ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Worship In Spirit and Truth

If we are to worship God in SPIRIT and in TRUTH like the Bible says, then how come so many churches and "Christians" out there do not teach/read the Bible (TRUTH) or believe in the Holy Spirit leading (SPIRIT)? Does this mean we have missed God?

Join Our Christian Singles and Take The Christian Living Quiz
 ---Leslie on 7/26/11
     Helpful Blog Vote (6)

Post a New Blog

Mark_V (1)

While the earliest blood transfusion is usually dated at 1665, the development of this as 'practice' was a slow process and would not really become an issue of general usage or 'treatment' until WW2.

Not until 1940 did the U.S. establish a national blood collection program for the military. In 1941 The Red Cross began its National Blood Donor Service.

This development predates Russell and comes at the end of Rutherford's life in 1942. Shortly thereafter, when faced with an issue that had moved from experimentation and into the large public arena, Jehovah's Witnesses would have to examine, from a scriptural perspective, how they should view this issue.
---scott on 8/2/11

Mark_V (2)

"There is no accounts that someone sacrificed a human and then dranked the blood." Mark_V


Not sure what you mean but Jehovah's Witnesses' stand on this issues is simply about the sanctity of blood and God's law regarding it.

"Keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication.

"Abstain"- Gk 'apekomai' does NOT mean dont eat.

1 Thess 4:3 "Abstain from fornication." KJV

1 Thess 5:22 "Abstain from all appearance of evil." KJV

1 Peter 2:11 "Abstain from fleshly lusts." KJV

Thank you for allowing me to clarify.
---scott on 8/2/11

Scott, in every passage concerning eating of blood concerned animals. Never was man mentioned in any of the context. In every case it was animal sacrifice. And even the punishment was never death. There is no accounts that someone sacrificed a human and then dranked the blood.
Second. this outlaw of blood was given to the J.W.'s until 1945, Charles Russell or Rutherford neither mentioned blood. So for over fifty years the J.W. didn't know nothing about blood transfusions violating sacred ordances, how could Jehovah W. receive the ordinance so late? Did God hide such an important ordinance for 50 years?
---Mark_V. on 8/2/11

You are getting very rattled Scott!

I have answered your questions before, and before.
---Warwick on 8/1/11

Scott, you have claimed JW's did not call organ transplants "cannibalism."

However Hiley Ward interviewed Milton Henschel, (JW presiding officer) in July 1968. Henschel said "Transplanting organs is really cannibalism." Interestingly He gave Genesis 9:3,4 in an attempt to justify this.

You have given this verse to justify the WTS ban on blood transfusons. Henschel also said "In transplants, you are taking something from another body to sustain your life" Quite so and it by necessity contains another persons blood.

However in 1980 the WTS lifted the ban on transplants allowing JW's to 'eat' blood.
---Warwick on 8/1/11

Scott you have asked "How exactly, then, is one of the three persons in the triune God flesh and bones?"

Who has said this?

What I have read here is that Jesus, as to the spirit is the Son of God, as Scripture says. As to His flesh He is The Son of Man, As Scripture says. Immanuel, God with us.

"Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me," Hebrews 10:5

This verse shows Jesus is both God (spirit) and man (flesh).

You cannot understand spiritual things as you have been indoctrinated into a form of anthropomorphism: you endeavour to impose human characteristics and limitations upon God.
---Warwick on 8/1/11

What was Jesus before He became flesh? Spirit?
Was He not a form of God and took on the form of man?
Phi 2:6-8 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Is He not now back where He proceeded forth(begotten) from, yet with a heavenly body?
---micha9344 on 8/1/11

Safer Ground Warwick

Still waiting for your answer. (and waiting...and waiting...)

Jesus said regarding the Father (John 4:21-24) that "God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth." (WEB)

And of course the Holy Spirit is...well...Spirit.

How exactly, then, is one of the three persons in the triune God flesh and bones?

Is the Father also flesh and blood now? If so, when did this occur?

Is the Holy Spirit no longer...well..spirit? If so when did this occur?

In the Trinity doctrine, the son is only one part of the triune. The other two 'persons' are does this work exactly?

Did this mystery just get even more mysterious?
---scott on 8/1/11


And again. How do you answer?

I'm a very patient man.

God said: "Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you, I give all to you, as I gave the green plant."

"Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood." Gen 9:3, 4 NASB


Were Noah and his family (and those that would follow) allowed to eat meat or not? Is there any scriptural evidence to suggest that God's people were vegetarian?

