Changes in the Blood Issue

I won’t go into great detail with regards the changes in the blood issue that Jehovah’s Witnesses hold so dear. All I’ll say is that they never used to allow any form of blood transfusion, not even organ transplants, as some blood may have remained in the actual organ. Then, organ transplants were allowed, then they weren’t, now they are, but it’s a “conscience matter”.

Did I mention the changes in the blood issue? Up until 2004, Jehovah’s Witnesses weren’t allowed to have any form of blood transfused into their system. Since 2004, Jehovah’s Witnesses will accept hemoglobin-based products (considered blood fractions) that are made from expired human blood despite them telling everyone that blood should be poured out on the ground and not stored.

Anyway, I found this great bit of research which identifies the changes in the blood issue. Well actually, Blondie discovered it. Before reading any further, I want you to ask yourself the following question: Would a religion that claims to be the only true religion make the following comments?

I’ve put the important bits relating to the changes in the blood issue in bold and blue.

w00 10/15 pp. 30-31: Questions From Readers
Occasionally, a doctor will urge a patient to deposit his own blood weeks before surgery (preoperative autologous blood donation, or PAD) so that if the need arises, he could transfuse the patient with his own stored blood. However, such collecting, storing, and transfusing of blood directly contradicts what is said in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Blood is not to be stored; it is to be poured out—returned to God, as it were. Granted, the Mosaic Law is not in force now. Nevertheless, Jehovah’s Witnesses respect the principles God included in it, and they are determined to ‘abstain from blood.’ Hence, we do not donate blood, nor do we store for transfusion our blood that should be ‘poured out.’ That practice conflicts with God’s law.

That’s really interesting isn’t it? Well 4 years later, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society says the following:

w04 6/15 pp. 30-31: Questions From Readers
Some would refuse anything derived from blood (even fractions intended to provide temporary passive immunity). That is how they understand God’s command to ‘abstain from blood.’ They reason that his law to Israel required that blood removed from a creature be ‘poured out on the ground.’ (Deuteronomy 12:22-24) Why is that relevant? Well, to prepare gamma globulin, blood-based clotting factors, and so on, requires that blood be collected and processed. Hence, some Christians reject such products, just as they reject transfusions of whole blood or of its four primary components. Their sincere, conscientious stand should be respected.

Other Christians decide differently. They too refuse transfusions of whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets, or plasma. Yet, they might allow a physician to treat them with a fraction extracted from the primary components. Even here there may be differences. One Christian may accept a gamma globulin injection, but he may or may not agree to an injection containing something extracted from red or white cells. Overall, though, what might lead some Christians to conclude that they could accept blood fractions?

“Questions From Readers” in The Watchtower of June 1, 1990, noted that plasma proteins (fractions) move from a pregnant woman’s blood to the separate blood system of her fetus. Thus a mother passes immunoglobulins to her child, providing valuable immunity. Separately, as a fetus’ red cells complete their normal life span, their oxygen-carrying portion is processed. Some of it becomes bilirubin, which crosses the placenta to the mother and is eliminated with her body wastes. Some Christians may conclude that since blood fractions can pass to another person in this natural setting, they could accept a blood fraction derived from blood plasma or cells.

Does the fact that opinions and conscientious decisions may differ mean that the issue is inconsequential? No. It is serious. Yet, there is a basic simplicity. The above material shows that Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse transfusions of both whole blood and its primary blood components. The Bible directs Christians to ‘abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from fornication.’ (Acts 15:29) Beyond that, when it comes to fractions of any of the primary components, each Christian, after careful and prayerful meditation, must conscientiously decide for himself.

So while a Jehovah’s Witness may not store their own blood for future use, they can use hemoglobin-based products made out of someone else’s stored blood. Brilliant!

I don’t claim to be a biblical scholar, for only a few dedicated men in Brooklyn have that title. I would, however, like to know what happened to Leviticus 17:14:

For the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood by the soul in it. Consequently I said to the sons of Israel: “YOU must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood. Anyone eating it will be cut off.”

If there’s a question to glean from the above scripture, it is to ask which fraction of the blood contains the “soul”?  Of course, Jehovah’s Witnesses are programmed to tell us that this scripture is not literal, but instead a metaphor for the gift of life as symbolised by blood.

Thing is, if the second phrase of the verse is a metaphor, why do Jehovah’s Witnesses take the first part of the scripture so literally that they would rather die than break it?

Next time you’re in a discussion with other Jehovah’s Witnesses about their latest stance on the blood issue, please make sure to read Leviticus 17:14 and ask the question.