Comments You Will Not Hear at the 7-24-04 WT Study (Abbreviated)

by blondie 12 Replies latest watchtower bible

blondie

Comments You Will Not Hear at the July 24, 2004 WT Study (June 15, 2004 issue) ABBREVIATED
Review comments will be in black and parentheses ()
WT quotes will be in red and quotes ""
Quotes from other sources will be in blue
RIGHTLY VALUE YOUR GIFT OF LIFE

"The blood of the Christ [will] cleanse our consciences from dead works that we may render sacred service to the living God."?Hebrews 9:14 NWT
If the blood of animals can do that, then the blood of Christ will clean our hearts much better. Christ gave himself to God as the sacrifice. He did this by the Spirit who lives for ever. He was a perfect sacrifice. He will clean our hearts from useless acts of worship. Then we can serve the living God.?Hebrews 9:14 Worldwide English Translation
www.biblegateway.com /cgi-bin/bible
Opening Comments
This is the introductory article to the more "meaty" article next week reviewing the points from the June 15, 2000 Questions from Readers on blood fractions. I?m sure the WTS has been getting many letters and phone calls from the "faithful" wanting specific endorsements and clarifications of treatments using blood fractions. When I called my local Hospital Liaison Committee because the elders would not venture an opinion, I found they would not give a definitive opinion either.
Can something so important be left to an individual?s conscience? Will your selection be in line with the WTS or elder body?s conscience? Will you be DF?d for your decision based on your personal conscience?
If you are an "active" JW and read my reviews, I encourage you to humbly inquire of your elders and local HLC.
The following are just some points that occurred to me as I read the article from my perspective of being a JW for over 40 years.
START OF ARTICLE
Paragraphs 1-3
We highly value life?our own and that of others.

Not too highly that they could waffle on the use of organ transplants.
Up till 1967?conscience matter

w61
8/1 p. 480 Questions from Readers
Is
there anything in the Bible against giving one?s eyes (after death) to be transplanted to some living person??L. C., United States.
The question of placing one?s body or parts of one?s body at the disposal of men of science or doctors at one?s death for purposes of scientific experimentation or replacement in others is frowned upon by certain religious bodies. However, it does not seem that any Scriptural principle or law is involved. It therefore is something that each individual must decide for himself. If he is satisfied in his own mind and conscience that this is a proper thing to do, then he can make such provision, and no one else should criticize him for doing so. On the other hand, no one should be criticized for refusing to enter into any such agreement.

1967-1980?disfellowshipping matter

w67
11/15 p. 702 Questions from Readers
When there is a diseased or defective organ, the usual way health is restored is by taking in nutrients. The body uses the food eaten to repair or heal the organ, gradually replacing the cells. When men of science conclude that this normal process will no longer work and they suggest removing the organ and replacing it directly with an organ from another human, this is simply a shortcut. Those who submit to such operations are thus living off the flesh of another human. That is cannibalistic. However, in allowing man to eat animal flesh Jehovah God did not grant permission for humans to try to perpetuate their lives by cannibalistically taking into their bodies human flesh, whether chewed or in the form of whole organs or body parts taken from others.

1980-now?conscience matter again

w80
3/15 p. 31 Questions from Readers ***
Some Christians might feel that taking into their bodies any tissue or body part from another human is cannibalistic
. (I wonder where they got that idea?see above) They might hold that the transplanted human material is intended to become part of the recipient?s body to keep him alive and functioning. They might not see it as fundamentally different from consuming flesh through the mouth.
w80
3/15 p. 31 Questions from Readers ***
Other sincere Christians today may feel that the Bible does not definitely rule out medical transplants of human organs.
(but waited on Jehovah to correct the WTS official opinion until 1980) They may reason that in some cases the human material is not expected to become a permanent part of the recipient?s body. Body cells are said to be replaced about every seven years, and this would be true of any human body parts that would be transplanted. It may be argued, too, that organ transplants are different from cannibalism since the "donor" is not killed to supply food.
w80
3/15 p. 31 Questions from Readers ***
For this reason, each individual faced with making a decision on this matter should carefully and prayerfully weigh matters and then decide conscientiously what he or she could or could not do before God. It is a matter for personal decision. (Gal. 6:5) The congregation judicial committee would not take disciplinary action if someone accepted an organ transplant. (which means they would have before 1980)
What if you or a loved one had lived during 1967-1980 and have needed a transplant? If you had obeyed the WTS and refused one and died???Would they take responsibility for the error in their interpretation?
It is right to "listen" to God obediently, desirous of grasping and acting on his view of life rather than preferring any other assessment of life.

Was God speaking in the pages of the WT when the doctrine of organ transplants flipflopped?
Show Respect for Life
Paragraphs 4-7
Note that Abel?s blood on the ground represented his life.
[God} said that humans could eat animal flesh---its blood?you must not eat?Some Jews interpret that to mean that humans were not to eat flesh or blood of an animal that was still alive?But time would clearly show (how?) that what God was here prohibiting was the consuming of blood (animal) to sustain life.
God views a man?s blood as standing for his life?represented by blood.
Not to misuse blood?involves one of the most important teachings in the Bible?the very core of the Christian message, though many churches choose to ignore it (explanation?).

