Culture Clash Daily

Culture Clash Daily

Where News & Culture Meet 



Breaking News      Jehovah’s Witness: Health And Religion Clash, Mother Legally Responsible For Son’s Death
Print this page

 

 

Headlines

 

Features

 

Entertainment

 




  

 
 
05 February 2011 

 
Jehovah’s Witness: Health And Religion Clash, Mother Legally Responsible For Son’s Death
 
Natalya Podlozehvich rushed her five year old son to hospital in
her home town of Kogalym, in Russia.  In a critical condition doctors
advised that to save the child’s life he must receive a blood
transfusion.
 
Podlozehvich refused to give permission for the transfusion, and
for two days the mother watched his condition deteriorate until the
little boy died in hospital.
 
Her grounds for the decision to reject treatment were religious, as
which Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that the consumption of blood is
unspiritual.
 
Last Wednesday a Russian court ordered that the woman was legally
responsible for her child’s death, fining her $170 (5000 rubles).
 
Disregarding direct and strong advice from medical staff at the
hospital the woman used her position as guardian to withhold
intervention that required blood being injected into his system.  
 
It’s not, by far the first time that the religious ideals of
Jehovah’s Witnesses have come in conflict with the medical profession. 
Last year the Supreme Court in South Australia ruled that a hospital had
the right to give a child a blood transfusion against the expressed
wishes of the parents.
 
The ten year old boy had been receiving chemotherapy for a 39 week
period.  His parents were told that under such conditions his body could
not reproduce enough red blood cells, his only hope was for a blood
transfusion.
 
It’s here that the state takes responsibility for the welfare of a
child, designating decisions and allowing doctors to intervene to save
the life of a child who cannot make an informed decision for themselves.
 
In the United States a hospital was hauled over the coals after it
was a decided that a 15 year old boy could refused blood, knowing the
serious implications of the decision.  The parents were complicit with
his decision and that was respected by the hospital.  After several days
the young man died.
 
One of the major concerns for children or even adults who are given
blood transfusion is that there is a risk the child will reject by the
family, the church and community.

If you have any comments, or even a correction, on this
article please email Mary Banfield: info@cultureclashdaily.com

All (reasonable) comments will be uploaded onto this
site.

Be one of the first to join us on Facebook!

For other major stories:

Foundations Of Science Shaken: DNA Can Teleport Says Professor Jeff Reimers

“e-cigarette” Leak Nicotine, Bad For Your Health, May As Well Stick To The Real Thing

Planning For Infertility: The Rise Of Egg Banks

References:

http://rt.com/news/court-jehovahs-witness-son/

http://jehovah.net.au/blood.html

http:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/court-orders-jehovahs-witness-boy-be-given-blood-transfusion/story-e6frea83-1225875658322//www.religionnewsblog.com/24320/teenage-jehovahs-witness-refuses-blood-transfusion-and-dies


 
 
Thank you very much to Vince for sending in the following information:
 
I was a JW for 15 years (and en elder) I left specifically because of the
blood issue. Here is my detailed letter to the JW leadership as well as my
congregation laying out why this policy is flawed. I wrote and turned it in
five years ago.

Today, because I simply walked away from the faith, though never took blood
or told anybody else to take blood, I am shunned by all JWs including one of
the children I raised since he was six years old.

Feel free to post it wherever you wish.

I hope it helps.

Vince

While this is a
rather lengthy letter of disassociation that I will be turning in to the local
body of elders shortly; it carefully lays out why I no longer believe this is
the one sole truth on the earth today. This is not based on having some axe to
grind with any particular people or specific experiences (though I have plenty
of those too). Instead, my decision to leave is based solely on a reasonable,
logical, carefully thought out foundation. One that may have been initiated by
our position regarding blood transfusions. But as you can read, one that has
since turned into so much more than just that.

All the best,

vinny

Dear Brothers,

I am writing to
share with you the recent turn of events, which have caused some very
significant changes in certain viewpoints that I hold to, and in my life
altogether. I truly believe that I have always been a zealous person for
Jehovah throughout my entire life in the truth. I have been baptized for over
15 years now, since June of 1990, with another three years of studying before
baptism. My family and I have always been regular at the meetings (as you all
well know), regular and active in service, always present at our assemblies and
conventions. We’ve always participated in our Kingdom Hall cleaning and
maintenance assignments. We auxiliary pioneered often. I have served as an Elder
for many years. I served as a magazine assistant and then servant years ago,
did the literature for a while, handled the territory for years, as well as a
couple years doing the accounts. I never refused a privilege (that I can
recall) and like many of you have given more talks than I can remember. I
conducted book studies as well as the Theocratic Ministry School during my
years as an elder. My life in, and appreciation for the truth has always been
something I valued tremendously. I’ve also made it a point to have a regular
family-study with my wife and kids. I always tried to make the studies
enjoyable and somewhat entertaining. Whenever they did make mistakes or
developed less-spiritual attitudes, I always counseled, encouraged and tried to
help them. When they made serious mistakes, in addition to my own corrective
and helpful measures, I helped them to see the need to also go forward by going
to the elders and getting the necessary discipline and counsel. Nothing was
ever to be hidden. We all regularly participated in the meetings as well. I
always invited my family to try to share at least one comment at each meeting
if at all possible. I almost always kept up with the day’s text and weekly
bible reading schedule too. We socialized extensively, with more sleepovers and
get-togethers than can be remembered. We were often one of the last ones to
leave the Kingdom Hall after meetings. There have never been any doubts about
my love for Jehovah. He has always been very real to me. My relationship with
him is now and has always been very special to me!

Recently
however, I’ve had some issues come up into my life that have challenged these
convictions, my core beliefs and even my explicit trust in the organization
itself. I have always simply “trusted” what the faithful slave
teaches us even if I did not necessarily understand particular viewpoints. Back
in early 1990 for example, when I was going over my baptism questions, I
remember not being fully convinced of the society’s position regarding no blood
transfusions. During that second set of questions at my house, the elder
suggested that I just try to trust the Society’s direction for now (since this
was the only serious doubt that I had) and perhaps later on down the road I
would begin to see our position on this issue more clearly. Well, I did just
what he suggested. If the organization can be right about a paradise earth,
condition of the dead, rejection of the Trinity etc etc, I figured it must be
right about this issue as well. After all, we do believe this is the only
organization Jehovah is truly using today. Trusting it was always easy for me.
No questions asked!

