English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-02-04 18:59:51 · 8 answers · asked by happy 1 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

8 answers

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the scriptures demonstrate a clear pattern indicating the sacredness with which Jehovah God (and thus god-fearing humankind) views all creature blood.


Predates Mosaic Law.
For example, over a thousand years before the birth of Moses, the pre-Israel, pre-Jewish, pre-Hebrew man Noah received what the scriptures record as only the second restrictive command on humans (after Garden of Eden's tree):

"Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you; and as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything. Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning; of every beast I will require it [that is, lifeblood] and of man" (Genesis 9:3-5)


Jewish Law.
Later, God's feeling regarding blood was codified into the Mosaic Law. This part of the Law dealing with blood was unique in that it applied, not just to Israel, but also to non-Jewish foreigners among them. It's also interesting that besides forbidding the consumption of blood, the Law also mandated that it be 'poured out on the ground', not used for any purpose.

"No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood. Any man also of the people of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, who takes in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten shall pour out its blood and cover it with dust." (Lev 17:12,13)

By comparison, it's significant that the Law also forbid the consumption of ceremonial animal fat, but that didn't apply to non-Jewish foreigners and it DID allow the fat to be used for other purposes.

"The LORD said to Moses, "Say to the people of Israel, You shall eat no fat, of ox, or sheep, or goat. The fat of an animal that dies of itself, and the fat of one that is torn by beasts, may be put to any other use" (Lev 7:22-24)


Early Christian era.
The Christian era ended the validity of the Mosaic Law, but remember that the restriction on eating blood preceded the Mosaic Law by over a thousand years. Still, does the New Testament indicate that Jehovah God changed his view of blood's sacredness?

"[God] freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses" (Eph 1:6,7)

"[God's] beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins... and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood" (Colossians 1:13-20)

"we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the pollutions of idols and from unchastity and from what is strangled and from blood." (Acts 15:19,20)

"For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from unchastity." Acts 15:28,29


Modern times
Some will claim that the bible's command to "abstain" from blood only applies to eating it, and does not apply to the use of blood for other purpose. If that form of respect for blood were common among Christendom, one might wonder then why so many (who ostensibly follow the book of Acts) so happily eat their blood sausage and blood pudding if they truly respect blood according to some limited understanding of Acts 15:20,29. In fact, respect for blood and for Acts and for the Scriptures themselves is too rare among even supposedly god-fearing persons.

An honest review of the Scriptural pattern over the millenia from Noah to the Apostle Paul teaches humans that blood is to be used for a single purpose: acknowledging the Almighty. Otherwise, for centuries the instruction was to simply dispose of it; 'poor it upon the ground'. When Jehovah's Witnesses pursue non-blood medical management, they are working to honor and obey their Creator.


Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/hb/
http://watchtower.org/library/vcnb/article_01.htm

2007-02-06 09:29:40 · answer #1 · answered by achtung_heiss 7 · 1 0

This question is getting old, only 10% of those refusing blood are witnesses.

As for people claiming that abstaining (Acts 15:20) only refers to eating, does that mean that only oral sex is bad and that all other forms of fornication are okay?

UCLA now performs bloodless transplants. Google “Bloodless Surgery” and you will find 150 hospitals now offer bloodless options to all their patients.

There is so much in the Bible that they could not have understood the science behind why something should or should not be done. In our modern times, we are learning just how the science fits. A good example was when God instructed his people to no longer allow marriages between close relatives. They didn’t understand what genetics was, or why for 2000 years it was okay, and than it wasn’t. Now, we know why.

There is no safe blood transfusion, even if there is no infectious agent present in it. Every transfusion lowers the body's immunal response and the exact same manner as AIDS does. There may or may not be any connection, but the fact if that it leaves you open very rare diseases, just like AIDS. It still requires coming into contact with the disease for it to become a problem.

That aside, there is the growing problems with contamination of the blood supply.

