|
Pokud není uvedeno jinak, všechny publikace byly vydány Watch Tower Bible And Tract Society Of New York, Inc. © nebo Watch Tower Bible And Tract Society Of Pennsylvania © nebo International Bible Students Association, Brooklyn, New York, U.S.A. ©. Upozornění pro čtenáře: Kopie článků jsou vytvořeny výslovně pro osoby jmenované v §37, odst. 2c zákona 121/2000 Sb. Před pokračováním ve čtení doporučujeme prostudovat příslušný zákon.
Watchtower 1952 2/15, p.128
Announcements
FAITHFUL TO DEATH
Friends of the truth throughout the earth will be interested to learn of the death of one who played a prominent part in the affairs of the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society for many years, Clayton J. Woodworth. An editor and textbook writer before coming into the Society's service; he first became a member of the Brooklyn Bethel family in 1912, renewing this membership after a necessary interruption August 1, 1919. He was the writer of the commentary on The Revelation contained in the noted The Finished Mystery which the Society published in 1917. For his part in this and other Society matters he was one of the seven brothers, including the Society's then president, J. F. Rutherford, who were sent to Atlanta Federal Penitentiary on false charges at the climax of World War I in 1918 but were released in 1919 and exonerated thereafter.
Following his release in 1919 Brother Woodworth was made editor of the Society's newly introduced magazine The Golden Age. He remained editor when the magazine's name was changed to Consolation in 1937, to carry on as such until 1946. Because of advancing years he was relieved of this when the magazine was given a new change of name to Awake! For years he served as a member and director of the New York Corporation, People's Pulpit Association and Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Inc. He continued joyfully active at other duties assigned to him till his illness made this recently impossible. He died at the ripe old age of 81, loyal to the faith and unwaveringly devoted to the theocratic organization, on December 18, 1951, at 4 a.m. Interment of his remains took place at the burial plot of the Bethel family adjoining Radio Station WBBR on Staten Island, New York, at the same time with two other faithful Bethel family members who had died, hours apart, two days previous at the Bethel home. All three professed to be of the anointed remnant, and we rejoice in hope of their realization of Revelation 14:13.
Watchtower 1952 12/15, p.764
Questions from Readers
Is vaccination a violation of God's law forbidding the taking of blood into the system?-G. C., North Carolina.
The matter of vaccination is one for the individual that has to face it to decide for himself. Each individual has to take the consequences for whatever position and action he takes toward a case of compulsory vaccination, doing so according to his own conscience and his appreciation of what is for good health and the interests of advancing God's work. And our Society cannot afford to be drawn into the affair legally or take the responsibility for the way the case turns out.
After consideration of the matter, it does not appear to us to be in violation of the everlasting covenant made with Noah, as set down in Genesis 9:4, nor contrary to God's related commandment at Leviticus 17:10-14. Most certainly it cannot reasonably or Scripturally be argued and proved that, by being vaccinated, the inoculated person is either eating or drinking blood and consuming it as food or receiving a blood transfusion. Vaccination does not bear any relationship to or any likeness to the intermarriage of angelic "sons of God" with the daughters of men, as described in Genesis 6:1-4. Neither can it be put in the same class as described at Leviticus 18:23, 24, which forbids the mingling of humans with animals. It has nothing to do with sex relations.
Hence all objection to vaccination on Scriptural grounds seems to be lacking. The only proper objection that some persons could raise to it would be on the matter of the health risks involved or of keeping their blood stream clean from diseased matter coming from a foreign source, whether from an animal sore or from a human sore. Medical science, in fact, claims that vaccination actually results in building up the vitality of the blood to resist the disease against which the person is inoculated. But, of course, that is a question for each individual concerned to decide for himself and as he sees it to be Jehovah's will for him.
We merely offer the above information on request, but can assume no responsibility for the decision and course the reader may take.
w58 8/1 478
Questions from Readers
One of Jehovah's witnesses who claims to be of the anointed remnant recently went to the hospital and took a blood transfusion, voluntarily. Should she be allowed to partake of the emblems of bread and wine at Memorial time?-R. J., United States.
