New BLOOD Watchtower - June 15, 2004 Issue!

by UnDisfellowshipped 102 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  TD

  They know their audience well --- both articles were one large appeal to ignorance:

  First of all, nobody "abstains" from blood in modern society today. Blood fractions, especially minute amounts of albumin as an excipient or adjuvant are everywhere. Albumin is in allergy shots, it is in childhood immunizations including MMR and IPV, and all post exposure vaccines. It is impossible to avoid and the idea that you could even if you wanted to is simply ignorant.

  Second, under the Law, blood was painted on the lintels and door posts of houses, it was smeared upon the earlobe, thumb and big toe of the priests, it was dribbled on the floor of the most holy, it was sprinkled upon tents, houses, people and animals, it was the "evidence" of a woman's virginity. The idea that blood's only "use" was upon the altar is simply ignorant.

  Third, the idea that God forbade the "use" of blood is rendered a contradictory tautology when the term "use" is extended to cover blood's design purpose -- circulating in the arteries and veins. The Witnesses, who condemn both autologous as well as allogenic transfusion cannot wriggle out of this contradiction, try as they might. No one can place their fingertips over a bright flashlight and claim that they don't "use" at least their own blood. Anything else is simply ignorant.

  Fourth, Jehovah's Witnesses can and do hold occupations that involve the "use" of blood. How exactly would a Witness MD evaluate kidney function if he or she could not order the patient's blood analyzed for BUN/Creatinine? How about a lipid panel for cardio risk? Or thyroxine ratio for thyroid function? Blood tests are the diagnostic staple in medicine today and will be for many years to come.

  The fact of the matter is as long as the "use" does not involve either consumption or transfusion of blood than the occupation in question is a "matter of conscience." In other words, a Witness may work in a med-lab that tests blood, but he or she may not work in a blood bank. Witnesses that don't know this is the written policy are simply ignorant. What exactly is a Witness diabetic doing when they test the glucose level of their blood if not "using" it for testing purposes for Christ's sake?
• 

  cyber-sista

  The key issues are quite simple

  If they are so simple why did they write this long article to explain it all in such complicated detail?
• 

  minimus

  TD---You are so right. They cater to IGNORANCE! After all, how many people even understand most medical terms? But their basic argument is obviously flawed as you and others have pointed out. Sadly, JWs will follow the leader and the rest of the crowd to their death in this life.
• 

  blacksheep

  You cannot use your own conscience, your decision must be dictated by the most restrictive conscience in your Congregation.

  Right, as you're lying there in the hospital bleeding to death, you can have someone survey the congregation to see if your having a blood transfusion might stumble anyone.
• 

  undercover

  So much for Christian Freedom, huh?
• 

  JeffT

  The WTBS is walking a tightrope, and one of these days they are going to fall off. Transfusions of whole blood are almost non-existent now. The doctors figure out which parts you need and give you that. Medical science does not know about "major" and "minor" components of blood. Interestingly it takes a lot more blood to get useful amounts of "minor" components. How does this fit in with "only one exceptable use."

  My take on these articles is that it's the legal dept. trying to explain the inexplicable in a way that keeps their butts out of court. If they openly change the rules there will be lawsuits flying in all directions. On the other hand they are likely having a very difficult time explaining to a doctor what they can and can't take, without looking stupid.

  Meantime people are dying. Sick.
• 

  dothemath

  For a long time Witnesses were proud of the no-blood stance, what with the aids, etc. in the blood supply.

  Now, it's so complicated..........they're actually endorsing the blood-collection system.

  I think they're between a rock and a very hard place..............trying to make life easier without losing all credibility over the ones who have refused blood over the years, at risk to their own life.
• 

  Puternut

  This so typical. Their reasoning on the scriptures and trying to enforce a conscience on you, by making you feel guilty if you don't comply with their reasoning.

  It is absurd and disturbing at the same time. It's once again typical of mind control and brainwashing.

  I hate this type of reasoning. I am getting more and more upset the longer I think about this subject.

  Puternut
• 

  BluesBrother

  I thought this was strange. Ist article "Rightly Value Your Gift of Life" , actually values Christs blood above his life

  P14 "Some churches emphasize Jesus death, their adherants saying such things as "jesus died for me" (Consider various translations of Eph 1.70

  P15 "Really if you had to rely on such translations you might overlook a very important point and this could limit your understanding of the Bibles message. Such renderings obscure the fact that the original text of Eph 1.7 contains a Greek word that means blood. Thus .....NWT says "We have release by ransom of the blood of that one......"

  P16 .........More was needed than a death, even the death of the perfect man jesus .

  Despite explaining that he was raised a spirit , with no blood. The article says that he presented to God the value of his lifeblood

  P18 "This divine truth allows us to grasp the wondrous scope of what the bible says about blood - why God views it the way he does, What our view of it should be and why we ought to respect the restrictions God set about the use of blood...(Some bible refs) these make it plain that each Christian should put faith in his [Jesus] blood"

  Is this not new pseudo light? I have not seen it explained that way before. .. Is it not putting the thing back to front? If blood signifies life, then why is it more important than life itself? How can you put faith in the red liquid that coursed through a mans veins, even Christ's...... Adam did not shed his blood - he lost his life, so surely it was Christs life that paid back the ransom?

  If I was still a dub , I would be so confused. And some poor so and so in every congregation has got to stand up one Sunday in July , conduct the study and pretend that it is so simple!!
• 

  garybuss

  
  Others might have mentioned this, but Witnesses I know do eat small amounts of whole blood and do so often. They are not concerned with the practices of the butchers or meat processors and I have never personally known one Witness who insists on kosher killed meat.
  
  To me, their blood medical treatment guidelines are as ridiculous as their rule against smoking cigarettes while allowing the consumption of alcohol. Of the two, alcohol is much more dangerous.
  
  It's all a big mess. How could I have been so stupid as to ever let them near my sons? GaryB