Malawi and MCP Cards?

[Many Miles]

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But when Brother Splane gave the first major announcement about finally dropping the unsupported "type" & "antitype" classes, who did he credit with promoting this very idea from decades earlier? Listen to his talk and note that he specifically credited Brother Bert Schroeder, who had died about a decade before this change was finally implemented.

There was more than one reason I choked a bit on that attribution from Splane.

- Splane is part of the GB who deemed the GB is the "faithful slave".

- Schroeder was part of the GB who deemed those who felt the "faithful slave" pictures only the leading ones of the anointed as "objectors".

According to Splane, we should learn from Schroeder.

According to Schroeder, Splane would fit into the "objectors" category.

Choke...choke...

Alfred Hitchcock anyone?

 

 

[Srecko Sostar]

7 hours ago, George88 said:

I must admit, it's quite amusing to consider the notion that all other Christian denominations strictly adhere to the standards set forth in the Bible. Can you provide another one?

You misapplied my comment, because you didn't see where the thought was going. As it is, no religion has an insight into the complete essence/truth. All religions have good and bad doctrines. It's the same with WTJWorg. 

Can any JW guarantee with his life that any past and existing doctrine is the only correct one today and that there will be no change of doctrine?

Since we can say in advance with absolute certainty that WTJWorg theology will change and that there is no continuity in the rigour of their own teachings, despite the persistent claim that all WTJWorg teachings /past, present and future/ are firmly based on the Bible, what you believe and claim about the JW religion has no meaning or purpose. 

JWs do not believe in the evolution of the universe and life, but they are fanatical in believing that there is an evolution of JW theology (in JW vocabulary it is said "that the light shines brighter and brighter").

7 hours ago, George88 said:

with one caveat: we are all inherently flawed, but that doesn't imply that we must choose a path of wickedness. 

That's right, ......... but I wasn't implying anything you're implying.

 

[Pudgy]

I think what George 88 is trying to convey is the intricate tapestry of linguistic expression, with the ethereal notions of implication, and nuanced resonance entwining within the labyrinthine corridors of discourse, where the boundaries between what is implied and what is explicit blur into an enigmatic confluence of meaning.

The nebulous tendrils of implication, with their elusive nature, evoking semantic ambiguity that, while cloaked in the syntax of eloquence, remains perpetually suspended in the liminal realm of suggestion, eternally alluding to the unfathomable depths of interpretative intricacy.

The labyrinth of implied meanings intertwining with the cadence of linguistic expression, forming an enigmatic tableau where the subject, like a phantom, elusively navigating the convoluted corridors of insinuation.

That, or pushing his Agenda.

[Pudgy]

My comments are more along the line of (paraphrased), “STUFF HAPPENS … get used to it!”.

[Pudgy]

You don’t “catch things” unless you already know the difference.

For example, the Robert A. Heinlein quote is accurate, but he actually died on May 8, 1988.

 

[Srecko Sostar]

23 minutes ago, Pudgy said:

Mislim da ono što George 88 pokušava prenijeti je zamršena tapiserija jezičnog izraza, s eteričnim pojmovima implikacije i nijansirane rezonancije koja se isprepliće unutar labirinta hodnika diskursa, gdje se granice između onoga što je implicirano i onoga što je eksplicitno zamagljuju u enigmatsko stjecište značenja.

Nebulozne vitice implikacije, sa svojom nedostižnom prirodom, evociraju semantičku dvosmislenost koja, iako zaogrnuta sintaksom elokvencije, ostaje trajno suspendirana u liminalnom području sugestije, vječno aludirajući na nedokučive dubine interpretativne zamršenosti.

Labirint impliciranih značenja koji se isprepliću s kadencom jezičnog izraza, tvoreći zagonetan plato u kojem subjekt, poput fantoma, neuhvatljivo plovi zamršenim hodnicima insinuacije.

To, ili guranje njegove agende.

Super written. What is more difficult to read and understand must be important. That's why WTJWorg has a "simple edition" to present the theological tangles as simple.

[Pudgy]

11 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Super written. What is more difficult to read and understand must be important. That's why WTJWorg has a "simple edition" to present the theological tangles as simple.

A standard technique for mass hypnosis.

AND … if you translate that into Latin, it makes you appear very smart … and noble.

“ Puto quid Georgius 88 significare conatur, perplexum esse linguae linguisticae peripetasmata, cum notionibus aethereis implicationis, et sonorum sonorum in labyrinthinorum corridora sermonis implicantis, ubi termini inter implicationem et explicitam labem in aenigmate. confluentem significatio.

Nebulosus claviculis implicationis, cum natura sua fallax, ambiguitatem semanticam evocans, quae, in syntaxi facundiae velata, perpetuo in limine suggestionis regni manet suspensus, aeternaliter alludens ad inscrutabilem profunditatem interpretativae intricationis.

Labyrinthus significationum implicatarum cum clausula locutionis linguisticae connexio, tabulam aenigmaticam efformans ubi subiectum, sicut phantasma, insinuationis perplexas corridores elusive navigans.

Id aut eius agenda”

Wah-de-do-dah!

[Pudgy]

Of course my very favorite Latin Expression only translates well into English …

”Sempre ubi sub ubi !”

“Always wear under wear !”

[TrueTomHarley]

Are you sure that your banjo-strumming, ‘I’m just here to learn, to help, certainly not to settle any disputes’ persona is not just a ruse? It sure seems like you are trying to settle one here:

19 hours ago, Many Miles said:

If that teaching is demonstrably wrong then the society has bloodguilt. If a person stands in even tacit support of that, natural law condemns them. Also, what God said to Noah condemns them too. Look close. Look very close. And, look hard. You don't want to be on the wrong side of that teaching.

18 hours ago, Many Miles said:

I can't attend public meetings. To do so would represent tacit support for a teaching I know causes many, many deaths

You might take into consideration that the teaching has, in all probability, saved far more lives than it has cost. This is because, here and there, courageous doctors have worked to accomomdate it. In doing so, they have both discovered and remedied previously unknown risks of transfusion. These remedies in turn have spread into the overall population, a thousand times more numerous than that of the Witnesses themselves. Seen in this light, it almost becomes a ‘no greater love’ situation—a small number die, many times more are saved.

It is hard to come to any other conclusion upon consideration of a 2008 New Scientist article, ‘An Act of Faith in the Operating Room,’ which reviews study after study and finds that, for all but the most catastrophic of cases, blood transfusions harm more than they help. The referenced ‘act of faith’ is not refusing a transfusion. It is giving one. I reviewed the article here:

https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2008/05/new-scientist-a.html

See how it criticizes common practices less than 20 years ago, such as giving patients a bit of blood after operation to ‘perk them up a little.’ It is not only unnecessary, but dangerous. Having learned from this, progressive hospitals tighten the standards for transfusion, often simply by lowering the hematocrit level which once triggered one, often by making use when appropriate of safer blood substitutes, often by not simply ‘topping off the tank’ after operation, recognizing such a practice is both unnecessary and dangerous. They owe it all to Jehovah’s Witnesses. 

The above does not negate that some have died due to holding fast to their understanding of ‘abstain from blood.’ However, it could be argued that the overall world owes a great debt of gratitude to Jehovah’s Witnesses for putting them on the right track. Should not the Governing Body receive a Nobel Prize in medicine for the reform they have triggered?

[Many Miles]

2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

The above does not negate that some have died due to holding fast to their understanding of ‘abstain from blood.’ However, it could be argued that the overall world owes a great debt of gratitude to Jehovah’s Witnesses for putting them on the right track. Should not the Governing Body receive a Nobel Prize in medicine for the reform they have triggered?

From a purely medical standpoint, I'd not advocate for a liberal use of donor blood. For all the reasons you cite plus more. From a purely medical perspective I'd advocate whatever is the current gold standard of care. If that includes use of some product rendered from donor blood, fine. If that includes abstaining from use of some product rendered from donor blood, that's fine too.

Undoubtedly the JW patient population who refused donor blood products over the years has pushed the science of medicine in ways that may otherwise have taken longer. But here is a critical thing that so far has not changed: there is still such a thing as bleeding to death. That is to say, if in a medical setting a patient's peripheral blood lacks sufficient volume or sufficient oxygen distribution capacity the patient is going to die.

The GB has not tried to advance the gold standard of medical care. The GB has acted to protect a religious position it has found itself entrenched in, with adherents it's compelled to place a lot of skin in the game by way of preventable deaths. What they've done is modified the doctrine to still be able to say they have the doctrine but mitigate the damage it causes. (More on that in my question to you below, should you choose to answer it) That's no Nobel Prize effort. People are still dying due to this policy, and particularly they're dying the result of severe anemia. They die because they can't accept transfusion of donor red cells without losing fellowship of lifetime close friends and family due to the isolating effect of the sister policy of unilaterally disassociating the person.

I'm not sharing this information to convince anyone to change their mind. It's just information for people to do with what they want. I'm also not sharing this information to protect a preferential view. If I'm wrong I put this out so whatever is wrong can be identified and learned from.

You've inquired of me regarding a purely medical perspective. I'll do the same for you.

Here's a medical question for you: What is the simplest method you can think of to use blood medicinally that does not have a patient receiving whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets or plasma?

[Pudgy]

vaccinations?

Covid “shots”?

For the most part I agree with TTH, and I will not take blood or blood fractions “circa 1960” but you do make a good point MM. But then, people DO get Nobel Prizes for accidental discoveries, or conversely, like Barak Obama, who got a Nobel Prize for being black.

By the end of 1945 about 220,000 people had been killed by the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, plus perhaps a million damaged for life.

Life is experimental. “Stuff Happens”. The result is ALWAYS the same … you die. 

I think, MM, your not attending meetings BECAUSE of the blood issue is a rationalism born of an entirely different motivation, but then again, i don’t care.

I recognize that for the long term best interests of the Japanese People, their defeat by atomic bombing was the best thing that could have happened to them.

The tree of freedom has to be fed with the blood of tyrants and patriots … and innocent bystanders.

…. that’s the way reality works.

Life is experimental. “Stuff Happens”. The result is ALWAYS the same … you die. 

There are no exceptions.

 

 

 

[Pudgy]

… just as an aside :

Every day globally thousands of lives are saved through the use of atomic energy comprehension and use. I am one of them.

Since 1945 perhaps 2 billion people.