The Blood Issue

by dutyfree 8 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  dutyfree

  I have a question about the infamous blood issue, which I am sure will be very easy for some people to answer.

  In the bible, NIV, NWT, KJ or whatever, the line, '...you should abstain from blood...' is taken literally by the witnesses and they do not take into account other scriptures whilst reading it.

  What other scriptures are there in the bible to support the theory that the writer's intended meaning was not to take it literally? So, in other words, I have argued with JWs that it means to not drink blood as there were no IV needles around then to inject the blood into the veins. But are there any other scriptures to back this up?

  Muchos gracios
• 

  AlanF

  Try Deuteronomy 14:21. It explicitly allows Israelites to sell gentiles an unbled carcass for food. If one acknowledges that God would not specifically allow an Israelite to aid and abet a gentile in disobeying what various Christians say is a universal law given to Noah in Genesis 9:4 about not eating blood, then it follows that the latter cannot mean "do not eat blood at all", but "do not eat the blood of animals you kill for food". The idea is to show respect for the Creator of life by doing something ceremonially special with 'the symbol of life' -- its blood, its soul.

  Thus, Genesis 9:4 only prohibits eating blood from animals killed for food. Since blood for a transfusion is outside that catogory, and Acts 15 is not derived from the Mosaic Law but from Genesis, Acts 15 cannot be used to claim that "the Bible prohibits blood transfusions".

  For a detailed discussion of this and more, see www.jwbloodreview.org .

  AlanF
• 

  You Know

  ***What other scriptures are there in the bible to support the theory that the writer's intended meaning was not to take it literally?***

  There aren't any. In the context of the apostolic decree, they also included fornication and idolatry as things that Christians should abstain from. Since there clearly are no allowances in the Scriptures for partial fornication or a little bit of idol worship, it stands to reason that to abstain from blood means what it says. / You Know
• 

  openminded

  This scripture in Matt 12:10-12 pretty much sums up the silliness of a "blood issue"(there is no issue). Am I missing something here? Please tell me if I am. Please!

  10 and, look! a man with a withered hand! So they asked him, "Is it lawful to cure on the Sabbath?" that they might get an accusation against him. 11 He said to them:"Who will be the man among you that has one sheep and, if this falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not get hold of it and lift it out? 12 All considered, of how much more worth is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do a fine thing on the Sabbath."

  Even Jesus realized that there are exceptions to the law. Especially if human life is on the line.
  How can the Society ignore this lesson from Jesus? How can they so rigidly enforce a law over basic mercy? I simply cannot understand how they can actually keep members in the face of dead kids.
• 

  Camay05

  Leviticus chpt 11 gives very clear dietary rules..there might be something in that chapter in regards to blood..but I am not sure.
• 

  kes152

  Here is what my sister heard from our Lord on this issue. Read it, and if your spirit bears witness on it, GREAT! If not, may you have peace. The 'site' is

  http://members2.boardhost.com/newlight2/msg/706.html

  To the Household of God, Israel, that is in the earth: May you have peace!

  I know that this matter has enjoyed great discussion over the past year or so (indeed, longer), and particularly on H20. To date, I
  have refrained from commenting on the subject, with the exception of stating that it was a 'conscious matter' and the Body of
  Christ would not want to infringe on the conscious of another... whether in deciding to take blood or telling others to refrain... and
  reminding the Body of Christ that the 'change' by the WTBTS was of no concern to us... indeed, we would wait instruction from our
  Leader.

  After that point, I never asked regarding the matter, as I have known and been shown that holy spirit teaches us 'all things'... and
  indeed it has for me. So, I knew that in his given time (the 'proper' time), if my Lord had anything to say on the matter he would.
  And, now, he has.

  I was not considering the matter at all when my Lord came to me and said, "The life is in the blood... the life is in the blood...", to
  which I replied, "Yes, Lord." He then asked me, "Would you, if another's life depended on it, give your blood?" Reminded of the
  'error' of Jezebel, stated in Revelation 3, I answered "NO, Lord!" And as I said 'no', I was reminded of my brother Peter, and the
  'event' when a linen of 'unclean things' descended to him... and he refused to eat.

  My Lord then asked me, "What happens when one eats blood?" and at first I was confused, so I didn't answer right away. "Where
  does it GO?", he asked me. "Does it not pass THROUGH a man, and empty OUT of him, into the sewer?" To which I replied, "Yes,
  Lord." "And is it what goes INTO a man that defiles a man?", asked my Lord, to which I replied, "No, Lord, but it is what comes OUT
  of a man."

  My Lord then asked me, "Would I profane the Covenant of my Father?", to which I replied, "No, Lord, you would not." "And, yet,"
  my Lord asked me, "what is it that I asked you to do with MY blood?"

  Okay, now at THIS point, I was a little startled. "Why, drink it," is what I replied. "And what happens when you drink MY blood?",
  he asked me. Again, I was a bit confused, and so he asked me, "Does it pass OUT of you?" To which I replied, "No, Lord, for your
  blood is holy spirit... and it remains IN me."

  Now, at this point, I thought of the wine that represents my Lord's 'blood' (holy spirit), and he read my heart and said, "Indeed,
  the wine does pass out of you, but my spirit remains, does it not?" To which I replied that yes, it did.

  "How is it then," asked my Lord, that if I am willing to give MY blood for you... so that you may have life, that you are not willing to
  give YOUR blood, so that your brother might live?" Again, I was completely startled. I had never thought of it that way. My Lord
  then asked me, "If your brother were hungry, would you feed him?" to which I replied that I would. "If he were naked, would you
  clothe him?" And I said, "Yes, of course." "But," my Lord asked me, if he were lying in front of you, dying for want of blood, you
  would not give him YOUR blood, YOUR life? Even though I gave you MINE? Truly, no one has greater love than this: that he would
  give his LIFE... for his friends. Is not YOUR life in YOUR blood? And would you not give YOUR life... for your friend?"

  Okay, so NOW... I am really starting to see where he's going with this. "Of COURSE I would give my life," I said. "I would do what
  you did." And he asked me, "I gave my life... and my blood... did I not?" To which I replied, "yes".

  The conversation continued and this is what I given:

  1. In following the 'pattern' of his giving his life for me, I am OBLIGATED to give my life on behalf of others. Since the life is in the
  blood, I am OBLIGATED to give my blood.

  2. 'Abstaining' from blood means abstaining from the consumption of blood for the frivolous maintenance of life. There are other
  'means of maintenance'... food... that can do the job. However, giving another your blood in order to save their LIFE... is a
  demonstration of love. And love... is the Law's fulfillment.

  3. Under the Law Covenant, Israelites could NOT mix blood because the life is IN the blood, and it was by this physical means that
  JAH could tell WHO was Israel. Israel's BLOODLINE proved who they were. However, now that all things 'physical' have been
  REPLACED by that which is spiritual, Israel it not determined by IT'S blood, red homoglobin, but by the 'blood' of God... HOLY
  SPIRIT. Those who have been 'transfused'... anointed... with holy spirit... are Israel.

  4. If given blood were as transgression against the Law Covenant, my Lord would NOT have directed any to 'drink' his. Indeed, he
  gave us wine to represent his blood, but this was because drinking it LITERALLY would have caused it to 'pass through' us and
  empty out into the sewer... thus devaluing its worth. He was not speaking of physical blood that would do this, but SPIRITUAL
  blood, that would stay IN us... and grant us 'life'... his life... the life that was in HIS 'blood'.

  My Lord continued our conversation by saying to me, in response to my concern about going before the throne of my Father and
  having to justify giving another my blood, "What truly does my Father want... for you to OBEY, rather than sacrifice, yes? So, you
  giving your life, rather than trying to gain it... would be in obedience to the 'pattern' that I set, yes?" To which I replied that I
  agreed.

  "And then," said my Lord, "did I not tell you, with regard to the life of OTHERS... 'I want MERCY... and not sacrifice?" To which I
  replied, "Yes". And he asked me, "Then are you willing to extend mercy to another... and give your life, just as I did?" to which I
  replied, "Yes, I am."

  I then asked him, "I am, too, Lord, free to TAKE blood," to which my Lord responded that I was not. I am free to GIVE blood, to
  save another, but as Israel, I am not free to TAKE it. For it is HIS blood, holy spirit, that will save me, that will make "[my] mortal
  alive, through his spirit that dwells in me." Romans 8:11

  He also said that I must know and recognize... and to the extent possible, let any that I give my blood to... that such 'life' is not
  the 'real' life... and any benefit... is temporary.

  To all that have ears... may you 'hear' what the spirit says to the congregation... and may the undeserved kindness and mercy of
  my God and Father, JAH OF ARMIES, and the peace of His Christ, JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH, be upon you!

  Servant to the Household of God, Israel, and a slave of Christ,

  SJ
• 

  You Know

  ***Even Jesus realized that there are exceptions to the law. Especially if human life is on the line.***

  You have misunderstood the account. Jesus was not making an exception to the sabbath law by healing the man's hand. The point Jesus was making is that the Law did not forbid such a thing in the first place. As Jesus said: "So it is lawful to do a fine thing on the sabbath."
  
  ***How can the Society ignore this lesson from Jesus? How can they so rigidly enforce a law over basic mercy?***

  Jehovah's Witnesses are not ignoring Jesus' lessons. The most vital lesson that Jesus ever taught is that obedience to God is more important than life itself. Besides, when it comes to blood transfusions, many thousands of people have lost their lives from a medical proceedure that is supposed to save lives. The number of those who have died from tainted blood or hemolytic reactions doesn't begin to compare to the relative handful of Witnesses that may have died from loss of blood. The latest issue In Great Britain over mad cow disease in donated blood is just one of many dangers that exist. / You Know
• 

  Preston

  Well, Acts 15:19, 20 are generally used to support the belief that blood transfusions are looked down upon. Without looking at the context of the Bible this same reasoning applies to fornication, partaking of what is strangled, and from food offered up to idols. Interestingly, in 1 Corinthians 8 the Apostle Paul says that it's not wrong to partake of food offered to idols, a prohibition of Acts 15:20. A careful study of Acts 15 shows that there were arguments between Jews and Christians as to what aspects of the mosaic law needed to be obeyed by Chrisitnas in order to gain salvation. An example being circumcision. Since the law was fulfilled in Christ (Acts 15:11) one couldn't gain salvation through works of the Mosaic Law no matter how noble a person's deeds were. Neverthless, there was a rift between Jews and Chritstians. So it was laid down in Jerulsalem that the Christians were to abstain from the things mentioned in Acts 15: 19, 20 out of respect toward the Jews and Moses (Acts 15:21). It was fitting for the Christians to abstain from these things in the presence of Jews since foreigners (non-Jews) had to abstain from the very same things in the presence of Jews in Leviticus ch's 17, 18. Many have the impression, as I did, that those scriptures represented the bare minimum of laws that Christians had to uphold. This cannot be for the scripture fails to mention the importance of loving God as well as loving one's neighbor. This is the context of Acts 15:19,20.
• 

  Enlighted UK

  Reply to You Know:

  I hear what you saying regarding risks of disease carried by blood.

  However.... I have been personally informed by a senior paediatric cardiothoracic surgeon working in a top London hospital that "he does not like using blood because of the risks involved. But in some circumstances there are no other alternatives". When someone is critically ill, you must weigh up whether there is greater risk from the physical illness or from possibly infected blood.

  A survey was conducted in the UK this year, 300 hospitals participated, and 69.1% of problems experienced after transfusing blood were caused by the patient being transfused the wrong type of blood in the first place - not by any infection. That is human error and could occur with medication etc.