Well, while
keeping up with the news one day back in November, I noticed there was a very
flattering article on the MSNBC News Website front page; the title of the
article was “Jehovah’s Roofing Service”. It was about Jehovah’s
Witnesses volunteering to put on a new roof for a Hurricane Katrina victim. The
article was so encouraging that I e-mailed it to many friends in the truth;
something I rarely do if at all. At the bottom of that article however, I
noticed people were publicly commenting about the article itself. After the
first day there were perhaps some 30 comments. The next day there was over 100.
After a few more days they finally capped the comments off with almost three
hundred altogether. Some were critical, (mostly “the Witnesses only help
their own” variety) a few were casual and nice, but most were from other
Witnesses like us, defending the truth against these so-called “critics”.
In fact I too at one point sent in a comment defending the truth, though it was
never posted since there were many others similar to it. There was one comment
near the end however, that stopped to make me think several times throughout
the next few weeks. It actually shook my faith a bit you might say. It
presented negative comments about the truth that I had never heard of before.
So much so, that I had to look up Watchtower and Awake articles to verify if
these statements were in fact true. Well, after a little research, I found out
that these comments were indeed true. One of the claims had to do with the
Golden Age magazine (now the Awake) years ago saying that vaccinations were not
allowed for Jehovah’s Witnesses. The article said that accepting a vaccine was:
“a crime, an outrage, and a delusion”. It also said that the smallpox
vaccination itself would: “cause syphilis, cancers, leprosy and many other
loathsome diseases”. For 21 years the Society did not allow vaccinations for
Jehovah’s Witnesses. I had never heard of this before. Even more of an issue
for me from this same comment, was that I learned from 1967 to 1980, the
Society also forbid Jehovah’s Witnesses from accepting organ transplants. Going
so far as calling it “cannibalism”. The consequences for those
accepting an organ transplant was disfellowshipping; complete shunning for
those that did not follow this decree. After over 12 years, the society did
finally reverse this, instead making it a “conscience matter”. My
immediate thoughts after learning about these two facts were; I wonder how many
people died from following the Society’s direction regarding these two medical
procedures? This information bothered me quite a bit.

Since 1945 blood
transfusions have been completely unacceptable for Jehovah’s Witnesses. Since
1961, disfellowshipping was the consequence. This

position against
blood transfusions has been well publicized with numerous articles throughout
the years in many of the Society’s publications. Transfusing certain
“fractions of blood” has just recently become a “conscience
matter”, rather than forbidden. Storing our own blood for an operation, as
well as donating our own to the world’s blood supply have always been condemned
as well. As I have already mentioned here, I have always been uneasy with this
particular position by the society that blood transfusions (even as a last
resort) are not allowed. However, like I also mentioned above, I have always
simply taken the position to “trust the Society” with issues like
this that I may not have agreed with nor fully understood. Realizing now
however, from this newer information to me that the society has made incorrect
stands in the past regarding vaccinations and organ transplants (and since
reversed these), has caused an even greater sense of concern in my mind over
this issue regarding blood transfusions today. After coming to learn about
these things I have since dedicated enormous amounts of time and efforts to
come to a better understanding of this position both in the eyes of the
Society, as well as from the medical community during the last few months. I
have researched and studied and compared notes from too many articles to list
here. I have extensively compared scriptures from several bible translations to
try to gain the fullest understanding possible. Because of the fact that people
have died, and will continue to do so, it is imperative to me that I fully
understand the reasons for our position. Though my children are now fully grown
up and can make their own educated decisions, I still actively participate in
the door-to-door ministry encouraging others to join us in worshiping Jehovah
as his Witnesses. This position of abstaining from blood transfusions could very
well affect those that I might happen to bring into the organization or their
children. After many months now of continuous soul-searching, prayer,
exhaustive research and meditation/reflection of this research, I have come to
the firm conclusion that the society’s position to abstain from blood
transfusions is in error. Just like it was on vaccinations and organ
transplants prior, which have since been reversed. I base this conclusion on
many factors, which include:

*** A blood
*transfusion* is not the same as eating or drinking blood as has been
illustrated with the: “If a doctor told you to abstain from alcohol, but
instead of drinking it, you transfused it into your veins…” illustration
that the society often uses. If a person was starving to death and was given
multiple blood transfusions instead of food, he would still die. A transfusion
of blood replaces the volume of blood lost (much like replacing an organ) which
is needed to sustain life, nothing more. No nourishment is gained by a blood transfusion,
as would be the case when eating or drinking the blood, which is forbidden.
This illustration often used by the society does apply with alcohol and other
digestible foods, but not for blood. It simply stays in your system
indefinitely.

*** The
scriptures in both the Hebrew and Greek sections of the bible, which say:
“blood must be drained out” and to, “abstain from… blood”
were always referring directly to the eating or drinking of animal blood. The
blood of the animal that had been killed was to be “poured out”
rather than eaten or drank. This token act of faith demonstrated to Jehovah
that the life that had been taken belongs to him. The blood of the animal
represents the life of that animal. Humans do have the right to take animals
for food only because the creator allows us to do so. Pouring out the blood
first, acknowledges this arrangement. By including modern day blood
transfusions in the current application of these verses however (which is not
the same as eating or drinking of animal blood), the society is going beyond
what is actually written in its application. In addition, the one supplying the
blood for a transfusion has not died at all, which was always the case when an
animal was bled. A “living” donor instead provides the needed volume
of blood-fluid that has been lost for another “living” individual.
And in many cases over the years, as a last resort this has been and can still
be a life-saving medical act. In other cases by refusing this particular
medical treatment because of our stand against blood transfusions, lives have
been and will continue to be lost. Is this what Jehovah wants, and is this
premature loss of life really necessary?

*** We can also
learn something about this from Jesus very own example. Jesus was also willing
to perform miracles on the Sabbath (something against the mosaic law) in order
to save lives, or even just heal the sick. Would not Jesus have made an
exception then to a dietary rule in order to save a human life? In Luke 14:5-6,
the bible account says: “And he said to them: “Who of YOU, if his son
or bull falls into a well, will not immediately pull him out on the sabbath
day?” 6 And they were not able to answer back on these things.” The
account in Mathew 12:11 goes even further, it says: “So they (Pharisees)
asked him “Is it lawful to cure on the Sabbath?” that they might get
an accusation against him. 11 He said to them: “Who will be the man among
YOU that has one sheep and, if this falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not
get hold of it and lift it out? 12 All considered, of how much more worth is a
man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do a fine thing on the Sabbath.” If
Jesus was willing to value the life of an ANIMAL enough to rescue that animal’s
life despite this “work” being done on a Sabbath, how much more so
then should the life of a human being be given priority over the strict
interpretation of the law? Well, we need not really ask since Jesus answered
this himself when he said in verse 12, “All considered, of how much more
worth is a man than a sheep!”. Yes rescuing a sheep from a pit on the
sabbath is the loving and merciful thing to do. Additionally, Jesus performed
many other miraculous works on the Sabbath. Yet to work on the Sabbath was to
bring the death penalty upon oneself. And in fact, the scriptures actually
record this penalty being meted out to a Sabbath violator. (See Exodus 35:2;
Numbers 15:32-36. Here we see clear evidence though that Jesus appreciated the
principle that love triumphs over law. That when life is at stake, (even an
animal’s life), rules can be set aside as circumstances require. LIFE is
valuable and precious. Jesus showed this love for life and people over and
over. While by contrast the oppressive, rule-keeping religious leaders often
missed the entire purpose of the law. By not allowing a blood transfusion to be
given, especially in last-resort situations, but rather allowing these ones to
die instead, is the proper “respect” for life being shown as Jesus
clearly demonstrated? Imagine if this involved allowing one of “our
own” to die due to such a strict stand by the society.

