Are they really just saving themselves?...

by Hecklerboy 12 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Hecklerboy

  When I was a teenager my best friends little brother (baby) died because he was refused a blood transfussion. It really bothered me even though I thought they did the right thing.

  Now that I'm out I was talking to my wife about it and the whole blood thing and came to the realization that they did it just to save themselves.

  Think about it. If you allow your child to have a blood transfusion, who is God going to blame? You or the child?

  Obviously he will blame you. Even the society says that it's not the child's fault if the parents allow a blood transfusion.

  So in my opinion they are just selfishly saving themselves.

  I for one would gladly die to save my child. And if God wants to kill me for saving my child's life, then so be it.

  P.S. I don't have any children yet, and I totally disagree with the blood policy.
• 

  blondie

  Unfortunately, if you lose your "spiritual standing" in the WTS to let your child have a transfusion, your minor child loses their "standing." The WTS teaches that minor children will live or die at Armageddon based on whether their parents are baptized JWs in good standing.

  Blondie (The WTS does not equal God)
• 

  drew sagan

  Excellent Point! The parents really are choosing not for the child, but for themselves.
  I'm not exactly sure when the blood policy was first put forth, but from what I understand Fred Franz was pretty much it's founder. Once they went from having no stand on the issue to then having a "I'd rather die than take blood" stance, the Watchtower crossed a line it could never go back on. Instead of letting individuals make their own decisions, the WTS makes it for them. This makes the Watchtowers "search for truth" meaningless. They now teach a policy they can never recant, even if "brighter light" would shine forth. A change in the policy would mean lawsuits, contention, and dissapointment from much of the membership. Once the line was crossed, they are stuck with the decision. To me this is one of the biggest proofs that the WTS is not Gods channel, and does not speak for him. It is an organization tied to its own needs and desires. It does what it best for itself.
  I think that the governing body now would like nothing more than for much of the hell Fred Franz caused to be put aside and forgotten about. But instead they must go along with reasonings decades old, because their religion is like so many other things. Man made.
• 

  juni

  The WTS teaches that minor children will live or die at Armageddon based on whether their parents are baptized JWs in good standing.

  So see Hecklerboy - in this religion they put you in a corner. This statement is EXACTLY what they teach. This is another reason I decided to DA myself from this unloving, judgmental religion. If this is truly how Jehovah will save/destroy, I don't want any part of worshipping a god like this. Took me a long time to admit to this most personal inner feeling.

  Juni
• 

  inbyathread

  The parents really are choosing not for the child, but for themselves.

  So here is my question. What if? and please don't slam me for this. I don't believe it but. What if the blood policy is correct and the parents, in making that hard decision, show their loyalty to Jehovah. Knowing that He will resurrect the child. They are placing the best care for the child in God's hands. Are they not thinking about the childs best interest? This is all based on the blood policy being correct.

  There is always a little bit if us (the parents) in every choice we make concerning our children. Is it selfishness that we let the doctors operate on the child? Yes. We don't want to lose that personal connection between ourselves and the future. We all know that we are going to die but having children allows us to know in our minds that there will be a future.

  On the day when one of our grown children decided to move away, oh I wanted to be selfish. I helped him move knowing that it was best for him. And he has mentally grown since he moved. But I am selfish. I would have preferred he stay closer. I now think that selfishness is a relative term.
• 

  fullofdoubtnow

  Good point Hecklerboy

  I don't have children either, and I never will have, I have gone past the age where I would want to be a mother, even if it were possible.

  I have known of parents who have lost children because of their stance on blood, and been made to feel like heroes by the elders and other congregation members, but I have wondered how they really felt about it. Their beliefs perhaps help them to feel vindicated, but they have lost a precious child that can never be replaced. I have never really looked at it as a selfish act, but it is. Then again, they are part of a selfish religion that encourages people to sacrifice everything, even their children, for the greater good of the wts.

  I do not totally believe in God now, but if he exists, I doubt that he would kill someone for putting their child's life ahead of a cult. How misguided these people are.
• 

  Hecklerboy

  And what if after 10 or 20 years they realize it's not the "truth"

  That has to be the most sickening feeling there is. Knowing that you let your child die for a cult.

  That would drive me insane.
• 

  rebel8

  When I was a child, my jw mother refused blood & fractions many many times for me. The main thing for her was saving herself and not being bloodguilty for allowing me to "sin", but there was also a component that didn't have anything to do with her....

  ...the elders gave me many lectures about how the cong would look upon me as a rape victim--damaged goods--that is what they said--someone who has a transfusion willingly or unwillingly is never considered clean by the org and no one will want to have anything to do with me....I would never find someone to marry me, etc...........yet another example of the literature saying 1 thing and the verbal teachings saying something much more strict and sinister.
• 

  carla

  What about 'laying your life down for your brother'? Shouldn't they be willing to lay down their own life, even spiritual, to save another?
• 

  inbyathread

  That has to be the most sickening feeling there is. Knowing that you let your child die for a cult.

  That would drive me insane.

  I know of a couple who lost their son in an automobile accident. He had been working all night long and was driving back home. The vehicle the young man was driving crossed the centerline and hit headon another vehicle. The passenger in the other vehicle survived. The driver did not. The parents did not ask to see the accident report. If the son had fallen asleep at the wheel, he would have been responsible (blood-guilty) for the death of the other driver. He also would have been responsible for his own death as he could have pulled over at any time.

  The parents decision not to view the accident report, relieved them of the knowledge and so can, in their minds, believe that he will be given a resurrection. (False hope) The WTS has interpreted more scripture than anyone else. I have firm belief that Jehovah will look at the whole situation. Why go insane believing you will never see your son again based just on these false interpretations.