Onlytruegod.org, Blood and Organ Tran...

Onlytruegod.org, Blood and Organ Transplantation

Posted in the Jehovah's Witness Forum

First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#1 Jul 22, 2009
This is the second of a series of discussions. You can view the first installment at: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

The web site onlytruegod.org is a Watchtower apologetic web site. It contains an untold number of false and fallacious assertions and conclusions. This thread will disclose those related to Watchtower’s historical position on organ transplantation.

Transplantation Always a Matter of Personal Conscience?

Assertion: At no time has Watchtower had a policy to disfellowship for accepting human organ transplant.(Ref. http://onlytruegod.org/jwstrs/MCB-transp.htm )

At one point in time Watchtower taught that human-to-human organ transplantation was cannibalism.

Though uncommon in contemporary developed societies, many converts in the south pacific isles have been disfellowshipped for cannibalism. In Papua New Guinea the practice of cannibalism is still practiced by some tribes and peoples. Missionaries there have converted many who later on were found to again be practicing a form of cannibalism where people would eat flesh of individuals who died of natural cause or accident. These Witnesses were disfellowshipped if they did not show remorse for their cannibalism. This policy remains in effect to this day.

Watchtower has always taken the view that cannibalism is a diabolical practice condemned in scripture as an evil. This is why in 1966 Watchtower expressed that cannibalism is “just as despicable” as drinking blood.(Ref. 1) Witnesses willingly drinking blood are disfellowshipped under Watchtower’s religious policy. Witnesses who are cannibals are also disfellowshipped under Watchtower’s religious policy. Again, to this day this is Watchtower’s policy.

In 1967 we Watchtower made the express assertions that human-to-human organ transplantation is cannibalism. Watchtower asserted,

“Did this include eating human flesh, sustaining one’s life by means of the body or part of the body of another human, alive or dead? No! That would be cannibalism, a practice abhorrent to all civilized people.”(Ref. 2)

Witnesses who were disfellowshipped for accepting human-to-human organ transplants were disfellowshipped for cannibalism just like Witnesses who drank blood were disfellowshipped.

In 1980 Watchtower restated its religious position on human-to-human organ transplantation by no longer teaching that the act was cannibalism. At that time rather than taking a “stand” that these transplants were “a form of cannibalism” Watchtower instead assumed the position that each of its member Witnesses would have to make this determination personally. As of that time Witnesses were no longer disfellowshipped for cannibalism because of accepting human-to-human organ transplants.(Ref. 3-4)

The assertion that at no time has Watchtower had a policy to disfellowship for accepting human organ transplant if false. Between the period of 1967 to 1980 Witnesses who willingly and without remorse accepted human organ transplants were disfellowshipped as cannibals.

Marvin Shilmer

__________
References:

1. The Watchtower, July 1, 1966 p. 401

2. The Watchtower, November 15, 1967 p. 702

3. The Watchtower, March 15, 1980 p. 31

4. Awake, July 8, 1972 p. 28

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#2 Jul 22, 2009
Transplantation Compared to Cannibalism?

Assertion: The Watchtower of November 15, 1967 only compared human-to-human organ transplantation with cannibalism.(Ref. http://onlytruegod.org/jwstrs/MCB-transp.htm )

That assertion is implicit because the subject article never admits the same Watchtower article expressly asserts that human-to-human organ transplantation “is cannibalistic.” Rather it characterizes Watchtower’s express assertion as though an unfortunate comparison. In context Watchtower’s statement reads,

“When there is a diseased or defective organ, the usual way health is restored is by taking in nutrients. The body uses the food eaten to repair or heal the organ, gradually replacing the cells. When men of science conclude that this normal process will no longer work and they suggest removing the organ and replacing it directly with an organ from another human, this is simply a shortcut. Those who submit to such operations are thus living off the flesh of another human. That is cannibalistic.”(Ref. 1)

The author of onlytruegod.org suggests Watchtower had made an unfortunate choice of words. It turns out there is nothing unfortunate about Watchtower’s statement. Watchtower did not simply compare organ transplantation with cannibalism. Watchtower expressly stipulated to its membership that human-to-human organ transplantation is cannibalistic. In other words, were a Witness to accept organ transplantation to sustain their life it would be cannibalism.

