News Bulletin: Éloïse Dupuis Dead at 27 – Watchtower Claims Another Victim, Son Left Motherless
avatar

eloise-dupuisIt is with deep sadness that we announce the death of Éloïse Dupuis, a 27-year-old Jehovah’s Witness from Quebec, Canada. Éloïse died on Wednesday October 12th 2016, just one week after giving birth to her first child, Liam.

JW Survey has obtained information from sources close to the family which confirm the rumors that her death was the result of her refusal to accept a life-saving blood transfusion, which led to intensified complications following her childbirth.

The tragedy began with the precarious birth of her son, not at the hospital, but at  the Maison de Naissance Mimosa (a house of birth) – with the assistance of a midwife.  Unfortunately the birth did not take place according to plan, and Éloïse was rushed to the hospital where an emergency Cesarean section was performed, followed by uncontrolled bleeding and the subsequent removal of her uterus.

While the practice of using a midwife is by no means exclusive to Jehovah’s Witnesses, the risk of death for mother and child is proportionately higher for Witnesses due to their refusal to accept blood. Throwing caution to the wind, some members exacerbate the risk of death by giving birth outside the safety net of a hospital, where alternative non-blood treatments are often available.  The practice of home-birth for Jehovah’s Witnesses amounts to jumping out of an airplane while refusing a backup parachute.

 

eloise-dupuis-2aBy outward appearances, Éloïse was a faithful member of her religion, a woman who loved life, loved her husband, and loved children. She was a babysitter with an abiding desire to build a family with her husband, Paul-André Roy. Even after the news was broken to her at the hospital that she would lose her uterus, in her intubated state she scribbled a note to her husband  on a piece of paper: “It’s OK – we will adopt.” Éloïse Dupuis did not want to die.

The death of Éloïse, while devastating and tragic, comes as part of the Jehovah’s Witness risk package, with the Witness organization recently intensifying its demand for loyalty among members by mentally preparing them for death in the event they need blood.

Behind the Scenes – The Inside Story

 

The story of Éloïse is a tale of conflict and divided loyalties. One the one hand, she was a dedicated, baptized Jehovah’s Witness with immediate family deeply entrenched in the religion. Her father, Alain Dupuis, is a prominent elder in Quebec, and is recognized by Canadian authorities as one of the few Witness elders in Quebec allowed to deliver marriage vows. In fact, he presided at the Éloïse’s first wedding, then her second marriage to current husband Paul-André.  As her parents and in-laws are all members of the Witness religion, her immediate inner circle would appear to be a solid, closed loop. However there was an alternative side to Éloïse which suggests that she desired friends and family outside of the insular community of Jehovah’s Witnesses, where association with non-JW friends and relatives is highly discouraged.

eloise-dupuis-with-cassandra

Close friend Cassandra (right) with Éloïse (left)

Yet somehow, Éloïse was able to maintain a close bond to her devoted aunt, Manon Boyer, who is not a Witness. She spoke to her aunt nearly every day, right up to the night before Éloïse went into labor. She was also very close with three non-JW sisters, who were in fact triplets. These four women were utterly devastated to find out that Éloïse’s pregnancy resulted in her hospitalization, and their pleas to JW family members went unanswered for six days, as Éloïse lay dying in the hospital. Frantic calls to Éloïse’s parents were unanswered, despite the fact that her parents knew how close their daughter was to these women. As a last desperate measure, they contacted Aunt Manon and collectively located Éloïse and phoned the hospital. They were able to reach a nurse, who informed them of the gravity of the situation, and they immediately drove three and a half hours to the Hôtel-Dieu de Lévis Hospital near Quebec City.  By the time they arrived, Éloïse was near death, with a beating heart, but complications so severe that her demise was imminent. They wanted to see their dear friend one last time. This proved to be a challenge. Not only was Éloïse surrounded by her husband and parents, but there were three men hovering nearby who denied access to Éloïse. These were Jehovah’s Witness elders; one of them has been referred to as “Le Grand Manitou” – a French expression which translates as “the big boss” or “the big shot.” (It is extremely commonplace for prominent Jehovah’s Witness elders to intervene in the medical affairs of hospitalized Witnesses, to ensure that only Witness-authorized treatments are administered).

Following a heated dispute, the sisters were able to say their final farewell to Éloïse, amid the protests of the three “wise men” – the big shots or enforcers of Jehovah’s Witness doctrine.

Doctors, Nurses, and Patient Advocates Deeply Disturbed

Patient confidentiality is a well-protected aspect of 21st century medical care, but there is a limit to what a person can bear, particularly when doctors are sworn to administer life-saving care to humans whose desire is to survive and recover from illness. Jehovah’s Witnesses frequently test the boundaries of medicine by announcing that they desire the highest standard of medical care, but when life is on the line, will reject the one treatment which will save their life -the blood transfusion.

There is no doubt that the medical professionals caring for Éloïse will never forget the woman who lost her life for adhering to Jehovah’s Witness doctrine. JW Survey was able to obtain exclusive details from one of the professionals treating Éloïse, who must remain anonymous for obvious reasons. The reason for obtaining this information, aside from the desire to understand  exactly why Éloïse died, is to refute the false claims of Jehovah’s Witness advocates who are attempting to mischaracterize the nature of her death, shifting the cause from lack of necessary transfusion therapy to the resultant infection which terminated her life.

Specifically, here is what happened: Éloïse arrived at the hospital following a failed midwife delivery, and doctors immediately delivered her baby Liam by C-section. There was a significant loss of blood during this procedure, further complicated by a uterine rupture, which depleted her blood even further. A hysterectomy was then performed, but the loss of blood required transfusion. The Jehovah’s Witness family, together with “The Grand Manitou” vehemently declined this treatment, and Éloïse began slipping out of consciousness, her hemoglobin count dropping so low that her life was rapidly slipping away. In an attempt to infuse as much oxygen as possible into her body, Éloïse was intubated. Unfortunately, dangerously low hemoglobin levels expose the body to extreme risk of infection, and Éloïse fell victim to the streptococcus bacteria. Without white blood cells to fight this invasion, Éloïse was defenseless. Her vital organs failed, her body failed, and she died.

According to one medical professional directly involved in her care, “all of this would have been avoided” with an initial infusion of 2-3 pints of blood.  This tragedy was preventable, but the medical rights of an adult patient surrounded by intense Jehovah’s Witness pressure forces hospital personnel to administer treatment which  defies accepted medical practice, and often leaves nurses and doctors in tears. The men and women whose sole focus in life is to save lives are handcuffed by the insanity of uneducated religious leaders who developed a policy which has needlessly ended the lives of tens of thousands of Witnesses.

While this case is not unique, it has incited the fury of both medical personnel and the friends  and non-Witness family members who have initiated a plea to hospital administration to investigate this case. As a result, an inquiry has been initiated by the coroner of Quebec, which will examine the details of this case, in an attempt to determine whether Éloïse acted purely on her own volition, or was heavily influenced by Jehovah’s Witness doctrine and enforcers.

vampire

Jehovah’s Witness video demands avoidance of “Vampire” themed movies

One interesting side note to this story is the fact that Éloïse was known to have a great fondness for the Twilight movie trilogy, even wearing a Twilight bracelet. While this may seem quite normal for a non-Witness, among most devout Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Twilight movie series is absolutely taboo; the subject of vampires and blood are intensely offensive to Jehovah’s Witness theology. In fact, the 2016 JW convention series (described below) featured a reference to this movie trilogy by producing their own movie which demonstrated the spiritual pitfalls of watching such “worldly” entertainment. The fact that Éloïse made no secret of her admiration for these films raises a potential question about her devotion to the Jehovah’s Witness doctrine. Further investigation may reveal that Éloïse might not have had the same dedication to her belief structure as one might be led to believe.

Why did this happen?

 

Jehovah’s Witnesses usually receive the latest doctrine from their web site, jw.org as well as regional and local assemblies held throughout the year. During the recent 2016 “Remain Loyal to Jehovah” regional assemblies held worldwide, an abundance of references were made connecting loyalty to God with the refusal to accept a blood transfusion. Éloïse would have been present to receive these non-negotiable instructions from Witness headquarters.

