Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Miles
Prodigy
Posts: 3353
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 257 times
Been thanked: 927 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.



.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #71

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
2timothy316 wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 8:56 am
tam wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:51 pm
So to take someone else's blood is to take that away from them and give it to yourself.

I'm not sure how that is relevant.
That is because you don't follow the Bible and you apparently agree with taking someone's life away from them.
"For the life of the flesh is in the blood."(Lev. 17:11) Do you believe this scripture to be true?
To take someone's blood is to take life away from them and it is very relevant as why I don't take blood from someone.
You can do whatever you choose. The fact remains that a person donating blood does not die. There is a risk, as difflugia said, in many things that people might do for another person, but it would be ridiculous to refuse those services. Such as rescue services, from fireman, from policeman, etc. You would not be showing love to these people by recklessly endangering yourself and them, but neither are people recklessly choosing to have an injury or disease that might require a blood transfusion.

As for giving something that has life in it... even Christ said that no one has greater love than this, that one lays down their life for their friends. A person donating blood isn't even going that far. Just giving some of their blood to help another person live.

No one accepting a blood transfusion is taking away the life of a person who donated blood.


Someone somewhere made the point that putting the emphasis on the blood rather than the life that makes the blood important, is backward. Blood is important because of the life in it. It is backward to sanctify the blood, while sacrificing the life that made the blood important. A religion demands its members sacrifice their lives (and the lives of their children), to avoid a blood transfusion. But there are no biblical prohibitions against blood transfusions.

This is of course the same religion that teaches its members to refuse to eat and drink the body and blood of Christ, something that Christ said one MUST do in order to have life in oneself.

Something to think about, even take to the One who is the Truth, who can reveal the truth of this and any other matter to you (to anyone), Christ Jaheshua.


Peace again to you.
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

Eloi
Guru
Posts: 1097
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 118 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #72

Post by Eloi »

It is useless to try to reason with people who believe that putting a substance into the body through a vein is somehow less harmful for the purpose of abstaining than drinking or eating the substance.

It has already been clearly explained here that the Bible shows that it is not about the how, but the what; firstly speaking about "eating" and lately about "abstaining". They apparently don't care about explanations ... It's a matter of attitude, opposition.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #73

Post by tam »

Peace to you.
2timothy316 wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:11 am
tam wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:51 pm A person takes medicine to maintain their life as well (like blood pressure medications), but that doesn't mean medicine is food providing nourishment.
Did you know more research has been done on aspirin and its effects yet there is research on blood and it's short or long term effects? Both giving and taking blood, neither have many long term research studies. There are in some studies that say blood is bad for some people.
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/me ... e_patients
“Transfusion is not as safe as people think,” says Steven M. Frank, M.D., leader of the study described in the journal Anesthesiology.
"Transfused blood also has a suppressive effect on the immune system, which increases the risk of infections, including pneumonia and sepsis, he says."

Blood is not a medication, its a transplant which as we know the body doesn't take kindly to a foreign substance in it.
People keep passing it off as this great thing but it is not what its cracked up to be.
Missing the point (that just because something prolongs your life does not mean that it is food providing nutrients).

But sure, perhaps there may be long term effects associated with blood transfusions for some people, whereas death has no long-term effects. Just one immediate and short term effect.
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #74

Post by tam »

2timothy316 wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 10:01 am
tam wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:58 am Peace to you.
2timothy316 wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 8:37 am
tam wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:51 pm Peace to you,
2timothy316 wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:12 pm
tam wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 6:41 pm "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."
Nutrient: a substance that provides nourishment essential for growth and the maintenance of life.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nutrient

Isn't that what a blood transfusion does?
No. Blood transfusions do not provide nourishment essential for growth. Food and drink provide nourishment essential for growth.
No? Then there is no point to a blood transfusion if it doesn't maintain a person's life.
Everything is carried in the blood. To say it doesn't provide a substance essential for life, I have to ask, do you even know what blood is and what it does?
You have chosen to accept a small part of that definition and rejected the rest.

When you cherry-pick a definition, you can make a word mean something it does not mean.
Said the pot to the kettle.
Taken in the arm or eating it the benefits are the same, providing growth, nutrients and life and this is a fact.
https://www.eater.com/2020/2/13/2080507 ... ingredient
Blood has "protein, it’s packed with iron, vitamin D, and other nutrients." These things don't go away when transfused into a person.
Timothy, there is nothing in that article which supports what you have said 'taking it in the arm or eating it, the benefits are the same'. That article is just talking about blood being eaten.
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 7443
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 633 times
Been thanked: 148 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #75

Post by onewithhim »

Difflugia wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 12:36 pm
onewithhim wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 11:44 amOh come on. Certainly, if transfusions were done back then, they would have been included in the prohibition. But they weren't done back then, so just the phrase "abstain from blood" covered every way you might inject it into a person. Back then through the mouth was the only way they knew how to do it.
You've written the argument in a way that perfectly shows the circularity of it.
How so? When the verses say "abstain from blood" that means in every way that a person could possibly take it into his body. Including transfusions....if they had been available. Just because they weren't, then, you think that means we can use them NOW to infuse blood into our bodies? I think the prohibition still stands.

.

2timothy316
Prodigy
Posts: 3397
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 97 times
Been thanked: 231 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #76

Post by 2timothy316 »

2timothy316 wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:47 pm
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?
I see no one has tried tackling this paradox.

