Transfusing blood is NOT eating blood

by Rufus T. Firefly 16 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  RubaDub

  I have found a conversation/discussion "stopper" to be something very simple:

  Ask question: Are Christians allowed to eat other people for nutrition?

  Answer: Of course not. That is cannabalism.

  Next question: Then is cannabalism a sin?

  Answer: Of course.

  Next question: Then why can Christians have organ transplants? The organ is put into your body which is OK but eating it is a sin.

  Closing argument: So why do you consider having blood put into your body the same as eating it?

  Game point. (The justifications can be very interesting indeed).

  Rub a Dub
• 

  BluesBrother

  I wonder if this illustration hold up ?

  Premise) The Bible required that animals killed for food had to be bled , and the blood not eaten.

  Does that always apply to the use of blood, even to save a life medically? eg.

  A Christian would not take addictive drugs for recreation ..but supposing your grandmother is dying of cancer and the doctor prescribes morphine in order to relieve her suffering. Is that also wrong? Or do the differing circumstances justify a different decision?
• 

  AndDontCallMeShirley

  The Bible required that animals killed for food had to be bled , and the blood not eaten.

  .

  The Law did allow an Israelite to eat the unbled meat of an animal they found already dead (this means all the blood was still in the meat). And it allowed Israelites to sell unbled meat to Gentiles.

  It goes back to the simple rule that when a life is taken the blood is poured out in acknowledgement of that life. In a blood transfusion, no donor has given their life, therefore, there's nothing to "give back" by pouring out the blood.
• 

  BluesBrother

  Hi Shirley. Funnily enough I now found this comment in the experience of a AJWRB member on another thread . It supports what you say,

  I noticed that even the Law covenant given by God had certain exemptions so as not to be a danger to the life and well-being of its adherents. For instance, on the issue of the command to abstain from eating blood, the “Insight on the Scriptures” makes this observation: “At Deuteronomy 14:21 allowance was made for selling to an alien resident or a foreigner an animal that had died of itself or that had been torn by a beast. Thus, a distinction was made between the blood of such animals and that of animals that a person slaughtered for food”.

  I learned that the scriptures allowed a Jew to eat of the unbled flesh of an animal not slaughtered by human hands if necessary, with no penalties other than a requirement to perform a ritual bathing. Thus, while a starving Jew might not desire to feed on the unbled flesh of a dead animal, such was allowed if necessary. The Levitical priestly class, who had all of their food supplied by the citizens, were restricted from eating such unbled animals.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/medical/282137/1/Gestapo-Tactics-the-Wayne-Rogers-story#.U9ajFfldVXY

  All the best.
• 

  blondie

  Actually it is a fallacy that the cells of a transplant are replaced. I asked the surgeon in charge here about that. He asked why then did his patients have to take rejection medication the rest of their lives.
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Biological cellular tissue is eventually catabolized by the body but this is a destructive metabolism rather than a constructive metabolism. (I.e., catabolism is not nutrition) Because biological cellular structures influence new (replacement) cellular growth of tissue then anti-rejection therapy is necessary to different extents based on transplanted tissue, when a transplant occurred and the expected life of transplanted tissue.
• 

  Island Man

  Actually it is a fallacy that the cells of a transplant are replaced. I asked the surgeon in charge here about that. He asked why then did his patients have to take rejection medication the rest of their lives.

  Blondie is right. A transplanted body part retains the biologically identity of the donor throughout its existence. Cells in the transplanted body part die and are replaced by new cells. But those new cells come about by cell division within the transplanted body part. So the new cells would continue to have the same DNA and other unique biological markers of the donor. This is why anti-rejection medication has to be taken by transplant recipients throughout their lives.