Question about a Jehova Witnesses belief?

JW's have misapplied God's prohibition against eating the blood of an animal because according to the Bible it is the "life" of the animal.

The Bible doesn't say anything about blood transfusions because they were not around when it was written. They have added their own interpretation to God's command and this poor man, his deceased wife, his new baby, and his wife's family have reaped the consequences of bad theology.

It's likely that the hospital did not know how to treat this patient WITHOUT blood. If I had stayed at a certain hospital it would of been death for me as they did not know how to treat me without the use of blood and were not willing to consider it. My husband got me out of there and rushed me to a hospital which has a bloodless medicine program.

But to answer your original question it's a biblical command Lev. 17:14 (don't tell me that this doesn't apply to our day because back in Bible times they didn't have blood transfusions) When you can't eat they "feed" you through a feeding tube. The same applies with blood trans. Taking blood into your body through your veins is the equivalent of eating it. Contrary to popular belief there aren't thousands of JW kids dying because their parents don't believe in transfusion. All the more PROMINENT hospitals these days are practicing "bloodless medicine". Atlanta Medical Center, Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic just to name a few. They aren't practicing bloodless medicine for the sake of nearly 7 million Jehovah's Witnesses (a small part of the population) but they have found that the Bible was correct all along. People who don't take blood recover quicker, have less complications and don't incur AIDS and Hepatitus from transfusions. The medical technology available today enables us to get excellent care without taking blood transfusions. For more info. http://www.watchtower.org/e/vcae/article...

In the Watchtower Society or Jehovah Witnesses,

It is believed that blood transfusions equate to blood consumption which biblically it is prohibited in the old testament as well prohibited in the new testament. So JW interpret blood transfusion with eating/nutrition.

The bible forbids consuming animal blood.

Acts 15:28,29

For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things,  to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from BLOOD and from things strangled and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!”

Acts 24:15

and I have hope toward God, which hope these men themselves also entertain, that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.

John 5:28, 29a

Do not marvel at this, because the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out

The only use for blood allowed in the Bible was for sacrifice for sins. Jesus was the only human who could give that and we only take "emblems" of his blood and body, not them literally. So it is respect for life, for sacrifice esp. for the ranson of God's son Jesus Christ....

I have had a c-section myself and then a VBAC with my next one (after I'd had carotid artery replacement). Sad stories of death are the rare ones, the exceptions, not the norm for us.

Refusing blood gives us much lower medical costs, much better care, shorter recovery time, no disease risk, etc.

We have to deal with separation from our families by being murdered for other things to: for example, we will not kill or harm others. In Nazi Germany, many of us were killed for that. Men were taken to prison areas for men, women to women areas and children were removed to youth camps to try to indoctrinate them with Hitler's ideas.

We are used to being this way. God's servants in the Bible often were too.....the Jews were scattered many times for obedience to God and their children, women taken as slaves, men killed. They continued to teach and witness and live exemplary lives wherever they were taken just as we JWs do today.

Debbie

I have hear that to be true about the Jehovah witnesses, I never believed it to be true in the catholic religion...When a person is in need of blood and it is a matter of life and death, no one would stop me from giving blood, even if they took the last drop , if it`s to save a life,which is so precious, god would never say it is forbidden to give blood to save a life...

It is sad what has happened to that couple. Nobody wants to lose a wife/mother/daughter for any reason at any time. I assume the question is why were they so adamant about the taking of blood, even if it were to save their own life? I will give you as detailed an answer as I deem necessary for you to have an accurate knowledge of the bible-based reasoning on this topic.

Let us look at the purpose of blood transfusions,

first by considering what is suggested by some

regarding Acts 15 and its admonishment to "abstain

from blood", as being merely the act of ingesting the

blood.

http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=ingestion :

1 entry found for ingestion.

Entry: absorption

Function: noun

Definition: taking in

Synonyms: assimilation, consumption, digestion,

drinking in, exhaustion, fusion, imbibing,

impregnation, incorporation, ingestion, inhalation,

intake, osmosis, penetration, reception, retention,

saturation, soaking up, suction, taking in Concept:

consuming/using

Source: Roget's Interactive Thesaurus, First Edition

(v 1.0.0)Copyright © 2002 by Lexico Publishing Group,

LLC. All rights reserved.

Basically, eating provides us with the function of

nourishment and sustenance for life. So, what of the

consumption or "ingestion" of blood?

The book _Blood-An Epic History of Medicine and

Commerce_ by Douglas Starr, p. xiv, has this to say:

"The Bible mentions blood more than 400 times: 'The

life of the flesh is in the blood,' says Leviticus,

equating blood with life itself. Blood is considered

so holy in the Old Testament that the Law specifically

forbids its consumption, which is why Jehovah's

Witnesses, who interpret the Bible literally, refuse

transfusions."

"In practicing transfusions one can only imitate the

example of nature which, in order to nourish the fetus

in the uterus of the mother, makes a continuous

transfusion of the blood of the mother into the body

of the infant through the umbilical vein. In

performing transfusion it is nothing else than

nourishing by a

shorter road than ordinary--that is to say, placing in

the veins blood all made in place of taking food which

only turns to blood after several changes." G. W.