The assertion above by onlytruegod.org is patently false.

Marvin Shilmer
__________
References:

1. The Watchtower, November 15, 1967 p. 702
columbo agnostic

West Chicago, IL

#3 Jul 22, 2009
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
This is the second of a series of discussions. You can view the first installment at: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
The web site onlytruegod.org is a Watchtower apologetic web site. It contains an untold number of false and fallacious assertions and conclusions. This thread will disclose those related to Watchtower’s historical position on organ transplantation.
Transplantation Always a Matter of Personal Conscience?
Assertion: At no time has Watchtower had a policy to disfellowship for accepting human organ transplant.(Ref. http://onlytruegod.org/jwstrs/MCB-transp.htm )
At one point in time Watchtower taught that human-to-human organ transplantation was cannibalism.
Though uncommon in contemporary developed societies, many converts in the south pacific isles have been disfellowshipped for cannibalism. In Papua New Guinea the practice of cannibalism is still practiced by some tribes and peoples. Missionaries there have converted many who later on were found to again be practicing a form of cannibalism where people would eat flesh of individuals who died of natural cause or accident. These Witnesses were disfellowshipped if they did not show remorse for their cannibalism. This policy remains in effect to this day.
Watchtower has always taken the view that cannibalism is a diabolical practice condemned in scripture as an evil. This is why in 1966 Watchtower expressed that cannibalism is “just as despicable” as drinking blood.(Ref. 1) Witnesses willingly drinking blood are disfellowshipped under Watchtower’s religious policy. Witnesses who are cannibals are also disfellowshipped under Watchtower’s religious policy. Again, to this day this is Watchtower’s policy.
In 1967 we Watchtower made the express assertions that human-to-human organ transplantation is cannibalism. Watchtower asserted,
“Did this include eating human flesh, sustaining one’s life by means of the body or part of the body of another human, alive or dead? No! That would be cannibalism, a practice abhorrent to all civilized people.”(Ref. 2)
Witnesses who were disfellowshipped for accepting human-to-human organ transplants were disfellowshipped for cannibalism just like Witnesses who drank blood were disfellowshipped.
In 1980 Watchtower restated its religious position on human-to-human organ transplantation by no longer teaching that the act was cannibalism. At that time rather than taking a “stand” that these transplants were “a form of cannibalism” Watchtower instead assumed the position that each of its member Witnesses would have to make this determination personally. As of that time Witnesses were no longer disfellowshipped for cannibalism because of accepting human-to-human organ transplants.(Ref. 3-4)
The assertion that at no time has Watchtower had a policy to disfellowship for accepting human organ transplant if false. Between the period of 1967 to 1980 Witnesses who willingly and without remorse accepted human organ transplants were disfellowshipped as cannibals.
Marvin Shilmer
__________
References:
1. The Watchtower, July 1, 1966 p. 401
2. The Watchtower, November 15, 1967 p. 702
3. The Watchtower, March 15, 1980 p. 31
4. Awake, July 8, 1972 p. 28
Hey MS, I wonder how many jw's died during that time period before the change.I think the familys of the dead would have a good court case of false teaching.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#4 Jul 22, 2009
Specified As a Matter of Conscience in 1967?

Assertion: The Watchtower of November 15, 1967 specified that human-to-human organ transplantation was a matter of personal decision.(Ref. http://onlytruegod.org/jwstrs/MCB-transp.htm )

Readers can view that now famous Questions From Readers article all they want and never find where it “specifies” that human-to-human organ transplantation is a matter left to individual conscience.

