And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him [Moses], and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.
If we are to walk in the light of truth we must recognize not only Jehovah God as our Father but his organization as our mother.
—Watchtower, May 1, 1957, p. 274
Why is everybody always pickin’ on me?
I am typing this with one hand, as the other is immobile: the arm hooked up to an apheresis machine. I am at my local Red Cross, donating platelets. Whenever I do this (which is at least once a month) my mind is drawn back to the days when I believed that such donations were a sin.
97% of people will require a blood transfusion at some point in their lives. I know I did when I had my scoliosis surgery. It was a good thing that I had given up the Watchtower religion’s stance on blood before that event.
Having received blood, I thought it was only right to later start donating blood. The Watchtower stranglehold over my mind had been so strong, however, that it was many years before I started donating, and then only after I had researched the “blood issue” extensively. Only 3% of people donate blood, so there is always a need.
After I had done this a few times the Red Cross asked me to start donating platelets instead, since there was a greater need for my particular blood-type’s platelets and plasma.
Here on the white-board in the apheresis waiting room they have a list of some of the people benefiting from the platelets we’re donating. They range in age from a few months old to over 70 years old. Many are battling leukemia. It does feel good to know that our platelets are helping them to live.
Why I “pick on” the Watchtower religion
Visitors to my site who are Jehovah’s Witnesses often ask why I “pick on” their religion. When I think about it, there are many aspects about the religion which are innocuous to someone [like me] who does not have superstitious beliefs of their own. For instance, I really don’t care what they say God’s name is, or how many persons they think he is, or whether his son is a created angel with an alter-ego named Michael. I don’t care if they choose not to celebrate birthdays or Christmas or salute a flag. In fact, I refrain from some of these things myself (for other reasons). Arguments about such things are only useful in as much as they point out how such doctrines may undermine the idea that they are following the Bible as exclusively and as closely as they claim.
In fact I wouldn’t “pick on” the religion at all [at least not singling it out from my diatribes against religion in general] if it weren’t for a few things, such as:
- Refusal of blood transfusions for their children
- The “two witness” rule that allows pedophiles a free pass in Kingdom Halls.
All of these really stem from one thing: allowing the Watchtower Society (aka the Governing Body) to override individual empathy and common sense.
Each person who becomes a Jehovah’s Witness vows at baptism to submit to the judgments of the Watchtower in deciding what is right and what is wrong. If the Society says you must shun people who come to disagree with the Watchtower, then shunning will take place with no questions asked. If the Watchtower says that blood transfusions are wrong, then [for most Witnesses] they are wrong: end of conversation. There will be no listening [or at least no hearing] of sensible arguments to the contrary. No heed will be paid to the son or daughter bleeding to death; the GB has spoken!
Contrast this attitude to what Jesus reputedly said:
Why do you not judge for yourselves what is right?
For Witnesses, the answer to Jesus’ question can be found in the following Watchtower quotes:
We resolve that we shall obey all instructions received from the Watch Tower, knowing that such proceed from the higher powers, Jehovah God and Christ Jesus. We resolve to be completely obedient to the Society as the visible part of the Great Theocracy.
–Watchtower, 2/1/1940 p.47
In submitting to Jehovah’s visible theocratic organization, we must be in full and complete agreement with every feature of its apostolic procedure and requirements.
–Watchtower, 10/1/1967 p.592
Avoid independent thinking… questioning the counsel provided by God’s visible organization.
–Watchtower, 1/15/1983 p.22
A mature Christian must be in unity and full harmony with fellow believers as far as faith and knowledge are concerned. He does not advocate or insist on personal opinions or harbor private ideas when it comes to Bible understanding. Rather he has complete confidence in the truth as it is revealed by Jehovah God through his Son, Jesus Christ, and “the faithful and discreet slave.”
–Watchtower, 8/1/2001 p. 14
…direction that we receive from Jehovah’s organization may not appear practical from a human standpoint. All of us must be ready to obey any instructions we may receive, whether these appear sound from a strategic or human standpoint or not.
—Watchtower, November 15, 2013, p.20
Freewill has been surrendered: There is no room left for individual decision making as to what constitutes right and wrong. If there were, then no Jehovah’s Witness would ever refuse life-saving medical care for their child. And no parent would ever shun a disfellowshipped son or daughter. It is only their blind misbegotten loyalty to their “mother” organization that causes them to act against their own sense of love for their children.
To adapt Zipporah’s statement to the Watchtower Society, we may cry: “A bloody mother thou art!” as we cast our bloodless dead children at the Governing Body’s feet.
For a complete refutation of the Watchtower’s blood policy, please see my 8-part series: The Jehovah’s Witness Blood Issue: Resolved!
Here I will only give one reason why the Governing Body is dead wrong on the blood issue. One is sufficient.
To cut through all of their defenses, let’s assume for the moment that they are right in claiming that blood transfusions are against God’s law. The question then shifts to:
According to the Bible is it ever okay to break God’s law in order to save life?
The answer is a resounding:
Now it happened that he was proceeding through the grainfields on the sabbath, and his disciples started to make their way plucking the heads of grain. So the Pharisees went saying to him: “Look here! Why are they doing on the sabbath what is not lawful?” But he said to them: “Have YOU never once read what David did when he fell in need and got hungry, he and the men with him? How he entered into the house of God, in the account about Abiatharm the chief priest, and ate the loaves of presentation, which it is not lawful for anybody to eat except the
priests, and he gave some also to the men who were with him?” So he went on to say to them: “The sabbath came into existence for the sake of man, and not man for the sake of the sabbath”
—Mark 2:23-17 (NWT)
Note that Jesus did not say that he and the disciples weren’t breaking the law. No, he did not deny that they were breaking God’s law. Instead he told a story about King David breaking God’s law as well. Why? For no other purpose than to show that God’s law was never meant to cause hardship. The law was to serve man, not the other way around.
When following the law would cause someone to die of hunger, then to Jesus’ mind it was a no-brainer: the law should be broken.
In Matthew’s account of the incident, Jesus is related as saying:
However, if YOU had understood what this means, ‘I want mercy, and not sacrifice,’ YOU would not have condemned the guiltless ones.”
—Matthew 12:7 (NWT)
He was speaking to the Pharisees, who–as we know–were real sticklers for following the law to the letter. But he could just as easily have spoken those words directly to the Pharisees of our day: the Governing Body of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
If the GB really knew what love is then they would have mercy on their followers and not demand the sacrifice of the very lives of their children. It would be a no-brainer for them as well.
Till that day dawns, they shall remain a blood-guilty “mother” to the victims of their policies which we hereby lay at their feet:
- the bloodless dead children (due to their blood policy)
- the abused children (due to their “two witness” policy)
- the abused women (due to their “women must be in subjection” policy)
- the suicide victims (due to their shunning policy)
Till these policies change, we–the “apostates”–will never stop “picking on” them, in hopes of saving those who may still be able to listen.
Meanwhile, if you want to do a really good deed and thumb your nose at the GB at the same time, go and donate blood.
People need it much more than they do a Watchtower or Awake magazine.