Blood of other creatures must not be used for anything, including blood transfusions, but should go back to the earth as respect of Jehovah God as life-giver. The Hebrew word dam and the Greek word haima means “blood,” and the only reference of these words is to the red fluid in the veins of humans and animals.
These two words do not include fractions of blood. This means that whether a Christian should accept red cells, white cells, platelets, plasma, albumin, immunoglobulins, coagulation factors, and other small fractions, is a decision that each Christian must make on the basis of his or her conscience.
INTRODUCTION
Accepting blood without repentance is viewed by the members of the Governing Body as proof that a Witness has disassociated himself from the congregation because he no longer wants to be one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
However, only when a Witness writes a letter where he states that he wants to withdraw from the congregation can it be said that the person by his own will, has made that decision. However, after the letter is sent, the three elders in the committee will make a decision, and the Witness will be thrown out of the congregation. And he will be viewed and treated like a person who has been disfellowshipped. So, even in the case when a brother writes such a letter, there is a suppression of his free will.
In connection with accepting blood, the free will of the Witness is even more suppressed. It is not the brother who has decided to leave the congregation, but rather a third party; the three elders of the congregation committee have decided that his action shows that he has decided to leave the congregation. But in most cases, it is not true that the person wants to leave the congregation. The situation is that the brother disagrees with the elders, and they throw him out of the congregation under the pretext that he, of his own free will, has decided to disassociate himself.
In a few studies, I will show that the term “disassociate himself” is made up and invented by the Governing Body without any basis in the Bible and that “disassociation” is interconvertible with “disfellowshipping.”
HOW BLOOD IS VIEWED IN THE BIBLE
The basic principle of this study is as follows: I take the text of the Bible in a literal way if the context does not clearly show otherwise. And I will not accept any exception to a law of God when the context does not clearly show that there is such an exception. Neither will I accept an interpretation of a text in the Bible that is not directly rooted in this text itself.
An example illustrating the importance of the three points above, particularly the third one, is 2 John 10. The Watchtower of July 15, 1985, page 30, admits that the persons a Christian should not receive into his home or say a greeting to, according to the context, are the antichrists who deny “Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh.” However, the same magazine says:
A person who had willfully and formally disassociated himself from the congregation would have matched that description [of an apostate or antichrist].
Therefore, a Christian must not receive one who has disassociated himself from the congregation into his home or say a greeting to him. This is a clear abuse of The Holy Scriptures because the words of John are applied to a group other than disfellowshipped persons[1]
THE LAWS OF BLOOD IN THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES
The Bible shows that blood is holy, and that it should not be used for anything except as a sacrifice on the altar, as outlined in the law of Moses. But the Mosaic law, with its sacrificial offerings of animals, was terminated. And Jesus’ perfect offering of his flesh and blood, of which the Jewish sacrifices were a shadow, has been sacrificed once and for all. (Hebrews 7:27) So, there is no longer any scripturally sanctioned, legitimate use of blood.
Before the worldwide flood, humans were not allowed to eat animals. This changed after the flood, and Genesis 9:3–6 (NWT84) says:
3 Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for YOU. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to YOU. 4 Only flesh with its soul—its blood—YOU must not eat. 5 And, besides that, YOUR blood of YOUR souls, shall I ask back; from the hand of man, from the hand of each one who is his brother, shall I ask back the soul of man. 6 Anyone shedding man’s blood, by man will his own blood be shed, for in God’s image he made man.
From these words, we understand that 1) blood represents life (the soul) of living beings, 2) blood must not be eaten, and 3) blood must not be shed by taking the life of someone. The common thread running through all three points is that blood has a value, which value is asked back if blood is misused. God has created living creatures as well as their blood that represents their lives. With him is the source of life. (Psalm 36:9) Therefore, only he has the right to decide how life and blood can be used.
God’s law to Israel contained several commandments regarding blood. Leviticus 17:11, 13 (NWT84) says:
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].
