Jump to content

BillyTheKid46

Member
  • Content Count

    940
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    49

Everything posted by BillyTheKid46

  1. Just curious Srecko. You keep implying the Watchtower is wrong for somehow having two different standards between crime and sin that you speculate they shouldn't have. Under the definitions you submitted, Which Sin under Crime do you believe secular law gives the Watchtower to PUNISH a person under the authority of crimes and punishment? Please be specific! On how the Watchtower should punish a crime of pedophilia for insistence, that secular law man's law won't have a problem with. I don't recall, where the Watchtower has incarceration cells for the wicked. 🤫 And how those that have paid their debt to society for a crime should have a different meaning for the Watchtower and not other religions or for secular law that implements those laws.
  2. This is one complete failure in your part. The Watchtower instructs their members to trust in God that the spiritual food given does conform to scripture. Therefore, people reading irrational comments on apostate sites should consider the deception given by ex-witnesses.
  3. What do overseers, Bishops, Deacons, Leaders have in common in 1 Timothy 3:1-13? Therefore, even by your standards of irrational thought, today's Elders qualify since they are anointed by God’s Holy Spirit. Your obstructionist view, your misguided view, your hateful view won’t redefine scripture to elevate you on something you will never be, part of Christ Body and part of Christ church. If you cannot abide by Paul’s Pastoral Epistles to Timothy, your accomplice has forsaken you as much as you have forsaken God. Qualifications for Overseers 3 The saying is vtrustworthy: If anyone aspires to wthe office of overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Therefore xan overseer1 must be above reproach, ythe husband of one wife,2 zsober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, ahospitable, bable to teach, 3 not a drunkard, not violent but cgentle, not quarrelsome, dnot a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own household well, with all dignity ekeeping his children submissive, 5 for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for wGod’s church? 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may fbecome puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover, he must be well thought of by goutsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into ha snare of the devil. [1] I won’t argue who is the “body of Christ” since it’s clear, no one here ever got it right by the Watchtower teachings if they think the anointed are the only one’s comprised of that body, when indeed scripture refers to the body as the church. The gift the 144,000 will have is a gift to serve Christ in the heavens as anointed kings while the rest of the anointed followers by God’s Holy Spirit will rejoice on earth. The only separation of Christ Body, is in “terminology” that’s it. Christ church will remain united regardless of what you think, in the heavens and on earth, and “all” true Christians are part of Christ Body as a church. 1 Corinthians 12:27 27Now you are the body of Christ, and each of you is a member of it. 28And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, and those with gifts of healing, helping, administration, and various tongues.…
  4. You can spin it all you want. Misapplying scripture is not going to get your resolve, granted. The chosen back then, just like today under the confines of Christianity are chosen by the spirit of God. Danker, Greek NT Lexicon (DAN) [DANK] ἅγιος ἅγιος, α, ον [Skt. assoc.] ‘set apart for dedication to the interests or expectations of deity’, holy – a. of things, holy, sacred, consecrated: Jerusalem as holy city Mt 4:5; God’s temple τὸ ἅγιον 1 Cor 3:17, also τὰ ἅγια Hb 9:12; faith that equals an extraordinary relationship to God Jd 20; vegetation Ro 11:16; nt. as noun: τὸ ἅγιον someth. that has been consecrated Mt 7:6. – b. of pers., holy: of God as worthy of ultimate reverence J 17:11; of Jesus: while unborn Lk 1:35, as noun ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ Mk 1:24; most frequently of the Holy Spirit Mt 1:18 al., and esp. in Acts; of transcendent entities dedicated to the service of God 1 Th 3:13; 2 Th 1:10; frequently of believers in general οἱ ἅγιοι God’s people, special people, saints Ro 1:7; 1 Cor 1:2; Col 1:26, and specifically marked by behavior exhibiting their dedication to God Eph 1:4. You keep inferring only to the saints when scripture includes those that have been commissioned to take the lead. Therefore, Elders can be included. The Watchtower GB can be included as well, but their purpose is more profound and should be held to the highest standard in the service of God. That keeps them spiritually effective as a group of anointed fulfilling the dispensation of spiritual food at the proper time, but also as the 7 wise men among the sheep to shoulder that spiritual responsibility. You insist in “hiding” the different gifts God assigns! That is an unconscionable act. Christian Heresy! The basic principle is delineated with two “as” (ὡς, hōs) clauses (“as God apportioned to each”; “as God called each one”) followed by two “thus” (οὕτως, houtōs) clauses (“live thus”; “I ordain thus in all the churches”). The verb μερίζειν (merizein) means to “assign,” “divide,” or “distribute something,” as in the apportioning of the promised land to the various tribes (Num. 26:52–56; Josh. 14:5). Paul does not specify, however, what it is that the Lord has apportioned to each one (see additional note). In Rom. 12:3, he uses the verb to refer to “the measure of faith that God has assigned to each one” (ἑκάστῳ ὡς ὁ θεὸς ἐμέρισεν μέτρον πίστεως, hekastō hōs ho theos emerisen metron pisteōs) and then rattles off a list of gifts (12:4–8).3 He argues in 1 Cor. 7:7 that “each one” has different gifts, and he may be thinking here of the different measures of faith, grace, or gifts they have received from Christ to live out their Christian calling (so Calvin 1960: 151; Conzelmann 1975: 126; Lang 1986: 96; Schrage 1995: 133). If the verb refers to the gifts apportioned to them by God (cf. 3:5; 12:4–11), it would underscore the assorted endowments each one has in the community. There is no one way for a Christian to live his or her calling, because each is to live in line with his or her gifts (Talbert 1987: 40). To try to become something one is not or to expect others to do so is a recipe for disaster. If Paul intended the object of the verb ἐμέρισε to be “spiritual gifts,” it is perhaps surprising that he does not use the same verb when he discusses the distribution of varying gifts in chapter 12, particularly in 12:7, where he writes “to each is given [ἑκάστῳ … δίδοται, hekastō … didotai] the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.” Other interpreters argue that the verb’s object is the individual’s lot in life, which the Lord has assigned, “the circumstances … in which the believer was providentially placed at the time of his conversion” (Godet 1886: 353; so also Lightfoot 1895: 228; Findlay 1910: 829; Weiss 1910: 184; Holl 1928: 219; Héring 1962: 54; Barrett 1968: 168, 170; Fee 1987: 310; R. Collins 1999: 283; Thiselton 2000: 549). The philological evidence for the meaning of καλεῖν (kalein, to call) and κλῆσις (klēsis, calling, 7:20) is crucial for determining what Paul intends.[1] Therefore, the only counterfeit priest here is you and your application of misguided understanding of script. The simplest and the most evident on your misunderstanding, who are all in the “body of Christ” that you continue to dwell on as a self-proclaimed anointed. Anointed and anyone, being saved by the spirit is part of that body. You have overplayed this false theory. A new theme is needed! 1 Corinthians 12:12-27 English Standard Version (ESV) One Body with Many Members [1] Garland, D. E. (2003). 1 Corinthians. Baker exegetical commentary on the New Testament (302–303). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic. As, the above shows even, Biblical scholars disagree with your approach. However, I've grown tired. Give Srecko a more false approach to scripture. He'll give a good review.
  5. Is it any longer than what you post? That would depend on you and if you understand 1 Peter 5:3. The first century Elder by comparison still had more authority than what secular law allows modern day Elders. Therefore, Today's Elders are commanded by God to uphold the cleanliness and spirituality of the congregation. Then you need to fully appreciate 1 Corinthians 6:2, since in this case Paul is referring to brethren suing each other. It would not be conceivable that a Christian that sued a fellow Christian for theft of service, or thereof, could NOT settle that argument only through Roman law. That became a standard for other more serious Christian sins. You know the list, why deny it. Then it becomes a matter between spiritual cleansing and crime and punishment by secular authority. A right, the early Hebrew nation had. In modern times, it remains the same format for modern Elders. In that sense, the Elders are NOT running people’s lives, but they do have a scriptural obligation and moral duty before God to keep the congregation clean. Acts 20:28 Of all people here, you should know better! Luke 17:3
  6. Sorry about that. I keep forgetting you take people's words literally when my words were to be used as ultimately. I guess you are one of those that use the "young literal bible" to exploit word for word, ideology. You've been here long enough to know what people are actually saying Srecko. Don't spoil it! Those that understand scripture, understand God's goal of perfection. Those deemed righteous and resurrected will be in a sinful state. Resurrection will be in an accumulative time-lapse, not all at once. 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 refers to whom. Now the misapplication is evident here with that of 1 John 3:2 or Revelation 20:11-15. Therefore, Jesus will resurrect who first?