If the other three things mentioned in the scripture are to be abstained from in any circumstance, why would blood get a pass?
People say, 'health reasons' yet there are examples in the Bible where a person's health was in jeopardy (as in being put to death) if they didn't worship an idol. Yet even under pain of death they didn't bow down to the idol. (Da 3:15-30) Them bowing down to the idol wouldn't have hurt anyone and it would have saved their lives. So why did Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah refuse worshiping the idol though they would die if they didn't?

Is the threat of a serious health concern, including dying, enough to break God's commandments?

2timothy316
Prodigy
Posts: 3397
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 97 times
Been thanked: 231 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #77

Post by 2timothy316 »

tam wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 10:20 am
No one accepting a blood transfusion is taking away the life of a person who donated blood.
This is an unscriptural view. But that is to be expected of those that pick and choose what parts of the Bible they want but ignoring the parts they don't like. It's like they are eating off a buffet. "I'll take that and that but I don't want Lev. 17:11."

User avatar
Purple Knight
Guru
Posts: 2112
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 668 times
Been thanked: 407 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #78

Post by Purple Knight »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Sat Apr 24, 2021 10:33 amFurther, The Watchtower September 1st, 1972
bleeding does not remove every trace of blood from the animal. But God’s law does not require that every single drop of blood be removed. It simply states that the animal should be bled.
You can logically reduce the permission to eat meat (when paired with the forbiddance from blood) to one of two things:

1. An encompassing (or overriding) permission, permitting anything required to do the act along with the act.

2. God is trying to trick you.

And let's be honest, if God is trying to trick you, he's going to succeed in tricking you. He's omnipotent and you're mortal.

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 7443
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 633 times
Been thanked: 148 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #79

Post by onewithhim »

Purple Knight wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:33 am
JehovahsWitness wrote: Sat Apr 24, 2021 10:33 amFurther, The Watchtower September 1st, 1972
bleeding does not remove every trace of blood from the animal. But God’s law does not require that every single drop of blood be removed. It simply states that the animal should be bled.
You can logically reduce the permission to eat meat (when paired with the forbiddance from blood) to one of two things:

1. An encompassing (or overriding) permission, permitting anything required to do the act along with the act.

2. God is trying to trick you.

And let's be honest, if God is trying to trick you, he's going to succeed in tricking you. He's omnipotent and you're mortal.
I don't believe that God is trying to trick anybody. Blood is precious to him, as "the life of the body is in the blood," (Lev.17:11) so he wants us to respect his position and just drain the blood out of an animal to the extent possible as it is hanging up. As JW said, that is all he requires, that the animal be bled, and the usual manner is sufficient.

User avatar
Miles
Prodigy
Posts: 3353
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 257 times
Been thanked: 927 times

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood

Post #80

Post by Miles »

onewithhim wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 11:22 am
Purple Knight wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:33 am
JehovahsWitness wrote: Sat Apr 24, 2021 10:33 amFurther, The Watchtower September 1st, 1972
bleeding does not remove every trace of blood from the animal. But God’s law does not require that every single drop of blood be removed. It simply states that the animal should be bled.
You can logically reduce the permission to eat meat (when paired with the forbiddance from blood) to one of two things:

1. An encompassing (or overriding) permission, permitting anything required to do the act along with the act.

2. God is trying to trick you.

And let's be honest, if God is trying to trick you, he's going to succeed in tricking you. He's omnipotent and you're mortal.
I don't believe that God is trying to trick anybody. Blood is precious to him, as "the life of the body is in the blood," (Lev.17:11) so he wants us to respect his position and just drain the blood out of an animal to the extent possible as it is hanging up. As JW said, that is all he requires, that the animal be bled, and the usual manner is sufficient.
Oh, I don't think it's all that precious. God kind of delights in the shedding of blood now and then.

1 Samuel 15:3
Now go fight against the Amalekites. You must completely destroy the Amalekites and everything that belongs to them. Don’t let anything live; you must kill all the men and women and all of their children and little babies. You must kill all of their cattle and sheep and all of their camels and donkeys.’”

Psalm 137:9
Bless the one who grabs your babies and smashes them against a rock.

Deuteronomy 20:17
but you shall devote them to complete destruction, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded,

Hosea 13:16
Samaria shall bear her guilt, because she has rebelled against her God; they shall fall by the sword; their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open.

2 Kings 2:23-24
23 Elisha went from that city to Bethel. He was walking up the hill to the city, and some boys were coming down out of the city. They began making fun of him. They said, “Go away, you bald-headed man! Go away, you bald-headed man!”
24 Elisha looked back and saw them. He asked the Lord to cause bad things to happen to them. Then two bears came out of the forest and attacked the boys. There were 42 boys ripped apart by the bears.

Genesis 9:6
“Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image

Isaiah 13:11,15-16
11 The Lord says, “I will cause bad things to happen to the world. I will punish the evil people for their sin."
15 Anyone caught by the enemy will be killed with a sword. 16 Everything in their houses will be stolen. Their wives will be raped, and their little children will be beaten to death while they watch.

Psalm 137:8-9
O daughter of Babylon, doomed to be destroyed, blessed shall he be who repays you with what you have done to us! Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock!

Joshua 6:21
Then they devoted all in the city to destruction, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys, with the edge of the sword.

Exodus 12:29
At midnight the Lord struck down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sat on his throne to the firstborn of the captive who was in the dungeon, and all the firstborn of the livestock.

Numbers 31:17-18
Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him keep alive for yourselves.


Boy! The guy's got a real thing for killing infants and children. Wonder what that's all about.


.

Post Reply