INTRODUCTION
One of the disfellowshipping offenses classified as a disfellowshipping offense in the book for elders, Shepherd the Flock of God (2025) is bloodguilt.
Appendix A, point 37 says:
- Manslaughter includes deliberate murder. It may also include causing loss of life through carelessness or because of violating Caesar’s safety or traffic laws. The body of elders should investigate the matter and determine whether to form a committee. The body’s decision should be based on clearly established facts, not simply on the decision of the secular authorities. — Deut. 22:8; w06 9/15 p. 30
Killing a human, an adult, a child, or a fetus, causes bloodguilt. This is discussed in the articles, “The 11 disfellowshipping offenses 11: Manslaughter (sfazō) I” (https://mybelovedreligion.no/2024/12/28/the-11-disfellowshipping-offenses-11-manslaughter-sfazo/) and II (https://mybelovedreligion.no/2024/12/29/the-11-disfellowshipping-offenses-11-manslaughter-sfazo-ii/).
In this article, the focus is on “loss of life through carelessness or because of violating Caesar’s safety or traffic laws.”
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF HUMANS IN CONNECTION WITH BLOOD
The lives of humans are valuable in the eyes of God, and several of the laws of Moses deal with the blood of humans and animals. After the flood, humans were allowed to eat animals, and in this connection, the value of life was stressed, as we see in Genesis 9:5, 6:
5 And, besides that, YOUR blood of YOUR souls shall I ask back. From the hand of every living creature shall I ask it back; and 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.
The law of God was that if a man shed the blood of another man, he was guilty to die, or, expressed in another way, he had bloodguilt. There is no Hebrew word for “bloodguilt,” and the English word “bloodguilt” is based on the plural form of the Hebrew word dam (“blood”). Blood is a liquid, and when it is plural, the reference is not to liquid blood but to the drops of blood. When a person is killed, drops of blood may be splattered on the garment of the killer. (Jeremiah 2:34) These drops of blood are evidence of the killer’s guilt — his bloodguilt.
One example where bloodguilt is mentioned is 2 Samuel 3:28:
28 When David heard of it afterward, he at once said: “I and my kingdom, from the standpoint of Jehovah, are innocent (nāqī) for time indefinite of bloodguilt (dām, plural) for Abʹner the son of Ner.
A word-for-word translation would be, “I and my kingdom are innocent…from the bloods (blood drops) of Abner.”
WHAT IS CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE?
The following definition is given:
Criminal negligence refers to conduct in which a person ignores a known or obvious risk, or disregards the life and safety of others.[1]
There were particularly two situations in ancient Israel where this principle was applied, as we see in Deuteronomy 22:8 (above) and Exodus 21:28-30 (below):
8 “In case you build a new house, you must also make a parapet for your roof, that you may not place bloodguilt upon your house because someone falling might fall from it.
28 And in case a bull should gore a man or a woman and that one actually dies, the bull is to be stoned without fail, but its flesh is not to be eaten; and the owner of the bull is free from punishment. 29 But if a bull was formerly in the habit of goring and warning was served on its owner but he would not keep it under guard, and it did put a man or a woman to death, the bull is to be stoned and also its owner is to be put to death. 30 If a ransom should be imposed upon him, then he must give the redemption price for his soul according to all that may be imposed upon him.
If a Jew had not taken precautions to prevent the harm and death of others, and a person died, he would have bloodguilt. But there may be borderline situations, and this is suggested in Exodus 21:30. A ransom could be paid for a man with a goring bull who killed another man in particular situations.
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE AS THE BASIS BLOODGUILT IN OUR TIME
The law of Moses is no longer valid. But God’s principles on which the laws were built are eternal. As to the application of the principles of bloodguilt and criminal negligence, the Awake! magazine of October 22, 1970, page 27, says:
Then again, the Mosaic law held that death resulting from criminal negligence incurred bloodguilt, and logically so. For example, if a bull gored a man to death the bull was killed. But if its owner knew that his bull was a gorer and he failed to keep it under restraint, both the bull and its owner paid with their lives. Likewise the law required that when a man built a house he build a low wall around the sides of its flat roof. If he failed to do this and a person walking on the roof fell off and was killed, the owner was charged with bloodguilt.—Ex. 21:28, 29; Deut. 22:8.