  7. With Biblical matters that secular authority doesn't take into account, that's a stretch. A poor mans ideology. However, without cause, Government will punish the faithful for obeying God. Does this mean, the Watchtower "rejects" man's authority? I think we all know the answer to that. The Watchtower obeys secular authority as seen by the leaked BOE letters. It was misconstrued or forcefully misdirected by unscrupulous people here. That failed didn't it. It blew up in their face, didn't it. Yes in deed. Scripture has many symbolic visual effects. That doesn't mean we should reject scripture to benefit our own understanding. After all, judgment day is a reality. Just like it was in Noah's day. Just like it was in Moses day. Just, like it was in Lots day. So forth and so on. Did any one of us see it, NO! But it is written for us to understand, God's intent to bring this earth back to paradise with "sinless" people.
  8. How sad that you invoke scripture and cite it without a meaningful argument that TRUTH be told, it is NOT the Elders, GB or the Watchtower for that matter that concludes those that consider themselves Christians and pledge loyalty by baptism will be punished by God as instructed by Christ who left clear instructions in scripture for those that became Christians and reverted to their worldly ways, or those that didn’t experience worldly ways due to being born within the organization but felt they had missed out on something good and exciting as putting to death their spirituality because there are people out in the world that cannot defend the misapplication of said scripture. I believe we all know the list of infractions mentioned in scripture, especially the ones about blasphemy and sin against God’s Holy Spirit. A true tribute to your father the devil as a false prophet. A poor man’s excuse to lash out by someone that consider themselves anointed, now that’s laughable! 😂 1 Timothy 5:19-20, 1 Timothy 5:17, Acts 25:16, Acts 24:2-13
  9. Just keep in mind John the Baptist thought that perhaps Jesus should be baptizing him, but Jesus answered in the affirmative that John should baptize him this once. Matthew 3:14-15 Therefore, The Holy spirit with Jesus became a visual effect, rather than those that receive God’s Holy Spirit. Jesus baptism in water was different from that of Paul that placed his hands on those that he baptized, the idea behind all of it, it is a symbolic gesture with literal consequences for those that chose to be baptized then turned their backs on God. 2 Peter 2:20 The point being, Jesus did not claim his baptism unto himself rather than through God’s Holy Spirit. Then baptism becomes transcendent through Jesus Christ not by Christ Jesus. The Holy Spirit is dispensed by God not Christ. Do you personally believe, those that sin against God’s Holy Spirit is a crime that should be punished by secular authority? John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13, Matthew 12:31 How about fornication, homosexuality, etc. Should those sin be looked at as crimes punishable by secular authority? Remember I’m referring to today’s modern democratic society. Where do you define Jesus words of give Caesar what belongs to Caesar, but give God what be longs to God Where’s the separation between church and state. You cannot combine both to mean the same. Therefore, separate your literal term with biblical term, since we are speaking about ancient laws applied to modern man. That doesn't mean we are going to carry a sword to punish a homosexual, but a homosexual can be punished by God through his laws. Once again, punishment is directed to who and for what reason.
