Jump to content
The World News Media


Isabella
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Member

The father of a severely jaundiced 14-day-old premature baby who denied the baby life-saving blood transfusion on medical and religious grounds, on Saturday explained his side of the story.

Mr Emmanuel Onokpise claimed he and his wife were never informed their child was in any danger of death to the baby due to the weight.

The Lagos State Government evacuated the baby via a court order following information from a concerned member of the public informed its Office of the Public Defender that Mr and Mrs Emmanuel Onokpise had, contrary to medical advice, discharged their severely ill baby from hospital after refusing her blood transfusion on religious and medical grounds.

Baby Onokpise, who was born on December 18, 2019, is now in an orphanage home.

According to the government, the baby’s parents, who were on Medical Insurance with a Health Maintenance Organisation (HMO), “vehemently opposed the blood transfusion” for the baby and took her home, where her condition deteriorated and death was imminent.

Onokpise, who responded to enquiries from The Nation via a statement, said he and his wife loved their child and believed in medical intervention to cure ailments.

He added that being Jehovah’s witnesses, they also had an obligation to obey Jehovah’s commandment to abstain from blood consumption.

Read more: 

    Hello guest!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 327
  • Replies 2
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Member

Irony: In Nigeria, they take babies away because they "believe" them to be in danger because their medical treatment ideas are still in the stone age.....

And on the other side of the world the country that has the facilities and knowledge to save babies are killing fetuses and full term babies because of new abortion laws that allows mothers to decide at last minute before birth if its life will be worth bringing into the world.   Crazy world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

The parents of a severely jaundiced 14-day-old premature baby, who vehemently opposed blood transfusion for their child on medical and religious grounds, have explained the motive behind their action.

Father of the baby Emmanuel Onokpise, who claimed he and his wife were never informed their child was in any danger of death due to the weight, said they love their child and believed in medical intervention to cure ailments.

He added that being Jehovah’s Witnesses, they also had an obligation to obey Jehovah’s commandment to abstain from blood consumption.

“Jehovah, the creator, expressly prohibits the ingestion of blood. He made this law both before and during the Christian era,” he said

The Lagos State Government took the baby Onokpise from the parents following a court order directing it to do so.

The government waded into the matter when a concerned member of the public informed the Office of the Public Defender that Mr and Mrs Emmanuel Onokpise had, contrary to medical advice, discharged their severely ill baby from hospital after refusing her blood transfusion on religious and medical grounds.

Baby Onokpise, who was born on December 18, 2019, is now in an orphanage home.

According to the government, the baby’s parents, who were on Medical Insurance with a Health Maintenance Organisation (HMO), “vehemently opposed the blood transfusion” for the baby and took her home, where her condition deteriorated and death was imminent.

Onokpise, who

Responding to enquiries from The Nation, Onokpise said in a statement

“The doctors informed us after she was delivered that she had jaundice. She was being treated for it.”

Read more: 

    Hello guest!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Similar Content

    • By Isabella
      LUXEMBOURG (CN) — A Latvian child who needed open-heart surgery prevailed Thursday in a religious discrimination case against the country’s Ministry of Health, which refused to sign on off on letting him undergo the procedure in another country where he wouldn’t require a blood transfusion.
      Names are withheld from the ruling released this morning by the European Court of Justice. It says only that the child was a Jehovah’s Witness who needed surgery because of a congenital heart defect, and that in Latvia the procedure is not possible without a blood transfusion.
      The boy’s parent requested a form called an S2 that would authorize treatment in Poland — presumably where the surgery can be performed without a transfusion — but Latvia’s National Health Service refused to comply. The family began fighting in court, losing every step of the way before the case reached Europe’s high court in Luxembourg, but ultimately the boy underwent heart surgery in Poland on April 22, 2017 — over a year after he was first denied an S2 form.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Indiana
      By Guest Indiana
      Taking Nigeria as a case study, if you are not a Jehovah’s Witness, you must have heard from some pastors or some other Christians like you about how the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach the wrong gospel. You must have heard them say that they use the wrong Bible. They must have told you to kick them out of your house or never let them in. They might have even told you that listening to them could lead you to Hell Fire.

      My view about them changed when I related with one of them during an external tutorial class. There was a single guy among the rest in a mixed class of Christians and Muslims. This guy was the only Jehovah’s Witness. We all had a lot of fun bullying him. We made jest of his bag and made jest of the fact that he was a Jehovah’s Witness.

      Despite all these bullying, he never retaliated. We were still kids back then and our knowledge of the Bible was what we were taught in our different churches. We argued over some verses in the bible and the guy took pains to explain some topics based on what he had been taught. We all shut him down, of course.

      Years later, I had the opportunity to visit one of their Kingdom Halls. I had read a lot of their FREE publications and I wanted to see what they did there. I was wowed. I have been to many other churches but this Kingdom Hall was different.

      The surprising part was that after the service, I met this guy again and he was so happy to see me. I was surprised. I thought he would make jest of me and ask why I was there. Instead, he and the other people there showed me love.

      How are the Jehovah’s Witnesses better Christians than the rest of us?
      Read more: 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest
      By Guest
    • Guest Indiana
      By Guest Indiana
      The Congolese woman, Bibiche Tshibola Makola, who is a Jehovah’s Witness by faith, was hesitant to have her own blood taken in advance, frozen and re-transfused into her.
      BENGALURU: A 39-year-old woman, who was diagnosed with a cardiac ailment, approached a city hospital, stating that she was ready to undergo any treatment, provided there was no blood transfusion involved in it. The Congolese woman, Bibiche Tshibola Makola, who is a Jehovah’s Witness by faith, was hesitant to have her own blood taken in advance, frozen and re-transfused into her. For Jehovah’s witnesses, transfusion of blood is against their religious belief.
      After a lot of analysis, surgeons at Fortis Hospital on Bannerghatta Road managed to perform a bloodless open-heart surgery and valve repair. According to doctors, the woman suffered from restrictive cardiomyopathy, where a chamber of the heart is unable to stretch and results in bleeding. The patient came to India for treatment, as many countries and centres refused to carry out the surgery.
      Dr Vivek Jawali, Chief Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgeon at Fortis Hospitals said, “Makolo had severe restrictive cardiomyopathy, in which there is restrictive filling of the ventricles. With due respect to her religious beliefs, we recommended her to undergo a bloodless surgery.” 
      The doctors then sat together and had a peri-operative plan. “We put the patient on a series of medications, including blood conservatives that helped increase her haemoglobin level to 14.8 g/dL. The surgery was conducted using all the blood conservation techniques practised at our unit for all patients , It was successful and no blood transfusion was required during the entire procedure.”
      Dr Murali Chakravarthy, Department of Anaesthesia, explained that bloodless surgery is a risky situation and can lead to hemorrhagic shock in the patient. Bibiche’s husband Roger Muamba said, “We were very worried about her treatment. We were very happy with the doctors.”
      Jehovah’s Witnesses against blood transfusion
      They believe, according to the Bible, that one must not ingest blood, even through transfusion. Under Quebec’s civil code, an adult who is conscious and of sound mind, has the right to either accept or refuse medical treatment.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By Bible Speaks
      We welcome Sophia and Caleb to Nigeria.
      ???
      They are both visiting Lagos and cross river state. We are looking forward to their visits in other states in Nigeria. #Eargerlywaitingforsundaybroadcast
      Thank you Brother - ???


