Thanks Elizabeth Dole. The Champaign County Blood Bank has likely closed or changed hands. Do Rhnull people know they are Rhnull? I found out I was O neg Rh neg when I was pregnant with my first child in She is B- I had my second child in I have felt a medical guinea pig at times but definitely my 4 yr old they want to study BAD! I have never donated blood or plasma. It is super weird this Rh negative stuff. Your explanation is the best I have come across. I am referred to as MS.
In the text books. Since then I have donated for heart and liver transplants and to save newborns. I feel strongly that a cure for Lukemia can be found in studying Rh Null blood. Honestly I feel the cure for many things can be found in 0 negative blood also.
I was a nurse and studies about this by regular dr. Are just about none. I mention my health problems I know are connected th being rh negative. Just by the fact that others are having them also and its not considered.
Darladrury76 gmail. Thank you for understanding. Thank you James! I was an Rh negative mother of twins! Your email address will not be published. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed. Skip to content. You are clearly a human, no ability to contemplate, you are just rash emotionally driven hairless monkey that speaks.
What qualifies you to make such a statement and what evidence do you base it on? The comment only goes to prove that you do in fact invent things to support your theory!
Show me real tangible evidence that all things in the bible are made up! As the Bible quite clearly states in Jeramiah ….. I do not like flippant remarks that have no substance! I remain contrite, although I suppose, maybe I was a touch frivolous! Not so much buffoonery however, I do actually hold the bible in high esteem. The bible has been translated, in whole or in part, into about 2, languages. It is by far the most widely translated and distributed book in history. Despite many corrupt religious leaders trying to withhold it, from the common man and all the unbelievers or non Christian efforts to destroy it!
Not least the Roman government! However, the Dead Sea Scrolls contain about biblical manuscripts or fragments that have been dated more than a thousand years older than the Leningrad codex. Despite the manuscripts, in the scrolls, having some variation in wording the message itself, was the same as the Bible today.
One scholar stated. Another Bible scholar wrote. I am all for a person having faith, Man should have faith. However, the ignorant nonsense you spew here is a direct indictment of religion. Science has regularly proven the bible inaccurate. The book itself is best read as allegory, and even then it is best to remember it was a socio-political tool when it was written.
As for the dead sea scrolls, half of those contradict the other half and the bible as well. In closing, all of your remarks are flippant and contain no real substance. Religion truly is the opium of the masses, it numbs the mind and destroys the person.
I am interested to know what and when you believe that science has proved the bible as inaccurate? I am also interested in why you consider what I posted as ignorant spew. I clearly referenced my sources. As for your comment about the Dead Sea scrolls…yes clearly there were spurious manuscripts that claimed to be biblical writings however, if one has actually read and studied the bible it is evident that certain manuscripts directly contradict the bible with idolatrous worship, magical divination.
Well said. The epitome of human reasoning. Without dumb prejudice. The Bible was an invention, a story told. You brainwashed fool. Ha ha. The only thing that is real is nature…. Luke has proved to be true. The sun changed from yellow to white. The stars move back and forth. All will prove to be true…in Gods time…according to that hour no one knows…He comes as a thief in the night! Literally bene Elohim means sons of godly beings.
In kabbalah there are 10 levels of being, from man to god. Modern Kabbalah interpretation is transgressed into spiritism and Buddha-based religions that accept reincarnation: they say that humans, in succesive reincarnations, reach a god-like state with prior 9 levels or degrees of spiritual embelishment trough every day living suffering being transformed in angels, thus not being obliged to reincarnation.
However, this science is false and is Fallen Angels deceit. Jesus and God in Book of Enoch clearly states that humans are ment to live once and eventually die, no matter what.
So give me a break with this Kabbalah crap!! People who eat and shit on a regular basis cannot reach a God-like position. Ancient knowledge? Esau was supposedly the father of the Edomites, his brother Jacob was father of the Israelites. Go back to your anti-semitic, racists craziness. I was actually looking for a serious article and came across this nonsense.
The ethnic group with the highest rate of rh neg blood are the basque of the Spanish-FrenshPyrenees,not so much the northern europeans. Learn to read. Max you have been down a really dark road and your facts are incorrect. Nephilim in the Biblical term is referencing giants. Goliath thought to be one himself. I suggest you study and learn the Cuneiform texts. By the way many of the artifacts supporting this where indeed some of the very first things destroyed when we invaded Baghdad.