  10. Since Matthew 28:19 is referring to the “great commission” it became a standard on how the apostles and all those Jesus commissioned to go and proclaim the good news of God’s Heavenly Kingdom. I don’t recall when John the Baptist told Jesus, I am baptizing you on your name. That in itself doesn’t mean Jesus couldn’t be used as the pro-claimer of that commission. John the Baptist baptized in the NAME OF REPENTANCE. I believe scripture gives the “father” top billing and then Jesus. Therefore, it is through Christ that commission was put into motion. While it is a personal decision to dedicate oneself to God, uttering words out load or in silence would be irrelevant. The “ACT” is what is needed for God to see ones true intent. Does that necessarily mean that a baptism can be undone? Symbolically, it can if a person desires it, but it is not a necessity to reemerge oneself with water again. You can’t, unring that bell. However, the position Paul took with the Ephesians in Acts 19:5 was in the name of our lord Jesus. In their case, simply put, just like Jesus, Paul is following Jesus footsteps by the power of the great commission. I “charge you” or I “commission you” to go forward and proclaim the good news of God’s Heavenly Kingdom. Paul understood the teachings of Christ. However, if you notice, Paul DIDN’T baptize them with water, but instead by laying his hand upon them that the Holy Spirit was granted. Does that mean, the use of water is wrong, No! Water was used a symbol for purity, cleansing and even Jesus and John used water for baptism. John 3:22-23 Therefore, the Water baptism of John the Baptist was a symbolic gesture of good will and faith toward those willing to obey the upcoming messiah and God by adhering to Jesus words and OBEY God’s Commandments. Does that mean no one can rededicate themselves by water submersion, no! A person baptized as an infant can rededicate themselves for obvious reason. How about a person from another religion. That would be left to the conscience of that person. If that person really felt he/she really didn’t understand the true intent of baptism then, they can rededicate themselves by baptism with a greater appreciation and by a better understanding. How about disfellowshipped persons. It is not a necessity unless they feel “repentance” is not enough to cleanse the error of their ways. Once again, a decision of the conscience.
  11. You have a misconception here. Watchtower lawyers are there in an advisory capacity. They might have received certain information in order to advise an Elder what the current secular laws are being considered in their state, territory or country. The spiritual aspect is left to the wisdom of the Elders since they are the ones with the firsthand knowledge of what is going on. That wisdom is based on scripture and should be applied by scriptural understanding with discernment. Therefore, your continued effort to intertwine both is fruitless to sensible people. The fact that you compare crime and sin as the same, when crime is a sin, but what constitutes punishment from God and what constitutes punishment from God’s secular authority are two distinct avenues of God’s authority.
  12. The approach made is acceptable. It defines the interest between doctrine and science without having to overlap them to make it confusing. The watchtower has always been interested in the advancements in science about blood since it is a close issue for true witnesses. The good thing, the science community has become proactive into finding different ways to treat illness and injuries without a traditional approach. Because of the witness’ faith, science has made good advancements for such a purpose. *** w85 4/15 p. 21 Insight on the News *** Jehovah’s Witnesses have always been interested in this type of research. While the Witnesses may allow nonblood fluids to be used for transfusion purposes, they will not compromise their religious beliefs—even when faced with danger—to allow for a blood transfusion. At all times these Christians hold firm to the Biblical injunction: “Keep abstaining from . . . blood.”—Acts 15:29. It would be a good idea though, those that are making the argument about blood actually know what they are talking about with GOOD research. Especially when it comes to the process of kosher meat, which you have made a sensible observation. Found inside - Page 660 Meat for the Jewish trade—known as kosher meat—is slaughtered, washed, and salted according to ancient Biblical laws, .... The edible byproducts include blood, brains, casings, fats, gelatin, hearts, kidneys, livers, oxtails, sweetbreads, .. Found inside - Page 44 Both meat and poultry are salted to remove blood because Jewish dietary laws forbid the use of blood as food. Fish To be kosher, seafood ... They also cannot contain lard or other nonkosher animal by-products. A K ® S ®d v*-^ PARVE A ... A far cry from that of ancient Rome for drinking the blood of Gladiators (Celsus, On Medicine 3.23) or blood pudding that is flavored by some in today's society.
