| Subject: Thank you BEN,Check Christian neutrality thread for more comment. (N.T) |
Author:
PAUL.
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 11/11/01 6:51pm
In reply to:
Ben
's message, "We see you, Paul" on 11/10/01 9:54pm
>Paul,
>
>I'm not sure what you expect the average person on our
>message board to say in response to this message. To
>me, it doesn't beg a lot of responses. That doesn't
>mean we're not reading it, as Don has informed you.
>
>Another problem is that, although I know you wish you
>could change this, it is simply hard to read one big
>paragraph of words. It would be preferable if you
>could divide your messages into several paragraphs.
>When I see a message that looks like this, my instinct
>is to go on to another message. My brain just doesn't
>process so much connected information very well.
>
>In any event, sometimes when you post a new thread,
>you may not get responses. That doesn't mean people
>aren't reading your posts. They may not have anything
>to say. On the other hand, I'm sure not every person
>reads every single post. So there may be people who
>really haven't read it. This is life on the message
>board. I will make a few responses to your message,
>but I really don't get into Bible debates too much, as
>I do not feel the Bible is anything special, beyond an
>interesting religious book.
>
>>I'll start with the hardest subjects blood
>>transfusions,Mr F relates a somewhat distorted version
>>of the experiences of a young Jehovahs witness couple
>>and their child.This couple in light of Bible teaching
>>believe that blood transfussions where against GODS
>>laws,GEN9*4,LEV7*24,17*24 and ACTS15*20. So they
>>extended their parental rights to ask fornon blood
>>alternative treatments (which there are several),and
>>these alternatives alsohave less chance of
>>complications.Let me make this point with an
>>illustration,"Two Jehovahs witnessess are in hospital
>>both are told they need blood transfusions,one has the
>>blood,one doesnt,both of them die.The one who had the
>>transfusion 'WOULD HAVE DIED ANYWAY',The one who didnt
>>'DIED BECAUSE HE DIDNT HAVE BLOOD'.Now I challenge
>>anyone to say that wouldnt be how theyd think."(I dont
>>think like that I should add)
>
>I'm really not sure what your point is here. First of
>all, I think you're assuming that everyone read every
>word of John Fitzgerald's messages. In reality, I
>suspect most people didn't. Because you are a
>Jehovah's Witness, you are hyper-sensitive about that
>issue, but the rest of us aren't. I didn't pay any
>more attention to his JW thread than I did to his
>FreeMason thread. I skimmed all of them, but didn't
>have time to read them in-depth.
>
>On the issue of blood transfusions, if a religion
>prohibits people from having them, I think this is
>morally wrong. It is not fair for parents to prohibit
>their children from medical care. I do not believe
>that kids _belong_ to parents. I think that kids are
>the responsibility of a society. Therefore, I also do
>not agree with parents' "right" to take their children
>out of mainstream society and teach them all sorts of
>religious doctrines in the place of science and other
>things that they will need to know to have a fair shot
>at being happy, successful members of society. But I
>digress.
>
>No people, including children, are the property of
>another person. So if the doctrine really is not to
>allow transfusions, I think it is wrong. If that is
>not the belief, you can correct me.
>
>>Onto
>>politics we believe that GODS Kingdom(or goverment)
>>under Christs leadership is the only answer to the
>>worlds troubles,so we do not vote,hold political
>>office,salute the flagor sing the national anthem.Are
>>these major crimes or just JWS exerting their right to
>>Christian neutrality.
>
>I think it is a person's right not to vote or salute
>the flag. Simply put, though, if you do not vote, you
>are not exercising your freedom to choose a candidate.
> So if you get one you don't like, it is your own
>fault.
>
>On the issue of the flag and anthem...if you don't
>value the freedom we have in
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 