If your son or daughter were badly burned, he or she would require regular whole blood transfusions. As a good Jehovah's Witness, it is your duty to refuse this procedure and watch your child die instead. However, as a parent, this choice will be excruciatingly painful, and you would prefer to die instead. Well, WHY NOT die in his or her place? Surely, if you take the initiative to transfuse your child, Jehovah will not blame him or her. That would not be showing perfect justice. You and YOU ALONE will take the blame, and Jehovah will merely cut you off when the time comes. Isn't this better than watching your boy or girl take one for the team by making the ultimate sacrifice? Why not be brave and suffer the consequences instead? Perhaps Jehovah will see that you are showing pure, unselfish love and forgive this heroic action.
Why not extend your child's life and take the consequences?
That's exactly what I've always thought. Are you not supposed to be willing to die for your children? You will take The consequences...perhaps not making it to paradise. Yet don't we all sin? Didn't Jesus die to cover our sins? Wouldn't it be considered a temptation you could not bear???
There are so many scriptures stating that sinning to save a life is acceptable...so..
The no blood doctrine created by the WTS (1940's) was a failed and weakly devised doctrine.
Well what do expect from novice bible theologians operating and running their own publishing house.
This old Hebraic dietary law concerning consuming blood is still held up by strict Orthodox Jews to this day in their Kosher blood letting of animals.
Even the most extreme Orthodox Jew will except a blood transfusion. Hows that? Because it was a dietary law. The murdering Jehovah killed everything alive that wasn't in the ARK. So he says to Noah it's ok to kill an animal for food if you drain the blood out first.
I always pictured Noah looking around and saying to Jehovah "what Animals?"
It was the ban on blood that made me question the rationally of the WTBTS and how gullible their followers are. Who in their right mind carries a suicide note on their person that starts by saying "No Blood!"
Who in their right mind carries a suicide note on their person
that starts by saying "No Blood!"
Not a mentally well balanced person to be sure, maybe someone from a mentally high controlling cult who's been manipulated and coerced to uphold the doctrines someone else made, maybe by men who were preconditioned to be delusional in their self acknowledgement that god was guided them exclusively through his holy spirit.
''Who in their right mind carries a suicide note on their person that starts by saying "No Blood!"
There is an article on Jwfacts.com about this, under ''blood''.
A young man back in the 1980's developed a terminal illness and required a ''whole blood tranfustion'' treatment. He refused and ultimately he met an untimely death, I believe at 29.
His widowed wife lamented was he a "martyr'' for upholding his ''blood belief", or on the contrary was he a ''card carrying victim''.
It's a heart-wrenching, yet informative article. Check it out. Jwfacts.com under ''blood tranfusions''.
This almost never comes up any longer as every major hospital keeps a judge on call for emergency transfusions when JW kids are at risk. We have family members who went through this, the JW Liaison committee told them to hold firm and the hospital would call the judge and thus take the decision "out of their hands" and God's judgement would be on "Caesar".
Even these men don't really believe the doctrine. No more do they advocate sneaking the kid out of the hospital. No, it's "let Caesar handle it, and Jehovah will not judge you".
What JWS have been doing is martyring themselves over someone else mistake .
These are the men who stated that vaccinations are derived from blood so no vaccination and organ transplants are a sin in kind to cannibalism.
The WTS was making other mistakes as well back in the 1940's like Jehovah resides in the Pleiades constellation, Jesus was crucified on a single upright stake not two pieces crossed over one another. 1914, 1925, 1975 the list is long and strenuous
They truly have a 'tiger by the tale', on the whole lot of their doctrines. The blood doctrine is probably one of the biggest. It's why they can't just drop doctrines, imagine the 'malestrom' of lawsuits.
Remember, 'not inspired nor infallible'. There has to be a reason why they admitted that a few times in the last year and a half or so.
Good point, but it negates the JW viewpoint that by letting the child die they feel that all of them will be reunited in paradise. Their thoughts aren't about what's good for the kid today. Their doctrine robs them of normal human feelings and replace them with fantasies of playing with pandas together if they forego this ultimately worthless life.
So if you want to ask those questions you probably first have to defuse the bomb that is their belief system that drops on their child. It's hard to use normal human reasoning with abnormal fantasy.