JW's please stay away

[JayJayDee]

A JW friend from another forum told me that a few years ago. I told the JW's and they didn't come around until this year. I'm not gonna ask them any more, I'll just sit in my living room watching and waving at them without answering the door.

That is your call and your right. They will get the message. Just realise why they come....there is no evil intent. There is nothing in it for them apart from trying to save your life. We love God and he has commissioned this work (Matt 24:14) and we love people, as God does. I don't think most people understand that it is a sacrifice to spend precious time looking for lost 'sheep' when most would not volunteer to help others without some kind of tangible reward.

Peace to you Awoon

 

[Awoon]

That is your call and your right. They will get the message. Just realise why they come....there is no evil intent. There is nothing in it for them apart from trying to save your life. We love God and he has commissioned this work (Matt 24:14) and we love people, as God does. I don't think most people understand that it is a sacrifice to spend precious time looking for lost 'sheep' when most would not volunteer to help others without some kind of tangible reward.

Peace to you Awoon

Yes I know that. Peace to you also.

 

[Flankerl]

There is nothing in it for them apart from trying to save your life.

So much arrogance.

 

[JayJayDee]

So much arrogance.

Is it arrogant to want to save someone who doesn't believe they need saving?

Is it arrogant to warn people of an approaching disaster?

We are just being obedient. (Matt 28:19, 20) If people don't want the lifeline, they can throw it back. :ignore: (Matt 120:11-15)

We are just the messengers, you are free to ignore us....but we wish you wouldn't.

 

[Sunstone]

Is it arrogant to want to save someone who doesn't believe they need saving?

Is it arrogant to warn people of an approaching disaster?

We are just being obedient. (Matt 28:19, 20) If people don't want the lifeline, they can throw it back. :ignore: (Matt 120:11-15)

We are just the messengers, you are free to ignore us....but we wish you wouldn't.

So, in other words, your pretty much blind to the harm your teachings, your organization, and your methods have sometimes caused people?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

As has already been mentioned, one is "fed" intravenously when food cannot be taken by mouth. Consuming blood via a transfusion is to us, the same as taking it into the body by mouth. Why does the method of intake make the blood somehow less sacred to God? It is God who forbids the consumption of blood. As it's Creator, surely recognition of its sacredness to him should make us think twice.
If you were dying of thirst and someone offered you a cup of blood to drink, would you drink it? Would you break God's law to save your life? This is what is at issue for us. We do not impose our views on others, but we will defend them to those who question our position. It isn't really an issue anymore. Bloodless procedures are now preferred. Any doctor worth his salt will not use it.

So, if blood has been demonstrated to be less than an optimal treatment in medicine in today's world and in fact, a procedure that doctors know can carry grave risks to a patient.....if it is demonstrated that the prime reason why it continues to be promoted is mainly financial, how can ignorance continue to prevail? Isn't it time to be better informed?

Why are people asked if they have EVER HAD A BLOOD TRANSFUSION when admitted to hospital?


And this is immaterial to the issue. It is recognising the sanctity of blood to its Creator and showing due respect. Israelites were not commanded to wash every drop of blood from their meat. It was to be drained out on the earth symbolically returning its life to God. The Pharisees took God's law and added to it things he never commanded.


Jehovah's Witnesses recognise that taking blood into the body, regardless of the reason or the method is contrary to God's law. If others wish to take blood, that is up to them. We have educated ourselves so efficiently that our Hospital Liaison Committee brothers are consulted by doctors when treating Witness patients.



I think this is a completely different issue H. Man has God's permission to slaughter animals for food. He established how they were to be killed and prepared. In Australia, there are very strict laws governing animal slaughter.
We do not have to be too concerned about how animals are treated here. Other nations may have huge problems, however. Each must do their own research.

The only thing that makes all of this tolerable for me is the assurance that, in the new world, no harm will befall any creature. We are designed to be vegetarian and it appears that all creatures will return to that state, including man.

.The difference is one is taking blood through the veins because of lost of blood to save ones life and the other is taking in blood through the digestive system for sustenance or religious ritual.
Scripture forbids the digestion of blood for sustenance and religious ritual.

.you are asking the wrong person if they would break scripture to save their life. I don't follow scripture at least not in a religious/obedience sense.
I may not take the blood just because I don't know where it is coming from and it would just make me throw up anyway because I'm not used to it and I'm vegetarian. But yes I would break watchtower interpretation of the law to save my life...who knows, they may change the interpretation in ten years

.if the draining of blood is symbolic and in relation to the preparation of meat and not literal so you don't have to wash out the blood as much as humanly possible, what does it have to do with blood tranfusions?

