YOU CAN DISTRIBUTE THIS INFORMATION TO ALL OF YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS AND NEWS MEDIA IF YOU WOULD LIKE!
This is a HUGE TIMELINE of Watchtower Society Quotes that show how much the Blood Transfusion Policy has CHANGED over the years! Can you spot all the Flip-Flops? (I got most of these Quotes from the Awesome Website, http://www.ajwrb.org and some other Websites)
First of all, here is what the Bible says about Blood:
Genesis 9:3: Every moving thing that lives will be food for you. As the green herb, I have given everything to you.
Genesis 9:4: But flesh with the life of it, the blood of it, you shall not eat.
Genesis 9:5: I will surely require your blood of your lives. At the hand of every animal I will require it. At the hand of man, even at the hand of every man's brother, I will require the life of man.
Genesis 9:6: Whoever sheds man's blood, by man will his blood be shed, for in the image of God made he man.
Leviticus 3:17: "'It shall be a perpetual Statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings, that you shall eat neither fat nor blood.'" (MY COMMENT: Notice -- The Watchtower Society DOES NOT FORBID eating Fat!)
Acts 15:19: "Therefore my judgment is that we don't trouble those from among the Gentiles who turn to God,
Acts 15:20: but that we write to them that they abstain from the pollution of idols, from sexual immorality, from what is strangled, and from blood.
1st Samuel 14:32: and the people flew on the spoil, and took sheep, and oxen, and calves, and killed them on the ground; and the people ate them with the blood.
1st Samuel 14:33: Then they told Saul, saying, Behold, the people sin against Jehovah, in that they eat with the blood. He said, you have dealt treacherously: roll a great stone to me this day.
1st Samuel 14:34: Saul said, Disperse yourselves among the people, and tell them, Bring me here every man his ox, and every man his sheep, and kill them here, and eat; and don't sin against Jehovah in eating with the blood. All the people brought every man his ox with him that night, and killed them there.
1st Samuel 14:35: Saul built an altar to Jehovah: the same was the first altar that he built to Jehovah. (MY COMMENT: NOTICE -- Jehovah DID NOT punish or destroy those people who ate meat with blood in it!)
Matthew 15:8: 'These people draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with their lips; But their heart is far from Me.
Matthew 15:9: And in vain do they worship Me, Teaching as doctrine rules made by men.'"
Matthew 15:10: He summoned the multitude, and said to them, "Hear, and understand.
Matthew 15:11: That which enters into the mouth doesn't defile the man; but that which proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man."
Matthew 15:17: Don't you understand that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the belly, and then out of the body?
Matthew 15:18: But the things which proceed out of the mouth come out of the heart, and they defile the man.
Matthew 15:19: For out of the heart come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, sexual sins, thefts, false testimony, and blasphemies.
Matthew 9:13: But you go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' for I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."
Matthew 12:2: But the Pharisees, when they saw it, said to him, "Behold, Your Disciples do what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath."
Matthew 12:3: But He said to them, "Haven't you read what David did, when he was hungry, and those who were with him;
Matthew 12:4: how he entered into the House of God, and ate the show bread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for those who were with him, but only for the Priests?
Matthew 12:5: Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath Day, the Priests in the Temple profane the Sabbath, and are guiltless?
Matthew 12:6: But I tell you that One greater than the Temple is here.
Matthew 12:7: But if you had known what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless.
Matthew 12:8: For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
Luke 16:10: He who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much. He who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much.
You will notice below that the Watchtower Society puts more importance on the SYMBOL of LIFE (the BLOOD), than on the actual LIFE ITSELF!
The Golden Age January 3rd 1923 Issue, Page 214:
The public is not generally aware of how large an industry is the manufacture of serums, anti-toxins and vaccines, or that big business controls the whole industry.... the boards of health endeavor to start an epidemic of smallpox, diphtheria, or typhoidthat they may reap a golden harvest by inoculating an unthinking community for the very purpose of disposing of this manufactured filth....Vaccination summed up is the most unnatural, unhygienic, barbaric, filthy, abhorrent, and mostdangerous system of infection known. Its vile poison taints, corrupts, and pollutes the blood of the healthy, resulting in ulcers, syphilis, scrofula, erysipelas, tuberculosis, cancer, tetanus, insanity, and death."
The Golden Age January 16th 1924 Issue:
"It has never been proven that a single disease is due to germs."
The Golden Age April 22nd 1925 Issue:
"I HAVE named this new discovery, which I believe will be epochal in the history of the treatment of disease, and which I am exclusively announcing in THE GOLDEN AGE prior to its general publication elsewhere, The Electronic Radio Biola, which means life renewed by radio waves or electrons. The Biola automatically diagnoses and treats diseases by the use of the electronic vibrations. The diagnosis is 100 percent correct, rendering better service in this respect than the most experienced diagnostician.... THE principle of operation of the Biola is the collection... of the disease vibrations.... the fluid containing the same waves or vibrations enters the body, meets the disease waves and destroys them.... This is a great step forward, marking the Biola as the most valuable treatment apparatus obtainable today, and well worthy of notice in the columns of a magazine like THE GOLDEN AGE."
The Golden Age May 1st 1929 Issue, Page 502:
Thinking people would rather have smallpox than vaccination, because the latter sows the seed of syphilis, cancers, eczema, erysipelas, scrofula, consumption, even leprosy and many other loathsome affections. Hence the practice of vaccination is a crime, an outrage and a delusion.
The Golden Age July 24th 1929 Issue, Page 682:
ON READING a report in The Golden Age that seventy percent of New York's children are defective, and eighty-five percent of Chicago's children, we must all realize that this terrible condition is only of very recent years.
How can it be otherwise? The streets are just lined with M.D. poison squirters. They are seen everywhere with grips full of the most deadly poisons and needles for injecting them. This they do to every child they can corner.
Without doubt the fifteen and thirty percent found O.K. are in most cases those who have escaped the poison squad. First, there is the M.D. vaccinating mania. Then comes the antitoxin for other excuses, etc., until the children are full of the most deadly poisons known. Added to this is the fact that they are compelled to drink milk from cows that have also been subjected to a liberal injection of tuberculin, a most terrible deadly poison. This poison enters directly into the blood circulation. Hence the milk. Then this milk is sterilized, or scalded to the boiling point or nearly so, destroying much of the life-giving nourishment of the milk, but not injuring the poison therein. Scalded milk, for either adults or children, is very constipating. This in turn causes more deaths and resulting ailments than do all other causes combined, I surely believe.
The Golden Age November 13th 1929 Issue, Pages 106, 107:
Avoid serum inoculations and vaccinations as they pollute the blood stream with their filthy pus.
The Golden Age February 4th 1931 Issue, Page 293:
...the vaccination law reduces the father and mother to mere slavery, almost as bad as the colored people were in, when their children were put up on the block and sold. In many slave-sale cases the mother and father were even forbidden to shed tears.
Vaccination is a direct violation of the everlasting covenant that God made with Noah after the flood.
Pages 294/297:
VACCINATION HAS NEVER SAVED A HUMAN LIFE-IT DOES NOT PREVENT SMALL POX
The Golden Age September 26th 1934 Issue:
"The Journal of the A. M. A. is the vilest sheet that passes the United States mail.... Nothing new and useful in theraputics escapes its unqualified condemnation. Its attacks are generally ad hominem. Its editorial columns are largely devoted to character assasination.... Its editor [Morris Fishbein] is of the type of Jew that crucified Jesus Christ."
The Golden Age March 27th 1935 Issue, Page 409:
Serum for "Christmas"!
A CERTAIN "health" commissioner offered the suggestion a short time ago that no mother could give her child a better present for "Christmas" than diphtheria immunization, meaning an injection of filthy and poisonous serum.
It is said that diphtheria is particularly deadly of late, and that seems likely. Parents cannot give their children the foods needed to build sturdy bodies that can resist the disease. But while parents are not able to get proper foods, they can get the serum injections for their children free.
The Devil is bent on destroying the human family, denying them the necessary comforts of life, and urging them to give their children "Christmas" presents of germ-laden pus. What a travesty of civilization!
The Golden Age September 23rd 1936 Issue, Page 816:
Corneas from the Dead to the Living
AT Moscow in the past year there were 100 cases of grafting of corneas from the eyes of the dead to the eyes of the living but blind. Many of the patients upon whom this operation was performed are now able to read and work.
Consolation March 22nd 1939 Issue, Page 21:
...the irrefutably logical fact that serums and vaccines are products of contamination...rise in cancer is attributed to the use of serums...for the best part they are but handicaps to inherent healing forces of the human body...these are by-products of pus matter...in reality and action it is worse than the proverbial "seven plagues"...One may go through life without having serious manifestations of what has been injected into his blood-stream, thus thinking he was "immunized", but, suddenly, it may begin its satanic work on his child, or even "unto third and fourth generation".