Was God contradicting Himself by saying that they could eat meat but not blood?

Was there some process described in Jewish law for the removal of every microscopic amount of blood?
---scott on 8/1/11

Changing views?

The Catholic Church held serious objections in the past to homotransplant (organ transplantation) "among creatures of the same species".
E. Chiavacci, Morale della vita fisica, EDB, Bologna. 1976: 64-81

Not long ago organ transplants presented "Serious reservations of moral character" for Catholics.
Problemi Di Etica Sanitaria (Problems of Sanitary Ethics), 1992, Ancora, Milano: 189
---scott on 8/1/11

Warwickian Reasoning-

1. Noah and his family were told by God that they could eat meat.

2. Noah and his family were told by God not to eat blood.

Conclusion- Noah and his family were hypocrites for eating meat.
---scott on 8/1/11

Aka, from experience I can assure you that most animal flesh is red, and that from the blood therein. The only meat that is died red, as far as I know, is mince meat as the blood in it oxidizes because of the increased contact with air, and becomes brown-grey.

That JW's eat red meat with blood in it simply exposes another hypocrisy of the WTS. And organization which , as Marc's quote shows, considers it is God's sole representative on earth. They are forbidden to have life-saving blood transfusions supposedly because this constitutes eating blood, which it doesn't, as transfused blood isn't food. However, hypocritically, as the same time they can actually eat blood!
---Warwick on 8/1/11

Scott you ask:am I ready to discuss the Bible? Obviously you wish to return to what you see as safer-ground. There you can cut-and-paste and attempt obfuscation by cleverly invented stories-2 Peter 1:16.

However I prefer subjects which expose the cultic evil of the WTS. These show one and all the ugly foundations, autocracy and hypocrisy of this arrogant organization. You cannot avoid the truth here because WTS literature spells it out for all to see.

"Jehovah's using only one organisation today to accomplish his will. To receive everlasting life in the earthly Paradise we MUST identify that organisation and serve God as part of it." (The Watchtower, 2/15/83, p. 12)

We are the only way-the sign of a cult.
---Warwick on 8/1/11

WTS president Rutherford, writing in 'Consolation' XX11 25/12/1940 wrote favourably of a blood transfusion. He wrote of a woman who accidentally shot herself, and was saved by a blood transfusion.

However in 1945 this same organization (WT, 1/07/45 p198-201) said blood transfusions were pagan and God-dishonouring.

Further the Dutch edition of Consolation 1945, on page 29 confidently stated "God has never published a decree which forbids employing medicine, injections and blood transfusions." It goes on to say that forbidding such things is like the Pharisee's forbidding healing on the Sabbath!

Deadly confused hypocrisy.
---Warwick on 8/1/11


''We should meekly go along with the Lord's theocratic organisation and await for further clarification, rather than baulk at the first mention of a thought unpalatable to us and proceed to quibble and mouth our criticisms and opinions as though they were worth more than the slave's provision of spiritual food. Theocratic ones will appreciate the Lord's visible organisation and not be so foolish as to pit against Jehovah's channel their own human reasoning and sentiment and personal feelings.'' (Watchtower, 2/1/ 52, p. 80)

You see Scott, you're still A SLAVE and should not use your reason concerning anything Brooklyn tells you to do or believe. Praise be to Christ who liberated us and made us co-heirs with him.
---Marc on 8/1/11

MarkV, 'Studies in the Scriptures' served its purpose in the years prior to 1914. We are no longer in that period, so it is not used or printed by The Watchtower.

Your internet source doesn't tell you the Watchtower printed 'Studies in the Scriptures' between 1886 and 1904. Your quote from CT Russell is thus apt. Not that he discouraged the use of the Bible, but 'Studies in the Scriptures' pointed to 1914, and in 1904- it was 10 years prior to what JW's knew according to Bible prophecy to be the beginning of Christ's invisible Heavenly rule (Rev.12:7-9).

So yes, 'Studies in the Scriptures' shepherded people away from trinitarian false religion in the 10 years prior to 1914- it preserved them alive physically and spiritually.
---David8318 on 8/1/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Interest Rates

David, it if served it purpose to bring light and it is not available, then you don't have the light according to your founder. He said concerning his book,
"Not only do we find that people cannot see the divine plan in Studying the Bible by itself, but we see also that if anyone lays the "Studies in the Scriptures" aside and even if he has used them after he has become familar with them, after he has read them for ten years-if he lays them aside and ignores them and goes to the Bible alone, though he had understood his Bible for years, our experience show that within two years he goes into darkness"
According to him, none of you are in the light, for none of you read his book.
---Mark_V. on 7/31/11

Scott does not want people to know that he believes the JWs to be God's ONLY mouthpiece and salvation organisation on earth.

