Ask about Jehovah's Witnesses

[Pegg]

Thank you for all the answers Pegg. I think Jehovah's Witnesses are probably some of the most understood Christians there are. I truly appreciate your effort.

no problem

i think you meant, misunderstood

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Yes I meant misunderstood

 

[Sententia]

As a jehovah witness saved by a blood transfusion who was old enough to realize how hard it was for mom to struggle with the decision I would ask why you keep going door to door?

Blood Transfusions are scientifically proven to save lives while your beliefs are nothing more than opinions and if people follow what you teach they or their children might end up unnecessarily dead. Great religion...

 

[Pegg]

As a jehovah witness saved by a blood transfusion who was old enough to realize how hard it was for mom to struggle with the decision I would ask why you keep going door to door?

Blood Transfusions are scientifically proven to save lives while your beliefs are nothing more than opinions and if people follow what you teach they or their children might end up unnecessarily dead. Great religion...

yep, i agree...its quite a sacrifice.

 

[Sententia]

As a jehovah witness saved by a blood transfusion who was old enough to realize how hard it was for mom to struggle with the decision I would ask why you keep going door to door?

Blood Transfusions are scientifically proven to save lives while your beliefs are nothing more than opinions and if people follow what you teach they or their children might end up unnecessarily dead. Great religion...

yep, i agree...its quite a sacrifice.

To be clear I am an atheist now. I would characterize your response this way though:

40 Virgins in the afterlife just crash your plane into the tower. Do not give your son blood just let him die and enjoy your afterlife.

The 40 virgins statement is a known terrorist... The let your kids die is an unknown terrorist. They will hide behind the freedom of religion to advise a mom to let her son die rather than allowing him to get a blood transfusion. True story.

When mom says hell no and lets her son live they will not disfellowship anyone. They will instead announce lets welcome back sister so and so and her son who was cured of cancer and lets all thank jehovah.

Of course if my mom said Jehovah is right and let me die they still would have taken her back.

My mom is now catholic and I am an atheist. My sister is a baptist and i dont blame her since it was probably the nicest religion we had growing up. My brother is a god believer but he doesnt really care if its Ra or Jesus and doesnt care to discuss it anymore than why people like pepsi or coke... Who cares is his motto... some people like X and some Y but can you help me change this tire or not. Etc etc.

Advising a mom to not let her kids get a blood transfusion that will save their lives but to instead just let them die is clearly wrong regardless of your religion.

 

[Pegg]

I dont blame you for your strong views, and im sure many other parents have struggled with the same circumstance as your mother.

I dont think there is one JW parent who would want to have to face that situation and im pretty sure that some of us might even make the same decision as your mum did. But we can't change Gods laws. We have to come to a point where we either accept that he has laws which restrict us in some respects, and there are laws that may even seem detrimental.

but the fact is that we are all walking a knife edge whether we have religion in our life or not. We live in a world where death is a daily threat...a threat from violence by some psycho gunman, or a speeding driver or an incurable disease or virus... and if none of them get us, old age will. So death is certain for each of us, its only a matter of when.

I would personally rather live without the threat of death, but its not going to happen in this life.

 

[averageJOE]

But we can't change Gods laws. We have to come to a point where we either accept that he has laws which restrict us in some respects, and there are laws that may even seem detrimental.

How do you know that these are "god's law's"?

 

[Jensen]

HI Jensen,
there are no rules that women must wear dresses or skirts, we are only told to wear modest clean neat clothing 1Timothy 2:9-10 Likewise I desire the women to adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind, not with styles of hair braiding and gold or pearls or very expensive garb, 10 but in the way that befits women professing to reverence God. If your view is that slacks are modest clean and neat, then by all means you can wear them to the meeting.

Clothing is a conscience matter. We know the principles and we individually apply the prinicples according to our own consciences. My guess is that the particular sister who was studying with you felt that wearing dresses or skirts was the right thing for her to wear. It is fairly common for sisters to wear more feminine clothing...perhaps we JW women see our femininity as something to be proud of so we tend to wear clothing that looks feminine. Slacks are not generally considered to be 'girly' in the west, but more 'boyish' because thats what men wear in our culture. But go to a culture where it is the norm for women to wear pants or men to wear dresses and you'll find the JW's there will likely wear what is normal to them.

But is really up to individuals what they wear. There are no fashion police..although if a baptized brother or sister is wearing obviously immodest clothing, then im pretty sure that the elders may be moved to speak to them privately about their clothing and try and help to readjust their view.

Thanks for the answer Pegg. I think that black slacks that are cut for a woman's figure certainly would not look masculine on a man. It is so good that you are here to give answers concerning JWs. Most views about JWs and their beliefs come incorrectly from others. So thanks for being here.

