What is our scriptural basis for refusing transfusion of products rendered from blood?

[Anna]

@Many Miles I second all of what Thinking said in the last post.

 

[George88]

11 hours ago, Many Miles said:

And I have just placed you on ignore. Have a good life George. You can waste someone else's time now.

I am not bothered by the nonsense coming from you or the individuals in the closed club who are no better. So, feel free to persist with your deceit, lies, and falsehoods like the uneducated person you are, just like the rest of them.

[Many Miles]

4 hours ago, Many Problems said:

It seems that the people in this forum are the ones responsible for forcing others out.

That's an odd thing to think. Does a library force people out because it contains books addressing many subjects from many perspective in many disciplines. Doesn't each person decide which book he pulls from the shelf, what subject he wants to learn more about, etc.?

4 hours ago, Many Problems said:

Instead of fostering positivity, there is a prevailing negative attitude that goes against the principles of being a Christian.

The only negative thing I see here (and I've not been here for long) is an apprehension to offer straightforward answers to straightforward questions. But it's not really negative in the sense that it bothers me. It's only negative in that it impedes engaging beneficial discussion.

 

4 hours ago, Many Problems said:

When did you all start believing that you are flawless?

I've not observed a single participant here who thinks themselves flawless. Who are these people you speak of?

4 hours ago, Many Problems said:

If you hold such deep contempt for the Organization, then there's no need for anyone to compel you to leave; you have already done so in the eyes of Jehovah.

Even the organization recognizes it is made up of people, each of which has their own personal conscience which varies from person to person. So we all have differences. Having differences is no reason to leave. Why run from what God has given us as a gift. Choice. So long as we act genuinely to do His will we have no reason to think His eyes will look upon us in a bad way. Our worship must be our own. If we just blindly follow what someone in authority tells us to do all we're doing is worshiping God for someone else.

 

4 hours ago, Many Problems said:

We are on the verge of the final chapter, and it is crucial that we maintain a positive outlook. Let us remember the lessons from the Israelites, for God does not desire this negativity from His people.

We should live each day in expectation. But we also do well to make today's decisions based on God's testimony (Bible and creation) and sound reason. There's no reason not to do both, and every reason to do both.

4 hours ago, Many Problems said:

It is worth noting that in earlier times, the scientific evidence supporting the matter of blood was not as extensive as it is today. Hence, it would be unfair to criticize the organization for something that was previously unknown. Such narrow-mindedness would surely be foolish.

The notion that red cells provide nutrition when transfused has been debunked since the 1940s. The notion that plasma (including cryosupernatant plasma) could provide nutrition when transfused has also been known since the 1940s. This is not new information. If you need reference material I'd happily reference my library and provide citations. You should be able to access the material either online or from you local library.

It is good to make sure of all things and hold fast to what is fine.

 

[Many Miles]

10 hours ago, Thinking said:

Many Miles I am genuinely with hand on my heart so sorry for your pain. no words will extinguish the guilt you feel….personally I do not see that you should think you have any..

I was following the society's guidelines, which is just another lame way of saying I was just following orders. I regret it to this day.

10 hours ago, Thinking said:

I dont know how many babies you lost in this way..or why this happened.

The mortality was due to anemia that was completely treatable with donor blood, only the products rendered from whole blood were on the society's list of things that could not be taken. That's why they died.

10 hours ago, Thinking said:

I hope you find a little scrap of peace brother. I’m barely hanging on but soon this will all be over with and I don’t want to be known by Jehovah for hurting my brothers and sisters…

Thank you for saying that. And, for my part, I don't intend to sit on truth thinking saying out loud what should be said out loud somehow is a bad thing. Wounds inflicted by a friend are faithful.

[Pudgy]

Well … I will have to admit that I have never thought much about refusing blood for minor children and babies, only that when the issue came up for myself several times in the past it was the right thing for me to do, and because of it I defaulted to a much better quality surgeon that performed (to the best of my knowledge) perfectly, with no blood or blood fractions.

The first heart surgeon I called “Manny the Used Car Surgeon”, as he suggested he could operate on me using blood, but he would tell my family and congregation he didn’t.

He said this was standard for him.

I told him no blood or blood fractions under any circumstances and he looked at me like he didn’t understand English and said “Well, I’m NOT going to operate without blood!” I said “Well, that’s OK … I respect your conscience, but I expect you to respect mine”.  And I went by ambulance to a Heart Center 15 miles away, with six EMTs very busy keeping me alive, to where they WOULD operate without blood or blood fractions.

I woke up “20 years younger”.

Sometimes, yer flips yer coin, and yer takes yer chances. That was in 2010. I could just as well have bled out in 2010.

There is nothing that has ever lived that has not, or will not die …. including infants and children. Thousands die every minute.

Get used to the idea.

Don’t be such a Snowflake.

It’s the ONLY GAME IN TOWN.

Suck it up and keep going as best you can.

Cowards die a thousand deaths, the Valiant die but once.

…. and Jehovah can reverse that!

[Pudgy]

…. could be worse.

If you had been a chicken you may have been eaten before you were even hatched! 

In 2022 about 279 million potential baby chickens were.

EVERY DAY!

 

[Many Miles]

5 hours ago, Many Problems said:

It is worth noting that in earlier times, the scientific evidence supporting the matter of blood was not as extensive as it is today. Hence, it would be unfair to criticize the organization for something that was previously unknown.

In an earlier comment I stated the following:

"The notion that red cells provide nutrition when transfused has been debunked since the 1940s. The notion that plasma (including cryosupernatant plasma) could provide nutrition when transfused has also been known since the 1940s. This is not new information"

A review of my library found the above is mistaken in relation to the decade. I should have said this information was available since the 1950s.

