Malawi and MCP Cards?

[Anna]

2 hours ago, Pudgy said:

I developed this understanding when I started integrating information from all sources, and STOPPED ignoring hard evidence.

It explains who Cain was afraid of and why they would want to kill him on sight, even if he wandered a thousand miles away.

It even explains who Cain “married” in exile.

It even explains the Aborigines in Australia, whose culture is 60,000 years old.

Genesis 4 even explains how God considered the blood and lives of his direct created “Homo Theocraticus”  in Eden his personal property as a special possession.

Learn all you can about “Punctuated Evolution”, then substitute the term “Punctuated Creation”

Then TEST your conclusions against the Bible. They should be consistent.

It’s like the Genesis account of Creation. It makes no sense from a Space based reference point, but from an observer standing on the Earth, it does.

(  … assuming you already understand the last 4 billion or so years of Earth’s geological and atmospheric development …)

 

 

You mean Jehovah created sub humans like he created dinosaurs? 

[TrueTomHarley]

X

[TrueTomHarley]

2 hours ago, Pudgy said:

I developed this understanding when I started integrating information from all sources, and STOPPED ignoring hard evidence.

It explains who Cain was afraid of and why they would want to kill him on sight, even if he wandered a thousand miles away.

It even explains who Cain “married” in exile.

It even explains the Aborigines in Australia, whose culture is 60,000 years old.

It would also rescue me from the young earth creationists. I’ve always been leery of these guys. As speculation goes, I kinda like it. 

Play your cards right and you could even start your own religion, with yourself as the Grand Pudge.

14 minutes ago, Many Miles said:

I was thinking mushrooms.

or the White Knight.

[Anna]

Going back on topic, (of a post that hasn't been on topic, lol) in reading everyone's comments I see the reasoning behind both the against and the for blood. Personally I can see why someone would abstain (which means both eating and transfusing). My main issue is that the organization says this is a conscience matter, whereas in practice this is not true. It is the societies conscience we are told to obey. We were always taught to tell the doctors that our conscience will not allow us to break God's law on blood. But what if someone's conscience did allow them, for whatever reason? This is why I think the blood issue (whole blood) should be something between them and Jehovah only. (Someone said well then we could say the same about fornication. Well, if no one in the congregation finds out about it, then it will still be between them and Jehovah, and they will have to answer to Jehovah for it in the end.

In line with this, I have noticed that elders on the HLC no longer "interfere" or are privy to a person's medical decision. In the USA hippa laws are strict, and absolutely no one should be able to find out if someone has had a blood transfusion, even relatives. So if someone does get a blood transfusion, it remains between them and Jehovah.

I think Tom's handling of the situation with the young brother in hospital was very good. No elder should be persuading another person to follow his (the elder's) conscience, or anybody else's conscience for that matter. The conscience is each person's their own. (This is why the conscientious objection to alternative service was a farce because the brothers who objected, for the most part, didn't know why they were objecting, they were just following the societies conscience). 

The stance now is we do not fight the Superior Authorities when it comes to transfusing children. Which makes me wonder where the principle "obey God as ruler rather than men" went to? Did we decide this because we do not want to make a spectacle of ourselves, fighting court battles and making it look like JW parents want their children to die? Don't get me wrong, I am glad about it, but where in truth does it leave  "obey God as ruler rather than man?" It seems like the organization has compromised... or not? Same with the fractions becoming  a conscience matter. I get why this was so, they "didn't want to get "dogmatic" (a phrase we will probably be hearing a lot more). But how much of this was also for practical reasons? The guidance about blood fractions itself says that people should realize that many vaccines (which members of Bethel used) and other therapeutic medicines contains blood fractions. So the person who says no to blood fractions should realize this, and then make an informed decision. I wonder if the covid vaccines had been based on blood fractions, or contained blood fractions, how would the organization have handled that? Probably they wouldn't have been able to "push" it like they did, and would have just had to say it's each person's decision, based on their own conscience. 

For me, when it comes to the question of blood, we don't want to be putting our life at risk just for man made rules. We have to be sure it is Jehovah's law, and by the looks of it this camp is split into two. Some say yes and some say no. 
I feel like we should apply Occam's razor and go with the simplest and clearest explanation. 

It's all giving me a headache...
 

[Many Miles]

12 minutes ago, Anna said:

It's all giving me a headache...

Take two of whatever makes you feel better, and call me in the morning. 

[Thinking]

14 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Adding to Thinkings list, of which each item is different, so that I think that would have answered your question, is just plain ‘ol human error. Anyone who has ever worked in healthcare (my wife is a retired nurse) knows there is plenty of it. 

In my area, hospitals laid off nurses who would not accepted the Covid shot. This led to collapse of the hospital system, as there were a lot of them, not easily or affordably replaced, so largely not replaced, making the remaining staff take up the slack over which they protested and went on strike. Do you think this worked to increase the safety of transfusion protocol?

Just recently local hospitals were found to be in severe violation of a law that they must not be understaffed. It’s a LAW—how could that have not fixed the problem? It’s as though administrators say, ‘If our nurses quit, the very stones will take care of you!’

Everything is collapsing. And whereas JW’s stand on war, tobacco, alcohol and drug abuse, and compliance with safety laws, place them BY FAR among the safest religions out there, you keep flailing a on a number so relatively tiny that neither Thinking nor myself can think of an example we personally know of. And neither of us are youngsters, especially Thinking.

In a revolving population of several million you are going to find countless examples of anything. But there is such a thing as focusing on the trees so minutely as to not see the forest.

Ha..your older than me…

[Thinking]

13 hours ago, JW Insider said:

First she gets perceived condescension from MM, and now you are going to give her a superiority complex.

Being the oldest should mean more wisdom and respect wouldn’t it…🤭

[Pudgy]

9 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

It would also rescue me from the young earth creationists. I’ve always been leery of these guys. As speculation goes, I kinda like it. 

Play your cards right and you could even start your own religion, with yourself as the Grand Pudge.

or the White Knight.

… sigh ….

… hard to play cards right with no thumbs.

[TrueTomHarley]

7 hours ago, Thinking said:

Being the oldest should mean more wisdom and respect wouldn’t it…🤭

Well, in that case she would be ancient.

[Many Miles]

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Well, in that case she would be ancient.

Sounds like most of us are limping along!

[Anna]

This is what happens when a thread gets worn out. Everyone starts mucking about, with no more meaningful contributions to add. It's a sign.

Tacos anyone?

[Pudgy]

… just waiting for the blockbuster movie “Adam and Eve vs Australian Aborigines”.