A source inside the Watchtower organization leaked the entire outline of speeches for this recent assembly series, which includes numerous reminders for Jehovah’s Witnesses that they must not only refuse blood, but must proactively make plans for their denial of treatment, should a whole-blood transfusion become necessary.

 

2016_assembly_blood_1

Jehovah’s Witnesses must prepare to decline blood transfusions

 

Particularly for young, impressionable members of the Jehovah’s Witness faith, the command to “abstain” from blood in any form, including transfusion, is a command so powerful that there is simply no alternative but to obey. As pointed out later in the 2016 Regional Assembly program, any disobedience related to the blood directive would mean certain death for the one breaking God’s law.  Essentially, survival now means everlasting death in the future, with God’s deadly stamp of approval.

Had Éloïse voluntarily accepted a blood transfusion to save her life and fulfill her role as a mother to young Liam, her actions would immediately be viewed as her “disassociation” from the Jehovah’s Witness organization. This stigma is not just a label, it is a mark of disloyalty which results in complete shunning by all Jehovah’s Witness friends and family. She would nurse her baby in virtual isolation, having been cut off from her support network.

Later in the assembly program, another discourse equated loyalty to God with adherence to Watchtower’s modern-day application of the Old Testament ban on eating blood:

2016_assembly_blood_2

Reminder to Witnesses that violation of blood policy equals DEATH

 

JW Movie Featuring the “Blood Card”

As if direct verbal instruction from the JW lectures was not enough, the recent 2016 Assembly unveiled a feature-length made-for-Witnesses movie (The Job Drama) which opens with a frightening scene where a Jehovah’s Witness woman is being rushed to the hospital following a violent accident. The woman dies, but not before the contents of her purse were emptied, revealing the familiar ‘NO BLOOD” card – a document traditionally carried by Witnesses at all times advising medical personnel that under no circumstances will they accept a transfusion. Jehovah’s Witnesses have long used visual imagery in their books, magazines and tracts to suggest and influence behavior. The addition of high-definition video adds an effective weapon to their arsenal.

In another series of videos produced at this latest convention, Jehovah’s Witnesses were introduced to the fictional character named Sergei – a young man who walked away from a promising career in music to adhere to Watchtower doctrine. Watchtower did not miss the chance to reinforce it’s anti-blood mandate one more time when the once youthful Sergei was now an old man, hospitalized, and facing his final challenge – the refusal of a blood transfusion which would likely end his  life.

The story of Sergei is fiction.    The story of Éloïse is real.

Éloïse was a genuine, real-life warm-hearted person raised as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, loyal to the very end. Her life was cut short at 27 years of age, the result of the most serious gamble of her life. She rolled the dice, deciding that the promise of resurrection and everlasting life in the future was very real; but saving her life with a few pints of blood right now would terminate her relationship with God, cost her all of her Witness friends and family, and ruin her life now and forever.

That is a tremendous burden to bear, particularly for a young pregnant woman who is suddenly thrust into a life or death decision.  Éloïse was an adult, with the right to make an informed decision on her medical care. However her decisions were not based on in-depth research or a recent religious awakening – they were firmly founded on the Jehovah’s Witness doctrine drilled into her from childhood.

Anyone who has been raised inside a cult and later escaped will tell you that their decision to become a blood card-carrying baptized member of the Jehovah’s Witness religion had more to do with influence and pressure than any other factor.  When you are pounded day after day, month after month, year after year with the notion that the world is controlled by Satan, that only Jehovah’s Witnesses have uncovered the “truth”, and that God demands complete loyalty to the mandates of his appointed leaders in New York, the net result is that you believe what you are being told.

And after all, why wouldn’t you? When your parents teach you these things – you trust them. When your friends at the Kingdom Hall believe it – so do you. When the elders of the congregation urge you to believe it – you have faith in these men. Your entire world consists of meetings several times per week at the Kingdom Hall. You read JW magazines and books, watch Witness videos, make presentations and testimonials at meetings, then put all of this into action on Saturday and Sunday when you knock on  doors, or wheel a book-laden cart down to the local bus stop, actively reinforcing your own belief structure by publicly identifying yourself as a loyal Witness.

The net result is that you are deeply vested in the belief system, an you are not allowed to question it. If you do, you are initially branded as a spiritually weak person, a very unpleasant stigma. If you persist in your questions or doubts, you become an immediate candidate for apostasy, which is the worst possible crime for a Jehovah’s Witness. There is no coming back from apostasy. A close second is accepting a blood transfusion – an act of disloyalty so severe, that even if you were to apologize and “repent” for accepting blood, you are forever labeled as a disloyal person who caved in  when you life  was on the line. This flaw carries with you for the rest of your life, regardless of whether you are reinstated to the congregation or not.

In the end, Éloïse was a beloved person, wife, child, and now a mother. Sadly, her child will grow up without her mom, the cruel result of a belief so bizarre, that all fingers point to God as the perpetrator of this policy. But this is not the God worshiped by Christians, or by Muslims, or by the Jews. This particular God, Jehovah, allegedly identified Nathan Knorr and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society as his spokesperson, and he inspired them to by the year 1961 to disfellowship any Witness accepting a blood transfusion. Meanwhile, the Almighty’s prolific spilling of both animal and human blood in the Old and New testament is legendary, and in complete conflict with the belief that life is sacred.

When I was 20 years old, I faced my first operation under the skilled hands of three oncologists and an anesthesiologist. I presented my “no blood” card along with an explanation of why I would not accept a blood transfusion under any circumstances. I was prepared to die. Some 15 years later, I faced the same test, and presented my updated and signed card to  the surgeons, once again with my parents and fellow witnesses at my side, assuring me that I was making the right decision. At the time, it was my only decision. The alternative was unthinkable. If I had agreed to a possible transfusion, I would have been ousted by my religion, abandoned by my friends, and left with the intense guilt which can only be understood by someone whose entire life was controlled by the doctrine implanted in my mind since childhood. At 46 years of age, I finally broke free, but it took over a year to remove my “no blood” document from my wallet. This was an act of finality which released me from the bondage to this bizarre and compelling belief – that God would not accept me if I accepted blood.

To the family of Éloïse I say that I am deeply sorry for your loss, but I must confess that I am angered, disturbed and horrified that you and Jehovah’s Witness elders permitted this vibrant life to die, without giving her a fighting chance to live. You filled her with doctrine which is neither scriptural or logical, despite all arguments contained in the Jehovah’s Witness manual of conduct. You robbed medical personnel of the chance to save a life, and these fine men and women will never forget Éloïse, or the unnecessary tragedy which ended her life.

The outcry of her aunt, her close friends, the hospital administration, the patient advocates,and  the government of the great province of Quebec will not rest until the story of Éloïse reaches every corner of our world, and the tragedy of undue religious influence will have been legally eliminated once and for all time.

From the warm heart of JW Survey and the entire community of concerned individuals, we honor the memory of Éloïse Dupuis.

 

eloise-dupuis-16

 

John Redwood

 

MEDIA COVERAGE

http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/mother-s-religion-comes-under-examination-after-dying-following-childbirth-1.3116847

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/montreal/quebec-jehovahs-witness-death-young-mom-investigation-1.3806578

http://ici.radio-canada.ca/regions/quebec/2016/10/14/010-enquete-coroner-hotel-dieu-levis-jehova.shtml

http://www.droit-inc.com/article18901-Sauver-Eloise-de-la-peur-de-Dieu

http://www.tvanouvelles.ca/2016/10/14/une-jeune-mere-temoin-de-jehovah-meurt-au-bout-de-son-sang

http://ici.radio-canada.ca/regions/quebec/2016/10/19/004-eloise-dupuis-manon-boyer-tante-plainte-police-levis.shtml

http://www.newser.com/story/232993/after-new-moms-death-jehovahs-witnesses-take-heat.html

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/jehovahs-witness-quebec-eloise-dupuis-1.3813974

Refusal of transfusion: one death, several questions

http://www.journaldequebec.com/2016/10/18/une-demande-daide-durgence-refusee

A Watchtower Tragedy

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Jehovah’s Witnesses and Blood – what are the facts?  – A thorough analysis from JW Facts 

The Friday Column: The Blood Issue and Leukemia: One Man’s Story

Bookmark the permalink.