    • By The Librarian
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Substitute of Biological Blood:
      These are substances which act like biological blood and are used in cases requiring a blood transfusion.
      Purpose:
      The main purpose served by blood is oxygen carriage to organs of the body. The artificial blood synthesized so far are serving functions varying from carrying oxygen to the function of volume expansion. Thus, volume restoration can be done with the help of these substances. These substitutes are mostly under clinical trials.
      History:
      Blood was considered supernatural having magical properties.  Many of the rituals were performed related to blood.
      Many beliefs are still followed. Several TV programs focused on the theme of blood like the vampires drinking human blood for survival. Jehovah’s witnesses are obligated to not receive or donate any blood-related products according to their beliefs even in case of matter of life and death.
      The history of blood transfusion dates back to very old civilization but documented research on this topic started after William Harvey discovered in the 16th century that blood flows in the arteries and veins. The blood transfusion often proved fatal. So different transfusions were tried like liquids from cows, goats, human milk as well as beer.
      The first cross-matched blood transfusion was done in the 20th century in Mt. Sinai Hospital in New York. Later advancements led to the Blood Component Therapy in which blood was separated into different components, which has made whole blood transfusion obsolete.
      Progress in the field led to improvements in the safety of blood transfusion with respect to decreasing transmission of blood-borne diseases such as HIV, Hepatitis B, and C etc.
      Who needs it?
      Artificial blood is used in cases which require a blood transfusion.
      The situations include;
      Patients of hemorrhagic shock: a state of decreased perfusion of organs due to the increased amount of bleeding. In case of emergency situations like roadside accidents In situations when blood donation is not accessible or not available such as remote or far-flung areas To meet the high demand for blood transfusion Types of Synthetic blood:
      Perfluorocarbon-based Hemoglobin-based Stem cells
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By The Librarian
      New research in the USA shows that Jehovah's Witnesses who refuse blood transfusions recover from heart surgery faster and with fewer complications than those who have transfusions.
      Patients who are Jehovah's Witnesses had better survival rates, shorter hospital stays, fewer additional operations for bleeding and spent fewer days in the intensive care unit than those who received blood trans­fusions during surgery, a study in the Archives of Internal Medicine shows.
      Jehovah's Witnesses undergo extensive blood conservation before surgery, including red blood-cell boosting erythropoietin drugs, iron and B-complex vitamins to guard against anaemia. The practice offered a "unique natural experiment" for scientists to study the short and long-term effects of the blood management strategy and may point to ways to reduce need for transfusions, researchers said.
      The study included 322 Jehovah's Witness patients and 87,453 other patients who underwent heart surgery at the Cleveland Clinic from 1983 to 2011. All Jehovah's Witness patients refused blood transfusions. In the other group, 38,467 did not receive transfusions while 48,986 did.
      The authors wanted to look at the difference between patients who receive blood transfusions during surgery and Jehovah's Witness patients, who undergo strict blood conservation practices before, during and after surgery, Koch said.
      While many patients do not have blood transfusions during and after heart surgery, they also do not undergo the same blood conservation practices that doctors use for Jehovah's Witness patients.
      Jehovah's Witness patients had an 86 per cent chance of survival at five years and a 34 per cent chance of survival 20 years after surgery, compared with 74 per cent at five years and 23 per cent at 20 years for non-Jehovah's Witness patients who had transfusions.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By JOHN BUTLER
      Jehovah has clearly and unambiguously prohibited the use of blood for sustaining human life.  Many times, OT and NT.
      Can I question this point please ?
      Did Jesus ever forbid the use of blood to save a human life ?  Can you show me a scripture where JESUS forbids the use of blood to save a human life ? 
      Let us look at a few points here.
      I think it is true that the Jews / Nation of Israel practised something known as Pikuach Nefesh 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
      This meant life was precious and should be saved even if it meant going against the Law.
      Add to this that Jesus gave an example which in my opinion goes much deeper than the actual words of the scripture.  Matthew 12 v 9 through 12.
      9  After departing from that place, he went into their synagogue, 10  and look! there was a man with a witheredHello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  hand!Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  So they asked him, “Is it lawful to cure on the Sabbath?” so that they might accuse him.Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. 11  He said to them: “If you have one sheep and that sheep falls into a pit on the Sabbath, is there a man among you who will not grab hold of it and lift it out?Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. 12  How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do a fine thing on the Sabbath.”
      Surely here Jesus is saying that it is right to go against 'the Law' and /or the principles of it, to save a life. 
      And please tell me, from where do those 'blood bits' come from that the GB say the congregants can use ?  I honestly have no idea on that one. 
      However if those 'blood bits' come from blood itself then isn't that actually using blood ?
      My wife hates cherries in cakes, so she picks them out, but she still eats the cake. If a person uses bits out of blood then in my opinion they are still using blood. 
      Over to you guys. 
    • By The Librarian
      The annual convention series of Jehovah’s Witnesses in and around the Federal Capital Territory, (FCT) begins this weekend at their Kwali Assembly Hall.
      A statement issued by the convention organisers say the  theme of convention: “Be Courageous “  is apt at this critical times, adding that “we need courage more than ever at school, at work and when tragedy strikes’’.
      Each weekend, beginning September 14 through December 23, delegates would be spiritually nourished and refreshed, the statement said.
      The statement made known that the 3-day program consists of 54 presentations that will include talks, audio dramas, interviews, and short videos. Additionally, a feature film entitled, ‘’The Story of Jonah, A Lesson in Courage and Mercy’’ will be shown on the final day of the convention program. Each day, the morning and afternoon sessions will be introduced by music videos prepared specifically for the convention.
      The Bible talks and interviews are expected help delegates learn practical ways they  can build courage to face today’s chaotic world. Also to be enjoyed are various videos where delegates would observe and learn lessons from real people, and even live animals about courage.
      According to David A. Semonian, a spokesman for Jehovah’s Witnesses, states, “When you look at the news today, you can clearly see that people of all ages are dealing with more anxieties and fears than ever before. It takes courage to face these pressures. We welcome everyone to this year’s convention to benefit from the practical advice that’s contained in the Bible.”
      Highlight of the convention program on Sunday, is a Bible discourse with the theme: “The Resurrection Hope Impacts Courage-How?”
      The convention program would be conducted in English, Nigeria Pidgin, Yoruba, Igbo and the American Sign Language for those with hearing impaired.
      Meanwhile, thousands of new members are expected to be ordained through water baptism.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      The parents of a 14-year-old boy with bone cancer won a legal challenge against a Mesa hospital that attempted to override their religious objections to blood transfusions.
      The Arizona Court of Appeals on Tuesday ruled that a lower court's emergency hotline used by hospitals to authorize medical treatment on behalf of patients is not allowed under state law.
      The parents of a 14-year-old boy with bone cancer challenged Banner Cardon Children's use of a Maricopa County Superior Court emergency hotline to authorize blood transfusions on behalf of the child. The parents and boy are Jehovah's Witnesses and objected to blood transfusions on religious grounds. 
      While Banner Cardon's medical-treatment plan initially consisted of alternative therapies to fit the parents' religious views, hospital staff later determined that blood transfusions were medically necessary. 
      Hospital staff called the Maricopa County Superior Court hotline multiple times from October through December last year to seek authorization for the blood transfusions. The court granted three of five requests, according to court documents.
      The parents filed a petition with the Arizona Court of Appeals seeking to halt the transfusions.    
      The parents, identified as Glenn and Sonia H., argued that the Superior Court hotline "lacked jurisdiction" for such emergency medical requests and also argued that hospital staffers did not justify the medical need for blood transfusions. 
      The lower court said that such emergency requests were "standard practice" nationwide and the hotline rotated among Superior Court judges who answered requests after hours. 
      In an opinion written by Judge Kenton D. Jones, the appellate court concluded that the question of whether the lower court had jurisdiction to OK emergency medical treatment was one "of significant statewide importance."
      Jones noted that Arizona law allows a Juvenile Court that has jurisdiction over a child to order a parent or guardian to get medical treatment for a child. However, the appellate court did not find any such jurisdiction for a Superior Court emergency hotline.
      "Our review of Arizona statutes and rules of procedure reveals no provision ... authorizing the superior court to maintain an emergency hotline for the purpose of ordering medical treatment for a non-consenting minor," Jones wrote. 
      Therefore, the lower court's order authorizing medical treatment on behalf of the boy is void, the appellate court said. 
      The parents filed the appellate-court action in November but did not request a stay of the lower court's order. The boy received blood transfusions on Dec. 1 and Dec. 5 before his parents relocated his care to a medical facility in Portland, Oregon. 
      Banner Health officials said the health-care provider has not yet decided whether to appeal the appellate court's decision.
      Representatives of Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, which filed a legal brief on behalf of the parents, did not immediately return a message seeking comment.
      A Jehovah's Witnesses website said the religion considers blood transfusions a "religious issue rather than a medical one," citing multiple biblical passages.
      Patients who develop certain types of cancer, such as leukemia, often require blood transfusions as a part of treatment.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      After being transported to Batroun Hospital suffering traumatic injuries, doctors were baffled after the girl's parents rejected a blood transfusion critical to save their daughter's life.
      BEIRUT: Farah D., the young girl who was involved in a recent car crash, received a blood transfusion Thursday after the Prosecutor of North Lebanon authorized Batroun Hospital Director Ayoub Moukhtar to perform the procedure despite her family's refusal because it goes against their beliefs as Jehovah Witnesses. 
      After being transported to Batroun Hospital on Wednesday suffering traumatic injuries, doctors were baffled after the girl's parents rejected a blood transfusion critical to save their daughter's life. 
      This bizarre development forced Moukhtar to contact his district's Prosecutor, who directed him to go ahead with the grueling operation which involved a set of blood transfusions. 
      The prosecutor argued the hospital was legally bound to save the girl's life.
      "I contacted the prosecutor, who stressed the need to save the girl's life regardless of the parent's religious beliefs, and the hospital duty is to keep the girl alive," he said.
      According to Moukhtar, Farah is now recovering from her injuries.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By Srecko Sostar
      Parts of original text is in black (copy/paste method). After initial problems, Bulgaria and JW made "friendly agreement" in 1997.  But JW members worldwide don't know about double talk that WT Legal Departments lawyers or lawyers from aside (pro hac vice) gave as promises. Promises was part of "theocratic warfare" (in translation = you can say one thing to "worldly people", but after that you can do as you planing in first place). Perhaps GB thinks how they covered this "loophole" in on eyes with such two sentence  in a Letter;
      "The agreements also include an acknowledgment that each individual has a freedom to choose the type of medical treatment he receives."
      "The terms of the agreement do not reflect the change in a doctrine of a Jehovah's Witnesses."  (this is said exactly for the reason they lied to Bulgarian government) 
      In other words; We can promise to Bulgarian government what we want but our members must not know that.
      I will stressed two things. 
      First deceiving came from WT JW representatives was about blood issue. As you see below, they promise how no religious sanctions exist for those JW members who want to accept blood transfusion. We all know how such claim is not truth. Taking blood  transfusion is, according to WT interpretation, violation of Bible command and according to WT publications is a sin. Every sin inside JW congregation must go to elders, go to investigation process and they will decide what to do with transgressor. If such member who took blood show no repent for that act, will be put in process for judicial committee with good chance to dfd.  Now, please go to the Letter from Brooklyn WT and see how they not announced to JW public/member about this "amicable settlement" as they called it. Once again, sentence quoted this: "The agreements also include an acknowledgment that each individual has a freedom to choose the type of medical treatment he receives."
      Second deceiving is about children as members of WT company (softly way is to said, members of congregation). According to WT lawyers children cannot become members, but we all know what looks like reality in JW congregations and how many minors are  baptised and thus are members of WT Company.
      To JW in Bulgaria and in the rest of the world Letter not told  "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth".  
      Application No. 28626/95 by Khristiansko Sdruzhenie "Svideteli na Iehova"  (Christian Association Jehovah's Witnesses) against Bulgaria
       "In respect of the refusal of blood transfusion, the applicant association submits that while this is part of the religious doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses, its acceptance depends on the personal choice of the individual concerned.  There are no religious sanctions for a Jehovah's Witness who chooses to accept blood transfusion." 
      "The Government submit, firstly, that the applicant association's statute did not require a minimum age for membership and that children have been participating in its religious activities without the consent of their parents.  
       As regards the alleged unlawful activities of Jehovah's Witnesses with children the applicant association submits that children cannot  become members of the association but only participate, together with their parents, in the religious activities of the community."  
      links: Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
       https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{"itemid":["001-3808"]}
                  https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{"appno":["28626/95"]}
       