The following Quote is taken from LUZ y VERDAD (The Golden Age as printed in Mexico) of June 1934, Page 91. A quick translation reads as follows:
Many mothers don't sell the milk that the nature gave them for their children, do they? For this reason we should not admire those who trade with their blood. After Landsteiner's discoveries, special entities have been formed that provide blood for necessary transfusions. Only those have the luxury [to give blood] that belong to the group O (zero), because, as has already been said, their blood is compatible to all humans. From statistics we see that in 1929, 7,000 persons sold blood in the hospitals of the United States, [in resonse to] calls in urgent cases and that they saved the lives of many people that had lost their own blood for one cause or another.
In England there are societies whose members offer their blood freely to those that have need. A society that was created in London that is affiliated with the Red Cross is spoken of with praise because its members offer needed blood in urgent cases. The majority of those [who donate blood] are strong and healthy youth, of diverse backgrounds, that contribute in this way in a really generous fashion to the salvation of the sick or injured. They are not paid a cent for their contribution, but society knows them and it respects them as they deserve to be respected.
For those who know Spanish, here is the original:
Comercio con La sangre
No venden muchas madres la leche que la naturaleza les di para sus hijos? Por esto no debe admirarnos que haya quienes comercien con su sangre. Despus de los descubrimientos de Landsteiner se han formado entidades especiales que proporcionan sangre para las transfusiones necesarias. Slo pueden permitirse este lujo las personas que pertenecen al grupo O (cero), por ser, como ya dijimos, su sangre inofensiva para todos los humanos. De una estadstica vemos que en 1929 vndieron sangre, en los hospitales de los Estados Unidos, 7,000 personas, llamadas en casos urgentes y que salvaron la vida de muchas personas que por una u otra causa habian perdido su propia sangre.
En Inglaterra hay sociedades cuyos miembros ofrecen gratuitamente su sangre a los que necesitan. Se habla elogiosamente de una sociedad creada en Londres y adherida a la Cruz Roja, cuyos mienbros se presentan en los casos urgentes y ofrecen la sangre necesaria. La mayora son jvenes fuertes y sanos, de entidades diversas, que contribuyen asi, en forma realmente generosa, a la salvacion de los enfermos o heridos. No cobran ni un centavo por su contribucin, pero la sociedad los conoce y los respeta como lo merecen.
Consolation December 25th 1940 Issue, Page 19:
The Mending of a heart
In New York city a house wife in moving a boarder's things accidentally shot herself through the heart with his revolver. She was rushed to a hospital, her left breast was cut around, four ribs were cut away, the heart was lifted out, three stitches were taken, one of the attending physicians in the great emergency gave a quart of his blood for transfusion, and today the woman lives and smiles gaily over what happened to her in the busiest 23 minutes of her life.
The Watchtower July 1st 1945 Issue, Pages 198-201:
(THIS IS A PARAPHRASE, NOT AN EXACT QUOTE)
Blood transfusions and blood products are officially banned as "pagan and God-dishonoring."
Consolation (DUTCH EDITION) September 1945 Issue, Page 29:
God has never published a decree which forbids employing medicine, injections and blood transfusions. It is a human invention like the Pharisee's disregard for mercy and grace. To serve Jehovah with all the mind does not mean to put our intelligence in a box. Principally because there is a human life at stake. The life being of great value is holy to Jehovah.
Awake! October 22nd 1948 Issue, Page 12:
According to God's law, humans are not to take into their system the blood of others.
The Watchtower December 15th 1952 Issue, Page 764:
Is vaccination a violation of God's law forbidding the taking of blood into the system? - G. C., North Carolina.
The matter of vaccination is one for the individual that has to face it to decide for himself....our Society cannot afford to be drawn into the affair legally or take the responsibility for the way the case turns out....all objection to vaccination on Scriptural grounds seems to be lacking....We merely offer the above information on request, but can assume no responsibility for the decision and course the reader may take.
"Make Sure of All Things" Book (1953 Edition), Page 47:
Blood Transfusion - Definition
Transferring blood from the veins or arteries of one person to another. As in intravenous feeding, it is a feeding on blood. An unscriptural practice.
Awake! January 8th 1954 Issue, Page 24:
We are told that it takes one and a third pints of whole blood to get enough of the blood protein or "fraction" known as gamma globulin for one injection. And since from the foregoing it must be admitted that such use of human blood is highly questionable, what justification can there be for the use of gamma globulin? Further, those interested in the Scriptural aspect will note that its being made of whole blood places it in the same category as blood transfusions as far as Jehovah's prohibition of taking blood into the system is concerned. - See Leviticus 17:10 - 14; Acts 15:20, 28, 29.
Awake! September 8th 1956 Issue, Page 20:
While this physician argues for the use of certain blood fractions,particularly albumin, such also come under the Scriptural ban. In fact, these fractions are being used not only by physicians but also by food processors, and so it would be well to note the labels on such products to see if they contain any blood substances or fractions. When in doubt, it would be best to do without.
Faith on the March Book, by A. H. Macmillan, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society Vice-President, Published by Prentice-Hall, Inc. (1957), Pages 186, 188, 189 {See The Watchtower, May 15th, 1957 Issue, Pages 302, 303, 304}:
...trouble over the draft in World War II...Approximately 4,500 of Jehovah's witnesses were sentenced to prison in the District Courts...One of the more serious problems I had to deal with, as I remember, was vaccinations. An order was received from the health department in Washington for all the inmates and guards to be vaccinated. Some of our boys in one prison in particular considered this the same as blood transfusions, and refused to submit. This caused considerable trouble...."I was in prison," I reminded them, "and I bared my arm and received the shot. Furthermore, all of us who visit our foreign branches are vaccinated or we stay at home. Now vaccination is not anything like blood transfusion. No blood is used in the vaccine. It is a serum. So you would not be violating those Scriptures which forbid taking blood into your system.
The Watchtower September 15th 1958 Issue, Page 575:
Are we to consider the injection of serums such as diphtheria toxin antitoxin and blood fractions such as gamma globulin into the blood stream, for the purpose of building up resistance to disease by means of antibodies, the same as the drinking of blood or the taking of blood or blood plasma by means of transfusions? - N.P., United States.
No, it does not seem necessary that we put the two in the same category, although we have done so in times past. While God did not intend for man to contaminate his blood stream by vaccines, serums or blood fractions, doing so does not seem to be included in God's expressed will forbidding blood as food. It would therefore be a matter of individual judgment whether one accepted such types of medication or not.
The Watchtower October 15th 1959 Issue, Page 640:
Consequently, the removal of one's blood, storing it and later putting it back into the same person would be a violation of the Scriptural principles that govern the handling of blood....if the blood were stored, even for a brief period of time, this would be a violation of the Scriptures...Again, if one's own blood would have to be withdrawn at intervals and stored until a sufficient amount had accumulated to set a machine in operation, this too would fall under Scriptural prohibition.
The Watchtower November 1st 1959 Issue, Page 645:
Little do men in general appreciate today that they are under the Creator's law concerning blood and that they will be punished for violating its sacredness. It is no light punishment, but it will call for their very life.
The Watchtower January 15th 1961 Issue, Pages 63, 64:
In view of the seriousness of taking blood into the human system by a transfusion, would violation of the Holy Scriptures in this regard subject the dedicated, baptized receiver of blood transfusion to being disfellowshiped from the Christian congregation?
The inspired Holy Scriptures answer yes....Hence a Christian who deliberately receives a blood transfusion and thus does not keep himself from blood will not prosper spiritually. According to the law of Moses, which set forth shadows of things to come, the receiver of a blood transfusion must be cut off from God's people by excommunication or disfellowshiping....if in the future he persists in accepting blood transfusions or in donating blood toward the carrying out of this medical practice upon others, he shows that he has really not repented, but is deliberately opposed to God's requirements. As a rebellious opposer and unfaithful example to fellow members of the Christian congregation he must be cut off therefrom by disfellowshiping.
Blood, Medicine and the Law of God (1961), Pages 7, 8:
Since it was forbidden to take the blood of another creature into one's own body, it would necessarily follow that it would be wrong to give one's blood to be infused into the body of another person....We cannot drain from our body part of that blood, which represents our life, and still love God with our whole soul, because we have taken away part of 'our soul - our blood - ' and given it to someone else.
Pages 13, 14:
Is it wrong to sustain life by administering a transfusion of blood or plasma or red cells or others of the component parts of the blood? Yes!...The prohibition includes "any blood at all." (Leviticus 3:17) It has no bearing on the matter that the blood is not introduced to the body through the mouth but through the veins. Nor does the argument that it cannot be classed with intravenous feeding because its use in the body is different carry weight. The fact is that it provides nourishment to the body to sustain life.
Pages 14, 15:
But regardless of the method used to infuse it into the body and regardless of whether it is whole blood or a blood substance that is involved, God's law remains the same. If it is blood and it is being used to nourish or to sustain life the divine law clearly applies...Mature Christians... are not going to feel that if they have some of their own blood stored for transfusion, it is going to be more acceptable than the blood of another person...Nor are they going to feel that a slight infraction, such as momentary storage of blood in a syringe when it is drawn from one part of the body for injection into another part, is somehow less objectionable than storing it for a longer period of time
Page 25:
While there is no direct flow of blood between the mother and the fetus, yet by osmosis there is some transfer of blood between the mother and the baby through the placenta.