13 As for any man of the sons of Israel or some alien resident who is residing as an alien in YOUR midst who in hunting catches a wild beast or a fowl that may be eaten, he must in that case pour its blood out and cover it with dust.
The passages show that the only authorized use of blood is on the altar as a sacrifice. When an animal was slaughtered, it should be bled before eating its flesh. By pouring out the blood on the ground and covering it with dust, life symbolically goes back to God, who is its source. The word “holy” refers to something pure, which is set aside exclusively for one purpose. The passages above indicate that blood is holy.
THE LAW OF BLOOD IN THE CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES
The Christian congregation was instituted on the day of Pentecost in the year 33 CE. At that time, the law of Moses, including its commandments regarding blood, was no longer valid. In the year 49, the question arose as to whether people of the nations should be circumcised. This question was discussed at the meeting of the apostles and the elders in Jerusalem. And influenced by holy spirit, the following decision was made, according to Acts 15:28, 29:
28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication.
As stated, in most instances where blood is mentioned, there is a prohibition against eating blood. However, the quotation from Leviticus 17:11, 13 shows, the use of blood for any purpose was also forbidden. When an animal was slaughtered, the blood was to be poured out on the ground and covered with dust. On this background, we need to ask the question: Are the words in verse 29 “to abstain from blood,” a prohibition only against the eating of blood, or do the words cover any use of blood?
THE MEANING OF “TO ABSTAIN FROM”
I will start with the scope of the Greek word apekhō (“abstain from”). Is the word relative or absolute?
According to BAGD[2] the Greek middle form of the verb apekhō with a genitive object has the meaning “keep away; abstain of.” Because the verb form is present middle infinitive, the NWT84 correctly gives the verb the imperfective rendering, “keep abstaining from.” In table 1.1, we see four examples of apekhō in the middle with the following object in the genitive. There can be no doubt that the meaning of all the examples is not to have anything to do with or keep completely away from the actions and states referred to by the objects. The same must be true with the use of the middle form of apekhō with genitive objects in Acts 15:29.
Table 1.1 Examples of the use of apekhō (“abstain from”) in NIV
| 1 Thessalonians 4:3 | It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid (apekhō) sexual immorality. |
| 1 Thessalonians 5:22 | Avoid (apekhō) every kind of evil. |
| 1 Timothy 4:3 | They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain (apekhō) from certain foods. |
| 1 Peter 2:11 | Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain (apekhō) from sinful desires. |
The table shows that the use of apekhō is absolute; Christians should have nothing to do with objects of the verb apekhō.
WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE WORDS “WHAT IS OFFERED TO IDOLS”
There are four objects that are forbidden according to Acts 15:28, 29, and I will now consider “what is offered to idols”. The Greek word we must consider is eidōlothytōn, and I quote two Greek-English Lexicons
εἰδωλόθυτον (eidōlothytōn) is a semantically complex word meaning literally ‘that which has been sacrificed to idols.’ There is no specific element meaning ‘meat,’ but the stem meaning ‘sacrifice’ implies ‘meat.’[3]
Eidōlothytōn…refers to meat which had been sacrificed according to the rites of the locality, and thus offered to a pagan deity, part of which had been burned on the altar, part eaten at a solemn meal in the temple and part sold in the market for domestic consumption.[4]
We note that the word eidōlothytōn does not only refer to meat sacrifices, and the rendering “what is sacrificed to idols” (NRSV) is a fine literal rendering.
Both the quoted sources indicate that the word refers to “meat” that is sacrificed. And the reason for this is that the reference in 1 Corinthians, chapter 8, is to meat that has been offered. But there is no linguistic reason to believe that “what is offered to idols” (eidōlolythōn) refers to meat.