Not hardly. As for your comment about the Dead Sea scrolls…yes clearly there were spurious manuscripts that claimed to be biblical writings however, if one has actually read and studied the bible it is evident that certain manuscripts directly contradict the bible with idolatrous worship, magical divination and other practices that clearly have no place in the word of God. If you refer back to my other comments you will see that I refer to bible scholars of which there are many that have declared the manuscripts of the dead sea scrolls that are contained in the bible are amazingly accurate and the message and the understanding is to be on the whole the same as the bible… accurate translations and copies.
With only difference being some aspects of terminology…being slightly different but not sufficient enough to alter the truth of Gods word! I am also open to man having faith…however, faith is built on knowledge and understanding and your personal relationship with God.
Incidentally I have never professed to be religious…I have faith in the bible as gods word! Um no, try the reverse you silly fool. Rh- did not appear here 35, years ago. Sure, in this day and age, all of us have genetics from multiple star systems however, when it comes to the BLOOD line, Rh- is the only remnants left of those not messed with by Enki and Enlil. Well that would explain a lot!
This is bullshit. Those with rh neg blood are pure bloods. Which I believe are descendants of Jesus and Mary Magdeline. I assume from that statement you are rh neg! What makes you think that Christ would have had relations with Mary Magdeline or any other woman for that matter. That would be a total contradiction of His teachings! Do not fornicate!! There are a number of scriptures in the new testament that indicates sexual immorality to be unclean, to abstain from, neither let us practice etc.
It includes adultery, prostitution, sexual relations between unmarried individuals, homosexuality and bestiality. This of course is unlawful in the eyes of God, man made laws of course vary from country to country and maybe some laws of man do not acknowledge them all, as unlawful. But even general bible quotes fail to support your claim.
Perhaps a different bible version with surrounding verses and context might help clear the fog. As a new congregation the apostle Paul wrote to them because he knew the people had been exposed to errant teaching from those in opposition to the way of Jesus Christ. Now we ask you and urge you in the Lord Jesus to do this more and more. For you know what instructions we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus.
NIV Matthew for context and clarity Jesus answers questions from the Pharisees and then he explains the meaning to his disciples. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit. As this is Jesus speaking directly, one must intelligently interpret the deed of sexual immorality or fornication sexual relations outside of marriage as unclean, in the eyes of Jesus and the will of his Father.
Other translations also term sexual immorality as unholy and evil. In addition there are many scriptures that express a very high view of marriage and parallels it to the relationship between God and his faithful followers, such as Ep , Mt , 1Co , Col , He , Mr , and Mt 22 and many more. Not to mention the many scriptures that refers to those committing sexual immorality not entering the Kingdom of God.
And incidentally, I do not belong to any religious order and neither do I practice any form or organised religion! I merely have an interest in the bible! And I would never try to pass off my views, as gospel! I therefore suggest that it is, in fact yourself, who jumps to baseless assumptions! Your dismissal of the idea that Jesus would procreate with a woman or take a woman as a partner have no basis outside of your clearly biased and very presumptuous assumptions.
Neither Jesus or the bible outlawed such a thing. And even if your definition was accurate it does not include procreation, which is the one and apparently only form of sex the bible does condone. Perhaps you ought to check the dictionary on the meaning of fornication and sexual immorality!
I accept that the Old Testament had the Mosaic law when God was involved with his people. The law was to protect them, mainly, I sense from idolatry, but also, as you say the times were different then and monogamy was not standard and it was at that time permitted to takes more than one wife. However, that was a temporary provision, as God always intended it to be, one man, one wife, when he instigated the first marriage in the Garden of Eden. This one will be called Woman because from man she was taken.
That is why a man will leave his father and his mother and he will stick to his wife. Jesus was not prohibited from sex or fathering a child but it would have had to be in the holy sanctimony of a married union.
To have had sexual relations with any female or fathered a child, he would have married first! Jesus gave up his perfect life and was without sin!
To redeem mankind and pay a ransom sacrifice for the original sin of Adam, that the whole of mankind inherited. For the wages sin pays is death, but the gift of God gives everlasting life by Christ Jesus our Lord. Ro but Jesus was not born of Adam, rather he was born of Mary, in the line of David, an immaculate conception! He was born perfect and sinless and neither did he sin during his life on Earth.
You do realise the dictionary was written after the bible? So its definition of sexual immorality is not overly relevant. But we seem to be making some progress as you now admit that Jesus could have fathered a child if he was married. So why are you so certain he did not marry? There is a relatively popular theory that Jesus took Mary Magdalene as his partner and wife.