*** I’ve also
appreciated another example that demonstrates this same “principle”
of Jesus’ valuing a person’s life over the written law. It had to do with the
woman who had a flow of blood for 12 years. Under the Mosaic Law a running
discharge made her “unclean”, and anyone even touching her would also
have to wash and be considered unclean until evening. However, she went even
further than this by actually touching Jesus garment secretly in hopes of
getting healed without anyone knowing. Jesus as we know, perceived that power
went out from him and realized what she had done. Others too were watching.
Notice though, that rather than condemn this woman for what she did, Jesus
instead compassionately tells her: “Your faith has made you well. Go in
peace, be in good health from your grievous sickness….” Once again we
can see the spirit of the law (and the value of a human life) taking precedence
over the supposed letter of the law, which the woman had clearly broken.

*** Acts
15:28-29 (which is the foundation scripture for society’s position against
blood transfusions since the Mosaic Law is no longer in force -this too is the
society’s view-) reads: 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. Good health to YOU!” The society considers this
to be an all-encompassing, absolute, eternal command. However, notice that
along with abstaining from blood, we also hear the command to abstain from
things sacrificed to idols” Now, if you read 1 Corinthians
8:4-8, we can see that Paul there helps the reader to see that the “eating
of food sacrificed to idols” was really a conscience matter. Obviously
then, the Acts 15:28-29 could not have such a broad, absolute, universal meaning
since another part of that same scripture is considered a conscience matter by
the apostle Paul in another verse. This decision instead was rendered so that
the newer “Gentile” Christians would be conscious not to stumble the
more traditional Jewish Christians, many of which were still rooted in Mosaic
Law. The decision was acknowledged that they were not under Mosaic Law any
longer. However to prevent unnecessarily stumbling of these traditional Jewish
Christians, this decree was given. This is also how most bible scholars today
understand these verses. The account at Acts 21:20-32 gives further evidence
that this decree was given because the older, traditional Jewish Christians
were being stumbled, since once again this very same prohibition found at Acts
15:28, 29 is repeated ten years later in Acts 21:25. Notice specifically how
verses 24 brings out that this decree was given because the Jewish Christians
thought Paul had discarded all Jewish law and customs which were causing these
Jewish Christians to be upset and stumbled. Paul’s words quoted above at 1 Cor
8:4-8 once again only adds further evidence that this command was not an
eternal, universal law from God since again, he there states that “eating
foods sacrificed to idols” (also included in Acts 15:28,29 along with
blood) is a personal decision for each individual Christian. The command to
abstain from fornication however is an absolute, eternal, universal command,
since it is clearly repeated often throughout the Christian Greek scriptures.
Not the case at all regarding blood. Nowhere else is this mentioned. 1
Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5: 19-21 contain many specific warnings for
Christians, but blood is not one of them. Nor is it mentioned anywhere else in
the Greek scriptures. And even if it were considered a universal, eternal
command, which clearly it is not, that decree then would be regarding the
EATING of animal blood, and not the receiving of blood fluid from a living
human donor to another living human donor. 

*** If consuming
blood was such a capitol offense, why were Saul’s men not executed when they
fell to eating blood along with the meat? (1 Sam. 14:31-35)

*** I also
wanted to find out how the most traditional, conservative and orthodox Jews
today felt about accepting blood transfusions, since they still object to any
traces of blood in their meat and other strict dietary guidelines from the
bible by insisting on kosher foods. After researching, I found out that they DO
accept blood transfusions, considering these bible commands to be based on the
eating and drinking of animal blood; something a blood transfusion is not.

*** Another
thing that now clouds the blood transfusion issue altogether for me is the 2000
decree that certain blood “fractions” are now permissible. Many of
these are now considered a “conscience matter”. Just a few years ago
most of these were forbidden. I have studied this very carefully and thoroughly
as well. Some of these “fractions” take far more blood and donors to
make them, than accepting the whole blood unaltered takes. Some hemophiliac
treatments for example, (which have been long permitted) require the collection
and storage of massive quantities of blood (up to 2500 blood donors for a
single treatment). These are not just some made-up numbers thrown out here, but
can be easily verified. Other more common “fractions” still require
many liters of blood, from many different people to donate. It is often just a
“concentrated” form of blood. These facts bring up two different,
problematic issues in my mind then. For one, how can we say that we as
Jehovah’s Witnesses “abstain from blood”, since all of these
fractions that Watchtower Society now permits like albumin, EPO, hemoglobin,
blood serums, Immunoglobulins, and hemophiliac treatments (clotting factors VIII
& IX) clearly tap into the world’s blood supply and can be (and are) used
by Jehovah’s Witnesses today? And two, if then, we as Jehovah’s Witnesses can
with a clear conscience now USE these fractions that come from the blood
supply, why are we then forbidden from donating to this same blood supply that
we now are allowed to tap into? And, why are we still not allowed to store our
own blood? The pouring of blood “back to the ground” was long ago
nailed to the torture stake when Jesus sacrificed his life; hence we are no
longer under that Mosaic series of laws. It sure appears to me then, that we no
longer abstain from blood, and can and do dip into the worlds blood supply,
often in great quantity, yet we are still not allowed to put back into this
same supply, nor can we store our own blood.