178 Responses to News Bulletin: Éloïse Dupuis Dead at 27 – Watchtower Claims Another Victim, Son Left Motherless

  1. Whip It says:

    Very Sad, we have just had a PT on Blood & that now blood fractions are ok, but you can’t donate blood????, his explanation was confusing,

  2. EDWARD GUZMAN says:

    plain and simple the bible forbids the eating of animal blood. but not the transfusion of blood from one human to the other.

    • Caroline says:

      EDWARD, even the eating of animal blood wasn’t that big a deal in the Hebrew scriptures because nothing happened to Saul’s men when they ate the meat with the blood at 1 Samuel 14:32-34.

      This information I did not pay any attention to when I was going to meetings but now when I read the Bible, I pay attention to what it “really” says.

      At Acts 15:29, the counsel from the”Governing Body” said Christians were to “abstain” from blood but it also says to abstain from things strangled and things sacrificed to idols but Paul ignored that counsel from the “governing body” and said not to worry about meat that was sacrificed to idols at 1 Cor. 8:1-13 and also it’s interesting that after that counsel at 15:29, Galatians 1:18-19 tells about how Paul went to Jerusalem and stayed with Cephas 15 days and the only other apostle he saw during that time was James.

      Since Paul was an apostle of Jesus and obviously would have been of the “governing body” if there was such a thing, then why didn’t he meet with the other members of the “governing body” when he went to Jerusalem?

      The counsel to “abstain” from blood is vague and when meat had been sacrificed to idols, there would have been no way of knowing if that meat had been properly bled, so how serious is that counsel to “abstain” from that meat?

      Should a person die for such vague counsel that was given by a group of men in Jerusalem 2,000 years ago that the apostle Paul ignored?

      • dee2 says:

        Good points Caroline.

        When we were JWs we were certainly misled about the “abstain from blood” doctrine. All of this just goes to show just how much filtered information we received.

        It is questionable whether a meeting actually took place in Jerusalem according to Acts 15 from which a resolution regarding abstaining from blood arose, as there are glaring discrepancies between Paul’s account of any such meeting and the account by the writer of the book of Acts:
        http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Watchtower_s_Achilles__Heel.pdf

        Further, Paul wasn’t in agreement with the Jerusalem Church. There was in fact an irreparable gulf between Paul and the Jerusalem Church as Paul was teaching his Gentile converts that with the advent and mission of Jesus, there was no longer a requirement to observe Jewish practices such as their dietary constraints whereas men from Jerusalem were telling Paul’s Gentile converts that they had to follow the Laws set down by Moses. These men were teaching that as followers of Jesus, Paul’s Gentile converts had to be Jews (Galatians 1:22-23; Galatians 2:6 NWT 2013).

        Whereas Acts claims that followers were to abstain “from things sacrificed to idols”, Paul wrote that it did not matter if “food offered to idols” were eaten. Concerning the eating of food offered to idols … some, because of their former association with the idol, eat food as something sacrificed to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. But food will not bring us nearer to God; we are no worse off if we do not eat, nor better off if we eat. All things are lawful, but not all things are advantageous. All things are lawful, but not all things build up. … Eat whatever is sold in a meat market, making no inquiry because of your conscience. … If an unbeliever invites you and you want to go, eat whatever is set before you, making no inquiry on account of your conscience” (1 Corinthians 8:4, 7-8; 1 Corinthians 10:23, 25, 27 (NWT, 2013).

        In 1 Corinthians 10 Paul sets the resolution of the Council at Jerusalem one side and declares that meat is not polluted because the animal from which it is taken had first been sacrificed in a pagan temple. Imagine that, Paul actually set aside the resolution of the Jerusalem Church which the WT claims is binding on JWs.

    • dee2 says:

      EDWARD G:

      If the Bible forbids the eating of animal blood, then JWs should be vegetarians since meat purchased from a grocery store still has blood in it so anyone who eats meat also eats some blood.
      This point about the inescapable fact that meat purchased from a grocery store still has blood in it was also made by an earlier commenter (Amyah on October 16, 2016 at 8:01 am ).

      Also, the residual blood in the meat is what makes meat a rich source of iron hence why people, including JWs, eat meat as a source of iron………….apparently the JWs aren’t aware where the iron in the meat is coming from?

      • outandabout says:

        Now come on, Dee!! You’re asking for a logical thought. A thought that’s free of superstition, ignorance, fear, obligation and guilt.

        Where do you hope to find that in a doomsday cult?

    • Sita says:

      So putting blood through the mouth is a sin but not through the veins? The bible is clear, no blood and if people can’t understand that, then don’t judge. Jw aren’t freaks that want to die, they have a lot of respect for life but you need to be one to understand, and a real one, not a make believe one. The real ones trust in God more than in people and they are proving it by not being afraid of dying. We all are going to die, so die later in life or a little earlier makes no difference, the difference is dying faithful to God and His laws. Don’t judge or talk about what you don’t know. Jehovah’s Witnesses are good people that promote peace and love and if there’s a few people that die because they believe in their faith that’s their business. Other religions have members that are murders, pedophiles, drug addicts, robbers, scammers, frauds, etc and I don’t hear people saying “oh, they are like that because they are catholic, or Protestants, or Jews, or Adventist, or Hindu etc…., but if it’s a Jehovah Witness then is a big problem. If you come to know a real JW you will learn how nice and good they are and how wise and down to earth they are.

      • dee2 says:

        Dear Sita,

        “We all are going to die, so die later in life or a little earlier makes no difference…..”

        I thought JWs were never going to die but were going to live forever without ever dying????

      • John Redwood says:

        Sorry Sita – your argument is absurd on so many levels. However I understand your position because you are indoctrinated just as I was for more than 40 years. When you are taught that only Jehovah’s Witnesses have the correct interpretation of the Bible, you are forced to accept the entire package of beliefs, from blood transfusion policy to shunning to the indoctrination and baptism of children at ages where their thinking skills have not developed to the point where they can make educated decisions. Your argument that Jehovah’s Witnesses are “good people” is not an argument – it is completely irrelevant to the death of Eloise and the subject of blood transfusion.

        Yes – there are good and bad people who are members of every religion. The difference you fail to see is that being a Witness comes with a hefty price tag which may cost you your life – all for a policy which has nothing to do with Christianity or with belief in God. If you were to read your copy of the Bible you would find that your God Jehovah spilled the blood of millions from the flood of Noah’s day to the genocidal wars of the Israelites, all the way to the mass bloodshed of all of humanity at Armageddon. Read about your God’s victim’s blood up to the bridles of horses in the book of Revelation, and know that this God you believe in is nothing more than a vindictive bloodthirsty God of death and vengeance. The spilling of animal blood, which is the subject of the Levitical passages dealing with blood, is a sign that Jehovah has no respect for the blood and life of his creatures, unlike the men and women of science who spend their entire careers saving the lives of humans out of pure compassion for their fellow man, with no strings attached. Your god is a fabrication, but even if you believe in the tales of the old and new testaments, one cannot escape the reality that the decision handed down in 1945 by Nathan Knorr has been a deadly decision imposed upon millions of Jehovah’s Witnesses, who are largely ignorant of the history of their own beliefs, just as you are equally ignorant.

        The one thing you correctly said is that we are all going to die. But I can assure you that there is no God in any universe which would demand that a woman like Eloise give up her life, leaving behind a child with no mother, a husband with no wife, parents with no daughter, and friends who no longer have their beloved companion. There is no law – it is a fabrication of a fundamentalist cult, and it is the equivalent of murder. The men who enforce this policy should be held accountable for this murder, and those defending it like yourself should be ashamed, deeply ashamed.

      • Winston Smith says:

        @Sita
        Luke 14:3-6 “In response, Jesus asked the law experts and the Pharisees, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath or not?” But they kept silent. He took the man, healed him, and sent him away. And to them, He said, “Which of you whose son or ox falls into a well, will not immediately pull him out on the Sabbath day?” To this they could find no answer.”

        Jesus broke God’s laws on the Sabbath to heal someone who was sick. Breaking the Sabbath was punishable by death. However Jesus understood that saving a life was more important than following a bunch of rules. In fact, according to accepted Rabbinical principles, life always overrides law.