Crile; Hemorrhage and Transfusion: An Experimental and

Clinical Research; 1909, D. Appleton and Company: 153

Accordingly, in the Bible, blood is "life", it is

sacred and thus belongs to Jehovah. It is also clear

that while all animals were placed "in man's hand",

he was still not allowed to use the blood. Humans were

not given the authority to use this blood as they

wished. All blood from all souls was sacred. We can

conclude that any use of blood by man outside of God's

expressed Scriptural approval was unacceptable.

Primary components are obviously "blood," and can even

be categorized as "food." Therefore banning its use is

soundly derived from Scripture. Additonally, our

creator allows fractions to be passed between

circulatory systems, and non-cellular fractions do

not seem to be classed as a "food". This gives

evidence that perhaps they are not to be included in

the ban.

The Encyclopedia Britannica, Micropedia II (1974) p.

89 defines the 4 major blood components as _plasma,

red blood cells (erythrocytes), white blood cells

(leucocytes), and platelets (thrombocytes)_. In recent

years fractions and extracts have been synthesized

from these components: Immunoglobulins, coagulation

factors, albumin, stem cells, interleucines etc. Are

these to be included with the 4 major components? We

don't know because these factors did not exist as

products in Biblical times, and therefore the answer

has been that

the use of these components is a matter of individual

conscience. This does not mean that anyone has

authorised the use of these components, but rather

that they have pointed out that they represent a "grey

area" where each individual must decide. Why so?

If we apply the Biblical mandate STRICTLY, then all

blood should be refused. The Society's position is

that the matter of blood fractions is not directly

resolved in Scripture and so this decision is

'outside' any definite doctrinal or theological

decision by the Society. Therefore the Witnesses'

precise stand is that blood is sacred and not to be

used for nourishment/sustenance/food," primary

components definitely are "blood" according to

Scripture. This category as "food" is explicitly

"Scriptural" and thus primary components are not to be

taken into our body. However, science and logic

dictates that fractions do not fall under the category

of "food/nourishment/sustenance" or considered "so

holy" by Jehovah. Since this modern knowledge creates

a "grey area" concerning the classification as

food/nourishment/sustenance, it is wisely left for

individuals to make that determination for themselves.

This is a loving provision that should be applauded,

but instead, is again used against Jehovah's

Witnesses by those seeking to further their own

potentially devious agenda. It is a damned if you do,

damned if you don't kind of scenario. It is another

form of persecution.

Consider again, Acts 15:29, which also demands that we

abstain from fornication (porneia), which many

struggle as to what is to be included within that

range. Here again, there may be some "grey areas" and

all groups decide as to what it is to be included in

the concept of porneia. So any "policy change" is

really a clarification of what should be included in

the group, as it is also with blood(haima).

Remember when Adam was given a vegetable diet for

nourishment and sustenance, Jehovah retained for

Himself the Tree of Knowledge to attest His

Sovereignty. When the way was later opened up to use

meat for nourishment and sustenance, Jehovah retained

a portion thereof also, the blood, to attest that He

alone is the Sovereign Giver of Life. Some therefore

put themselves in a satanic/adversarial position by

trying to "open up our eyes" and see that this form of

nourishment/sustenance/food "is good," "pleasant" and

"to be desired to make one wise." Genesis 3:4-6

Jehovah's Witnesses have been pioneers in the area of

"blood alternatives, and the world owes them a debt of

gratitude for paving the way for safer medicine. Some

may wish to try to keep people in the dark ages of

medicine, with no hope of triumph over and above

blood-borne diseases. But by the willingness that

Jehovah's Witnesses have demonstrated in conjunction

with the advanced medical field, the operating table

is a much safer place for all patients. "Blood

products are useful but carry their own set of

risks,...Thus whenever we can avoid using them, we

should - not only in Jehovah's Witness patients, but

in every patient." USC Health-Quarterly, Spring 2000

vol. 12 no.1

Jehovah's commandments are never burdensome. Rather,

they free us from so much of the ignorant ways of

mankind. His stipulation against the use of blood

demonstrates His divine wisdom and justice. He alone

is the giver of life, and He alone will secure an

everlasting future for all mankind, a mankind who

fears His words and respects His admonitions. They

will reap everlasting rewards in a world that no more

will need the use of "blood transfusion" or any form

of "modern" medicine.--Rev. 21:3,4

Isn't it kind of like seeing a man about to step in front of an on coming bus and saying nothing?

If you can prevent the man from stepping and front of the bus and you do not, are you not guilty of his death since you could have prevented it?

I don't see any difference between the man stepping in front of the bus and the woman needing blood. Both could have be saved from imminent death.

Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians, and they have a lot of Bible passages taken out of context to support there man made belief system. They also had to translate their own version of the Bible to fit their needs,

God be with you,

William, a bond-servant of Jesus

<'(((><

The JW's take that from a bible verse which is simple but apparently confuses them