    • By Bible Speaks
      WORLD PRESS COMMENTS ON JEHOVAHS WITNESSES REFUSAL TO TAKE NO BLOOD ~
      Opponents object:
      Jehovah's Witnesses always use the following illustration in terms of containing blood:
      For example, what about someone who was strongly advised by the doctor to abstain from alcohol? Would he follow the advice if he stopped drinking alcohol but injected it directly into his veins?
      The comparison may sound logical at first glance, but this is delayed. Alcohol is present in a form that is metabolizable to body cells. Therefore, if someone received intravenous alcohol, the body would treat it as if it had been administered orally. Blood, however, does not serve as a food when administered intravenously, but functions as an organ transplant. Red blood cells, for example, begin immediately with the transport of oxygen.
      Also, would a doctor seriously discourage treatment that could save your life?
      WE RESPOND:
      The illustration used by Jehovah's Witnesses serves to make honest minds understand, that it is the same to eat as to inject oneself. We use alcohol in an illustrative way. Nor have we ever said that injecting blood is a way of feeding. What can not be discussed, is that if a doctor forbids the use of any substance, no one in their right mind would inject that substance. What you do not deny, is that the blood to be transfused begins immediately to act as what is WHOLE BLOOD.
      GENESIS 9: 4, is a biblical principle: flesh with its blood, should not eat. (evidently transfusions had not been invented, nor do guns justify killing because they did not exist when murder was prohibited)
      LEVITICUS 17:14, incorporates the principle to the Jewish Law, making it clear that "You must not eat the blood of any kind of flesh, because the soul of every kind of flesh is its blood". It should be noted that the text says that all kinds of flesh have blood, a statement that EMPHASIZES that it is only WHOLE BLOOD that is prohibited, since not all animals have blood.
      ACTS 15:20 solidly affirms the prohibition for the Christian world, prohibiting any use of blood by using the verb ABSTAIN! 
      Google translated