Another problem
with “fractions” (for me) is that certain fractions such as
“Albumin” ARE acceptable by the society, but others making up even smaller
amounts are not. “Albumin” for example is a blood plasma protein that
is produced in the liver and forms a large proportion of all plasma protein.
This “authorized” fraction, Albumin, however makes up just 2.2
percent of the whole blood and again IS approved by the society today. White
blood cells on the other hand are NOT allowed, not authorized by the society,
yet these white blood cells make up less that one percent of whole blood. White
blood cells are absolutely needed to fight infections and are often very
important for accident and post-surgical patients. Yet again, these white blood
cells are not acceptable by the society. Another fraction, Blood
“Platelets” are needed to help cause clotting, so people do not bleed
to death (especially important with chemotherapy, other cancer treatments and
hemophiliacs). Yet platelets are another fraction NOT authorized. Platelets
make up only .17 percent of whole blood. That’s not even one quarter of one
percent, (a far smaller portion than albumin). Yet these platelets are
forbidden by the Society. I have read the literature and fail to see the logic
of this “approved” and “disapproved” list with no
explanations anywhere. It’s also worth noting that if you add up all of the
fractions that ARE acceptable by the society, you come up with a total of 97
percent of what makes up whole blood that is pumping through our veins right
now. However, these cannot be taken together as whole blood, but must be
instead broken down and taken separately, in minute fractions. It has been
compared before to being allowed to eat ham, bread and cheese, as long as
they’re kept and eaten separately. Yet not being allowed to eat them together
for instance as a ham and cheese sandwich. I just fail to see the
reasonableness in this kind of doctrine. “Hemopure” is an acceptable
blood-product that Jehovah’s Witnesses are allowed to use. It is made from
purified bovine, or in simpler terms, Cow’s Blood. How can we as humans be
allowed to use this purified animal blood today, yet not be allowed to use our
own blood, or that of another living human donor?

So then, when I
add up all of the facts listed above here; that blood transfusions are not the
same as eating blood. That the scriptures themselves are always referring to
the “eating or drinking” of animal blood that is forbidden (not
transfusions). How Paul shows at 1 Corinthians. 8:4-8 that the Acts 15:29
command is not all encompassing command but had a particular purpose. That
Saul’s men were not killed after eating blood. How the strictest of Jews today
allow blood transfusions. That Jesus clearly demonstrated how life (even that
of an animal) was more important than a narrow, strict interpretation of the
law, with the “animal that fell into a pit on the Sabbath” illustration
he used, and the “Woman with a flow of blood” real-life example. How
the one donating blood is a LIVE donor and offering this blood to another
person that is also alive and in need. That the Society was wrong before about
forbidding vaccinations and organ transplants and then reversed these
decisions. Many loyal Witnesses nonetheless died from such stands. And, the
Society has now changed its position once again, instead of saying no to all
blood, to now say “fractions” of blood are acceptable, even though
the particular fractions approved and disapproved seem to have no particular
rhyme or reason and we are still not allowed to donate blood nor store their
own. Though we can use cow’s blood. It seems fairly easy for me then, to come
to the conclusion that I can no longer support the society’s position on blood
transfusions today. In fact I believe it was an erroneous decision from the
beginning, and has only been made even more confusing and unstable with the
latest “fractions” adjustments.

So, what does
one do then? I do love the truth, and certainly the friends in the truth. I
have no problems at all with any people in the truth and have spent almost half
of my life now in the organization. I believe I get along with about everybody.
No exaggerating. This is solely a personal position, a conscience matter
regarding organizational policies that I can no longer agree with and accept.
If a person I brought into the truth allowed one of their own to die because of
this stand, that I helped them to take, I would have a difficult time living
with myself. Not only can I no longer support this blood position with a clear
conscience, but after thoroughly investigating, I believe it is truly wrong. I
can also no longer with a clear conscience bring other people into the organization,
since blood is a very integral and well-known position of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
I cannot see a way around this. Even if the Society were to reverse itself
entirely, how would anybody feel about losing a loved one during the last 60
years this has been in force, only to have the policy changed altogether? And
what took them so long would be monumental issues in the eyes of many. Imagine
how much work would be involved in overhauling all of the literature if this
position were reversed. The Bible Topics for Discussion sections for example in
the new world translation bibles would have to be changed, and many other
things… too many to list here. So I cannot quite see this reversal happening
anytime soon if at all. Though others feel a reversal is imminent.

What complicates
this entire issue even further for me now, and adds another problem with the
organization in my mind, is another entirely separate issue (which I also find
greatly disturbing) that will follow my change of position here now. IF I
cannot support this doctrine on blood any longer, and if I cannot with a clear
conscience have my blood card signed to refuse blood transfusions, I would then
be considered as having “disassociated” myself from the organization
of Jehovah’s Witnesses by this particular stand in and of itself. If another
brother or sister were to ask me “why are you no longer going out in the
ministry”, or “what has happened to you spiritually”, or things
appear to have changed with you etc. etc.; if I were to reply to them by
sharing my honest opinions about the organization’s past mistakes, and my
opinions disagreeing with the Watchtower Society, I would then be
disfellowshipped for Apostasy. This fact in itself does not sit too well with
me since I have done nothing wrong here. I still love Jehovah; I love my wife
and family. I do not drink, nor practice anything the bible tells me not to. I
pay my taxes, try to live honestly and remain a good influence for my family
and others. I have not changed as a person at all here. Yet because of a
“conscience” issue, and because I can no longer support the society
on what I truly believe is a flawed issue, I will be cut-off from my all of my
brothers and sisters throughout the organization. This policy too, is just wrong!
The Watchtower Society has stated in print several times that it is not
infallible; that they DO make mistakes. Yet even though it admits mistakes have
been made, it still insists that we as publishers accept whatever it teaches as
if it were coming from God himself. Those that do not agree with these
teachings and share those opinions (even though nothing else bad or
unscriptural has been done) are subsequently disfellowshipped. Your life, as
you know it, is ripped apart. To disfellowship another simply because that
person might disagree with a particular interpretation of a teaching is not
right, just or fair. Past history fully supports the idea that the society has
been wrong before and can be wrong now. Organ transplants, vaccinations, end of
the world predictions and other doctrinal errors to name just a few. Clearly
they were wrong about these issues. Lives have been and are now involved with
the current policy on blood transfusions. To be expected to fully support this
policy or be expelled is just unreasonable and not in harmony with what we know
about Jehovah. To encourage other people we meet in the ministry to
“examine their religion”, yet at the same time to forbid us to do the
same is nothing short of hypocritical. We are told that we can examine our faith,
though this must be done “In-house”. In other words, only through the
society’s publications can we examine our religion. Any other sources that are
critical are considered apostate and dangerous. I consider this position by the
organization to be very similar to my wanting to buy a new Nikon camera for
example. Imagine if Nikon told me that I could ONLY use their-own reference
material to gain information? Consumer Reports, Popular Photography or any
other “Non-Partisan” publication would be completely off limits. And,
if I did go to these “outside” sources, and shared any critical
opinions/reviews with others, I would no longer be allowed to even buy their
camera, plus other people who like Nikon cameras would have to now shun me
altogether. How reasonable is this? This is exactly what the society is doing.
Those that know me will tell you that whenever I make any type of serious
purchase, I do my homework and extensive research. We just recently purchased a
high-end scanner; I spent perhaps two months or more comparing scanners,
reading reviews, learning as much as I possibly could about this piece of
equipment before purchasing. If it is reasonable then to carefully
“examine” the purchase of a piece of equipment, and it is reasonable
to ask others in our ministry to carefully “examine” their own
religion, why is it unreasonable then to carefully “examine” our own
religion and means of worshiping God? And, if one does examine his faith and
does find problems and then expresses these concerns about what he has learned,
how can the “complete removal” of that person be considered anything
but completely unfair?

