Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Miles
Prodigy
Posts: 3394
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 266 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #1

Post by Miles »

.


After reading another thread mentioning Jehovah's Witnesses I became interested in their beliefs about blood. They reject blood transfusions and don't eat meat with more than a trace of blood in it. Searching around a bit I came across the following from a pro-JW web site.


"Do Jehovah's Witnesses Eat Red Meat Since it May Contain a Trace of Blood?

Though Christians are to abstain from blood (Acts 15:29), the Bible shows that the eating of flesh by Christians is proper, for God Himself told us that we could eat meat from "every animal". "Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for YOU." (Gen. 9:3)

But God commanded that before eating the flesh of an animal, his people were to pour out its blood on the ground and cover it with dust, being careful not to eat the blood, on pain of death. (Deut. 12:23-25; Lev. 7:27) This is our way for us to show respect for God's view of life.

So when someone carefully takes the strict precautions that God outlined by making sure that an animal is properly bled before consumption, they wouldn't be breaking God's command of eating blood. Since God Himself has issued these directions, obviously, if properly done, God does not have a problem with eating the meat from "every animal".

People can rest assured that nearly all blood is removed from meat during slaughter, which is why you don’t see blood in raw “white meat”; only an extremely small amount of blood remains within the muscle tissue when you get it from the store. (Also see: The Red Juice in Raw Meat is Not Blood (todayifoundit.com)"
source
(My emphasis)


However, from a comprehensive explanation of the slaughtering of animals: (I urge anyone who's interested to access the link below)

"Blood loss as a percentage of body weight differs between species: cows, 4.2 to 5.7%; calves, 4.4 to 6.7%; sheep, 4.4 to 7.6%; and pigs, 1.5 to 5.8%. Blood content as a percentage of live weight may decrease in heavier animals since the growth of blood volume does not keep pace with growth of live weight. Approximately 60% of blood is lost at sticking *, 20-25% remains in the viscera, while a maximum of 10% may remain in carcass muscles."
source

So my question is, if the muscle (meat) can contain up to 10% of an animal's blood wouldn't this make it unacceptable to Jehovah's Witnesses?



*"Cattle and pigs are usually exsanguinated [drained of blood] by a puncture wound which opens the major blood vessels at the base of the neck, not far from the heart. The trade name for this process is sticking"
Source: ibid.



.

2timothy316
Prodigy
Posts: 3399
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 97 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #51

Post by 2timothy316 »

tam wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:18 pm [Replying to 2timothy316 in post #46]

Like I said... gnat, camel. Matt 23:24
You're eating both at this point.

Eloi
Guru
Posts: 1163
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 127 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #52

Post by Eloi »

tam wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:35 pm
Eloi wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:29 pm
tam wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:18 pm (...) it was certainly not my intention to take anything away from the points being made by Difflugia.

Peace again to you all!
It should, since you're supposed to be a Christian and take seriously what the Bible says about blood, even if what the Bible says doesn't make sense to the other posters from their own point of view.

The matter of blood was told to Noah as soon as he was allowed to eat animals (Gen. 9:3-5) ; then to the Israelites when they were given the law of Moses (Lev. 17:13,14) and in the first century it was given again to the Christians (Acts 15:28,29). If that doesn't seem like "enough" to someone ... then that someone has a big problem accepting God's point of view on the matter.
Thank you, and as Difflugia has pointed out, those commands were about eating blood. Eating blood and a blood transfusion are not the same thing.

Peace again to you.
Christians were not told not to "eat", but to abstain. At that time some people believed that drinking human blood would make them stronger. Christians knew very well what they should do about it ... same today.

2timothy316
Prodigy
Posts: 3399
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 97 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #53

Post by 2timothy316 »

Difflugia wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:35 pm
JehovahsWitness wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:57 pmThe word used covers more than mere oral consumption, that is not an interpretational issue it is linguistic....
Quite the contrary. A wise poster said this recently, with which I wholeheartedly agree:
JehovahsWitness wrote: Wed Jan 05, 2022 3:31 pmChristians that read the gospels without insight or regard for context make nonsense of the Word of God.
Yes lets put Acts 15:19, 20 into context.

"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."

So when would there ever be ever be an acceptable time that it would be OK not to abstain from idols?
Would there ever be a time when it would be OK not to abstain from sexual immorality?
Would there ever be a time when it would be OK not to abstain from things had been strangled?
Last edited by 2timothy316 on Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5580
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 245 times
Been thanked: 208 times
Contact:

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #54

Post by tam »

Peace to you,

[Replying to Eloi in post #52]

The context was about eating/drinking blood.