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Mrs Mortimer was undergoing a hip operation when she refused the blood transfusion
      A Jehovah's Witness lost her life after she refused a blood transfusion during a major hip operation due to her religious beliefs.
      Barbara Mortimer, 69, went against doctors' advice and sadly died on May 24, 2017, shortly after a hip replacement.
      A final hearing was held at The Old Courthouse in Hatfield yesterday (Wednesday, October 18) before Coroner Geoffrey Sullivan.
      The court heard that in January of this year, Mrs Mortimer visited her GP Mark Penwell with "severe left hip pain."
      Doctor Penwell said: "She was struggling to walk with it, even using a stick.
      "The only useful intervention was a hip replacement."
      He admitted however, that he had concerns about Mrs Mortimer, of Portland Road, Bishop's Stortford, who would decline any blood products due to her being a Jehovah's Witness.
      Mrs Mortimer also suffered what was thought to be a heart attack in 2006 and acute coronary syndrome after having chest pain in 2010.
      For her hip, Mrs Mortimer was referred to consultant orthopaedic surgeon Rajeev Sharma.
      He said: "She came to see me in the clinic on Thursday, March 23.
      "She came in with a diagnosis of hip arthritis on one of the sides.
      "She had an X-ray that showed the joints were worn out."
      Risks associated with the procedure including displacing the hip, heart attack and most commonly infection, were discussed with Mrs Mortimer.
      Mrs Mortimer chose to ungergo surgery, but was taking aspirin at the time which thins the blood. There was also a risk that she would need a blood transfusion during the operation.
      Steps included administering tranexamic acid, swabs soaked in adrenalin and a spinal aesthetic as opposed to general, as these all help to prevent and restrict blood loss.
      Mr Sharma said: "We needed to be sure our surgery is in such a manner to prevent bleeding.
      "It was safe to proceed providing we take all the necessary precautions."
      The procedure went ahead with Mrs Mortimer's haemoglobin levels being within an acceptable range.
      But during the operation after the joint was dislocated, the living part of the bone began to bleed.
      The bleed then became "exponentially massive," according to Mr Sharma following the removal of hard cartilage.
      The adrenalin swabs, an alternative method to stopping the bleed due to Mrs Mortimer's belief's, were inserted to constrict the blood vessels as well as a plastic membrane.
      Mr Sharma said: "We continued with the procedure, it was the best way to stop the bleeding.
      "I could not think why such a lot of bleeding would take place.
      "Was it the aspirin? Would it have had a significant effect on her or was there an anomaly in the pelvic bone?"
      Following the surgery, Mr Sharma spoke with Mrs Mortimer's family.
      "The recommended blood products were declined," he said.
      "We were struggling to keep her alive if we can't give her any blood. Persistent refusal was risking her life."
      Mrs Mortimer faced the decision of accepting blood products or hope that the fluids given to her post-operation would stimulate cell production after such a huge blood loss.
      She died during the early hours of the morning at Rivers Hospital in Sawbridgeworth.
      Mr Sharma was challenged in court by Counsel Kate Smith, who asked whether further enquiries should have been made prior to the hip replacement due to her age, religious beliefs, medical history and the fact she was taking aspirin.
      Ms Smith presented a booklet in court regarding Jehovah's Witnesses and surgery.
      It said "should avoid any medication that could increase blood loss," referring to aspirin which thins the blood and makes the likelihood of needing a blood transfusion more likely.
      Mrs Mortimer signed a refusal form indicating her religious convictions that "no blood transfusions are to be administered in any circumstances".
      Mr Sharma said in "hindsight" there are things that would have been done differently but at that stage all the safety precautions had been made.
      The operation was also not considered to be life-threatening.
      He was also challenged whether Mrs Mortimer needed to be on aspirin. The decision to take this course was made working on the basis that she had suffered a heart attack – later found to be untrue.
      Coroner Geoffrey Sullivan, said: "I cannot see a short form conclusion.
      "The adequate way to my mind is a narrative verdict to encompass blood loss [from the] surgical procedure and declining of blood products.
      "She was admitted to Rivers Hospital, she had advanced decision not to accept blood products, and asked to consider accepting blood products, but declined to do so."

