Do Witness children die from not taking blood?

by juandefiero 30 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  juandefiero

  YES - Awake! 1994 May 22 p.2 Youths Who Put God First (3-15)

  "In former times thousands of youths died for putting God first. They are still doing it, only today the drama is played out in hospitals and courtrooms, with blood transfusions the issue."

  NO - Watchtower 1998 December 1 p.14 Defending Our Faith

  "Jehovah's Witnesses have been targets of false accusations - barefaced lies and twisted presentations of their beliefs... The accusation that numerous children of Jehovah's Witnesses die each year as a result of refusing blood transfusions is totally unfounded."

  So does that mean that the May 22, 1994 Awake! was a "false accusation...barefaced lie...twisted presentation of [JW] beliefs"?

  Are we confused yet? ;)

  (Special thanks to Splash...)
• 

  DATA-DOG

  Elder: The WTBTS publications DO NOT contradict themselves, ever.

  DD
• 

  slimboyfat

  Technically the first quote could be read to mean that thousands "put God first" rather than thousands "have died". And I don't know that thousands of children have died because of no blood. No doubt many have, but thousands? I don't know. What they say is reprehensible in any case, and the triumphalist tone of the article is repulsive. I know an active pioneer sister who hated that Awake! and refused to place it. She's still a pioneer though.
• 

  juandefiero

  SBF: I suppose it could be read that way, however in the 1998 article, they don't mention "thousands"... they use the term "numerous."

  "...The accusation that numerous children of Jehovah's Witnesses die each year as a result of refusing blood transfusions is totally unfounded..."

  Numerous could be defined as anything from a few handfuls to millions.

  I could say I've been to the Museum "numerous" times throughout my life. That would be a true statement. But, that doesn't mean I've been to the museum hundreds or thousands of times. I could have gone once a year for 20 years, and the word "numerous" would still be correct to use.

  So, the juxtaposition of these two articles is still conflicting, especially seeing as the cover for the 1994 article had pictures of numerous children who had died.

  
  
• 

  slimboyfat

  Are all the pictures of children who actually died? That's pretty horrific.
• 

  sir82

  Are all the pictures of children who actually died? That's pretty horrific.

  Yes, the kids on the cover died.

  I think there are posts somewhere on this site implying (or outright stating, don't recall for sure) that the kids, as they lay dying, were told they would be mentioned in an upcoming edition of Awake.
  
• 

  baker

  Those magazines are "old" light and shouldn't be taken literally. Only material that is on jw.org should be considered current... It is a shame though, that these kids put their life up for what is likely to become "old" light. M 15:17
• 

  Finkelstein

  It wasn't really those kids decisions but their parents who made and instigated their decisions.

  This is what happens when men put the power of god into their own hands , erroneously dangerous and destructive things happen to humanity.
  
• 

  OUTLAW

  .....................

  .........................Dead JW Children is Considered..

  ...................................GOOD ADVERTISING..
  ......
• 

  ShirleyW

  That rag is from 1994, didn't they do something similar ten more years earlier? I know I remember reading separate stories of a child that had died because they're parents wouldn't let them take blood. Even if the words came out the childs mouth that they don't want blood because they're a JW, children can't sign contracts so their parents are the ones that allowed there children to be murdered, all because of seven old guys in Brooklyn who had the parents thinking they were doing it for Jehovah. Because of that alone I'm surprised some of their properties haven't been attacked for just the blood issue alone.