The author of onlytruegod.org plies a paragraph specifying that it was left to individual conscience for a Witness to choose to donate his or her body to medical science upon their death for unrestricted use. Apparently the author of onlytruegod.org wants readers to accept “I choose to donate my dead body to science for unrestricted use” as him or her saying “I choose to accept an organ transplant.” This is so transparent it hardly deserves attention. It is the sheer blatancy of this dishonest reasoning that makes it noteworthy! Because organ from a corpse might be used for transplantation does not mean organs from a corpse will be used for transplantation, or that the donor chose to have his or her organs used for transplantation.

The assertion above by onlytruegod.org is unsound. The article in question offers no specificity as claimed.

Marvin Shilmer

“thirdwitness.com”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#5 Jul 22, 2009
Thoroughly covered in great detail.

http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

Organ Transplants--Never DFing Offense
columbo agnostic

West Chicago, IL

#6 Jul 22, 2009
Thirdwitness wrote:
Thoroughly covered in great detail.
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
Organ Transplants--Never DFing Offense
UUMMM fourth witness, I wouldnt take your word if your tounge was noterised sir. Jw's are taught to lie to the non jw's in order to prove a point. Nice try.You keep trying like that you may be a second witness some day. GOOD LUCK.
ATALAYA

San Juan, Puerto Rico

#7 Jul 22, 2009
Marvin Shilmer has blood obsession syndrome. :)

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#8 Jul 22, 2009
Thirdwitless writes:

“Organ Transplants--Never DFing Offense”

To accept Thirdwitless’ assertion one has to believe:

Watchtower’s doctrinal position held cannibalism just as despicable as accepting transfusion of blood, but Watchtower disfellowshipped for blood transfusion but not for cannibalism.

Question for Thirdwitless:

Could Witnesses of the 1960s practice cannibalism without being disfellowshipped?

YOU TELL US.

Marvin Shilmer

Since: Nov 08

United States

#9 Jul 22, 2009
Thirdwitness wrote:
Thoroughly covered in great detail.
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
Organ Transplants--Never DFing Offense
Yet another pile of lies by the most offensive, pathological JW defender on the Net.

The very fact that a 1980 Watchtower article canceled disfellowshiping for taking a transplant disproves your lies.

Spare us your ridiculous claim that the 1980 article didn't do that; the Watchtower Society doesn't issue orders that DF'ing is no longer to take place unless a DF'ing policy were in place to begin with.

AlanF

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#10 Jul 22, 2009
AlanF,

Thirdwitless would have people think Watchtower would tell elders not to do something they never did. Loon!

Thirdwitless would have people think Watchtower does not disfellowship for cannibalism but it does for smoking cigarettes! Loony loon!!

I suppose all those smokers can become cannibals to take their mind off nicotine! And, and, and…. since cannibalism is “a personal decision” these human meat eaters will even qualify as congregation elders just like Witness males who accept transfusion of cryoprecipitate can!

Thirdwitless is a fool of the first order.

Marvin Shilmer

“thirdwitness.com”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#11 Jul 22, 2009
AlanMF wrote:
<quoted text>
Spare us your ridiculous claim that the 1980 article didn't do that; the Watchtower Society doesn't issue orders that DF'ing is no longer to take place unless a DF'ing policy were in place to begin with.
AlanF
The WT issued no such order in that 1980 WT.

It was very similar to the July 15, 06 WT: "suppose a brother viewed so-called soft-core pornography on several occasions. He is ashamed, confesses to an elder,.... Although no judicial action would be warranted, this type of uncleanness would call for strong Scriptural counsel..."

Lets use AlanF's and other's reasoning: THIS ARTICLE SPECIFICALLY tells elders NOT to form JC's; WHY would the WT EVEN NEED TO INFORM THEM NOT TO FORM A JC, IF soft core porn was never a dfing offense?????

By their reasoning, soft core pornography must have been a dfing offense in the past because here it is said that it is not a judicial matter. But that is simply not the case.

“thirdwitness.com”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#12 Jul 22, 2009
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
Thirdwitless would have people think Watchtower does not disfellowship for cannibalism but it does for smoking cigarettes!

