Judah lived for the coming of The Messiah. Do you believe The Messiah has come or not? Are you not also living for the coming of The Messiah? Why?
-
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!
Christian's Birthdays and Other Holidays
- Thread starter Jeremy Mason
- Start date
Jeremy Mason
Well-Known Member
Absolutely, but what we don't want to do is falsely project obscure concepts that make christianity somewhat backwards and dangerous. Quibble over christian celebrations and medical necessities.
Not only do I believe that your church is promoting unnecessary extrapolations, I find the use of medical opportunities to be lacking, unChrist-like and criminal. I could never join a group with such fervor for the Lord and simultaneously fail to allow the very life saving procedures need to sustain life. If there's an example of having a thorn-filled practice, it's this one.
Matthew 7:15-16 (NIV)
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
Do some homework on bloodless medicine Jeremy. Blood is a multi million dollar business. It is not the "life saving" procedure that most people have been led to believe it is. Google the dangers of blood transfusions. Then try the actual cost of a blood transfusion. Then Google bloodless surgery. See for yourself why it is still promoted even though the risks are well documented. Where there are vast amounts of money to be made, there is always corruption. Whose world are we living in?
I have countless brothers and sisters who were told point blank that they would die without blood. None of them did. Many more people die who have had blood transfusions. Don't get sucked in to this false premise. It is no coincidence that the human circulatory system is compatible with ordinary sea water. Saline can save your life just as easily and more safely than blood, which was forbidden by God's law and was restated as a necessary thing for Christians. Blood is sacred to God. It is the very symbol of life itself. Consuming the blood of another physically is repugnant and forbidden in God's word.
Jeremy Mason
Well-Known Member
I'm not trying to further big medicine and it's corruption. I'm on your side in that debate. But what i won't do is admonish people who unfortunately have to utilize a blood transfusion. If you don't want your life saved in the event the hospital needs to follow medical protocol, then fine. It's when a child is in need of these life-saving requirements that I become contentious.
I
Again, you be the dean of your university. Just give the children the medical attention as the doctor sees fit.
That's great they can use other/safer means of surgery. However, it is commonly used when needed.
Blood transfusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Drinking blood and using it to save lives are completely incompatible. It's like when Jesus healed a man on the sabbath.
Matthew 13:9-14 (NIV)
Doing good is giving a child the medical resources he/she needs.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
Gods law tells us very clearly to abstain from blood.
Do you think its acceptable to break Gods laws for self gain??
Do you think he will accept that?
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
It is not as "contentious" as you might imagine. Children can be saved without blood, just the same way as everyone else.
Doctors are well aware of the dangers and the drawbacks of transfusing human tissue from one person to another. Blood is basically a liquid organ and we all know what the body's response is to the introduction of foreign tissue. It wants to reject it.
You do realize that doctors will do all in their power to avoid blood when treating our children. We have signed agreements with them and a Hospital Liaison Committee to deal with all inquiries on the bloodless treatment of Jehovah's Witnesses. We are actually experts in this field now.
Also from WIKI....
Benefits
Bloodless medicine appeals to many doctors because it carries low risk of post-operative infection when compared with procedures requiring blood transfusion. Additionally, it may be economically beneficial in some countries. For example, the cost of blood in the US hovers around $500 a unit ( Feb 2012 Red Cross charges $700/unit - according to union rep in OH and hospitals' cost is about $1000 to $1500/unit- real cost is usually 5 times these amounts when everything is added in ), including testing.[13] ....... Geisinger Medical Center began a blood conservation program in 2005 and reported a recorded savings of $273,000 in its first six months of operation.[14] The Cleveland Clinic lowered their direct costs from $35.5 million in 2009 to $26.4 million in 2012 - a savings of nearly $10 million over 3 years.[15]
Health risks appear to be another contributing factor in their appeal, especially in light of recent studies that suggest that blood transfusions can increase the risk of complications and reduce survival rates.[16][17] Thus the recovery rate is faster with bloodless surgery allowing the patient to leave earlier."
