Tonight's service meeting

by sspo 35 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • SirNose586
    SirNose586
    They told me that they were willing to meet with me and help me out with whatever they could, give me advice, etc. but I knew I was going to end up being disfellowshipped anyway if they found out I was gay so I just decided to stop attending the meetings. But I still enjoy reading their publications. And I miss that. I don't get the magazines anymore. And I'm sure they wouldn't talk to me if they saw me out. lol

    Welcome, justahuman! Good that you avoided the kangaroo court. I'm one of those guys still trapped in the Tower.

  • blondie
    blondie

    Blood tests---------Notice how the WTS dances around this:

    *** w78 6/15 pp. 29-30 Questions From Readers ***

    A doctor said that prior to surgery a patient could have some blood withdrawn and stored, in the event that a transfusion is needed during surgery. How should a Christian view such use of his own blood?

    From the standpoint of those in the medical field, this procedure may seem quite practical. There are grave dangers in accepting a transfusion of someone else’s blood. Seemingly fewer risks are involved if a person is given a transfusion of his own blood. So there is a trend among doctors to use the procedure called "autologous transfusion." This involves drawing off the patient’s own blood and "banking" or storing it for transfusion purposes when necessary. If not needed by the donor, the blood may be used for other patients.

    As the information on pages 22-25 of this magazine shows, the transfusing of blood conflicts with the Bible. The Scriptures reveal that God considers blood to be sacred, and his servants should treat it accordingly. In line with this, Jehovah God told the Israelites that they could do only two things with blood. First, God said: "I myself have put it upon the altar [of sacrifice] for you to make atonement for your souls." Secondly, if an animal’s blood was not used on the altar, the Israelite was to pour it out on the ground; he thus acknowledged that life is from God and that the blood representing life was not being diverted for some personal use. (Lev. 17:11-14) But was this way of treating blood just for God’s servants under the Mosaic law? On the contrary, logically, true worshipers, prior to the giving of the Law, already had been dealing with blood in this way.

    God had earlier told Noah and his family that humans should not eat flesh with blood in it. (Gen. 9:3, 4) So what would have been done? When an animal was killed for food, its blood would normally have been drained off and disposed of on the ground. The life-representing blood did not belong to Noah and his family but belonged to the Life-Giver. Accordingly, it would be appropriate to pour out the blood on the earth, which is God’s symbolic "footstool."—Isa. 66:1.

    The command to Noah also applies to Christians. In the first century C.E., the Christian governing body published the decision, backed by the holy spirit, that Christians must ‘abstain from things strangled and from blood.’ (Acts 15:19, 28, 29) What would that mean in practice? The expression "things strangled" designates the flesh of animals that were killed in a manner that left their blood in the meat. Christians could not eat such flesh. How about the phrase ‘abstain from blood’? This would prohibit the using of blood drained from such a creature, as in the case of some pagans, who made and ate blood sausage or other blood-containing foods or who drank blood that came from animals or warriors killed in the arena. Christians would not do any of these things. When they drained blood from a creature, they would do what God’s servants in the past had done, abstain from it. They could thus underscore their appreciation for the sacredness of blood and life and also demonstrate their dependence on the merit of Christ’s blood.

    So, if medical personnel suggest that a Christian permit some of his blood to be withdrawn and deposited in a blood bank for later transfusion purposes, the Christian is not without guidance from the Bible as to the proper course. He can mention that ancient Israelites were told that removed blood was to be ‘poured out on the ground as water,’ to show that it was for God and not to sustain the life of some earthly creature. (Deut. 12:24) And he can refer to the pointed command that Christians ‘abstain from blood.’ In view of this, how could he allow his blood to be collected in a blood bank for later transfusion into himself or another person?

    ?

    Whataboutadevicesuchasaheart-lungpumporadialysis(artificialkidney)machine?MightaChristianusesuch?

    There are Christian witnesses of Jehovah who, with a good conscience, have allowed these devices to be used, provided that the machines were primed with a nonblood fluid, such as Ringer’s lactate solution.

    When this sort of device is operating, the patient’s blood flows from a blood vessel through tubing and the machine (where it is pumped, oxygenated and/or filtered) and then flows back into his circulatory system. The machine temporarily performs some of the functions normally handled by the patient’s own organs.

    Some Christians have conscientiously reasoned that the blood is flowing continuously and that the external circuit might be viewed as an extension of the circulatory system. They have considered it comparable to a piece of tubing that might be implanted in the body to shunt blood around a blockage in a vessel.

    Of course, each Christian should weigh what is involved in the use of these and similar devices. He could consider whether he views the blood involved to be blood that clearly has left his body and so should be disposed of or as blood that, basically, is still part of his circulatory system. (Deut. 12:16) Then he can make a decision that will leave him with a clear conscience before God.—1 Pet. 3:16.

    ?

    Would it be wrong to submit to a blood test?

    Based on their knowledge of the Scriptures, most of Jehovah’s Witnesses, if not all, do not object to such tests. The small quantity of blood removed from the body is not eaten or injected into someone else. It is merely examined or tested before being disposed of.—Deut. 15:23.

    (what scriptures are they talking about....what happened to pouring out the blood...they just said in the question before that it was not just eating it or transfusing it, but Christians must pour it out)

    *** w60 11/15 p. 690 par. 18 Marrying in Honor ***

    It is only proper to submit to blood tests and other medical examination required before marriage and the obtaining of the marriage license.

    *** w52 6/15 p. 362 The Marriage Ceremony ***

    They must also have complied with the laws of the land, such as obtaining the proper license, waiting the required time designated by law after receiving the certificate and, where required, obtaining the necessary blood tests, health check-up, etc.

    Blondie

  • TheListener
    TheListener

    Loosie, the card that ajwrb has up isn't the newest US card. A revised card (just like the card in the UK, almost) was issued in January '05. I'll see if I can find mine and scan it in.

    It has a list of components and you check off whether you will accept, not accept or are willing to discuss it. I should have a blank somewhere floating around the house.

    Unlike the past there is no reason to update the card each year. You only fill one out if your decisions have changed, or if you move to a different state.

  • garybuss
    garybuss

    Please post the current USA blood wallet card.
    I found this for UK.

  • garybuss
    garybuss

    Here's link to a 2001 no blood medical directive.

    http://www.womensheartfoundation.org/PDFs/ad_bloodless_care.pdf

  • sandy
    sandy

    Thanks for that post Blondie . . . I knew I could count on you.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit