If as a parent you had a seriously ill child that required a blood transfusion and you decided to allow your child to have that transfusion would your child be denied a possibility a paradise or would it only be the parent denied that chance. What i am asking would the child be affected by a decision out of there hands???
2007-11-07 23:15:55 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I think it is strange that no one has actually answered my question.... i am aware of the reason behind no blood i am aksing more about the effect it would have on a child that didnt make the choice.... would that child still be able to enter paradise or would god forsake the child due to the transfusion that was out of his/her control?
2007-11-08 00:28:10 · update #1
No, a parent who chooses to disrespect blood is the sinner (rather than one who is unknowingly involved).
But the primary goal of a Jehovah's Witness is not mere self-interest, it is to serve and please God and Christ. A true Christian cannot "sacrifice" his own salvation as though that were a primary concern. Love of God is an undeniable quality of a true Christian (such as a Jehovah's Witness), and vastly overwhelms any personal self-interest.
(1 Samuel 15:22) Look! To obey is better than a sacrifice
(Proverbs 21:3) To carry on righteousness and judgment is more preferable to Jehovah than sacrifice.
(Hosea 6:6) For in loving-kindness I [that is, God] have taken delight, and not in sacrifice
(Mark 12:33) This loving [God] with one’s whole heart and with one’s whole understanding and with one’s whole strength and this loving one’s neighbor as oneself is worth far more than all the whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.
Incidentally, when the bible states some command unequivocally, then what might have otherwise seemed to be in the immediate best interests from a human point of view becomes irrelevant.
That is an enormous protection, and admittedly requires faith that God and Christ mean what they say in the Scriptures.
(Matthew 7:11) If you, although being [comparitively] wicked, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more so will your Father who is in the heavens give good things
But even in practical terms RIGHT NOW, Jehovah's Witnesses really and truly believe that their children benefit and have benefited from an uncompromising respect for blood. The bible's wisdom has allowed them to avoid health complications and additional risk in most (nearly all) cases. As the decades passed from the 1950s to today, Jehovah's Witnesses have been unsurprised that study after study shows that many MULTIPLES more have died from a blood transfusion than from a conscientious decision to pursue other medical strategies. Thus, Jehovah's Witnesses believe that their understanding of God's view of blood has literally saved literal lives among Jehovah's Witnesses even now (these last few decades) and has certainly improved the quality of life for those who have recovered with fewer complications. Pro-blood activists and anti-Witness critics are infamous for their inflammatory rants, but the fact remains that the medical institution has itself concluded that blood transfusions need to be reduced and eliminated.
So, a Jehovah's Witnesses parent does not respect blood because of some eventual hope that God will reward him or his child, but because he believes it is in his child's best interests NOW.
Learn more:
http://watchtower.ca/e/hb/index.htm?article=article_07.htm
http://watchtower.ca/e/vcnb/article_01.htm
2007-11-09 03:59:08 · answer #1 · answered by achtung_heiss 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
EXPOSE JW CULTIC AND SATANIC TEACHINGS
Your hypothetical situation will arise if JW's are allowed to expand and broaden their teachings. The only way forward is to expose them, their heretical and Satanic teachings through Biblical preachings. No JW's will ever be answer, as their doctrines are deviant. The gracious Jehovah, merciful, slow to anger, of great kindness and compassion, would indeed allow that child to enter into heaven, provided that child's sin is forgiven. IT HAD NOT AND WILL NEVER BE DEPENDANT UPON any works, lack of it or temporal or physical corruption. If the sins are forgiven, the child (or adult) will enter heaven.
Psa 23:1 The LORD (Jehovah) is my Shepherd; I shall not want.
If you actually analyse the first verse in Psalm 23 (a well known which is written by King David), the LORD Jehovah is the Shepherd.
Who is this LORD, ie Jehovah? Is He God the Father or is He God the Son? A well versed five year old may already able to identify who Jehovah and the Shepherd is. Any adult with an ounce of uprightness and a modicum of evangelical integrity arising from a evangelically converted heart would have acknowledge that Jehovah (ie the LORD) is NONE OTHER THAN JESUS CHRIST, the blessed Second Person of the Godhead - is the Shepherd.