I suppose all those smokers can become cannibals to take their mind off nicotine! And, and, and…. since cannibalism is “a personal decision” these human meat eaters will even qualify as congregation elders
Since no one seems to have any power of reason or logic about them I guess I will have to walk you thru this slowly in detail. I understand that no appostapposers will look at this objectively but at least any lurkers who seek truth can see it for themselves and any JWs who read this will be fortified in their faith that the WTS is not so unreasonable as others try to make them appear by their cunning language and smooth talk.

Lets look back and really read what that November 15, 1967 WT said. Did it say that taking an organ transplant is the exact same thing as eating a person? Is that what the article meant when it compared organ transplants to cannibalism? Lets see.

Watchtower wrote:
"Did this include eating human flesh, sustaining one’s life by means of the body or part of the body of another human, alive or dead? No! That would be cannibalism, a practice abhorrent to all civilized people...."

At this point the article is talking about literally eating human flesh because it says how abhorrent it would be to civilized people. It is not talking about transplants just yet. Transplant are not abhorrent to civilized people.

Watchtower wrote:
"When there is a diseased or defective organ, the usual way health is restored is by taking in nutrients. The body uses the food eaten to repair or heal the organ, gradually replacing the cells. When men of science conclude that this normal process will no longer work and they suggest removing the organ and replacing it directly with an organ from another human, this is simply a shortcut. Those who submit to such operations are thus living off the flesh of another human. That is cannibalistic."

Now it is talking about transplants. It is not talking about eating humans at all but rather living off the flesh of another human by means of a transplant. It is cannibalistic because like eating flesh, receiving a transplant allows one to live off the flesh of the other human. That's it. It is definitely not saying that eating people is the exact same thing as receiving a transplant because as the article has already shown eating a person is 'abhorrent to civilized people' but transplants we know are not.

“thirdwitness.com”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#13 Jul 22, 2009
Watchtower wrote:
"However, in allowing man to eat animal flesh Jehovah God did not grant permission for humans to try to perpetuate their lives by cannibalistically taking into their bodies human flesh, whether chewed or in the form of whole organs or body parts taken from others."

Again the article is not sayng that eating humans is the exact same thing as an organ transplant. Eating humans is abhorrent to civilized people, remember. It is again saying that just like eating humans can perpetuate your life so can human parts from another person perpetuate your life and in that way it is cannibalistic.

Later the article uses cannibalistic again
Watchtower wrote:
"Would they use his organs in cannibalistic medical experiments?"

There were no medical experiments in 1967 that involved the eating of human organs. Thats obviously not what the Watchtower article is talking about. So again the article is saying that the 'medical experiments' of organ transplanting are cannibalistic in that your life might be extended by human body parts from another person. Again, it is not saying that experimental organ transplants is just exactly the same thing as eating a human being.

Summary: The article is saying that the only way that organ transplants and eating human beings is the same is that they are both intended to perpetuate the life of a person with the body parts from another person. Thus an organ transplant in that sense alone is cannibalistic according to the article.

“thirdwitness.com”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#14 Jul 22, 2009
Watchtower wrote: "in allowing man to eat animal flesh Jehovah God did not grant permission for humans to try to perpetuate their lives by cannibalistically taking into their bodies human flesh"

The phrase 'perpetuating their lives' is the key. Organ transplants are like cannibalism in the sense that a person takes body parts from someone else to perpetuate their lives. But getting an organ transplant does not make you a person who has chewed and eaten human beings. Taking an organ transplant and eating a human being is two separate things altogether.

This is very easy to understand. But of course I know that many will try twist what is said and they will pretend that it all just flies right over their heads claiming it is legalistic jargon and complicated goobley gop. But we really all know how easy this is to understand and how the Watchtower publication is being twisted.

Watchtower wrote: "Those who submit to such operations are thus living off the flesh of another human. That is cannibalistic."

It cannot be denied that those who receive organ transplants live off the flesh of another human.

That IS cannibalistic in that sense only. That is what the WT is saying. No its not eating another human being and the WT didn't say it was. But its still cannibalistic in the sense pointed out above, living off the flesh of another.