Pages 38, 39, 40:
Jehovah's witnesses do not argue that blood transfusions have not kept alive patients who otherwise might have died. We do not take it upon ourselves to conduct an objective debate of the advisability of the use of blood in medical therapy. The point is not for us to determine. God himself has ruled on the matter, and it would be presumptuous for us, in the name of medicine or humanitarianism or anything else, to open the issue to debate, to pit human wisdom and experience against the law of God....Although Jehovah's witnesses will not eat blood as a food, nor in medical use consent to any kind of blood transfusion or, in place of it, an infusion of any blood fraction or blood substance, this does not rule out all medical treatment.
Pages 51, 52, 53:
These facts render completely untenable the claim by any physician that a patient absolutely must have blood transfused in order to live.
Page 54:
Jehovah's witnesses...know that if they violate God's law on blood and the child dies in the process, they have endangered that child's opportunity for everlasting life in God's new world.
Page 55:
...resorting to blood transfusions even under the most extreme circumstances is not truly lifesaving. It may result in the immediate and very temporary prolongation of life, but that at the cost of eternal life for a dedicated Christian.
The Watchtower August 1st 1961 Issue, Page 480:
The question of placing one's body or parts of one's body at the disposal of men of science or doctors at one's death for purposes of scientific experimentation or replacement in others is frowned upon by certain religious bodies. However, it does not seem that any Scriptural principle or law is involved. It therefore is something that each individual must decide for himself.
The Watchtower September 15th 1961 Issue:
Page 557:
Is it wrong to sustain life by infusions of blood or plasma or red cells or the various blood fractions? Yes!
Page 558:
...regardless of whether it is whole blood taken from one's own body or that taken from someone else, whether it is administrated as a transfusion or an injection, the divine law applies.
Page 559:
Whether whole or fractional, one's own or someone else's, transfused or injected, it is wrong
Page 563-564:
PERSONALITY INFLUENCED
15. Those who are more inclined to rest their confidence in the learning of men than in the wisdom of God may feel that the care exercised in the selection of blood donors makes it possible to avoid all these dangers. But consider the facts. It will probably shock you to learn that the blood of dead people is being transfused into the bodies of hospital patients, but reports from Russia and Spain show that it is exactly what is done there; and even in the United States of America experiments have been conducted with transfusion of cadaver blood! Of course, that probably is not the practice in your community. But the magazine Time as of May 26, 1961, reports the case of a 49-year-old woman in the Pontiac General Hospital who was given two pints of blood from the cadaver of a 12-year-old boy who had drowned in a nearby lake and who had been dead from two and a half to three hours. Also, that as long ago as 1935 a doctor in a Chicago suburb had used a technique like that of the Russians, and that this American doctor accounted for about thirty-five cadaver-blood transfusions in two years. Perhaps the donor is ones own living relative, a reputable, clean-living individual. Does that assure safety? No; it will not remove the danger of a reaction due to incompatibility; nor does it guarantee that the individual may not be the carrier of some disease, perhaps even unknown to himself. In most cases, however, one who receives blood has no idea who the donor is. Some of it may come from healthy persons; some from alcoholics and degenerates. Criminals in jail are given the opportunity to donate their blood. For example, the New York Times of April 6, 1961, reported: "Inmates of Sing Sing Prison at Ossining will give blood to the Red Cross today." A commendable act? Perhaps not as beneficial to their fellow men as the community is led to believe.
16. When the Israelites were preparing to enter the Promised Land, Jehovah moved Moses to repeat to them his law forbidding the consumption of blood. As recorded at Deuteronomy 12:25, he said: "You must not eat it, in order that it may go well with you and your sons after you, because you will do what is right in Jehovahs eyes." An edition of the Pentateuch edited by J. H. Hertz has a footnote on that expression "that it may go well with you," which says: "Ibn Ezra suggests that the use of blood would have a demoralising effect upon the moral and physical nature, and pass on a hereditary taint to future generations." The point is an interesting one, and that it may apply in the matter of blood transfusions is testified to by medical doctors. For example, in his book Who Is Your Doctor and Why? Doctor Alonzo Jay Shadman says: "The blood in any person is in reality the person himself. It contains all the peculiarities of the individual from whence it comes. This includes hereditary taints, disease susceptibilities, poisons due to personal living, eating and drinking habits.... The poisons that produce the impulse to commit suicide, murder, or steal are in the blood." And Dr. Amrico Valrio, Brazilian doctor and surgeon for over forty years, agrees. "Moral insanity, sexual perversions, repression, inferiority complexes, petty crimesthese often follow in the wake of blood transfusion," he says. Yet it is acknowledged in the public press that organizations whose blood supply is considered reliable obtain blood for transfusion from criminals who are known to have such characteristics. Certainly no one who is trying to depart from the works of the flesh and use his life in the way that God directs through his Word is going to lay himself open to such a ruinous future.Rom. 12:2; Eph. 4:22-24.
Page 565:
While it may produce seemingly beneficial results at the moment, it may ultimately take its toll in disease and stillborn children as a direct result of such an ill - advised course. Even if no physical harm results to the patient or to one's off - spring, violation of the law of God sin God's new world.
The Watchtower November 1st 1961 Issue, Page 670:
Since the Bible forbids the eating of blood, how are Christians to view the use of serums and vaccines? Has the Society changed its viewpoint on this? - J. D., U.S.A.
The Bible is very clear that blood could properly be used only on the altar; otherwise it was to be poured out on the ground. (Lev. 17:11 - 13) The entire modern medical practice involving the use of blood is objectionable from the Christian standpoint. Therefore the taking of a blood transfusion, or, in lieu of that, the infusing of some blood fraction to sustain one's life is wrong. As to the use of vaccines and other substances that may in some way involve the use of blood in their preparation, it should not be concluded that the Watch Tower Society endorses these and says that the practice is right and proper. However, vaccination is a virtually unavoidable practice in many segments of modern society, and the Christian may find some comfort under the circumstances in the fact that this use is not in actuality a feeding or nourishing process, which was specifically forbidden when that man was not to eat blood, but it is a contamination of the human system. So, as was stated in The Watchtower of September 15, 1958, page 575, "It would therefore be a matter of individual judgment whether one accepted such types of medication or not." That is still the Society's viewpoint on the matter. - Gal. 6:5.
However, the mature Christian is not going to try to find in this a justification for as many other medical uses of blood substances as possible. To the contrary, recognizing the objectionableness of the entire process, he is going to stay as far away from it as he can, requesting other treatment where such is available.
The Watchtower May 15th 1962 Issue, Page 302:
Are idolatry and fornication damaging to the Christian personality? Disastrously so! So too is the taking in of blood, whether through blood foods or blood transfusions...Transfusing blood, then, may amount to transfusing tainted personality traits.
The Watchtower February 15th 1963 Issue, Pages 123, 124:
As to blood transfusions, he knows from his study of the Bible and the publications of the Watch Tower Society that this is an unscriptural practice. (Gen. 9:4; Acts 15:28,29) Now it is up to him to carry his own load of responsibility in applying what the Scriptures have to say on this matter. One day he may go to the hospital for surgery. There he explains his position to the doctor. "All right," the doctor says, "then we will use plasma." Or the doctor may tell him, "What you need is red cells to carry oxygen. We have red cells that we can use. How about that?" The Christian may not be well versed in medical matters. Shall he call his congregation servant or the Society? That should not be necessary, if he is prepared to carry his own load of responsibility. He need only ask the doctor: "From what was the plasma taken?" "How are the red cells obtained?" "Where did you get this substance?" If the answer is "Blood," he knows what course to take, for it is not just whole blood butanything that is derived from bloodand used to sustain life or strengthen one that comes under this principle. Someone may argue with you that the Scriptures are referring to the "eating" of blood but that blood is not taken into the digestive system during a transfusion. True, but the fact is that by a direct route the blood serves the same purpose as food when taken into the stomach, namely, strengthening the body or sustaining life. It is not the same as a vaccine given to a healthy person to build him up, just as food is given to nourish him.
Awake! May 8th 1964 Issue, Page 30:
...an effective human serum against lockjaw has been developed...Now some of it will be from human blood!
Awake! September 8th 1964 Issue, Page 24:
Some may claim that a transfusion is not really drinking blood, so it would be different. But such argument is not valid for conscientious persons, because the Bible says to "abstain" from blood, regardless of how it is taken into the body. If a doctor advised you to abstain from drinking alcohol, would you inject the alcohol into your bloodstream instead? If he told you to abstain from drinking coffee, would you inject it into your body? If you were warned to abstain from smoking, would you take the nicotine and inject it into your veins? Of course, these actions would be senseless. So, too, a Christian has the right, when he reads God's law warning him to abstain from blood, to do just that - abstain. Injecting the blood directly into his bloodstream is hardly 'abstaining' from blood.
