Jump to content
The World News Media

The most DISTURBING news about the BLOOD DOCTRINE, ever


JW Insider

Recommended Posts

  • Member
23 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

patients are often not aware of what their conscience allows until the "Church Council" lets them know if something is "approved" or not.

Seems this is the truth for many sadly:

WHEN faced with making a personal choice, one woman told a friend: “Do not make me think; just tell me what to do. That is easier.” WT (Study) Feb 2017 p12 para 1

PS NYT said " He and Dr. Smalley quoted a 1977 article in the Journal  ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 6k
  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Boy that brings back some memories! I had more than a few exchanges with Rusky on the subject of blood, fractions, and associated biblical texts, etc. There is so much left unsaid about this issue. Ev

Rather than being disturbed by one person's belief, it might be good to remember the basics in God’s word and strengthen ourselves to obey instead of looking for reasons to justify vacillation.  

Hi JW Insider, Interesting point you have brought up regarding the blood issue and Bro Smalley.   I can see why he's "out of sorts" being in a position to defend a public policy which is quite di

Posted Images

  • Member

Well... We have beat this horse to death ...and made dog food out of the ground horse meat ... since the clear and unambiguous command from the Biggies in Jerusalem that even the Apostle Paul respected ..  "ABSTAIN" from blood. ..... how about an observation, and a pressing question?

Did you know that although Jehovah God lamented the desperate times when Jerusalem was under siege ( ... that means enemies using catapult siege engines throwing huge rocks into and over their walls and crushing Jews... ) those starving to death  would EAT THEIR OWN DEAD ...

.... He NEVER once prohibited the practice.

Not even ALLUDING to forbidding it.

Go ahead... be a sport ... look it up.  It's only a CULTURAL taboo.

.Presumably those killed  bled out before being eaten, and we have been talking about how GOD views blood as his own personal property ... um... haven't we?

Delicious Soylent Green .jpg

Cannibal Duck.jpg

.... um... that was the pressing question.

.

.

Of course .. if we want to ignore God's viewpoints for PRACTICAL considerations ... like when 6,000 Bethelites and Special Pioneers were recently "laid off" ( .. and hung out to dry ...) given a map to the front door ....

 

Layoff Solution  750  .jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

What do you think “Gene Smalley” would tell you as a pretender of the truth, that he hadn’t already told past pretenders like “Randy Watters”.

I hate to seem judgmental but . . .  Gene and Randy both acted like jerks, way too often for my taste. Something seemed a little off with both of them. Also, if such a conversation took place --and it seems likely-- it seems to have taken place after the year 2000 based on the subject matter. Randy Watters was a press-room manager until 1980, and was well known for being smug, smart-alec, and sarcastic, even though he was friends with (and worked for) Tom Cabeen who was good-natured, humble, and well-liked. The point is that both Watters and Cabeen were well-known, and they attended all the Bethel Elders meetings with Smalley, but they were both disfellowshipped and kicked out of Bethel. So what made Watters think that Smalley was going to forget that?

If you are asking what Gene Smalley would say to me, I think he would tell me the truth, as long as I told him from whom I heard the rumor, and as long as I approached the matter in a serious way. (I am concerned that he will make me promise secrecy.) In general, I don't think he is a pretender of the truth. Perhaps this one issue is a difficulty at present. Most of us, I think, can deal with one serious issue at a time and not completely lose our bearings spiritually. I think he would preface it with a lot of "couched" language to make sure that I didn't think his current view was too much of a shock, and that I was still "grounded" spiritually. All this is assuming the information I received about it was correct. If it wasn't then I would expect him to clarify without hesitation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
6 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

“And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.”

I think this is saying that the foundation and structure of the congregation results in unity of faith, correct knowledge of the Son of God, and spiritual maturity, resulting in greater stability and less risk of being tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine, or by human cunning, craftiness and deceitful schemes.