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      A judge has authorized a Montreal hospital to perform blood transfusions to treat a 14-year-old teen with cancer, despite her refusal because she is a Jehovah's Witness.
      By allowing transfusions, the court ruled that it is lawful to protect children, sometimes "against themselves," when their decisions can be fatal.
      Under Quebec law, minors over the age of 14 can refuse certain health services. However, if the child’s parents or a hospital--in this case, the McGill University Health Centre--wants to administer those services, they can seek a judge’s permission.
      Superior Court Judge Lukasz Granosik said in his decision that the teen is "a brilliant, articulate girl" who is very successful at school and has a "maturity beyond her biological age," but that she was not yet mature enough to decide for herself, and was under pressure from her parents who are also Jehovah's Witnesses.
      Granosik also noted the girl spoke of death with "resignation," despite having a 97 percent chance of recovery if she underwent treatment.
      In June 2017, she found out she had Hodgkin's lymphoma, a form of cancer, and had to begin chemotherapy.
      This treatment, however, often requires blood transfusions. Without it, the patient could die or suffer irreversible neurological damage, her doctor said.
      Jehovah’s Witnesses do not accept blood transfusions.
      Judge Granosik’s decision was rendered on Sept. 1.
      - With a report from The Canadian Press

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By Bible Speaks
      QUEBEC, CANADA
      A judge orders a 14-Year-old witness to be baptized with blood.
      A judge from Quebec has decided that a 14-Year-old Jehovah's witness who has cancer must undergo blood transfusions, despite his express desire not to receive them.
      The Adolescent, who is not named, learned in June that she has hodgkin's lymphoma, a rare form of cancer affecting white blood cells. He has an excellent survival rate, if it's early.
      Treatment involves chemotherapy, which often requires blood transfusions. But as Jehovah's witness, the faith of the girl states that it is against God's desires to consume or be transfused with any blood.
      The girl, who had just turned 14 at the time of her diagnosis, refused to accept any transfusion.
      Under the québec law, children under the age of 14 may reject certain health services. However, if the parents of the child or a hospital want to administer these services, they may request the permission of a judge.
      In his decision issued earlier this month, judge lukasz granosik noted that the girl had embraced his religion at an early age and was baptized at 12 years of his own agreement.
      McGill University Health Center, where the girl was being treated, argued that the girl was not mature enough to make those decisions and was under the pressure of her parents to refuse transfusions.
      In his judgement, granosik noted that the girl was brilliant and expressive, but also said he was talking about death "almost with resignation".
      Noting that the law is designed to protect children even from themselves, he ordered the girl to submit to any blood transfusion necessary to save his life
      The girl's Hematologist-oncologist says that the girl's prognosis with full treatment is excellent, with 97 percent of recovery possibilities.
      The hospital has promised to use blood transfusions only if the child's life is in danger, and use other methods to avoid transfusions when possible.
      No update on the current adolescent health status is known.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Rebecca Lumley
      May 25 2017 7:38 PM
       
      A man who almost died after refusing a blood transfusion has hit out at the “harmful” practices in the Jehovah’s Witness religion that prohibited him from doing so.
      Phil Dunne was a devoted Jehovah’s Witness five years ago when he was diagnosed with cancer and told he would die if he did not receive a blood transfusion to negate internal bleeding caused by a tumour in his stomach.
      Jehovah’s Witnesses are prohibited from receiving blood transfusions “even in matters of life and death” and report a worldwide following of 8.3 million people.
      Speaking on RTÉ Radio One’s Liveline, Mr Dunne described how he was willing to die rather than go against his religion’s teachings.
      He said: “I had my father in law at the time write out a will for me because I was too weak in bed. I gave him all the instructions on what to do and I pretty much prepared myself to die.”
      Mr Dunne, who is originally from Co Wicklow and grew up in the US, was an active member of his religion at the time and had been attending Jehovah’s Witnesses meetings since the age of seven.
      He said he spent four days in hospital before doctors could think of an alternate way to treat him that did not involve a transfusion.
      He said: “I think they were hoping that I would just break down and take a transfusion eventually.
      “They decided to try very intense, targeted radiation to try and shrink the tumour so rapidly that they’d be able to stop the bleeding and then I’d be able to do chemotherapy to actually control the cancer once they’d stabilised me.”
      Mr Dunne said doctors regarded this as a “last ditch” solution, but the procedure proved successful and he has been cancer-free since.
      The experience led Mr Dunne to re-evaluate his involvement with the religion.
      He recounted: “Everyone around me was so proud of me and I became the shining example of faith and that was kind of weird because on the inside I was really feeling conflicted.
      “It kind of feels like you stepped out onto the street and somebody pulls you back just before a bus hits you. I’m just sitting there wondering if I had died for no reason back then, would I have really believed in the teaching?”
      Mr Dunne gradually became disillusioned in his faith and after two years left the religion completely. This resulted in the breakdown of his marriage and led him to move away from the area in which he had lived.
      He said: “It got to a point where I couldn’t live with the hypocrisy, preaching about something I didn’t believe in.
      “They make you really terrified of telling anyone you have doubts or anything like that, so I hid it for a long time and because of that I was breaking down, I was acting terribly and I really wasn’t doing well and that was affecting my marriage negatively.”
      When someone chooses to leave the Jehovah’s Witnesses they are as good as “excommunicated”, according to Mr Dunne.
      “They can officially shun you, they call it dis-fellowshipping. It’s basically the same as excommunication. So no-one is supposed to talk to you.
      “You’re not even meant to say hi if you see them on the street. If people find out that you’ve disassociated yourself they assume that you’re what they call an apostate. You’re what they describe as a mentally diseased person.”
      Mr Dunne said that while he has “nothing against individual Jehovah’s Witnesses”, he believes their teachings “can be harmful.”
      He said: “People need to be aware of the dangers involved in any organisation.”