Jensen

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I dont blame you for your strong views, and im sure many other parents have struggled with the same circumstance as your mother.

I dont think there is one JW parent who would want to have to face that situation and im pretty sure that some of us might even make the same decision as your mum did. But we can't change Gods laws. We have to come to a point where we either accept that he has laws which restrict us in some respects, and there are laws that may even seem detrimental.

If you look at the tenet in those terms, perhaps.

If, instead of "God's laws", you look at it as "our interpretation of what we believe to be God's laws", then your hands don't seem nearly as tied.

It's not as if there's anything in the Bible that explicitly says "God doesn't want you to get blood transfusions!" You've had to infer the belief based on statements about diet.

Also, if we look back, we see that "God's laws" (or at least what you refer to with the term) did change. From what I can glean online, the JW prohibition on blood transfusions didn't even begin until 1945.

Because of this issue alone, I'm not inclined to give the Jehovah's Witnesses any consideration as a belief that I might ever adopt. Your Bible does say "a good tree does not grow bad fruit"... and if this practice isn't a "bad fruit", then nothing is.

Frankly, this is one issue where I would be prepared to have the state overrule the wishes of the parent in the care of their children. When a blood transfusion is needed, it is so clearly beneficial and the failure to have one is so clearly harmful that any parent who would not allow his or her child to have one has forsaken his or her duty as a parent, IMO. At that point, religious freedom be damned; freedom of belief doesn't include the freedom to kill children.

 

[Pegg]

How do you know that these are "god's law's"?

the laws about blood are very easily identifiable in scripture...starting from when Noah was given permission to first eat animals, their blood was to be removed from the animal and Noah was restricted from eating it, right thru the Mosaic laws and the blood laws remained into the christian congregation...

Gen 9:3 Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for YOU. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to YOU. 4 Only flesh with its soul—its blood—YOU must not eat. 5 And, besides that, YOUR blood of YOUR souls shall I ask back.

Deut 12:15-16 “Only whenever your soul craves it you may slaughter, and you must eat meat according to the blessing of Jehovah your God that he has given you...16 Only the blood YOU must not eat. On the earth you should pour it out as water

Deut 12:23 Simply be firmly resolved not to eat the blood, because the blood is the soul and you must not eat the soul with the flesh

Leviticus 17:10 “‘As for any man of the house of Israel or some alien resident who is residing as an alien in YOUR midst who eats any sort of blood, I shall certainly set my face against the soul that is eating the blood, and I shall indeed cut him off from among his people


Here the apostles of the Jerusalem congregation sent a letter along with Paul to be given to the congregations:
Acts 15:23-29 “The apostles and the older men, brothers, to those brothers in Antioch and Syria and Ci‧li′cia who are from the nations: Greetings! 24 Since we have heard that some from among us have caused YOU trouble with speeches, trying to subvert YOUR souls, although we did not give them any instructions, 25 we have come to a unanimous accord ...28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper...


Acts 15:13 After they quit speaking, James answered, saying: “Men, brothers, hear me. 14 Sym′e‧on has related thoroughly how God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name....19 Hence my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God, 20 but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.

And with regard to the Mosaic law, some were confused about what the new gentiles needed to follow because some Jewish christians felt they must adhere to the entire law, so the apostles sent the message to Jewish christians about what parts of the law the gentiles were required to follow:
Acts 21:24-25 And so everybody will know that there is nothing to the rumors they were told about you, but that you are walking orderly, you yourself also keeping the Law. 25 As for the believers from among the nations, we have sent out, rendering our decision that they should keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood and what is strangled and from fornication.”

 

[Pegg]

If you look at the tenet in those terms, perhaps.

If, instead of "God's laws", you look at it as "our interpretation of what we believe to be God's laws", then your hands don't seem nearly as tied.

It's not as if there's anything in the Bible that explicitly says "God doesn't want you to get blood transfusions!" You've had to infer the belief based on statements about diet.

its true that 'transfusions' are not mentioned...these verses could simply be dietary rules about animal blood, which would have very little to do with transfusing human blood.
However, it is clear that animal blood was viewed as sacred by God, so how could we conclude that human blood is less valuable? We certainly could not conclude that. Humans are made in Gods image, animals are not. Therefore our blood must have even more significance to God then animal blood.

We can only conclude that Gods view of blood is sacred, both animal and human blood is sacred to him because it represents 'life' as Leviticus 17:14 says: For the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood by the soul in it. Consequently I said to the sons of Israel: “YOU must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood

When a human died, it was the 'blood' that cried out to God...as in the case of Abel: Genesis 4:10 “Your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the ground.”
It just may be that there is something about blood which is connected to God in a way that we do not understand.

Also, if we look back, we see that "God's laws" (or at least what you refer to with the term) did change. From what I can glean online, the JW prohibition on blood transfusions didn't even begin until 1945.

thats probably right...we also used to think it was alright to smoke and to celebrate christmas and birthdays and easter. As our understanding of such things has deepened, so has our stance on them. When the early brothers began to have an understanding of where these customs originated they began to see how opposed they were to christianity and so they cleaned them out from among themselves.

Gods laws on blood are in the bible for a reason... obviously it is a serious matter in Gods eyes even if we dont fully understand it. But we do acknowledge that life belongs to God and we can see that he views blood as the 'soul' of the individual, so the blood really belongs to God because it gives life. He has not given us permission to use another souls blood for our own benefit.

Because of this issue alone, I'm not inclined to give the Jehovah's Witnesses any consideration as a belief that I might ever adopt. Your Bible does say "a good tree does not grow bad fruit"... and if this practice isn't a "bad fruit", then nothing is.

when you actually do a bit of digging around into the use of blood in medicine, it becomes quite apparent that it is a bad fruit itself. There are many risks involved in blood and I know because my grandfather died after a transfusion...he lost his leg due to smoking but the transfusion he received gave him septicemia and he died. So its not as safe as it is made out to be. I recently saw a news report from China where they have 100,000 people infected with HIV through blood transfusions.

Frankly, this is one issue where I would be prepared to have the state overrule the wishes of the parent in the care of their children. When a blood transfusion is needed, it is so clearly beneficial and the failure to have one is so clearly harmful that any parent who would not allow his or her child to have one has forsaken his or her duty as a parent, IMO. At that point, religious freedom be damned; freedom of belief doesn't include the freedom to kill children.

and this has happened to many Jw's...doctors have obtained court orders to force transfusions on individuals..
Is it constitutional to force someone to take a certain type of medication or treatment? I would not like to have my rights revoked when it came to my health... or that someone else could override my personal choices when it came to medicine.

We make informed decisions as JW's and we do accept alternatives to blood which do not carry the risks that blood carry. There are so many safer alternatives, non-blood expanders and pharmaceuticals to control hemorrhage and medicines to stimulate red blood cell production...there is a whole range of alternatives that we will use...its not as if we reject all treatment.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

its true that 'transfusions' are not mentioned...these verses could simply be dietary rules about animal blood, which would have very little to do with transfusing human blood.
However, it is clear that animal blood was viewed as sacred by God, so how could we conclude that human blood is less valuable? We certainly could not conclude that. Humans are made in Gods image, animals are not. Therefore our blood must have even more significance to God then animal blood.

We can only conclude that Gods view of blood is sacred, both animal and human blood is sacred to him because it represents 'life' as Leviticus 17:14 says: For the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood by the soul in it. Consequently I said to the sons of Israel: “YOU must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood

When a human died, it was the 'blood' that cried out to God...as in the case of Abel: Genesis 4:10 “Your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the ground.”
It just may be that there is something about blood which is connected to God in a way that we do not understand.

And using blood to save a person's life is a pretty important use... sacred, even.

Edit: and it's not enough to say you don't understand what's going on. If you're going to do something as major as condemn a child to a preventable death, then you had damn well be certain of the support for your claims.

Wishy-washy "mysteries" don't cut it. If you're going to deny a child the right to life on the grounds that to do otherwise would go against the will of God, then you had better be completely certain of God's opinion on the subject.

thats probably right...we also used to think it was alright to smoke and to celebrate christmas and birthdays and easter. As our understanding of such things has deepened, so has our stance on them. When the early brothers began to have an understanding of where these customs originated they began to see how opposed they were to christianity and so they cleaned them out from among themselves.

So... despite dilligently studying the Bible, it took them 70 years to decide that God didn't want these things; who's to say what the future will hold? It could be that "deepening" your stance will lead to the JWs taking the opposite conclusion, no?

Gods laws on blood are in the bible for a reason... obviously it is a serious matter in Gods eyes even if we dont fully understand it. But we do acknowledge that life belongs to God and we can see that he views blood as the 'soul' of the individual, so the blood really belongs to God because it gives life. He has not given us permission to use another souls blood for our own benefit.

If you go only by the Bible, then God hasn't given you "permission" to use refrigerators, cars or indoor plumbing, either.

when you actually do a bit of digging around into the use of blood in medicine, it becomes quite apparent that it is a bad fruit itself. There are many risks involved in blood and I know because my grandfather died after a transfusion...he lost his leg due to smoking but the transfusion he received gave him septicemia and he died. So its not as safe as it is made out to be. I recently saw a news report from China where they have 100,000 people infected with HIV through blood transfusions.