The principle involved here has a very direct bearing on the use of automobiles today. If a driver kills a man with his auto because of driving too fast, or carelessly or recklessly, or because of having been under the influence of narcotics or alcohol, then in the eyes of God he would incur bloodguilt is the argument.
The application of criminal negligence in connection with an automobile accidents is sound. The Watchtower of September 15, 2006, page 30, had a detailed discussion:
Questions From Readers
What is the congregation’s responsibility if a Christian driving an automobile has an accident that results in the death of others?
The possibility of bloodguilt deserves consideration because the congregation needs to avoid community responsibility for bloodguiltiness. (Deuteronomy 21:1-9; 22:8) A driver who is responsible for a fatal accident may incur bloodguilt if he was careless or deliberately violated one of Caesar’s safety or traffic laws. (Mark 12:14) But there are other factors to consider.
A manslayer who fled to one of Israel’s cities of refuge had to stand trial. If the slaying was found to be unintentional, he would be allowed to remain in the city, safe from the avenger of blood. (Numbers 35:6-25) So if a Christian is responsible for someone’s death in an accident, the elders should investigate matters to determine if there is a measure of bloodguilt. The government’s view or a court’s decision does not altogether determine what action the congregation will take.
For instance, a court may declare the person guilty of some technical violation of the law, but the investigating elders may determine that no bloodguilt exists because the driver had little or no control over the circumstances resulting in the fatality. Conversely, if the court dismisses the case, the elders may conclude that he actually is bloodguilty.
The decision of the elders investigating the case should be based on the Scriptures and the clearly established facts—an admission by the driver and/or the testimony of two or three reliable eyewitnesses. (Deuteronomy 17:6; Matthew 18:15, 16) If bloodguilt is established, a judicial committee should be formed. If the committee determines that the bloodguilty person is repentant, he will receive appropriate reproof from the Scriptures and will be restricted as regards privileges in the congregation. He would no longer serve as an elder or a ministerial servant. Other restrictions would also be imposed. And he is accountable to God for his carelessness, neglect, or lack of caution that resulted in the accident and fatality.—Galatians 6:5, 7.
To illustrate: If weather conditions were bad at the time of the accident, the driver should have exercised greater care. If he was drowsy, he should have stopped and rested until he was no longer sleepy, or he should have had someone else drive.
Suppose the driver was speeding. If any Christian exceeds the speed limit, this is a failure to render “Caesar’s things to Caesar.” It also betrays a disregard for the sacredness of life, for there is the possibility of fatal consequences. (Matthew 22:21) In this regard, consider something further. What kind of example would an elder be setting for the flock if he was careless about Caesar’s traffic regulations or deliberately failed to obey them?—1 Peter 5:3.
The principles behind the laws about the goring bull and the walls around the sides of a flat roof are that “the blood represents life and is God’s special property,” and “the welfare of our neighbors is important.” The mentioned laws were given because of the special circumstances in Israel, and similar laws cannot be given in spiritual Israel. However, the Christian law, “You must love your neighbor as yourself,” (Romans 13:9) is based on the same two principles as the mentioned Mosaic laws. Because of love for our neighbor, we will do what we can to protect him or her from dying from an accident.
BLOODGUILT BASED ON CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE AS A DISFELLOWSHIPPING OFFENSE
If there is an accident with the loss of life, and the opinion of two elders is that a brother or sister has shown criminal negligence and therefore has bloodguilt, a judicial committee will be formed to consider disfellowshipping the brother or sister.
The whole situation is constructed by the members of the Governing Body and is very far from being a disfellowshipping offense, because:
- A person who shows criminal negligence, and because of this causes the death of another person, has a great responsibility. However, bloodguilt means that a person is guilty to die, and this was a part of the law of Moses, which is terminated. Thus, bloodguilt is not a part of the Christian arrangement.
- Criminal negligence is difficult to establish, even when a driver who is under the influence of drugs or alcohol kills a person in a car accident.
- The nouns in 1 Corinthians 5 and 6 that express serious wrongdoing, indicate that only when a person is permeated by one of the serious wrongoings and is practicing this action, can he be disfellowshipped from the congregation. Even if serious wrongdoing is established in a car accident causing the death of someone, this happened one time. And because of this, disfellowshipping is not possible.
- The only instance where a person is guilty to die, which was expressed by the word “bloodguilt” is when someone with purpose kills an adult, a child, or a fetus.
Details about these situations are discussed in the two articles that are referenced in the introduction.
[1]. https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/laws/criminal-negligence/.
