-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Are Blood Transfusions Really Life Saving?
- Thread starter Deeje
- Start date
Jenny Collins
Active Member
Please share the scriptures surrounding Acts 15 that say Christians are not to consume fat? All you did was quote Leviticus which was about a ceremony involving "giving fat" to Jehovah! As far as consumption of meat back in those times, Israelites were free to eat meat, so clearly they consumed some fat back then! Everyday life involved eating some fat back then, but the ceremony said that the fat should be set aside for God!
Fast forward to our day! Christians do not practice this ceremony, but our everyday diets do include meat, the same as ancient Hebrews! But even so, I have never known a JW to sit down and eat fat, they remove it when cooking and only traces remain
Fast forward to our day! Christians do not practice this ceremony, but our everyday diets do include meat, the same as ancient Hebrews! But even so, I have never known a JW to sit down and eat fat, they remove it when cooking and only traces remain
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
Well, speaking as one 'who would have died without it,' I can say this; religious freedom is vital. JW's have the absolute right (codified in the US Constitution and in the religious rights documents of many other nations, as well) to make such decisions for themselves. They also have the absolute right to try to convince the rest of us that they are correct about them.
..............and we have the same right to ignore them, adhere to our own opinions or to attempt to teach them what we believe to be true. I do think, however, that being rude, mocking and ridicule are counterproductive. Nothing, after all, cements an opinion quite like opposition to it.
As for me, I'm all for research into alternatives, but when my own marrow stops producing the good stuff, I'm sure not going to turn down donations to keep me going.
Jenny Collins
Active Member
As far as the way Orthodox Jews interpret the scripture concerning blood consumption, we are not orthodox Jews and I imagine that you aren't either! Do you worship in the same way that they do? Neither do we
Jenny Collins
Active Member
That is a fair response! JWs never seek to impose their consciences on others! The ironic thing about it, is that some of these same people here who act like our children are at such risk, may believe in abortion! Not all of them, but some talk about "the woman's rights over her body" and ignore that she is ignoring the rights of her unborn child! Then they get mad at us over the blood issue and always bring up our children! They may claim abortion is different, but that is their conscience and their interpretation! Well the blood issue is our conscience and interpretation! They seek to impose their conscience and interpretation onto us!Well, speaking as one 'who would have died without it,' I can say this; religious freedom is vital. JW's have the absolute right (codified in the US Constitution and in the religious rights documents of many other nations, as well) to make such decisions for themselves. They also have the absolute right to try to convince the rest of us that they are correct about them.
..............and we have the same right to ignore them, adhere to our own opinions or to attempt to teach them what we believe to be true. I do think, however, that being rude, mocking and ridicule are counterproductive. Nothing, after all, cements an opinion quite like opposition to it.
As for me, I'm all for research into alternatives, but when my own marrow stops producing the good stuff, I'm sure not going to turn down donations to keep me going.
Your response was refreshing! We get so much flack from people, that it is a good thing when someone comes along and actually give a reasoned response
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Actually you are being "legalistic" about it, and what we've seen over and over again here and elsewhere are statements like "My denomination's practices are not 'legalistic' but yours are" [generic statement]. It is a religious law and practice with the JW's, so I do think it's important to "own it" as such.
Now, as far as I'm concerned, your practices are your practices, and I don't have any problems with that as long as others are not being hurt in the process.
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
Well, I don't think you do legally, and that is good.
However, er.....when a really committed JW finds out that I'm a really committed Mormon, sparks do tend to fly. (grin)
It's OK, though. Usually that only happens on a really hot day when a couple of very wilted JW's show up on my doorstep. A glass of lemonade and some cookies generally smooths things over. Oh, they still think I'm doomed, but at least they leave a bit more cheered up.
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
You folks - grabbed Jewish texts, - and misunderstood them, - and twisted them to mean something else.
They know what THEIR texts mean. They aren't "interpreting" LIKE YOU ARE. They understand Hebrew, and their cultural traditions, and Laws.
It is not just Orthodox Jews, - it is all Jews. I used an Orthodox quote because they are usually the strictest in following the Law.
It has nothing to do with worshiping the same as them. YOU are claiming THEIR text says something that it does NOT say.
As I said earlier, read those verses in context, and also look at the Hebrew. ALL of the verses are concerning DEAD animals, - as sacrifices, - or clean eating Laws.
You can not logically come to your conclusion if you actually study the texts.
*
Last edited:
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Well, speaking as one 'who would have died without it,' I can say this; religious freedom is vital. JW's have the absolute right (codified in the US Constitution and in the religious rights documents of many other nations, as well) to make such decisions for themselves. They also have the absolute right to try to convince the rest of us that they are correct about them.
..............and we have the same right to ignore them, adhere to our own opinions or to attempt to teach them what we believe to be true. I do think, however, that being rude, mocking and ridicule are counterproductive. Nothing, after all, cements an opinion quite like opposition to it.
As for me, I'm all for research into alternatives, but when my own marrow stops producing the good stuff, I'm sure not going to turn down donations to keep me going.
Yep, I would have died too. In fact they all thought I was a goner. But I'm tough.