''Jehovah's using only one organisation today to accomplish his will. To receive everlasting life in the earthly Paradise we MUST identify that organisation and serve God as part of it.'' (The Watchtower, 2/15/83, p. 12)

''Those who are convinced The Watchtower's publishing the opinion or expression of a man should not waste time in looking at it at all. Those who believe God uses The Watchtower as a means of communicating to his people, or of calling to his prophecies, should study the Watchtower.'' (The Watchtower, 1/1/ 42, p. 5)
---Marc on 7/31/11

Scott, again you endeavour to evade the truth.

Genesis 9:4 concerns the eating of blood, as food. However blood transfusions are not eating blood but the provision of life-saving fluid. Blood serves a number of purposes in the body but being food is not one of them.

The question for you is: are Jehovah's Witnesses allowed to eat red meat, that which still has blood in it?

Surely this is a straight-forward question which can be answered yes or no.
---Warwick on 7/31/11

MarkV- For many who had a copy of 'Studies in The Scriptures' printed by the Watchtower Society in the years prior to 1914, it did prove a life saver- literally. Otherwise you would have been involved in the trinitarian debacle called the 'Great War'- fought in trinity-land.

So yes for many, 'Studies in the Scriptures' served its purpose at that time in shepherding people away from the 'darkness' of trinitarian warmongering and into the 'light' of scriptural truth. The Watchtower Society identified 1914 not as a time for Christians to take up arms and slaughter their brothers, but scripturally as the period when the 'times of the Nations' (Lu.21:24) would end and Christ's invisible rule would begin in Heaven (Re.12:7-9).
---David8318 on 7/31/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Marketing

Donna66 & Warwick

Read it again.

God said: "Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you, I give all to you, as I gave the green plant."

"Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood." Gen 9:3, 4 NASB


Were Noah and his family (and those that would follow) allowed to eat meat or not? Is there any scriptural evidence to suggest that God's people were vegetarian?

Was God contradicting Himself by saying that they could eat meat but not blood?

Was there some process described in Jewish law for the removal of every microscopic amount of blood?
---scott on 7/31/11

"Banned organ transplants" Warwick

SInce you no doubt have this article...

You will note that the reference to 'cannibalism' is actually the opinion of The Encyclopdia of Religion and Ethics, under "Medical Cannibalism", (edited by James Hastings, Volume 3, page 199) that the WT article comments on.

Organ transplants have never been 'banned'. This has always been let up to the individual to decide for himself.

The WT concludes: "The Christian can decide in such a way as to avoid unnecessary mutilation and any possible misuse of the body. Thus he will be able to have a clear conscience before God."1 Pet. 3:16.

Ready to discuss the bible yet?
---scott on 7/31/11

//Eating red meat is eating blood.// technically, not necessarily. (please read to the end before replying.) there is no such thing as "red" meat. muscle meat is grayish in color. in the old days, reddish looking meat was considered red meat because it looked red in appearance from the blood (like d66 says). today, red dye is added to continue the facade. who is going to buy grayish meat when there is a bright red cut of "red meat" by it? why do you think a great cut of red meat turns gray if you let it sit for a while... same meat...if not spoiled...tastes the same with less carcinogens.

anyway, i agree with any point in time, do you think that 100% of blood was extracted from a any piece of meat?
---aka on 7/31/11

Scott does not know but Rhonda does Kosher meat still has some blood in it.

The WTS forbids life-saving blood transfusions falsely saying this constitutes eating blood. Which is untrue. However JW's eat red meat which does constiture eating blood.

Such deadly unbalanced, autocratic, hypocrisy.

Is blood sausage forbidden?

Remember this same WTS is the organization which says it is God's sole mouthpiece on earth. And once banned organ transplants claiming, as God's word on earth, that they constituted "cannibalism." But apparently God changed his mind, or was it the oft mind-changing autocrats of the WTS?
---Warwick on 7/31/11

Send a Free Winter Ecard

What Scott doesn't understand: from another thread (where you again were given the multiple last say). I do use French to establish a principle for these reasons:

1) It is a language I understand well.

2) And it is a live language therefore we can converse with French speakers, so as to be clear what they mean.

Conversely Biblical Greek is no longer spoken. It is therefore more difficult to know what a writer means.