However, as the three quotations below shows, food, and plants, and flowers were offered to idols, as well as libations, which are drink offerings:
A ritual (or religious ceremony) consists of a sequence of actions and words (or rites) that are performed or spoken as part of religious worship. The ancient Greeks and Romans performed many rituals in the observance of their religion. Some rituals, such as the recitation of prayers, were simple. Others, such as animal sacrifices, were very elaborate. Sacrifices, the most important of the ancient religious rituals, were offerings to the gods. Although offerings were usually animals, other typical sacrificial gifts included cooked food, plants, pottery, or even a stone or flower.[5]
In the course of the second year, the persecution against us increased greatly. And at that time Urbanus being governor of the province, imperial edicts were first issued to him, commanding by a general decree that all the people should sacrifice at once in the different cities, and offer libations to the idols.[6]
XLIV.16. The word which thou hast spoken to us in the Name of the Lord! — we will not hearken to thee! 17. But we shall surely perform every word, which has gone forth from our mouth: to burn to the Queen of Heaven and pour her libations, as we and our fathers did, our kings and our princes, in the cities of Judah and streets of Jerusalem, and had fulness of bread, and were well and saw no evil.18. But since we left off to burn to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour her libations, we have lacked everything and been by the sword and the famine consumed.19. And while we were burning to the Queen of Heaven and poured her libations, did we make her cakes and pour her libations without our husbands?[7]
Many Bible translations and commentaries on the Bible assume that the prohibition against eidōlolythōn is a prohibition against eating meat that is offered to idols. The meaning of the Greek word does not support this interpretation because the meaning is “that which is offered to an idol” and this does not only include meat. This shows that the prohibition includes everything that is offered to an idol, like meat, plants, food, and drink offerings, as well as things that could not be eaten.
Moreover, I have shown above that the word apekhō (“abstain from”) means to “to have nothing to do with.” As the third quotation above shows, different rituals and rites were used in connection with offerings to the gods in Rome and Greece. Therefore, “to have nothing to do with” “that which is offered to idols” would include not participating in these rituals and rites, even though one is not eating a part of something that has been sacrificed.
The stress of not eating sacrifices to idols in so many sources is linguistically wrong. If we follow the principle of taking the text of the Bible in its literal sense, not accepting any exception when the contest does not clearly show there is an exception, the conclusion is that any contact or participation in an offering ceremony to an idol, is prohibited.
WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE WORDS “ABSTAIN FROM BLOOD”
The stress of not eating blood is also found in many Bible commentaries. As I have shown above, in most cases where blood is mentioned, there is a prohibition against eating it. But I have also shown that because blood is holy, any use of blood of other creatures is prohibited. Because the apostles and the elders in Jerusalem were Jews, they knew the law of Moses. And the use of the Greek word apekhō (“to have nothing to do with blood”) would include “not eating” and “not using.”
But would there be other uses of blood than eating or drinking it in the ancient world that Christians must “have nothing to do with”? I present a few examples below.
A Babylonian cuneiform text describes the magic use of blood:
If a man’s forehead is affected and the demon in the man’s body cries out and does not depart, is not restrained through bandage or incantation (that is, if all remedies fail), then slaughter a captures Kurkū bird, squeeze out its blood, take its…, its fat and the skin of its crop?, burn it in the fire, mix cedar with the blood, and pronounce the incantation ‘evil finger of man’ three times.[8]
In ancient Egypt, blood was used in ointments and dressings:
However, also more macabre ingredients were often prescribed: for instance ‘Lizard blood, dead mice, mud and mouldy bread were all used as topical ointments and dressings, and women were sometimes dosed with horse saliva as a cure for an impaired libido’.[9]
In ancient Egypt, blood was also used as medicine:
Eye problems were treated with a dose of bat’s blood because it was thought the night-vision of the bat would be transferred to the patient.[10]
There were also other medicines for eye problems. One text says:
“a mix of fat of an ox, blood from a bat…blood from an ass…and the brain of a quadruped.”[11]
In Rome, around 100 CE, blood was used as cosmetics.
