So, you don't have to give the money to your mosque but can give the money directly to charity? I wouldn't mind giving 2.5% directly to a charity (like a homeless shelter or food kitchen).
You mentioned this words "probably" and "I would guess". That's the basis of your reasoning here. Guessing. You have no idea and you will continue to have no idea unless you open up those plugged ears and maybe just listen. Bring whatever Bible you want to check that against whatever is said in the Kingdom Hall. Otherwise, how will you ever know? Fine, be like the rest of the billions on this planet and just keep guessing from afar. As long as you are happy huh? Col
You do preach the same system inside the hall as you do on our doorsteps and outside of our doughnut shops, right? Does the same reasoning apply to JWs? They make a lot of claims about problems with Christian churches yet when they invite me to visit a Kingdom Hall I say "sure, I'd love to, right after you go with me to my church, fair enough?". They all run from such a fair offer. When was the last time you visited a non-JW church? I have visited Lutheran, Catholic, Methodist, Brethren, Evangelical Free, Presbyterian, Amish, Assemblies of God, Friends, various non-denominational churches, and sat in on a teaching at a Jewish fair. I have even visited your theological neighbor's holy ground, I toured the San Diego Temple before it was closed to non-Mormons after the grand opening. I don't think they allow you to visit others, they give you some script to avoid such visits. How's that script go again?
Same system? Doughnut shops? The information I provide is the same you will hear in a Kingdom Hall. I don't know what "other" system you are referring to other than that. So, money-laundering, corruption, gay ministers, faction splits, divorce rates, pedophilia etc.. are you saying these claims are untrue? Of course, I am not saying and in no way will any part of our organization say that these things happen in all churches. But, there seems to be a "FAIR WHACK" of it going on would you not say? I mean, how many hundreds of millions of dollars has some of these churches paid out settlements for law suits against some ministers involved with small children? That's just one area of problems. Why on earth would I even think of attending these churches with this many problems? I look at our people and how they are in harmony with God's will and I do not see or hear of these problems. If there are any reports of these problems, most have turned out to be outright lies. Good for you. I see that our Kingdom Halls are not on that list. Hmmm...What are you afraid of? It's just a building and the people inside are lovely people and will welcome you with smiles.....REAL smiles. Col
You accused someone of making statements about the Watchtower organization without stepping inside a Hall. I was only pointing out that he should get the same info inside or outside the building. You are refering to the Church of Rome which is similar to the JW's in that they add their own doctrine to the Bible. They have a problem they created by their doctrine on celebacy. The JW's have killed many people with their confusing eating blood with transfusing blood. Don't attend one with the problems. Would you have a problem with attending a church that didn't have any of the problems you list? One that just meets, studies God's word, and walks by faith? I said I agreed to go to a Kingdom Hall if the Watchtower person went with me to a Christian church. The ball was in their court. I mentioned I did visit a Mormon temple (a close parallel to the Watchtower organization) so I am not afraid of visiting non-Christian churches. Would you willing to visit a Christian site? I assume you won't but if you will visit http://www.harvest.org/tv/ and let me know if this is what the Watchtower is against. He is very much like Billy Graham in his theology.