Bloodless surgery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The command to all Christians was clear Jeremy Mason. After intense prayer and consultation with the holy spirit, Gentile believers were not forced to observe the law of Moses regarding circumcision, but there were some "necessary things" that they needed to observe......
"Therefore, my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God,  but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from what is strangled, and from blood"...."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, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!" (Acts 15:19,20, 28, 29)
Abstaining from strangled animals (and hence not properly bled) and from consuming blood was mentioned twice. It was put on the same level as sexual immorality, both carried the death penalty under Mosaic Law, so it was no small matter to God.
What does the word "abstain" mean to you? If an alcoholic was told to abstain from all alcohol, would he be able to stop drinking it but instead inject it straight into his bloodstream?
If a hospital patient cannot consume food by mouth, how are they often fed? Is it not intravenously? We do not see the consumption of blood to be permissible in any form, no matter how "life saving" it might seem to be.
If you were dying of thirst and someone offered you blood to drink, knowing the Biblical prohibition, would you drink it to save your life? (Lev 7:20; 17:10-12)
I don't quite understand the reason for this citation.
Lives can be saved without blood. Blood actually slows down recovery and compromises the immune system. When you introduce foreign tissue into the body, it sends the immune system into overdrive. Resources in the body are wasted trying to defend against the foreign invader.
Using children in this argument is simply emotive.
Propping up a cash cow is more important than finding safer ways to save lives.
Here is a list of the possible transfusion reactions in children....
- Immediate Adverse Effects of Transfusion
- Delayed and Long Term Adverse Effects of Transfusion
- Transfusion Reaction Report Form (PDF 108 KB)
Thankfully informed doctors are taking action themselves to offer bloodless treatment to all their patients, not just to JW's. Whole hospitals are now dedicated to bloodless medicine.
The last time I was admitted to hospital, one of the questions on the admission form was "Have you EVER had a blood transfusion?" Why do you suppose they need to ask that?
Jeremy Mason
Well-Known Member
God's law says to smite people for various things. Do you smite people?
Jeremy Mason
Well-Known Member
You make it sound that this happens more times than not.
Experts? :sarcastic I just hope the Hospital Liaison Committee in Australia is aware of your medical certifications.
I like how you criticize the medical community for being corrupt, then share a link that shows how they save money with other medical procedures in part. Don't get me wrong. It's great that they have found other solutions.
Just the laws the JWs see fit, right?
People in those days did not have blood transfusions so there was no need to require laws regarding that medical solution. Sorry, eating blood an using it for life-sustaining reasons are completely unrelated.
I don't think drinking blood would help much and has the added danger of contracting disease.
I don't quite understand the reason for this citation.
It's actually from Matthew 12:9-14.
It says that in times of healing, Mosaic laws are trumped. True, but as I posted earlier, it's a very common procedure. Even with the associated risks.
I was simple saying that children need to have doctors to preform necessary life-saving protocols and not the advice of their parents ministers.
Jeremy Mason
Well-Known Member
Yet, when absolutely necessary, doctors will use blood transfusions for children.
i'm ok with that, but they still use that procedure commonly.
The last time I was admitted to hospital, one of the questions on the admission form was "Have you EVER had a blood transfusion?" Why do you suppose they need to ask that?
I'm not sure.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
Actually it happens every time you introduce foreign tissue into the body. The immune system is designed to fight such foreign tissue as a natural response.
Did you know that a female body would reject its own foetus if it wasn't for a specific group of cells designed by God to protect it?
The Hospital Liaison Committee members are recognised in most countries as the acknowledged experts in the field of bloodless medical techniques. They are routinely consulted by doctors when treating Witness patients. Do not underestimate our commitment or our expertise in this area.
I do not criticise the medical community at all. We have many doctors and others connected with the medical community in our brotherhood. The majority of medical practitioners are dedicated men and women whose work is very much utilised and appreciated by us.