I lost so much blood that I had to have transfusions BEFORE they could even medevac me, - as I would have bled out and died on the plane. And Immediately upon landing, I had more transfusions to replace what I lost on the plane.
I would not be alive without those transfusions.
Now if only I could think my damaged and dying kidney into regenerating, I'd be an even happier camper.
*
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
First, - you do not understand the verses and take them out of context. Just ask a Jew!
Second, - These Laws were specifically to the Jewish people - not future Christians.
*
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
You seem to have missed 17.
Lev 3:17 It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood.
*
For someone with a knowledge of Jewish law metis, that is a bit extreme. Being forbidden to consume blood in any form, means what it said. If the animal was properly bled, then that was all that was required according to God's law. There is a big difference between having a slight amount of residue in the meat (not forbidden) and sculling a pint of blood. (absolutely forbidden according to Leviticus 17:13-14)
Since intravenous feeding is often administered when patients cannot consume food by mouth, we view the transfusing of blood to be 'consuming' it.
For Christians, God's law on consuming blood also included improperly bled animals, (Acts 15:28-29) so as long as the animal is slaughtered according to that rule, we can and do consume meat with no issue of conscience.
God's law is always for our benefit, so obeying that law has protected us from HIV and other diseases transmitted through blood transfusions. People have a right to know when something is dangerous to their health......the video in the OP is proof that transfusing blood is not without real risk. We have made it our business to know the truth and doctors now understand that our position is not only reasonable, but preferable.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
They do have the right to do what they want to themselves, but not their children, also convincing others also can be harmful, if what they are doing is wrong then it is wrong.Well, speaking as one 'who would have died without it,' I can say this; religious freedom is vital. JW's have the absolute right (codified in the US Constitution and in the religious rights documents of many other nations, as well) to make such decisions for themselves. They also have the absolute right to try to convince the rest of us that they are correct about them.
..............and we have the same right to ignore them, adhere to our own opinions or to attempt to teach them what we believe to be true. I do think, however, that being rude, mocking and ridicule are counterproductive. Nothing, after all, cements an opinion quite like opposition to it.
As for me, I'm all for research into alternatives, but when my own marrow stops producing the good stuff, I'm sure not going to turn down donations to keep me going.
Jenny Collins
Active Member
Yeah, but what does your situation and receiving blood have to do with Jehovah's Witnesses choice over their own bodies? You being here today, has nothing to do with whether they want to have them? They didn't interfere with your rights, you got them and we are not criticizing you! But your medical crisis and having blood, shouldn't have anything to do with their choicesYep, I would have died too. In fact they all thought I was a goner. But I'm tough.
I lost so much blood that I had to have transfusions BEFORE they could even medevac me, - as I would have bled out and died on the plane. And Immediately upon landing, I had more transfusions to replace what I lost on the plane.
I would not be alive without those transfusions.
Now if only I could think my damaged and dying kidney into regenerating, I'd be an even happier camper.
*
Jenny Collins
Active Member
I actually like Mormons! There was only one who I didn't like and that is because he was on a site and would always trash JWs! He would submit awful questions about them, and then JWs found out he was a Mormon and one of them told them they knew he was one! Then I went to his hateful questions about us and mentioned he was one and suddenly he changed and said: "I am not attacking them, just asking" He didn't want to make the Mormons look bad, and wanted to act like that but maintain anonymity! Then he blocked me and still asked the rotten insulting questions! I mentioned it to another Mormon on there and he said he didn't approve of him!Well, I don't think you do legally, and that is good.
However, er.....when a really committed JW finds out that I'm a really committed Mormon, sparks do tend to fly. (grin)
It's OK, though. Usually that only happens on a really hot day when a couple of very wilted JW's show up on my doorstep. A glass of lemonade and some cookies generally smooths things over. Oh, they still think I'm doomed, but at least they leave a bit more cheered up.
While it is true, Mormons and JWs don't see eye to eye, Mormons are also a minority religion which faces contempt as we do, and the Bible says to "honor men of all sorts" and having the true religion isn't about having an elite club, but rather setting an example for others and making one's way of life inviting to others! Too often religion is about disdaining others who don't view the world through our eyes, and that is wrong, and not something Jesus would do
Jenny Collins
Active Member
Th
Nope, you interpret it as legalistic, but we are not! You are entitled to that view of course! Thank you for not caring about our world view and just letting us be!
Jenny Collins
Active Member
I am not sure that you understand what I mean by legalistic
Jenny Collins
Active Member
Act
Acts says to "abstain from blood" It is not a "Jewish text" but a New Testament command for Christians! We do not need to ask a Jew because we are not Jewish
Jenny Collins
Active Member
"Lasting statute for your generations" Yes, a lasting statute for their generations, the Israelites! Levitcus is directed to them, not us, and it lasted in all the days of the Israelites
Jenny Collins
Active Member
That scripture was directed to Christians, the law was ending! They had just decided that circumcision was no longer necessary and they were putting all of that away, but they had to "continue abstaining from blood" If they were still under the law code, they would still need to get circumcised!