Perhaps, some in this forum may want further proof, which is amply furnished here, who the Shepherd is, who is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ:
Joh 10:11
I am the good Shepherd: the good Shepherd giveth His life for the sheep.
Joh 10:14
I am the good Shepherd, and know My sheep, and am known of Mine.
Heb 13:20
Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,
1Pe 2:21-25
For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow His steps: ….but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.
Thus if any JW hath an ounce of uprightness and a modicum of evangelical integrity arising from a evangelically converted heart may want to repent to understand Psalm 23 correctly;
Jehovah is my Shepherd (ie Jesus Christ) ………
and so, Jehovah is the Shepherd and the conclusion is VERY CLEAR (ie the Lord Jesus Christ is Jehovah, co equal, co-eternal with the Father).
If the JW cannot see this, how then can they see their deviant heretical and Satanic practice of refusal of blood transfusion?? Thus, there will be more orphans, more heart aches, and the only persons who rejoice is the evil trinity (Rev 16:13) that energise these heresies (Guess unto whose domain doth CT Russell fall, namely the dragon, the beast or the false prophet?).
Pray that Jehovah Christ Jesus may show redeeming grace to remove the scales from the JW eyes (Acts 9:18, KJV)
Shalom
A fuller dealing of their deviant teachings may be found here:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071105052320AA8wf36&cp=2
.
2007-11-08 03:13:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
image this, it somewhat is a blistering warm day and you head to the mall to relax off. jogging via the automobile parking zone you spot a toddler locked in a automobile with the abode windows up. You wait a jiffy to make certain if somebody comes. the toddler is in seen misery, no longer able to roll down the abode windows or get out of the vehicle. You call the police, they arrive, destroy the window and the paramedics artwork to shop the toddler. meanwhile the mum and father come back and elegance why their window is broken. while asked why they left their toddler interior the vehicle, they are asserting "by using fact it somewhat is safer for the toddler to be locked interior the vehicle the place no you possibly can get it than to danger leaving a window open". Now think of this, a toddler is gravely sick and a blood transfusion ought to doubtlessly shop that's life. the mum and father say no by using fact the transfusion will endanger that's danger at eternal life in paradise. the toddler interior the vehicle replaced into risk-free from doubtlessly being abducted, on the possibility of dying from warmth exhaustion. The ill toddler replaced into risk-free from doubtlessly being denied paradise on the possibility of dying youthful from some thing preventable. religious liberty isn't an excuse to disclose others to break. Sincerity playstation : you will desire to by no skill go away a toddler or puppy in a automobile on a warm day ever.
2016-10-15 11:13:58 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why risk your life to have "life saving blood" to save your life? Many die from just having a transfusion, not from refusing it. And If it ever came down to where choosing blood or refusing blood I would rather refuse blood because I would be obeying God's command in abstaining from blood. Even if I did die from not having a transfusion I know I will be resurrected in the new system. Also saying no to a transfusion is a conscious weighing matter. Would refusing blood make Jehovah happy or would it make him unhappy when receiveing blood? That is the question you should be asking yourselves! But here's the answer it makes Jehovah happy when you obey his command! It's the Bible's Policy not ours.
2007 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses
published 2007
Latvia
Christian Faith put to the test
The Blood issue has also tested the integrity of some. On September 6, 1996, Yelena Godlevskaya, a 17 year old girl who was hit by a car, suffered multiple fractures to the pelvis. Spiritually mature, Yelena had determined in her heart to abstain from blood. (Acts 15:29) Back then, most doctors in Latvia were unfamiliar with nonblood techniques, so the attending doctors refused to preform corrective surgery. Then about a week later, two doctors cruelly forced a blood transfusion on Yelena late one night, and she died.
Reasoning from the Scriptures
Blood
Blood Transfusions
Does the Bible's prohibition include human blood?
YES, and early Christians understood it that way. Acts 15:29 says to "KEEP ABSTAINING FROM......BLOOD." It does not say merely to abstain from animal blood. (Compare Leviticus 17:10, which prohibited eating "any sort of blood.") Tertullian (who wrote in defense of the beliefs of early Christians) stated: "The indirect upon 'blood' we shall understand to be (an interdict) much more upon human blood."-----The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. IV, p. 86.
