User Reviews

This well-done document provides both information and human interest in its two stories.

Told in parallel, we follow two Jehovah's Witnesses. Joseph Kempler is a Jewish survivor of the Holocaust. He lost his faith as the deaths mounted and the horrors of the concentration camp unfolded for him. Yet in his camp, a separate barracks housed the Jehovah's Witness prisoners, partly to segregate them from the non-Aryans and partly to reduce the proselytizing. These were political prisoners who by following the tenets of their religion refused to swear allegiance to the Fuehrer and the Fatherland. They could leave if their would sign a "loyalty oath". As Joseph lost his faith, he become aware of these protesters, was able to attend clandestine meetings, and eventually took on their religion. We are told his story, including his reconciliation with family members (including a daughter he had pretty much abandoned).

The other story is about twenty-something Seth Thomas, who follows the faith along with the rest of his family. His "auto de fe" comes about with his need for a transplant to replace his (congenitally) diseased liver. He can't have blood products, so the medical establishment won't do the transplant. Eventually UCLA (?) agrees to do an experimental bloodless surgery. With huge risks, he agrees; and his father will provide the partial liver donation. The whole family is faced with the risk of losing two members but are steadfast in their belief that's it's the right way to live (or die).

A lot of history is filled in around these two stories. We find how many of our rights are due to the fights the Jehovah Witnesses have undertaken: they do not vote, they do not protest(?), but they do litigate.

If you are the type to answer that particular knock on the door with "No thanks, get lost", this movie will make you want to ask a few questions, if for no other reason than to exercise nearly-found respect.

I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses and I also work in an acute care medical facility. Over the years I have seen people die from hemolytic reactions to blood transfusions, have attended numerous conferences on blood born pathogens, and have seen several patients become seriously ill from pathogens induced by transfused blood. I have also heard several Jehovah's Witnesses being told that they will die if they refuse blood and after 26 years in the field I have never actually seen it happen, leaving the question, "is it really unreasonable to refuse blood transfusions or is the community at large benefiting from the battle on this issue?" The issue for Jehovah's Witnesses is a moral one. "You must abstain from blood" is not an ambiguous statement. Thank you for this movie and allowing comments on it.

Felt it was very balanced in showing what Jehovahs Witnesses have done in protecting American freedoms. It also showed the strong faith of two families who were first generation witnesses. I also appreciated how it showed how by becoming a Jehovahs Witness affects non-witness family members and how hard it is for them to accept the fact that they don't celebrate holidays, the sad part is that non-witness families do not think of having their witness family over for family dinners/visits or give them gifts at any other times but for holidays or birthdays. When it comes to medical care the witnesses want and expect a high standard of medical care, what people forget is that blood transfusions allow for sloppy medical care and surgeries whereas bloodless treatments causes the medical team to be highly skilled and trained, which would you prefer to treat your loved ones? I highly recommend this video!

I think if you were to ask most JW's whether they expect a miracle cure because of their faith, you will find they do not. I know I do not. What you will find instead is that they believe the promises Christ made of a resurrection. So, even even if the worst were to happen and we die while holding onto our integrity, Jehovah can, and will correct this.

It really gets down to a simple question: is God real to you or is this all just make believe? If he is real, and you trust him, you will follow his directions no matter what the short term outcome may be.

I had a heart attack about a year and a half ago. One in my family was horrified when she saw the words "NO BLOOD" written in large letters over my chart. I reasoned with her that if I were in a position that only a blood transfusion would save my life, would that be a good time to anger the only one could return me to life when the time came? She didn't get it -- God just isn't real enough to her. Too bad. I wish she could have the comfort a strong faith gives.

I am puzzled with the comments by "flowerae" - that "I think that it is wrong to spread the message that there are those that don't accept blood will still live."

Who is spreading this "message"? I ask because I have not seen such a message. Is there rightly a message that avoiding blood has many benefits and as such it actually increases your chances of survival? Well, as a Jehovah's Witness, I can tell you that there are DOCTORS who have told us that.

When Jehovah's Witnesses talk to people, it is not common for them to bring blood up in a conversation. Rather, it is usually other people who do. I always say that I have no right to insist that they should not have a blood transfusion, "that is between you and your Doctor."

On the other hand, I also point out that it would be equally wrong then to tell people, like me, that I MUST have a blood transfusion. It is indeed a very personal matter, between you, the Doctor, your family and what you would never put last on the list, your relationship with God, the Father who gives us all life.

Does that then make us fanatics? I don't think so, no more than those who went to war believing they were fighting for a just cause and willing to die, yes, they will even say for "freedom." Do they not also understand that we are also willing likewise. Not that anybody wants to die, no sane person would. But when God is a real person to you, then we should be "free" and have "freedom" as well, to obey for a higher cause. Just think of all those American bodies on Omaha Beach. To many they died for "something" - it was for what the believed in. Nobody thinks they wanted to die.

The same goes for Jehovah's Witnesses, forcing them to have blood is taking away something they cherish, and it is also about "freedom." Nobody would want to live and be enslaved at the same time.

But, here is the flip side, that God says we will "prosper" if we do "abstain from blood" (Acts 15), that God is not a liar and that the disciple Luke (who wrote Acts) was actually a physician? Yes, several books of the Bible was written by a DOCTOR. May be a coincidence, perhaps, but interesting nonetheless. Avoiding blood has been a blessing - and the benefits hugely outnumbers the negatives, which are actually hard to number at all.

My Mother was told she would die in her 30's if she did not have a blood transfusion and an abortion. She got a better Doctor who did care and did not panic. My kid brother was not aborted, but has kids of his own. My Mother? She is now 82.

I love the last moments of "Knocking" - the part where the Jew JW (that alone sounds funny) on the carousel with that wonderful expression on his face. Priceless.