Do you believe that Jehovah Witness statement of blood transfusions is wrong?

i.e .. Do you believe this is a misinterpretation of the bible?

Many people who are witnesses die because of cruicial transfusions being refused. I personally think its wrong that this so called church pushes this, And i've even spoken to witnesses who have come away from the church because of this...

Please tell me your thoughts.

Absolutely.they are taking Levitical law ans placing it out of context.If there was a real edict about blood transfusions all christians would be abstaining.

In *my* opinion as a non JW, yes, it is wrong. This is how it was explained to me:
"The Watchtower Society forbids blood transfusions because the procedure allegedly constitutes eating blood, which is forbidden in the Bible in Genesis 9:4 and Acts 15:28鈥?9. They contend that receiving blood intravenously constitutes eating, just as people can receive food intravenously." I just don't see it.

I have also been told that their policies have mellow somewhat:
Punishment for those who opt to accept blood transfusions are now more lenient, and the Society has long allowed the consumption of such 鈥渕inor鈥?blood components as albumin and immunoglobulins; these components are permissible because blood is thus used in 鈥渟mall quantities.鈥?br>
While repentant Witnesses will be forgiven for undergoing the procedure, the Society continues to teach that blood transfusions are a violation of God鈥檚 prohibition against eating blood. Jehovah鈥檚 Witnesses now have an expanded array of medical treatments that are accepted by the Society, and they also have the possibility of being spared the abusive practice of disfellowshipping if they receive a transfusion.

No.

The Bible says;
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!鈥?(Acts 15:28,29)

What does "abstain" mean?

It means "keep away", without any qualification like "only through the mouth" as others insist.

Notice that this is grouped together with fornication.

Keep away from fornication. Does that mean so long as you do not use your mouth it is ok?

So why should there be a difference?

"Many people who are witnesses die because of cruicial transfusions being refused"

Hmmmm... do you know how many;

- people die because they ACCEPTED blood?
- people died, not because they refused blood, but because alternative treatment was delayed?

Ever heard of "bloodless surgery"? Do a little google search on that one. Thousands of JWs undergo such surgery every year and survive.

"And i've even spoken to witnesses who have come away from the church because of this..."

Did you know that the vast majority of ex-JWs are such because they couldn't keep their zips (or legs) closed?

Of course, they won't tell you THAT!

The reason that consuming blood was banned in the Old Testament is because the ancient Jews considered it a pagan practice which desecrated the God-given life force that resided in the blood of a person or an animal. But there is no concrete evidence that a blood transfusion (done with proper care) is physically harmful, nor can you say that it is disrespectful to God or to any person so long as it is being done with the full consent of the donor. Blood transfusions preserve life, and do so without going through your gut, so basically the J.W. doctrine is a load of bunk-ola. Besides, the donated blood eventually "goes back to God" when the recipient one day dies anyway, right?

No, it's not wrong. It is not a misinterpretation of the Bible simply because people don't find it convenient. It's far easier to bend the Bible to YOUR belief than to change yourself to fit the Bible, isn't it.

Now, how many people who are witnesses die? Give me your facts. And please, not something you got off an apostate or ex-JW website. I mean a number given out by the AMA. They keep records. Then look up the number of non-witnesses who die worldwide yearly from taking bad blood in a transfusion. Include those who aren't dead yet but have HIV, Hepatitis or other fatal disease of the blood and will be dead soon.

Then look up the numbers of how many 'so called' christians are smokers with small children in their homes. I'm sure you've heard about second hand smoke and the dangers from that. Why aren't you asking members of other 'so called churches' how many of them are killing their kids with second hand smoke? Yeah, I thought so.

There are lots of tenants in the Bible meant for an ancient people that they simply ignore but they go all out for this one and then they call these poor victims heros. Letting someone die is the same as murder and they fight for this right to euthenize their own kids in this way! I think it's got to stop even though I allow them their beliefs. What if they learned that these heros had actually had doubts about being Witnesses but weren't given a choice to even find out. I guess we'll never know. In my opinion, if they believe that abortion is wrong then they should also view death by being allowed to die rather than take blood is wrong too.