That is not what a blood transfusion is.

https://www.ajwrb.org/is-a-blood-transfusion-a-meal
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

2timothy316
Prodigy
Posts: 3399
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 97 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #55

Post by 2timothy316 »

tam wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:48 pm Peace to you,

[Replying to Eloi in post #52]

The context was about eating/drinking blood.
No it's not. It's about abstaining from things that are not acceptable.

Eloi
Guru
Posts: 1163
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 127 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #56

Post by Eloi »

tam wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:48 pm Peace to you,

[Replying to Eloi in post #52]

The context was about eating/drinking blood.

That is not what a blood transfusion is.

https://www.ajwrb.org/is-a-blood-transfusion-a-meal


Put yourself in context. Do you really think that if there had been some way of putting human blood into the veins to make themselves "stronger" (instead of being drunk) at that time, Christians would have accepted it? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? Do not lie to yourself.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5580
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 245 times
Been thanked: 208 times
Contact:

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #57

Post by tam »

Peace again to you,

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #55]


Your religion connected this prohibition to eating and drinking blood as well. Why else fight to convince others that a blood transfusion was the same as eating blood?
“Each time the prohibition of blood is mentioned in the Scriptures it is in connection with taking it as food, and so it is as a nutrient that we are concerned with in its being forbidden.” W58 9/15 575 Questions from Readers
Some persons may reason that getting a blood transfusion is not actually eating. But is it not true that when a patient is unable to eat through his mouth, doctors often feed him by the same method in which a blood transfusion is administered? Examine the scriptures carefully and notice that they tell us to keep free from blood and to abstain from blood. (Acts 15:20, 29) What does this mean? If a doctor were to tell you to abstain from alcohol, would that mean simply that you should not take it through your mouth but that you could transfuse it directly into your veins? Of course not! So, too, abstaining from blood means not taking it into our bodies at all. (The Watchtower, June 1, 1969, p. 326-7)
Part of the response:
As already discussed, for blood to become food, it will have to be eaten, to pass the digestive system and be broken down into components that can be used by the body’s cells. This does not happen during a blood transfusion. The blood retains its function as blood, and is used as it was used in the donor’s body: to transport nourishment and oxygen to the different parts of the body. A blood transfusion is not nourishing any more than a kidney transplant is.
and,
With substances like alcohol and certain drugs it makes no difference how they are administered because the end result, the absorption by the body, is the same. However what if the end result was not the same? Would this man in question also be prohibited from using a mouthwash or cough syrup that contained alcohol? Would he be prohibited from using alcohol as a topical antiseptic or in an after shave? The very idea is ridiculous because the purpose is entirely different. The error of this analogy can be illustrated with a similar one we like to use:

“Consider a man who is told by his doctor that he must abstain from meat. Would he be obedient if he quit eating meat, but accepted a kidney transplant?”

Obviously eating and receiving an organ transplant are completely dissimilar just as the eating of blood and the transfusion of blood are in no way connected.

https://www.ajwrb.org/is-a-blood-transfusion-a-meal
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

Eloi
Guru
Posts: 1163
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 127 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #58

Post by Eloi »

This IS NOT about drinking, eating or transfusing ... THIS IS about the blood itself.

Lev. 17:11 For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for YOU to make atonement for YOUR souls, because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul [in it]. 12 That is why I have said to the sons of Israel: “No soul of YOU must eat blood and no alien resident who is residing as an alien in YOUR midst should eat blood.”

Also those who practice homosexual sex try to "soften" the mandate by speaking of "love". Mandate is mandate.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 18134
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 437 times
Been thanked: 671 times
Contact:

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #59

Post by JehovahsWitness »

tam wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 5:02 pm Peace again to you,

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #55]


Your religion connected this prohibition to eating and drinking blood as well. ...
“Each time the prohibition of blood is mentioned in the Scriptures it is in connection with taking it as food, and so it is as a nutrient that we are concerned with in its being forbidden.” W58 9/15 575 Questions from Readers

Obviously there is a connection, transfusing and eating are both means by which blood can enter the body. So? So what? How does this fact nullify any of the points made so far? A "connection" isnt synonymous with an absolute equivalent.
To illustrate: There is a "connection" between horseback riding and travel by train in that they are both terrestrial means of transpiration. That is not however to say that a horse is a train.
Perhaps you can explain in a few sentences what point you are trying to make with this statement that isn't stating the obvious.





JW
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Wed Jan 12, 2022 6:31 pm, edited 7 times in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 18134
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 437 times
Been thanked: 671 times
Contact:

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #60

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Difflugia wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:35 pm
JehovahsWitness wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:57 pmThe word used covers more than mere oral consumption, that is not an interpretational issue it is linguistic....
Quite the contrary. ...
What do you mean "Quite the contrary" ? The contrary of "more" is ...."less". Are you suggesting the word "ABSTAIN" does not cover more but, (quite the contrary) to abstain covers less than the verb to consume?

JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

Post Reply