I'm a taxi cab driver in Kansas City. Ask most any cab driver or taxi passenger in the area who Papa Bear is and they will tell you.

Last Spring, there was a conference here of reps of Blood Services, from all over the world. They were here to learn a new labeling system. Up until this year, there was no uniform labeling system for blood, causing mismatches and other problems.

I had some passengers from London and I asked them about an article I read that England was importing thousands of pinks of blood a year from the U.S. because of contamination of their local supply by Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (Mad Cow). They said they were, but the practice has been discontinued, as the U.S. supply was no longer considered safe within the parameters they set, in other words, what is an allowable percentage of contamination.

They now get it from Australia. Apparently, Canadian is also not considered safe. She said we are fooling ourselves if we think our supply was anywhere near being safe. There are no tests for Mad Cow that can be done on blood. It can only be confirmed after death. There has also been an increasing rate of viral zoonotic (Rabies).

So, if people want to hide their heads and think their safe, go right ahead, but I'll stay with the 90% of non-JWs who are also refusing blood.

The sale of blood and blood products is big money, to where there is a growing problem with over bleeding of those who donate or sell their blood. When you over bleed, the immune system gets activated, causing a production of chemicals to create clots. That can be a problem for those receiving the blood, to suddenly get a blockage in a vein.

It should also be noted that strict Judaism also believes the blood is the soul, which is why when there is terrorist bombing, they clean up every last bit of blood to be buried, even chipping up the roads.

The fact is that what the Jws have done for over 50 years has made the care of patients safer. It is why you must give permission to have your child treated. There is also one benefit of their work for those who do take transfusions. It had driven down the cost of blood as corporations compete to get hospitals to buy from them.

Quality Alternatives to Transfusion
http://www.watchtower.org/e/hb/index.htm?article=article_03.htm

2007-02-04 20:20:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

They believe that taking blood through the mouth or veins violates God's laws. Their basis for this belief is Genesis 9,4: "You shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood" and Leviticus 17, 14, "You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood".
That's the problem when verses in the Bible are interpreted
literally. The blood referred to here are the blood of animals not human beings.
It's a weird religion if I may so.
Have a great day

2007-02-04 19:30:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 4

It is just more of the cults many false teachings. The bible tells us not to eat blood. So God is protecting us by telling us not to eat blood. Great sickness would result from the eating of a animals blood. Blood contains many things we do not desire in us a humans the blood of animals has toxins in it and also other perasites. So no wonder God instructs us not to eat the blood. But no were in the bible are we told not to give blood to save a life and no were in the bible are we instructed not to recieve blood transfusions. Weather whole blood or plasma. The bible states it is more blessed to give then recieve. And God has called us to be givers of life and of ourselfs. Like i said this is the teachings of a cult only and is not supported in the Holy Word of God his Bible.

2007-02-04 19:16:40 · answer #4 · answered by Thomas A 2 · 1 4

Jehovah God's word clearly shows that blood is sacred and of high value in God's eyes as he says, life is in the blood. His Son's, Jesus Christ, spilled blood of his ransom sacrifice can redeem man from sin if he exercises faith in that ransom. God tells us in his word to abstain from blood, that means to voluntarily shun it. If your doctor told you to abstain from blood you would believe it to be OK to just inject it into your veins would you, No, you would stay away from it. Well, God has told us to abstain from blood, so we should obey our God as obedience to God is a must for salvation.

2007-02-04 19:07:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

They believe that you are taking on a part of that person that God never intended us to share...they also don't believe in being organ donors.

2007-02-04 19:07:24 · answer #6 · answered by LS 4 · 0 3

It is sacred to G-D,and we shall not eat thereof.

2007-02-04 19:19:13 · answer #7 · answered by Sweet Willy 3 · 3 1

Blood for what?

2007-02-04 19:03:38 · answer #8 · answered by -♦One-♦-Love♦- 7 · 0 6

fedest.com, questions and answers