Why not ask the other 90% of people who are non-witnesses why they are refusing blood. There are so many now that it it now a common question asked before surgery.

You need to learn to look things up for yourself instead of repeating the same old sorry songs.

As for what the Bible says, how about looking in the King James, where it says to obstain from fornication and from blood. If you believe that this only refers to eating blood, does that mean that we need only obstain from oral sex, but all other forms of fornication is okay?

Whether we want to believe it or not, it IS scriptural what they follow. Our blood belongs to God and he wants it back. Gen 9:5 "聽And, besides that, YOUR blood of YOUR souls shall I ask back. From the hand of every living creature shall I ask it back; and from the hand of man, from the hand of each one who is his brother, shall I ask back the soul of man. "
So it really isn't our to give away. Here is the Biblical evidence:
Right after the global flood, when God first granted humans the right to eat animal flesh, he commanded Noah and his family: 鈥淓very moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to you. Only flesh with its soul鈥攊ts blood鈥攜ou must not eat.鈥濃€擥enesis 9:3, 4.
(Acts 15:29) 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!鈥?br> (Deuteronomy 12:23) "Simply be firmly resolved not to eat the blood, because the blood is the soul and you must not eat the soul with the flesh."
(Acts 15:20) "but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood."
So some may say that it say not to EAT. But if it says to stay away from alcohol would you then inject it into your veins? I just found out that a major hospital in San Antonio TX called NE Baptist (yes...a religious entitiy but not a JW) just turned into a completely bloodless hospital. They found out through a 20 yr study that the cost/complications/recovery time/death from blood transfusions were far greater that from those who refused blood as a life saving measure (apparently many Witnesses went there for surgeries or emergencies.) Interesting huh?
Hope this helps.
Have a great day!

No it is not wrong. Who do you love more, you or God? Who can give you everlasting life, man or God? Obedience to God's commands is what can give us everlasting life. Jesus was our example and a faithful and loyal one he was. Even people of the world refuse blood because of the diseases it can carry. After blood is collected and packaged for transfusion it cannot be tested. Individually it can but in bulk it cannot because of excessive cost. Would you want to take a chance with your life by taking in "dirty" blood as opposed to using blood expanders. Loss of blood is not the problem, but loss of volume in the veins and arteries. IV fluids can solve that problem. A person can still take a transfusion and die from a mitigating circumstance. You only hear what opposers want told. I choose not to disobey God. Bloodless surgery is everyday now. Hospitals are adapting the practice as many are refusing blood, not just JW's. I refuse because of Faith in my God and love for him and his word. This is my choice from accurate knowledge of the scriptures.

In a world where people die for many things you find this one fact hard to accept ... It is what God had written and even unto death we will follow his way for us ... It is because being our Creator he does know what is best for us ... I myself had a major operation and would not accept blood in any form , and yet i am still here... if one has absolute faith in God it matters not the outcome ... what matters to him is that we did as he asked .......... That is what faith in God means , It does not mean you turn tail and run when it becomes a matter of life and death.... We do it out of love For him and his son who died to save us .... It is God who has the power to bring you back from the dead , not a doctor who is but a man , and to whom no salvation belongs..........

When I hear about JW's being ridiculed about their stance on blood transfusion, I can't help but think about the the recent story I read in the news about a man who died and donated his organs and blood. Several people received blood transfusions and organ transplants from him. They all were infected with HIV.

This horse has been dead and it's corpse has been decomposing for years, and yet people continue to beat it relentlessly.

The prohibition of blood in the Bible talks specifically about "do not EAT blood", which means do not CONSUME it. The blood is considered sacred and should not be consumed because then it will be digested and excreted together with all the other waste from the body. But when we get a transfusion, the blood goes directly into our blood stream and becomes part of our own blood. There's no way to confuse both, only the Watchtower Society and their twistings of the commandments.