I don't think you mean that all these changes (instability) over the last few years about "fractions" were caused by deceitful schemes and craftiness. But I would agree that we have given others the unavoidable impression that our doctrines can change direction as if  tossed to and fro by waves and wind. The "blood doctrine" has actually changed more often than the doctrine about "this generation." 

For example, Acts 15 was at first understood, not to be rules about whether we Christians must avoid blood, but that this was a necessary request for a time when Jewish Christians still considered themselves to be under the Mosaic Law and that it was a compromise necessary by Gentiles to avoid stumbling these Jewish Christians and Jews who were interested in conversion to Christianity. Here is the earliest Watchtower reference to the point:

He further suggested writing to them merely that they abstain from pollutions of idols, i.e., from meats offered to idols (`verse 29`), and from things strangled and from blood–as by eating such things they might become stumbling blocks to their Jewish brethren (See `1 Cor. 8:4-13`)–and from fornication. The eating of blood was forbidden, not only by the Jewish Law, but also before the Law. The same command was given to Noah. (See `Deut. 12:23`; `Gen. 9:4`.) . . . It will be noticed that nothing is said about keeping the ten commandments, nor any part of the Jewish law. It was evidently taken for granted that having received the spirit of Christ the new law of love would be a general regulation for them. The things mentioned were merely to guard against stumbling themselves or becoming stumbling blocks to others. -- Watch Tower, 11/15/92 p.350,351 Reprints p.1473

This began to change in 1909, referring to animal blood, but transfusions were still seen as a good, loving and merciful thing as late as 1945. (Animal blood in food was banned in 1927) Although I have never seen it, the Dutch Consolation (now Awake!) September 1945, evidently said:

"God never issued regulations which prohibit the use of drugs, inoculations or blood transfusions. It is an invention of people, who, like the Pharisees, leave Jehovah's mercy and love aside."  (p.16)

In the July 1, 1951 Watchtower QFR it was clarified that blood transfusions were not for Christians, but it was also clarified in the 1950's that no one would be disfellowshipped over their decision. Then in 1961 it became a disfellowshipping offense to take blood and blood products, including any fractions.Then various fractions began to be included over the years, moving to and fro on several of them before finally settling on turning the majority of usable blood fractions into a matter of conscience. Currently 100% of blood can be accepted in all but four of its various fractions.

 

EXAMPLE OF DOCTRINE CAST TO and FRO

Plasma serum for example was

  • Acceptable during WWII
  • Unacceptable in 1954
  • Acceptable in 1958
  • Unacceptable in 1963
  • Acceptable in 1965

So perhaps this type of thing is based on some kind of deceit or deception, as mentioned in the verses you quoted from Ephesians, but I don't think it's always purposeful deception. As Melinda pointed out earlier, there is a kind of deception based on desire, which is how Eve, for example, was deceived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

... JUST A NOTE ALLEN SMITH:

... for what it is worth, and certainly worth the price of electricity of a few photons on a screen ... um ... when someone defends a view that is completely contradicted by actual real world facts, and they are intelligent people, normally prone to use their intellect, as you are ... they have a choice .... change their viewpoint to reflect what is real .... which will almost always involve a great deal of anguish ... and consequences from those who hold the same irrational viewpoints ... or begin that slippery slope that leads to a fractured, and fragile mind.

As the group The Eagles sang in their incredibly perceptive song from the late 1960s or so, (paraphrased) ...

" ... Take it easy, take it easy ... don't let the sound of your own wheels, MAKE YOU CRAZY ..."

I have to daily remind myself of these things ... as the Universe will decide what is true .. and it is without mercy.

" There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." " — Daniel Webster

.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 years later...
  • Member
9 hours ago, Many Miles said:

Boy that brings back some memories! I had more than a few exchanges with Rusky on the subject of blood, fractions, and associated biblical texts, etc. There is so much left unsaid about this issue. Even academic writers usually miss some of the big things. One day. One day

11B17946-5EDF-45A7-9339-78AD4D9F4D50.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,381

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • misette

      misette 209

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Donna Mosteller

      Donna Mosteller 1

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Linnie

      Linnie 0

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.