This position
also has nothing to do with my own son being disfellowshipped, though some I am
sure will choose to believe otherwise. I will however add this information
about this personal ordeal that brings to light another problem; After
receiving a very emotional phone call from my disfellowshipped son thousands of
miles away in September 2004, I was told by one of our elders that it was, “wrong
for me to have accepted that phone call”. Instead he said I should have
told him to “locate the elders in his territory” and that “we
need to tighten up things around here in our congregation”. This was the
most insensitive counsel that I have ever heard in my years in the truth. His
mother had recently committed suicide just a couple of years before, he had
just turned 18, was own his own for the first time in his life,
disfellowshipped, was 5000 miles from home and felt extremely lonely, sad and
despondent. Sure, I could have “turned down” that call all right. Who
in his right frame of mind though would have done such a thing to their own son
or daughter, in such a time of need? Then, nine months later, after discussing
it with the rest of my family, we agreed to allow him to return to living in
our house, from Maui. (This decision was due to his very deep depression,
suicidal tendencies, a drug dependency problem, and having the ACL torn out in
his knee…all at the same time). We agreed to allow him back home to get the
help needed to get back on his feet, under very strict circumstances I might
add (as the watchtower allows) which included his going to meetings, bringing
no leaven into the home, turning his life back around by serving Jehovah, (which
he did for six months by the way). I was then told by this same elder that my
decision to allow him home was “cutting the hand of Jehovah short, and
another big mistake”, and because of this erroneous decision on my part, I
as his father “might be the one destroyed at Armageddon”. This same
elder then took me off the watchtower reader’s list for the first time in my
eight years living on this island. (I had no problem with this, but felt I
should at least be told about it) When I inquired as to whether it was just a
coincidence or by design that I was missing from that list, he told me that it
was by “choice” and that there would be “more where that came
from”. While this “list” of unreasonable responses about my
helping my own son after his being disfellowshipped may seem completely unfair
and far less than loving, the brother himself truly believed what he was doing
was the correct thing. I will also add that there was very little personal
resentment on either of our parts. He sincerely believed he was just doing what
the society wanted. One of the things I cannot understand then, is how we as
Jehovah’s Witnesses can spend enormous amounts of time assisting other people
in our ministry –people that are often depressed, fighting addictions,
language issues, living at times as we know very ungodly lives–, to do better
and we ultimately give these ones the help and assistance needed so they can
serve God in an acceptable manner. However, if one of our very OWN people or
family members has been disfellowshipped, and happens to fall into a similar
dangerous pattern (one that often begs for loving assistance now more than
ever) we have minimal provisions at all to help these ones of our own to get
back onto their feet. They in fact must be “cut off” and completely
shunned by all at a time when many will actually need help the most. The
example of my son above illustrates this well. For someone to lose their mother
at such a young age (15) via a gun in her mouth, and then spiral into a course
of rebellion is not that uncommon. But to completely have to cut that person
off, without any assistance whatsoever from the congregation, when help is MOST
needed at this time, is contrary to what the scriptures teach us about Jehovah.
He continued to ask the Israelites to come back to him over and over. Even
assisting these former rebels to gain his favor once again. Now, because this
same individual (my son) now moves out of my home, I too, as his father, am
expected to cut off all ties and association with him. Even keeping business
dealings to a minimum. There are downtimes in our lives when we need help and
support and love, rather than just blindly cutting these ones off indefinitely.
Where is the balance, the love and the help in such a policy as this today?
Even if these disfellowshipped ones did turn their course of life around, and
did become married, faithful, honest etc. By not agreeing to go back to the
meetings for six months (minimum) or sometimes much longer in this shunned
state, and then to go back in front of a judicial committee for judging whether
they have truly repented, these people would remain disfellowshipped for the
rest of their lives.

This letter here
and my changes in position toward the organization itself are not based on this
situation with my son, or any other “personal” problems. It is solely
because of my making a reasonable, logical and careful examination about
certain policies that we as Jehovah’s Witnesses often blindly accept without
questions. This change is not based on any personal problems or, my wanting to
leave the organization. In fact leaving is the LAST thing I have even wanted to
do. I have always valued the organization. After an exhaustive examination,
that has taken many months to go through. And after coming to learn many things
I did not know before when I was younger and much more nave than now. There are
four specific issues that have changed my opinions about and support for the
Watchtower Society today.

1- For the many
reasons clearly stated above, I am thoroughly convinced the position to abstain
from blood transfusions is wrong. Lives, in my honest opinion, are needlessly
lost because of this dangerously flawed doctrine. Allowing certain blood
“fractions” since the year 2000 only complicates and muddies this
position even further. Being allowed to USE some fractions from the world blood
supply, but not being able to donate towards this same supply, nor store my own
blood for medical use, only adds the additional element of hypocrisy to this
stand that Jehovah’s Witnesses are known the world over for taking. The lack of
reasons why some fractions are allowed and other (though smaller) fractions are
not allowed adds further to the quandary the society has found itself in today.
This stand usually does not give a good witness nor leave a positive impression
on people’s minds at all.

2- The Society
has a lengthy history of other doctrinal mistakes and medical blunders such as
not allowing vaccinations and organ transplants in the not so distant past.
These mandates were wrong when they first came off the presses and they were
wrong many years later when finally reversed. To attribute these flip-flops to
“the light getting brighter” is just irresponsible. Jehovah does not
change his mind like this. He is a “God of truth”… “Who cannot
lie”. Imperfect men in positions of oversight have made these doctrinal
decisions, which have caused lives to be cut short without justifiable reasons.
There were no apologies made either. This poor historical record of mistakes
only makes the current blood transfusion policy even more suspect. Implicit
trust in an organization that has a track record of mistakes and errors like
this is simply foolish, dangerous and irresponsible. Especially when we must
force these policies on younger, inexperienced, helpless ones. To be forced
into “practice sessions” with our young people so they can make a
better stand against blood transfusions does not sound right either.

