospital was desparately going to get a court order. They did...too late.
This story made chills go down my spine for another reason...as you know my Mom died, because of JW beliefs. When one of my children was born my then wife and I fought with doctors to keep our baby from having a transfusion. That is how much I believed and how misled I was, luckily our child survived.
The story in the link here http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/16/86336/1.ashx could have been our story, our baby was exposed to the danger of the deadly teachings of the WTS. Back then...my JW wife & I would have let our child die. My X still will...the potential is scary.
JWBen, I hope you will never be in that position to impose a possible death sentence on a loved one because of any religious belief. I hope you will see the Truth about the Troof, before then.
Rabbit
Bone marrow transplant is OK. Remind: Blood Transfusion is nothing more than bone marrow transplant. Ben JW should allow blood transfusion when he try to persuade people that transplant is not cannibalism. Blood transfusion is exactly organ transplant.
jwsons
JW Ben,
It's very easy for you to say it was a conscience matter when you haven't had to live with the consequences of the death of a loved one because of such a policy . I lived it...and still feel the loss. You may have interpreted the society's position to mean it was a matter of conscience, but you never had to make that life and death decision yourself. My parents did. My parents made the decision based on the watchtower teachings. I was there. I know what influenced their decision, and they didn't make that decision in a vacuum. My parents were not the only ones who made such a decision. Others have died as a result of this fiasco. And then the society changed it without even acknowledging the damage they caused. Shame on them.
Rabbit,
Thank you....and I'm sorry for your loss as well... The governing body of the watchtower society has a lot to answer for, They will one day stand before their maker. I would not want to be in their shoes.
Coffee
JWBen,
One question. If it truly was a matter of conscience, then why didn't they state that in the early articles. They could have. That would have been the logical thing to do. They waited over a decade....until people had died because of the policy before finally stating it in clear terms. Why?
Coffee
JWBEN: Where is the proof you were going to show us all, proving that Witnesses can be independent thinkers and not get disfellowshipped? I did a posting on this reminding you what you promised and you had no reply, yet you come on here again with more of your drivel?!
I will read replies but it is unlikely I will have anything else to say on this matter.
You bloody coward.....
Where is this proof?? I'm going to keep bugging you until you either show us something, or admit you were wrong.
Mary