“thirdwitness.com”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#15 Jul 22, 2009
Marvin Shilmer wrote:
The assertion that at no time has Watchtower had a policy to disfellowship for accepting human organ transplant if false.
The Organization Book published in 1972 doesn't even include a question about organ transplants and certainly does not list it as a dfing offense. Imagine that. I wonder why? Could it possibly be that it was a personal decision, a conscience matter, as the WT stated in both 1967 and 1980?

“thirdwitness.com”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#16 Jul 22, 2009
An example similar to organ transplants can be shown concerning use of tobacco when tobacco was not a disfellowshipping offense.

The April 1, 1954 WT states: "Could we imagine Christ Jesus smoking? Unless we can, we must admit that smoking tobacco is incompatible with Christianity.........
Tens of thousands of Christian ministers of Jehovah at one time had the tobacco habit, but, finding it incompatible with Christianity, they dropped it..........
The thing is to be fully convinced that smoking tobacco is displeasing to Jehovah God, shows lack of neighbor love and is not good for the one smoking, either physically, spiritually, mentally or morally."

As we see tobacco use was condemned as unchristian. Of course as a side point, we will never here from appostapposers the countless number of lives that JWs saved by their stance on the use of tobacco. But did you know that even though those statements were made in 1954, tobacco use was not a disfellowshipping offense until the 1970s.

But now note the contrast made with blood. The January 15, 1961 WT clearly shows taking a blood transfusion was a disfellowshipping offense.

The Watchtower clearly states: "In view of the seriousness of taking blood into the human system by a transfusion, would violation of the Holy Scriptures in this regard subject the dedicated, baptized receiver of blood transfusion to being disfellowshiped from the Christian congregation?
The inspired Holy Scriptures answer yes."

If receiving an organ transplant was a disfellowshipping offense the Watchtower magazine would have said so as it clearly did with blood transfusions. But just as it did not state that tobacco use was a disfellowshipping offense at the time neither did it state that organ transplants were a disfellowshipping offense. Simply because, it was not a disfellowshipping offense. It was in reality a personal decision that each person had to make.
jace

Washington, DC

#17 Jul 23, 2009
Thirdwitness wrote:
An example similar to organ transplants can be shown concerning use of tobacco when tobacco was not a disfellowshipping offense.
The April 1, 1954 WT states: "Could we imagine Christ Jesus smoking? Unless we can, we must admit that smoking tobacco is incompatible with Christianity.........
Tens of thousands of Christian ministers of Jehovah at one time had the tobacco habit, but, finding it incompatible with Christianity, they dropped it..........
The thing is to be fully convinced that smoking tobacco is displeasing to Jehovah God, shows lack of neighbor love and is not good for the one smoking, either physically, spiritually, mentally or morally."
As we see tobacco use was condemned as unchristian. Of course as a side point, we will never here from appostapposers the countless number of lives that JWs saved by their stance on the use of tobacco. But did you know that even though those statements were made in 1954, tobacco use was not a disfellowshipping offense until the 1970s.
But now note the contrast made with blood. The January 15, 1961 WT clearly shows taking a blood transfusion was a disfellowshipping offense.
The Watchtower clearly states: "In view of the seriousness of taking blood into the human system by a transfusion, would violation of the Holy Scriptures in this regard subject the dedicated, baptized receiver of blood transfusion to being disfellowshiped from the Christian congregation?
The inspired Holy Scriptures answer yes."
If receiving an organ transplant was a disfellowshipping offense the Watchtower magazine would have said so as it clearly did with blood transfusions. But just as it did not state that tobacco use was a disfellowshipping offense at the time neither did it state that organ transplants were a disfellowshipping offense. Simply because, it was not a disfellowshipping offense. It was in reality a personal decision that each person had to make.
########

I have repeatedly asked 3JW if the WT taught billions of persons that the taking of Transplants was Unscriptural, against the Word of God and he has not asnwered it yet

he keeps on repeating that the Service Dept had no policy in place to DF a baptized JW, yet he has not yet told us whether or not that JW went to the home of billions with this false Gospel message.

