I know they don’t take blood, but do they give it?
No.
From The Watchtower “Moreover, God’s law to his people of ancient times specified that blood, when taken from a body, was not to be used for anything, but was to be disposed of. (Deut. 12:16)”
Although JW’s base there refusal of blood on a NT injunction to ‘abstain from blood’ they believe the reason for this can be found in the OT which they believe states that blood is holy and not to be used for any purpose, so allowing blood to be used for any purpose is wrong. For this reason they also refuse to use certain types of fertiliser that contain blood. The verse they base this on (Deuteronomy 12:16) is in fact speaking specifically of the blood of animals slaugheterd for meat, and states “But you must not eat the blood; pour it out on the ground like water.”
Not eaxactly unequivocal support for the concept that blood is holy.
The ones who ring my doorbell when I’m sleeping do. You should see the expression on their facial remnants.
I’M JUST KIDDING. <sigh> God. Take it easy.
But doesn’t the blood that gets dumped on the ground like water, um, water the soil and provide it with nutrients? What’s the difference between pouring it directly on the ground and pouring it on the ground mixed with whatever to make fertilizer?
For that matter, since it’s pretty much impossible to remove all the blood from a piece of meat either by slaughter or by cooking, are all Jehovah’s Witnesses vegetarians? Good on them if they are, I’m one, but shouldn’t they all be by religious fiat?
WAG but I think it’s an objection to defiling it by commercialising it. I suppose RCs might object a bit to making fertiliser out of holy water and the Eucharistic wafers for the same reaons.
Yeah, it’s a point I never quite understood myself, but of course Jews are under the same commandment. In the case of orthodox Jews they denature the blood by salting the meat and hence dehydrating it. This seems strange since the blood would have been more thouroughly denatured simply by cooking the meat. However considering that salt wasn’t available in those quantities when Deutreonomy was written this is obviously a fairly recent addition to custom and presumably simply bleeding the animal was considered good enough for God originally.
The WTS interprets “eating” of blood in its most general form to include accepting “transfusion of whole blood, packed RBCs, and plasma, as well as WBC and platelet administration.” . Essentially all other Christian and Jewish faith groups belief that the passages refer to dietary laws; i.e. to the actual eating of meat containing blood.
Which is interestibg because the Watchtower itself has stated repeatedly that the injunction against eating blood (or any other OT law) has no direct application for JWs although it provides a ‘useful insight into the reasons underlying such an injunction’. The injunction refered to is one in the NT requiring Christians to abstain from blood. Basically JWs don’t obey anything in the OT, instead living thier lives according to their interpretation of the NT, and AFAIK there is no mention of the eating of blood in the NT.
Okay.
Here’s something from the Watchtower website itself.
WITNESS POSITION ON THERAPY
Jehovah’s Witnesses accept medical and surgical treatment. In fact, scores of them are physicians, even surgeons. But Witnesses are deeply religious people who believe that blood transfusion is forbidden for them by Biblical passages such as: “Only flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat” (Genesis 9:3-4); “[You must] pour its blood out and cover it with dust” (Leviticus 17:13-14); and “Abstain from . . . fornication and from what is strangled and from blood” (Acts 15:19-21).1
While these verses are not stated in medical terms, Witnesses view them as ruling out transfusion of whole blood, packed RBCs, and plasma, as well as WBC and platelet administration. However, Witnesses’ religious understanding does not absolutely prohibit the use of components such as albumin, immune globulins, and hemophiliac preparations; each Witness must decide individually if he can accept these.
Gee, not to get too hypertechnical here, but what about autologous transfusions? What about bone marrow transplants? Any JWs out there who’d like to share their own take as well?
And as I type this, a PSA for blood donation plays on the TV in the background. Spooky.
Watchtower, June 1978
“A doctor said that prior to surgery a patient could have some blood withdrawn and stored, in the event that a transfusion is needed during surgery. How should a Christian view such use of his own blood?
[snip, large amounts of reasoning for refusing transfusion]
So, if medical personnel suggest that a Christian permit some of his blood to be withdrawn and deposited in a blood bank for later transfusion purposes, the Christian is not without guidance from the Bible as to the proper course. He can mention that ancient Israelites were told that removed blood was to be ‘poured out on the ground as water,’ to show that it was for God and not to sustain the life of some earthly creature. (Deut. 12:24) And he can refer to the pointed command that Christians ‘abstain from blood.’ In view of this, how could he allow his blood to be collected in a blood bank for later transfusion into himself or another person?”
In other words JWs refuse autologous transfusions.
Watchtower, May 1984
" Could a Christian accept a bone-marrow transplant, since blood is made in the marrow?
The Bible states clearly that God’s servants must ‘abstain from blood.’ (Acts 15:28, 29; Deuteronomy 12:15, 16) But, since red cells originate in the red bone marrow, do the Scriptures class marrow with blood? No. In fact, animal marrow is spoken of like any other flesh that could be eaten. Isaiah 25:6 says that God will prepare for his people a banquet that includes “well-oiled dishes filled with marrow.” Normal slaughtering and drainage procedures never drain all blood cells from the marrow. Yet once a carcass is drained, then any of the tissue may be eaten, including the marrow.
Of course, marrow used in human marrow transplants is from live donors, and the withdrawn marrow may have some blood with it. Hence, the Christian would have to resolve for himself whether—to him—the bone-marrow graft would amount to simple flesh or would be unbled tissue [snip to avoid copyright infringment] So the Christian should consider what additional issues he would have to face if he submitted to a marrow transplant.—Proverbs 22:3.
Though a personal decision has to be made on this matter, the Bible’s comments about blood and marrow should help the individual to decide."
In other words it’s left up to the conscience of the individual.