While I certainly think that all medical procedures should be made safer, you're presenting a bit of a false picture, because in most cases, a blood transfusion is a matter of life or death. How many lives were saved to balance those infections?

and this has happened to many Jw's...doctors have obtained court orders to force transfusions on individuals..
Is it constitutional to force someone to take a certain type of medication or treatment? I would not like to have my rights revoked when it came to my health... or that someone else could override my personal choices when it came to medicine.

I'm not talking about overriding your rights. You're an adult of sound mind; while I'd prefer you didn't throw your life away, it's your life to do with what you want.

What I object to is these beliefs being pushed onto children who didn't choose them. Parent's aren't owners of their children; they're their children's stewards. Throwing away a child's life by denying them reasonable, necessary medical care is an abdication of the duties of that stewardship.

We make informed decisions as JW's and we do accept alternatives to blood which do not carry the risks that blood carry. There are so many safer alternatives, non-blood expanders and pharmaceuticals to control hemorrhage and medicines to stimulate red blood cell production...there is a whole range of alternatives that we will use...its not as if we reject all treatment.

When a JW child is denied a blood transfusion, it was not his informed decision.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

What do Jehovah's Witnesses think of other Christians? Will other Christians have a chance of salvation in JW view?

 

[Pegg]

What I object to is these beliefs being pushed onto children who didn't choose them. Parent's aren't owners of their children; they're their children's stewards. Throwing away a child's life by denying them reasonable, necessary medical care is an abdication of the duties of that stewardship.
When a JW child is denied a blood transfusion, it was not his informed decision.

However, parents do have rights about how their children will be raised, what school they will go to, where they will live, what sort of clothing they will wear, who they can associate with, which parties they can attend, when they can have their first alcoholic drink...parents are endowed with the responsibility to make these decisions

as soon as you take away a parents right to choose medical treatment, you are destroying the fundamental rights of everyone in their most basic setting

I agree with you that a parent should never prevent their child from receiving medical treatment...but there are a lot of different treatments out there and they are not all safe & acceptable. We want our kids to have the safest and best treatments that dont contravene our religious convictions. Blood happens to be one of those treatments that we do not want.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

However, parents do have rights about how their children will be raised, what school they will go to, where they will live, what sort of clothing they will wear, who they can associate with, which parties they can attend, when they can have their first alcoholic drink...parents are endowed with the responsibility to make these decisions

as soon as you take away a parents right to choose medical treatment, you are destroying the fundamental rights of everyone in their most basic setting

Parents have the right to raise and protect their children. Killing a child over the parents' religious beliefs does not fall into either of those categories.

Just as a parent doesn't have the right to beat their child to death, a parent doesn't have the right to kill their child with their religious beliefs.

 

[Pegg]

What do Jehovah's Witnesses think of other Christians? Will other Christians have a chance of salvation in JW view?

other christians, and people of other religions...even JW's themselves, are in Gods hands. The form of worship he requires is set out in the scriptures. We all need to ensure that our form of worship is 'clean and undefiled from the standpoint of God' as James stated.

So, any of us may think that we are doing what is required, but if God does not see it that way then we may find ourselves on the wrong end of the stick so to speak. When Jesus said "not everyone saying to me 'Lord Lord' will enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens, will" he was speaking about christians....those who were claiming to be calling on his name.

So all of us are in the same boat when it comes to salvation. We are striving to apply the scriptures as we see fit...others will apply them as they see fit... in the end God will decide.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Yes he was also speaking of his followers when he said: Why say to me Lord Lord, but do not the things I say?

 

[Pegg]

Parents have the right to raise and protect their children. Killing a child over the parents' religious beliefs does not fall into either of those categories.

Just as a parent doesn't have the right to beat their child to death, a parent doesn't have the right to kill their child with their religious beliefs.

Yes we do have the right to 'protect' our children. We see blood as something that has proved to be a very dangerous substance and its not something I would want to put into my child because its like playing russian roulette...no one can guarantee you that they will not come out of it unscathed which is why hospitals pay out millions of dollars every year on botched transfusions.

 

[Pegg]

Yes he was also speaking of his followers when he said: Why say to me Lord Lord, but do not the things I say?

thats exactly right and this is why we just cannot assume that we will all be saved...even myself... i cannot assume im saved because im a JW. I need to be personally applying Jesus words in my life. If I dont, then going to meetings every week, or going out preaching is not going to save me. Many christians are led to believe that they only need to come out on sundays and show up at church and they will be saved

there is a lot more to being a christian then that.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Pegg I as a Gnostic, claiming also to follow Jesus, try my hardest. I try my hardest to love everyone, and to not judge, and to give charity.