Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Theology of Death


The primary feature of Faith and all Faith inspired practices and beliefs, are basically unscientific and cannot be ascertained by experiments. Hence, the debates, doctrines and positions, held by anyone, are based on numerous arguments, understandings and interpretations that anyone deems correct. Therefore, with the need to respect the personality of one’s thoughts, it becomes academically correct for someone to respect the beliefs of another – hence the right to freedom of worship and devotion.

But, like the legal debate on limitations to rights and privileges, the inalienable freedom to express your Faith and Beliefs comes to an immediate end when the life of an innocent baby, who does not understand doctrines and practices, is at stake.

Since the birth of a religious faction known as Jehovah’s Witnesses, the litany of mortality from hospitals has been ever unending because the Faith refuses blood transfusion on the grounds of being a sin. Citing biblical portions to support their belief, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have, in many occasions, folded their arms to watch pregnant women in labour and their innocent babies condemned to death.

Interestingly, it is important to listen to Jehovah’s Witnesses proselytise the bible portions that prohibit blood transfusion:

   1.    ‘Genesis 9:4. God allowed Noah and his family to add animal flesh to their diet after the Flood but commanded them not to eat the blood. God told Noah: “Only flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.” This command applies to all mankind from that time on because all are descendants of Noah.’

   2.    ‘Leviticus 17:14. “You must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood. Anyone eating it will be cut off.” God viewed the soul, or life, as being in the blood and belonging to him. Although this law was given only to the nation of Israel, it shows how seriously God viewed the law against eating blood.’

   3.    ‘Acts 15:20. “Abstain . . . from blood.” God gave Christians the same command that he had given to Noah. History shows that early Christians refused to consume whole blood or even to use it for medical reasons.’

For the citation on Genesis 9:4 and Leviticus 17:14, I am still trying, very hard, to understand the relationship between a simple Jewish traditional dietary manner of slaughtering an animal to bleed it before roasting it and refusing a medical attention to a dying patient. 

These bible verses state God’s blessings and commands to Noah and his sons. However, while God allowed man the ability to eat animal flesh, He includes a restriction that they should not eat the blood of these animals along with their flesh. Under the Law of Moses, Israelites were required to, very carefully, drain the blood from animals before consuming them.

The reaffirmation of this decree is mentioned in Act of the Apostle 15:20 which still has to do with eating and drinking blood of animals and which, by the time of “Act of the Apostles” was a famous religious practice associated with idol worship. Some of the Gentile Christians who were converted retained the practice of eating strangled animals; James had to advocate writing a letter to them to do away with such practices.  

The underlined in number three above, which states “…History shows that early Christians refused …blood or even to use it for medical reasons.” is a blatant lie! If by ‘early Christians’ they refer to early members of the Jehovah’s Witnesses – maybe those members of the Bible Student movement, and the followers of Christian Restorationist minister, Charles Taze Russell in 1870, they maybe are correct.

Even as at that, when one considers that it was in 1818, that the British obstetrician, James Blundell successfully transfused human blood to a patient who was haemorrhaging during childbirth and in 1901, Karl Landsteiner, an Austrian physician discovered the first human blood groups, which helped transfusion to become a safer practice, the “early Christian whatever” becomes more wonderful.

Factually, when a religious body, of any kind, forms an idea that stands against life, it is simply a theology of death. And, when we remember that God created life, values life and came that ‘man may have life and have it abundantly’, it is obvious that the theology of death is inspired by the devil.

When it comes to a point of folding your arms and watching a pregnant woman and her baby spiral to death, it becomes a criminal offence that should be punishable by Law. If an adult, who in allegiance to Jehovah’s Witnesses dies, that is left for him/her. But when an innocent baby, who cannot defend itself, is murdered, it becomes a crime most heinous!

Idiongo Ebong 


No comments:

Post a Comment