Is a transfusion really the same as eating blood?
In a hospital, when a patient cannot eat through his mouth, he is fed intravenously. Now, would a person who never put blood into his mouth but who accepted blood by transfusion really be obeying the Command to "Keep abstaining from.....blood"? (Acts 15:29) To use a comparison, consider a man who is told by the doctor that he must abstain from alcohol. Would he be obedient if he quit drinking alcohol but had it put directly into his veins?
How Can Blood Save Your Life?
Blood Transfusions—How Safe?
http://www.watchtower.org/e/hb/index.htm...
Videos:
Transfusion-Alternative Health Care—Meeting Patient Needs and Rights
http://www.watchtower.org/e/vcnr/article...
BLOOD: WHOSE CHOICE AND WHOSE CONSCIENCE?
by J. Lowell Dixon, M.D.
http://www.watchtower.org/e/hb/index.htm?article=article_07.htm
To Genesis 15:5 we are not a Cult or satanic. We don't worship men(that's a cult). we worship Jehovah God alone and we follow his teachings. We celebrate the Memorial of Jesus' death aka The Lord's Evening Meal once a year on Nissan 14. Maybe you should go to a local Kingdom Hall and find out for your self! go to the Website:
http://watchtower.org for more info
Reasoning from the Scriptures
Jehovah's Witnesses
Are Jehovah's Witnesses a cult?
A cult is a religion that is said to be unorthodox or that emphasizes devotion according to prescribed ritual. Many cults follow a living human leader, and often their adherents live in groups apart from the rest of society. The standard for what is orthodox, however, should be God's Word, and Jehovah's Witnesses strictly adhere to the Bible. Their worship is a way of life, not a ritual devotion. They neither follow a human nor isolate themselves from the rest of society. They live and work in the midst of other people.
2007-11-08 01:50:33 · answer #4 · answered by ladybugwith7up 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
of course we would never want any child or family member to die. would you? we trust Jehovah God and his son Jesus Christ who knows better then doctors. people who have taken of blood have died. while my late husband was high on morphine in the hospital, they had him sign a paper and he got blood and two weeks later he was gone. they can check it all they want. see what Jehovah Witnesses are all about at www.watchtower.org. I have a friend who had a triple bypass this year without blood and he is here and happy and well. many doctors are giving bloodless surgery even if you are not a Jehovah Witness. and many who are not a witness are going without blood also because they feel the same way we do.
2007-11-07 23:47:39 · answer #5 · answered by lover of Jehovah and Jesus 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Jehovah's Witnesses and Blood transfusions..Do you believe what this doctor says?
This is a reply that I got from a medical doctor, to a question concerning a Jehovah's Witness mother who died and left behind 2 new born baby girls after delivery.
The Watchtower pints nonsense about how Blood is not necessary. This is a reply from a real doctor, not a publishing company.....Will you listen now?
I'm a doctor and have found myself in the appalling situation of trying to save a life where the patient refuses blood because they are a JW. If they have signed a form there's nothing we can do, but if it's a child ie if the parent refuses to allow their child a life saving transfusion, we can overrule them.
They get their anti transfusion beliefs as follows:
They cite four biblical texts (Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 17:12-14, Acts 15:29 and Acts 21:25). They say these mean that blood, the life-force, belongs to God and is not there for human use. They believe it a sin to eat not just black pudding but also to eat the flesh of animals that have not been properly bled.
And they extend the ban to transfusions. They won't even allow someone's blood to be stored before an operation and then used after it to replace their own blood loss. Blood is not to be stored; it is to be poured out and returned to God. Some JWs even reject dialysis or cell salvage on these grounds. Some will not accept red cells, white cells, platelets or plasma, but accept "fractions" made from these components.
There is a philosophical problem here. When a substance is broken down into components does the original remain? Some 90-96 per cent of blood plasma consists of water. The remainder is albumin, globulins, fibrinogen and coagulation factors. JWs say these may be used, according to conscience, but only if taken separately. Opponents say is like outlawing a ham and cheese sandwich but allowing the eating of bread, ham and cheese separately.