Blood?How Could it Be Used?
Paragraphs 8-10
Jehovah provided more details?Law code?animal sacrifices?"blood?have put it upon the altar."
Jehovah added that if someone, such as a hunter or a farmer, killed an animal for food, he had to drain the blood and cover it with dust?by pouring the blood on the earth, the person acknowledged that the life was being returned to the Life-Giver.
Sidepoint for next week: Research how hemoglobin-based products such as Hemopure are made. How does the principle above factor in?
That law was not a mere religious ritual with no import for us.
Do Christians follow the Law?
The Creator chose to view blood as having an elevated significance, reserving it for one special use?covering sins (atonement). So under the Law, the only God-authorized use of blood was on the altar to make atonement for the lives of the Israelites.
The Life-Giver?s Solution
Paragraphs 11-20
The Law was actually pointing to something vastly more effective.
Recall that in Noah?s day decreed that humans could eat animal meat to sustain life, but that they could not take in blood.
Is that what the Bible says, "take in blood"?
"its blood?you must not eat." Genesis 9:3,4
In dying for us, Christ provided a ransom to cover our sins. That ransom is at the core of the Christian message.
Some churches emphasize Jesus? death, their adherents saying such things as "Jesus died for me." (I know quite a few JWs that would say that!)
The WTS quotes Ephesians 1:7 from The American Bible (1902), Today?s English Version (1966), The New Testament (1969), and The Translator?s New Testament (1973) purposely picking Bibles that are either not very well-known or used to prove that the churches above?
Overlook a very important point which could limit your understanding of the Bible?s message. Such renderings obscure the fact that the original text of Ephesians 1:7 contains a Greek word that means "blood."
What happens when I select all the translations in the Bible Gateway URL from the beginning of this review?
Ephesians 1
7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace
© Copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society New International Version (NIV)

Ephesians 1
7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace
© Copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society All rights reserved worldwide Ephesians 1:7 :: New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Ephesians 1
7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace
© Copyright 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation Ephesians 1:7 :: The Message (MSG)
Ephesians 1
7 Because of the sacrifice of the Messiah, his blood poured out on the altar of the Cross, we're a free people--free of penalties and punishments chalked up by all our misdeeds. And not just barely free, either. Abundantly free!
© 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 2000, 2001, 2002 by Eugene H. Peterson Ephesians 1:7 :: Amplified Bible (AMP)

Ephesians 1
7 In Him we have redemption (deliverance and salvation) through His blood, the remission (forgiveness) of our offenses (shortcomings and trespasses), in accordance with the riches and the generosity of His gracious favor,
© Copyright 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by The Lockman Foundation Ephesians 1:7 :: New Living Translation (NLT)

Ephesians 1
7 He is so rich in kindness that he purchased our freedom through the blood of his Son, and our sins are forgiven.
Holy Bible. New Living Translation copyright © 1996 by Tyndale Charitable Trust. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers. Ephesians 1:7 :: King James Version (KJV)
Ephesians 1
7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; Public Domain Ephesians 1:7 :: New Life Version (NLV)

Ephesians 1
7 Because of the blood of Christ, we are bought and made free from the punishment of sin. And because of His blood, our sins are forgiven. His loving-favor to us is so rich.
1969 by Christian Literature International Ephesians 1:7 :: English Standard Version (ESV)
Ephesians 1
7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace,
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Ephesians 1:7 :: Contemporary English Version (CEV)
Ephesians 1
7-8 Christ sacrificed his life's blood to set us free, which means that our sins are now forgiven. Christ did this because God was so kind to us. God has great wisdom and understanding,
© Copyright 1995 by American Bible Society Ephesians 1:7 :: New King James Version (NKJV)
Ephesians 1
7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace
© Copyright 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Ephesians 1:7 :: 21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
Ephesians 1
7 in Whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace,
© Copyright 1994 by Deuel Enterprises, Inc. Ephesians 1:7 :: American Standard Version (ASV)
Ephesians 1
7 in whom we have our redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace,
© Copyright 1901 Public Domain Ephesians 1:7 :: Worldwide English (New Testament) (WE)

I consider this very deceptive of the WTS!
Concluding Comments
I know that this article and the following one were discussed when they first came out.
If anyone can find that topic and post it here, please do.
Blondie
TD

Hi Blondie:
I know that this article and the following one were discussed when they first came out.
If anyone can find that topic and post it here, please do.
Lee Elder / Sam Muramoto:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/16/74548/1.ashx
My two cents:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/16/73658/1.ashx
Leolaia

I consider this very deceptive of the WTS!

blondie....I'm just a little confused since the portion of the article citing Ephesians 1:7 was not provided. What does the NWT, TEV, etc. say that conflicts with the versions you cited?
mineralogist

I consider this very deceptive of the WTS!
Same in the german issue: citing some outdated or not commonly used bible translation - not ONE of my 13 different bibles renders it WITHOUT "blood".
blondie

blondie....I'm just a little confused since the portion of the article citing Ephesians 1:7 was not provided. What does the NWT, TEV, etc. say that conflicts with the versions you cited?