  13. Perhaps. Then you can agree it’s a matter of personal decision how anyone is allowed to conduct themselves, especially when it comes to obeying God. I was recently advised, my D’fd brother was in the hospital and it was life threatening. I had no problem having to go down the hospital to support my brother in his time of need. Even though, he has personally stayed away from the family. His choice! When I got there, I greeted him with tender loving care. We spoke of things that are going around the world, and how he thought God’s day is vastly approaching. I advised him to return to his roots and accept the evil that had befallen him after the death of his dear wife. He shrugged his shoulders and that was the end of that conversation. We continued to speak about other things. He didn’t entice me with worldly views or encourage me to defy God in any way. Had he done so, I would have treated my visit as a bad association. Bad company. I would have wished him a fast recovery, and I would have left. As a person of conscience that he is, he would have understood, as he has done in many occasions. It’s those that wish to lay claim to fame by publicly voicing themselves in public that get the attention. Attention for the wrong reason, since no one gets D’fd for no reason. There is also the cultural aspect of people not willing to speak to someone. In Mexico, Homosexuality is a grave sin. Therefore, a Catholic parent with a gay child will reject that child because of culture within that religion. Because, the Catholic faith is now accepting of homosexuality. However, faith won't change the minds of those that hold on to old values. That is actually the way the Watchtower and scripture defines “stay away from bad influence”. If such influence is transmitted by mail, TEXT, messages, in person, etc. guess what, don’t allow it in your life as a true Christian. Why? For the fear of not being influenced by that association. In simple words, Jesus would say, why give the devil a chance to corrupt your good Christian life. This can also be defined from Christian member to member. I will agree that the majority of present day witnesses don’t understand the concept of bad association that is literally forced by an ex-witness view of shunning. Remember, that word was made by opposers that they themselves falsely claim the Watchtower is about.
  14. Once again, you have missed the point Srecko. I understand your need to sway your argument. However, those in the world that shun people do it for divisive reasons. Many times, not out of love. The Watchtower supports a structured moral and spiritual reasoning just as Jesus indicated and mandated. You seem to forget, who the author of this “agape love” is from. When, society deals with the psychology of dealing with, for instance an addicted family member, many times they just don’t want to deal with that member. There are some as seen on TV with the TV series “intervention” that we can see how devastating an addiction can be. Then, you would have to ask, are these interventions out of love for that member through the teaching of Christ, or are they simply out of love for their family member with no consequence, as to their personal salvation that is needed for everlasting life. Therefore, when I state view your criticism from all angles, don’t try to sway your argument to define your personal view, but use commonsense to see a situation for what it is, through the eyes of the world, but most importantly through the eyes of our savior Christ Jesus that framed the work you are criticizing. The Watchtower obeys those given Biblical laws. Therefore, witnesses should have no problem obeying those laws set forward by God. Matthew 19:17, 1 John 2:3-6, Romans 7:12 If a witness does, then they are not seeing the objectivity of their personal emotion not to understand, when to apply "agape" love to those who have departed from God's law to reenter a world as a tax collector. Then, there is nothing biblical or spiritual that anyone can say or help with, unless a person is willing to repent. Then they have the help and support of the Watchtower and witnesses toward a repentant person. Personally, you should understand as a critic of the Watchtower and as an ex-witness. What responsibility do you bear that you are NOT willing to recognize or accept, just to make the argument your part of?
  15. You seem to have missed the point. The point is, what's the difference when worldly people do the same. Another issue that has not been considered here, while I have personally seen it. There are many ex-witnesses that shun their family out of their own volition. They are the one departing from their family. There is one experience where a witness mother did everything she could to speak with her daughter and instead the daughter moved to France as not to have any further contact with her mother. That witness mother, died never knowing what happened to her daughter. Therefore, look at your criticism from all angles. You will find that the word shunning has ZERO credibility with us that have experienced the other side of that word. Reverse shunning, start learning that phrase and store it in your vocabulary.