Page 25:
"In the event of a transfusion or other therapeutic measure of that type without consent, the aggrieved party would have the right to sue in the civil courts. Transfusion without consent is technically a 'battery,' a tort or civil wrong, and a trespass to the person. The first basic essential then of blood transfusion from the legal aspect is that it can only properly be carried out with real [explicit] consent."
The Watchtower November 15th 1964 Issue, Pages 680, 681, 682, 683:
The Society does not endorse any of the modern medical uses of blood, such as the uses of blood in connection with inoculations. Inoculation is, however, a virtually unavoidable circumstance in some segments of society, and so we leave it up to the conscience of the individual to determine whether to submit to inoculation with a serum containing blood fractions for the purpose of building up antibodies to fight against disease. If a person did this, he may derive comfort under the circumstances from the fact that he is not directly eating blood, which is expressly forbidden in God's Word. It is not used for food or to replace lost blood. Here the Christian must make his own decision based on conscience. Therefore, whether a Christian will submit to inoculation with a serum, or whether doctors or nurses who are Christians will administer such, is for personal decision. Christians in the medical profession are individually responsible for employment decisions. They must bear the consequences of decisions made, in keeping with the principle at Galatians 6:5. Some doctors who are Jehovah's witnesses have administered blood transfusions to persons of the world upon request. However, they do not do so in the case of one of Jehovah's dedicated witnesses. In harmony with Deuteronomy 14:21, the administering of blood upon request to worldly persons is left to the Christian doctor's own conscience. This is similar to the situation facing a Christian butcher or grocer who must decide whether he can conscientiously sell blood sausage to a worldly person.
Awake! August 22nd 1965 Issue:
Page 18:
The fact that serums are prepared from blood makes them undesirable to Christians because of the Biblical law against the use of blood. However, since they do not involve the use of blood as a food to nourish the body, which the Bible directly forbids, their use is a matter that must be decided by each person according to his conscience.
Page 20:
The question as to whether you and your children should be vaccinated is something for personal decision. You must decide on the basis of what you feel is the best course for the health of your children as well as for your own health. No one should be criticized for his decision. In view of the many risks involved with vaccinations, the course of wisdom seems to be one of caution.
The Watchtower November 15th 1967 Issue, Page 702:
Is there any Scriptural objection to donating one's body for use in medical research or to accepting organs for transplant from such a source? - W. L., U.S.A.
...removing the organ and replacing it directly with an organ from another human, this is simply a shortcut. Those who submit to such operations are thus living off the flesh of another human. That is cannibalistic. However, in allowing man to eat animal flesh Jehovah God did not grant permission for humans to try to perpetuate their lives by cannibalistically taking into their bodies human flesh, whether chewed or in the form of whole organs or body parts taken from others.
The Watchtower December 1st 1967 Issue, Page 724:
Whereas the Mosaic law with its provisions about fat was abolished when Christ died as a sacrifice, the Apostolic Christian Council of Jerusalem reaffirmed God's law to Noah and applied it to the true Christian congregation. Christian fathers are obliged to teach this law and enforce it with regard to their minor children, for by God's law the fathers are the spiritual, religious guardians as well as the domestic parental caretakers of their underage children. The Christian witnesses of Jehovah today recognize that fact and follow the divine rule of conduct. They endeavor to keep their children from violating God's law to Noah and also the Jerusalem Council's decree. (Eph. 6:4) Rightly they try to protect their children from taking foreign blood into them.
Awake! June 8th 1968 Issue, Page 21:
There are those, such as the Christian witnesses of Jehovah, who consider all transplants between humans as cannibalism; and is not the utilizing of the flesh of another human for one's own life cannibalistic?
Awake! April 8th 1972 Issue, Pages 29-30:
Watching the World
Operating with Stored Blood
Men of science are constantly developing new methods for performing surgical operations. The Journal of the American Medical Association, dated November 15, 1971, described a procedure for open-heart surgery that employs sever hemodilution. Early in the operation a large quantity of blood is drawn off into a plastic blood bag. Though the bag is left connected to the patient by a tube, the removed and stored blood is no longer circulating in the patient's system. It is replaced with a plasma volume expander, which dilutes the blood remaining in the veins and which gradually dissipates during the operative procedure. Near the conclusion of the operation the blood storage bag is elevated, and the stored blood is reinfused into the patient..... These techniques are noteworthy to Christians, since they run counter to God's Word. The Bible shows that blood is not to be taken out of a body, stored and then later reused.
The Watchtower June 1st 1974 Issue, Pages 351, 352:
Serums or antitoxins are used. These are obtained from the blood of humans or animals that have already developed the antibodies for fighting the disease. Usually the blood is processed and the blood fraction (gamma globulin) containing the antibodies is separated and made into a serum. When this is injected into the patient it gives him temporary passive immunity. This is temporary, for the antibodies do not become a permanent part of his blood; when these pass out of his body he is no longer immune to the disease. It can thus be seen that serums (unlike vaccines) contain a blood fraction, though minute....What, then, of the use of a serum containing only a minute fraction of blood and employed to supply an auxiliary defense against some infection and not employed to perform the life - sustaining function that blood normally carries out? We believe that here the conscience of each Christian must decide.
The Watchtower October 15th 1974 Issue, Page 684:
Decades ago, the transfusing of one person's blood into another's veins became a common practice. Then the transplanting of organs came into vogue. Where might this all lead?...men today contemplate wholesale 'cannibalizing' of bodies. And even that seems too mild a term...This shows where things can lead once men begin to violate Bible standards, including its prohibition of taking the blood of another creature into one's own body.
Awake! February 22nd 1975 Issue, Page 30:
Hemophilia Treatment Hazard
Certain clotting "factors" derived from blood are now in wide use for the treatment of hemophilia, a disorder causing uncontrollable bleeding. However, those given this treatment face another deadly hazard: the Swiss medical weekly Schweizer Med Wochenschrift reports that almost 40 percent of 113 hemophiliacs studied had cases of hepatitis. "All these patients had received whole blood, plasma, or blood derivatives containing [the factors]," notes the report. Of course, true Christians do not use this potentially dangerous treatment, heeding the Bible's command to 'abstain from blood.'
Jehovah's Witnesses and the Question of Blood (1977):
Page 9:
Could God's law on blood be set aside in times of emergency? The Bible answers, No. There was no special dispensation for times of stress. We can see this from what occurred with some soldiers of Israel in the days of King Saul. Famished after a long battle, they slaughtered sheep and cattle and "fell to eating along with the blood." They were hungry and were not deliberately eating blood, but in their haste to eat the meat they did not see to it that the animals were properly bled. Did the fact that this seemed to be an "emergency" excuse their course? On the contrary, their God - appointed king recognized their action as 'sinning against Jehovah by eating along with the blood.' - 1 Samuel 14:31 - 35.
Page 18:
There is no denying that in Bible times God's law had particular application to consuming blood as food. Intravenous administration of blood was not then practiced. But, even though the Bible did not directly discuss modern medical techniques involving blood, it did in fact anticipate and cover these in principle. Note, for example, the command that Christians "keep abstaining...from blood." (Acts 15:29) Nothing is there stated that would justify making a distinction between taking blood into the mouth and taking it into the blood vessels. And, really, is there in principle any basic difference?
Page 41:
...whether having religious objection to blood transfusions or not, many a person might decline blood simply because it is essentially an organ transplant that at best is only partially compatible with his own blood.
..."a bottle of blood is a bomb."..."...donating blood can be compared to sending a loaded gun to an unsuspecting or unprepared person...."
Pages 48, 49:
Does this brief consideration of only some of the medical risks of blood mean that Jehovah's Witnesses object to transfusions primarily for medical reasons? No, that is not the case. The fundamental reason why they do not accept blood transfusions is because of what the Bible says. Theirs is basically a religious objection, not a medical one. Nevertheless, the fact that there are serious risks in taking blood simply underscores the reasonableness, even from a medical standpoint, of the position that Jehovah's Witnesses take.
Page 51:
Doctors know that alternative solutions are not really "blood substitutes." Why not? Because the hemoglobin of the red cells delivers oxygen throughout the body. Nonblood solutions do not contain this.
The Watchtower June 15th 1978 Issue, Page 24:
...God's command to 'abstain from blood' rules out ingesting it by the mouth as well as through injections into the veins.
Pages 29, 30, 31:
Are serum injections compatible with Christian belief?
What, however, about accepting serum injections to fight against disease, such as are employed for diphtheria, tetanus, viral hepatitis, rabies, hemophilia and Rh incompatibility? ...This seems to fall into a 'gray area.'...Hence, we have taken the position that this question must be resolved by each individual on a personal basis....How concerned should a Christian be about blood in food products? ...This may call for a degree of care....Christians, individually, must decide what to do.
(MY COMMENT: You can see the opposite view ABOVE in "Blood, Medicine and the Law of God" (1961), Page 11 AND Awake! February 22nd 1975 Issue, Page 30)
The Watchtower March 15th 1980 Issue, Page 31:
Should congregation action be taken if a baptized Christian accepts a human organ transplant, such as a cornea or a kidney?