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
      (Stock image)
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      When Jim Steenhuizen wound up in the intensive care unit with massive internal bleeding, doctors ordered a blood transfusion to save him.
      But even though his condition was serious, the father of two refused.
      As a Jehovah’s Witness, his religion forbids taking blood transfusions from another person.
      So doctors tried a new blood replacement product, which was acceptable.
      And after a few weeks, the 48-year-old Anderson man was back at work delivering the mail on his rural route thanks to Sanguinate.
      “I had never heard of it. And I was very thankful for it,” he told The Greenville News. “I try not to think about what might have happened.”
      Dr. Sharif Khan, a hematologist with Bon Secours St. Francis Health System where Steenhuizen was treated, said it’s challenging when providers can’t offer supportive care because of religious restrictions. But Sanguinate could solve that problem.
      “About 85 percent to 90 percent of Jehovah’s Witness patients who are told about this product accept it,” he said. “He got several doses and was stabilized. And he made a complete recovery.”
      Promising alternative
      As a result of vehicle crashes, injuries and illness, about 13.2 million transfusions are performed every year in the U.S., according to the National Institutes of Health.
        And there are 1.04 million Jehovah’s Witnesses, according to nationmaster.com, which compiles data about a variety of issues.
      There are others who can’t take blood transfusions as well, including those who develop multiple antibodies for whom matching blood can’t be found, such as patients with sickle cell disease, Khan said.
      An alternative could be helpful in those circumstances, he said. But earlier efforts to develop such a product have proven unsuccessful, he said, and even dangerous.
      As a physician specializing in disorders of the blood, Khan followed the research and learned about Sanguinate. It looked more promising than the previous attempts.
      Sanguinate is produced through a process that links molecules from cow’s blood with molecules from carbon monoxide to create a bigger molecule that lasts longer than human blood and doesn’t have to be refrigerated, he said. It’s manufactured by New Jersey-based Prolong Pharmaceuticals.
      As a stabilizing agent, Sanguinate is not being considered as a replacement for chronic blood transfusions, he said. Rather, it’s used as a bridge to something else — surgery to stop the bleeding or buying enough time until the body can make more of its own blood, he said.
      Danger zone
      When Steenhuizen arrived at the hospital, he was bleeding severely in his intestines, Khan said. He’d lost more than 80 percent of his red cells — the cells that carry oxygen to the brain, kidneys and other vital organs.
      A search located some Sanguinate at a hospital in Charlotte, he said. And a staffer drove there to retrieve it.
      At the time, Steenhuizen was facing multiple organ failure, Khan said. But after receiving a few units of Sanguinate, his oxygen level improved substantially and he was out of the danger zone.
      “He was completely coherent, his oxygen level was up,” he said. “And made a complete recovery.”
      After that, St. Francis became one of 27 sites involved in a Phase 2 clinical trial of Sanguinate already underway across the country when blood is not an option, whether for religious or medical reasons, he said.
      It’s hoped that it can one day be used by the military in battlefield conditions and by EMTs who arrive on the scene to find a victim bleeding profusely, Khan said.
      “If somebody has been in a crash, the (EMTs) can’t stick an IV into their arm and start blood,” he said. “And the Department of Defense is interested in research into these products for obvious reasons. They are stored like medications on shelves, not refrigerated, and they can be carried in an ambulance or military vehicle.”
      They don’t need to typed either like blood does, he said. And while undetected diseases may be spread through human blood transfusions, the manufacturing process destroys all the organisms in the cow’s blood that might cause disease, he said.
      But Sanguinate is not without risks, though they’re considered manageable, he said. Patients must be monitored closely for potentially dangerous blood pressure spikes and kidney dysfunction.
      Staying alive
      Steenhuizen developed internal bleeding on Feb. 13 — as best anyone can figure from taking ibuprofen for his back pain. Ibuprofen is one of a number of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAIDs, that can cause bleeding in some people. A day later, he was in the ICU.
      At that point, he said, his hemoglobin was a fraction of what it should have been. But a life-saving transfusion was out of the question because of the religion he and his family observe.
      Sanguinate (Photo: Bon Secours St. Francis Health System)
      “Because of my stance as a Jehovah’s Witness, I refused to take blood,” he said. “The Bible states to abstain from blood, that blood is sacred and belongs to God.
      “If I was to die because I didn’t take blood, I would have died in good standing with Jehovah, my God,” he added. “And my family was OK with that.”
      Thankfully, it never came to that. As his concerned doctors were considering surgery to try and stop the bleeding, they decided to try Sanguinate along with other medications he was given. And slowly, his blood count began to rise.
      “The main thing was to boost the oxygen level to the organs to keep me alive,” he said. “Eventually ... my blood cells started going up.”
      Steenhuizen was released after two weeks in the hospital and was back at work on March 11. He no longer takes NSAIDS, says he’s pretty much back to normal, and is glad that Sanguinate is available for him and other Jehovah’s Witnesses.
      “I think it was a great product. And I think it could benefit others,” he said. “It saved my life.”