Your original comment stated that this would have been against his teachings of do not fornicate, which are now changing to simply saying he did not marry.
But how can you be so certain he did not marry? My point is that your beliefs are full of baseless assumptions. No where does Jesus say people cannot have sex, even outside of wedlock, but even if he did, the claim that he may have fathered a child with Mary Magdalene, who he took as his wife, cannot be refuted in any definitive way. You may find it unbelievable based on your preconceived ideas of Jesus, but such assumptions have not basis and much of what you claim about Jesus, his life and his teachings is nothing but assumptions based on virtually nothing.
This is my problem with religious people like yourself. You have no real evidence to support your belief yet you claim that such beliefs are facts, when they are not even well supported theories. There are some secular manuscripts confirming that a man called Jesus, who claimed to be the son of God and performed some miraculous deeds, did in fact exist.
There are also some writings that make reference to his death and resurrection, however, the secular accounts are very sparse and limited in detail. You do not accept the Bible as a source of evidence, you also state that I have made up the definition of sexual immorality, because the dictionary is also not an acceptable source of definitions.
As there is absolutely no evidence or proof, in any manuscripts, reports or writings of that time, in fact not even a shred or fragment has been found that says Jesus took a wife, married, had sexual relations or fathered a child…. I assume that your comments about Jesus and Mary Magdalene, are based on something other than your own biased and baseless assumptions? Whilst mine are based on The bible which has been translated, in whole or in part, into about 2, languages.
Unlike you I am not pretending to know whether or not Jesus was married. I am not trying to ridicule you I was just asking if your claims had any basis. One way or another I got my answer. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I said it goes against his teachings and it would render his death and ransom sacrifice, as null and void!
If he had! I am certain that if there was any shred of evidence, what so ever, of Jesus Christ having sinned or fallen short of the ransom sacrifice. Some glorifying, non believer would, without a doubt, ensure the whole world knew about it! It would be plastered over all the national and international news and media! Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, As it is in heaven. And so you see, my point being that religion as we know it, would not exist if there were offspring of Mary Magdalene and Jesus running about.
Unless of course, there was a wedding first! Quite possible Tony, or maybe he enjoys gossip and tickle tackle, lol. Or that they have also carried out research on old testament accounts that refer to historical facts, such as the rise and fall of various world powers.
Or, that they might have studied the accounts that claim to relay prophetic events apparently, well in advance of their actual fulfilment and researched the accuracy of the copying and translation of the manuscripts available and the age and dates they were written.
It is quite staggering to read the prophecy in the book of Daniel that relays the events surrounding the fall of the Babylonian Empire by Cyrus the Great in BC. It is through study and the acquiring of knowledge that some people base their belief and in time develop a faith.
I personally do not attend any religious organisation or profess any particular denomination. I have however, come to a understanding and respect for the Bible and now believe that it truly is the Word of God, even though I do not follow or practice any type of worship.
I am sure he has not changed his view in any way, shape or form and he still considers me to be completely bonkers! Thanks for your comment though, it did actually make me smile.
I work on the oceans and have plenty of time to read in the off watch. That was a great read with lots of wisdom. Another clinical importance is that such subjects readily form alloantibodies when exposed to Rh antigens. We report herein a rare Rhnull phenotype in a sibling, which was detected as a part of the difficult sample work-up for red cell antibody screening and identification. The absence of the Rh complex alters the RBC shape, increases its osmotic fragility, and shortens its lifespan, resulting in a hemolytic anemia that is usually mild in nature.
These patients are at risk of adverse transfusion reactions because they may produce antibodies against several of the Rh antigens. Rh antigens may also be involved in the transport of ammonium across the RBC membrane. Interestingly, the first member of a family of water channels aquaporins and the first member of a family of urea transporters were both found in blood group proteins the Colton blood group and Kidd blood group, respectively. Only one antigen, the D antigen determines whether or not you are considered Rh negative, but in reality there are 50 known antigens within the Rh blood group system.
If you test negative for the presence of all of them, you are Rh null. If you test negative for the presence of D , even when other antigens from the Rh blood group system are present, you are considered Rh negative. Disclaimer: This blog, all of its content and all of my posts are for Entertainment Purposes Only. Please note that comments will not be approved unless you use your real name. You can use first name only, if no one else has commented under that name before. Otherwise use first name and last initial.
If that has been taken, use your full first and last name. No exceptions. Thank you for understanding. I was cmv- for a long time and donated for the same thing.
0コメント