According to Jehovahs witnesses the world would end in 1914..when this failed to happen they moved the date to 1916..then 1918---1925---1942--1975--2000. All failed prophecys. They said that the generation that saw 1914 would not pass away before the end of the world...but changed this teaching in 1995
They said that God forbid Vaccinations and that he also forbid Transpants but have changed thier minds again.
At one time no blood was allowed...but they have changed thier minds and now allow almost all the components of blood,if taken seperately.
A witness cannot store thier own blood..but can use blood donated by others.
Why would anyone trust an organization with such a record of flip-flops in doctrine?. They claim to speak for God...but its not the God of the bible.
Should a witness go against the teaching of the organization they face censure and shunning,they will be cut off by family and friends,treated as if dead. This is not christianity.

Eddie Cooney, Manchester, England

Please call to mind what Satan said to God in the first two chapters of Job, with specific emphasis on Job 2:4, which reads:

"Satan answered Jehovah and said: 'Skin in behalf of skin, and everything that a man has he will give in behalf of his soul.'

And 2:9, " Finally his wife said to him: "Are you yet holding fast your integrity? Curse God and die!"

This is really what it means to be Christian, to maintain your integrity even under the heaviest opposition. Is this not what Jesus did? He didn't _have_ to die, and yet he was not so short sighted to try to save himself knwoing full well, what it meant for mankind (Matt 26:53). The apostles of the first century were given the opportunity to forsake their faith and avoid martyrdom, yet they recognized the importance of staying faithful. (Romans 8:35-39).

This woman put her focus on what was to come, though loving life, she remained faithful without compromise (Luke 16:10). Unless we do the same, we have no hope (James 2:18-23)

Reuben, Phoenix,

It is a sad to read about a young Witness that has died to her personal belief that blood transfusions are wrong, based on her understanding of Bible texts such as Lev. 17:10-13 and Acts 15:28,29. The article mentions that other religious groups interpret that text as referring to "consumption by mouth only". But when Witnesses cite Bible text such as those clearly stating to "abstain from blood" many people from other religious groups clearly understand why the vast majority of the Witnesses cannot in good conscience accept blood transfusions. I once spoke to an evangelical who said he agreed with me that blood transfusion are wrong. A pentecostal once told a Witness minister that she understands why Witnesses do not accept blood transfusions, and that she herself would not in good conscience accept one.
So others agree after reading what the Bible clearly states. By the way, UK there are over 129,000 active JW's in the UK, and they are growing, with over 200,000 adherents.

David Lopez, New York, USA, New York

D Smith, it appears from your comments that you are a Jehovah's Witness (JW). I am a Christian and I am aware that JW have their own "bible" and doctrine.

By JW's interpretation of scripture, a mother of a new baby has "chosen" to die rather than receive a blood transfusion. A child has been deprived of it's natural mother needlessly. She did not die because she had to choose death over apostasy or was murdered as she evangelised some heathens. Please tell me how her death has served JW, the baby, the families involved or God? The God that I know does not require such a "sacrifice" and He is definitely NOT legalistic! A blood transfusion is not the same as eating/drinking blood for carnal/hedonistic reasons.

Mark 12:24 Jesus answered and said to them [the Sadducees], "Are you not therefore mistaken, because you do not know the Scriptures nor the power of God? .."

What a sad, tragic loss of a very precious life! Please stop telling people that it's anything to do with God!!

David Pitan, Surrey, UK

Jehovah's Witnesses maintain their blood transfusion ban is from the Bible commanded by God,binding on all mankind.
Then why does the Watchtower leadership allow so many blood component fractions to be taken?
It's like saying I am forbidden to eat a ham sandwich but can eat all the parts of it the ham,lettuce,bread,pickle separately.
This isn't just an academic squabble, followers are DYING over this dogma.

Danny Haszard, Bangor Maine, usa

Please could some one tell me if a child is sexually abused in the congregation by an adult and there are no witnesses what would the parents of the child be advised to do by the elders.