  16. I would be interested to know how this application can be seen as sound judgement when regular people out in the world shun family members for drug addiction, alcoholism, homosexuality, etc. They, don't accept phone calls, emails, mail, messages relayed by others, secondhand notifications, etc. What makes a Watchtower lawyer unique under the same standard that worldly people use to set people straight. How many drug addicted people live with you? How many extreme alcoholics. In LA, there's a place called skid row where all the abandoned drug addicts and alcoholics live. There are many generous people that go help, but how many do you think will welcome such a person in their home. People need to start thinking before they write if you want this forum to be seen as academic. Now some will argue about fornication and adultery. How can agape love influence those that are doing spiritual harm to themselves and those they have encouraged?
  17. I won't deal with idiot's anymore, especially sick minded ones. Get some help!
  18. Instead of twisting my words as you usually do, try to understand an intelligent observation. I know it is extremely difficult for you, but give it a try. You are not dealing with Anna, and James. If you are going to object to my comments, then object to them in, an intelligent way, not directly out of ignorance of not knowing what you are ultimately talking about. *** w61 9/15 pp. 561-562 Using Life in Harmony with the Will of God *** DANGERS AVOIDED BY OBEDIENCE 8 The position of Jehovah’s witnesses in regard to blood transfusion is not one based on the approval or disapproval with which the practice meets in medical circles. It is not the safety or danger of the procedure that governs their decision, but the Word of God. However, knowledge of some of the effects from which one is protected by obedience to God’s law on blood does enhance one’s appreciation for the rightness of Jehovah’s ways. 9 The general practice among medical doctors in recent years has been to give blood in the belief that it may do some good. Sometimes it is given because of the insistence of patients or to satisfy relatives who want to be sure that “everything possible has been done.” Concerning this the Director of the Blood Bank at New York University-Bellevue Medical Center said: “Blood transfusions have been administered on the theory that they can never do any harm and might possibly benefit the patient. This idea is wrong because there are dangers inherent in blood transfusion.” Says the journal of the American Academy of General Practice: “It is unfortunate that many have lost the fear of transfusion and now order a transfusion as blithely as ordering a bottle of saline.” Over four thousand years ago Jehovah God told man that he should not take the blood of other creatures into his body; and modern medical practice confirms the fact that violation of that law is fraught with grave dangers. Therefore, it’s not what the Watchtower is referring to with the safety of blood transfusion but what science said about blood transfusion THAT THE WATCHTOWER ACCEPTED as sound advice. That has changed with fraction blood since it has been studied more carefully than it was since the beginning of the ideology of human blood transfused blood. As for kosher, try some deeper research. You might find the expression "fraction" is a viable interpretation, instead of your distorted literal view of it.
  19. I won't get into Allen Smith nuance. I'm sure he can defend himself with any debate pushed forward here. When, Meat is processed as kosher, then you have to understand the term fraction. I don't believe understanding the physics in science can undermine an intellectual observation. I believe that point has not been correctly communicated. The subject was escalated to the Watchtower doctrine with blood. The point being missed is, while whole blood had many complications and was misunderstood by the science community, fraction blood byproducts have been studied. I would say a byproduct, by comparison would be safer than a regular whole blood transfusion. Therefore, it was beneficial to voice the dangers of whole blood as the early Watchtower did, due to health complications rather than how it is now, leaving “fraction blood” to the individual’s conscience. Transfusions is not a cure and it won’t save every life. It however, remains the cheaper option for doctors and hospitals. That's the hard sell for them. It doesn't mean other means haven't worked, they have, it just cost them more to save a life for moral and religious reasons than to simply transfuse whole blood. Therefore, doctors by the aid of ex-witnesess are demonizing the Watchtower stance, when they could apply bloodless surgeries or blood byproducts that don't require whole blood or blood period. They still use that misleading platform in an attempt to shame witnesses to accept blood. This is what the public observes and uses as an excuse to attack the Watchtower. A poor mans excuse for an intellectual debateGiven that argument, there is NO contraction in standards by the Watchtower. Another thing, the science community is researching, the structural genetic code or genetic marker morphing by blood transfusion. Bone marrow will change a person’s DNA. Something, those that are contemplating the use fraction blood will need to consider.
  20. I don't have a flair for your stupidity anymore James. There is nothing intelligent that comes out of that crooked mind than can be debated.
