Does the Bible say blood transfusion is against God's law?

Justin108 · Post by **Justin108** » Thu Jan 26, 2017 8:28 am

Jehovah's Witnesses believe blood transfusions are against God's law. The usual supporting scriptures for this are Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 17:14 and Acts 15:20. However, reading these verses, it's pretty clear that eating blood is prohibited. So why do Jehovah's Witnesses object to blood transfusions?

Justin108 · Post by **Justin108** » Wed Feb 08, 2017 1:43 am

onewithhim wrote: The whole bottom line is the respect for life.

It is precisely because of my respect for life that I donate blood regularly

onewithhim wrote:We would want to save a life, using the best options available.

Sometimes (quite often) blood transfusion is the best option available

onewithhim wrote:If someone said that we would save our life or our child's life by putting Dran-o in the veins would you do it?

If there were legitimate medical evidence behind the benefits of Dran-o, then yes.
A procedure seeming "gross" to really doesn't matter if it's effective. Ever heard of Premarin? It's a hormone therapy drug that uses female horse urine in its manufacturing. If someone desperately needed hormone therapy, should they stay away from Premarin because "eww gross, horse urine"?

I'm not quite sure why you're comparing blood to Dran-o though... Is there something inherently wrong with blood?

onewithhim wrote: If blood substitutes are no good, then blood wouldn't be either.

Please support that claim

onewithhim wrote: Someday it will be told---more people died from blood transfusions than those people who didn't take blood at all.

I'd stay away from making predictions if I were you. Jehovah's Witnesses don't have the best track record in that department

rikuoamero · Post by **rikuoamero** » Wed Feb 08, 2017 4:18 am

[Replying to post 146 by 2timothy316]

So if I were to intentionally to toss away that commandment knowing full well it's disobedience, then I just might lose eternal life. Though there is no hell, there is eternal death. Even though I might not be killed off forever, it's something that I don't even want to risk period. One can't hide the intentions of their heart. The choice to abstain is a guaranteed blessing. So I choose the guaranteed blessing, even if it might mean my life, like Jesus Christ showed his faith knowing that he would die because he was obedient.

Am I crazy or does this sound like Pascal's Wager, anyone?
Also...guaranteed? I thought this was supposed to be a religion, that talks a great deal about believing on faith, and whatnot.

2timothy316 · Post by **2timothy316** » Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:00 am

[Replying to post 152 by rikuoamero]

"Faith is the assured expectation of what is hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities that are not seen." Hebrews 11:1

What many people think is their faith is actually credulity and not faith as defined in the Bible. Real faith has evidence and credulity has none. I have discovered evidence of realities/things to come that have not yet taken place.

credulity: willingness to believe or trust too readily, especially without proper or adequate evidence; gullibility.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/credulity

Justin108 · Post by **Justin108** » Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:02 am

2timothy316 wrote: [Replying to post 152 by rikuoamero]

"Faith is the assured expectation of what is hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities that are not seen." Hebrews 11:1

What many people think is their faith is actually credulity and not faith as defined in the Bible. Real faith has evidence and credulity has none.

What evidence does your faith have?

2timothy316 · Post by **2timothy316** » Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:07 am

[Replying to post 154 by Justin108]

There is a whole thread dedicated to faith vs credulity.

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... ty&start=0

Justin108 · Post by **Justin108** » Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:27 am

2timothy316 wrote: [Replying to post 154 by Justin108]

There is a whole thread dedicated to faith vs credulity.

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... ty&start=0

All I can find on this form is your definition of faith as "belief with evidence". I'm asking for that evidence

2timothy316 · Post by **2timothy316** » Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:20 am

[Replying to post 156 by Justin108]

Than read more of the thread and ask something specific concerning faith on that thread. (because apparently we are done with the blood discussion) Because just asking 'what evidence' is a broad question.

onewithhim · Post by **onewithhim** » Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:04 pm

Justin108 wrote:
onewithhim wrote: The whole bottom line is the respect for life.
It is precisely because of my respect for life that I donate blood regularly

onewithhim wrote:We would want to save a life, using the best options available.
Sometimes (quite often) blood transfusion is the best option available

onewithhim wrote:If someone said that we would save our life or our child's life by putting Dran-o in the veins would you do it?
If there were legitimate medical evidence behind the benefits of Dran-o, then yes.
A procedure seeming "gross" to really doesn't matter if it's effective. Ever heard of Premarin? It's a hormone therapy drug that uses female horse urine in its manufacturing. If someone desperately needed hormone therapy, should they stay away from Premarin because "eww gross, horse urine"?

I'm not quite sure why you're comparing blood to Dran-o though... Is there something inherently wrong with blood?

onewithhim wrote: If blood substitutes are no good, then blood wouldn't be either.
Please support that claim

onewithhim wrote: Someday it will be told---more people died from blood transfusions than those people who didn't take blood at all.
I'd stay away from making predictions if I were you. Jehovah's Witnesses don't have the best track record in that department

If you haven't gone to the hospital web-sites that I provided links to, to show what the advantages are to blood substitutes, please don't keep accusing me and others of not caring about life. If you just didn't see them, here they are again....and these are just two of hundreds.

www.hopkinsmedicine.org/bloodless_medicine_surgery

https://www.pennmedicine.org/for-patien ... e-medicine

Justin108 · Post by **Justin108** » Thu Feb 09, 2017 1:29 am

onewithhim wrote: If you haven't gone to the hospital web-sites that I provided links to, to show what the advantages are to blood substitutes, please don't keep accusing me and others of not caring about life. If you just didn't see them, here they are again....and these are just two of hundreds.

I've said this a thousand times. While there are substitutes, the substitutes are not always viable. Sometimes blood is needed and when Jehovah's Witnesses refuse blood, then they don't care much about living

onewithhim · Post by **onewithhim** » Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:00 pm

2timothy316 wrote: [Replying to post 152 by rikuoamero]

"Faith is the assured expectation of what is hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities that are not seen." Hebrews 11:1

What many people think is their faith is actually credulity and not faith as defined in the Bible. Real faith has evidence and credulity has none. I have discovered evidence of realities/things to come that have not yet taken place.

credulity: willingness to believe or trust too readily, especially without proper or adequate evidence; gullibility.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/credulity

Yes, and credulity is confused with true faith, by most. I too have discovered evidence of realities though the things to come have not come yet.