There is no prescription in the covenant of Christ that prohibits blood transfusions. So, it is adding to what God has commaneded.

Under the law of Moses, one could not eat blood, and this was mentioned in the book of Acts, but it pertained to idol worship.

No, I don't believe it is wrong. I'd refuse blood even if I wasn't a JW. For both religious and medical reasons...however, if I became atheist, the medical reasons would outweigh the religious ones.

Debbie

deffinately wrong if i hadnt had a transfusion i most likely would have died at an early age and wouldnt have met my amazing girlfriend who lights up my day whenever i think of her :) (sickening i know lol )

No, because taking transfusions is risking your life and risking the chance of diseases.

You might stop by a Kingdom Hall one day and voice your concern. You just might get a much more intelligent answer to your concerns.

My thoughts are this: it is no different from believing the bible forbids stem cell research, right?

I think a lot of the religion is bizarre, but if they want to believe it, that's their decision.

It's a great way for people to kill themselves for no reason...

Yes. I also think its sick and evil to impose this on their children.

Deadly wrong, so to speak.

All the bible says is not to drunk blood. So they're being idiots.

Yes I can believe in that as long as I dont need a transfusion

Yes I Do,

yes i think that it is wrong, i want my life saved!

No
(to the first question in bold).

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the Scriptures demonstrate a clear pattern indicating the sacredness with which Jehovah God (and thus god-fearing humankind) views all creature blood.


Predates Mosaic Law.
For example, over a thousand years before the birth of Moses, the pre-Israel, pre-Jewish, pre-Hebrew man Noah received what the scriptures record as only the second restrictive command on humans (after Garden of Eden's tree):

"Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you; and as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything. Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning; of every beast I will require it [that is, lifeblood] and of man" (Genesis 9:3-5)


Jewish Law.
Later, God's feeling regarding blood was codified into the Mosaic Law. This part of the Law dealing with blood was unique in that it applied, not just to Israel, but also to non-Jewish foreigners among them. It's also interesting that besides forbidding the consumption of blood, the Law also mandated that it be 'poured out on the ground', not used for any purpose.

"No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood. Any man also of the people of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, who takes in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten shall pour out its blood and cover it with dust." (Lev 17:12,13)

By comparison, it's significant that the Law also forbid the consumption of ceremonial animal fat, but that didn't apply to non-Jewish foreigners and it DID allow the fat to be used for other purposes.

"The LORD said to Moses, "Say to the people of Israel, You shall eat no fat, of ox, or sheep, or goat. The fat of an animal that dies of itself, and the fat of one that is torn by beasts, may be put to any other use" (Lev 7:22-24)


Early Christian era.
The Christian era ended the validity of the Mosaic Law, but remember that the restriction on eating blood preceded the Mosaic Law by over a thousand years. Still, does the New Testament indicate that Jehovah God changed his view of blood's sacredness?

"[God] freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses" (Eph 1:6,7)

"[God's] beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins... and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood" (Colossians 1:13-20)

"we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the pollutions of idols and from unchastity and from what is strangled and from blood." (Acts 15:19,20)

"For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from unchastity." Acts 15:28,29


Modern times
Some will claim that the bible's command to "abstain" from blood only applies to eating it, and does not apply to the use of blood for other purpose. If that form of respect for blood were common among Christendom, one might wonder then why so many (who ostensibly follow the book of Acts) so happily eat their blood sausage and blood pudding if they truly respect blood according to some limited understanding of Acts 15:20,29. In fact, respect for blood and for Acts and for the Scriptures themselves is too rare among even supposedly god-fearing persons.

An honest review of the Scriptural pattern over the millenia from Noah to the Apostle Paul teaches humans that blood is to be used for a single purpose: acknowledging the Almighty. Otherwise, for centuries the instruction was to simply dispose of it; 'poor it upon the ground'. When Jehovah's Witnesses pursue non-blood medical management, they are working to honor and obey their Creator.