In Rome, people put barley flour and butter on their pimples and sheep fat and blood on their fingernails for polish.[12]
Blood from humans and animals was also used in different kinds of magical spells in Egypt and Greece.[13]
A synthesis of the view of blood in the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Greek Scriptures is as follows:
The Hebrew Scriptures show that any use of blood from another creature except as a sacrifice on Jehovah’s altar is wrong. The discussion above shows that blood was used in many different ways in the ancient world. It was used as food, in sacrifices to idols, in connection with magic rituals, in ointments and dressings, and in medicines and in cosmetics. Most of these uses were not mentioned in the Bible. But because any use of blood is wrong, all these uses were wrong from God’s point of view.[1]
[1]. I received the following question from a reader: If any use og blood is forbidden, does that mean that blood tests of small samples of our own blood is forbidden? The prohibition in the Hebrew Scriptures is against the use of blood from dead creatures. The prohibition in Acts 15:29 is given to «you», which indicates that any use of the blood of other creatures is forbidden. This means that whether to use your own blood for blood tests or storing your own blood for an operation is something that each one’s conscience must decide.
| Any use of blood from humans and animals in addition to its use as food was forbidden in the Hebrew Scriptures, and any use of blood from other creatures is forbidden according to Acts 15:29. |
ARE BLOOD FRACTIONS INCLUDED IN THE PROHIBITION AGAINST BLOOD?
In connection with the worship of God, it is important to differentiate between actions and material. I use an illustration: The soldiers of emperor Nero has arrested a Christian family of father, mother, and a child. The family is led to an altar on which there is a fire. Beside the fire is a receptacle with incense, and the father is told to put some incense in the fire, which means that he is sacrificing to the genius of the emperor. If he refuses to do that, he and his family will be killed. What is idolatry in this situation? It is the action of putting the incense on the fire. There is nothing wrong with the fire or with the incense. The family has used fires on different occasions, and they may even have put incense on the fire when there was a special occasion, but this would not be idolatry.
Would the situation be different if the man was ordered to pour some blood on the fire instead of incense? No. There would be nothing wrong with the blood. And the idolatry would be the action of pouring incense or blood on the fire.
Paul also differentiates between material and action in his discussion of meat sacrificed to idols in his first letter to the Corinthians. There were several temples in Corinth where meat and other items were offered to idols. There were also restaurants in the temples where parts of the animals that had been offered to idols were served the guests. Other parts of these animals were sold at the market.
Could Christians eat this meat at restaurants or buy this meat at the market? Paul answers the question in 10:25:
25 Everything that is sold in a meat market keep eating, making no inquiry on account of YOUR conscience.
Even though a part of the animal had been offered on the altar, there was nothing wrong with the meat because it was no longer an idol sacrifice. But what is the meaning of the words “making no inquiry on account of your conscience”?
In connection with the sacrifices the animals were slaughtered, and big chunks of meat were put on the altar, and a part of this meat was burned in the fire as a sacrifice to the idol. It could be that a Christian would differentiate between pieces of meat that had been put on the altar but now was sold at the market, and pieces of meat from animals that had been slaughtered but had not been put on the altar. His conscience would forbid him to eat meat that one time had been put on the altar. The point of Paul is that it is not necessary to inquire about what previously happened to the meat. Now, when it was served in the restaurant or sold at the market, it was not a sacrifice to an idol.
The important point is that there was nothing wrong with the meat. It was the action of participating in the ceremony when meat was put on the idol altar that was wrong.
How can these examples help us understand the prohibition of blood better? The important point is that there is nothing wrong with the liquid blood. It is some actions connected with blood that are wrong.
The issue that is seen in the law to all humans after the flood (Genesis 9:4-6) and in the law to Israel (Leviticus chapter 17) is that the blood in all creatures represents their lives that Jehovah has given them. In order to approve Jehovah as the life-giver, we shall not use the blood of other creatures for anything. But when a creature dies, its blood must go back to the earth, and by this, showing our respect of Jehovah as the life-giver.