They are criticised for other inconsistencies. Blood fraction products are only available because of blood donation – a practice JWs condemned as unethical.
Many JWs still carry a signed and witnessed advance directive card absolutely refusing blood in the event of an accident. And the church's website still carries alarmist material about the dangers of transfusions in transmitting Aids, Lyme Disease and other conditions. It also exaggerates the effectiveness of alternative non-blood medical therapies.
What do doctors think?
The British Association of Anaesthetists guidelines insist that the wishes of the patient must normally be paramount. US doctors take a similar view; they know giving blood to someone who does not want it could get them sued – one of the busiest trauma hospitals in Florida even has a blanket policy of refusing to treat JWs.
Other countries, like France, take a more dirigiste view. And a landmark case in Dublin recently ruled that doctors were right to give a woman blood during childbirth because the right of her child to have a mother over-ruled her own right to refuse the blood.
There are even more subtle dilemmas to come. One asks whether doctors are obliged to give chemotherapy, which is normally accompanied by a blood transfusion, to patients who insist on having it without the blood, without which it is highly likely to fail. As medicine advances things are likely to get more, rather than less, tricky.
One more thing. Their literal interpretation of the Bible allows them (not unlike the Catholic church) to keep child abuse secret: Not good. They take Deuteronomy 19:15 literally, which demands two witnesses to a crime (not easy in cases of abuse). And they cite 1 Corinthians 6:1-11 – "Does anyone of you that has a case against the other dare to go to court before unrighteous men, and not before the holy ones?" – to justify trying to deal with criminals with courts of elders rather than courts of law. A Panorama investigation reported they have an internal list of 23,720 reported abusers which they keep private. Studies in the US suggest they have proportionally four times more sexual assaults on children than the Catholic Church.
Any religion which literally interprets the Bible, and keeps its doings secret can be a cause of harm in my view. And the idea that a woman can die leaving twins, motherless because of an obscure text in the Bible appals me as a doctor and a human being.
Dr Evie Wallace
2007-11-10 15:32:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
if your 16 years old son wants to go to a prostitute, if you allowed and he commit fornication who sinned he or you?
the same verse that forbid blood forbid fornication (Acts 15:28-29.)
If your goverment request your son of 21 years old to go to a war to kill another human and be killed (both forbidden in the bible) and you support that decision aren´t you guilty of the blood that this young man will shread?
how many that had happened the blood issue? few times that is why is in thr News, but how many "christians soldiers" have been killed cause their spiritual leaders didn´t tell them is wrong to go to a war?
How many JWs had been killed fighting in the war? none cause we prefer go to jail instead of kill in a war for biblical reason, the same why we abstain of blood.
If you compare both statics people died for refusing a blood transfusion Versus Jws people saved by not support the war, what do you think would be the ratio?
1:1000 at least.
Acts 15:28-29 "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. Good health to YOU!”
"from blood and from things strangled " why separated if they are the same animals with the blood inside and blood separate it?
that is not JWs ´s policy it is bible´s policy.
2007-11-07 23:44:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
I could tell you a very sad long tale about a very young boy, injured in a car crash that needed blood, and the family refused.
Highlights! they were firm. He was not. This teenager stated he wanted to live.
We used all the other products and blood builders there were available, but he needed whole blood.
This went on for days with lawyers and all the behind the scenes nonsense you can imagine. Ended up with the decision is the kid's. Mom and Dad moved in and the kid died.
There was no need for it. He could have been saved.
As a Christian I consider JW's as false prophets and monsters. I'll pray for one, but don't intend to make close friends.
2007-11-07 23:31:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
I think that the transfusion is out of the question; period.
something about
"blood shall not pass from one body to another"
or summat.
but I do know they can have blood taken and saved for later times; as a precautionary measure.
to that guy under me; they might've been able to save the kid under the principles of implied consent; and just claim that the parents weren't thinking of the child's best interests; seeing as he stated that he wanted to live and have the transfusion.
2007-11-07 23:18:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