        So by your JW standards Jesus should have been disfellowshipped? Were his enemies justified in this law breaker’s execution? By applying your reasoning on blood, you must answer “yes” and your whole concept of the ransom sacrifice falls apart (since he was a sinner).

        WS

      • Caroline says:

        Sita, I was in the “truth” for 50 years and there is no way that when I was in the “truth” that I would have said to any of them “We all are going to die” and you are wrong in saying that JW’s aren’t afraid of dying. They are just as afraid of dying as anybody else is.

        Every Witness I know wanted to live as long as they could live and even went to doctors and took chemo therapy to live if they had cancer.

        They cry when a family member or a friend is diagnosed with terminal cancer but the vast majority of the Witnesses that I have known over the last 50 years have died from one disease or another from when I first became a Witness in the 1960’s.

        We were all promised that we would not die because we were all tricked into believing that Armageddon would happen before the generation of 1914.

        I remember the years before 1975 that Witnesses couldn’t even suggest that Armageddon wasn’t going to happen in 1975 because it meant that we weren’t putting our trust in Jehovah’s promises.

        None of us here are saying that Witnesses as a whole aren’t good people. Over the years, I think of so many of the “brothers and sisters” and how trusting and sweet and nice they were and are and my heart is sick over the waste of their lives in a religion that uses religion and the Bible to build up their huge real estate empire with their free labor.

        It only takes one click of the mouse to go to JWfacts to see just a few of the lies that you are being told to keep you in that religion. Have the courage to examine the real history and teachings of the Watchtower.

        I can tell by your comment that you are new.

        Take it from those who have been in the “truth” for a long time that you put your trust in men (Watchtower) and not God. You are putting your trust in the Governing Body and when you say you are putting your trust in God, you are mistaking the Organization for Jehovah.

        If God really wanted not to kill the vast majority of mankind, he would have made that Bible easy for all mankind to understand it so they could follow it without having to trust in a group of imperfect men who claim to be “anointed” who live in New York in the year 2016 to explain it to us.

        Anybody can claim to be “anointed” but they don’t claim to be anointed with “holy spirit” do they?

        All they have to do is say they “pray” before any decisions and supposedly Jehovah is giving them direction but that is the same thing as saying that when they pray then God is directing them by his “holy spirit”.

        If God is directing them by his holy spirit then they would never make a mistake, but they never claim that they never make mistakes when it comes to their understanding of the Bible.

        You are putting your life in the hands of imperfect men who claim they have been anointed because they woke up one morning and had the “feeling” they were going to heaven and the only hope for those who have the “feeling” that they are going to heaven is that they are going to heaven to be kings and priests over the earth.

        The problem with the Watchtower organization is that if an ordinary rank and file Witness wakes up one morning and gets the “feeling” that they will go to heaven when they die, that person would be considered mentally ill so they don’t even tell anybody because they don’t want to be considered mentally ill by the elders or anybody else in the congregation but that same reasoning doesn’t seem to apply to the Governing Body who are directing you and 8 million other Witnesses.

        The rest in the congregation would think that person was thinking they are arrogant in thinking they were going to heaven to rule over the rest of mankind on earth as a king and priest so those people wouldn’t dare to come out and say they got that feeling but it isn’t considered arrogant to apply that reasoning to the Governing Body but last year, Geoffrey Jackson admitted that it was arrogant to say that during the Australian Royal Commission who were looking into the allegations that the Watchtower Society as a rule cover up child abuse in their congregations.

        It’s just a “feeling” that those men on the Governing Body are going to heaven is all it takes for you to put your trust in them to believe in their rendition of the Bible.

        Are you willing to die for a “feeling” that those men had when they woke up one morning?

        If you can take “fractions” of blood to save your life, then that’s blood.

        If you can take “fractions” to save your life, then somebody had to donate that blood to save your life, but you are not allowed to donate your blood to save him.

        Does that even begin to make sense to you?

        • Big B says:

          To all who answered Sita:

          Ditto and great comments offered to another poor blinded ‘Sheeple’. Surely, with such information and logical arguments forwarded Sita will continue to do more research thus coming to “the Truth about the Truth.”

          With any luck Sita will not have to waste decades of his/her life as we have done serving this man made, delusional, doomsday, Adventist cult.

        • Summer says:

          Thank you Caroline and Winston.
          Both of your comments were kind and your explainations were excellent and exact. Beautiful 🙂

      • dee2 says:

        Dear Sita,

        If this God whom you worship cares so much about the sanctity of life, why didn’t he also reveal himself to the Canaanites as he did to Moses in the burning bush so that the massacre of the Canaanites could have been avoided?

        God could have invited the native Palestinians into his covenant, given them the same laws he had given the Israelites, and established an egalitarian society where people of all races could live together in harmony. Instead, he ordered his people to invade and slaughter the natives, killing them to the last man, woman and child, specifically instructing them to show no mercy to anyone under any circumstances. What followed was a series of terrible, bloody battles in which tens of thousands of people died violently. Finally, God pronounced his campaign of genocide a success (Joshua 11:15).

      • Freed Mason says:

        Dear Sita

        Happy to see that you are least keen to see both sides of the story by visiting this site after you have been explicitly told NOT to by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.

        The issue is your right to make a life decision and live with the consequences, an example of which is your decision to visit this site after being told NOT to.

        Adam, Eve and everyone else that is and ever was alive has been granted this by God.

        You answer to God and no one else.

        When you are in a stressful situation, as this young lady was, it would have been more respectful on the part of the elders to respect her God given right to make a personal decision regarding taking or not taking a blood transfusion.

        Their physical presence at the hospital and actions under the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society directives took away this young lady’s right to that decision.

        Lets get real here: most JWs surrounded by a group of elders on their deathbed would be influenced to NOT take a blood transfusion.

        This is NOT freedom of thought and action, which God has granted us all.

      • yawn says:

        OK Sita, I’ll play along. Let’s assume the blood rule is correct, and that taking blood in any way is a sin.

        Then my question is, why is this treated as some kind of ultimate, unforgivable sin? Does it receive this level of precedence in the Bible? And why do elders feel they need to influence a person’s decision? Do they do this with other potential JW sins? Why don’t JWs carry a card that says “NO CIGARETTES” so they can show it to a cashier should they ever be tempted to buy a pack? Smoking is a sin too, right?

        Actually, that brings up another question. If I “do the right thing” and don’t accept blood ONLY because I was being influenced by elders or someone else, don’t you think Jesus and Jehovah would know, and judge me according to my true feelings anyway? Why not leave it to them to figure out? Do you feel they’re not up to the task?

        • Big B says:

          @ yawn:

          Excellent point! Yes, didn’t Jesus say that very thing at Matt. 5:27 You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart”. (Berean Study Bible)

          http://biblehub.com/matthew/5-28.htm

          So your point is well stated as you are being judged not only by outward appearances or actions but by your thoughts as well.

          If that is the case, and I believe it is, who is able to stand? Certainly, everyone has bad inclinations at one time or another. Which is why Jesus must judge not imperfect men, namely “governing body members.”

      • konceptual99 says:

        Sita,

        I blindly accepted the no blood policy for years, even risking my own life with emergency surgery when I was still a teenager. However, it only takes a small amount of logical thinking to see that the whole doctrine is built on sand. One of the biggest hypocrisies is the fact that it is not acceptable to donate blood but perfectly acceptable to have fractions produced from donated blood.

        Ask yourself why it is wrong to donate blood. No doubt the answer is that it should be poured out and not used. Then ask yourself where fractions come from. Now try and explain to me how that is not a completely illogical position.

        Lift the lid on the rest of the doctrine and it’s the most evil of hypocrisies since it puts lives at risk for an indefensible nonsense.

        • dee2 says:

          The nonsensicalness (if there is such a word) and hypocrisy of the doctrine can be seen when one considers that:

          – JWs eat meat purchased from a grocery store which has blood in it as it is not possible to clean meat of all of its blood.

          – The doctrine claims that the blood from the blood donor is more sacred than the life of the person who is ailing, yet life is supposed to be sacred.

          – There is no violation of the sanctity of life in the blood transfusion process. When a person receives a blood transfusion, the blood donor is not put to death in order for the donated blood to be extracted from their body.

          • dee2 says:

            – Organ transplants which were once banned are now allowed, yet the organ contains the blood of the organ donor………unless of course the doctors managed to rid the organ of the donor’s blood……..

      • l says:

        Sita, you need think before you anger post. You are asking non witnesses, to get to know a real JW. Do you know any “real” JW that will be a real friend to any non JW? All of us know the truth already, the fact that your trolling this site, proves you are doubting your faith. The article about Eloise is a absolute tragedy. The fact that you don’t view the loss of a mother, wife, friend, and daughter as painfully tragic and hart breaking, is truly sad. All you see, is someone that died faithful till the end. Let me guess, at the funeral. I’m sure nothing will be said about Eloise personally, and her love of life and family. Only her faith and hopes for the new system , will be mentioned. It takes an “Apostate” web site to tell the truth about this. Keep looking Sita, you’ll eventually find the strength.

  3. twistedsister69 says:

    Ironic that the blood doctrine is supposedly rooted in the sanctity of life, yet adherence to that doctrine causes the loss/destruction of life in so many cases. Would the True God be so full of contradiction? No wonder all “true believers” are so confused. The gods they worship are the epitome of confusion. Hopefully soon, with the economic troubles so many nations are currently suffering, the desperate eyes of world leaders will turn toward the vaaast coffers of organized religions (and cults).

    • yawn says:

      I have a friend in the medical profession and she dreads ever having a JW patient with complications. She would like to “respect the sanctity of life” by doing everything in her power to save it, but is denied this opportunity by JWs.

  4. Twmack says:

    Every body respects the sanctity of life, unless they
    are psychopathic or in some other way mentally
    deranged.

    An example of such reverence took place in a shopping
    complex, very close to my home. A woman was being
    attacked by a frenzied man wielding a knife ( her partner
    as it turned out). Ignoring their own safety, several of
    the shoppers grappled with the man over powered him
    and held him till the police arrived.

    What a contrast to those elders, not only standing by
    as Eloise was dying, but also trying to prevent her
    non JW relatives and friends going to her aid.

    Diabolical, insanity, words cannot describe my disgust.

  5. Twmack says:

    Jesus said he hadn’t come to abolish the law covenant
    but to fulfil it, ( to accomplish its purpose). Paul reasoned
    that Jesus sacrifice had effected this.

    Hebrews 8:13 Sums up Paul’s argument.–
    “When God speaks of a “new covenant” it means he has
    made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will
    soon disappear.” NLT

    So Jesus words and Paul’s reasoning rule out the right
    of anyone to impose on anyone else, ‘Any Part’ of the
    obsolete law covenant i.e. the dietary blood law.
    in effect it is saying that, Jesus sacrifice was only partially
    successful in removing the old laws.

    The Jewish elders were entrenched in the old ways
    even demanding circumcision for everyone, they failed in
    this bid. But it seems a compromise was reached and they
    were pacified by being allowed to retain the “dietary law”,
    which Paul clearly had little regard for

    It’s patently not clear direction from any God, but men,
    different factions contending for their own way.

    • dee2 says:

      Good points Twmack,

      >>>>”It’s patently not clear direction from any God, but men,
      different factions contending for their own way.”

      It certainly is interesting to note that the meeting at Jerusalem boldly declared that God’s Holy Spirit directed them to issue a formal resolution counselling Christians to “abstain from meats offered to idols and from blood, and from things strangled, and from formication” thereby treating the ceremonial and moral obligations of the Mosaic Law as of equal force (Acts 15), YET in 1 Corinthians chapters 8 &10 Paul set the Holy Spirit-directed resolution of the Jerusalem meeting aside regarding the eating of meat sacrificed to idols. How could Paul have done this when the Holy Spirit directed the Jerusalem meeting to pass this necessary resolution which must be adhered to (also insisted on by the WT)?

      Definitely no Holy Spirit directing anybody as claimed, but just different factions of Christianity competing with each other back in the day:

      http://www.jwstudies.com/Why_Does_WTS_Accept_Christendoms_Scriptures.pdf

  6. Mj says:

    Irresponsible brain washing. One thing to choose as an adult to join the beleif system quite another to indoctrinate children who grow up totally mind-fu*#ed. The thought process of JW’s ultimately led to my own brothers suicide years after he left the religion. He was ultimately unable to undo the childhood fairytales and reconcile with the reality of life. I am repulsed by the fracture this cult creates on young minds.

    • Big B says:

      At Mj:

      Many condolences to you and your family’s loss. The FOG (fear,obligation and guilt) imposed on the membership by the leadership has led to many dollars being spent on counseling for separation anxiety and other deep seated depression’s related to leaving this cult.

      It is very hard to completely break free unscathed from this soul sucking, so called Advent-ism and unfortunately, your brother was one of those who paid the ultimate price on finding out the ‘Truth’ about the ‘Truth’.

      Again, thanks for sharing your story and my sympathy for your loss.

  7. outandabout says:

    A JW needing a blood transfusion may well be in a weakened and confused state and knowing they may die without a transfusion, left to their own devices may very well decide to have one.

    But in come the Blood Goons to badger that person into refusing a transfusion.

    I wonder how many times these Blood Goons have actually killed people in this manner.

    Murder? manslaughter? or aiding and abetting a suicide?

    You choose, but each of them carries a jail term.

  8. Twmack says:

    @dee 2, Thanks for the link Dee, your comments and
    research are always appreciated.

    • dee2 says:

      Twmack,

      There is certainly much to be discovered when you remove yourself from the filtered information and undue influence of the WT and begin to examine the Bible critically.

      When a JW, it certainly never occurred to me that Paul actually went against Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit when he (Paul) set aside the resolution of the Jerusalem meeting which was issued by God’s Holy Spirit (Acts 15 versus 1 Corinthians 8 & 10).

      Jesus stated that when he returned to heaven he would send the Advocate, the Helper, the Holy Spirit to guide persons into all the truth:

      John 14:16 – 17, 26:
      “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— the Spirit of TRUTH…………But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.”

      John 15:26:
      “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of TRUTH who goes out from the Father—he will testify about me.”

      John 16:7,13 – 15:
      “But very truly I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.
      But when he, the Spirit of TRUTH, comes, he will guide you into all the TRUTH. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. He will glorify me because IT IS FROM ME THAT HE WILL RECEIVE WHAT HE WILL MAKE KNOWN TO YOU. All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said THE SPIRIT WILL RECEIVE FROM ME WHAT HE WILL MAKE KNOWN TO YOU.”

      And, according to the declaration of the Jerusalem elders:
      “It seemed good to the HOLY SPIRIT and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements…….” (Acts 15:28, 29).

      (emphasis mine in above cited scriptures)

      Despite the declaration that the Holy Spirit issued the decree of the Jerusalem meeting, Paul nevertheless set the decree aside (Acts 15 versus 1 Corinthians 8 & 10). So apparently, as far as Paul was concerned, the Holy Spirit and Jesus didn’t guide the Jerusalem elders into all the truth as Jesus stated would happen.
      ________

      Too, while a JW, I was under the impression that there were no competing factions of Christianity back in the day. I got the impression that there was always an orthodox view from the time of Jesus and the apostles onwards, and that there were small splinter groups invested in deceiving people into heresy. However, on doing research I discovered that this was in fact not the case – there were quite a few groups with divergent, opposing and conflicting views among the early Christians, eventually the more dominant group (the Pauline Christians) won out and this was what influenced/shaped the selection of the books for the New Testament.

      The Paulines won out mainly because of the backing they received from Emperor Constantine. Had Constantine selected a different sect of Christianity, Western civilization would have taken a completely different course – the Jewish Christians, for example, did not believe that Jesus was God or the son of God, or that he came from heaven or was birthed by a virgin; these beliefs were courtesy of Paul’s creative exegesis and that of the other New Testament writers.