3- The number of
times the Society has predicted the “end of the world” is surprisingly
large. I never knew just how often this was the case. The end of the system was
predicted, in writing, in these years: 1874, 1875, 1881, 1888, 1914, 1915,
1918, (could occur in 1920), 1925, (“resurrection of Princes” in
1929), 1932, 1940, (“any day now” in 1942), (“why not now”
in 1951), 1975, and before the generation that was born in 1914 dies, which was
dropped in 1996 after it was clearly another false prediction. Every one of
these predictions, in writing, has proved false. People sold homes, gave up
opportunities to start families, secure employment, gave up opportunities for
an education and instead spread a message of doom that was simply untrue with
each prediction made. All of these failed. We really are known the world over
for these continuous false “end of the world” prophecies. When
looking up information from secular (non-apostate, such as encyclopedia)
sources, each authority said basically the same thing; that Jehovah’s Witnesses
are known the world over for our “many end of the world
proclamations”, that did not come true. Deuteronomy 18:20-22 pointedly
states this: “However, the prophet who presumes to speak in my name a word
that I have not commanded him to speak or who speaks in the name of other gods,
that prophet must die. 21 And in case you should say in your heart: “How
shall we know the word that Jehovah has not spoken?” 22 when the prophet
speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word does not occur or come true, that is
the word that Jehovah did not speak. With presumptuousness the prophet spoke
it. You must not get frightened at him.'”

4- Despite the
numerous errors in doctrine, medical mistakes, end of the world false
predictions and unscriptural blood transfusion bans that fill its pages of
history, the society still demands full support of its policies and doctrines
today. Notice this comment from a 5/1/72 WT (page 272): “That they
[Jehovah’s Witness] must adhere absolutely to the decisions and scriptural
understandings of the Society because God has given it this authority over his
people.” If this is God’s true and only channel, how then can they be so
wrong, so often, on doctrine, medical issues, end of the world predictions, and
yet still demand complete obedience from its members or face risk of complete
shunning? If any baptized Witness *expresses* his thoughts (even if only as
opinions) that are contrary to what is taught in the Society’s publications
right now, they will be disfellowshipped for disrupting unity. Squashed like a
bug. This “squelching mechanism” that I like to call it keeps an
unhealthy fear in its rank and file members to stay in line. Losing all contact
with friends and family is just too much to bear for many. Life as you know it
is gone. In addition, we are also told time and again not to even consider
looking at outside sources. All of this “outside material” is called
“apostate literature.” The term “Apostate” applies based on
one simple criterion; is it critical of the organization? Most sources critical
of the organization are not apostate. They are secular; and they are often
simply stating the facts about this organization. Facts, that the society does
not want its members to know anything about. Our examining the society can ONLY
be done, we are told, if it is done within the organization. So, by not being
allowed to examine our own faith through outside sources, and by having the
ever-present threat of disfellowshipping hovering over us if we were to speak
critically of the organization, most Jehovah’s Witnesses do not even know about
these many issues that I have just posted above. As a nearly 20 year member, I
too never knew many of these things (because we are told not to) until I
finally decided to examine based on the unusual circumstances mentioned above
about seeing an article on a national news website that allowed critical
comments about the organization after the article. Comments that shook my faith
so much I decided to investigate things further. Comments that I was not
supposed to look at not even think about because they are called
“Apostate”.

Additionally, I
have other (though perhaps less serious) issues that raise doubts in my mind as
well. For example, many of the brothers are far more concerned about their
“positions” than they are with the genuine well being of the PEOPLE
in the congregations. Over and over I have seen this clearly demonstrated. It
is sad to watch. Nowhere is it more obvious that when the circuit overseer
visits twice each year. The manner in which many people change for these visits
regarding their comments, showing up for service, finally arriving on time and
being friendlier is remarkably transparent at times. Also, having to count our
time each month and then turn in that time to the headquarters just seems to
take away from the value of really wanting to talk to others. Service can at
times just be about getting in our double-digit numbers rather than about truly
helping people. The real meaning of witnessing can be lost. I know of many
others that feel this way as well. There just seems at times to be so many
rules if one wants to remain in good standing. Brothers cannot grow any type of
beards. Cannot even work on military or church buildings if self-employed.
We’re not talking about worshiping there, but even performing a service in
these places is forbidden. We cannot even go into another church for a funeral
or wedding of another friend, family member or relative. Our children are not
allowed to play any organized sports or join other clubs in or out of school.
We are “not encouraged” to get pschycological help for those that
really need it. Sisters have to wear dresses at all meetings, service,
assemblies etc. I realize many of these are minor to some, but they just
illustrate the point that we are governed, as an organization by a set of many
rules and regulations that are not all scriptural. This list can just go on and
on.

Any ONE of these
many issues that are listed above could raise serious doubts in my mind about
whether this religion is in fact the one and only truth. However, when I add up
ALL these issues together (and many more things not even listed here), I cannot
help but come to the inescapable conclusion in my mind, that this is not the
sole truth on the earth today. That this is not the one single organization used
by God that I had always believed it to be. This has been and will continue to
be one of the most difficult things I have ever had to realize and accept. I do
love the friends and have no ill feelings or animosity towards a single one.
Not even one. This decision is not about people in this organization. I have
many friends and have enjoyed my associations with all of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
This is instead about the “policies”, the doctrinal policies that my
conscience will no longer allow me to be a part of. Yes, I still see positive
things being accomplished by this organization and have tried to balance it all
out before making any definitive decisions. So I am not one-sided when it comes
to evaluating the organization and my own subsequent position on what to do. I
might compare this quandary I am in to something like driving a fancy sports
car; there might be some truly “good” things it can do. Lots of
power, great handling, maybe even a real beauty on the outside. But if you also
knew it had these so-called “problems”; perhaps the brakes are known
to just go out, or the gas tank explodes when hit from behind or has a lousy
track record in terms of reliability, it would still be irresponsible in my
sincere opinion to just disregard or “look the other way” when it
comes to the apparent flaws that are obvious here… even though there is a
measure of good too. The vehicle that I have chosen to use to worship God (this
organization) is very flawed in my honest opinion. So much so, that I no longer
find it acceptable to use to worship God. I am not trying to use some type of
magnifying glass to intensify the negatives with the society in general or with
regards to the blood transfusion position in particular. I am also not
influenced by any so-called “apostate” propaganda. What I have
written above here is entirely my own. How I personally feel, from my own
evaluations, as carefully as I know how. These issues are real, and in my mind
they are all very significant problems.

Because I am
willing to share this research and information with those that may wish to ask
why I no longer can support the organization today (as I’d hope others would do
for me), I would soon be disfellowshipped from the organization by my local
congregation. Disfellowshipped for simply sharing information that the
organization does not want its members to find out on their own.
Disfellowshipped for offering unbiased, reasonable, logical and well-researched
opinions that are not supported by the Watchtower Society. I am therefore left
with no other alternative that I can think of, but to disassociate myself from
the organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It would hopefully be fair and
reasonable to expect to be able to just go out into my own new direction while
respecting each other’s beliefs along the way. But instead, I will have to be
treated as an outcast. Considered as one in the same light now as an
unrepentant thief, murderer, drunkard, adulterer etc. Completely shunned,
simply for disagreeing with the Watchtower Society’s doctrine. Doctrine that
has been proven to be wrong many times before. If anyone has another suggestion
or idea that I have not already mentioned, or that might help, I am still open
and willing to consider these as well. But I have already looked at all things
as conscientiously and thoroughly as I am capable of doing for several months
now. I sincerely appreciate those of you taking the time to of read all of
this. At least you will know why I will no longer be one of Jehovah’s
Witnesses. I wish everybody in the organization only good things. I have very
fond memories too.