This information was discovered, ironically, by medical researchers looking for means of feeding patients intravenously when they are unable to get it any other way.

- They found that a product that JWs of today can accept without fear of reprisal does provide decent nutrition; transfusion of cryosupernatant plasma and cryoprecipitate.

- They also found a product that JWs of today cannot accept without fear of reprisal does not provide any nutrition at all; transfusion of red cells.

[Pudgy]

17 minutes ago, Many Miles said:

- They found that a product that JWs of today can accept without fear of reprisal does provide decent nutrition; transfusion of cryosupernatant plasma and cryoprecipitate.

- They also found a product that JWs of today cannot accept without fear of reprisal does not provide any nutrition at all; transfusion of red cells.

The book “1984” was supposed to be a warning …. not an instruction manual.

[Many Miles]

14 hours ago, Thinking said:

I dont know your story thus why you no longer have the same belief as us anymore concerning it.

I thought long about that comment. My story is no more and no less a story about a boy who was raised to respect truth.

Many generations of my family have been associated with JWs, even before JWs were a thing. My paternal side goes back to Russell.

I was raised to trust the society. So that's what I did. And, that was my mistake. 'Do not put your trust in nobles, nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs.' I should have listened to that with more care than I did.

When it came to the society's blood position, when I was baptized I trusted that someone higher up and smarter than me understood the details, and I trusted them.

Way, way later down the road, I found out the society could not and would not answer for important underpinnings of its position on blood. This was the case regarding physiological aspects of blood as a substance, and medical aspects of transfusion medicine. This was also true of biblical statements regarding blood, and particularly as it relates to Noah. Ultimately, what lit me up to take a closer look at this whole thing were things I read in our own publications. I realized the scriptural truth of the whole thing was already spelled out in our literature! So I showed it to the society. Crickets.

Compare these two articles:

Here: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1983290

Here: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101983099

In the second article, pay careful attention to paragraphs 7 and 8. Very close attention, as you look back over the first article linked above. This material was all published in the same year. None of it is the result of "new light" that changed. Remember there are biblical characters who worshiped the only true God who were never under Mosaic Law. Men like Noah, Job, Elihu and Cornelius. These latter had to obey the decree issued to Noah. But not to the different standard issued to Jews under Mosaic Law.

Those internal articles are just the tip. 

People are still dying over something that should be left for each person to decide on their own, without religious coercion of being potentially shunned.

In the end, my story doesn't and shouldn't matter. What matters is truth.

 

 

[Many Miles]

On 11/5/2023 at 2:15 PM, Anna said:

The question was: when is blood no longer blood? A line had to be drawn somewhere, and so the line was drawn at minor fractions because it was deemed that although derived from blood, it was no longer blood. 

Getting back to this, the statement above is based on reasoning put forth by the society. The underpinnings of it can be read here: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102017578?q=blood+broken+down&p=par

Religious position: Under pain of shunning, JWs cannot eat (transfuse) whole blood, white cells, red cells, platelets or plasma. But if the substance is none of these, then the individual JW can accept or decline according to their own conscience and without religious repercussion.

An extreme irony to the idea that we can eat of what comes from blood once it is no longer blood is made as simple as cooking blood under heat. Why?

When you cook blood under heat the remaining substance is neither whole blood, nor white cells, nor red cells, nor platelets, nor plasma. You can examine the cooked  material all you want. You won't find a trace of a red cell, or a white cell, or platelets, or even plasma. All that anatomy is totally gone under heat. What was blood is no longer blood, according to the society's reasoning.

In a tiny simple nutshell, that shows the current absurd state of our position on eating (transfusing) blood.

 

[Pudgy]

Using that same logic you can fry up a large pan of severed human fingers, noses and ears, annnnddd … once cooked they are not human fingers, noses and ears anymore. Especially if you pull the meat off with a fork, add some herbs and spices, and serve with a tasty salad, perhaps some fava beans and a nice Chianti. 

In a tiny simple nutshell, that shows the current absurd state of our position on eating cannibalized human body parts.

(…. satire alert for the agenda driven)

[George88]

5 hours ago, Many Miles said:

In the second article, pay careful attention to paragraphs 7 and 8. Very close attention, as you look back over the first article linked above. This material was all published in the same year. None of it is the result of "new light" that changed. Remember there are biblical characters who worshiped the only true God who were never under Mosaic Law. Men like Noah, Job, Elihu and Cornelius. These latter had to obey the decree issued to Noah. But not to the different standard issued to Jews under Mosaic Law.

Many, Anna and Pudgy, I fail to comprehend what aspects of these articles you all fail to grasp in regard to the application of the Mosaic laws. Before and after, there were instances where certain requirements of the law were unnecessary for Gentile Christians. This is due to the fact that the Jewish High Court extended the laws and considered themselves the ultimate authority. Regarding the matter of transfused blood, there shouldn't have been any issue since it didn't exist back then and wouldn't have been applicable based on that understanding. The only scenario where it would have been a concern is if someone chose to consume an animal without properly draining its blood or if they indulged in the gruesome practice of drinking the blood, as done by certain Roman nobility who would consume the blood of fallen gladiators.

So, let me ask you all, what part of the transition do you fail to understand when a person repents? We have been presented with the following questions in those articles. Based on scripture, what biblical foundations do you oppose, under the conditions outlined in the understanding of the Word, not your personal interpretation?

Nevertheless, it will undoubtedly result in an intriguing book, much like the works of Carl Olof Jonsson.