Anyone A Jehovah's Witnesses?

Question

I had to summarize an article about a women that was a Jehovah's Witnesses and allegedly died because she did not want to get a blood transfusion around 1998. Can someone please explain this to me? What happerns if u do want to have a blood transfusion?

Answer 1

Jehovah's Witnesses believe in getting the best medical care available for themselves and their families. Many individuals among Jehovah's Witnesses are themselves physicians and other health care professionals.

It is sad when those who have theological differences with the Witnesses actively work to spread misinformation about their beliefs. The fact is that Jehovah's Witnesses have hundreds of hospital liaison committees around the globe to help advance nonblood medical management technologies and awareness in the medical community.

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.

Answer 2

Achtung was very thorough in explaining why Jehovah's Witnesses would not want to have a blood transfusion. I would just like to add, the advancements in medical treatment have made the "need" for blood transfusions obsolete. Thanks to Jehovah's Witnesses willingness to undergo "experimental" procedures, doctors have developed some pretty amazing techniques.
http://www.watchtower.org/library/g/2000/1/8/article_01.htm
From this link, you can discover many of the advancements. I feel it is very important to be informed of these, so that if you are ever faced with a situation where you need surgery, you know you have options. As Papa Bear brought out, the blood supplies are not "safe". One newer danger that many people are not aware of is called TRALI. I'll provide you with a link that discusses that as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRALI
Despite the dangers of blood transfusions, the main reason Jehovah's Witnesses will refuse blood, remains the same, we believe blood is sacred. Acts 15:19, 20, 29 gives us that prohibition. Further, the shed blood of Jesus represents the life he gave in behalf of mankind. It is the key to our Christian hope, which means the forgiveness of sins and hope of eternal life. When we abstain from blood, we are demonstrating our faith in the shed blood of Jesus. It is the only thing that can truly redeem us and save our lives.

Answer 3

Who but someone indoctrinated by the Watchtower could confuse a lifesaving blood transfusion with the eating of blood?
Who but the Watchtower would prohibit blood transfusions even of their pets. (Better not let your cat out, it might eat a mouse without draining the blood).
Who but the Watchtower would tell us that if we get a blood transfusion we might suffer from:
~ moral insanity,
~ sexual perversions,
~ repression,
~ inferiority complexes,
~ urges to commit petty crimes
Who but the Watchtower would say that blood is a symbol of life and then refuses to let it be used to save lives?

The Watchtower says that blood transfusions are "not absolutely prohibited" and a matter of personal choice, but then disfellowships (excommunicates) any member who does.

These points are well documented but you can find most of them at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_and_blood_transfusions

Answer 4

I've been in this position myself, as one of the 90% of non-JWs who also refuse blood transfusions. There are so many of us that over 150 hospitals now offer it to all patients. If she died, than she was at a hospital that refused to keep up on new procedures in this regard. I hope the have changed since than.

There was a conference here in Kansas City of reps of blood banks from all over the world. They were here to learn a uniform labeling system for blood. Prior to then, there was no system, with each blood bank having their own. It caused a lot of mix ups over the years.

Three ladies I had in the taxi were from Britain, where if you are under 18, you could only be given blood donated in America, due to the Mad Cow disease problem. That policy has now changed, as they no longer believe American blood to be safe. They are now getting it from Australia. The problem here is not just disease, but greed. Blood banks having been overebleeding donors to get more blood to sell. Overbleeding cause the immune system to put out large quantities of blood clotting factors. The person getting the blood ends up with a joint of these factors, with the sudden emergence of clots after surgery.