I do however, criticise medical practitioners who fail to respect that the patients they treat are more than just bodies in a bed. The whole person is more than just the body. Those who respect that our stand on blood is first and foremost a religious stand that when violated, leaves us in tatters, and who work with us to produce a good result with alternatives.....these are the doctors who deserve our respect.
Would you like to elaborate on this point? What laws do JW's follow that are not Biblical and therefore binding on all Christians?
I have already explained that taking blood into the body by any means is not "abstaining" is it? What does that word mean to you? Feeding the body is often done intravenously, so we see blood transfusions as "eating" blood.
That isn't what I asked. But interesting that you acknowledge the transmission of disease.
That makes more sense.It's actually from Matthew 12:9-14.
But no sorry, that is not what that scripture is about at all. Jesus was not telling the Pharisees that they could transgress the law....he was saying that their strict interpretation of the law took it beyond the reasonable command that God gave.
Healing on the Sabbath did not transgress the law, it simply went against their much stricter enforcement of that law.
This response is clearly demonstrating ignorance of the facts Jeremy Mason. Doctors must by law recognise the sensibilities of their patients and their right to refuse medical treatment that violates their conscience. Why then would a parent consent to a procedure for their children that they know violates God's law on the sanctity of blood as well as being proven to be dangerous of itself, with no guarantee that the patient will live anyway? Do you know how many people die who have been given blood? Way more than those who refuse it. Do you understand that?
It is not 'the advice of the parent's ministers'....it is God's command we choose to follow.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
If you investigate alternative therapies, there is never a time when blood transfusions can be proven to save lives any more than the alternatives. Even in cases of extreme trauma, the decision to transfuse blood is usually made because it is an almost standard procedure. Given the dangers of the procedure itself, the decision to use blood is not something doctors can now carry out as "routine". JW patients have proven that the medical attitude towards blood is not well founded. We are the living proof that blood is not optimal therapy. Doctors themselves are now on board with our stance. It is completely compatible with the practice of modern medicine.
If doctors still 'use this procedure commonly', with all that they know about its documented adverse effects, then personally, I would avoid that kind of doctor like the plague. They have not kept up with the times. They are actually supporting a multi million dollar industry.
Blood transfusions can transmit 'nasties' that stay with you for life. The fact that they have to ask if you have "ever" had a blood transfusion, means that they are aware of this fact.
In countries where blood is sold rather than donated, people have to be concerned about the lifestyle of those who need to sell their blood for money.
Becoming aware of the cost of a single unit of blood used in hospital treatment will reveal why this procedure is still used and promoted as "life saving" in full knowledge of the fact that it is not without significant risk.
God did not give his very detailed laws on blood to Israel and also to restate them to Christians as a "necessary thing" because it was not an important issue to him.
We believe that consuming blood is against God's law, regardless of the delivery system.
Don't forget who is ruling this world! (1John 5:19, 20) Nothing is as it seems when the biggest con artist in existence is running the show.
(2 Cor 11:14, 15) This is a decision for all to make individually, but for JW's it is not negotiable.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
i thought the bible says: "19 Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but yield place to the wrath; for it is written: “‘Vengeance is mine; I will repay,’ says Jehovah.” 20 But “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by doing this you will heap fiery coals on his head.” 21 Do not let yourself be conquered by the evil, but keep conquering the evil with the good
" Romans 12:19
But all this is besides the point. Gods law states:
Acts 15:28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you except these necessary things: 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!”
What does 'abstain' mean? Look it up in the dictionary and you'll see what it means.
And we are to 'abstain' from sexual immorality according to this verse too....does that mean that God only expects us to abstain from some forms of sexual immorality or do you think it means 'all forms' of sexual immorality?
InChrist
Free4ever
Do Jehovahs Witnesses Really Abstain From Blood?
