Jehovah's Witnesses - if your beliefs are bible based?

then do they only apply to you?

My foster mother is a Jehovah's Witness, and as we all know, it goes against the grain to accept a blood transfusion. However, my aunt, who is not a JW, is sick with lupus. The doctors were unable to contact any immediate family members, but were able to contact my foster mother. She signed the release form, allowing the doctors to give my aunt a blood transfusion. Since your belief to not accept any blood transfusions is bible based, is it not safe to say that you should practice what you preach? I know that if I needed one, she would have left me to die. What say you to that?

Update:

My aunt is related, my biological mother's brother's wife. My foster mother is obviously not related. She is the wife of an elder who used to belong to the Alberton South congregation in JHB, South Africa. Any more stupid questions about credibility? Would you like her name too?

Update 2:

Jadore: I have no more contact with the club, but am trying to find out which location she has moved to, I would really like to report her, because I feel that this is an act of hypocrisy, don't you agree?

Update 3:

My aunt only told me about it in January, which is when I returned to the country. Since I was disfellowshipped in 1996, I have not had any contact with my foster mother, as she and my foster father as well as their two daughters and the rest of the congregation followed the society's direction to stop associating with me. I'll give you my aunt's phone number and you can ask her about the date, the hospital, etc. Are your aggressive questions a response to feeling like you're in a corner?

Update 4:

Jadore: here's the details, I just spoke to my aunt. apparently it was an emergency, and the hospital was unable to contact my uncle. my foster mother just happened to be visiting my aunt at the time, and that is how she happened to sign the papers. if you know anything about anything, you will know that south africans don't really care too much about following protocol, as long as they get a signature.

Update 5:

Jadore: here's the details, I just spoke to my aunt. apparently it was an emergency, and the hospital was unable to contact my uncle. my foster mother just happened to be visiting my aunt at the time, and that is how she happened to sign the papers. if you know anything about anything, you will know that south africans don't really care too much about following protocol, as long as they get a signature.

Update 6:

Jadore: here's the details, I just spoke to my aunt. apparently it was an emergency, and the hospital was unable to contact my uncle. my foster mother just happened to be visiting my aunt at the time, and that is how she happened to sign the papers. if you know anything about anything, you will know that south africans don't really care too much about following protocol, as long as they get a signature. it happened at the Union Hospital.

Update 7:

Jadore: here's the details, I just spoke to my aunt. apparently it was an emergency, and the hospital was unable to contact my uncle. my foster mother just happened to be visiting my aunt at the time, and that is how she happened to sign the papers. if you know anything about anything, you will know that south africans don't really care too much about following protocol, as long as they get a signature. it happened at the Union Hospital. are you even a JW?

Update 8:

Jadore: here's the details, I just spoke to my aunt. apparently it was an emergency, and the hospital was unable to contact my uncle. my foster mother just happened to be visiting my aunt at the time, and that is how she happened to sign the papers. if you know anything about anything, you will know that south africans don't really care too much about following protocol, as long as they get a signature. it happened at the Union Hospital. are you even a JW? would you like to know if she was on her period that day?

Update 9:

sorry... LOL, computer glitch!

10 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Sounds like your foster mother is very selective. Technically, by signing the release form should have bothered her "bible trained conscience". Some JWs may have opted NOT to sign.

    It's just another one of the double standards JWs can have! Just like it's ok that they are kind to non-believers but treat ex-believers as if they are criminals!...and on top of it...it's NOT ok to have a meal with exJW family but perfectly OK to debate online with exJWs that they don't even know! Sick!

    Yes, blood is sacred. So is LIFE itself!

    edit: "find it odd that those who are opposed to JWs' position on blood say little or nothing about the wanton slaughter of aborted babies worldwide or the spilling of human blood in warfare. Such hypocrisy!"

    WHO is this person talking about? Generalizing those who are against JWs stand on blood are now all PRO abortion and PRO war? Hypocrisy? Hypocrisy is being online discussing these issues with ex-JWs in the first place...when we KNOW what you believe and what your taught....therefore we are in a very good position to be objective AND reasonable.....not narrow-minded and brainwashed!