No one can dispute that the Hebrew word dam and the Greek word haima refers to the red fluid in the veins of humans and animals. Therefore, to respect God as the life-giver we do not use this read fluid of other creatures. It is the action of letting the blood be spilled that is important, and not the material blood. Therefore, to ask whether a certain fraction of blood is “blood” is just as forfeited as it was for Christians in the first century CE to ask whether a piece of meat that was sold at the marked one time had rested on the altar of the idol. This is a non-question because blood fractions are not mentioned in the Bible.
In order to follow the pattern expressed by Paul in 1 Corinthians, we treat the red fluid in animals and humans with respect by letting the red fluid go back to the earth, “making no inquiry on account of YOUR conscience” as to whether different fractions of blood are forbidden or not.
| From the point of view of respect for God as the life-giver, a Christian will never take the red fluid, blood, into his or her body in any way or use it in any way.
Whether to accept blood fractions such as red cells, white cells, platelets, plasma, albumin, immunoglobulins and other small fractions, is a matter that the conscience of each Christian must decide.[14] |
The members of the Governing Body have overruled the consciences of individual Witnesses by deciding that some fractions of blood can be used and others cannot be used. This will be discussed in the next article
ADDENDUM
THE ISSUE IS NOT THE MATERIAL BLOOD BUT RESPECT FOR JEHOVAH AS THE LIFE-GIVER
I start by quoting 2 Corinthians 3:6 NIV:
6 He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
Paul contrasts the old covenant, which could not give life, with the new covenant, which can give life. Can we apply the principle that “the written code condemns to death, but the spirit makes alive” to the situation regarding the use of blood?
I will give an example of an extreme use of “the letter”:
I was a sailor, and I came back to Norway to get an education as a ship engineer. I had a positive view of the Bible, but I did not read it. In the summer of 1961, I was approached by Jehovah’s Witnesses, reading the book I was given, was an aha-moment for me. I decided to serve Jehovah, and I planned to start as a full-time servant. Four months after I read the book, I was baptized in a private home. The next day, I signed on for a five-month journey on a tanker that should go to the Antarctic to transport the oil made from whales back to Norway. The purpose was to earn money for my full-time service.
Six months after my baptism, my partner and I started as a full-time servant in a small town without any congregation. And now, the extreme situation materialized. Four years earlier I had been on the factory ship of a whaling expedition. Because of this, I participated in a meeting with representatives of the branch office inquiring about whether whales were bled or not.
Whales are huge creatures, and the blue whale can be 27 meters long and weigh 150 tons. Our expedition caught 1,400 big and smaller whales were captured. The whales are shot with harpoons weighing 75 kg, and they make holes in the body of the whales. These holes are plugged, and the whales are filled with compressed air, so they will not sink until they are transported to the factory ship. This means that the whales are not bled.
The oil from the whales is made into different products, and this was the concern of the branch office because many of these products are eaten. The branch published information about the use of the oil of whales through the Kingdom Ministry.
One result was that the Witnesses in Norway stopped using margarine, which contained oil from whales. Several other products included oil from whales as well, and we did not use these products. My pioneer partner and I researched the production of bread, and we were informed that all breads contained a fat called Bakin. We contacted the producer of Bakin, and we were informed that it contained oil from whales. Therefore, we stopped buying bread, and we ate crackers instead of bred.
At the international assembly in Stockholm in 1963, the branch overseer discussed this issue with Albert Schroeder of the Governing Body, and the overseer was advised to calm down the situation. A letter was sent to the congregation referring to the words of Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:25.
25 Everything that is sold in a meat market keep eating, making no inquiry on account of YOUR conscience.
These words were applied to any product that could be bought. and our extreme attention to products with oil from whales stopped.
How shall we view this situation? There is no doubt that all Witnesses who stopped eating margarine and bread and other products by this showed a strong determination to follow the laws of Jehovah and support him as the life-giver. But was it necessary? The answer is no. The brothers at the branch office and individual Witnesses “followed the letter” much longer than was necessary in order to respect Jehovah as the life-giver.