But you have, as usual, gone for what you perceived to be a soft-target. However the target is rock-hard as the principles I explained are correct, no martter what the language. Language is not translated word for word, as you believe.
---Warwick on 7/31/11

Scott, If we are to believe the witnesses are right, the very founder of your religion says that Jehovah Witnesses even by reading their own bible are in darkness. According to him you can read your bible for ten years, but if you do not have his book "Studies in the Scriptures" you are in darkness. That you only get light through that book. And according to the Witnesses that book has not been available for many years. They themselves stop publication. How can you get light if that book is not available? That is according to him. He posted this in the Watchtower of Sep. 15, 1910.
---Mark_V. on 7/31/11

Eating red meat is eating blood. The hemoglobin in blood is what gives the meat it's red color. Even strictly kosher beef, supposedly "bled" and certified so by a rabbi, still contains enough blood to make it "red" meat.

Legally, Drs must allow a patient to decline any treatment they wish. But only whole blood or RBCs will keep a person from bleeding to death if blood loss is over a certain amount. If a patient is not KNOWN to be a JW, they will get transfusion(s) of human blood products in an emergency where such treatment is deemed life saving.
---Donna66 on 7/30/11

Scott:, ''Witnesses [believe]... God's Word does not [change].''

Then why does The Watchtower keep on changing their minds about core salvation subjects like organ transplants and blood transfusion?
---Marc on 7/30/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Life Insurance

What Warwick doesn't know- (2)

He said: "The WTS bans transfusions as 'eating blood'...but allows the eating of steak...A deadly hypocrisy, unfounded in fact."

The "Facts"-

God told Noah: "Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you, I give all to you, as I gave the green plant."

"Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood." Gen 9:3, 4 NASB

Obviously God was not contradicting himself. He simply required Noah to 'bleed' meat properly, thereafter it could serve as food. If Witnesses follow a 'deadly hypocrisy' it is one established by Jehovah Himself.

Witnesses DO NOT eat blood sausage, etc.

---scott on 7/30/11

What Warwick doesn't know- (3)

He said: "Medical proceedures have risk. Often people have no choice."

The truth-

Jehovah's Witnesses' stand on blood is a scriptural one and not based on medical procedures or their 'risks'.

Witnesses are well informed about alternatives to blood transfusions like Hemodilution, Cell Salvage equipment and Erythropoietin, Neumega, NPlate. etc. (that safely stimulate blood cell production).

Additionally, if needed, there are Hospital Liaison Committees that work with local Drs and an International list of (non-Witness) consulting Drs that consult 24/7 with local Drs to offer proven strategies in the bloodless treatment of Witnesses. And all free of charge.
---scott on 7/30/11

What Warwick doesn't know about JW's & blood- (1)

He said: "It is not the job of the WTS to medical processes..."

The truth- Drs will never, even under dire circumstances, guarantee that a blood transfusion is a "life-saving process". If so, ask one to put that in writing when they're recommending one.

While Witnesses have deep respect for Drs and the medical community, seeking the best treatment available, they realize that medical practices change, God's Word does not.

Recall that 'Bloodletting' was "the most common medical practice performed by doctors until the late 19th century (2,000 years)." Wikipedia

---scott on 7/30/11

Warwick, you are correct. I went with my sister to the kingdom hall and saw and read what they believed in just, for she gave me all the books, so that I could know why she had joined them. As you say, they are not vegetarians, and eat steaks which is all blood. No matter how hard they try to remove the blood it will still be there. They are hypocrites for teaching what they teach. When God told them not to eat the blood, it was not because people were eating other peoples blood. They made it look that way. I flew to Texas to try to convince her to change, but after a month she had no more choices and went into a coma and died. God only knows why this goes on, and I don't question God, for He is Sovereign and knows the time for all of us.
---Mark_V. on 7/30/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Make Money

What is the JW stance on pain medications such as aspirin or ibuprofen?
---micha9344 on 7/30/11

Leslie, I agree with James L. Everything he has said is from Scripture. I believe there is a lots of religious talk by Christians that is wrong. Works for salvation is one of the most talked about subject. Believers insist they are saved by Grace through faith, and when they see a believer sin, they say, "see, you will know them by their fruits, he is not saved" What they fail to see is the sin within themselves. So what they are doing is denying what they said they believed, salvation by Grace through faith. James said it correctly the fruits talked about was concerning false teachers. By listening to what they taught we could tell they were false teachers. Not their salvation. Only God knows that.
---Mark_V. on 7/30/11

You gave only two options for what I must apparently believe - 1) everyone is saved, or 2) someone is saved just because they say so.

apparently you don't read my posts, or you don't understand English. What scripture says is that Everyone Who Believes In Jesus is "saved" But you don't believe that.