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    Trying to keep up to date with JW teaching just gives me a headache and I don't have that magazine of theirs which you refer to. However, knowing what I do about their 144,000 doctrine, I wonder if the JW person who answered that question might have been referring only to the anointed class (the 144,000). That is because he quotes from Mat 19:28 about those ones sitting on 12 thrones alongside Jesus to judge certain ones. All JWs know that (according to their doctrine) it is only the 144,000 who will be be ruling with Christ in heaven, judging others. They reckon the 12 apostles are part of the 144,000. If that is correct, then he is not saying that all JWs will be born again. Further, as the 144,000 have to be born again and that is a spiritual rebirth (which their literature agrees with), if they are implying that the great crowd of 'other sheep' must also experience a rebirth after the resurrection, they would have to explain where, in the Bible, there is any hint that there are 'two degrees' of the new birth - one spiritual, and the other physical. Mind you, they seem so determined to tell the 'other sheep' that the only difference between them and the anointed is that the latter go to heaven, I wouldn't be surprised if teaching comes out to say the 'other sheep' get a 'sort-of' new birth as well. Remember that the Watchtower Society has been challenged for many decades on their absurd denial of Jesus' words in John 3, that everyone wanting to see the Kingdom of God (let alone enter into it) MUST be born again, from above, by the Holy Spirit. Already they have told the 'other sheep' that 'holy spirit' is available equally to them and the 144,000 according to how much study, door-knocking, and acceptance of Society teaching they work at. If there is a new idea, that all JWs can be regenerated in the next age - after Armageddon and the resurrection - then the JWs have a big problem. How is it that all of the 144,000 are regenerated (born agan) whenever they die physically? Once more, this would betray their 'two degrees'; two levels, two tiers of salvation system. They make the whole thing so complicated it becomes absurd. They are just digging themselves ever deeper into a black hole. Jesus' words are simple and pure. Unless we are all born again by the Holy Spirit adopting us into the family of God, we will never see - let alone enter into - any aspect of the Kingdom of God. If JWs of the 'other sheep' class think they will get the new birth (or, regeneration) after Armageddon and the resurrection, then that is only another carrot being dangled in front of them. Jesus said "If you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins." (John 8:24) They do not believe Jesus to be the one He said He was. Nobody who dies in their sins will be regenerated or born again. Hebrews 9:26-28 applies; we die once, and then we face the judgement. It's time JWs woke up to the grave danger they are in.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I really don't know how your foster mother thinks or why she made that decision. Why don't you ask her instead of everyone else here on YA?

    Perhaps your foster mother felt she had no right to force her own beliefs on your aunt knowing that your aunt do not share the same beliefs? Perhaps she believe that adults should decide for themselves if they will respect Gods law or not and simply acted in accordance with what she new your aunt would have decided? Perhaps she was considering the Biblical principle in Deut. 14:21: "You must not eat any body [already] dead. To the alien resident who is inside your gates you may give it, and he must eat it; or there may be a selling of it to a foreigner"

    While the Bible very clearly and directly tells Christians to abstain from blood ” (Acts 15:19-21) there is no scripture directly talking about signing release forms for non JW relatives. Perhaps your foster mother felt unsure what would be the right thing to do in such a situation?

    Why not just ask her?

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Perhaps I am missing something in the reading. Are your foster mother and your aunt related? If not, (and I'm not sure which country you reside) then how can a person who is unrelated not only be asked to sign but be given the right to sign for such a serious matter?

    Does she have power of attorney over her if she is/is not related? Does your aunt have a medical directive on record?

    There are so many other questions that a clear answer cannot be given for all involved.

    Yes, I'm one of Jehovah's Witnesses and strongly uphold God's law on the sanctity of blood. My husband is a hemophiliac and has had 30 surgeries without blood in the past 30 years. There are so many alternatives out there that it surprises me that the hospital/doctor did not offer these as a choice.

    Yes, I;m familiar with lupus also. I have a niece who is one of Jehovah's Witnesses who has had lupus for years.

    Since our beliefs are Bible based, yes they apply to all. That does not mean that all choose to abide. By that I mean that as mentioned, abortions are against God's standards. We would not have one. That law applies to all the world. But it is obviously not adhered to throughout the world. Is that a Bible based law for only Jehovah's Witnesses? Or for all?

