Question On Blood

Frenchy

I just recently read a post on another board where a person claiming to be a witness claims that she called the Society as was informed by them that it was all right to have one's own blood stored for future use. Anyone else heard of this? Am I just slipping behind the times or could she be mistaken about the matter?

beckyboop

Hi Frenchy,

Yup, you got it right! You can look on the society's official website. I just read it there the other day. It basically said there are no scriptural objections, it's a conscience matter.

Hmmm...I can't remember what the site is--someone help!

Becky

Marvin Shilmer

Hi, Frenchy

If this account is true it signals a departure from WTS policy up to now. But, if she was told that extracts taken from her blood could be stored for future use this would be inline with past policy as long as these extracts were not in the form of red cells, white cells, platelets or plasma. Frankly, WTS policy on blood is so confusing to the average Witness that they could be told the latter and think it meant the former.

Pathofthorns

Any further information on this would be appreciated. If this is truly the case, it would be in a soon-to-be released QFR article.

I can't see why they would object to this, as the stated objection in the past was that the blood was not poured out on the ground but instead "stored". Since massive amounts of blood need to be collected and "stored" for permitted blood fractions, the stand preventing using one's own blood appears inconsistent.

I believe Witnesses are more scared of contracting a disease through blood transfusions than they are concerned over breaking "God's law" on the matter. I suspect if the Society actually does change their policy in this regard, few would object.

There already were blood cards leaked using terminology that would suggest that the Society has been considering this. It would be nice to know they are further dismantling this horrible policy.

Path

Marvin Shilmer

Hello, Path

You wrote:

“There already were blood cards leaked using terminology that would suggest that the Society has been considering this.”

Yes, I forgot about that faux pas. As I recall the retracted “no blood” cards said the holder was refusing allogeneic blood, which is donated blood, whereas self-supplied blood is termed autologous. The sister Frenchy’s talking about might be one of the earliest persons outside Bethel told about an unpublished change that has occurred behind the scenes.

Okay, who wants to call Bethel, with a very specific question?

Frenchy

Thank you for your responses. Maybe someone knows something definite.

Becky, you said: "You can look on the society's official website. I just read it there the other day. It basically said there are no scriptural objections, it's a conscience matter."

I did a quick look see but I don't see anything new there. Are you perhaps referring to the 'quick recovery' of blood during surgery that is now permitted?

Join the Watchtower or you will die.
Only Jehovah's Witnesses have the TRUTH all other religions EVIL and from the Devil.
You must beleive the Watchtower or you're going to die a painful death forever, isn't that really GOOD NEWS?

Elsewhere

Wow, the WTS's views and data change just as fast as the IT field!!!

One day, "WOW! Look at this new thing!" The next day it is out dated and passé.

I could have sworn I heard someone say "God does not change".

"As every one knows, there are mistakes in the Bible" - The Watchtower, April 15, 1928, p. 126
Believe in yourself, not mythology.
<x ><

Question On Blood

Frenchy

beckyboop

Marvin Shilmer

Pathofthorns

Marvin Shilmer

Frenchy

Marilyn

TheStar

D wiltshire

Elsewhere

Share this