Showing respect to Jehovah as the life-giver means that we follow the laws he has given us in the Christian Greek Scriptures as we understand these laws.
I will illustrate this with prayer to Jehovah, and I quote Acts 9:40 (above), Romans 14:11 (middle), and Jonah 2:1, 2 (below):
40 But Peter put everybody outside and, bending his knees, he prayed, and, turning to the body, he said: “Tabitha rise!”
11 for it is written: “‘As I live,’ says Jehovah, ‘to me every knee will bend down, and every tongue will make open acknowledgment to God.’” 12 So, then, each of us will render an account for himself to God.
1 Then Joʹnah prayed to Jehovah his God from the inward parts of the fish 2 and said:
When Peter prayed to Jehovah after Tabitha had died, he fell on his knees. Out of respect of Jehovah, people who prayed to him often fell on their knees. In the prophecy quoted by Paul, the words “every knee will bend down” means that everyone living will worship Jehovah. However, Jehovah heard the prayer of Jonah from the belly of the fish.
What is the letter and the spirit in this situation? In the situation with Peter, he wanted to demonstrate his dependence of Jehovah and his respect for him. And other Christians did the same when they prayed to God, for example Paul. (Ephesians 3:5) But Jonah could not bend his knees because he was in the belly of the fish.
So, the letter is that we need to have a special position when we pray to God to show respect for him. The spirit is that we have a heart that respects Jehovah, and we show this respect by our words when we pray to him and by our service to him.
We can also illustrate the issue of the letter versus the spirit by the fact when an animal is bled, there is still a lot of blood in the flesh of the animal. If we buy a piece of this meat and put it in a vessel overnight, there will be some blood in the bottom of the vessel. Servants of God will of course pour out this blood. But when they fry the piece of meat and serve it for dinner, there is still some blood in the steak that the servants of God eat.
I have seen that some Witnesses, who are eager to serve God and abstain from blood, have put the meat in water overnight in order to remove the rest of the blood from the piece of meat. This is a way of following the letter, they do their utmost to abstain from blood. I have also seen Witnesses who have fried å piece of meat, and when the oil in the frying pan has become red, have removed the oil and put new oil in the pan and fried the meat. This is also to follow the letter.
What does it mean to follow the spirit? The requirement in Israel and among Christians was to open the big veins of the animal that was slaughtered, so, a part of the blood could flow down on the earth. There was still a great amount of blood in the meat that was eaten. But eating the meat that contained blood was not a violation of God’s laws. Following the spirit was the action of removing some of the blood of the animal, which was a token indicating that the life of the animal was given back to Jehovah, the life-giver. That the meat that was eaten still contained much blood was irrelevent. It was not the fluid blood that was important (the letter) but it was the action of bleeding the animal (the spirit) which showed resepct for Jehovah as the life-giver.
What is the requirement today, and how can we follow the spirit? Acts 15:29 says that we “must abstain from blood (haima),” and haima is the red fluid in the veins of humans and animals. Christians are allowed to eat meat which contains some blood. But Christians will only eat meat from animals that are bled. Some Christians will follow the letter by doing more than is required by putting the meat in water overnight or removing a part of the frying oil. This is their conscience, they want to serve Jehovah, and he approves their actions. Other Christians fry a piece of meat that contains some blood and eat it. That is their conscience, they want to serve Jehovah, and he approves their action.
Using blood from another human as a transfusion with a medical purpose clearly is a violation of the law to abstain from blood. As mentioned, the Greek word haima refers to the red fluid in the veins of humans and animals, and this fluid is what Christians must abstain from.
Some Christians go further than the requirement to abstain from the red fluid that is haima. Medical textbooks define “blood” as the read fluid in the veins that carries oxygen. Some textbooks also say that the principal components of blood are red cells white cells, and platelets. Some follow the letter, and because these arecomponents of blood, they refuse a transfusion of full blood, red cells, white cells, and platelets. This is their conscience, they want to serve Jehovah, and he approves their actions. Other Christians only refuse transfusions of full blood and following the spirit because abstaining from haima is the token indicating that Jehovah is the life-giver, and that the life of any dead creature, represented by the blood, must go back to Jehovah. These Christians would accept red cells, white cells, and platelets. This is their conscience, they want to serve Jehovah, and he approves their action.