    If the Bible says "Do not steal", it applies to all and as Witnesses we try our best to put into practice what the Bible requires.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    If your aunt wanted blood and your foster mother signed for it, I don't know what rule would apply. Your Aunt was likely incapacitated and could not give her own concent. Not enough details, but it looks like a compromise to me.

    Linedancer, you said "The asker's foster mother compromised her beliefs and gave permission to have blood administered to the asker's aunt. But does that mean ALL 7 million Jehovah's Witnesses will compromise their Bible-based beliefs concerning blood? No. We do practice what we preach."

    Yep, ALL JW's practice what they preach....except for the thousands that don't.

    Also, of what relevance is the abortions and war issues? The asker is talking about one Witness who evidentaly compromised. Her actions have nothing to do with war or anything else.

    Would Her defense to Jehovah be "Yes I did consent, but look at all the abortions and wars"?

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    My dear, first of all, I pray that your aunt gets better. I once knew someone with lupus, and I feel sadly for you.

    Second, the idea that we can't receive a blood transfusion is nowhere to be found in the Bible.

    It's based on the Scripture that says we are not to eat the meat with the blood in it, for the blood belongs to God, for in it, the Scripture says, is the life of the flesh ("The life of the flesh is in the blood").

    In fact, these Jewish legalists stretched out God's Law to the breaking point every which way, so that Jesus had to rebuke them left and right.

    Just one example (other than the JW's statement that you can not receive a blood transfusion, which I'll cover in a moment), the Bible says that you should not seethe a kid in it's own mother's milk. This is tantamount to cruelty to animals. The Jews have stretched this so far out of proportion, that they won't eat ANY meat with ANY milk, even if they KNOW it doesn't even come from the same animal! (Totally nonsense!) (BTW, I should know - I grew up under the Jewish Law, but was redeemed from the curse of the Law by Jesus Christ when I was in my mid-20's.)

    But, Jesus asked the pharisees (Jewish Legalists), "Is it wrong to save a life?" and again, "If your ox falls in the ditch on the Sabbath, aren't you allowed to rescue it so it doesn't die?"

    The ability to save a life, by whatever means, is the command of Jesus. To allow a life to die because of a religious "superstition" is not only pharisaical (i.e. like the pharisees), but contradicts the teachings of Jesus.

    Again, I pray that the blood transfusion will help your aunt.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Jehovah's Witnesses do not receive blood or donate blood. They would never consent to the infusion of blood to another human soul.

    You claim that your foster mother allowed "YOUR" aunt to have a transfusion, is your foster mother related to you?

    What makes you think that she would allow "YOUR" aunt a transfusion but not you.

    Your question is lacking credibility.

    x x x

    Edit

    If your foster mother is no relation to you or your aunt, how come she was accepted as a signature by the hospital.

    It is not just anyone who can give consent to another person receiving medical treatment of any kind not just blood transfusions. They seek the next of kin or at least another member of the family.

    Edit

    So if she has moved and you do not know how to find her, you are no longer her foster child?

    When did this all happen?

    Edit

    Yes I am a Jehovah's Witness, but the truth is I do not believe one word of what you are saying. x

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    The asker already know our position on the blood issue. Acts 15:29: "To keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication."

    The asker's foster mother compromised her beliefs and gave permission to have blood administered to the asker's aunt. But does that mean ALL 7 million Jehovah's Witnesses will compromise their Bible-based beliefs concerning blood? No. We do practice what we preach.

    I find it odd that those who are opposed to JWs' position on blood say little or nothing about those religions that allow the wanton slaughter of aborted babies worldwide or the spilling of human blood in warfare. Such hypocrisy!

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Tanya you know that no Jw is going to answer this question..1: you are an "apostate" and they cant talk to you because you might sway their religious beliefs. 2: they know she was wrong in signing the release...but will justify it by saying it was a conscience matter, and your aunt was not a Jw therefore it was ok.

    Edit; I see I was once again proven wrong by the Jw's....let me rephrase this...No Jw that is strong in their faith will answer your question because you are an "apostate"

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    JWs mean well, but they don't believe in the whole Bible. They are a cult.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.