Mr Brown, Birmingham, England

Firstly they are not a cult what a ridiculous statement! and secondly what the media does not portray is that a lot of people die from blood transfusions and in fact medics are in aggreement with witnesses because a lot of blood is contaminated resulting in pro-longed pain and eventually death.

G T, Chatham, Kent

Who are Jehovah's Witnesses?
Dissident Jehovah's Witness speaks out.

No tolerance,the Jehovah's Witnesses are a cult because they try to cut you off from others who do not have the same beliefs, including family. The Watchtower is an oppressive organization if there ever was one!

The 'message' is their false Gospel that Jesus had his second coming already in 1914.The problem with this,is it's not just a cute fairy tale, Jesus warned of the false prophets who would claim "..look he is here in the wilderness,or see here he is at the temple"

The Watchtower's Gospel "kingdom" is a man-made "different version".(Gal.1:8)
The Watchtower is a truly Orwellian world.
----
Danny Haszard Jehovah's Witness X 33 years and 3rd generation

Danny Haszard, Bangor Maine, usa

It's reasonable to remember that biblical language is not the language in common usage today and thus, like many other things, it's 'all in the interpretation'. The phrase which reads “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” could well mean something like 'don't eat raw meat'.

Tarni, London, UK

If people would do their medical research, they would find that transfused blood goes into shock and looses it's oxygen carrying capabilitys. Stored blood is even efected more. Check with such hospitals as the USC Medical Center in Southern California, USA, or anyother bloodless center throughout the USA.

Jon, Eugene, USA

i think it is absolutely disgusting. to think that they have let that young girl and mother die it does'nt bear thinking about.but i will tell you something they better not come knocking on my door preaching again.

evans, carmarthenshire,

Numbers are not declining at all. they are on the rise. the figures are close to 8 million. Jehovah's witnesses are not a cult either. and despite popular belief nobody is forced not to have a blood transfusion. it is a personal and private matter and up to that individuals conscience. it is common knowledge that blood transfusion is bad medicine and there are many other alternatives to accepting blood. instead of bashing these peoples beliefs why don't you try to understand them. this religion has not been involved in war, does not promote homosexuality and teachers their followers to be better people. they actually follow the bible by the letter which is something the church fails to achieve.

David, London,

Jehovahs witnesses claim that the bible is clear in forbidding Blood transfussions. Years ago they said the bible was clear in forbidding Vaccinations,yet they changed thier minds.
They also said the bible was clear in forbidding Transplants,yet received new light from heaven,and changed thier minds.
They once said that blood should be poured on the ground,but now accept many components of blood,but not whole blood.
They are not allowed to store thier own blood but are willing to use blood donated by others.

Seems to me that they are playing with peoples lives.

Eddie Cooney, Manchester, England

Lines are now blurred. i do not fully understand the rationale behind the JW position on transfusion of bank blood (refusal) and that of salvaged blood from the operative site (accept).

Moreover I am sure the bible doesn't subdivide the blood into its constituent components, such as clotting factors, haemoglobin globulin etc. as outlined above.

As someone who works in the theatre of a maternity unit who would be involved the decision as to whether to let a woman die or go against her wishes I can feel great sympathy for the doctors and midwives involved in this tragic case.

I also have great sympathy for the woman's family, but would ask of them would you think differently if you had the opportunity to change the past/

David, Sheffield, UK

Is it narrow minded to fight for your country? Or to encourage your children to do the same? How many of us who condemn the Witnesses smoke, perhaps in front of our children? How many don't stick to speed limits? How many of us are divorced or are one-parent families?

With the possible exception of the first point, there is nothing noble about these things, no desire to do things right. Just human weakness and selfishness. But all the above can threaten life, health, or mental well-being. Yet we're up in arms s the moment someone tries to remove our "rights" to do these things.