He had not told us whether a dying person be it a jw or jw bible study was informed as to what the "Bible says" on the matter.

The official position of the GB was to tell folks around the world as the mouth pc of God that it was scripturally Wrong- This was a lie from Day one, it was dead wrong the minute it rolled off the presses at 117 Adams Street in Brooklyn

3JW would have argued to the Death with anyone he meet on the street, at their homes, and any Brotehr that SUCH A COURSE WAS SCRIPTURALLY WRONG-

the bottom line is the messages was Unscriptural.

all the sematics will never change this one simple FACT

one of the most important things i have learned and teach to others is the key to talking to a JW is KNOWING WHAT QUESTIONS TO ASK

if not the jw will play you with word games, they are experts at it
jace

Washington, DC

#18 Jul 23, 2009
Once the jw is cornered he will argue,

"well it was a new medical practice and even OTHER RELIGIONS took the same positions"

DUHHHHHHHH the channel of God is now taking ques from Christedom, yes agents of Satan??

yep the old johnny plays in the street mindset why can't i mom

and yet when they take other positions it is due to be SPIRIT DIRECTED BY GOD HIMSELF, YEA RIGHT

see when a jw argues any position from the medical standpoint he loses, since there are lots of "Dangerous and risky" medical procedures

a christian doesn't make a decision on medical procedures based on HOW DANGEROUS IT IS, brain surgery is probably dangerous too

the jw first announces that it is Unscriptural, invokes its too dangerous and OTHER RELIGIOUS LEADERS of satan company agree with us and so we joined in a took the same position as well

now how assinne does that sound coming from the mouthpc of god that is being spirit directed

nope nope nope, what we have is merely a group of dudes giving their uninspired OPINION ON A LIFE AND DEATH MATTER, telling folks it will harm their relationship with God, stressing folks out into believing they are sinning against God

sorta like the first century Boys who told folks if you DON'T WASH UP TO THOSE DAMN ELBOWS GOD IS GOING TO PIMP SLAP YOU
jace

Washington, DC

#19 Jul 23, 2009
so for future reference i suggest never ask the jw would the jw DF a member for taking a transplant, but instead expand it to the broader sphere of WHAT MESSAGE CALLED THE GOSPEL were you guys selling to billions of humans as THE TRUTH!

Since: Nov 08

United States

#20 Jul 23, 2009
Despite Thirdwitness' lies, organ transplants were a DF'ing offense. I know this very well, because it was this very issue that, in 1967, was the first time I disagreed with WTS teaching. I argued with certain "servants" (there was no elder arrangement) back then that the idea was stupid, and they argued that "Jehovah's organization" was correct and needed to be kept clean by DF'ing wrongdoers.

The issue quickly became a hot potato for WTS leaders, though, because it prevented many JWs from getting needed medical care. Many JWs failed to get cornea transplants because of fear of being DF'd. By the time the DF'ing policy was rescinded in 1980, I was for all practical purposes no longer a JW, and I missed the Watchtower article. I was flabbergasted some years later when a faithful JW I was friendly with got a kidney transplant. He and other JWs explained the new policy, and were happy that they could now live rather than die because of a ridiculous and misguided policy, and not have to make a choice between their lives and being DF'd.

Give it up, Thirdwitness. You weren't around back then; I was.

AlanF

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
10 Years on this forum! 5 min pcloadletter 248
Jehovah`s witnesses have the true religion 8 min red blood relative 4,196
WHY is the 'TRINITY" found in NO Bible anywhere? 30 min red blood relative 916
JW's in the 1950''s 56 min red blood relative 24
Jesus: "I surrender my Flesh"- CHURCHianity. 2 hr jad2017 29
YES-Jesus WAS once known as Michael (Sep '14) 2 hr Larry 12,745
not worth it 3 hr Spike 13
Boni's Favorite Verse: John 17:3 4 hr jad2017 419
They expect us to believe Jesus is 1/3 God!!! 8 hr rsss11 44