Showing respect for God as the life-giver is not connected with the letter but with the spirit. It does not mean that we must avoid any small trace of blood, which is impossible — this is the letter. But it means the action of abstaining from the read fluid of other creatures — this is the spirit.
It is not the material blood that is important but it is the token, the action in connection with blood — abstaining from it
The situation in Norway in the years 1962 and 1963 when every brother and sister were encouraged not to do research in order to avoid the tiniest trace of blood, was extreme. And the situation when the members of the Governing Body differentiate between different fractions of blood, telling the Witnesses which fractions are prohibited and which fractions are not prohibited, and where they say that some medical procedures are acceptable and others are not acceptable, are just as extreme.
The Word of God does not tell us anything about blood fractions or medical procedures. And therefore, the conscience of each Christian brother or sister must decide whether to accept certain blood fractions or certain medical procedures. The decision of the members of the Governing Body have grossly violated the words of Paul in 2 Corinthians 1:24:
24 Not that we are the masters over YOUR faith, but we are fellow workers for YOUR joy, for it is by [YOUR] faith that YOU are standing.
Each Christian is standing because of his or her faith. An it is because of a Christian’s faith and conscience that each one will make different decisions, including decisions of whether to accept a particular blood fraction or not. But the members of the Governing Body have made this decision for each Christian by making their rules. In this way the members of the Governing Body have become masters over the faith of the Witnesses of Jehovah.
When a servant of Jehovah is convinced that the Bible is the only authority, and he or she refrain from blood transfusions and from the use of blood, he or she has followed the spirit of the law of blood.
If the faith and conscience of such a Christian allows the infusion of a blood component, no one has the right to question this decision. Making their own decisions are the rights of all servants of God.
[1]. For a detailed discussion of the issue, see the article “Resigning from Jehovah’s Witnesses leads to shunning,” in the Category “Disassociation not based on the Bible,” and “The members of the Governing Body are twisting God’s thoughts” in the category “The Governing Body.” After 1985, 2 John 10 was used several times in the Watchtower literature to prove that the Witnesses should not greet disfellowshipped and disassociated persons. But The Watchtower of August 2024 admitted that the scripture did not refer to disfellowshipped and disassociated persons, and should not be used in this way.
[2]. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature. W.F. Arndt and E.W. Gingrich, 1957.
[3] J.P. Louw and E. Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains.
[4]. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. C. Brown ed. 1971 III, 432.
[5]. https://erenow.net/ancient/ancient-greece-and-rome-an-encyclopedia-for-students-4-volume-set/390.php.
[6]. Church History, Eusebius Pamphilus. https://biblehub.com/library/pamphilius/church_history/chapter_iii_in_the_course.htm
[7]. Jeremiah, George Adam Smith. https://biblehub.com/library/smith/jeremiah/4_and_after_xxx_xxxi.htm.
[8]. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/003591571400701610.
[9]. https://schoolhistory.co.uk/ancient/ancient-egypt/ancient-egyptian-medicine/
[10]. https://www.ancient.eu/Egyptian_Medicine/
[11]. https://www.bt.dk/historie/tyrefedt-flagermuseblod-og-firbenslort-blod-var-medicin-i-oldtidens-egypten.
[12]. https://cosmeticsinfo.org/Ancient-history-cosmetics
[13]. https://theconversation.com/ancient-spells-and-charms-for-the-hapless-in-love-130567.
[14]. Even if blood fractions are not included in the words dam and haima, will not accepting such fractions be a violation of the law that the blood of other creatures should not be used for anything? Fractionating blood is done by others than the Christians, and whether a Christian will accept such a factor as medicine is a matter of conscience.