Witnesses are not perfect, but by and large TRY to lead good lives and look after their children. They are recognised by many employers and governments as honest, trustworthy citizens. Their choice is to live life this way - yes CHOICE - not fear of being shunned.

Because we don't share their convictions some want their rights removed.

So who really are the narrow minded ones?

John Dunn, Milton Keynes, UK

Many more have died from the fanatical JW blood ban than died at Jonestown.The Watchtower religion is 'Jonestown without the kool-aid'

Mike, Akron Ohio, usa

I have a question:

Belief, at its most fundamental level, is defined as the making of a choice about that which is unknowable. Nothing wrong with that. Death, on the other hand, requires no belief, it is a certainty. Jehovah's Witnesses, by their position on blood transfusions, ask their practioners to prioritise the unknowable (the prospect of achieving happiness in the afterlife) over the certain (the prospect of physical death by blood loss). Nothing wrong with that either. But whichever way you spin it - the Jehovah's Witness position amounts to a gamble; the gamble that God might require us to die of blood loss in order to satisfy him. But according to www.watchtower.org, Jehovah's Witnesses are taught that gambling is bad. Why, for Jehovah's Witnesses, is it mandatory to gamble your present life on the prospect of God's theological character but forbidden to put a fiver on a horse?

Gabriel, Ireland,

Witnesses were once fighters for certain good things in our laws, but the organization has evolved full circle into a bunch of hypocritical old men who remain in a severely retarded Victorian world where they hole up and say, "We are the only true religion!" and yet the soup stinks. They are declining the last two years in many parts of the earth due to THIS, the internet, the very thing they are encouraged to avoid because it makes them look so bad. Follow any of the links about Jehovah's Witnesses in the search engines and you will find the record of false prophecies, flip-flops in doctrine, phony dates, and bloodguilt over wrongful deaths, including those from following their ever-changing stance on blood transfusions.

Randall Watters, Manhattan Beach CA, USA

The so called blood ban was obviously a dietary prohibition as the Muslims have with their halal It was introduced because living in a very hot climate blood would go bad very quickly and become a health hazard. You cannot avoid blood as it is in the tissue of the meat anyway.
It has nothing to do with the bible or with so called god
God is supposed to know everything he fails to predict the modern advances in science and medicine If blood transfusion had been possible in biblical times it would have been forbidden specifically
I think it highly immoral to force your beliefs on your children
at an age when they are unable to decide for themselves
rationally.
These kids will grow up motherless now and for what? some
persons illogical interpretation of a minor quote in the bible.
There is also something in the bible about beware false prophets. The Witnesses have told us several times the world is going to end.
Religion only survives through indoctrination of kids

billcarr, london, UK

The interpretation of the bible (or any other religious book) is just that an interpretation; all those books were written centuries ago on different circumstances and in different languages no translation can express their true meaning and how those extrapolate to our lives today. Taking those documents literally is not only dangerous but narrow minded; if an adult, following her religuion, does not want to have a blood transfusion, it is probably her right, but it is a disgrace they want to extend their believes and risk the lives of their children by not allowing it on a life threatening situation.

R. Bugarti, London,

In answer to Danny Haszard

Firstly, that an organisation acts to minimise lawsuits is hardly a terrible thing. He uses the expression as though it's an ulterior motive - but its a legitimate consideration that practically every organisation on the planet shares.

Nevertheless, the main argument he makes is not a reasoned one. A person cannot be baptised as a Witness unless they thouroughly understand the behaviours expected of Christians - as interpreted be Witnesses. No one is forced to be baptised.

If a person chooses to leave his wife for another woman, that is a decision he must make for himself. No one will force him to do otherwise, but such behaviour is not appropriate for Christians and so he may be disfellowshipped (excommunicated) as a consequence.

In the same way, a witness who decides to accept blood will not be stopped - it is his personal choice - but that choice will have demonstrated that he did not want to uphold a fundamental law of the Bible.

D Gardner, Erith, UK

The verse stated refers to not consuming blood. If a doctor told you not to drink alcohol for the sake of your health, would it be okay to stick it in your veins instead?

