- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 120150
05 Oct 14
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75I think that when a Jehovah witness parent would rather allow their child to die than permit them a blood transfusion, then something has gone horribly wrong in their head because of their religion.
What you take from the scriptures and it's many stories and examples is up to you. Your relationship with god is up to you. How you view his laws are up to you. I'm not arguing with that.
I would hope you would give me that respect too.
But as I keep saying the bible which is God's view on all we do as humans and how we decide how to react to his ...[text shortened]... rdered, that most here are in fact doing to us, as we choose to follow that order even to death?
When you come here and defend that situation, then something has gone wrong with you.
That is the observation.
05 Oct 14
No one has come up with any hard numbers yet on how many children die each year from their parents not letting them have a blood transfusion. And yet a few here condemn us for that biblical backed command That we are simply following.
If the ones here are truly concerned and upset and would like to voice their opinions on the abuse children recieve from their parents, check out these sites and maybe throw your energy and hatred for parents abusing their children:
Just a few of hundreds of sites with info on what children go thru either directly or indirectly from their parents.
These are things JW parents would never do to their children. But if they did they would be removed from the congregation, unlike most so called christian churches today who would not remove them.
http://www.internationalcap.org/abuse_statistics.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28214266
http://www.ersnet.org/news/item/4212-secondhand-smoke-kills-more-than-600000-non-smokers-worldwide.html
http://www.loveourchildrenusa.org/cabusefacts.php
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/01/27/3206581/kids-gun-violence-killed-injuries/
05 Oct 14
Originally posted by galveston75So in cases of child abuse you expel the family and wash your hands of it? Has your organisation ever been found guilty of covering up child abuse by its members?
No one has come up with any hard numbers yet on how many children die each year from their parents not letting them have a blood transfusion. And yet a few here condemn us for that biblical backed command That we are simply following.
If the ones here are truly concerned and upset and would like to voice their opinions on the abuse children recieve f ...[text shortened]... _facts/
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/01/27/3206581/kids-gun-violence-killed-injuries/
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 120150
05 Oct 14
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75Yes you've tried this tack once already and I pointed out then that one was too many, referring you to the link I provided in the "another life saved from the madness" thread. You have chosen to ignore this and my other evidences against your cult on this topic which is fine but ignoring the content of those posts is simply you being dishonest once again Galveston75.
No one has come up with any hard numbers yet on how many children die each year from their parents not letting them have a blood transfusion. And yet a few here condemn us for that biblical backed command That we are simply following.
If the ones here are truly concerned and upset and would like to voice their opinions on the abuse children recieve f ...[text shortened]... _facts/
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/01/27/3206581/kids-gun-violence-killed-injuries/
In that thread I linked to a news article where the state had to intervene to prevent a Jehovah's Witness parent allowing their child to die. You presumably think the child should have been allowed to die to appease your god. It is disgusting, disgracefull and you should be downright ashamed of yourself.
All this because of one scripture in the New Testament which is obviously at best ambiguous. Refuse to reply to my posts if you want Galveston75; I shall still be here calling you out to account for your crazy dangerous beliefs.
05 Oct 14
Originally posted by FMFLook it up yourself as you both seem to "know it all anyway". No matter how I answer you and "dumbo dive dude", you two are not looking for anything but what you two can razz others about.
So in cases of child abuse you expel the family and wash your hands of it? Has your organisation ever been found guilty of covering up child abuse by its members?
The more you two keep posting this sillyness the more you expose your motives which is pure evil.
05 Oct 14
Originally posted by galveston75'Pure evil'? Hilarious.
Look it up yourself as you both seem to "know it all anyway". No matter how I answer you and "dumbo dive dude", you two are not looking for anything but what you two can razz others about.
The more you two keep posting this sillyness the more you expose your motives which is pure evil.
05 Oct 14
3 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobI think it may be very valid depending on your definition of evil, its not always used in a supernatural sense, but may be used to describe immorality, or hurtfulness, something that causes pain or sorrow.
'Pure evil'? Hilarious.
For example in a Biblical context
That which results in pain, sorrow, or distress. In order to convey the correct thought in English, the very comprehensive Hebrew word ra' is variously translated as “bad,” “gloomy,” “ugly,” “evil,” “calamitous,” “malignant,” “ungenerous,” and “envious,” depending upon the context. (Ge 2:9; 40:7; 41:3; Ex 33:4; De 6:22; 28:35; Pr 23:6; 28:22)
The Greek word kakos' may be defined as that which is (1) morally evil and (2) destructive; among the ways it has been translated are: “bad,” “evil,” “hurtful,” “injurious,” “wrong.” (Ro 7:19; 12:17; Col 3:5; Tit 1:12; Hebrews 5:14)
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200001452
clearly by definition that are the very embodiment of evil, its personification, its essence incarnate etc etc etc Now you will tell us why they are not to be considered 'pure evil'.
05 Oct 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobie😴
I think it may be very valid depending on your definition of evil, its not always used in a supernatural sense, but may be used to describe immorality, or hurtfulness, something that causes pain or sorrow.
For example in a Biblical context
That which results in pain, sorrow, or distress. In order to convey the correct thought in English, the ve ...[text shortened]... sence incarnate etc etc etc Now you will tell us why they are not to be considered 'pure evil'.