Sorry, Lee, I had time constraints. But those references left out "blood" in the translation which is what the WTS was trying to say, that is, by using those outdated, seldom used translations that people were not getting the full import of Ephesians 1:7. What I showed is that is the vast majority of Bible translations that scripture IS translated with the phrase "the blood of Christ." The WTS is making a connection between blood transfusions and the blood of Christ. Because these people supposedly never hear or read that phrase in their Bibles, that is why blood transfusions are acceptable to them.
"through his death?/American Bible
"By the death of Christ"/TEV
"It is in and through Christ"/The NT
"It is through Christ's death"/The Translator's NT
Thanks, TD for those URLs.
Thanks, mineralogist, letting us know that the "food" is the same in every country.
Blondie
Maverick

Thank you Blondie!
This subject is near and dear to my heart, (and the blood that flows through it).
I was in a very bad accident as a young child. Smashed up real bad and blood was required in the form of whole body transfusions. We are talking the late 1950's and I still have the scars on both ankels as a reminder. My grandmother was a JW and tried to talk my mother into letting me die. My mother told her where she, and all her JW pals, could go in no uncertain terms. 36 procedures and forty plus years later I'm still here. Does this mean I should have die and all that I've done, including fathering my daughter, should not have happened? Will God have to correct this matter in His due time? Has this action upset the timeline of the universe? How many children, and there children, are not here and did not have an advocate to guard their lives as I did?
The WatchTower and its leadership have amassed blood-guilt clear to heaven! Mav
jgnat

As a Christian non-JW, I understand the significance of Jesus' shed blood, as blood is a symbol of life, and sacred. With blood we live, without it we die. Jesus' gift of blood has great significance for me. No JW has satisfactorily explained to me why it would be a sin for me to give my blood as a gift to others to save their lives.
The two deceptive paragraphs that Blondie references, I type here in full. This reasoning is a "straw man", I believe, since these translations are rarely used today. In the evangelical circles I frequent, the most popular bible is the New International Version. In traditional churches it is the King James Version or the Revised Standard Version.
14 Some churches emphasize Jesus' death, their adherents saying such things as "Jesus died for me." Consider how some Bible translations render Ephesians 1:7: "It is in him and through his death we have deliverance, that is, the putting away of our offences." (The American Bible, by Frank Sheil Ballentine, 1902). "By the death of Christ we are set free, and our sins are forgiven." (Today's English Version, 1966) "It is in an through Christ and the sacrifice of his life that we have been liberated, a liberation which means the forgiveness of sins." (The New Testament, by William Barclay, 1969) "It is through Christ's death that our sins are forgiven and we are set free." (The Translator's New Testament, 1973) You can see in such renderings an emphasis on Jesus' death. 'But,' some may say, 'Jesus' death is truy important. So, what is lacking in these renderings?'
15 Really, if you had to depend on such translations, you might overlook a very important point, and this could limit your undersdanding of the Bible's message. Such renderings obscure the fact that the original text of Ephesians 1:7 contains a Greek word that means "blood". Thus, many Bibles, such as the New World Translation, come closer to the original: "By means of him we have release by ransom trhoug the blood of that one, yes, the forgiveness of trespasses, according to the riches of his undeserved kindness."
jgnat

Ephesians 1:7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace (Revised Standard Version 1952)
Leolaia

Ahhh, ty, blondie and jgnat....now I understand what the point was. When I read the original post, I thought the Society was citing those translations to hide the fact that the word "blood" was in the text, which of course got me totally confused....
blondie

Maverick, what an experience!
I was in a very bad accident as a young child. Smashed up real bad and blood was required in the form of whole body transfusions. We are talking the late 1950's and I still have the scars on both ankels as a reminder. My grandmother was a JW and tried to talk my mother into letting me die. My mother told her where she, and all her JW pals, could go in no uncertain terms. 36 procedures and forty plus years later I'm still here.
I?m glad your mother did not let others intimidate her and followed her own principles. Even as a JW I found it foolish for many JWs to just blindly say no blood, without seeing if the procedure was permissible by JW standards. I know that is partly why the WTS is repeating this information which appeared in a Questions from Readers in 2000 but now in a WT study discussion next week. Too many JWs stay uninformed about what is new in medicine and what is allowed by the WTS to JWs.
Thanks, jgnat, for typing those paragraphs.
And to Lee, again, it is very deceptive.
Ahhh, ty, blondie and jgnat....now I understand what the point was. When I read the original post, I thought the Society was citing those translations to hide the fact that the word "blood" was in the text, which of course got me totally confused....
Think of it this way. First the WTS cites 4 basically not very well known translations, to neither JWs or non-JWs, all which leave out the mention of "blood." Then knowing that few if any JWs have read any other translation other than the NWT, they hide the fact that the "blood of Christ" appears in numerous translations used by millions of Christian non-JWs. I showed that in all the translations I found under Bible Gateway, that the blood of Christ was not only mentioned but made extremely important in the Christian theology.
Blondie

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 7-24-04 WT Study (Abbreviated)

Share this