On another note, witnesses believe in the resurection hope after har-mageddon, this is what all who serve Jehovah have to look forward to. So prolonging a life in this system (ultimatly controled by Satan the devil) is not worth risking losing out in that which Jehovah has promised. Those who unfortunatly lose their lives in circumstances like this have a wonderful future awaiting them. Of course no-one wants to die as life is a gift from God and is precious, there are also bible principles which are more important.

I have had two operations on my heart in my life, once at 8 weeks old and once again in 2005. I was transfused during the first operation in 1981. Thankfully I managed to avoid any infection, but in 2005 at the age of 25, I refused blood and had sucessfull surgery to repair a valve without blood.

Stuart Douglas, Renfrew, Scotland

For this woman, her faith was more important than her life.
That was her choice.
If you're religious, either you have faith or you don't.
Personally, I don't have faith in any religion.

William, Manchester,

The interpretation of Scripture by the Jehovah's Witnesses is just plain wrong. Blood is a symbol of life and life to God is sacred, that is why symbolically the Lord said that it should not be eaten. There is no Biblical injunction against blood transfusions. Even the strictest Orthodox Jews practice it , for them the sving of life overrules anything else. Life is sacred.

David Whitfield, Carnforth. Lancs, UKredpassatdiesel@yahoo.co.uk

With regard to your figures concerning the number of Jehovah's Witnesses in the United Kingdom, the actual number is over 130,000 and in 2006/7 there was a 3% increase in the figures over the previous year. Worldwide there are over 6.5 million Witnesses, which means that one person in every 1000 worldwide is a Witness and the numbers are increasing.

The Bible is clear in it's prohibition of blood. Consistantly it forbids the misuse of blood. In the book of Acts the first century governing body based at the time in Jerusalem clearly stated in Acts Chapter 15:28,29; that the prohibition on blood applies to Christians. Avoiding blood is listing alongside fornication in that verse.

When a patiant in hospital cannot be fed normally, food can be given intravenously giving noutrition to the body likewise whether blood is eaten or transfused it makes no difference.

Jehovah's Witnesses do all they can to look after their health. They don't smoke. They do not allow abortion.

D Smith, Newcastle, UK

the bible tells us to stone an adulteress to death.

Jesus said let he who is without sin cast the first stone
does this not tell you something?

alan mc affee, richmond, north yorkshire

Witnesses are adherring to their religious veiws. Nobody is forced to do anything they do not want to do, everything is on the individuals concience.

Witnesses have worked tirelessly with leading medical experts in developing treatments which can be used on anyone from any faith, background etc which promote the use of non-blood products or techniques. All of the treatments carried forward to everyday medical usage are of course deemed safer than using blood. Leading medical experts would not help develop unsafe practices or liase with people who have no concern over their medical welfare.

A persons human rights should allow them to ditate their own path in life. Other people should respect their decisions. If they pose no threat to others who has the right to criticise?

We should concentrate on the drug users and alcoholics who use up our resources on the NHS!!!

M Charles, Lancashire, UK

Robert de Jong:

Tell that to the woman who just died giving birth because she refused a transfusion. Or better yet tell her husband and her motherless child.

It's interesting that witnesses are now allowed to take all the fractional components of blood seperatly but not allowed to take them when they are together sort of like saying it's allright to steal a car as long as you remove one part at a time.

Tom, USA

Tom, tacoma, WA

In some cases, there are alternatives to blood transfusions. Massive total blood loss requires blood oftentimes to save ones life. The alternatives are great when you have certain blood disorders, such as hemophilia. A person who doesn't take blood after a massive blood loss MAY survive it, if they have expert care, tons of rest and no further complications. Or they may have all that and die because the body simply NEEDS blood to live. You can push that envelope so far and at some point, you can't push it anymore.

Horrific accidents, massive blood loss after a childbirth hemorrage or major surgery--will often result in death because there was no oxygen carrying blood to keep the body alive.