Scripture says a man is justified by faith WITHOUT works, But you don't believe that.

You have a superficial understanding pf scripture, and then try to condemn everyone that studies.

I suppose if someone says it's raining cats and dogs, you would expect to see animals in the air?

I used to believe just like you, until I got saved. I do pray for you, by the way
---James_L on 7/30/11

leslie, you are being rather presumptuous. i had a reason to ask and i am encouraged by a contributor of some of the books of the Bible to ask questions. after all, we are warned of wolves in sheep's clothing.
---aka on 7/29/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments

The points that the JW's miss are:

1) It is not the job of the WTS autocracy to decree what life-saving medical processes people should have.

2)The WTS bans blood transfusions as 'eating blood', which it is not, but allows the eating of steak and black pudding which is eating blood! A deadly hypocricy, unfounded in fact.

3) They also miss the point that all medical proceedures have risk. But often people have no choice.

From MarkV's blog we see that his sister was seriously ill in hospital. The WTS autocrats visited her and using fear caused her to reject a transfusion, and she died, because of their heartless, baseless intervention. What monsters these people are!

---Warwick on 7/29/11

Willa, it's ok to you since you have not had a son, or sister or wife needing the blood to survive. But I know in my heart that if your son was in the hospital you would do anything possible for him to live. That is what parents do. You can talk all you want but until you lose someone you have no place to say it does not matter. It mattered a lot to my family. I am but one person here who has said they lost two people due to the refusal to receive blood because of their faith. And I know there is thousands out there just like me. And yes we all will die, and eating healthy food does not stop you for dying. And yes, God has our due time, but we are still responsible for our actions in life. Our responsibility does not stop.
---Mark_V. on 7/29/11

The WTS certainly has prepared answers for its people to use against Christians. From exJW's we know they run schools for this purpose.

A Christian on these pages makes an objection and we receive a flood of cut and paste answers.

MODERATOR you have given the JW's 6 blogs in a row on this one subject. Scott has been allowed to post 5! Please be upfront is this a JW controlled site? I have never seen anyone else allowed to have 5 posts!
---Warwick on 7/29/11

This discussion over JW's cult practice of not having blood transfusions is ridiculous. Either way the results may not be beneficial for the patient. I don't see it to be any better to have a transfusion than not. Personally I am O.K. with my blood and I'm not of the JW faith! Death is certain. If you want to be healthy and live a long life due to your health, exercise and eat fruit and vegetables and meat in moderation. The main cause of disease and most things needing a transfusion is health orient along with criminal activity. Of coarse that's not always the case but certainly is the majority.
---willa5568 on 7/29/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks

"Waiting is over." Marc (3)

(Dr. Kitchens continues)

"The Jehovahs Witness patients decision to forego transfusions for major surgical procedures appears to add 0.5% to 1.5% mortality to the overall operative risk."

"Less clear is how much morbidity and mortality are avoided by this practice, but they probably exceed the risk of not being transfused."

"Hence, Kitchens reasonable question: "If not transfusing Jehovah's Witnesses actually results in little acute extra morbidity and mortality and avoids a significant amount of costs and chronic complications, should patients receive fewer transfusions?" WT 93, 10-15 pg 32
---scott on 7/29/11

"Do the maths." marc

JAMA 1970, page 461:

"Depending on whose figures you accept, the incidence of transfusion associated. hepatitis can be as low as 0.05% or as high as 8%...the National Academy of Sciences National Research Council estimates that blood transfusions result in 30,000 overt cases of hepatitis and as many as 3,000 deaths every year."

SAGA March 1972, page 32

"incompatible blood transfusions, that is transfusions of blood of the wrong type due to technical or administrative errors, killed over 5,000 patients in just one year." Dr. Albert Ehrlich, Director of Laboratories at St. Marys Hospital, N.J.
---scott on 7/29/11

'Patients who received blood transfusions had higher rates of heart attack, heart failure, stroke, and even death.' -Duke Med News Oct 8. 2007.

'The Centers for Disease Control estimates that as many as 35,000 deaths and 500,000 illnesses a year may be due to the presence of serum hepatitis in blood for transfusions.' -my blood site dot com.

'In Sub-Saharan Africa, 24.5 million individuals live with HIV/AIDS... As many as 10% of these people contracted the disease from infected blood received during one of the 6 million blood transfusions performed annually in Africa.' -one million african lives dot org.

The math- 10% of 24.5million? That's 2,450,000 men women and children destroyed by blood transfusions!
---David8318 on 7/29/11

"You want me to parse a sentence with you!" Marc

Of course you would refuse to comment on the Greek, because to do so would expose the hypocrisy of those claiming that the NWT changes meaning by 'adding words' when clearly translations (like the one cited by Warwick) does just that.

Another example is the NIV's rendering of Colossians 1:15 where translators inserted the word 'over' (before creation).

This obviously is a theologically driven rendering. And of course the Greek word for 'over' appears in no manuscript for Col 1:15.

The NIV translation committee has even written concerning their removal of the divine name from their bible, stating that (largely) this was a choice driven by money.
---scott on 7/29/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes

"Your waiting is over." Marc (1)

Really? You claim (7/28/11) that [JW's stand on blood has] "led to the deaths of 1000's, if not millions, of babies." And you cite Dr. Kitchens?

You've made a wild and irresponsible claim. You DO know that there are only about 7 million witnesses on earth right? ' And you ask me to do the math?

Let me provide a little context for the article that you've cited. In part it says:

"The American Journal of Medicine (February1993), Dr. Craig S. Kitchens asked: Are Transfusions Overrated? He noted that physicians often weigh whether the benefit of a therapy is more than the risk it might bring. What about transfusions?..."

---scott on 7/29/11

"Waiting is over." Marc (2)

"Kitchens reviewed recent evidence of many risks linked with transfusions, such as hepatitis, compromised immunity, organ system failure, and graft-versus-host reactions. One study summarizing a myriad of complications from blood transfusions concluded that each transfusion event has an aggregate 20% chance for some adverse reaction, some of which are minor but others deleterious, even fatal.

However, do the supposed benefits justify facing such risks? Dr. Kitchens reviewed 16 reported studies involving 1,404 operations on Jehovahs Witnesses, who refuse transfusions in obedience to the Bible command to abstain from blood.- Acts 15:28, 29..."

---scott on 7/29/11

Scott, I can prove two, my sister and my uncle. My sister as well as my uncle needed blood in order to have surgery. Right before my sisters had surgery, the Elders from the J. Witnesses talked to her, my mother and I had to stand outside the room, after the meeting, she refused the blood. Though it was her decision to make, and they did not force her, she was told if she took the blood she would not see paradise. So she was proud to be a Jehovah Witness, and with a proud heart she died for refusing the blood.
My uncle refused also, but later sent to a hospital outside of Los Angeles where they performed surgery with a laser, but also died because when he had the surgery it was too late.
---Mark_V. on 7/29/11


Your waiting is over: ''[Refusing blood adds] 0.5% to 1.5% mortality to the overall operative risk'' for JWs in ROUTINE surgery (Watchtower, 10/15/93, p. 32) According to the Red Cross every year 10% of the US population requires blood products in order to help their lives. Do the maths.

BTW ''Vaccination is a direct violation of the Everlasting covenant that God made with Noah after the flood.'' (The Golden Age, 2/4/31, p. 293)

Then God changed his mind on April 15, 1952.

Still waiting for comment regarding The Watchtower being the only mouthpiece for God and being the only organisation from which one can obtain God's salvation.
---Marc on 7/28/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Depression

James L & aka - 1st aka - I am a Follower of Jesus Christ who goes ONLY with the Bible and the Holy Spirit. 2nd James L - Apparently you think that either EVERYONE is a Christian or that those that say they are a Christian really are - infact the Bible says differently. The Bible warns to beware of wolves in sheeps clothing, which are people that claim to be of God, but are NOT. I suggest you go with the Bible and not your fairy tale beliefs.
---Leslie on 7/28/11

Scott you gave the information regarding what Billy Graham is supposed to have said. I googled your reference, which was not an original source. I could only find what someone claimed he said. I could find no original source.

You criticized others for not using original information. Now you have tried to avoid the obvious.

And you ask "what is with you?"

What insults? I asked "Scott, before I shout hypocricy can you tell me if you took Billy Graham's prediction from the original source or from a second hand source?"

You refused to answer. That means you have no answer. Therefore hypocrite is simply a description of your behaviour, not an insult.

---Warwick on 7/28/11

\\just because someone calls themselves a "Christian" does NOT mean they are. The Bible says we will know them by their FRUIT\\
---Leslie on 7/28/11

That statement proves that you don't comprehend what you read, or that you only listen to what preachers way without checking them out.

