Jehovah Witnesses: Is it true that in Bulgaria that Witnesses can receive blood transfusions?

Question

I just read this in another answer. Can you verify or refute this info?

On March 9, 1998, the European Commission of Human Rights accepted a settlement between the government of Bulgaria and the Christian Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses in which Bulgaria, in exchange for a significant concession from the Witnesses, agreed to recognize the Witnesses as an official religious organization.

The Bulgarian government, in order to reach an agreement, will now provide civilian service for conscientious objectors to military service (Information Note No. 148, ). The compromise made by the Society is far more noteworthy. The Society agreed, regarding blood transfusions, that “members should have free choice in the matter for themselves and their children, without any control or sanction on the part of the association” (Ibid.; emphases added).

To TRK: When the governing body says you can fornicate and take drugs in certain circumstances, then your argument will hold water. those examples are not pertinent to the argument. The Governing Body modified your churches position....one you claim is scripturally sound...and said "you guys choose for yourself". it's either wrong or it isn't!!! I'll loook forward to the pronouncements on fornication being optional!

To Keiichi: Your organizations position on this has NEVER been optional. You expressley teach against blood transfusions! You can't deny that. It appears the Governing Body "made a deal" with the Bulgarians to gain acceptance there. That's like the JW's in San Francisco saying "WE won't preach against homosexuality if you give us special treatment."

Answer 1

JR, then I submit that your organization lied to the Bulgarian government, since the agreement clearly says "no religious sanctions".
I know you believe you owe no allegiance to earthly governments, but how about just keeping your word?

No religious sanctions means stoning??? LOL
Disfellowshipping is a religious sanction. Catholic church has been doing it for centuries.

Also, the same verses used to ban transfusions were once used to keep Witnesses from being vaccinated. Clearly that policy changed. The JW's had to change their stated policy in order to gain acceptance from an earthly government. What about obeying God, rather than men? They won't salute the US flag, but they'll compromise what they consider to be God's order against transfusion to get in good with the Bulgarians?

EDIT: Your organization told the Bulgarians that NO religious sanctions would be taken. So, you had to promise the Bulgarians you wouldn't stone people to death?? Come on, you know fully well what was agreed to.
EDIT2: JR, from exchanges with Hannah J Paul, she was ADAMANT about not taking blood. I sense there exists a difference of opinion about this in your group. I just find it interesting that given your groups position on earthly governments that the Governing Board would cave in on this.
I still wonder about how the families of those who've died because of this policy feel about this new stance.

Answer 2

Actually that information would be incorrect that other countries according to the WTBTS accept blood transfusions based on a persons conscience decision.The correct statement is that all JW's have to make conscience decision on whether they will accept blood fractions, not a whole blood transfusion, that includes all of it's components no matter what the percentage is.

Plasma is a primary component of whole blood and is not acceptable for any of us(JW's) to accept into our bodies.At this present time only fractions that are no longer a component of whole blood is acceptable for use instead of a blood transfusion, but it is still a question of ones personal conscience to decide to use them or not, because there is nothing in God's Word as regards to fractions of blood, only whole blood and it's components are what is sacred and must not be eaten, or in this case taken internally into the body as a blood transfusion.

So where you heard that the WTBTS states that in other countries, we as Jehovah's Witnesses accept blood transfusions after making a personal conscience decision, is in fact a false statement.

As for the document in question, The Mosaic Law for instance spelled out in minute detail how the Israelites were to conduct themselves not only in religious matters but also in business dealings, marital relations, dietary and sanitary practices and, of course, judicial decisions. The Law also carried strict sanctions against violators, even imposing the death penalty in some cases.

This is not the case today, the Witness who accepts a blood transfusion will not be harmed in any way so there is no "threat to public health".

This is clearly stated in the Watchtower April 27, 1998 Press Release:

Jehovah's Witnesses are pleased that, through open communication, an amicable settlement was made between the Christian Association of Jehovah's Witnesses and the Government of Bulgaria. The terms of the agreement do not reflect a change in the doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses. Rather, the agreement reflects an increased understanding of the concerns and actions of both parties.

Answer 3

No, they aren't allowed at all, because the Bible makes it clear on how we should treat blood..


The Watchtower submitted that there are no religious sanctions against blood like there were when the Mosaic Law was around. People in that time was killed for violating it, but that is not the case today for JWs.. they just disfellowship whoever accepts blood. So the thing is, its based on one personal decision if they want to disobey or accept the command God gave us.

Greg M.
The Mosaic Law had religious sanctions that resulted in death, but that is not the case here.. we do not harm anyone.

Greg M.
The Watchtower wanted to legalize their work in Bulgaria. In 1994, the government of Bulgaria thought the blood ban by the Watch Tower was threat a public (in some sort of way). They made a deal that Watch Tower will not take any actions on the Bulgarians who accept blood transfusions, because they have disfellowshipped themselves. They cannot control any do anything with people who chooses to accept blood and so forth.

Everything is based on what a person wants to do.. they will not harm anyone that disobey Gods law. If they choose to accept blood, then thats on them. They would have disfellowshipped themselves by doing so.

unsilenced lamb

I never said is was not a disfellowship offense.

Greg M.
Yes Im aware of that, just like any other Witness is. Those sanctions have to do with further harm, or treat to public heath like the article states... Nothing has changed on Blood and it never will.. If you can't reason, then I have nothing else further to say.

Answer 4

JWs can do anything they want to do almost anywhere in the world. The real question is, what is pleasing to Jehovah?

In the Bible, true Christians are to abstain from blood. Today with all the fractions of blood in medicine, it is no longer an open and shut case. At the molecular level, everything is the same.