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Jehovah’s Witnesses break the law forbidding “extremism” when its members refuse blood transfusions, Russia’s Justice Ministry said Thursday at a Supreme Court hearing on the question of banning the religious group in the country. The ministry added that if the organization is outlawed, its members could be prosecuted individually for extremism.
      The Justice Ministry last month suspended the organization’s headquarters in St. Petersburg, alleging that its activities “violate Russia’s law on combating extremism." The country’s Supreme Court Wednesday began hearing a case that could outlaw the Jehovah’s Witnesses, which has 175,000 members and 395 branches across the country, as an extremist organization.
      Jehovah’s Witnesses believe the Bible prohibits the ingesting of blood and so refuse to allow blood transfusions or donations. At a session of the Supreme Court Thursday, a spokesperson for the Justice Ministry argued that the stance meant the organization violated the anti-extremism law that was passed following Russia’s second war in Chechnya in 1999 and 2000 and the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States.
      “Checks have found that the organization is in breach of the law on resistance to extremism,” she said, according to Russian news agency TASS. “In particular, the organization’s religious literature forbids blood transfusion for its members in defiance of the doctors’ recommendation.”
      The group had been warned in March 2016 that it could be banned if further evidence of alleged extremism was found in the following 12 months.
      “The religious organization Jehovah’s Witnesses has been repeatedly warned by courts of law, but it has taken no required measures to eliminate the violations,” the Justice Ministry spokeswoman said.
      A representative for the ministry asserted that the Jehovah’s Witnesses promoted the idea of their exceptionalism and supremacy over other religions, which similarly violated anti-extremism legislation.
      The Supreme Court dismissed a counterclaimfrom the Jehovah’s Witnesses that its members were victims of repression.
      The Jehovah’s Witnesses have strongly denied the accusations against it, arguing that “extremism is profoundly alien to the Bible-based beliefs and morality” of members of the faith.
      The federal United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) said Wednesday that the Justice Ministry’s move “reflects the Russian government’s tendency to view all independent religious activity as a threat to its control and the country’s political stability.”

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By JW Insider
      I can't describe my feelings very well about something I just learned. I seriously don't know how to handle this issue.
      A couple days ago, I made a post in the area of this forum about the blood doctrine. While writing that post, it reminded me that I have been holding on to a couple of questions about the ins and outs of the doctrine, more specifically about why we now accept just about 100% of the products that are made from blood. It's true that we don't accept "whole blood" transfusions, but "whole blood" transfusions are so rarely offered any more that even the word "transfusion" has come to refer to to several blood therapies that JWs regularly accept.
      Anyway, it occurred to me that I should have no problem getting a couple of these specific questions answered because I know some of the people who were involved very deeply in the blood issue. About three years ago, at the end of 2013, I talked to Brother Rusk in NYC immediately after the Annual Meeting. I hadn't seen him for many years. He was also good friends with my wife and he gave our wedding talk back in the very early 1980's. When I met with Fred Rusk in his office at Brooklyn Bethel in 1979 and 1980 to talk about the wedding, my fiancee, and leaving Bethel, among other things, he very often took phone calls about the blood issue. He wouldn't send me out of his office, but would usually just say, can you wait a second, and then he would go on for up to an hour (during my work time) talking to doctors, hospital personnel, elders, circuit overseers, patients, or sometimes a brother down in the Service Department who was trying to word a letter correctly about our policy. Our policy was still fairly straightforward back then. Fractions were not a big "thing" yet, but there were still questions about what did and did not contain blood, or whether certain kinds of blood storage machines were acceptable or not (containing the patient's own blood). There were also issues regarding blood decisions that I had never thought of before, related to child custody, headship over family decisions, etc.
      Brother Rusk died fairly recently, but he wasn't the one involved so much with the new "fractions" policy anyway. The person who began taking over for Brother Rusk as the Society's subject-matter-expert on blood was Gene Smalley, also from the Writing Department.
      These two brothers have very different reputations. Brother Rusk was a very well-loved, peaceful man, who was nearly always soft-spoken, kind, patient and helpful. Even when taking care of a serious issue, you never saw anger. He was a cornucopia of the fruits of the spirit. Gene Smalley was almost the opposite in every way. Spiteful, hateful, bad-tempered, yelling, angry, backbiting, divisive, contentious, etc., etc. (He wasn't that way all the time of course, but often enough to gain a reputation, and more than once threatened with losing his job in Writing.) But his sweet wife Anita just died very recently (from cancer) and I thought this might be a good reason to contact him and, perhaps, if the conversation could be comfortably turned, it could be a chance to get a couple questions answered about fractions. He would know the precise answer. 
      Well, I haven't called him yet. Instead, yesterday, I started asking around from friends who may have seen how he is doing recently. This includes one person who worked with him until fairly recently in Writing, and one person who was a close acquaintance of both Gene and Anita.
      Here is the most disturbing thing I learned. I was told that I shouldn't ask Gene Smalley about the blood doctrine. Although still on the Writing Committee, evidently he has not believed in the Blood Doctrine since about 1992, according to one of the persons I just spoke with. Yet, he has still promoted it and given interviews about it.
      I have always thought of Brother Smalley as the "father of the fractions doctrine." So he would be the perfect person to ask. But the persons I asked are both well known at Bethel, and one of them has even been mentioned in the publications as early as the 1970's. My obvious question was, "Well, if he doesn't believe in it, then why does he still defend it?" Both of the persons I asked gave me the same answer, even though I asked them separately. (Although one could have been repeating the answer they heard from the other.) The answer, paraphrased:
      Even though he doesn't believe in it, he still defended it because of all the persons who have died.
       