Jesus NEVER said we will know a Christian by their "FRUIT"

As a matter of fact, he said we will konw False Teachers by their fruit. And He said they will be wolves INSIDE, but Look Like Sheep on the OUTSIDE.

Meaning you WILL NOT be able to tell them apart by looking at them.

The fruit is the teachings. You've got some bad fruit there yourself
---James_L on 7/28/11

Leslie, are you a Jesus Christian?
---aka on 7/28/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study

"Blood transfusions which have led to the deaths of 1000's, if not millions, of babies." Marc

Prove it.

I'll wait.
---scott on 7/28/11

"Scott, whether you are a hypocrite is up to you..." warwick


Proof again that in an effort to wield your flaccid apologetic sword you fail to even read my post(s) before responding with insults.

If you would simply read my post about Billy Graham you will find at the end of the quote (and for your convenience) the publication, the year, the month, and even the page number where this is found.

Seriously, what is with you?
---scott on 7/28/11

I have learned throughout the years that just because someone calls themselves a "Christian" does NOT mean they are. The Bible says we will know them by their FRUIT (if they are a Christian or not). I can say with certainty that MOST of the people on Christianet (including the Moderators) are NOT Christians. People claim to be "Christians" based on their belief in God, but the Bible says that even the devil believes in God (James 2:19). Also, just because your Pastor got a PHD in Theology or Divinity does NOT mean they are teaching/preaching the Bible, or speaking the TRUTH. MOST Pastors out there preach/teach heresies and error.
---Leslie on 7/28/11

Scott, whether you are a hypocrite, regarding this matter is up to you.

Did you get your information on Billy Graham's prediction from the original source or a secondary source, some antiChristian's comment perhaps?

But to compare an individual's prediction (if in fact he made it) to the prophecies made by the WTS is ludicrous. Billy Graham does not claim to be God's sole mouthpiece on earth.

You wrote Marc regarding "a literal word for word translation of the Greek text?" Anyone experienced with translation knowsit is not usually possible to translate one language literally into another. If that were so all a translator would need is a dictionary.
---Warwick on 7/28/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


I've given you citations from your own literature that you must believe the Watchtower is God's only mouthpiece presently on earth, that it's God's only prophetic organisation, that salvation can only be found in the Watchtower. Others have demonstrated how your organisation wants to know how a man makes love to his wife. Furthermore, and worst of all, it has flip-flopped on ''commandments'' dealing with organ transplants and blood transfusions which have led to the deaths of 1000's, if not millions, of babies. That's PURE EVIL. Logic tells you that an organisation that alters its mind on core, salvation-connected subjects, claiming both come from God, is not from God.

And now you want me to parse a sentence with you!
---Marc on 7/28/11

Scott, you claim others do not answer your questions but you (and David) regularly avoid answering. I wrote "How many innocent WTS dupes have died because they could not have a blood transfusion, or organ transplant, or vaccination?"

And I asked "Would you let your loved ones die rather than have a medical proceedure?"


MODERATOR: it has been noticed and commented about off line that Scott is regularly allowed multiple blogs (up to 4 in a row) and also regularly gets the last say on a thread with such multiple blogs.

Do a little research and you will see this is correct.

---Warwick on 7/28/11

Still waiting for your answer to this question.

SInce you have claimed that 'adding words "Disingenuously reflect[s] an organisation's heretical theology..." I would like to get your thoughts on Warwick's post on 7/13/11.

There he cited Philippians 2:6,7 with the following rendering:

"Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage..."

With your keen eye toward heretical theology, and examining just the text and grammar alone (a discussion of context is sure to follow) which of the above words is a literal word for word translation of the Greek text?
---scott on 7/28/11

i have experience meeting christians who say they are teaching the truth or are led by the spirit.
---mike on 7/28/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis

Scott and David,

Answer me this: Is Jesus good?
---Marc on 7/28/11

"Before I shout hypocricy..." Warwick

What's to stop you...shout away. I would expect no less from you.
---scott on 7/28/11

Scott, before I shout hypocricy can you tell me if you took Billy Graham's prediction from the original source or from a second hand source?

"When you point a finger at someome remember there are three pointing back at you!"
---warwick on 7/27/11


My apologies.

The words ''come to Jehovah's organisation for salvation'' appear in the Watchtower November 15, 1981, p. 21.

My error.

But what about the others?
---Marc on 7/27/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


I'm happy to arrange for a couple of nice individuals to drop off some actual magazines so you won't continually embarrass yourself by using anti-witness sites for your information. Just looking out for you.

