-Removed-According to the Bible only Jehovah, his son Jesus and the chosen ones who go to heaven to serve as Kings and Priest with Jesus are the only beings ever spoken of as being immortal or given immortality.
The Great crowd are never said to be given immortality but they are given the chance to live forever as long as they stay faithful to Jehovah and his acting King Jesus. If they at some point in history prove unfaithful to God can die just as Adam and Eve did.
If you want the scriptures that shows this I will send them to you but they have been posted here many times with no understanding by most that read them.
As a matter of interest for trinitarians, the Holy Spirit is never mentioned being immortal or given immortality as Jesus and his Father are. The reason is it can't be given a trate such as that because it's not a being as Jehovah and Jesus are.
Originally posted by robbie carrobiewow, that is awesome!
this is an extract from the 2007 yearbook of Jehovahs witnesses
Canada has many indigenous people who speak their own language. A few years
ago, a sister named Carma witnessed to a man who is a Blackfoot Indian. “When I
tried to witness to him in English, he refused to listen,” says Carma, who lives on
the Blackfoot reserve with her parents. ...[text shortened]... at you have identified this young native
American girl and her efforts are just pure awesome!
God bless her.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe murdered are done, they are awaiting judgment. Those left behind, both
yes the murderers and the murdered.
those that were killed, and those that are suffering for it both need to be saved,
they both need healing, they both need fixed. Jesus died for sinners, He died
for all of us, that means those that did the murdering and those that are
suffering here in now in this life because of it.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by Conrau KIn the article, there was a man in a car crash whom the doctor could not treat any
Well, even the hospital you yourself cited as an excellent example of bloodless surgery could not give a total alternative to blood transfusions. In the article, there was a man in a car crash whom the doctor could not treat any other way than by blood transfusion. Bloodless surgery and blood fractions are not as safe as blood transfusions.
other way than by blood transfusion? this is a fallacy, even in cases of extreme
bloodless you can treat with volume expansion, that is replacing the lost volume
with a synthetic serum so that what occurs is haemodilution.
Bloodless surgery and blood fractions are not as safe as blood transfusions -
another fallacy, in many instances persons who undergo bloodless surgery recover
more quickly.
you are now attempting to justify your moral stance on medical grounds, an
exercise that you tried before, let me remind you, we refuse blood because it is a
religious precept, we have also recourse to philosophical argument regarding
conscience and the right of self determination, you want to take blood, that's up to
you, but we have our own thoughts on the matter and would be pleased if you would
let us exercise our right of self determination, our right of conscience and our right
of religious freedom.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIn the article, there was a man in a car crash whom the doctor could not treat any
In the article, there was a man in a car crash whom the doctor could not treat any
other way than by blood transfusion? this is a fallacy, even in cases of extreme
bloodless you can treat with volume expansion, that is replacing the lost volume
with a synthetic serum so that what occurs is haemodilution.
Bloodless surgery and blood fraction ...[text shortened]... our right of self determination, our right of conscience and our right
of religious freedom.
other way than by blood transfusion? this is a fallacy, even in cases of extreme
bloodless you can treat with volume expansion, that is replacing the lost volume
with a synthetic serum so that what occurs is haemodilution.
Read the article. You yourself provided it. The hospital, which you credited as a success for bloodless surgery, could not treat him. Blood fractions and synthetic serums cannot replace the lost hemoglobin.
Bloodless surgery and blood fractions are not as safe as blood transfusions -
another fallacy, in many instances persons who undergo bloodless surgery recover
more quickly.
Of course. Many cases of diseases require blood. Fractions simply cannot do the same job.
would be pleased if you would
let us exercise our right of self determination, our right of conscience and our right
of religious freedom.
I don't believe in any such rights, especially so when they involve children. Most countries do not, for example, recognise a right to self-determination in regard to euthanasia. I don't see how refusal to accept necessary and urgent blood transfusions is any different.
