It is a well-known fact that Jehovah’s Witnesses are prohibited from donating or accepting blood transfusions. They base this on a few select passages from the Old and New Testaments:
Only flesh with its soul--its blood--you must not eat. (Gen 9:4, NWT)
For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you. (Acts 15:28-29, NWT)
As for the believers from among the nations, we have not sent out, rendering our decision that they should keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood and what is strangled and from fornication. (Acts 21:25, NWT)
With respect to the Genesis text, Ron Abel answered this rather well:
1. This passage is not necessarily binding upon all nations. Circumcision, distinction between clean and unclean animals, and animal sacrifices were all practised by the patriarchs, but are not now binding upon believers. (Gal. 6:15; Col. 2:14-17; Heb. 10:11, 12).
2. The prohibition of the eating of the blood was later limited to Israel as a part of the Law of Moses. It was not made binding upon all nations. “Ye shall not eat of any thing that dieth of itself: [because the blood had not been poured out as the law required] thou shalt give it unto the stranger that is in thy gates, that he may eat it; or thou mayest sell it unto an alien . . .” (Deut. 14:21).
3. The changing, inconsistent, and arbitrary nature of the JW prohibition is seen from the following:
a. In the mid 1940s the Watchtower Organisation initially declared an outright ban on the acceptance of blood in any form, whole or fractional.
b. Gradually the situation has changed. Now some components of blood are permitted, so that JWs are instructed “. . . when it comes to fractions of any of the primary components, each Christian, after careful and prayerful meditation, must conscientiously decide for himself.” Thus, whilst whole blood for subsequent transfusion are all forbidden, albumin, immunoglobulins, haemophiliac preparations (Factors VIII and IX), diversion of a patient’s blood through a heart lung machine, are all allowed if the JWs conscience permits.
d. Doctors who are JWs are allowed to take blood and administer blood to patients who are not JWs.
4. Blood used in transfusions is taken from a living, willing donor, not a corpse. Murder is not committed. It was Jesus Christ who said, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (John 15:13). Blood transfusions are given to sustain life, not to take it. (Ron Abel, Wrested Scriptures: A Christadelphian Handbook of Suggested Explanations to Difficult Bible Passages [ed. John Allfree; rev ed.; Birmingham: The Christadelphian, 2011], 105)
With respect to the texts in Acts, we read:
1. Neither in Acts 15 nor any of the Old Testament scriptures on which the recommendation of the Jerusalem Council were based (e.g., Lev. 3:17; 17:14; Deut. 12:23-25) is there any reference to the transfusion of human blood. The problem had to do with the eating of animal blood—or more precisely to the eating of animal flesh from which the blood had not been properly drained.
2. Blood transfusion is not “feeding on blood” as the JWs maintain. Blood is given for its volume and for its ability to transport oxygen around the body.
3. The Law of Moses on which the advice of the Council was based has been done away as is seen from Col. 2:14; Gal. 3:10-14.
4. The ruling of the Spirit-guided apostles and elders at the Jerusalem Council was the for ecclesias made up of a mix of Jew and Gentile believers. It was given against a background of demands being made by the Jewish element that the Gentiles should be circumcised and observe the Law of Moses (Acts 15:5).
The Jerusalem Council made it clear that the Gentiles were not required to keep the Law, but “lay upon [them] no greater burden than these necessary things that ye abstain from meats oared to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well.” (Acts 15:28, 29).
The Jerusalem Council made it clear that the Gentiles were not required to keep the Law, but “lay upon [them] no greater burden than these necessary things that ye abstain from meats oared to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well.” (Acts 15:28, 29).
a. This would allow the Jewish believers (many of whom continued to observe the Law) to eat with the Gentiles and thus enjoy fellowship together as brethren (Acts 11:2, 3).
b. The demands would, at the same time, place restrictions on the Gentile believers who (many of them being in straitened circumstances) would have been tempted to attend the idol festivals where they could have obtained a free meal from the sacrifices offered to idols, the worship o which was associated with ritual fornication (Cf. the advice to the Corinthians in 1Cor. 8:7-15; 10:14-22).
c. The fact that the restrictions imposed on the Gentile believers had to do with the circumstances local to them in time and place is seen in the prohibition of “fornication”. Why no reference to adultery, murder, etc.? The fornication, being attached to idolatry and eating flesh with the blood, clearly has reference to the idolatry into which some of them were being tempted.
5. After the Jewish Council the teaching of Paul to the Gentiles made it plain that food in itself was not morally harmful—“I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean” (Rom. 14:14). Of particular relevance in his advice to the Corinthians, “Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof. If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake” (1 Cor. 10:25-27).
6. It is worth noting that even under the Law, if one partook the flesh of an animal that “died of itself” or had been killed by a wild animal the punishment was, “He shall both wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even: then shall he be clean” (Lev. 17:15). (Ibid., 106-7, italics in original)
Of course, while the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society is wrong in their prohibition of blood transfusions, one should ensure that secondary issues such as blood transfusions are not the main area of one’s discussions/interactions with Jehovah’s Witnesses. Indeed, one should focus on areas of central importance, such as the identity of Jesus Christ, and how JW Christology is severely flawed, such as the identification of the archangel Michael with Jesus. On JW Christology, be sure to check out the following articles on this blog:
Support this blog:
Paypal