by TD 5 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
For any who think that the JW's are correct in teaching that the Bible forbids transfusion medicine;
For any who have doubts about the teaching but are still unsure if the JW's are right or not;
For any who suspect that the JW's are probably wrong, but still think there might be some tiny kernal of truth at the heart of the teaching;
...This thread is for you
I would like to hear anything you consider to be a compelling argument
TD,
This is all based upon some supposed doctrinal letter written by the Jerusalem congregations which said:
Acts 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. 30 So when they were dismissed, they came to Antioch: and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle: 31 Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation.
So who was the Holy Ghost depicted here? The congregation in Antioch which appointed Paul and his delegation who both decided the matter beforehand and sent Paul's congregation to Jerusalem to correct this error at its source. Acts 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. 2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. 3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. And the us in verse 28 was James and the congregation in Jerusalem.
This letter was taken as a peaceful settlement by Paul and not a doctrinal statement. Keeping the Law was not a requirement for salvation. It was now detrimental in fact. And unknown by Paul it did not settle the matter for all Christians in the Faith. How do we know? Because Paul continued to have a problem with Jews everywhere in his territories and had to return some 14 years later only to find out this:
Acts 21:20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: 21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. 22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. 23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; 24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. 25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
So what did Paul now learn? That the Christian Jews in Jerusalem like James were still keeping the Law and expected Paul as a Jew to keep it as well. Their letter was written only to Gentile Christians and exempted them from most of the Law with a few exceptions like this. And they were more Talmudic then legal rules. Paul was now in a fight for his life from his own Jewish brothers. And they almost succeeded in carrying out their threats from which Paul was saved by the Roman Army. He believed the matter settled years ago for both groups and now had to gain time to influence them without the support he had years earlier. If the letter was binding upon us then why is not the statement "Do therefore this that we say to thee:" also as binding as their letter? Why do JW's not save their heads and take the vows today? This was after all demanded by their so called Governing Body? Who was wrong all along for these many years, James and the congregation he influenced or Paul? Who needed the correction that finally came with the book of Hebrews? The Jewish congregation in Jerusalem or the Gentile congregations scattered about the world? You decide who to believe, it is your life, your ministry, your everlasting life as well as your present life and that of your loved ones that hangs in the balance.
Joseph
Regardless of all the doctrinal arguments and medical evidence, it comes down to one simple fact:
JWs use blood.
The entire situation is a hypocritical farce, because whilst one JW dies refusing a blood transfusion, another JW is having their life saved with a blood derivative.
The entire situation is a hypocritical farce, because whilst one JW dies refusing a blood transfusion, another JW is having their life saved with a blood derivative.
I agree completely.
I think the reasoning on blood in JW literature has mutated to the point where every single element is contradicted elsewhere in the same literature and I doubt that the depth of the hypocrisy is fully grasped by all.
Active JW's certainly don't grasp this and even some on JWD who half heartedly defend the JW position seem to miss it as well.
On one hand, JW literature states that blood belongs to God and should not be "used" as man sees fit. On the other hand, JW literature outlines a policy where blood may be used in many ways. (As you point out.)
On one hand, JW literature claims that the allowed components are only "minor fractions" and some JW's will try to sidestep the problem you cite above by claiming that the allowed fractions are not actually "blood." On the other hand, JW literature contradicts this idea, specifically referring to fractions as "blood" on more than one occasion.
On one hand, JW literature claims that blood was "Reserved for one special use" and we are not allowed to "use" blood today. On the other hand, JW literature gives specific guidance to those who "use" blood as part of their occupation (e.g. Lab Techs, Nurses, etc.) saying that as long as the blood is not "used" for purposes of consumption or transfusion, then such "use" is a matter of conscience.
On one hand, JW literature points out that under the Law, sacrificial blood prefigured the blood of Christ and because of this symbolism, "using" blood today would show disrespect for Christ's sacrifice. On the other hand, JW literature acknowledges that the Law is no longer in force; that this symbolism was transferred by Christ's own command to the sacrements of communion; (i.e. The emblems of Memorial) and that animal sacrifices no longer have any value.
On one hand, JW literature claims that blood removed from the body should be poured out. On the other hand, JW literature and official correspondence allows blood completely removed from the body and taken to some other part of the medical facility for tagging or testing to be reinfused as long as the procedure is an ongoing therapy.
On one hand, JW literature claims that transfusing blood is analgous to eating blood. On the other hand, JW literature acknowledges that a blood transfusion is for all intents and purposes, an organ transplant and that organ transplants are not analgous to cannabilism.
On one hand, JW literature states that blood should not be eaten even if it is cooked first. On the other hand, current JW policy as outlined in their literature allows the use of any fraction of any component. Since heat (as in cooking) or for that matter, even distilled water will fractionate red cells, this is no different than saying it is okay to eat blood provided it is cooked first.
If there is one single element of the current reasoning on blood that is not contradicted elsewhere in their literature, I'm not sure what that would be.
The Watchtower states that, if their conscience allows them, Witnesses with specific medical conditions (e.g., hemophilia) can use Factor X, a product directly derived from the blood of innumerable donors. It takes a massive volume of donated blood to get 'enough' Factor X. But witnesses are not allowed to donate blood. On this basis alone, their stand is shockingly hypocritical and farcical.
At a minimum it should be a conscience matter only for fully informed, baptised adult (or mature youth) JW's. Whatever interpretation you take, it should never affect the lives of young children or babies.