My very best to
each and every one of you,

VKT

Post Script:

It has been over
two weeks now since writing this letter. I have had the opportunity to speak
with many different brothers from this island and the mainland about my
concerns over these issues mentioned above. Obviously with people that do care
a lot, there is no denying that. However, it must also be mentioned that
despite their caring, not one of these people (including many very experienced
ones) could successfully deal with these issues that I have printed above. None
really even tried! Instead the same theme was spoken throughout all these many
conversations; “Wait on Jehovah” or, ” The light gets
brighter”. Also, I heard the “Jehovah can bring back those that
died” kind of comments. There was also much worse said than this from
fanatical brothers, but I’ll just skip those. These statements do absolutely
nothing to help me in dealing with these very specific issues. They are in fact
irresponsible, insensitive and quite honestly illogical responses to these
problems. These are not loving comments at all. It’s just too easy to say that
Jehovah will “fix” what the Society has broken. The “NO
BLOOD” position has been in effect for 60 years now. How much longer
should anybody wait? I have investigated this even further since writing this
letter. The evidence is overwhelming; that this policy among Jehovah’s
Witnesses (enforced via disfellowshipping and now through automatic
disassociation) is an erroneous, unscriptural and un-loving application. People
have died unnecessarily. People continue to die today. This policy is still
nonetheless forced on all of Jehovah’s Witnesses today. I cannot, with a clean
conscience then, continue to support this unfair doctrine personally. I cannot
continue to bring people into the organization that will push this on them
either. When such ones suggest I wait on Jehovah, wouldn’t it be more accurate
to say “Let’s just wait in the Society”? No, I will not wait on the
society while more continue to lose their lives needlessly. It would be
irresponsible to take such a position today.

Because of my
simple “disagreement” with this policy now, the elders that visited
me showed that this alone would constitute “Apostasy”. Not spreading
it, and not having a transfusion, but by simply “believing” it is
wrong. This was based on the definition of apostasy in the reasoning book
exclusively. This is of course absolutely not true. I am not disagreeing with
what the bible teaches (as they claim) I am instead simply disagreeing with how
the Watchtower Society interprets this scripture and thus forces all to comply
with its interpretation, or risk judicial proceedings and disfellowshipping.
The same Watchtower Society that was clearly wrong about Vaccinations in the
past, Organ transplants as well as many end of the world predictions. These
brothers have now given me three options; either recant my position altogether
(and still be reproved at the very least), or be disfellowshipped, or to
disassociate myself from the organization altogether. What an unfair set of
choices. Needless to say, this is just another reason why I fail to believe
this is the lone TRUE Christian congregation on the earth today, in addition to
the many reasons listed above. I officially choose the third option. I
therefore officially resign my membership from the organization of Jehovah’s
Witnesses. I wish you all much success and happiness. Thanks for your time,
attention and many years of fellowship.

Edited by adding
the “post script” portion which is posted several paragraphs down.
The above is the entire letter I turned in to the body of elders.

And here is something else I wrote proving the JW blood
policy is in error (a little more direct) just a couple of years ago.

STILL NOT SURE THE JW’S ARE WRONG ON BLOOD?

HERE COMES PROOF…

First of all, the bible’s prohibition against blood
ALWAYS had to do with eating the blood of (((ANIMALS))). Every single time. No
exceptions.

LET’S TAKE A LOOK.

Lev. 17:13-14 “‘As for any man of the sons of
Israel or some alien resident who is residing as an alien in YOUR midst who in
hunting catches a wild beast or a fowl that may be eaten, he must in that case
pour its blood out and cover it with dust. 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. Anyone eating it will be cut off.”

Lev.7:26 “‘And YOU must not eat any blood in any
places where YOU dwell, whether that of (((FOWL or that of BEAST))). 27 Any
soul who eats any blood, that soul must be cut off from his people.’”

****** So we can clearly see Leviticus 7:26
specifically says “fowl or beast”…. those are what? Animals is what
they are. MOSES SAID THAT, NOT VINNY. If the JW’s have a hard time with what
Moses said then go take it up with Moses then.

One could not, under the law covenant eat or drink
the blood of any ANIMAL. It had to be “POURED OUT”. A blood
transfusions is nothing like this.No animals involved. No eating or drinking
involved.

Rather a living donor provides the needed volume of
blood for another living human.

LIFE IS VALUABLE. More valuable than the
misapplication of some law. Let’s see what Jesus Himself said that may add some
light on this issue.

FROM JESUS HIMSELF:

From the JW’s NWT bible: Matthew 12:1-14

1 At that season Jesus went through the grainfields
on the sabbath. His disciples got hungry and started to pluck heads of grain
and to eat. 2 At seeing this the Pharisees said to him: “Look! Your disciples
are doing what it is not lawful to do on the sabbath.” 3 He said to them: “Have
YOU not read what David did when he and the men with him got hungry?

(KEY POINT) 4 How he entered into the house of God
and they ate the loaves of presentation, something that it was (((not lawful)))
for him to eat, nor for those with him, but for the priests only? 5 Or, have
YOU not read in the Law that on the sabbaths the priests in the temple treat
the sabbath as not sacred and continue guiltless? 6 But I tell YOU that
something greater than the temple is here.

(MAIN POINT HERE) 7 However, if YOU had understood
what this means, ((((I WANT MERCY AND NOT SACRIFICE)))),’ YOU would not have
condemned the guiltless ones. 8 For Lord of the sabbath is what the Son of man
is.” 9 After departing from that place he went into their synagogue; 10 and,
look! a man with a withered hand! So they asked him, “Is it lawful to cure on
the sabbath?” that they might get an accusation against him.

(TO DRIVE JESUS POINT HOME) 11 He said to them:
“Who will be the man among YOU that has one sheep and, if this falls into a pit
on the sabbath, will not get hold of it and lift it out?

APPLICATION OF JESUS MESSAGE FOR ALL CHRISTIANS
THEN AND NOW:

12 All considered, of how much more worth is a man
than a sheep! So it is lawful to do a fine thing on the sabbath.” 13 Then he
said to the man: “Stretch out your hand.” And he stretched it out, and it was
restored sound like the other hand. 14 But the Pharisees went out and took
counsel against him that they might destroy him.