Regarding the transplantation of human tissue or bone from one human to another, this is a matter for conscientious decision by each one of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Awake! June 22nd 1982 Issue, Page 25:
While these verses are not stated in medical terms, Witnesses view them as ruling out transfusion of whole blood, packed RBCs, and plasma, as well as WBC and platelet administration. However, Witnesses religious understanding does not absolutely prohibit the use of components such as albumin, immune globulins, and hemophiliac preparations; each Witness must decide individually if he can accept these.
You Can Live Forever On A Paradise Earth Book (1982), Page 216:
"So too abstaining from blood means not taking it into your body at all."
Awake! March 22nd, 1983 Issue, Page 16:
It is with this in mind, and not just to honor the requests of Jehovah's Witnesses, that Denton Cooley [of Houston, Texas] has performed open-heart operations now for over seven years, limiting transfusions wherever possible by substituting hemodilution, diluting the patient's blood with a glucose and heparin solution. If this method has given excellent results since then . . . one wonders why it has not been extended to present-day surgery.
United in Worship of the Only True God Book (1983):
Page 158:
The doctor may suggest that you have some of your own blood withdrawn and stored for use, if necessary, during a later operation. Would you agree? Remember that, according to God's Law given through Moses, blood removed from a creature was to be poured out on the ground. (Deut. 12:24) We today are not under the Law code, but the underlying message is that blood is sacred and, when removed from a creature's body, is to be returned to God by pouring it out on his footstool, the earth. (Compare Matthew 5:34, 35.) So how could it be proper to store your blood (even for a relatively brief time) and then put it back into your body?
But what if the doctor says that, during surgery or in the course of other treatment, your blood would be channeled through equipment outside your body, and then, right back in? Would you consent? Some have felt that, with a clear conscience, they could permit this, provided that the equipment was primed with a nonblood fluid. They have viewed the external equipment as an extension of their circulatory system. Of course, situations vary, and it is you that must decide.
Page 159:
Loyalty to Jehovah ought to make us resist {blood} resolutely, because we choose to obey God rather than men.
To persons who do not yet know Jehovah, arguments in favor of blood transfusions may at times seem to show high regard for the sacredness of life. But we do not forget that many who argue in this way also condone the destruction of life by means of abortion.
New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (1984 Edition):
Leviticus 3:17: "'It is a statute to time indefinite for YOUR generations, in all YOUR dwelling places: YOU must not eat any fat or any blood at all.'"
Numbers 23:23, 24 [Balaam's 2nd Prophecy]:
23: For there is no unlucky spell against Jacob, Nor any divination against Israel. At this time it may be said respecting Jacob and Israel, 'What has God worked out!'
24: Behold, a people will get up like a lion, And like the lion it will lift itself up. It will not lie down until it may eat prey, And the blood of slain ones it will drink."
The Watchtower May 15th 1984 Issue, Page 31:
Could a Christian accept a bone-marrow transplant, since blood is made in the marrow? Doctors perform most bone-marrow transplants by withdrawing some marrow from a donor (often a near relative) and then injecting or transfusing it into the sick patient....Of course, marrow used in human marrow transplants is from live donors, and the withdrawn marrow may have some blood with it. Hence, the Christian would have to resolve for himself whether - to him - the bone-marrow graft would amount to simple flesh or would be unbled tissue. Additionally, since a marrow graft is a form of transplant, the Scriptural aspects of human organ transplants should be considered. See "Questions From Readers" in our issue of March 15, 1980....a personal decision has to be made on this matter...
The Watchtower April 15th 1985 Issue, Page 13:
"....our position on blood is nonnegotiable." (MY COMMENT: I LOVE THAT QUOTE!)
The Watchtower June 15th 1985 Issue, Page 30:
"Each batch of Factor VIII is made from plasma that is pooled from as many as 2,500 blood donors."
Awake! October 8th 1988 Issue, Page 11:
"Dr. Margaret Hilgartner of the New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center said: "A severe hemophiliac is exposed to the blood of 800,000 to 1 million different people every year.""
The Watchtower March 1st 1989 Issue, Pages 30, 31:
Do Jehovah's Witnesses allow the use of autologous blood (Autotransfusion), such as by having their own blood stored and later put back into them?
This clearly rules out one common use of autologous blood - preoperative collection, storage, and later infusion of a patient's own blood....Jehovah's Witnesses, though, DO NOT accept this procedure....In a somewhat different process, autologous blood can be diverted from a patient to a hemodialysis device (artificial kidney) or a heart - lung pump. The blood flows out through a tube to the artificial organ that pumps and filters (or oxygenates) it, and then it returns to the patient's circulatory system . Some Christians have permitted this if the equipment is not primed with stored blood....What, though, if the flow of such autologous blood stopped briefly, such as if a heart - lung machine is shut down while the surgeon checks the integrity of coronary - bypass grafts?...a Christian having to decide whether to permit his blood to be diverted through some external device ought to focus, not primarily on whether a brief interruption in flow might occur, but on whether he conscientiously felt that the diverted blood would still be part of his circulatory system. -
Galatians 6:5. What about induced Hemodilution?...Some Christians have accepted this, others have refused. Again, each individual must decide whether he would consider the blood diverted in such a Hemodilution circuit to be similar to that flowing through a heart/lung machine, or he would think of it as blood that left him and therefore should be disposed of. A final example of autologous blood use involves recovering and reusing blood during surgery. Equipment is used to aspirate blood from the wound, pump it out through a filter (to remove clots or debris) or a centrifuge (to eliminate fluids), and then direct it back into the patient. Many Christians have been very concerned whether in such salvage there might be any brief interruption of blood flow. Yet, as mentioned, a more Biblical concern is whether the blood escaping into a surgical wound is still part of the person. Does the fact that the blood has flowed from his circulatory system into the wound mean that it should be 'poured out,' like the blood mentioned at Leviticus 17:13? If an individual believes so, he would probably refuse to permit such blood salvage. Yet, another Christian (who also would not let blood flow from him, be stored for some time, and later be put back into him) might conclude that a circuit with recovery from a surgical site and ongoing reinfusion. would not violate his trained conscience....When faced with a question in this area, each Christian is responsible to obtain details from medical personnel and then make a personal decision....While modern medicine might be able to help us extend our lives for a time, we certainly would not want to extend our present life by doing anything that would violate our Christian conscience or would displease our Life - Giver.
The Watchtower December 1st 1989 Issue, Page 12:
"The faith of Jehovah's Witnesses is under attack from all sides _ by the clergy of Christendom who hate the Kingdom message we take from house to house, by apostates who collaborate with Christendom's clergy, by medical authorities who want to impose blood transfusions on us and our children, by atheistic scientists who reject belief in God and the creation, and by those who try to force us to compromise our neutrality. All this opposition is orchestrated by Satan, the ruler of darkness and ignorance, the enemy of accurate knowledge."
How Can Blood Save Your Life? (1990):
Page 6:
Those who respect life as a gift from the Creator do not try to sustain life by taking in blood.
Page 8:
...a transfusion is a tissue transplant.
Page 14:
A healthy person may tolerate a 50 percent loss of red blood cell mass and be almost entirely asymptotic if blood loss occurs over a period of time.
Page 16:
The conscience of some Witnesses permits them to accept organ transplants if done without blood.
Page 19:
Blood...is the most dangerous substance we use in medicine.
Page 20:
...to force blood on a Christian would be the equivalent of forcible sex - rape. (MY COMMENT: Yes, but were there 2 Eye-Witnesses, and did the person receiving the forced Transfusion SCREAM?)
Page 22:
Each year thousands die as a result of transfusions; multitudes more get very sick and face long - term consequences.
Page 27:
Witnesses believe that blood removed from the body should be disposed of, so they do not accept autotransfusion of predeposited blood. Techniques for intraoperative collection or hemodilution that involve blood storage are objectionable to them.
The Watchtower June 1st 1990 Issue, Pages 30, 31:
Do Jehovah's Witnesses accept injections of a blood fraction...Each must resolve the matter personally before God.
Page 30:
Do Jehovah's Witnesses accept injections of a blood fraction, such as immune globulin or albumin? Some do, believing that the Scriptures do not clearly rule out accepting an injection of a small fraction, or component, taken from blood....In view of the command to 'abstain from blood,' some Christians have felt that they should not accept an immune globulin (protein) injection, even though it was only a blood fraction. Their stand is clear and simple - no blood component in any form or amount. Others have felt that a serum (antitoxin), such as immune globulin, containing only a tiny fraction of a donor's blood plasma and used to bolster their defense against disease, is not the same as a life - sustaining blood transfusion. So their consciences may not forbid them to take immune globulin or similar fractions....That some protein fractions from the plasma do move naturally into the blood system of another individual (the fetus) may be another consideration when a Christian is deciding whether he will accept immune globulin, albumin, or similar injections of plasma fractions. One person may feel that he in good conscience can; another may conclude that he cannot. Each must resolve the matter personally before God.
