Jerry Coynes excellent response to JW criticism of his stand against Watchtower blood policy.

nicolaou

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/09/01/a-jehovahs-witness-criticizes-me-for-criticizing-their-policy-on-blood-transfusions/ Apologies for rubbish formatting - posting from phone. If someone could make that link clickable I'd be very grateful.

cofty

Thanks Nic, great article on a very popular blog.

It is clickable by the way.

ThomasCovenant

I've never understood the whole 'it's safer from a physical/medical stance' point of view that some witnesses take up.

It doesn't matter whether it was 100% safe or 100% fatal whether you do or don't have a blood transfusion.

Obedience is all that matters.

Once, at the Watchtower study, the subject of Uzzah and touching the Ark was being discussed. Brothers ended up character assasinating Uzzah to salve their conundrum that he may have had good intentions in stopping the ark falling.

All that mattered though was that God said,

''Don't touch it or I'll kill you. I'm not interested in whether your heart is in the right place or whether you're a right bastard. I said, don't touch.''

''Don't have blood or I'll kill you. I'm not interested in whether it's safer from a medical perspective or not. I said, don't have blood.''

steve2

In the present instance, it is not what God says that matters, but what the organization say God means when he says it - except that JWs are willfully blind to that important distinction.

Lee Elder

The governing body sets themselves up as the Vicar of Christ.

Even the Pope would blush at the kind of power they lay claim to.

Where does the Bible make such distinctions about the use of blood?

http://ajwrb.org/watchtower-approved-blood-transfusions

Lee