Watchtower says "Don?t Eat Blood"

by Sam Beli 22 Replies latest watchtower medical

  • Sam Beli
    Sam Beli

    If my recollection is correct, some here have stated that the WTS no longer uses the ?do not eat blood? argument. I too thought that they had learned better, but not so. Here is an excerpt from their current statement:

    CHRISTIANS are forbidden by God's law to ingest blood by any means. (Acts 15:28, 29) Obedience to that law has sometimes led to misunderstandings that have resulted in Christians being denied available and effective alternative medical management of their health problems.

    This statement attempts to stretch the meaning of "ingest" beyond the scripture?s original "eat," and beyond the Standard English usage by adding to the meaning with the words "by any means."

    Note the actual meaning of "ingest:"

    in·gest (ĭn-jĕst')
    tr.v., -gest·ed, -gest·ing, -gests.

    1. To take into the body by the mouth for digestion or absorption. See synonyms at eat .

    2. To take in and absorb as food: "Marine ciliates ? can be observed ? ingesting other single-celled creatures and harvesting their chloroplasts" (Carol Kaesuk Yoon).

    Even in this 21 century, the WTS cannot separate in its thinking the physiological act of eating from the very different procedure called "Transplantation" or "Transfusion."

    Their "thinking" does not begin to raise the level of scholarship.

    Here is the link to their current web site statement May 31, 2004:

    http://www.watchtower.org/library/g/1995/3/22/article_01.htm

  • Elsewhere
    Elsewhere

    Uhhh Ohhhh... some JWs have died because they didn't get blood-derived treatments..... but it's not the fault of the WTS!!! Oh no!!! It's because some Doctors (not the confused JWs) did not understand the convoluted WTS teachings on what is and is not allowed.

  • XQsThaiPoes
    XQsThaiPoes

    Dont you love it when they recant while saying it is some annonymous groups misunderstanding.

    watchtower 2/15 2013

    CHRISTIANS are forbidden by God's law to ingest blood [fornicate] by any means. (Acts 15:28, 29) Obedience to that law has sometimes led to misunderstandings that have resulted in Christians being denied available and effective alternative medical management of their health problems [forms of sexual intimacy].
  • Sam Beli
    Sam Beli

    Had a devil of a time getting this post to accept all of the text and formats. Sorry.

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    How could the book of Acts be forbidding a medical practice that was unknown to the writer?

  • bull01lay
    bull01lay

    I have to agree with the Borg on this one - Acts15:29 (New American Standard) "Abstain from things sacrificed to Idols and from blood"

    Whilst they couldn't possibly have known about our medical advancements etc, the way in which it is written doesn't denote the medium by which blood is ingested, transfused or any other means. It merely says to ABSTAIN!

    In context (verse 28) says that it seemed good for the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: (Italics/bold added)

    Just one other thought on this though... "Holy Spirit and to us "... so if they had any personal preferences or opinions, in addition to the HS, have these been recorded as 'gospel' by the bible writers ???

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    Bull01lay...1 Cor 8 has Paul declaring that eating things sacrificed to idols is not any issue to him or his God but may stumble the weak Jewish Christians. Acts 15 likewise is saying that not avoiding things sacrificed to idols and blood and things strangled might stumble Jews who hear "Moses being read " and therefore Pauline Christians were being encouraged to avoid doing it. Notice the expression, 'necessary things' includes eating things sacrificed to idols. The expression meant then that these were deeemed the most offensive practices to the Jewish Christians (who in the story had the dispute with Paul )and therefore most to be avoided for their sakes. Fornication in this context possibly refers to the temple prostitution popular among the Gentile Christians before conversion and would therefore not be a prohibition about simple sexual contact. The Jews never had a prohibition against this. Things "strangled" and "blood" likewise possibly refer to popular types of Greek temple sacrifices rather than simply diet prohibitions tho it could mean both. The book of Acts was written to unite the 2nd century factions of Jesus cultists under a central authority by encouraging accomodation and introducing a mythic central authority in Jerusalem to which all the Gentile Christians conceeded( a precedent for the hierchal Church structure). The verses in discussion also appear to have been interpolated soon after writing, so the flow of thought may not be easily discerned.

  • Pistoff
    Pistoff

    Hmm.

    bull said:

    have to agree with the Borg on this one - Acts15:29 (New American Standard) "Abstain from things sacrificed to Idols and from blood

    Bull, I recommend you read, and reread, the book of Acts. You may find as I did that the "older men" in Jerusalem were nothing more than the elders in the (jewish believer influenced) Jerusalem congregation; they were NOT a "governing body" in Jerusalem.

    Note Acts 21; in that chapter you will find that fear of the jewish christians led the elders to be looking backward and allowing things to be taught that were meant to pacify the jewish believers. Even Paul, who later would lead the discussion about the abandonment of the law, allowed himself to be sucked in to avoid being killed by the jewish believers; he went to the (by now pagan) temple and was there when young men sanctified their vows to God by old jewish ceremony.

    All of this is after the decision on blood. This is hardly the thinking of a completely christian body of elders.

    I read this one day sitting in the meeting; it hit me like a 2x4: this was an allowance to the jewish believers. It was nothing more than a dietary restriction.

    Think about it. In the same breath, things sacrificed to idols are mentioned. Later Paul would say that what is sacrificed to idols is nothing, just as idols are nothing.

    Christians are NOT under this old law. It is such a stretch anyway to compare the eating of blood to blood transfusions. When you are in the hospital starving to death, they do not give you a blood transfusion. Transfusions do NOT nourish the body as food does. You think this only because you have heard it for decades.

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    What a fine exposition, Pistoff!

    AlanF

  • bull01lay
    bull01lay

    Peacefulpete, pistoff:

    Thanks for your views on that...

    Holy Spirit and to us "... so if they had any personal preferences or opinions, in addition to the HS, have these been recorded as 'gospel' by the bible writers ???

    I had kinda started to pick up on the personal views bit, and will definitely have another read - it's very hard to get past some of the doctrines and witness reasonings on things... even after 10 years of being out!!

    Cheers guys,

    Bull!.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit