JW blood San Francisco Chronicle blooper? 6-14-05

by DannyHaszard 3 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  DannyHaszard

  JW blood San Francisco Chronicle blooper? 6-14-05 Popular misconception or actual dub secret practice? Cultural issues spawn distrust of doctoring Documentary film shows ...
  San Francisco Chronicle, CA - 34 minutes ago
  ... Many Jehovah's Witnesses believe that blood transfusions will harm their ability to go into the afterlife, so they reject them. ... (partial excerpt below) -- Many Jehovah's Witnesses believe that blood transfusions will harm their ability to go into the afterlife, so they reject them. He said they are much more likely to accept transfusions, however, if they have been able to set aside their own blood and are merely having it put back into their body. ?? Is this correct? The blood ban is in such an evolving mutated state of flux i may be 'out of date'.
• 

  Pistoff

  Welcome to the Orwellian world of the WT.
  
  Who controls the past controls the present; who controls the present controls the future.
  
  The WT is in the early phases of abandoning the hard line blood policy; they are starting to state that "certain christian's consciences" allow them to take blood fractions, as if our consciences have anything at all to do with why we have rejected blood all these years; we were told in no uncertain terms that to take blood "in any form" was unscriptural.
  
  [The book Worship the True God is a carbon copy of the United in Worship book without the chapter on blood or the chapter on the 144,000; draw your own conclusions.]
  
  Now the WT is weaseling around the concept, and has instituted the completely insane policy that whole blood, plasma, white or red blood cell, or platelets, are NOT to be transfused.
  
  However, if you break any or all of those compounds just one step further, NONE of them are forbidden.
  
  Yep; no to whole blood, no to the "four major components" but YES YES YES to hemoglobin, the big lifesaver.
  
  Yes yes yes to blood treatments for hemophiliacs, requiring thousands of donations that are forbidden for witnesses to participate in.
  
  Soon, the WT will say that blood has ALWAYS been a conscience issue, just as they have said that 1975 was never singled out as the end of this system.
• 

  Gopher

  He said they are much more likely to accept transfusions, however, if they have been able to set aside their own blood and are merely having it put back into their body.

  Whoever said this was probably just guessing. If someone from the WTS or a local liasion committee had said this, I would take it more seriously.

  The WTS allows their members to recirculate the blood through a cleansing machine, reasoning that such a machine is merely an extension of their own body. Some JW's are so scared of any medical procedure involving blood that they would shy away from even this reasonable procedure.

  I haven't heard that the WTS would allow their members to store their own blood and retransfuse it later. Correct me if I am wrong.
• 

  Scully

  Sounds like someone who wasn't totally clear on the blood transfusion issue was Running Ahead Of The Organization™, kind of like how is described in the talk Beware the Voice of Strangers.

  Another area where we need to exercise extreme caution is in what we hear in news reports and documentaries. Now, we've touched on documentaries before, where they are promoted by the apostates, and they are becoming more and more prevalent; it's obvious. But sometimes things are presented as truth in the media, but they're not truth, or at least they're not the whole truth, and they're not presented by apostates, and the apostates have no connection with them. Maybe it's just an overzealous reporter trying to make a name for himself and added to that he doesn't like Jehovah's Witnesses, and so he goes out and he spreads lies about them. How do you feel when you hear reports like that? Doesn't make you feel good, does it? In fact, doesn't it get you upset inside? I feel upset inside when that happens, at least temporarily. And we should be upset, we don't like to hear things like that.

  [19:35] Something we want to keep in mind, friends, is that we don't want to be personally refuting these untruths unless Jehovah's Organization assigns us to do that publicly. Now when we talk to people in our ministry and elsewhere and they bring up points about what they have heard or read, sure, then we can present the truth to them. But we don't want to be doing that publicly, because that very often just leads to worse reports about us.

  Apparently the WTS has had to clean egg off its face a few times!