"It does not seem possible to explain why it is a violation of Gods law to accept plasma, platelets, red and white cells when all the fractions of these are permitted by the WTS"
Do Jehovahs Witnesses Really Abstain From Blood? | AJWRB.org
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
some of the 'components' of blood fall under a conscience decision.
What we cannot accept on religious grounds is any 'whole blood'
But some may accept certain minor 'blood fractions' such as albumin, immunoglobinlins, clotting factors, haemoglobins, haemin or interferons. These are left to individual conscience to decide.... so some may refuse them and others may accept them and either decision is fine.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
Blood fractions must be left to the exercise of individual conscience, since there is nothing in the Bible to expressly forbid the use of separate minute components of blood. A fraction is only one tiny part of the complex formula that makes up our lifeblood.
We obey the Bible's command to "abstain from blood". If certain fractions can be utilized by the body in their own right but cannot be identified as "blood" on their own, then our conscience must dictate our actions. To violate our conscience is also a sin.
One example is the blood supply from mother to foetus. These two separate individuals may have completely different and incompatible blood groups, yet certain components of blood can be transferred via the umbilical chord from mother to child, yet there is no mingling of the blood streams of these two individuals. The foetus is not part of the mother's body but is formed within it as host for the developing new life.
We have researched this topic very carefully and we understand what we have to do from a purely Biblical viewpoint. Where no black and white command is in evidence, then Bible principles must dictate our actions. Whatever we decide to do must leave us with a clear conscience.
Jeremy Mason
Well-Known Member
If blood transfusions are so dangerous then why is the practices so common?
Yep.
Believe me, I have heard plenty in this thread alone that demonstrates your commitment to endanger child safety in regards to blood transfusions. As to your expertise, I'll let the doctor present the necessary medical options, even if it offends your sensibilities.
Good for you.
I respect the doctors expertise, period!
I would love to determine all the Mosiac Laws that your church doesn't prescribe to, but that will have to be done at another time.
Obviously I don't see blood transfusions and eating blood to be the same thing.
I would not eat or drink blood to answer the question. The reasons why are because I don't think it would help dehydration.
My point was that Jesus understood the difference between Pharisaical POV and the need to do good. Like saving a hand and more importantly, life. Why can't you make the connection?
I can't speak for Australian law, I can only hope that the doctor is in a legal position to treat people in the need of a blood transfusion.
Do you? Obviously the benefits out-way the risks.
Way more than those who refuse it. Do you understand that?
i do not understand that comment.
I think your church is stretching God's decrees when it comes to these medically established solutions.
Jeremy Mason
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry you feel that doctors are prescribing blood transfusions as if they are handing out candy.
They are the doctors and they have a host of reasons to ask such questions.
Actually, they ask all kinds of questions when someone donates or sells blood. But how would you know, right?
Yep and it still works for many.
Got it.
Don't forget who is ruling this world! (1John 5:19, 20) Nothing is as it seems when the biggest con artist in existence is running the show.
It true that there is plenty of con artists in the world and doctors are no exception. However, given that they are doctors, I feel it is wise to consider all their expertise, even in the case of a blood transfusion.
:sorry1:
Jeremy Mason
Well-Known Member
But as you can see, there are Mosaic laws your church does not follow. This is a good thing.
Eating blood was forbidden, not using it to save a life is never mentioned. The reason I believe blood eating/drinking was prohibited was because it was a pagan ritual.
Pagan/Wiccan Religion: Drinking blood, drink cow, pagan religions
I not drink blood, but a med-rare steak is hard to pass up. :drool:
Good question for those who are hermaphrodites.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
More than likely because a lot of people make a lot of money out of it.
