Letting JESUS refute the Watch Tower blood policies

by Terry 33 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  sarahsmile

  They did not have blood transfusions in the bible. All the scriptures were referring to not drinking blood because of ritual practices in front of idols.

  Did you ever noticed how the society delibrately leaves out scriptures about; what would you do for your friend? A true friend GIVES his life for his friend. That is the basic bibical foundation for blood transfusion. You give your blood for them which represents life.

  Consdering how awful animals are treated, How would a JW know that the chickens did not get its head twisted,strangled,before chopped! Ekks! They do not care about the meat strangled. Should JW go to a certain places just to buy meats?
• 

  BU2B

  Very nice work. I will use this information and reasoning. Thank you :_)
• 

  problemaddict

  Well done. I think the lynchpin in reasoning using the western text type, is wether the society has choosen to try to debunk it. Ha!

  Is there any material at all the refferences or perhaps even uses it in the society publications? That would automatically lend credit to their use, and could be quite damning.
• 

  problemaddict

  what bible did you quote from Terry.
• 

  Terry

  Thanks Bobcat, for answering Eden's question.

  Problemaddict, I compiled this information over a long period of time and can no longer

  recall which translation I used! Sorry about that, Chief!

  I wanted to make this much simpler, but I had reached the point where the facts got lost if I scaled it down more.

  a smarter person than myself could do a better job of it.
• 

  Finkelstein

  In theoretical Bible interpretation, blood could still be considered sacred and passed on to another human being

  as a direct means to save that person's life, keeping the dietary abstinence law intact.

  All supported incontestably in the Bible's own scriptures.

  The leaders of the WTS. have shown once again their inept amateurish bible theology, which by their own

  staunch aggressiveness irrevocably resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people, some who

  were just innocent naive children.
• 

  Terry

  The WTS is not charitable toward human beings. They demonstrate no love for the brothers and sisters.

  The glee and zeal for a world holacaust (Armageddon) is their only happiness.

  Sort of sickening, isn't it?

  I was reading something yesterday that caught my attention.

  The Consolation magazine was filled with extreme views, anti-medical propaganda, crackpot diet/health fulminations, and general

  rants and preachments of an anti-scientific coloration.

  I wish I could find the exact quote. One of the reasons given for the NO-TRANSFUSION prejudice centered on the idea

  the Army would not allow black people (called Negroes) to donate blood during WWII, therefore the transmission of traits, characteristics,

  personality, etc. was likely a RISK for anyone receiving donated blood.

  That racial element jumped out at me. Interestingly repugnant, isn't it?
• 

  problemaddict

  Oh man.....where is THAT article!
• 

  sarahsmile

  Terry that is just awful!
• 

  smiddy

  Clearly, Jesus demonstrated the over-riding principle was the precious saving of life even if it meant superficially breaking the Law!

  If this applies to Sabbath breaking to bring about healing and preserving of life:

  WHY WOULDN'T IT APPLY TO BLOOD as well?

  LIFE is more precious than law.

  Thanks Terry , this thread is by far the best explanation I have ever come across for having a blood transfusion.

  The scriptures that the society use , are really saying do not become blood -guilty before God.

  The scripture that comes to my mind is 1 Sam.14:31-35 The soldiersaul disobeyed Gods law regarding blood for fear of starvation , and they were not condemned by God. .... As you said , the preservation of life trumps over the obedience to a law.

  smiddy