.we have animal farm animal rights laws as well and still slaughterhouses have been caught beating, throwing and strangling animals as well leaving them in very poor living conditions. So unless you buy meat only with a cruelty free label (we have RSPCA certified meat for example) you don't know what happened to that animal before it went on your plate. Especially when you eat out at say KFC for example who got caught physically abusing their chickens.

 

[Pegg]

.The difference is one is taking blood through the veins because of lost of blood to save ones life and the other is taking in blood through the digestive system for sustenance or religious ritual.
Scripture forbids the digestion of blood for sustenance and religious ritual.

what do you think sustenance means?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

what do you think sustenance means?

I mean to digest something as food or drink for the taste and nutritional value, for example the Inuits leave the blood in their meat and other tribes eat blood clots dipped in milk. I don't have a problem with that they are used to it, but that's what I mean.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

So unless you buy meat only with a cruelty free label (we have RSPCA certified meat for example) you don't know what happened to that animal before it went on your plate.

I wish we had that here.

 

[Flankerl]

Is it arrogant to want to save someone who doesn't believe they need saving?

Is it arrogant to warn people of an approaching disaster?

We are just being obedient. (Matt 28:19, 20) If people don't want the lifeline, they can throw it back. :ignore: (Matt 120:11-15)

We are just the messengers, you are free to ignore us....but we wish you wouldn't.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Katzpur]

I wish we had that here.

Well, what do you know, Frankie. You and I have found something we can agree on.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

We are just being obedient. (Matt 28:19, 20) If people don't want the lifeline, they can throw it back. :ignore: (Matt 120:11-15)

The system would better be served with a no-solicitation list, since a life preserver once revoked turns into a bludgeon with repeated casts.

 

[rusra02]

The system would better be served with a no-solicitation list, since a life preserver once revoked turns into a bludgeon with repeated casts.

I think it was mentioned previously anyone who doesn't want Jws to visit them can ask they be placed on a do-not-call list, and Jws will make every effort to respect their wishes. At times, we simply forget to check for do not calls. And we apologize for any mistakes we make. Even Christ said at Revelation 3:20;" Look! I am standing at the door and knocking. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come into his house and take the evening meal with him and he with me." Jesus often used meals to impart spiritual information. Jws are not knocking to be invited in for a meal, but to impart the knowledge they have gained through careful study of the Bible. Such spiritual "food" can lead to life everlasting.

 

[Pegg]

I mean to digest something as food or drink for the taste and nutritional value, for example the Inuits leave the blood in their meat and other tribes eat blood clots dipped in milk. I don't have a problem with that they are used to it, but that's what I mean.

sustenance means to sustain or nourish, yes.

Isnt that the same thing when blood is injected into someone...the purpose for the injection is to nourish and sustain them.

I dont see a difference with eating it or injecting it. It has the same purpose. No one eats it because it tastes good.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

sustenance means to sustain or nourish, yes.

Isnt that the same thing when blood is injected into someone...the purpose for the injection is to nourish and sustain them.

I dont see a difference with eating it or injecting it. It has the same purpose. No one eats it because it tastes good.

Ironic, since the entire basis of Jesus's sacrifice is blood as sustenance.

 

[Pegg]

Ironic, since the entire basis of Jesus's sacrifice is blood as sustenance.

The bible says his blood is for forgiveness....which is quite different to sustenance in this context.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

The bible says his blood is for forgiveness....which is quite different to sustenance in this context.

And the last supper?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

sustenance means to sustain or nourish, yes.

Isnt that the same thing when blood is injected into someone...the purpose for the injection is to nourish and sustain them.

I dont see a difference with eating it or injecting it. It has the same purpose. No one eats it because it tastes good.

Sustenance is food or drink.
The purpose is to replace the loss of blood which in some cases is essential to saving a persons life. Eating blood isn't essential. How do you know no one eats it because it tastes good!?

 

[Astravalon]

sustenance means to sustain or nourish, yes.

Isnt that the same thing when blood is injected into someone...the purpose for the injection is to nourish and sustain them.

I dont see a difference with eating it or injecting it. It has the same purpose. No one eats it because it tastes good.

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Again, the biblical directives to abstain from blood seem to be in reference to[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]consuming it as one would food/beverages. If it meant abstaining from any[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]and all blood across the board – regardless of how it got into the body – then[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]everyone would need to drain the blood they already have out of their bodies.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Obviously, the way God designed us, blood is rather important. [/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]-[/FONT]

 

[Me Myself]

Cant you just open the door and with a cheerful expression tell em "you came in early! The strippers wont be here yet, but If you wish you can come in join me and get this party started!"