    • Guest Kurt
      By Guest Kurt
      February 22, 2017 
      Blood transfusions are a common and often lifesaving procedure. However, some groups, such as 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. , forbid blood transfusions on religious grounds. Recently, the Royal College of Surgeons issued Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  on what to do when a person rejects a transfusion based on religious belief. However, these guidelines need further clarification to make it easier for surgeons to act fully in line with developments in English law when it comes to children. In recent years, there has been a 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. , where the doctor always knows best, and a move towards “shared-decision making” – a process that is enshrined in Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. . This means that the patient is informed of all the risks and, together with the doctor, they make an informed decision. The issue of transfusion refusals is becoming increasingly important because the population of Jehovah’s Witnesses is growing, as well as people who refuse blood transfusions for reasons unrelated to religion. And the guidelines make a good attempt to give direction to surgeons who have to grapple with potentially life-threatening situations involving the refusal of blood transfusions using a patient-focused approach.
      Clarity on adults
      There is a very clear picture about how surgeons should manage adults who refuse such intervention, and there is further practical advice on how they should comply with legal, ethical and regulatory obligations. If these adults have capacity, then their wishes should be respected. If they do not have capacity, the surgeons must act in the patient’s best interests. In emergency situations, as well as surgeons acting in the patient’s best interests actions must also be in line with any advance decision by the patient – if a document is available detailing their wishes.
      Adult refusals will be honoured if sufficient documentation exists – even in emergencies. Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. However, the guidelines are too clear cut in the way they depict the issue of refusals in the case of children. They don’t grapple sufficiently with the developments in the law that have happened since the 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  in 1982. The Gillick case was brought by Victoria Gillick in 1982 in attempt to prevent doctors from giving contraceptive advice and treatment to children under 16-years-old, without informing or receiving consent from their parents. It was eventually dismissed and the judge said that if a child had enough maturity, understanding and intelligence regarding their medical treatment – known as a “standard for capacity” – then they could make decisions on this without parental consent.
      While English law deals with the capacity of 16 to 17-year-old children under the 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. , decisions about children under the age of 16 still rely heavily on the Gillick case and its subsequent developments. However, the 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  for determining capacity has changed since Gillick and it is now pitched at a higher level – which is more difficult for children to reach because it can include, in some instances, a requirement to demonstrate an ability to understand the implications of the consequences of refusing treatment. This can become an almost unattainable standard. Additionally, case law dealing with children has now shifted much of its focus from respecting the autonomy of children to adopting an increasingly more paternal approach. Children – overruled
      In all cases that have been to the English courts, children who have refused transfusions have been found to 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  to make these decisions. Therefore, the courts have consistently overruled the decisions of children. The guidelines state that overruling in the courts “has been the outcome of the majority of cases relating to the refusal of blood”. However, the guidelines should have avoided using the phrase “majority of cases”: no case in English law has upheld a child’s wish to refuse a blood transfusion because doing so has been seen, by the courts, to conflict with the child’s best interests.
      Therefore, satisfying the requirements of Gillick in terms of understanding and intelligence is not enough for children under 16. There is a strong likelihood that the wishes of children possessing these characteristics will still be overruled. This means that the standard of capacity under Gillick is not the only yardstick by which the validity of the decision of the child is measured. It is worth noting that cases in English law 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  that even if a 16 to 17-year-old child has the relevant capacity, his or her wishes may also be overruled by the courts. Parents can overrule their child. Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. Refusing a blood transfusion is, of course, a very serious decision to make, and so the guidelines are right to urge surgeons to be mindful of their obligations to patients. However they are not completely up to scratch in terms of how they tease out some nuanced developments in the law that have the potential to impact on children. More needs to be done to determine what decisions could be made in the courts.
      There are, indeed, flaws with the current approach in English law, but the guidelines must work within it and reflect the context of the law as it stands. The guidelines could, however, be more specific in the way in which they discuss the law, and particular focus could be given to legal developments post-Gillick in relation to children under 16.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  




  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Esther  »  Eric Ouellet

      Bonjour Éric
      Je recherche un discours pour une étudiante. Le thème c'était "Dieu approuve-t-il une religion en particulier ? " 
      Si tu l'as en audio ou écrit, c'est assez urgent car je la vois cet après-midi. 
      Merci beaucoup mon frère
      Esther😉
      · 0 replies
    • folens  »  Esther

      Bonsoir Esther et-ce celui-ci?

      Dieu accepte-_t-_il toutes les religions.docx
      · 1 reply
    • Esther  »  jpl

      Bonsoir Jpl
      Je recherche un discours qui avait pour thème " Dieu approuve t'il toutes les religions ? " C'est pour mon etudiante de la Bible. Si tu l'as écrit ou oral, peu importe, c'est pour qu'elle puisse l'écouter
      Merci beaucoup ! 
      Ta soeur dans la foi
      Esther
      · 3 replies
    • Esther  »  folens

      Bonsoir
      Je recherche un discours qui avait pour thème " Dieu approuve t'il toutes les religions ? " C'est pour mon etudiante de la Bible. Si tu l'as écrit ou oral, peu importe, c'est pour qu'elle puisse l'écouter
      Merci beaucoup ! 
      Ta soeur dans la foi
      Esther
      · 0 replies
    • the Sower of Seed

      Daniel 12:6 Jehovah sends an angel to ask another angel: “How long will it be to the end of these marvelous things?” The other angel "the man clothed in linen" is inspired by Jehovah, raises both hands to Heaven and answers twice! One at verse 7, then verses 11 & 12. Just as the angel raises both hands to Heaven, there are 2 fulfillments, there are 2 beasts, the first dies, but rises again with greater power today. This who Jesus spoke about at Matthew 24: 15 “Therefore, when you catch sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation, as spoken about by Daniel the prophet, standing in a holy place (let the reader use discernment). 
      Today we can use discernment as we see the dashing to pieces of the “power” of the holy ones in the hindrance of the “public” ministry caused by Covid19. We will see a greater attack on that ministry of Spiritual Israel under the rule of the King of the South as the world turns on religion. 
      Jesus stated that no man knows the day or hour, that was true then, because only Jehovah knew how long He gave Satan to prove his point. Only Jehovah could look into the last days and see when the constant feature would stop, the days are counted from then until the first day people will enjoy true happiness. This is the most important day to live for.
      John 4:23 states "Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshippers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him." Why is God having to search for "True Worshippers"? Because the world is almost all "False Worshippers", denied understanding as stated at Daniel 12:10.  It's amazing how He has hidden the truth from minds, religions formed before the last days were formed without all the facts, even though they could read it over and over, because of their heart’s inclination, He has hidden the facts from them. How the primary resurrection will occur on Earth, that the land would be apportioned out to those choosing to live as a subject of the sovereignty of the Almighty God Jehovah. 
      Jehovah longs to talk with His friends of old like Noah, Abraham, David as well as Daniel. Daniel has seen Michael/Jesus stand up and the start of the resurrection which will benefit him, how he will stand up for his lot. verse 13. God has promised them the "Promised Land", a greater land then the small area of Israel, the whole planet will become a blessed restoration of the Edenic starting place. Matthew 19:28 Jesus said to them: “Truly I say to you, in the re-creation, when the Son of man sits down on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes of Israel. Consider too Acts 3:21 "Heaven must hold this one within itself until the times of restoration of all things of which God spoke through the mouth of his holy prophets of old." The true reward that so many have hoped for now has a starting date!    
      If you have given your life to Jehovah and enjoy a relationship with Him, Read and Meditate on Daniel 12, pray for insight and understanding, for knowledge, wisdom, for faith and integrity for the days ahead!  For whether we live or die, we belong to Jehovah and will enjoy our lot just like Daniel.

      · 1 reply
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      64.1k
    • Total Posts
      133.5k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,083
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    gabriel2021
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.