There comes a point of Christian conscience in these gray areas. Since Jehovah examines our hearts, a clear conscience is needed no matter what decision we make. Whole blood we would not take being definitely against Jehovah's law, but what percent IS acceptable? If the conscience is clear, there is no fault or guilt. That is not for any man to judge.

The location does not matter. Bulgaria, England, or the USA makes no difference. The principles are the same.

Answer 5

This is an excellent question, because anti-Witnesses have been foisting their ignorant accusations about this for a decade, seemingly without any interest in the rather obvious truth of the matter. Sadly, even some defenders of Jehovah's Witnesses misunderstand the matter.


Focusing on the first question in bold...
Yes, a Jehovah's Witness in Bulgaria or any other country might choose to ignore Acts 15:20,28,29 (et al) and accept a blood transfusion. This has been the case for decades.

Doing so in any country will not result in any congregational "investigation" or "sanctions" and there is no possibility that the person could be disfellowshipped for that. Such a person has already disassociated himself. The congregation need not necessarily react to the actions of the one who has chosen to disassociate himself.

It is not a "congregation" or "religion" (per se), but rather individuals who would likely choose to avoid associating and fellowshipping with their former brother.

Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/hb/index.htm?article=article_07.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/vcnb/article_01.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/19880415/article_01.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/19970101/article_01.htm

Answer 6

We always have a free choice regarding blood, like anything else, we can commit fornication, take drugs etc...but if we want to have Jehovah's approval, we do not practice such things. And if unrepentantly practice such things, we can be removed from the congregation.

There is no change in Bulgaria, the brothers know God's laws and if they are spiritually strong, they would not take a blood transfusion, even if they would not be removed from the congregation. A Christian does not practice wrongdoing just because they could get disciplined. They are faithful due to love of God and his righteous standards.

"We must obey God as ruler, rather than man." Acts 5:29

Answer 7

properly first, in simple terms the reality which you're expressing concerns capacity which you at the instant are not waiting to make this step. you mustn't pledge to maintain on with some thing or somebody, if based on your experience of right and incorrect and what you have studied, you are able to not substantiate this place i be attentive to many JW's listed right here are asserting " properly there are different thoughts that are safer ". This needs to be defined further in spite of the incontrovertible fact that. whilst the quantity of blood necessary interior of reason small, different thoughts exist certainly, and why not take them? I, myself might extremely not take blood, if i dont could. yet in some circumstances, there's no different selection. additionally, blood grew to become right into a prohibition interior the scope of the Jewish weight loss application. This grew to become into by way of fact whilst killing an animal, Jews necessary to aknowledge that for the duration of straightforward terms Jehovah had the incredible to take existence. subsequently, dumping the blood on the floor, symbolically lower back that existence to god, and symbolically payed the cost of that existence by capacity of offering the blood to God comparing this theory with a blood transfusion is like comparing apples and oranges. This theory does not be conscious to it. the errors interior the JW's place is that it places the blood itself by way of fact the middle-piece of the difficulty. it incredibly is the reason JW's are additionally against taking blood and storing it, for later for use on the comparable guy or woman if necessary. as though the difficulty grew to become into the incredibly blood and not what it represents.lower back, additionally pretty illogical. If blood capacity existence ( subsequently your existence), extremely it must be stored and utilized in some unspecified time interior the destiny, to maintain that comparable useful existence. Please do not provide too lots value to the liquid tissue we call blood. it incredibly is not related to the item. the comparable element applies to bread and wine used to remember Jesus's final supper, the cost of those products in straightforward terms exists interior that context. exterior of it, they're non significant, and could take transport of no particular attention. If it incredibly is not actual, then the logo has take extra desirable value than what it symbolizes.

Answer 8

Hi there.

Is there one rule for Bulgarian JW's and another for the rest of the world ?

Or did the Watchtower deliberately lie to the European Court of Human Rights regarding it's practice of disfellowshipping JW's who receive blood transfusions ?

Judge for yourself.

The following excerpt is from the online European Court of Human Rights Portal -

AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application No. 28626/95
by Khristiansko Sdruzhenie "Svidetelina Iehova" (Christian Association of Jehovah's Witnesses) against Bulgaria.

"In respect of the refusal of blood transfusion, the applicant association (JW's) submits that while this is part of the religious doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses, it's acceptance depends on the personal choice of the individual concerned. THERE ARE NO RELIGIOUS SANCTIONS FOR A JEHOVAH'S WITNESS WHO CHOOSES TO ACCEPT BLOOD TRANSFUSION" (caps for emphasis, insert mine).

So, according to this statement made by the Watchtower Society representatives before the European Court, JW's are free to receive blood without fear of disfellowshipping (in Bulgaria, at least). IF the statement is true, that is, and not yet another Watchtower LIE masquerading as "Theocratic War Strategy".

I favour the latter.

If anyone would care to receive a copy of the official document from which I have quoted, feel free to send me your e-mail address.

The following link might be found helpful -

http://www.ajwrb.org/

May God be gracious to JW's!

Blessings.

Answer 9

Yes...They were going to be blocked in the political process and not recognized as a viable religion, so Jehovah told them that in Bulgaria, they could have blood transfusions.
Canada is next.

If Bulgaria were Malawi..witnesses would be required to die....The Society makes me sick..The fact that Witnesses can not see the corruption in their organization makes me sick.

What are the Canadian Witnesses going to do when it becomes a matter of conscience? I thought that Gods laws were universal!


The Witnesses that claim that they can do whatever they want are outright lying...blood transfusions are a disfellowshipping offense...Do I have to go into your literature and fetch the guidelines for you?...I think not.

Answer 10

I believe that is true. Amazing,huh?