      • dee2 says:

        ****birthed by a virgin should read born of a virgin****

      • Winston Smith says:

        @dee2
        Your logic resonates with me. I consider myself a Christian Deist, translation: I believe that there is a creator and that observing the creation is the best means of achieving an understanding of the creative force. I also believe the teachings of Jesus were of value and that he may have likewise been a proponent of an early form of deism. However, he was later deified by church teachings, especially those of the Apostle Paul.

        In the words of Thomas Paine: I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life. I believe in the equality of man; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.

        (Sidebar: These are my personal feelings and should not be taken as evangelical in nature, in keeping with the site’s guidelines.)

        WS

  9. dee2 says:

    Sita,

    I should also ask:
    Where is the violation of the sanctity of life in the blood transfusion process?
    When a person receives a blood transfusion, is the donor put to death before the donated blood is extracted from their body?

    Regards.

  10. Twmack says:

    A doctor would advise “Abstain” from alcohol if it was
    being abused, but no doctor would tell you to avoid
    a blood transfusion, especially if your life was at risk.

    So the JW counters with.- ‘We accept doctors help but
    not when it conflicts with the Bible, JHVH knows best
    what’s good for our health’.

    But consider a realistic prospect. A quarter of a million
    people yearly contract Leprosy. If you as a JW were one
    of those people, and were desperate for a cure. Would
    you trust the Bibles remedy given in Lev 14? —-

    Take 2 live birds kill one of them dip the live bird into the
    blood of the dead bird then sprinkle the leper with the
    blood and release the live bird, and bingo you’re cured.
    (Obviously paraphrased but check it out).

    Or would you prefer to trust a doctor, with 21st century
    scientifically proven knowledge. Who could cure you
    with 2 kinds of anti biotic’?

    Not a difficult choice is it? When the mind is free from
    fundamentalist dogma, and Bronze Age superstition.

    • outandabout says:

      Shaking off that dogma and superstition is the hard part.
      A recent conversation with a Witness may as well have gone like this;

      Me: See this mug I’m holding up?

      Witness: Yes.

      Me: What color is it? (the mug is orange)

      Witness: Blue.

      Me: No, it’s orange.

      Witness: No, it’s blue. The GB told us so and they wouldn’t lie because they love each and every one of us.

      Me: Ok, here’s a piece of fruit. An Orange. What color is it?

      Witness: Orange.

      Me: Why do you think it’s called an Orange?

      Witness: Because it’s orange! Duh!

      Me: Ok, now here I am holding up the Orange and the and the mug together. What color is the mug?

      Witness: Oh, look!, you’re just trying to confuse me and drag me away from the Truth. Us Witnesses were warned about this sort of thing. Satan is everywhere. Wake up!

      So,…yeah.

      Literally, billions of people worldwide are under some form of undue influence. It’s what we do, it seems. We’re vulnerable and so open to abuse. We need to be sharp to protect ourselves and those around us.

  11. dee2 says:

    Update on the investigation into Eloise’s death:

    http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/montreal/jehovahs-witnesses-childbirth-quebec-hospital-1.3816979:

    “Jehovah’s Witnesses defend hospital visits that push for bloodless treatment”

  12. dee2 says:

    Why is it that the only mechanism by which God could be appeased or forgive sins was by the killing of animals and the spilling of their blood? This idea was carried forward to the New Testament with the killing of Jesus Christ and the spilling of his blood.

    However, according to Christianity, the death of Jesus was a miscarriage of justice. So I wonder then, what if there was no so-called miscarriage of justice so that Jesus was not put to death by the Romans and given that he could not die a natural death given that he was perfect, would Christians still receive forgiveness of their sins and their hoped for salvation?

    I can only conclude that God is a bloodthirsty God who can only be appeased by death and the spilling of blood.

    • outandabout says:

      right,….and so the GB are hung up on blood because it makes them feel more like God?

      Sick and dangerous Men.

    • factsnotfiction says:

      Lets be honest, in little more than the blink of an eye in Gods supposed time frame, JW’s would have us believe that this same God has gone from requiring complete Genocide of entire nation’s and/or cities, including the killing of women, babies and old people. As well as mass sacrifices of animals with the splashing of blood all over the place at specially built temples and tabernacles…….. to simply requiring them to stand next to literature carts outside railway stations and to refuse blood transfusions and not celebrate birthdays.

      Is it just me, or does it appear that what ‘God’ wants from his people or what he doesn’t want them to do at any given time in history, seems to depend largely on what is generally happening or possible or acceptable, in the world around them at the time. There doesn’t seem to be much constancy over what is a very short timescale in Gods eyes.

      • outandabout says:

        What you are describing is religion being forced to adapt to it’s surroundings or die. It will continue being watered down like this until one day it will become just an embarrassing footnote of our development and will be studied and wondered about and “how could we possibly have behaved like that”.
        Probably one crowd that can’t adapt is Islam and just look at the state it’s in. If ISIS has done one positive thing at all, it’s to highlight to a connected world, the dangers of total and utter bullshit.

      • outandabout says:

        What you are describing is the ongoing process of religion being forced to adapt or die. It’s a beast in trouble.
        So it must eventually become watered down to the point of nothingness and become just a footnote in our development.

  13. Caroline says:

    I came into the “truth” in the early 1960’s and before I became a Witness I wasn’t scared of dying from not being able to take blood. When I was young I did have a blood transfusion but after going through the first blood booklet in the 1960’s, I was scared I got some horrible disease from that transfusion. Up until that booklet, I never gave it a thought.

    Once I got baptized I knew that I would not be able to take blood anymore and I was always terrified from then on because of that right up until I left the organization 2-1/2 years ago. I was always terrified for my children too once I had kids.

    Another thing that scared me was in 1967, the Society said a Christian could not have an organ transplant because it was cannibalistic. At the time I was having a lot of kidney infections and one time my kidneys didn’t work for 3 days during this time so that also scared me that I would not be able to have an organ transplant. I don’t remember the Society saying you could get disfellowshiped for it, but this is from the 1967 Watchtower page 702:

    “Those who submit to such operations are thus living off the flesh of another human. That is cannibalistic. However, in allowing man to eat animal flesh Jehovah God did not grant permission for humans to try and perpetuate their lives by cannibalistically taking into their bodies human flesh, whether chewed or in the form of whole organs or body parts taken from others.”

    In the 1980 March 15, 1980 Watchtower page 31 changed it’s stance and said it was up to a person’s conscience but think about all the people who didn’t take a kidney or liver transplant during all that time and died.

    I remember after reading the 1967 Watchtower magazine where the Society said it was cannibalism to have an organ transplant and it made me really hate the Society for saying that. I remember feeling that way but I stayed in and then in 1980 when they changed it to a conscience matter, I thought about all those people who would have died because they couldn’t have a transplant and I hated the Society for those deaths but I stayed in.

    In 1961, the Society said it was perfectly okay to donate your organs. That was the organization that I got baptized in and then on a dime, the Society changed and said it was cannibalism in 1967, after I got baptized, but it was too late as I was baptized by then. I was tricked.

    If God’s Holy Spirit was really directing the Watchtower Society, why would he allow the Society to get it right to save lives , then wrong to let all those people die and then right again so Witnesses could live?

    I stayed in all those years and closed my eyes to all the things that disturbed and terrified me but now that I am finally free from the cult, I am more angry than ever over all those people who have died and are still dying because of those men in New York who only care about building up their real estate empire.

    I feel they are murderers and I wished I believed in God because those men deserve to be punished by that God that they represent. Second best is for the governments to throw them in prison for all those deaths for the rest of their lives.

    • dee2 says:

      Maybe one of the GB members or a close relative needed an organ transplant which was why they flip-flopped on the ban on organ transplants…………..who knows.

      • outandabout says:

        well I wouldn’t put it past them to do that, Dee. I remember when the Exclusive Brethren Cult had a ban on alcohol and that changed overnight because the new head honcho in Australia liked his whiskey and now the congregations all get smashed and sing gospel songs around the piano at home on Sunday’s. It’s their only outlet.

        And having mentioned that crowd,they went through a stage of having their teenagers rebelling and leaving home and so were forced to modify before they had nobody coming up behind to keep the scam going.

