There's some arcane Bible verse that they think prohibits it. The irony is that they approve of plasma transfusions, or other transfusions that just extract part of the blood, but not the whole thing.
2007-06-27 07:06:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The Bible in its entirety gives instruction on what NOT to do with blood.
Genesis 9:3,4
Leviticus 17:11,12
Acts 15:28,29
Hebrews 9:11-14,22
Furthermore, it does talk about the proper use of blood.
JWs have been spared disease and untimely death by obeying this bible based law (avoiding hepatitis, AIDS, and other diseases transmitted by blood transfusions) even before it was discovered in the 1980s. Thank God for his insight and instruction.
Today, bloodless surgery is preferred by many surgeons. It speeds up the healing process and is less costly.
2007-06-27 07:13:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by Roxie J Squared 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
do you recognize, it could make me ill too if this is easily what surpassed off! this is fairly effortless for the media to living house in on undesirable factors and blow them out to such an quantity that the data are lost. Then there is the commonplace public who could somewhat have faith a father could disown his very own new child, than to have faith that there could desire to be yet another tale completely distinctive and this is because of the fact all and sundry needs to think of undesirable human beings, that's exactly what Jesus pronounced could take place! If this that's actual that the father has disowned his new child: 2 possible reasons. One, he's not ALLOWED to make certain his new child because of the fact he's deemed a undesirable make certain and the media are selecting to assert distinctive. 2nd, the names sound some form of African, so that's possible that the father has perplexed the issue and thinks that he can no longer settle for his new child because of the blood transfusion. And just to: reassure you all: if this does take place, by no potential is the new child to blame and as a result i know that if he grow to be my new child i could nonetheless love him and handle him no distinctive to if he had no longer had one. Prejudice is the main significant emotion.
2016-10-03 05:49:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because the Bible tell us to abstain from blood. at acts 15:20.
As to transfusions , the Society, is in the process of changing their view point on the use of blood components. but not whole blood.
2007-06-27 07:18:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by fuzzykitty 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
"The official teaching of Jehovah's Witnesses regards blood as sacred and rejects allogeneic and pre-operative autologous transfusions of whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets or plasma. This is based on an understanding of the biblical admonition to "keep abstaining from blood" based on Acts 15:28, 29 (NWT). Although accepted by a majority of Jehovah's Witnesses, evidence indicates a minority does not wholly endorse this doctrine"
2007-06-27 07:06:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
any religion has some out dated beliefs, like the one ou said. but as i heard muslims do it and have no problem with it.
many JWs are extremists, but i have an iranian jewish friend and he and his family do blood transfusion is it becomes the matter of death and life.
2007-06-27 07:09:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
The passage that says not to eat (partake) of blood is the reason they use.
LEV 17:14
2007-06-27 07:07:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by Atheist Geek 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
They believe it violates the Scriptural prohibition against eating blood.
2007-06-27 07:06:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by Suzanne: YPA 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Weak stomachs. They don't want to whiteness the sight of blood.
2007-06-27 07:07:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
I was told it has something to do with the blood being the spirit. IDK
2007-06-27 07:06:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by Gir 5
·
0⤊
1⤋