I think this particular point is moot. I already said the information is the same whether inside the hall or outside the hall. However, a careful look at Matthew 18:18-20 (take close note of verse 20) where it says: 18 “Truly I say to YOU men, Whatever things YOU may bind on earth will be things bound in heaven, and whatever things YOU may loose on earth will be things loosed in heaven. 19 Again I truly say to YOU, If two of YOU on earth agree concerning anything of importance that they should request, it will take place for them due to my Father in heaven. 20 For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst.†Therefore, that shows the importance of meeting together. One place is in our Kingdom Halls. Sorry. We don't add our own doctrine to the Bible and we certainly have not killed anyone. You need to keep up with the facts about blood before you start spouting accusations like this. If transfusing blood is sooooooo good for you, then why are more and more hospitals opting for bloodless surgery? Go ask the doctors why. You might get a bit of shock that it is not Jehovah's Witnesses "telling them they have to". I am already in one. A perfectly good one at that. Why would I even bother looking at a church when I firmly believe our organization is thoroughly backed by God? There's no basis for "doing a deal" when it comes to faith in God. So, did you "do a deal" when you visited all these other doctrines? Why try to "do a deal" now? Billy Graham? Hmmm....the same Billy Graham that was filthy rich from all the begging for donations to be closer to God?? A man who receives over $400k a year (2005) as a company executive? Why would a Christian man want to be anything like him where his name is involved with politics and the media? How would Jesus view this man? Back in Jesus' day his apostles were not rich man, or involved in politics either. Jesus refused to be King and wanted nothing to do with politics. A good example for us all don't you think? Col
Woa, can't let that pass! Many more people have died or become seriously ill as a direct result of having accepted a blood transfusion than ever has been the case with those refusing it - talk to the haemophiliacs in Canada and France!. Today, laws require that medicines be tested and approved before they are used to treat people. Blood has never been formally approved in this way, many Doctors agree that if it were presented to gain a licence it would be refused as the risks are just too great. Let's also remember that it is not JW's who are the originators of the prohibition on blood! The bible says, at Deuteronomy 12:23, "But be sure you do not eat the blood, because the blood is the life, and you must not eat the life with the meat. At Leviticus 17:10,11 it shows why blood is so special, "For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life." So it was used in connecton with the animal sacrifices made by the Israelites and pointed forward to the blood that was to be shed by the 'Lamb' Christ Jesus. Now because of the references to 'eating' many people say that this was a Mosaic dietry law and that it was only applicable to literaly eating blood, but is that so? Of course there is no mention in the bible of blood transfusions but then again neither is there of heroin or crack cocaine - none of these things existed when the bible was written but do we doubt that the misuse of them so prevelant today is disapproved by God? However if the prohibition on blood was a dietry law, part of the Law of Moses, then it would have ceased to be obligatory upon Christians when the Law of Moses came to an end after Jesus fulfilled the Law and replaced it with the Christian Congregation ... was the law on blood discontinued when the Mosaic Law ended? No, it wasn't! Note the command issued by the Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem, it was so important that it was sent in letters to all of the congregations, (Acts 15:28,29):- " It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals {hence unbled} and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things." So it was not a dietry law from the Law of Moses, but was it still just a dietry law? Well what happened to all of the other dietry laws that were imposed upon Gods people in Israel? Well animals that chewed the cud were forbidden as food as were camels, pigs, certain species of fish, birds and invertibrates. Do these restrictions still apply to Christians? No! Does the prohibition on 'eating' blood still apply? Yes, as shown at Acts 15:28,29 (quote above). So what does 'eating' imply? Well what happens when you eat? The nutrients from the food are distributed around the body - how? By means of the blood, which also transports oxygen etc so blood is used as a part of the body's means of feeding itself, so technically a blood transfusion is eating blood, HOWEVER, it is not the eating or not eating that is the issue. The fact is that blood is so special in Gods eyes that He allowed it to be used only for one thing, to make atonement for sin, which served to point forward to the shed blood of Jesus sacrifice making the way open for salvation to mankind. For this reason blood is something that should not be misused, (ie used for any other purpose), if we are to remain 'clean' in Gods eyes. The medical profession agrees that avoiding blood in medical use is the truly wise course and more and more alternatives are being made available all of the time, (haemodilution, cell salvage, anaesthetic procedures, drug regimes, etc), to limit the need for blood use. However for JW's it is not a medical issue, it is a scriptural one and hence they abstain from blood.
So if a loved one has been in an accident and has lost blood and is losing blood and will die if they don't receive blood, you would let them die? Keep the response to life or death, give them blood they live, follow the Watchtower they die. Make your answer a clear yes or no.
Have you stopped beating your wife? Make your answer a clear yes or no. Your question is medically unrealistic, it is never so simplistic. It is also scripturally irrelevant because life does not take precedence over obedience to God, the Source of Life. Let me deal with my personal stance. For me, my wishes have already been formalised in a legal document stating my wishes in respect to medical treatment - it forbids the transfusion of blood. My nearest loved one is my wife, who has a similar document. I would support and uphold her express wishes, if called upon to do so. My next nearest loved ones are my children, they too have their own documents and they would doubtless be supported by their own marriage partners. But let's for a moment assume that such documents did not exist and a Doctor told me that my wife, (lets say she is unconscious), needed a blood transfusion. Firstly I would want to know why he is only looking at blood as a source of treatment for my wife; why are blood salvage, haemodilution, EPO and other drugs not suitable for use. I would want to know whether he personally feels incapable of helping her without blood or whether he feels that blood is the only option. If the former I would insist that he finds a professonal who would treat my wife without blood, (or I would do it myself ... search that is not operate!), and if the latter I would make contact with associates and contacts within the medical profession to check what he was saying, if I didn't already know the answer myself. I already know that it is never so simplistic as "she needs blood or she will die". If all else fails, I would honour the known wishes of my wife. If it were a minor, my actions would remain the same, although in the UK the law allows for Doctors to administer blood to minors in certain stipulated cases, if such a case existed I would not be able to legally prevent that, (though as a parent I would be at liberty to challenge it in court). I have been involved with several cases involving minors where blood was the first option of the Doctors but after discussion successful alternative treatments were used. In fact I have been involved with a number of cases where the statement, "He/she needs blood or they will die/suffer serious consequences", has been made and subsequently has been proved to be inaccurate and the individual concerned has made a full recovery. In one instance a mans blood count fell to 1.8 g/dl (the normal is 14-16, 10 is considered as adviseable before surgery and 6/7 is considered to be about as low as you would want it to go if surgery was planned). I was actually speaking to the guy on the telephone yesterday ... he has made a full recovery and did not need blood or blood products. For the record, I have never been involved with a case where someone has died directly as a result of refusing blood, however I have been involved where a minor has been transfused forcibly and returned to the parent dead.
So for the record, Granddad and everyone obedient to the Watchtower would allow a loved one to bleed to death.
There can be an organization that takes charity from Muslims and gives it to the poor. But there is always a chance of them being corrupt. So its much more preferable to give it directly to the poor. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) also said that if a needy person asks you for something, give him something at least; let it be half a date! Also, its compulsory upon every healthy Muslim to fast for one month so that he learns self-control and knows how it feels to be a poor and hungry man. So it all helps into a perfect system.
There is some truth in what they say about other options, but the legalism and misinterpretation are of another factor. They are dead set for their belief system but don't even have the Holy Spirit and deny His power, that is enough for me to have proof that they are off on their beliefs.
I like that! It makes a lot more sense to me because if you give directly to the poor you know the donation is exactly where it needs to be and cuts out the middle man. Just curious, how can you fast for an entire month? Are you allowed only water or can you drink juice too? Can you have any food at all like fruit?
Complete abstinence from food and water from dawn till dusk for 29 or 30 days depending upon the Lunar calender. And a celebration called Eid after that in which there is another charity to be given on behalf of every member of the family by the head of the family so that the poor can celebrate too. This is the system of God.
But the Prophet (PBUH) also said that he who does not abstain from anger, lying and other evil things, Allah does not need him to be hungry. This shows that there has to be some learning and revival of the character too. Staying hungry itself holds no importance.
At least you could eat or drink at night, the hardest thing I think would be going without the water during the day. Do you do that once a year or once in your lifetime in Islam? In the US I don't see it done as much for religion, but I know a lot of people who believe it purifies your body and is spiritual for your mind. About 2 yrs ago I went on a 3 day fast just to try it out except I cheated a little because I still allowed myself water and fruit But it wasn't bad, it was actually kind of fun.
Its compulsory every year! Its one of the five basic pillars of Islam. All of them are: 1- To believe God is only one. 2- To pray five times a day. 3- To fast in the month of Ramadan. 4- To pay charity every year. 5- To offer pilgrimage in Kaabah once in a lifetime. I do fast in that month. Its not difficult to abstain from anything as far as you love God and have a strong faith in Him. We eat and drink a lot just before dawn, so its make things much easier!
For the record tbarr60 I don't know how you could come to that conclusion from my response. You are clearly ill-informed as to the matter of medical treatment without blood, but hey you probably enjoy it that way as you can take snipes at JW's without the accountability of being factually correct. There is every truth in what we say about alternatives - medical professionals acknowledge this, (and indeed are grateful to JW's for allowing them the opportunity to find alternative procedures), even if the uninformed do not. Absolutely - as Jesus said, "You will know the truth and the truth will set you free." Who authorises you to decide who does or does not have Gods Holy Spirit? You are quite wrong - in what way to JW's deny Gods power? Not main stream religion? Neither was Jesus and his follower were persecuted because they were teaching something different to the comfortable 'norm'. Because they believe that Jesus was Gods Son, not God? Jesus said he was Gods Son. Because they actively preach? Jesus taught his followers to go aout and find people to preach to. Because they refute pagan teachings like hellfire, the immortality of the soul and the trinity? So does the bible.
Who are you to say we are "off in our beliefs" when you clearly misunderstand or do not know what our beliefs are? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!! You "assume" you know know more about us than we do. Now, that's worth a chuckle. Col