New Published Study Finds the Cost of Blood Transfusions is Significantly Under-Estimated, Establishes True Cost at $522 to $1,183 Per Unit
IRVINE, Calif., April 5 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- A new blood transfusion cost analysis study published in the April 2010 issue of Transfusion, a peer-reviewed academic journal, shows that when all of the complex cost factors leading up to and after a red blood cell (RBC) transfusion are considered, the actual cost of blood is substantially higher than previously estimated. With actual blood transfusion costs ranging between $522 and $1,183 per-unit37% higher than estimated by prior studies, which did not include all associated coststhe new study calculates that the true cost of blood is 3.2 to 4.8-fold higher than reported blood product acquisition costs.(1)
"Representing the most detailed and rigorous method utilized to date to account for the cost of blood transfusions," study findings confirm that annual expenditures on blood and transfusion-related activities for surgical patients are significant resource drainscosting between $1.6 to $6.0 million per hospital surveyed........
While multiple studies have shown that blood transfusions increase morbidity and mortality, the present study did not attempt to evaluate the morbidity-associated costs of blood transfusions. Thus, the cost estimate presented in this study may still underestimate the cost of giving blood transfusions. (BOLD mine)
New Published Study Finds the Cost of Blood Transfusions is Significantly Under-Estimated, Establishes... -- IRVINE, Calif., April 5 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ --
[Morbidity refers to the disease state of an individual, so transfusions increase the incidence of disease.
Mortality refers to the incidence of death (number of deaths) in a population. It is stated that blood transfusions also increases the incidence of death]
So the published medical studies stating that blood transfusions increase morbidity and mortality mean nothing to you? We did not write the studies, nor is our stand purely based on medical outcomes. It is first and foremost a religious position that we believe is supported in the scriptures. The fact that it turns out NOT to be the medically optimum treatment now for a lot of doctors who have observed outcomes over many years, means nothing to you either?
You are free to exercise your own conscience in this matter....It isn't my sensibilities that you have to worry about.
I'm sorry, but doctors are not God. Some of them I would not take my sick cat to.
Some are nothing more than the servants of drug companies. You have already acknowledged the corrupt activities of Big Pharma....who do you suppose peddles their wares?
We are no longer under the Mosaic law. The law pertaining to blood was restated for Christians as a "necessary thing". This has been shown to you by both Pegg and myself.
You are free to make your own choices in this.
Blood is not given for hydration. Saline is given as a plasma volume expander. It keep the veins from collapsing and ensures circulation of remaining blood in the body until red cells are replenished by the bone marrow. With the assistance of EPO, this happens quite rapidly.
Saving our life by breaking God's law puts us in a precarious position.
You might save your present existence at the cost of your everlasting life.
The law has no right to violate a person's conscience and it has no right to override it.
A cancer sufferer can refuse chemotherapy. A patient can refuse life saving surgery for whatever reason. There is no way that doctors have the right to decide for a patient what is best for them and then legally enforce it. What may seem the best treatment from the doctor's point of view, may not be right for the patient who has the legal right to autonomy and personal bodily integrity.
Even minors can go before a judge and refuse to accept medical treatment, including blood. If the judge deems the minor to be in full possession of all the facts and has a firm grasp of the possible consequences, they can be deemed to be making a mature decision.
I take it you would have those rights removed? You would give the law the right to force a treatment upon you against your will? Is this the kind of world you want to live in?
Read the medical studies. They benefits don't outweigh the risks. If they did then why are hospitals dedicated to bloodless medicine springing up all over the world?
I said....."Why then would a parent consent to a procedure for their children that they know violates God's law on the sanctity of blood as well as being proven to be dangerous of itself, with no guarantee that the patient will live anyway? Do you know how many people die who have been given blood? Way more than those who refuse it. Do you understand that? "
You assume that people who consent to have blood transfusions always recover. The stats prove that way more transfused patients die than those who received no blood.
These "medically established solutions" are in fact life threatening in many cases.
Doctors themselves are opting for safer methods of treatment. You would stay in the dark ages with outdated medical practice?
We know that God's laws on the sanctity of blood have been vindicated. Arguing against them is rather pointless, especially when many specialists in the medical profession themselves are abandoning the practice.