The Watchtower July 15th 1990 Issue, Page 30:
He describes blood as "the most dangerous substance we use in medicine."
The Watchtower August 15th 1990 Issue, Page 29:
Is it proper for a Christian to receive an injection of a blood fraction, such as immune globulin or albumin? Responding to God's law, Christians do not accept blood transfusions of the major blood components - plasma, red cells, white cells, or platelets. Some of Jehovah's Witnesses, however, have conscientiously felt able to receive an injection of one of the small protein fractions of the plasma. Interestingly, some of these proteins naturally pass from the bloodstream of a pregnant woman to the separate blood system of her fetus.
Awake! September 8th 1990 Issue, Page 31:
In 1979 Mr. and Mrs. Malette of Quebec, Canada, were involved in a car accident...she was carrying a signed Medical Directive/Release Card, clearly refusing blood transfusions...The doctor...ignored those instructions...Mrs. Malette sued the doctor and the hospital...she was awarded $20,000.
Awake! November 22nd 1990 Issue, Page 12:
The evidence mounts that blood transfusions are harmful to the immune system.
1991 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses, Page 37:
In another case a 16 - month - old baby with meningitis was becoming more anemic. As is often the case, the anemia was due to many blood samples being routinely taken for testing purposes.
[MY COMMENT: Compare this Quote to "How Can Blood Save Your Life?" (1990), Page 14, which says: "A healthy person may tolerate a 50 percent loss of red blood cell mass and be almost entirely asymptotic if blood loss occurs over a period of time."]
The Watchtower January 15th 1991 Issue, Page 29:
...Jehovah's Witnesses abstain from blood not because it is unhealthy but because accepting it is unholy.
The Watchtower June 15th 1991 Issue, Page 10:
The reality is that blood transfusions are fraught with many risks. They can even be fatal.
Page 15:
Appreciation for this value helps Jehovah's Witnesses to be resolved not to misuse blood, even if a physician sincerely claims that a transfusion is vital. He may believe that potential benefits of a transfusion outweigh the health risks posed by the blood itself. But the Christian cannot ignore an even graver risk, the risk of losing God's approval by agreeing to a misuse of blood.
Page 18:
If you have children, are you sure that they agree with and can explain the Bible - based stand on transfusions? Do they truly believe this stand to be God's will? Are they convinced that to violate God's law would be so serious that it could put at risk a Christian's prospect for everlasting life? Wise parents will review these matters with their children, whether they be very young or almost adults. Parents may hold practice sessions in which each youth faces questions that might be posed by a judge or a hospital official. The goal is not to have a youth repeat by rote selected facts or answers. It is more important that they know what they believe, and why. Of course, at a court hearing, the parents or others might present information about the risks of blood and the availability of alternative therapies. But what a judge or an official would likely seek to learn from speaking with our children is whether they maturely understand their situation and options and also whether they have their own values and firm convictions.
Page 31:
How strenuously should a Christian resist a blood transfusion that has been ordered or authorized by a court? God's law must be obeyed!...if a court - authorized transfusion seemed likely, a Christian might choose to avoid being accessible for such a violation of God's law....If a Christian did put forth very strenuous efforts to avoid a violation of God's law on blood, authorities might consider him a lawbreaker or make him liable to prosecution. If punishment did result, the Christian could view it as suffering for the sake of righteousness.
Pay Attention To Yourselves and to All The Flock Book (SECRET ELDERS RULE BOOK -- ONLY AVAILABLE TO ACTIVE ELDERS) (1991 Edition), Pages 92-95:
Act as qualified judges
Remove unrepentant wrongdoers...
(MY COMMENT: One of the Disfellowshipping Offenses mentioned is:) Failure to abstain from blood.
The Watchtower October 1st 1994 Issue, Page 31:
Currently a small amount of albumin is also used in injections of the synthetic hormone EPO (erythropoietin). Some Witnesses have accepted injections of EPO because it can hasten red blood cell production and so may relieve a physician of a feeling that a blood transfusion might be needed....As noted, many Witnesses have not objected to accepting an injection that contains a small quantity of albumin.
Awake! December 8th 1994 Issue, Pages 23-26:
Is the RhIG shot made from blood?
Yes. The antibodies that make up the shot are harvested from the blood of individuals who have become immunized or sensitized to the Rh factor.... .Genetically-engineered RhIG not derived from blood may become available in the future.
Can the Christian conscientiously take RhIG?
....This journal and its companion, The Watchtower,have commented consistently on the matter* (See Footnote Below). ....some Christians have concluded that to them it does not seem a violation of Bible law..." The decision whether to take RhIG remains finally, though, a matter for each Christian couple to decide conscientiously.
Footnote: *See The Watchtower of June 1, 1990, pages 30, 31; June 15, 1978, pages 30, 31; and How Can Blood Save Your Life?, published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc.
Awake! February 22nd 1995 Issue, Page 21:
The doctors decided to provide alternative treatment. Plasma was extracted from the blood, and thus antibodies attacking my blood cells and kidney tissues were removed. I was then given injections of Ringer's solution together with albumin. I had discussed this treatment with the doctors and gave them written permission to administer it.
The Watchtower August 1st 1995 Issue, Page 30:
Because of such dangers, the Center for Bloodless Surgery utilizes alternatives to blood transfusions, including the reinfusion. of a patient's own blood, a technique that some Witnesses may find unobjectionable under certain circumstances.
The Following Quotes and Information about the Blood Policy in Bulgaria were taken from http://Quotes.JehovahsWitnesses.com/euro_blood.htm :
2000 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses, Page 24:
Highlights of the Past Year
In 1998 a case involving Jehovah's Witnesses in Bulgaria was given attention by the European Court of Human Rights. What led up to it? The Bulgarian government had deprived Jehovah's Witnesses, as well as some 20 other religious groups, of legal recognition. An appeal to the Bulgarian Supreme Court had been denied because, among other things, Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in the Trinity and in other non-Biblical doctrines of Christendom. This led to arrests, the breaking up of meetings for worship, and the confiscation of religious literature. The European Court urged Bulgaria to settle matters with Jehovah's Witnesses on a friendly basis. As a result, in October 1998, Bulgaria again gave legal recognition to Jehovah's Witnesses. This made it possible to send four missionaries from the 106th class of Gilead to Bulgaria to assist the local publishers in sharing the Kingdom good news with the people there.
---------------------------------------------
COMMENTS FROM QUOTES.JEHOVAHSWITNESSES.COM: On June 28th, 1994, the government in Bulgaria refused the application to renew the registration for "Khristiansko Sdruzhenie "Sviditili na Iehova" (Christian Assiciation of Jehovah's Witnesses). In effect, Jehovah's Witnesses were no longer recognized as a "religion" in Bulgaria, and therefore could not enjoy the benefits associated with the official status of "religion".
The Bulgarian Witnesses viewed this action as persecution. In an effort to regain their former status, they made an official complaint to the European Court of Human Rights (herein ECHR). Since this petition was likely done with the support and backing of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, we feel that the statements made by the applicant's representatives (i.e. the statements made by the Jehovah's Witnesses' lawyers) can be included in this web reference. Some of the quotes on this page are from the documentation generated by that petition.
The Admissibility Decision is available from the ECHR's official web site: Click here
The matter before the ECHR was finally settled by way of a "friendly agreement" between the two parties. To read the complete "REPORT OF THE COMMISSION" as posted at the ECHR's web site, click here. Note that parts of this report are written in French. A reproduction of part of this document, along with English translation, is included below.
A summary of the matter, written in English was formerly available at the ECHR's web site: [link no longer functions www.dhcommhr.coe.fr/eng/E276INFO.148.html].
The Admissibility Decision and Report, linked above, can be found by you independently by using the ECHR's Case Law search engine and entering:
Application Number: 00028626/95
Check-mark Reports
Check-mark Admissibility Decisions,
Check-mark English
Click the Search button, and when the new page opens, SCROLL DOWN..
*** European Commission of Human Rights, Information Note no. 148 ***
[link no longer functions: www.dhcommhr.coe.fr/eng/E276INFO.148.html]***
II. Reports adopted
(i) Reports adopted under Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention (friendly settlement)
(a) One Report was adopted by the plenary Commission under Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention, concluding that a friendly settlement had been secured:
- KHRISTIANSKO SDRUZHENIE "SVIDETELI NA IEHOVA" (CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES) v. Bulgaria (Application No. 28626/95)
The case concerned the refusal to re-register the applicant association pursuant to a 1994 law, and the alleged suppression of its activities and those of its members. In settlement, the Government agreed to introduce legislation as soon as possible to provide for civilian service for conscientious objectors, as an alternative to military service, and to register the applicant association as a religion. The applicant [Jehovah's Witnesses] undertook with regard to its stance on blood transfusions to draft a statement for inclusion in its statute providing 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.