        Is the same thing happening with the JW’s? I know they encourage early baptism in order to stem the hemorrhage, but they may have a multi-pronged approach and one of those prongs could be the recent ‘lying about homosexuality’. Kid’s today have a more tolerant attitude towards gay people and perhaps the WT is trying to sidle up to these teenagers. “Yeah yeah, we like gays too. We’re progressive. Stick with us and you’ll be alright”. Giving them lollies.

        Maybe I’m being a bit OTT but I just don’t trust those ghastly men and they need viewing with the utmost suspicion.

        I agree with Caroline when she say’s they should be jailed and them being deluded is absolutely no defense whatsoever. Do we let a serial killer off just because they are deluded? Jail them!

  14. Twmack says:

    Specifically which fractions of blood does the Bible
    say it’s ok to take? Or is this yet another case of
    Human rules? Matt,15:9

  15. Caroline says:

    It is interesting that in the scripture Watchtower likes to use (Acts 15:29) it says: “”If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. God health to you.””

    There is nothing in that scripture that says “and if you don’t do as we say, you will be disfellowshiped.”

    The Society likes to use the Hebrew Scriptures to back up not being able to take a blood transfusion but Jesus’ death did away with the old Law covenant. If Jesus’ death didn’t do away with the old law covenant, then we’d still be killing and sacrificing animals.

    • dee2 says:

      Caroline:

      To be fair to the WT, they do have a point as the Old Testament requirement to abstain from blood was repeated as a necessary requirement for Christians in the New Testament according to Acts 15.

      What the WT has neglected is the fact that there was infighting among the early groups of Christianity so, whereas the Jewish Christians were claiming that the requirements of the law of Moses should still be observed:

      Acts 15:1, 5, 21:
      ” “Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: “Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.”

      Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”

      “For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.” ”

      the writer of Hebrews (assumed to be Paul) stated that there was need for a second covenant to replace the first covenant because the first covenant was flawed:

      Hebrews 8:7 (NIV):
      “For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another.”

      (it’s difficult to understand how the first covenant could have been flawed if Yahweh, the perfect one, had given it to the Hebrews, but I digress).

      The infighting among the Jewish Christians and Paul is telling when one compares Paul’s account in Galatians etc of the meeting in Jerusalem with that in Acts 15.
      According to Acts 15:2, 12, 22 – 26, 35, Paul was at the meeting in Jerusalem at which the Holy Spirit issued the requirement to abstain from blood. In Paul’s writings in Galatians etc, however, there is no mention of any such meeting:
      http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Watchtower_s_Achilles__Heel.pdf

      It seems the Jewish Christians were just trying to find a way to legitimize the continued observance of the law of Moses – they went so far as to declare that their decree in Acts 15 had the backing of the Holy Spirit.

      • dee2 says:

        NOTE:

        My comment above was not to support the WT’s ban on blood transfusions but to make the point that the no blood law was not strictly an Old Testament edict (Leviticus) but was also repeated in the New Testament by the Jewish Christians as binding (Acts 15), as there was conflict between the Jewish Christians and Paul as the Jewish Christians did not believe that the first covenant was flawed as Paul claimed and so the Mosaic Law was still to be observed as far as they were concerned.

        The WT however, took it upon itself to extend the Levitical dietary law to abstain from eating blood from a dead animal to lifesaving blood transfusions. The WT will not find any support from the Jews for this however.

    • Winston Smith says:

      It seems this obsession with expelling anyone who disagreed with a particular opinion was associated with the latter first century corruption that reportedly became commonplace: 3 John 1:9-10 “I wrote something to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to have first place among them, does not receive us. This is why, if I come, I will remind him of the works he is doing, slandering us with malicious words. And he is not satisfied with that! He not only refuses to welcome the brothers himself, but he even stops those who want to do so and expels them from the church.”

      WS

    • dee2 says:

      The Jewish Christians had a valid point: they couldn’t see how a covenant given by their perfect God Yahweh could be flawed as claimed by Paul (Hebrews 8:7), hence why they insisted on the continued observance of the Law of Moses (Acts 15).

      This is one of the reasons why the Jews to this day have not accepted the New Testament or Christianity – how could a perfect God have given them a flawed covenant which needs to be replaced?

  16. Caroline says:

    Something the Watchtower Society glosses over when they point to Lev. 17:10-12 about not eating blood and the life is in the blood etc. is that at Lev. 17:7, the Israelites were sacrificing to goatlike demons and now they were to take those animals that they killed to the tent of meeting to sacrifice it to Jehovah instead of sacrificing them goatlike demons and that blood belonged to Jehovah and so that is why they couldn’t eat that blood and if they didn’t bring that sacrifice to Jehovah instead of the goatlike demons, they were considered bloodguilty and would be cut off from among his people (Lev. 17:4) and of course they gloos over Lev. 17:15,16 that if they ate an animal not properly bled because they “found” it, all they had to do was wash and they’d be clean.

    So, why couldn’t they eat the blood from an animal they slaughtered? Because that blood belonged to Jehovah.

    In Lev. 18:21, they were told that they couldn’t offer their children to Molech. Does that mean that they could or could not offer their children to Jehovah? Was it just to Molech that they couldn’t offer their child up as a sacrifice?

    In Lev. 18, the Israelites were given instructions about all the people and animals they couldn’t have sex with so why at Acts 15, didn’t the “governing body” tell them about that? Were all those laws not to be followed anymore and the only laws those new Christians had to follow was not to eat blood, fornication, not to eat strangled animals and stay away from meat sacrificed to idols (which Paul disregarded)?

    In the 1961 Watchtower January 15, page 64, this is what it says about the part where Acts says “good health to you”:

    The decree of the apostles at Jerusalem declares: “If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper.” Hence a Christian who deliberately receives a blood transfusion and thus does not keep himself from blood will not prosper spiritually. According to the law of Moses, which set forth shadows of things to come, the receiver of a blood transfusion must be cut off from God’s people by excommunication or disfellowshiping.”

    If the Society was following what the Israelites did, anybody who eats blood should be killed and the meat should be offered to Jehovah as a sacrifice.

    It’s the Watchtower who decided that it was a disfellowshiping policy, not the apostle Paul or the “Governing” body in Jerusalem. That was not said in Acts chapter 15. It just said if they kept those regulations, they’d have good health.

    It was the Society who changed it to “spiritual” health and decided it was a “death” sentence (disfellowshiped).

    The Society took it upon themselves to read into that scripture what the “governing” body meant when they (“governing body”) said “good health to you” as if the apostle Paul and the Governing body were too stupid to put it into the correct words but it took them to understand it and set the proper punishment. They knew they couldn’t literally kill anybody who takes blood, but they could punish them in the next best way of killing them by disfellowshiping them.

    That same article went on to say that if they took blood and repented, they wouldn’t necessarily be disfellowshiped unless they openly disagreed with the policy but in the same year (1961) Watchtower March 1 article on page 159, it said it was okay to associate with disfellowshiped ones as long as they didn’t discuss religion but that wasn’t good enough so the Society changed it to what it is today where you can’t associate with anybody disfellowshiped even if you stay away from religion.

    Anthony Morris 3rd cried when he related an experience when a young boy died from refusing blood (last summer’s assembly talk) but he should cry when he talks about an experience like that because he is the reason that young man died. It has nothing to do with the Bible. The Governing Body are bloodguilty and they SHOULD cry over those deaths because it’s not the Bible why people die from not getting blood transfusions. THEY are the reason all those people have died.

    They (Governing Body) are “guardians of doctrine” (their doctrines) but they are not guardians of truth or the Bible.

  17. Twmack says:

    @dee2, Good observation about the Jews of today
    and their romanticised view of their past. In this of
    course they are no different from any other people,
    but as a nation who for millenniums have observed
    the Levitical law regarding blood, they have never
    regarded it as anything more than a dietary rule
    concerning the eating of animal blood.

    They have never added to that law by stretching
    it to the use of human blood for life saving purposes,
    that applies right up to the present day.

    As regards the skewing of History, JWorg, is up there
    with the best. Only about 150 years old but already
    trying to disconnect from their origin and founder
    C,T R. and his pyramidology and 1914 failed nonsense.

    • dee2 says:

      Good point Twmack,
      my comment above could have been taken to mean that I was supporting the ban on blood transfusions:

      >>>>>”…….as a nation who for millenniums have observed
      the Levitical law regarding blood, they have never
      regarded it as anything more than a dietary rule
      concerning the eating of animal blood.