  21. Frankly, this is an irrational conclusion. Try to summarize the dialect, correctly. 😏
  22. Interesting. I guess everyone here is vegetarian. Any meat still contains a small amount of blood by product (Fraction). The red liquid juice is not blood. That’s a misconception because it is red. It’s a myoglobin protein. That helps oxygen storage. Ironically, it can be compared to the hemoglobin in blood. While the blood is led out in the slaughter house, no meat is completely free of blood byproduct in a cellular level. Therefore, when scripture states let the blood spill out, it’s not saying to get your wash rag and scrub the carcass. You can bleach it out, and still have micro blood product left over. I wonder what history reveals about blood transfusion that ignorant people don’t take into account. Could it be fools just want to have something to say against the Watchtower, they are willing to blindly attack like a ravenous animal everything the Watchtower offers as sound doctrine? Hmm! Blood transfusion. I remember when people didn’t understand the “different types” of blood that actually got people killed by transfusing the wrong type. Science then figured out how to store blood instead of having a direct donor. Then, I seem to recall a little thing called transmission of disease by blood transfusion. I wonder if those people are comfortable living the rest of their lives with Hepatitis A, B, and C. etc. Then, doctors found out, there was actually a rejection of transfused blood. Then, science found out how people could get HIV, Aides from transfused blood. Then science figured out stored blood is only good for 14-21 days, and all that donated blood will go to waste if it isn’t transferred to blood banks that actually need it. Then science figured out that not all microbes (infectious diseases) can be screened out and eliminated in stored blood, no matter how hard they try to clean it. Then fraction blood was introduced to give the recipient the choice to choose their conscience instead of some delusional ideology about it being about monetary or lawsuits. If a person dies due to their conscience, then they made that choice. Yes! There is a lot of academic intelligence going on here that a 3-year old would understand it better. It’s great to be part of the human race, when children think better, than adults. I guess that’s why Jesus said, bring me the children to teach.
  23. I guess my response was too intellectual. I wonder why! 😉 Earlier post above: The question should be, what kind of sensible interaction should be with a family member unwilling to obey God that once did? Must be a Hitler lover or at the very least, a Trump supporter! Which one are you James? 😈 Matthew 15:14 14Disregard them! They are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.”
  24. Good way to manipulate the Watchtower literature RYAN. What’s even worse is your assertion, those who follow scripture should be guilty of supporting scripture? The theme you have corrupted is: *** w17 October p. 12 The Truth Brings, “Not Peace, But a Sword” *** The Truth Brings, “Not Peace, But a Sword” Now if a family member is D’fd or disassociated because that person is no longer willing to obey God? Then what good would it do to that person to hear the word of God? What would be the purpose of continually texting, phoning, and sending them letters if you know they will be thrown away because it will become a contentious subject matter to them. Won’t they hang up if you start talking about scripture? Won’t they say, give it a rest, that’s your life not mind anymore. So what good is it to argue with a fallen family member or friend. *** w17 October p. 16 The Truth Brings, “Not Peace, But a Sword” *** IF A FAMILY MEMBER LEAVES JEHOVAH Therefore, what would the truth bring that member if they will reject it out of strife? As, an ex-witness that post a lot of nothing good. You can use yourself as an excellent example. Has reading about scripture brought you any closer to God? Or further away from God? How about, Srecko, Witness, John. Has reading about scripture brought them any closer? Or do they have to desperately defend their personal evil now that you people have committed apostasy. Think man! Think! Then maybe you will start to comprehend your ideology is wasteful! The question should be, what kind of sensible interaction should be with a family member unwilling to obey God that once did? That goes to the core of knowing the path of righteousness and now they personally chose to condemn it on their own. However, RYAN, have you heard of "THE CHURCH OF GOD"? What is the difference with their bylaws than that of the Watchtower?
  25. HahHAHHAHHaaahahahaha! Thanks for making my point in this open forum, about the closed one. Like I said, when will you stop looking like a pathetic loser! 😫🤣

×
×
  • 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.