WOW! How's That for the Stance on Blood?

Yan Bibiyan

While taking another stab at the practices of mainstream Christianity (to hold services on a particular day), the WT strangely explains what "abstaining from blood" means in Acts 15:

September Awake 2011

On page 10:

"...The Scriptures indicate that some commands

given to Israel also applied to those

in the Christian congregation. These included

the commands to abstain from idolatry

and fornication, as well as from eating blood (emphasys added) .

(Acts 15:28, 29) Significantly, the commands

regarding the weekly Sabbath were not included

among the ones that Christians were required

to obey.—Romans 14:5.

What do you think? I say it's pretty cut and dry.

Do you know of other printed material where the WT unambiguosly says that "abstain from blood" actually means "do not eat blood"?

Knowsnothing

w86 1/9 pg 23. "Pious respect for blood".

I won't cite the whole thing because my WT CD is in Spanish.

However, I will translate a portion.

Así que la idolatría, el comer sangre y la fornicación están en el mismo plano religioso. Los cristianos tienen que abstenerse de todas estas cosas para conservar la buena salud espiritual y participar en el cumplimiento de las promesas de Dios. Con relación a la sangre, sea que esta se coma por la boca, o se transfunda por las venas, el propósito es el mismo: sostener y alimentar al cuerpo. Como el cuerpo gobernante claramente lo indicó, el no abstenerse de la sangre es una violación de la ley de Dios.

Therefore, idolatry, the eating of blood and fornication are at the same level religiously. Cristians have to abstain from these things in order to conserve good spiritual health and to participate of the fullfilling of God's promises. Respecting blood, whether it be eaten by mouth, or be transfused through veins, the purpose is the same: sustain and feed the body. As the governing body clearly indicated, failure to abstain from blood is a violation of God's law.

So, on the one hand, it admits it is eating through the mouth that constitutes eating blood, but then they go on to say that transfusion is also eating. It's been argued before already with JW apologists that blood transfusions ≠eating blood, because when taken through the veins, it is no different than an organ transplant.

wasblind

How 'bout the good Ole reasoning book, that's a staple based on the foolishness of the WTS

Under the subheading : ' Christians are commanded to abstain from blood"_________ page 70

the WTS states: " ( there the eating of blood is equated with idolitry and fornication....) "_________page 71

As stated time and again a transfusion is not eating blood

they don't give folks blood transfusions when their stomachs growl from hunger

If I lost five pints of blood drinkin' five pints would not save me

exwhyzee

The subject matter in this scripture was talking about animal blood. The notion of transfusing human blood for medical purposes wasn't even though of so how could it have been condemned?

That's like saying the use of automobiles out in service is unscriptural.... we must to walk on foot from door to door exactly like Jesus did.

wha happened?

so does the Sept srticle later add transfusions, or does it just leave it with the eating of blood?

wasblind

Mind you now on page 71 in the reasoning book it the WTS states:

" Similarly, any food to which whole blood or even some blood fraction has been added should not be eaten."

In reallity no one should be punished for having' a transfusion because they haven't eaten anything in gettin' a transfusion

Hell, why not kick the meat eaters out, cause ain't no way, if your a meat eater your gonna avoid some blood

no matter how little, darn fools , git on my last nerve, just pis me off

exwhyzee

I asked him "if takin' blood was a sin, aint that fraction a piece of that sin ????"

Yes....and wasn't it a sin for someone to roll up his/her sleeve at the blood bank and allow their blood to be extracted for medical use ?

Maybe JW's can donate blood if they stipulate in writing that only fractions of their blood can be used.

wasblind

I'm sorry exwhyzee for changin' my post on you so I will restate it :)

An elder once told me that it's alright to take a blood fraction cause

you only take what you need

Mind you now a sin is a sin, and if adam and eve only took a bite of the

forbidden fruit not the whole thing, just a bite , a fraction, they still

were punished

this fraction thing is another example of the WTS doin' what they want

anytime they want too

mariemcg

Looks like another Bubble and Tickle flop!!

TD

Do you know of other printed material where the WT unambiguosly says that "abstain from blood" actually means "do not eat blood"?

Yan,

They've put this in writing a number of times, both explicitly and implicitly.

Here's an explicit example: Under the subject, "Paul" Insight On The Scriptures Volume II make the following statement about the Decree:

"The decision then made was that circumcision was not required for Gentile believers but that they should keep free from idolatry, from eating and drinking of blood, and from sexual immorality." (p. 587)

Here's an implicit example: In order to get around the idea that the Decree was just a temporary measure to appease the Jewish Christians, the JW organization frequently cites non-JW scholars:

"In "Origin and Beginnings of Christianity," Professor Eduard Meyer commented that the meaning of "blood" in Acts 15:29 was "the partaking of blood that was forbidden through the law (Gen. 9:4) imposed on Noah and so also on mankind as a whole." (The Watchtower, June 15, 1978 p. 23)

So even though they didn't explicitly say it themselves, the idea is still incorporated into a related argument via the scholar they quote and agree with.

These examples are starting to get a little dated, so it's cool that you found a recent example. It shows that the entire argument still boils down to a question of whether the consumption of blood and the transfusion of blood are in some way, equivalent to each other.

WOW! How's That for the Stance on Blood?

Share this