6 edits
Originally posted by Conrau Kok, whatever, regardless of your stance 8,000 persons were treated without blood in that unit, a testimony to the skill and professionalism of those doctors, nurses and surgeons involved. Many persons have died as a consequence of adhering to principles they think are right, who are you to determine what is good for them? who are you to tell them what may be done with their body? That is correct, you have no jurisdiction, so get over it. Noteworthy is your failure to address in the case of adults the right of self determination, although hypocritically you admit that in the case of euthanasia you are fine, so you resort in the most despicable fashion to that of minors, who in many cases we have no jurisdiction anyway, and in the case of trauma and excessive blood loss which runs a higher risk, yet the fact remains, we have the right of self determination, we claim the right to exercise the faculty of conscience and all that we ask are that others respect that right, but you could not even bring yourself to do that, yet surgeons and other medical professionals have and i thank my God for the stance that they have taken. I dearly hope you never become a medical professional, you are the sort that would pressurise some little old lady into taking a pint of blood for some gall bladder operation, against her express wishes.
[b]In the article, there was a man in a car crash whom the doctor could not treat any
other way than by blood transfusion? this is a fallacy, even in cases of extreme
bloodless you can treat with volume expansion, that is replacing the lost volume
with a synthetic serum so that what occurs is haemodilution.
Read the article. You yourself provi a. I don't see how refusal to accept necessary and urgent blood transfusions is any different.[/b]
Originally posted by robbie carrobieEducating people on cleanliness has value but we're not talking about that. Printing a leaflet for someone educating them about clean water when they don't have any clean water to drink in the first place is redundant. It's like giving cookbooks to people who are suffering in a famine.
educating persons on cleanliness has no value?
You see there are some bits of your organisation i find quite admirable, bits i find wacky and some aspects that leave a bitter taste in my mouth. I feel that all the money and effort that goes into printing Awake! and The Watchtower could be spent on something more noble and better for humanity. Because let's face it, all those millions of magazines that are produced just end up in land fill or back in a recycling depot.
Originally posted by Proper Knobyes of course its a huge problem, but we are in the business of teaching people to look after themselves, as our organisation is totally voluntary, from the persons that work in the printing factories to the persons who submit donations, we find that its the best way. Fairly recently we had a whole magazine dedicated to the problem of finding and maintaining a clean water supply, but i cannot locate it at the moment. Obviously those brothers and sisters in affected lands will go to the local people concerned and try to educate them. If no clean water is available then what can we do?
Educating people on cleanliness has value but we're not talking about that. Printing a leaflet for someone educating them about clean water when they don't have any clean water to drink in the first place is redundant. It's like giving cookbooks to people who are suffering in a famine.
You see there are some bits of your organisation i find quite admi ...[text shortened]... llions of magazines that are produced just end up in land fill or back in a recycling depot.
As for magazines ending up in landfill, we have a program of recycling, never the less, dig this,
That is what a person in Hungary felt he had found. He wrote to Jehovah’s Witnesses and explained: “I would like to make a request of your organization. I would like to order from you The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah’s Kingdom and the book You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth.
“Let me explain the reason for my request. In my city I work with a garbage truck where I found the magazine. I cleaned it and took it home with me. At home I studied it with my family. We would like to increase our little knowledge. Therefore, we ask you for your understanding and help.”
Jehovah can make a raven take food to Elijah, he can bring truth to persons in the most unlikely of places. One feature of the concentration camps was that the brothers there never went without spiritual food, it was smuggled in somehow!
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf no clean water is available then what can we do?
yes of course its a huge problem, but we are in the business of teaching people to look after themselves, as our organisation is totally voluntary, from the persons that work in the printing factories to the persons who submit donations, we find that its the best way. Fairly recently we had a whole magazine dedicated to the problem of finding and ma ...[text shortened]... camps was that the brothers there never went without spiritual food, it was smuggled in somehow!
Cease printing your literature and use that money to put in clean water infrastructures in places where they don't have any.
Originally posted by Proper Knobnope, people need our literature in order to learn truth, we are in the business of teaching, we help people to help themselves.
[b]If no clean water is available then what can we do?
Cease printing your literature and use that money to put in clean water infrastructures in places where they don't have any.[/b]