Actually Fishy does make one good point with his Watchtower post stating autologous blood is between Jehovah and the publisher.
Yes, but the medical directive forbids it.
Blood Transfusions are Biblically Supported
by allpoweredup 45 Replies latest watchtower medical
-
Fisherman
-
Finkelstein
The question one could pose to a JWS, could not the law of the abstinence of blood be held in observance through the act of a blood transfusion based upon the fact that the blood did not come from someone who was not dead and it is not being eaten which the law inherently was established upon ?
Unfortunately the WTS's lead doctrinal makers were pretentiously novice bible theologians who made up their own doctrines as they were able and endeavored to do.
The dire consequences of which cost the lives of thousands of people who were JWS followers.
-
Chook
I raised the issue with 3 young sisters(16-20) yesterday on their way to a convention via MacDonalds . I say to the loung ladies you are dressed nice is there a wedding on to with they identified themselves, I raised the issues of blood fractions which they supported then I reminded them that it is meant to be pored on the ground. I asked them what happened to the JWs that Died who didn't take blood factions and later the leaders of your church changed it to a conscience matter. I was reminded of the resurrection hope to which I asked who replaced the mother so the children could have a memory. I said they didn't die for God they died because of a head office decision.
I said some churches punished members for going to other churches, I said could you imagine Jesus shunning a 16 year old baptised Christian who went back to grandmas Jewish church. Then I asked could you imagine Jesus getting his new converts to send in reporting hours for their preaching assignment. I said if your church is using gods name just remember it was a catholic monk who put the vowels in the Tetragrammaton, I asked is it possible that God was directing the catholic monk.
These poor kids were going to the assembly with more questions than answers, I said they need to question any religion that your not free to resign from without sanctions.
-
Lee Elder
Chook- Brilliant questions and intervention. Cheers!
-
Finkelstein
What causes much consternation with JWs when posed with counter theological views is that they are deeply indoctrinated to believe and accept that their teaching is the Truth above all other Christian based religious teachings.
In reality the WTS/JWS is full of weakly devised doctrines and some were deliberately created to enhance the proliferation of literature rather than be accurate bible interpretations.
-
Old Navy
Here is a very comprehensive article about The Law and Blood.
Quote from the article:
It is still true that blood is sacred; Jesus died to save us from our sins, and his blood is spoken of throughout the NT as vital and sacred. The REAL question is, is the eating of blood still to be equated with profaning life? Not in most modern cases of incidental consumption of blood. Furthermore, does the usage of blood as a vehicle of saving lives (as in blood transfusions) at the same time constitute a profanation of life, or a respect for life? The answer should be obvious.
It also must be clarified that transfusing blood is not the same as eating blood. The WT confuses the issue by pointing out that blood acts as a kind of "food" in transfusions (see Blood, Medicine and the Law of God, pages 17,18), whereas the REAL issue they should be concerned with is whether or not the use of blood to save a life is profaning it. Such is certainly not the case when a person is dying, and a blood transfusion may save their life.
It is important to note that orthodox Jews today, while STILL OBEYING the OT laws against the eating of blood, believe there is nothing wrong with taking a blood transfusion. Even the legalistic Jewish mind does not make such a connection, yet the Governing Body of the WT forces this interpretation on their people.
Much more at the link above.