****** Now, I have asked dozens of JW’s to please
read this entire account again. From beginning to end to read it. And then tell
me, in their own words, that Jesus would say to the parents of a three year old
child, that was in an auto accident, that was the fault of some drunk driver
for example, who was about to DIE due to severe blood loss, but yet whose life
COULD be saved by accepting a blood transfusion, from a LIVING human donor,
that Jesus would tell that parent, “NO, THIS CHILD MUST NOW NOW DIE”.

OR TO THE MOTHER OF TWO LITTLE INFANTS AND A YOUNG
HUSBAND, “NO THIS MOTHER MUST NOW DIE”. (as just recently happened).

If the JW’s believe that Jesus would do just that
(AND THEY DO) ,then they have MISSED THE ENTIRE POINT OF THOSE VERSES!!!!

First of all, Jesus says, in his OWN words, from
the New World Translation, that “David entered into the house of God and
they ate the loaves of presentation, something that it was (((NOT LAWFUL))) for
him to eat, nor for those with him, but for the priests only”.

Why did Jesus even mention this account stating
that the law was BROKEN? David was told beforehand that this was Holy Bread.
Yet he requested that bread, received it and ATE it anyway.

Yet NOBODY was punished.

AND JESUS HIMSELF USED THAT ACCOUNT FOR A REASON!!!

What was Jesus point in using that account?

Before healing the man’s withered hand and before
his, “if a sheep falls into a pit” illustration, Jesus makes the
entire point very clear. He says:

However, if YOU had understood what this means,
(((I WANT MERCY AND NOT SACRIFICE))), YOU would not have condemned the
guiltless ones.

Over and out the JW arguments go.

So what part of what Jesus just taught, do the
JW’s, or the WT Society NOT GET?

What spin can you try to use on this? You are stuck
here.

Acts 15:28,29 had to do with ANIMALS BLOOD. DO NOT
EAT THE BLOOD OF THE “SLAIN” –(slain means dead)– (((ANIMAL))) not
a “living human”.

The JW’s misapplication of ACTS 15 has been refuted
and put into proper perspective. Not by me, but by God’s only begotten Son
Himself, Jesus Christ.

What JESUS said and taught with those verses
destroys people needlessly dying for a gross MISAPPLICATION of scripture!

The JW’s cannot get out of this hole they are in.

Jesus own words, taken IN CONTEXT make it clear to
anybody reading that “mercy” and “life” are far more
important than the sacrifice of Human life.

This applies perfectly to a person in need of a
modern day blood transfusion. Jesus values LIFE over the sacrifice of life due
to a gross and often deadly misapplication of scripture.

A blood transfusion is not a sin, nor against bible
principles.

This is why every other religious group on the
earth today, including every single one that adheres to any portion of the
bible, allows blood transfusions to be used. ALL Christians, Muslims, Hindus,
Mormons, Jews… EVERYBODY.

It is a personal decision with all of the world’s
faiths, and not one that should be forced on its members, at risk of expulsion,
as is with the JW’s.

Lets look at some very key bible warnings for ALL
CHRISTIANS:

Paul said at 1 Cor 6: 9-11 …9 What! Do YOU not
know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled.
Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural
purposes, nor men who lie with men, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor
drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. 11 And
yet that is what some of YOU were. But YOU have been washed clean, but YOU have
been sanctified, but YOU have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord
Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.”

**** Where is blood, JW’s, if it was such a
universal law?

Paul said at Gal 5: 19-21…”19 Now the works
of the flesh are manifest, and they are fornication, uncleanness, loose
conduct, 20 idolatry, practice of spiritism, enmities, strife, jealousy, fits
of anger, contentions, divisions, sects, 21 envies, drunken bouts, revelries,
and things like these. As to these things I am forewarning YOU, the same way as
I did forewarn YOU, that those who practice such things will not inherit God’s
kingdom.

****Where is blood, JW’s, if it was such a
universal law?

Paul also said at Ephesians 4:25 Wherefore, now
that YOU have put away falsehood, speak truth each one of YOU with his
neighbor, because we are members belonging to one another. 26 Be wrathful, and
yet do not sin; let the sun not set with YOU in a provoked state, 27 neither
allow place for the Devil. 28 Let the stealer steal no more, but rather let him
do hard work, doing with his hands what is good work, that he may have
something to distribute to someone in need. 29 Let a rotten saying not proceed
out of YOUR mouth, but whatever saying is good for building up as the need may
be, that it may impart what is favorable to the hearers. 30 Also, do not be
grieving God’s holy spirit, with which YOU have been sealed for a day of
releasing by ransom. 31 Let all malicious bitterness and anger and wrath and
screaming and abusive speech be taken away from YOU along with all badness. 32
But become kind to one another, tenderly compassionate, freely forgiving one
another just as God also by Christ freely forgave YOU.

****Where is blood, JW’s, if it was such a
universal law?

There are obviously many laws, principles and
warnings given by Paul throughout the new testament. But NOTHING ON BLOOD.

Jesus Christ, God’s own Son said this, in arguably
the Greatest Sermon ever recorded:

Matthew 5:21 “YOU heard that it was said to those
of ancient times, ‘You must not murder; but whoever commits a murder will be
accountable to the court of justice.’ 22 However, I say to YOU that everyone
who continues wrathful with his brother will be accountable to the court of
justice; but whoever addresses his brother with an unspeakable word of contempt
will be accountable to the Supreme Court; whereas whoever says, ‘You despicable
fool!’ will be liable to the fiery Ge·hen´na.

23 “If, then, you are bringing your gift to the
altar and you there remember that your brother has something against you, 24
leave your gift there in front of the altar, and go away; first make your peace
with your brother, and then, when you have come back, offer up your gift.

25 “Be about settling matters quickly with the one
complaining against you at law, while you are with him on the way there, that
somehow the complainant may not turn you over to the judge, and the judge to
the court attendant, and you get thrown into prison. 26 I say to you for a
fact, You will certainly not come out from there until you have paid over the
last coin of very little value.

27 “YOU heard that it was said, ‘You must not
commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to YOU that everyone that keeps on looking at a
woman so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery with her
in his heart. 29 If, now, that right eye of yours is making you stumble, tear
it out and throw it away from you. For it is more beneficial to you for one of
your members to be lost to you than for your whole body to be pitched into
Ge·hen´na. 30 Also, if your right hand is making you stumble, cut it off and
throw it away from you. For it is more beneficial to you for one of your
members to be lost than for your whole body to land in Ge·hen´na.

31“Moreover it was said, ‘Whoever divorces his
wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 However,

 
 
 
 
 

Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Esquire by Matthew Buchanan.