A dialogue has opened up between me and a JW friend about their stance on blood. Just wondered if any of you were ever asked a question that made you think twice, or if you have any questions that you think would be good to ask? (I don't want to offend this person. We are very good friends.) Also, if there is a question I should stay away from, that would be handy to know. And what some of her come-back arguments might be and how to counter PEACEFULLY! Any advice?
Got any good questions about Blood issue?
by whyizit 20 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Check_Your_Premises
This is not a comprehensive list. These questions are only from scriptures and wt. You could also bring up medical facts and the risks of transfusions.
WT summary:
1. The whole blood doctrine is based first on the use of Genesis 9:5 where God told Noah to poor out blood and give it back to Him. It can't be eaten! This means that blood is sacred.
2. Next there is in Leviticus I think, a section about pouring blood on the altar. It can't be eaten! This means blood is only to be used for sacrifice.
3. Finally in Acts there is a couple of verses that say "abstain from blood". This means abstain completely, totally, and entirely!!!
Some good setup questions:
If you are reading a verse, you are often able to come up with several different meanings right? I mean abstain from blood wasn't likely referring to blood transfusions because they weren't taking place at that time. So that means we have to take that verse and apply it to mean it includes blood transfusions, right?
So when we take a verse and try to find it's meaning in our lives, should we pick the most likely, or the one that is most difficult for us?
For 1 and 2 you could simply say:
"BUt in those verses, isn't it talking about something that died. I mean isn't that why blood is sacred because it represents the life lost? Isn't that the same reason blood is used for sacrifice? I mean there is nothing magical about blood, it is a symbol of the life lost right?"
"Isn't saying you should be willing to die rather than be disrespectful to the symbol of life (blood), kind of like saying I will sacrifice my marriage to save my wedding ring?"
"As a rule, isn't it a good thing to be REALLY difficult to convince that God wants you to let your kids die?"
For 3 you could say:
"How do you abstain from an object? I mean don't you abstain in the form of an action? I mean if I say I abstain from junkfood, you know that I mean I abstain from EATING junkfood. It is obviously implied. So if that verse says abstain from blood, doesn't that mean the writer didn't put the specific action in their, because it is so obviously implied? So the question is what action in regards to blood was so obviously taking place that the writer didn't see the need to say it explicitly? Was it blood tranfusions?"
THey will probably say:
If a doctor told you to abstain from alcohol, would you think it was ok to inject it into your viens?
Respond:
Well if it was my family practioner I would say yes, but then if it was my dermatologist I would figure he was telling me not to use products with alcohol on my skin. See context matters here.
Eventually he will get flustered and rely on the credibility of the org and God's arrangement:
At this point you have them. First ask:
"So the WT says that is what those verses mean? But didn't they used to say it was wrong to have an organ transplant or vaccinations? So did God tell them to make those mistakes? Or did they make a mistake, in which case doesn't that mean they can't be trusted to interpret the blood verses correclty? " (point them to reexamine.org)
"Does God expect you to obey the org, at the risk of your own life, when they are wrong?"
Then they will say they have to obey Jehovah's organization:
Now you really got 'em
"Well when Jesus showed up, God's organization wanted to kill him. Judas obeyed God's organization and betrayed Jesus, instead of following his conscience. Judas wasn't rewarded. He was reviled and judged!"
CYP
-
-
Check_Your_Premises
has a link to Chapter 9 of In Search of Christian Freedom which is about the best debunking of the blood doctrine out there.
is a web site that stands for associated jw for reform on blood. They have all sorts of info their as well.
Happy hunting.
CYP
-
drew sagan
I think some great points about this are made in the book "In Search of Christian Freedom". My favorite point brought out is in dealing with blood plasma. The components of blood plasma are as follows (shown in percentages).
Water ~92
Proteins 6–8
Salts 0.8
Lipids 0.6
Glucose (blood sugar) 0.1
You can see that it mainly contains water and proteins. These proteins include:
Albumins
Globulins
Fibrinogens
Hemoglobins
The Watchtower holds that blood fractions, including these proteins can be acceptable for Christians, but that blood plasma can not. The question is, why not? It is simply because they feel that plasma is a "major blood component" and that is a good enough reason to reject it.
I had a discussion with a friend about this who is a pretty knowledgeable JW. He couldn't answer the question why the fractions would be acceptable, but not the component. The only difference is the add-on of a few proteins and WATER!!! But yet it becomes unacceptable for Christians because of this? Who makes this decision? Who gets to choose and define "major" components and "minor" ones. My friend could only reply that plasma was a major component and that it violated Gods law to use it. But he could not answer the more important question WHY? -
Check_Your_Premises
Oh yeah, one other thing on "abstain from blood", cuz when you pester them they will get to making a big deal out of "abstain clearly means to avoid completely!!!"
Let them really make a big deal out of that one. Then say, "well if it means in some total, all encompassing sense, why is it ok to take fractions? I mean, isn't taking fractions like saying you can't have a car, but here are all the parts and you can build it on your own?"
-
Clam
Problem is the WTS keeps shuffling over somthing that can be a matter of life and death and can leave children without parents and parents without children.
If they stuck to what it said in Acts and stood by that as meaning blood transfusions then maybe they would be taken more seriously. But what they think Acts 21:25 says is:
How can they swallow this?
-
Clam
oops - they think Acts says this. . .
But as for the gentiles who have become believers, we have sent them a letter telling them we decided that they must not eat any food that has been offered to idols, or the primary components of blood—namely red cells, white cells, platelets and plasma. However fractions of all primary components are permitted. Having said that, when it comes to fractions of any of the primary components, each Christian, after careful and prayerful meditation, must conscientiously decide for himself. “
-
proplog2
Jesus said that no-thing (blood is a "thing" ) that enters the body can defile it. Mark 7:13-19.
The point is made at the end of this in vs 19 "Thus he declared ALL foods clean."
It is OK to eat blood. It is a nourishing food. Christians are not under food restrictions_ except if it could stumble someone with a weak conscience.
I am baffled why this scripture isn't used by those who would like to discredit the flawed reasoning of the Watchtower Pharisees. It neatly puts the whole issue into perspective.
No need to define what "eating" is. No need to compare intravenous feeding with oral ingestion.
It makes it possible to read Acts 15 and realize that the request ot abstain from blood was an effort to placate Jewish Christians and make it possible for Gentiles to share meals with their Jewish brothers.
-
2112
I have had them say to me that "if you Dr. said abstain from beer would you take it like a transfusion?" which is really silly. But what I try and show them is that, if someone was to take beer that way, the body would use it as food. But if you were to take blood that way it would continue the same function it was made for, to carry oxygen through the body. The body would not use it for food.
All the OT restrictions were diatary, as blood is not digestible.
If it were possible I would love to see the GB medical records each time a medical restriction was lifted to see just who on the GB needed a transplant or a blood fraction. I believe that would be very telling. I ask did the WT sacrofice a GB member on the alter of no blood?