      They have never added to that law by stretching
      it to the use of human blood for life saving purposes,
      that applies right up to the present day.”<<<<<<

      Indeed, the Jews have never extended the Levitical law to abstain from eating the blood of a dead animal to getting a lifesaving blood transfusion nor do they do so now.

      So even with the WT's acceptance of the Jewish Christians' viewpoint to maintain certain aspects of the Mosaic Law as per Acts 15, the WT would find no support from the Jews for extending the Levitical dietary law to include a ban on lifesaving blood transfusions.

  18. Twmack says:

    @Winston Smith, Thanks for 3 John 1 : 9-10. I think
    the org, would definitely put Diotrephes in the bad guy
    category but they ape him perfectly.

    not only expelling from the cong, but also kicking out
    anyone who extends the hand of friendship to the
    expelled ones.

    What happened to “Love your Enemies”, Forgive up to
    70 times 7 etc ? It seems the falling away from Jesus
    teachings ( Christianity) happened well before the death
    of the last apostle. Such a gap between Jesus and the
    rest,

  19. Eyes opened says:

    Out of this terrible, terrible tragedy comes exposure. This story has made headline news on AOL.com.

    Regards

  20. Doc Obvious says:

    This is what happens when things are not being taken care of by Watchtower Bible Tract Society

    Annual Donation amount to Watchtower Bible and Tract Society: $0.00 USD

    Annual Field Service time to Watchtower Bible and Tract Society: 0 hours 0 minutes

  21. Claire Isfåle says:

    Just 3 words: Shame on them!

  22. Mark Garner says:

    It is always sad, when someone dies, but it amazes me that no highlights all the facts regarding Jehovah God’s (not the watchtower’s) universal decree on “abstain from blood” Jehovah’s word states that “life is in the blood” For that reason Jehovah God has decreed that BLOOD IS SACRED. Jehovah is the only one who can decide for us what is beneficial. The only use Jehovah reserved for the use of blood is the spilling of Jesus’s blood to redeem us. Hence if YOU TRULY believe what Jehovah’s word says, you WILL believe that this beautiful young woman, WILL come back in the resurrection, because Jehovah says, “if you keep my regulations, YOU WILL LIVE BY MEANS OF THEM.” My mother also died, because of her faithfulness to the blood issue, and I miss her terribly, BUT, I HAVE FAITH, (which most people, by their comments prove they don’t) that SHE WILL come back in the resurrection. WAKE up people, and quit bashing, as we know an imperfect organization, and at least praise them for trying to stick closely to bible principles

    • Covert Fade says:

      Question for you: If “life is in the blood,” is life also in the fractions of the blood? If not, can you explain how “life” magically vanishes from blood at a certain point when you break it down into smaller components that suddenly become acceptable for Witnesses to take? And can you back that use of fractions up with a scripture?

      Also: Can you explain to me how if blood is viewed as sacred because as it’s a symbol of life, that it therefore makes sense to sacrifice actual life to protect that symbol? Isn’t that like sacrificing a marriage in order to save a wedding ring?

    • John Redwood says:

      Dear Mark

      I really feel sympathy for the position you are in. If the answers were all black and white, we would not have this discussion, and in fact we would have no need for religion whatsoever. However it seems that God wishes to test everyone’s “faith” – to see whether they are a loyal Christian or no, with an approved heart condition, right?

      Trust me when I tell you that I know all of the Witness arguments for every subject, as I was one for 46 years, and I would still be one had I not woken up to the truth and to religion altogether. Every belief system has a thousand different variants, and I would say Jehovah’s Witnesses are just another religion – but they are not, at least in the sense that they are far more dangerous than the mainstream religions which you would refer to as Babylon the Great. Death, repression of education, and childhood indoctrination are but a few of the many aspects of the Witness religion which render the group far more dangerous than most.

      As for the blood issue – you are deeply indoctrinated by a relatively temporal anomaly in our socitey. A tiny group of men, led by Joseph Rutherford, enacted a ban on blood transfusions in 1945, based on nothing but the most insane application of scripture the world has ever known. To interpret that blood could be spilled by the millions of gallons in the “righteous” genocides of the old testament, along with the insanity of sacrificing and cutting the throats of millions of animals during the Israelite “festivals” – not to mention the crushing deaths of every “opposer” of God from the global deluge of Noah’s day, to the Israelite wars sanctioned by God, to the end of 99.9% of all human life at Armageddon – it is pure insanity.

      Do you believe God is fear-inspiring? Well think again, it is the words on paper, which are interpreted by deranged individuals of the 20th and 21st centuries which are in fact fear inspiring. Religious organizations and cults are built on FEAR – and without this fear, you have no religion. You are afraid that these men in New York might be right – that they might somehow be telling you the truth, and that overwhelming fear is what killed your mother.

      I am very sad when I hear that your mother died because of the blood issue. This was completely unnecessary. There is no God in any universe which would allow your mother to die for belief in this religious doctrine which has murdered so many since 1945. No, blood is not sacred to your God – if you believe this, you have not read the Bible. And you have not researched the prohibition on blood which originated out of complete ignorance of medical procedures at the time it was initiated. The small group of men who came up with this insane and deadly policy were the same men publishing utter nonsense in the Golden Age, the Consolation, and the Watchtower Magazines. These men spread their theories, banning vaccinations, instilling great fear in uneducated Witnesses, and even taught that a blood transfusion would carry with it the personalities of the one who donated the blood. Please – do your research, and you will understand how all of this came about, and why ignorance and poor education led to one of the worst travesties in modern history – killing more persons than Jim Jones and a hundred other cults combined.

      No, you haven’t done your homework, just as I didn’t for most of my life – because I trusted the organization, and was willing to die rather than take blood. If I had not woken up to this ignorance, I might be dead today. I wish I could say the same for your mom – she was a victim, just as Eloise was, and you will see very soon that the firestorm this has created will cast an even brighter light upon the religion you have faith in. Believe me – your faith is not in God, it is in the doctrines carried out by 7 men in New York, who are as deluded as you are – but who are responsible for death, poor education, and the covering up of child molestation cases, for which they will be held responsible.

      Thank you for visiting Survey, I hope this your first stop on the road to recovery

      JR

  23. Mark Garner says:

    Some of the above comments, seem to be right on. Disfellowshipping is a mechanism that is extremely misused in the Watchtower. Elders abuse it and DF people that probably should have not been DF’d. If elders would shepherd like a real shepherd, the DF rate would drop quite a bit. One writer said above, that WT is bloodguilty, I believe this also, because I have been the butt, of Watchtower abuse, at the hands of local elders, that didn’t give a “plug nickel” about me. Sad, Sad, Sad.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

applications-education-miscellaneous.png

Comment posting guidelines:

Kindly observe the following requirements before posting any comments to our articles or pages:


  • ABUSIVE COMMENTS - Do not post comments that include swear words or may be considered abusive, lewd, blasphemous, obscene or threatening
  • ILLEGAL COMMENTS - Do not post comments that condone or propose illegal activity, or that breach copyright law
  • OFF-TOPIC COMMENTS - Do not post comments that are off-topic and bear no relation to the page or article
  • RELIGIOUS NEUTRALITY - Do not post comments that are evangelical in nature or may be construed as imposing one person's religious beliefs (or lack thereof) over those of another
  • LANGUAGE - Visitors from all countries and language groups are welcome. You may post comments in languages other than English, but we would appreciate if you could make any such comments brief. We would also be grateful if you could run any such comments through Google Translate and convert these to English, but this is not an absolute requirement.
  • LINKS - You may post links to third party websites, so long as (1) you limit these to 2 links per comment, and (2) the content on these links doesn't contravene ANY of the first four points. Specifically, you may not post URLs to websites that are evangelical in nature. Our links page has an extensive list of such sites for any who are curious about Christian beliefs in the context of Jehovah's Witnesses.

JWSurvey.org thanks all visitors in advance for respectfully observing these guidelines. Any who persistently fail to do so, despite warnings, may find themselves blocked from making further comments at the discretion of the site moderators, whose decision will be final and not open for debate.