From the JW point of view as 'Christians' they are bound by all the new and some old testament laws. It would be a farce if they copped out every time things got hard, they might as well have a corporate merger with the Catholics.
Acts 15:20 clearly states that the new Christians that are being recruited should abstain from blood amongst other things.
--
19"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21
--
My interpretation of it even as an ex JW includes no blood transfusion. It seems quite clear - Don't use blood.
How many of Christ apostles were martyred including Christ? How many early christians including children were fed to the loins and died for their beliefs?
It seems JWs don't want to apply a different standard to themselves. Surely that's admirable from a belief point of view?
Didn't Daniel end up in the lions den? Weren't his friends thrown in the furnace? If you believe this stuff then you have to apply it. That's what JWs do. At least they aren't hypocrites about this issue.
How many young people take up arms and die with 'honour' for their idiotic politicians?
Blood and sacrifice alternative view point
by Spectrum 32 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Spectrum
-
carla
At least they aren't hypocrites about this issue.
What a joke! You should check out http://ajwrb.org/index.shtml and see just how hypocritical they really are about the blood issue. Do you know why I give blood? To make up for all the blood jw's use up 'not' taking blood.
-
Spectrum
Carla,
That was an interesting site. It seems that the hypocrites are the GB. They don't want to lose face or be sued so they are coming up with creative ways of allowing for blood use.
If they are God's organisation why were they not enlightened earlier even before medical science knew about these things? That would have provided evidence to the world that they have something special. -
2112
It may be interesting to find out which, if any, GB member needed some form of blood each time a change in the policy came around. I don't know if anyone is in a position to find that out but it would go a long way to explaining the changes over time.
-
Ingenuous
In Acts 15 in the NWT, the instructions in the letter sent to the congregations was to "keep" abstaining from blood. The word "keep" suggests there was a precedent to which the congregations were to attend. In fact, there was: the Mosaic Law. Those who did not want to offend the sensibilities of the Hebrew Christians could "keep" obeying the Law's injuction on blood. The specific injunction dealt with the consumption of blood as food - and that was only for animals that had been purposely killed for food.(There was no prohibition against consuming the blood of animals that had died of natural causes or from an attack by another animal.) Consumption bears no resemblence to transfusion. You probably already saw all this on that site, though.
And I give blood for the same reason Carla does.
-
rebel8
How many of Christ apostles were martyred including Christ? How many early christians including children were fed to the loins and died for their beliefs?
It seems JWs don't want to apply a different standard to themselves. Surely that's admirable from a belief point of view?I told myself not to comment on this thread but I can't help myself.
IMO people being willing to endure dire consequences in order to uphold what is right is admirable. However, that's not exactly what's happening with JWs. They are coerced into compliance with a rule, then brainwashed into thinking it's a totally voluntary decision they've made.
What happens if a JW accepts a blood transfusion? As if DAing wasn't bad enough, the JW believes he/she is going to be executed by Jesus at Armageddon, which will be coming any moment now. Not only will he/she be executed, but probably tortured too in light of the gory depictions of suffering in the literature.
Another point: Even if you disregard Ingenious' very logical point, take a step back from how the WTS interprets the Bible and just use your own brain for a moment (not meaning to come across in an insulting manner). If God is loving, why would He want countless people to suffer and die because of a vague scripture? Why would the Almighty care what is done with a few blood cells? Wouldn't an all-good deity want to promote the health and well-being of His subjects?
And yet another point: If God wants children and adults to suffer and die as a result of refusal of medical treatment, is that God worth worshipping?
-
carla
If I have to hear from one more person how much we should admire their zeal, I'm just going to !!! Do you admire the zeal no matter how mistaken? The Nazi's were zealous, the men in NAMBLA (men who believe sex with young boys is ok) feel zealous in their cause, I'm sure some true Satanist are zealous as well. Do you admire them? People think because the jw's claim to use the Bible, that somehow makes them sort of ok. Jim Jones and David Koresh did too, now there's acouple of admirable fellows.
-
Spectrum
Rebel,
I agree with you totally. I find the God of the bible too cruel for my sensibilities to accept him although Christ does seem to try to redeem him or alter his personality to one of love and kindness. IMO that was 3000 years too late and too many dead people in the mean time.
But the issue here is like you rightly mentioned, loyalty. If one thing pervades all religions, it's unquestionable loyalty to their diety. JWs are no different in this regard. They believe what they ready in the book they choose to worship along with a billion other people.
The bible talks about sacrifice from the first book to the last. Abel sacrificed his best whatever to God but He did not spare him. Thinking about that, it is in fact interesting. Why did Abel get pummelled if he was the righteous one.
Yes the WTBTS tells them not to take blood but it is in the bible in plain English. I can't agree with Ingenuous because that passage is about making it easier for the Gentiles to accept Christ and not about offending the sensibilities of the Christian Jews. -
blindersoff
Blood is an organ. A liquid organ. I thought my (medical field) son had flipped when he told me that. But it is & so the 'rule' of organ transplant applies here. Having an organ transplant is quit different from eating an organ. From the BLOOD brochure, page 3:
"Those
who respect life as a gift from the Creator do not try to sustain life by taking in blood."------------------
So if we respect life we let someone die, because blood is too important to be used to sustain life----huh?
B
-
Spectrum
Blindersoff,
It may well be an organ but Paul forbade christians to use it in any which way. It's clear in Acts 15:20.
JW are just acting on this belief/command to the death which is admirable.
I get the feeling that Paul was a charlatan so I wouldn't trust him with my puppy nevermind my life but then again am not a practising Christian JW think they are, the GB are a disgrace to their followers.