Posted by ben1957 [Ben1957] on April 09, 1999 at 22:24:24 {qzNMJDwJ.2fVhdAiUGeIfnr8X/g5J2}:
This post is� directed at "AF" in reply to a post that was in answer to one that I had done im the middle of February.� This discussion was centred around BT (Blood Transfusions). To keep the discussion in context I am prefacing all old remarks with "previous" and my new comments with "new".
�previous ben1957
: ... How ever if a person in full control and under no pressure "willingly" accepted a BT I would treat them as DF even if the Society said it was a conscience matter (personally I see the Bible law on Blood as Binding).
�precious AF
I see. So you treat those who willingly take organ transplants and volunteer for alternative military service as DF'd persons. Have you no respect for the "faithful and discreet slave"? Who are you to decide what should be a matter of conscience for your fellow JWs?
�new ben1957
Please note what I said.."if a person in full control and under no pressure "willingly" accepted a BT".� I was talking about Blood Transfusions not organ transplants. I do respect the "faithful and discreet slave", and I was not making conscience judgements for other JWs regarding transplants. My comment was in regard to those that WILLINGLY WITHOUT ANY PRESSURE FROM ANYONE ELSE, had a blood transfusion.
You must know something that I do not in regard to transplants for I� have found no where in any WTBTS literature where organ transplants are forbidden.�
�In 1967 there was a question from readers regarding transplants. The question was "Is there any Scriptural objection to donating one�s body for use in medical research or to accepting organs for transplant from such a source?".
It is true that the answer made the point (as many people like to draw attention too) that transplants were on a par with cannibalism.� Please remember that transplants were still relatively new at this time. But please notice these two quotes from that article.
1) "Whether wider use of such operations will be made, we do not know. Nor can we decide whether a Christian should accept some animal part as a transplant; that is for personal decision"
and��� 2) "They can consider the divine principles recorded in the Scriptures and use these in making personal decisions as they look to God for direction". The article discussed many Bible principles for Christians to consider but clearly leaves it up to the INDIVIDUAL TO DECIDE. This personal decition was to be used in regard to animal and/or human transplants.
A question from readers in March 15 1980 asked "Should congregation action be taken if a baptized Christian accepts a human organ transplant, such as of a cornea or a kidney?"
After discussing similar material to the 1967 article, the bottom line of the reply was..."....For this reason, each individual faced with making a decision on this matter should carefully and prayerfully weigh matters and then decide conscientiously what he or she could or could not do before God. It is a matter for personal decision. (Gal. 6:5) The congregation judicial committee would not take disciplinary action if someone accepted an organ transplant."�
�
previous ben1957
: Some people out here are under the impression that JW must obey every thing that the WTBTS say and that is not true. (Some individuals see that way, but the WTBTS do not
previous AF
Most of the time JWs must obey, since if they don't they're liable to be DF'd, "marked" or otherwise have "privileges of service" taken away.
new ben1957
Whay JWs must obey are Gods Laws.� There is plenty of room for personal conscience for one to make his own decition on matteres.
The law of the land stipulates that when driving a car, there is a speed limit that we must addhear to. Some drivers do not think that the law is fair, the fail to realise that such laws are for the good of the community as a whole.�� If we choose to break that law we risk the consequenses. Gods LAWS are for the good of the community as a whole, if we decide to take the selfish view that they are unfaire we risk. the consequences.� The decition is still up to us.� If we get fined (or worse as in some new laws in the US regard driving), we have no one to blame but ourself.� If we break Gods law and get caught we can only blame ourself.
If we do not like the driving laws, do not drive or go somewhere else that is more leanient.� If we do not like Gods laws go else where.
previous ben1957
A JW believes all the major doctrines of "truth" eg no hell, no trinity, Gods government, his purpose for mankind, moral laws of the Bible, no Easter or Christmas or other pagan ideas.
previous AF
Many of these things are merely the opinions and human interpretations of what is in the Bible. The ever-changing ideas of WTS leaders proves that merely because they at one time claim that something is "bible-based", that's not necessarily so. You already know plenty of examples, I think.
new ben1957
Well AF you really need to do some Research and you will find that some of the major teachings of Chritianity such as Trinity, Hell fire, Imortal Soul, Christmas Easter etc� are of pagan origin and not Bible based. All� encyloprdias that Ihave looked at show the "pagan" oragins of those teachings.� The WTBTS do not stand still.��� If you take the time to examine Gods word closely you will find that even the deciples of Jesus made mistakes, had wrong interpretation of ideas, falsely prophesied, and showed that they were imperfect humans subject to making mistakes and humble enough to CHANGE them.� The WTBTS will admit when their perception of a text, word, idea has been wrong and change just as the first century Christians did.
previous ben1957
: Often when the WTBTS prints information they will use words like "it appears as if, according to current knowledge, perhaps, probably, etc. This type of language is often used in relation to new "ideas" or the application of prophecy.
previous AF�
Right. They're called "weasel words".
new ben1957�
You can call them "weasel words" if you like, thats fine with me. But what it really shows is that they do not� claim to be inspired.� It shows that the present knowledge that they have leads to a certain conclusion that may not be right, but at present explains the point to their current level of knowledge. They are not presented as absolute truth (allthough some indeviduals may take it that way, it is not what the WT is saying), but as possible explanations of a matter.
previous ben1957
�Unfortunately humans being the imperfect creatures they are often do not see such words (or do not want to) and pronounce things as truth that the WTBTS say are "may be's.
previous AF
True, but irrelevant to this thread. The ban on blood transfusions is not stated using weasel words. So what's your point?�
new ben1957
It is not irrelevant to this thread of thought because� the point is, many people here on this forum do not portray an accurate picture of what JWs believe because they only see what they want to see and read things into WT literature that is not there or only read (or quote) portions of articles.��
The ban on Blood is not stated using weasel words because it is clear cut command form God. If you can not see that, well that is your business,and I will not hold it against you. On the other hand,� JWs do beleive it to be a law from God.�� If you would like me to e-mail you some old articles from the 50's and 60's that shows the complete issue I will be glad too.
previous ben1957�
: JW are quite free to follow their conscience
previous AF
Absolute nonsense. Claiming that this is so in the case of blood transfusions is like claiming that when an armed robber threatens you with a gun, and you give him your money, that you've given it to him voluntarily. This kind of reasoning comes only from people who are desperate.
new ben1957
I made the mistake of assuming too much from potential readers.� When it comes to clear Bible law such as no blood, murder, fornication, stealing etc and pagan religious practises, a true Christian will follow Gods law to the point of giving his life. God commands and wants obeidience from his followeres. (Exodus 19:5, 23:21,22; Deut 11:27,28; 1 Sam 15:22; 2 Thes. 3:13-15; John 18:37; Heb 5:9; Acts 5:29, etc).� Gods command is to keep the congregation clean of such things.(1 Corin. 5:9,10,�� 6:9-11;� 1 Tim 1:8-10)� If a person can not abide by that, than they do not love their creator.
The following ones conscience steps in when things are not spelled out in the Bible as in the above. There are many aspects of life that must be governed by conscience and no man can judge us on those actions.� Transplants are one such area.
BEN1957