You said ''Come to Jehovah's organisation FOR SALVATION'' (Watchtower, 1/15/83, p. 22)

Sorry, but that article is based on 1 PETER 5:8 "Your adversary, the Devil, walks about like a roaring lion..." pgs (18-22) Nowhere does it include the words that you have planted dishonestly between quotation marks.

You've become increasingly Warwickian (yes you can use that) in your approach, employing slander because of your inability to defend your position using God's word alone.
---scott on 7/27/11

Scott, I answered your Philippians 2:6,7 question before!

As a translator I know languages are not translated word for word.The translator aims to convey the meaning from language 1 into no. 2, while keeping the meaning in line with overall context.

Consider French translation : 'Qu'est-ce que c'est cette maison?' Literally 'What is it that it is that house?', correctly translated as -'What is that house?'

Consider this in line with the WTS translation of Colossians 1:16-21 where 'other' is 4 times added to the text. The insertion of 'other' totally changes the meaning of the Greek. And takes it out of context with what the OT and NT says about Jesus-He is Creator, Redeemer, Jehovah our Righteousness-not a creature.
---Warwick on 7/27/11

There are hardy any churches or "Christians" out there that teach/read the Bible and are led by the Holy Spirit. How do I know this, the goofy worldliness and false teaching that is in churches brought by pastors (ie: putting peanut butter in your armpit and having others lick it out - what does this have to do with God?, the teaching that the O.T. is done away with, and there is more than one way to God). This is why the polls say that the majority of "Christians" do not know what the Bible says, and what the books of the Bible are. This is a finger of condemnation to the church/pastors/"Christians".
---Leslie on 7/27/11

"And just Who is the Word of God?" Cluny

What is the "sum" of Jesus? This should be interesting.
---scott on 7/27/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


''Come to Jehovah's organisation FOR SALVATION'' (Watchtower, 1/15/83, p. 22)
''Jehovah's using only one organisation today to accomplish his will. To receive everlasting life in the earthly Paradise we MUST identify that organisation and serve God as part of it.'' (Watchtower, 2/15/83, p. 12)
''Those who are convinced The Watchtower's publishing the opinion of men shouldn't waste time in looking at it at all. Those who believe God uses The Watchtower as a means of communicating to his people, or of calling attention to his prophecies, should study the Watchtower.'' (The Watchtower, 1/1/ 42, p. 5)

JWs must believe salvation comes only through the WT and God only speaks through them. So Watchtower is a false prophet.
---Marc on 7/27/11

\\"Sanctify them by the truth. Your word is truth." John 17:17, ISV

"The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting." PS 119:160, NASB
---scott on 7/27/11\\

And just Who is the Word of God?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/27/11

The ones who aren't . . . because they are just fitting in and copy-catting. Their attention is mainly to themselves and others they want to fit with and use. And ones can also in prayer mainly be trying to just use God to give them what they want or to just get them through their hard day, instead of deeply submitting to Him and enjoying and loving Him in worship . . . all the time, even.

It has worked for me to pray for honesty, so I can attract together with ones who really are God's approved leaders and His other obedient people. I have found real Christians are more ready to love me, than I have been ready to be loved! (c:
---Bill_willa6989 on 7/27/11

"Sanctify them by the truth. Your word is truth." John 17:17, ISV

"The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting." PS 119:160, NASB
---scott on 7/27/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery

//You missed something very important, Leslie..."They, that worship Him must worship Him in Spirit (Holy Spirit) and in truth (Jesus, the Son), for the FATHER (First Person) seeks such to worship Him."// --Amen.

//"Christians" out there do not teach/read the Bible (TRUTH)//

Leslie, I hear a lot of "bible-believing" jargon from you. Mostly, you say something like the Bible says. The Bible is inanimate. it does not say a word.

In the Bible, it is written that Jesus is the Truth. The Bible does not say the Bible is the Truth. Scripture may be Spirit-breathed, but the Truth is in the Word (the Living God) ... not the words that make up a Bible.

Do you worship the Bible or the Word?
---aka on 7/27/11

"And I will show you a still more excellent way. If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels but have not love, I am a noisy gong...."
---John.usa on 7/27/11

You missed something very important, Leslie.

This is a Trinitarian statment:

"They, that worship Him must worship Him in Spirit (Holy Spirit) and in truth (Jesus, the Son), for the FATHER (First Person) seeks such to worship Him."

How long have you been a Christian, Leslie? You seem to be setting yourself up as the authority of who and what is real Christianity, and you talk about other churches as if you know everything about them and everyone else.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/26/11

Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.