We can't know all, but we do know that many people who would survive with blood are lost when it is unavailable due to circumstances or the demands of the patient.

And two babies are motherless. Does God value that symbol of life more than that young mom's actual life?

What would Jesus do?

M, Washington State, USA

This is of course a desperately sad case, but by way of a counter argument, individuals make decisions every day that impact their on their wellbeing. Millions of people exercise their freedom of choice to harm themselves with tobacco, alcohol or other drugs. Some sign up to join the armed forces, and lose their lives as a result. Others even participate in sports that carry a risk (however slight) of injury or even death. This young lady made a reasoned choice based on a personal religious conviction. If the arguments that are being put forth here were taken to their conclusion, then no one should have the freedom to choose anything that might harm them. We may not agree with her choice, but we must surely support her right to make it.

Matthew, Bristol, UK

I was raised a witness and my sister was born with a life threatening medical condition and was told that she would need massive amounts of blood or she would die.........Well, NO BLOOD was given and she is now a 32 year old nurse and mother of two..... Instead of always putting witnessess down why don't people bother to look at the good and wonderful things they do.............

Julia, Missouri, USA

Julia Sherman, Kansas City, MO

I would like to say that those of you, who think Blood transfusion is the lifesaver, than you think wrong. Since many years there are better alternatives than blood, as many doctors will tell you. After considering the statistics will tell you, its those who get the alternative treatments sooner come out of hospitals as those who received blood transfusion.
Jehovah's Witnesses have often been used as testcases for proving the new alternatives. The Cellsaver for instance, blood thinners to raise the bloodvolume to prevent the bloodloss, and much more.
Ask any doctor, who has experiance with bloodless surgery, and they will tell you that Bloodles surgery is a much safer.
In a lot of cases where Jehovah's Witness patients have died, Doctors told that it was because of the bloodrefusal. But if the patient would have gotten the blood, the percentage of a possible survive is low, the patient thus would have died anyway. Why? Too great a loss of blood, complications etc.. So don't judge.

Robert de Jong, Rønne, Denmark

When I practised medicine in New York State, if Witness parents refused a badly needed blood transfusion for their minor child, we could, usually within the hour, obtain a judge's order making the child a temporary ward of the state, and proceed with the transfusion.

Henry, Brackley, UK

Jehovah's Witnesses elders will investigate and disfellowship any Jehovah Witness who takes a blood transfusion,to say the issue is a 'personal conscience matter' is subterfuge to keep the Watchtower out of lawsuits.

Many Jehovah's Witnesses men,women and children die every year worldwide due to blood transfusion ban.Rank & file Jehovah's Witness are indoctrinated to be scared to death of blood.
FYI
1) JW's DO USE many parts aka 'fractions' aka components of blood,so if it's 'sacred' to God why the hypocritical contradiction flip-flop?
2) They USE blood collections that are donated by Red cross and others but don't donate back,more hypocrisy.
3) The Watchtower promotes and praises bloodless elective surgeries,this is a great advancement indeed.BUT it's no good to me if I am bleeding to death from a car crash and lose half my blood volume and need EMERGENCY blood transfusion.

Know this,the reason that JW refuse blood is because of their spin on the 3000 year old Biblical old testament,modern medicine will eventually make blood donations and transfusions a thing of the past.When this technology happens it won't vindicate the Jehovah's Witnesses and all the deaths that have occured so far.
The Watchtower's rules against blood transfusions will eventually be abolished (very gradually to reduce wrongful death lawsuit liability) even now most of the blood 'components' are allowed.
In 20 years there will be artificial blood and the Red Cross will go on with other noble deeds.
None of these changes will absolve the Watchtower leaders or vindicate their twisted doctrines
Are there dangers from blood?There are over 500 aspirin deaths in USA yearly.
---
Danny Haszard born 1957 3rd generation Jehovah's Witness

Danny Haszard, London, UK