Jump to content
The World News Media

Beware: Fake News about JW changes to doctrinal beliefs (Accepting blood transfusions, etc)


Guest Indiana

Recommended Posts

  • Guest

After decades of doctrinal embargo placed on blood transfusion for medical purposes for its members, the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses- the leadership group overseeing the religion’s activities wordwide has finally made a U-turn, reversing its stance on the matter.

In a letter to all its Congregations (Kingdom Halls) worldwide on Thursday, the Governing Body tacitly approved blood transfusion for medical purposes for adherents of the religion.
It is on record that a significant number of Jehovah’s Witnesses who had medical condition requiring blood transfusion for treatment died because they or their guardians refused blood transfusion because of religious belief.
Also, the age-old dogma that Jesus Christ (second coming) returned invisibly to earth in 1914 has been discarded, saying that it has no sound scriptural basis.
The Governing Body stated in the letter: “We now believe this to be in error… we must admit that this adventist practice entails human speculation without sound scriptural basis.”
While admitting that the doctrinal changes may prove disconcerting to believers whom have been hurt or lost their loved ones because of earlier stance on blood transfusion, the Governing Body admonished them to embrace the changes with the spirit of love and forgiveness.

https://www.thrillernewsgh.com/2019/09/09/jehovahs-witnesses-changes-doctrinal-beliefs-accepts-blood-transfusion-now/

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 2.1k
  • Replies 17
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is HIGHLY unlikely to be true for the following reasons: 1.) The GB never admits a mistake, or apologies for anything, no matter how blatantly absurd, or especially grievous, and 2.) A

Revisionist History. If you change it ... you cover up the fact that gullibility reigns, and makes the context of remarks and comments confusing. That is why they do not delete amendments to

I saw that video .... and I laughed myself silly, and fell over backwards with my feet up in the air, laughing, when the Circuit Overseer said his name was "Neal", and you thought he meant K-N-E-E-L .

Posted Images

  • Member

This is HIGHLY unlikely to be true for the following reasons:

1.) The GB never admits a mistake, or apologies for anything, no matter how blatantly absurd, or especially grievous, and

2.) Anything without proper attribution, and that cannot  be independently checked from that stated attribution, can be disregarded summarily.

The probability of this being true approaches ZERO.

e6f6d1ae5e08f36708af6f80ea7baeca2520b37872a5dbdbe0dfc3b2050134c4.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
14 minutes ago, Indiana said:

Please go ahead and remove it

I was able to change the title. So if people want to discuss this fake news phenomena, the item is still here. BTW, the linked site above gives many indications that they deal in Fake News (along with some real stuff too, to increase interest).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Revisionist History.

If you change it ... you cover up the fact that gullibility reigns, and makes the context of remarks and comments confusing.

That is why they do not delete amendments to the US Constitution, such as for "Prohibition", which was later rescinded by ANOTHER amendment.

It is my opinion that revisionist history is dangerous to the mind, soul and personal integrity.

Give BOTH titles, if you must.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





×
×
  • 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.