*** European Commission of Human Rights Application No. 28626/95 ***
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/Hudoc2doc/hedec/sift/3641.txt
AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF by Khristiansko Sdruzhenie "Svideteli na Iehova" (Christian Association Jehovah's Witnesses) against Bulgaria
In respect of the refusal of blood transfusion, the applicant association submits that while this is part of the religious doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses, its 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. Therefore, the fact that the religious doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses is against
blood transfusion cannot amount to a threat to "public health", every individual being free in his or her choice.
...
The applicant association denies the Government's allegation that Jehovah's Witnesses were seeking a theocratic society. They are respectful of public authority, work in public service and respect the opinion of others. They do not disturb ceremonies honouring the national flag or other symbols, but simply refrain from taking an active part in them. Moreover, Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide participate in social activities.
*** European Commission of Human Rights, Application Number 28626/95 ***
Report of the Commision
PART II
SOLUTION REACHED
14. Following the decision on the admissibility of the application, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement in accordance with Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties to submit any proposals they wished to make.
15. In accordance with the usual practice, the Secretary, acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.
16. By letters of 8 and 12 September 1997 the parties indicated their willingness to reach a friendly settlement. The parties exchanged correspondence and proposals for a friendly settlement and held meetings in Sofia on 20 and 21 November 1997. On 17 January 1998, upon the parties' request, the Commission made proposals to the parties with a view to resolving some remaining differences in their positions. The parties again met in Sofia on 10 February 1998.
17. By letters of 10 and 11 February 1998 the parties informed the Commission of the final text of the friendly settlement. This text, compiled on the basis of the correspondence received from the parties, reads as follows:
"I. Concernant la substitution du service militaire par un service alternatif, le Gouvernement Bulgare s'engage dposer au Parlement un projet de loi, dans les meilleurs dlais, instituant un service civil alternatif au service militaire.
1.1. Le projet, selon l'avis de la requrante, rpond aux exigences des objecteurs de conscience, fidles des Tmoins de Jhovah, qui souhaitent effectuer un service civil alternatif en remplacement du service militaire.
1.2. Le projet de loi dfinitif, dpos par le Conseil des Ministres au Parlement, sera soumis immdiatement la Commission europenne des Droits de l'Homme.
II. Concernant la position des Tmoins de Jhovah sur le sang, la requrante s'engage rdiger une dclaration, qui sera annexe de faon intgrante aux statuts des Tmoins de Jhovah de Bulgarie en vue de son immatriculation, stipulant que :
2.1. - les patients Tmoins de Jhovah recourent systmatiquement aux soins mdicaux pour eux-mmes et leurs enfants ; il appartient chacun d'entre eux d'utiliser son libre arbitre, sans aucun contrle et sanction de la part de la requrante ;
2.2. - s'agissant du respect de la lgislation sanitaire bulgare, l'association chrtienne les Tmoins de Jhovah de Bulgarie s'engage respecter son application, y compris :
2.2.1. - en ne fournissant pas de dclaration pralable de refus de transfusion de sang aux personnes mineures;
2.2.2. - en ce qui concerne les personnes majeures, en observant les dispositions de ladite lgislation et en reconnaissant chaque individu la libert de choix.
*** English Translation of part of the the above section ***
II. Concerning the position of Jehovah's Witnesses on blood, the petitioner undertakes to draft a statement which will become part of the bylaws of Jehovah's Witnesses of Bulgaria, in view of their registration, stipulating that:
2.1 - Jehovah's Witness patients resort to the use of the medical system for themselves and their children; each member having the right to make use of this freely at their own discretion, without any control or sanctions on the part of the petitioner.
2.2.1 - to not furnish an advance directive refusing blood transfusions to minor persons.
*** Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society, Public Affairs Office, Press Release, April 27, 1998 ***
[to see a scanned copy of this press release fax, click here]
BULGARIA TO RECOGNIZE JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES AS A RELIGION; EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACCEPTS AMICABLE SETTLEMENT
On March 9, 1997 [sic] the European Commission of Human Rights decided to accept the amicable settlement agreed to by the Government of Bulgaria and the Christian Association of Jehovah's Witnesses (Khristiansko Sdruzhenie "Svideteli na Iehova"). Word of this decision reached the attorneys for the Witnesses on March 20, 1998.
Bulgaria has agreed to grant the Christian Association of Jehovah's Witnesses recognition as a religion. Bulgaria also agree to create without delay a bill that will allow alternative civilian service for those whose conscience will not allow them to engage in military service. The agreement also includes an acknowledgment that each individual has the freedom to choose the type of medical treatment he receives. With the amicable settlement, the Witnesses agreed to withdraw their complaint against Bulgaria.
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.
The complaint before the Commission came because, on June 28, 1994, the Bulgarian Council of Ministers refused to renew the Association's registration as a religion. Following this decision, "various measures were taken against the activities of [Jehovah;s Witnesses and of its members. These included arrests, dispersal of meetings held in public and private locations and confiscation of religious materials." according to the Commission report.
"The more than 2000 associated with Jehovah's Witnesses in Bulgaria fell confident that this agreement will allow them the freedom to practice their religion in Bulgaria," said Alain Garay, one of the attorneys for the Witnesses. "Not only is this a step forward for religious freedom in Bulgaria but it sets an example for religious freedom in all states with membership in the Council of Europe."
Jehovah's WItnesses, an international Christian brotherhood, number some five million worldwide. Presently, over 85,000 congregations, in some 200 lands, operate in conjunction with 104 branch offices.
------------------------------------------------------
The above faxed press release is not available at the Watchtower Society's official media website (www.jw-media.org); however a more recent press release, which deals with the official recognition in Bulgaria (rather than simply the ECHR court result) is available. This more recent press release mentions only the things that Bulgaria was required to do as result of the ECHR "friendly agreement" and does not indicate any "acknowledgements" made by or undertakings directed toward the Watchtower Society.
*** http://www.jw-media.org/releases/981008a.htm ***
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES OFFICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION
For Immediate Release
October 8, 1998
Victory for human rights in Eastern Europe:
Christian religion sets legal precedent in Bulgaria
After years of arrests, beatings, and loss of property, Jehovah's Witnesses have regained legal recognition in Bulgaria. They are the first religion in the country to successfully appeal to an international body in order to regain legal recognition. Dozens of religions were banned in 1994.
This legal recognition, which was received Wednesday, October 7, 1998, represents an important victory for religious freedom in the country and throughout Eastern Europe, said Lubomir Kutchoukov, spokesperson for Jehovah's Witnesses in Bulgaria. "We are grateful that appeals to international standards of human rights have led to this reasonable and peaceful conclusion," he said. "All people of Bulgaria will benefit from this victory."
This important legal victory came after intervention from the European Commission of Human Rights of the Council of Europe. In July 1997, the Commission suggested that the government of Bulgaria enter into a friendly settlement with Jehovah's Witnesses. On March 8, 1998, the Commission accepted the terms of the settlement, which included the government's promise to grant legal recognition to Jehovah's Witnesses. As part of the settlement, Bulgaria also agreed to create a bill that will allow alternative civilian service for conscientious objectors. The terms of the agreement involved no change in the doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Jehovah's Witnesses were first legally recognized in Bulgaria on July 17, 1991, shortly after the fall of communism. However, despite democratic changes in Bulgaria, restrictions on religion continued. Beginning in 1993, public defamation against "non-traditional" churches began, resulting in many human rights violations. In 1994, some 39 religions lost their legal status after the passage of a restrictive law on religion. Jehovah's Witnesses were subjected to a rash of police raids, beatings and arrests.
At the same time, "there has not been a single member of a 'sect' [judicially] charged for committing a crime motivated by religious convictions," stated a 1996 report by the Bulgarian Helsinki Commission and Human Rights Without Frontiers.
Jehovah's Witnesses have been present in Bulgaria since the first decades of this century. They have nearly six million members worldwide, and more than 13 million have attended their religious services. They are officially recognized in more than 150 countries.
For more information on Jehovah's Witnesses, visit www.watchtower.org.
Media contact: (718) 560-5600
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Watchtower June 15th 2000 Issue:
Questions From Readers
Do Jehovah's Witnesses accept any medical products derived from blood?
The fundamental answer is that Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept blood. We firmly believe that God's law on blood is not open to reform to fit shifting opinions. Still, new issues arise be cause blood can now be processed into four primary components and fractions of those components. In deciding whether to accept such, a Christian should look beyond possible medical benefits and risks. His concern should be what the Bible says and the potential effect on his relationship with Almighty God.
The key issues are quite simple. As an aid to seeing why that is so, consider some Biblical, historical, and medical background.
Jehovah God told our common ancestor Noah that blood must be treated as something special. (Genesis 9:3, 4) Later, God's laws to Israel reflected the sacredness of blood: "As for any man of the house of Israel or some alien resident ... who eats any sort of blood, I shall certainly set my face against the soul that is eating the blood." By rejecting God's law, an Israelite could contaminate others; thus, God added: "I shall indeed cut him off from among his people." (Leviticus 17:10) Later, at a meeting in Jerusalem, the apostles and older men decreed that we must 'abstain from blood.' Doing so is as vital as abstaining from sexual immorality and idolatry. ?Acts 15:28, 29.
What would "abstaining" have meant back then? Christians did not consume blood, whether fresh or coagulated; nor did they eat meat from an unbled animal. Also ruled out would be foods to which blood was added, such as blood sausage. Taking in blood in any of those ways would violate God's law. ?] Samuel 14:32, 33.
Most people in ancient times would not have been troubled over the consuming of blood, as we can see from the writings of Tertullian (second and third centuries C.E.). Responding to false charges that Christians consumed blood, Tertullian mentioned tribes that sealed treaties by tasting blood. He also noted that "when a show is given in the arena, [some] with greedy thirst have caught the fresh blood of the guilty ... as a cure for their epilepsy."
Those practices (even if some Romans did them for health reasons) were wrong for Christians: "We do not include even animals' blood in our natural diet," wrote Tertullian. The Romans used food-containing blood as a test of the integrity of real Christians. Tertullian added: "Now, I ask you, what sort of a thing is it, that when you are confident [that Christians] will turn with horror from animals' blood, you should suppose them greedy for human blood?"
Today, few people would think that the laws of Almighty God are at issue if a physician suggested their taking blood. While Jehovah's Witnesses certainly want to keep living, we are committed to obey Jehovah's law on blood. What does this mean in the light of current medical practice?
As transfusions of whole blood became common after World War 11, Jehovah's Witnesses saw that this was contrary to God's law ?and we still believe that. Yet, medicine has changed over time, Today, most transfusions are not of whole blood but of one of its primary components: (1) red cells; (2) white cells; (3) platelets; (4) plasma (serum), the fluid part. Depending on the condition of the patient, physicians might prescribe red cells, white cells, platelets, or plasma. Transfusing these major components allows a single unit of blood to be divided among more patients. Jehovah's Witnesses hold that accepting whole blood or any of those four primary components violates God's law. Significantly, keeping to this Bible?based position has protected them from many risks, including such diseases as hepatitis and AIDS that can be contracted from blood.
However, since blood can be processed beyond those primary components, questions arise about fractions derived from the primary blood components. How are such fractions used, and what should a Christian consider when deciding on them?
Blood is complex. Even the plasma-which is 90 percent water-carries scores of hormones, inorganic salts, enzymes, and nutrients, including minerals and sugar. Plasma also carries such proteins as albumin, clotting factors, and antibodies to fight diseases. Technicians isolate and use many plasma proteins. For example, clotting factor Vill has been given to hemophiliacs, who bleed easily. Or if someone is exposed to certain diseases, doctors might prescribe injections of gamma globulin, extracted from the blood plasma of people who already had immunity. Other plasma proteins are used medically, but the above mentioned illustrate how a primary blood component (plasma) may be processed to obtain fractions. * (SEE FOOTNOTE BELOW)
Just as blood plasma can be a source of various fractions, the other primary components (red cells, white cells, platelets) can be processed to isolate smaller parts. For example, white blood cells may be a source of interferons and interleukins, used to treat some viral infections and cancers. Platelets can be processed to extract a wound-healing factor. And other medicines are coming along that involve (at least initially) extracts from blood components. Such therapies are not transfusions of those primary components; they usually involve parts or fractions thereof. Should Christians accept these fractions in medical treatment? We cannot say. The Bible does not give details, so a Christian must make his own conscientious decision before God.
Some would refuse anything derived from blood (even fractions intended to provide temporary passive immunity). That is how they understand God's command to, abstain from blood.' They reason that his law to Israel required that blood removed from a creature be 'poured out on the ground.' (Deuteronomy 12:22-24) Why is that relevant? Well, to prepare gamma globulin, blood-based clotting factors, and so on, requires that blood be collected and processed. Hence, some Christians reject such products, just as they reject transfusions of whole blood or of its four primary components. Their sincere, conscientious stand should be respected.
Other Christians decide differently. They too refuse transfusions of whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets, or plasma. Yet, they might allow a physician to treat them with a fraction extracted from the primary components. Even here there may be differences. One Christian may accept a gamma globulin injection, but he may or may not agree to an injection containing something extracted from red or white cells. Overall, though, what might lead some Christians to conclude that they could accept blood fractions?
"Questions From Readers" in The Watchtower of June 1, 1990, noted that plasma proteins (fractions) move from a pregnant woman's blood to the separate blood system of her fetus. Thus a mother passes immunoglobulins to her child, providing valuable immunity. Separately, as a fetus' red cells complete their normal life span, their oxygen-carrying portion is processed. Some of it becomes bilirubin, which crosses the placenta to the mother and is eliminated with her body wastes. Some Christians may conclude that since blood fractions can pass to another person in this natural setting, they could accept a blood fraction derived from blood plasma or cells.
Does the fact that opinions and conscientious decisions may differ mean that the issue is inconsequential? No. It is serious. Yet, there is a basic simplicity. The above material shows that Jehovah's Witnesses refuse transfusions of both whole blood and its primary blood components. The Bible directs Christians to 'abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from fornication.' (Acts 15:29) Beyond that, when it comes to fractions of any of the primary components, each Christian, after careful and prayerful meditation, must conscientiously decide for himself.
Many people would be willing to accept any therapy that seems to offer immediate benefit, even a therapy having known health risks, as is true of blood products. The sincere Christian endeavors to have a broader, more balanced view that involves more than just the physical aspects. Jehovah's Witnesses appreciate efforts to provide quality medical care, and they weigh the risk/ benefit ratio of any treatment. However, when it comes to products derived from blood, they carefully weigh what God says and their personal relationship with our Life-Giver. -Psalm 36:9.
What a blessing for a Christian to have such confidence as the psalmist who wrote: "Jehovah God is a sun and a shield; favor and glory are what he gives. Jehovah himself will not hold back anything good from those walking in faultlessness. O Jehovah . . . , happy is the man that is trusting in you"!-Psalm 84:11, 12.
FOOTNOTE: * See "Questions From Readers" in The Watchtower of June 15, 1978, and October 1, 1994. Pharmaceutical firms have developed recombinant products that are not taken from blood and that may be prescribed in place of some blood fractions used in the past.
SUGGESTED QUESTIONS FOR THE DOCTOR
If you face surgery or a treatment that might involve a blood product, ask:
Do all the medical personnel involved know that, as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I direct that no blood transfusions (whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets, or blood plasma) be given to me under any circumstances?
If any medicine to be prescribed may be made from blood plasma, red or white cells, or platelets, ask:
Has the medicine been made from one of the four primary blood components? If so, would you explain its makeup?
How much of this blood-derived medicine might be administered, and in what way?
If my conscience permits me to accept this fraction, what medical risks are there?
If my conscience moves me to decline this fraction, what other therapy might be used?
After I have considered this matter further, when may I inform you of my decision?
END OF BLOOD QUOTES TIMELINE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know 100% what the Society's Current Blood Policy is (I don't know if even the Governing Body and Elders do anymore, or if they ever did).
However, here is what I have heard is now ALLOWED by the Society:
Vaccinations (Shots) even if they contain Blood!
Organ Transplants even though the Organs contain Blood! (Probably a large amount of Blood too!)
Bone-Marrow Transplants
Hemophiliac Blood Treatments
All sorts of Blood Fractions
Here is a Pharisee-Like List of the "Acceptable Blood Fractions" which Witnesses are now allowed to accept (at least this is what I have heard, not 100% sure):
*Factor VIII
*Gamma Globulin
*Blood Plasma Proteins
*Albumin
*Immune Globulins
*Rh Immune Globulin
*Hemophiliac Preparations
*Clotting Factors
*Synthetic Hormone EPO (Erythropoietin) (contains only "a small amount of Albumin")
*Autologous Blood (Autotransfusion) (Where your own Blood "flows out through a tube to the Artificial Organ that pumps and filters (or oxygenates) it, and then it returns to the patient's circulatory system")
*Hemodilution
*HemoPure (Cow's Blood)
*PolyHeme
Also in a 1960's Article the Watchtower Society said that Jehovah's Witness Doctors CAN GIVE Blood Transfusions to those evil "Worldly People!" (However Witnesses are not even allowed to give Blood to their PETS -- Does this seem odd? I guess the Watchtower Society is basically saying that "Worldly People" are so wicked that it doesn't matter if you give them Blood, yet your Pets are better than Worldly People)
Here are some Comments I found about the Society's Blood Policies on a Website (can't remember which Website though):
Who is Blood Guilty before Jehovah God? If the Society believes you should not have Blood according to the Bible, then where in the Bible does it allow certain parts of Blood? What about all of the followers of the Society that needed a Blood Fraction (which is now allowed) when they were in their "not allowed mode"? Did any of these die needlessly? Does Jehovah give "New Light Blinking Back and Forth" to the Governing Body so they can keep adjusting their stand on parts of Blood?)
Jehovah's Witnesses are now allowed to accept ALL of the components of Blood, as long as you separate the components and then accept them!
Is there any logic in this?
Edited by - UnDisfellowshipped on 19 September 2002 23:6:31