We, of course, regret with you that this sister who professes to be one of the anointed remnant took a blood transfusion voluntarily during her stay in the hospital. We believe that she did the wrong thing contrary to the will of God. However, congregations have never been instructed to disfellowship those who voluntarily take blood transfusions or approve them. We let the judgment of such violators of God's law concerning the sacredness of blood remain with Jehovah, the Supreme Judge. The only thing that can be done in the cases of individuals like this is to view them as immature and therefore not capable of taking on certain responsibilities, hence refusing to make certain assignments of service to such ones.
Since an individual is not disfellowshiped because of having voluntarily taken a blood transfusion or having approved of a dear one's accepting a blood transfusion, you have no right to bar this sister from the celebration of the Lord's Evening Meal. As an anointed member of Christ's body she is under orders and command by Christ Jesus to partake. Whether she is unfaithful as to what she professes to be by virtue of taking the emblems of the Lord's Evening Meal is something for Jehovah God to determine himself. His judgment begins at the house of God. It is not for you or anyone serving the Memorial emblems to act as the judge, but to allow the emblems to go to anyone in the audience as these are passed along in the normal manner of letting each one have the opportunity to partake.
w58 9/15 575
Questions from Readers
Are we to consider the injection of serums such as diphtheria toxin antitoxin and blood fractions such as gamma globulin into the blood stream, for the purpose of building up resistance to disease by means of antibodies, the same as the drinking of blood or the taking of blood or blood plasma by means of transfusion?-N. P., United States.
No, it does not seem necessary that we put the two in the same category, although we have done so in times past. Each time the prohibition of blood is mentioned in the Scriptures it is in connection with taking it as food, and so it is as a nutrient that we are concerned with in its being forbidden. Thus when mankind for the first time was permitted to eat the flesh of animals, at the time of the restatement of the procreation mandate to the Deluge survivors, blood was specifically forbidden. (Gen. 9:3, 4) In the law of Moses blood was forbidden as food, and therefore we repeatedly find it linked with fat as things not to be eaten. (Lev. 3:17; 7:22-27) And so also in the days of the apostles; it was in connection with eating meat sacrificed to idols that the eating of strangled animals and blood was forbidden.-Acts 15:20, 29.
The injection of antibodies into the blood in a vehicle of blood serum or the use of blood fractions to create such antibodies is not the same as taking blood, either by mouth or by transfusion, as a nutrient to build up the body's vital forces. While God did not intend for man to contaminate his blood stream by vaccines, serums or blood fractions, doing so does not seem to be included in God's expressed will forbidding blood as food. It would therefore be a matter of individual judgment whether one accepted such types of medication or not.
w59 10/15 640
Questions from Readers
Although it is unscriptural for a Christian to accept another person's blood in transfusion, would it be allowable for a dedicated Christian to have some of his own blood removed and then put back into his body during an operation?-W. D., U.S.A.
According to the method of handling blood prescribed by the Bible, blood when taken from a body was to be poured out on the ground as water and covered over with dust. (Lev. 17:13, 14; Deut. 12:16, 23, 24; 15:23; 1 Chron. 11:18, 19) This is because life is in the blood and such shed blood is held sacred before Jehovah God. The covenant regarding the sanctity of blood stated after the Flood is still binding today, and it covers both animal and human blood, whether one's own or another's. Consequently, the removal of one's blood, storing it and later putting it back into the same person would be a violation of the Scriptural principles that govern the handling of blood.-Gen. 9:4-6.
If, however, hemorrhaging should occur at the time of an operation and by some means the blood is immediately channeled back into the body, this would be allowable. The use of some device whereby the blood is diverted and a certain area or organ is temporarily bypassed during surgery would be Biblically permissible, for the blood would be flowing from one's body through the apparatus and right back into the body again. On the other hand, if the blood were stored, even for a brief period of time, this would be a violation of the Scriptures.
The use of another person's blood to "prime" any device employed in surgery is objectionable. In this case the blood would circulate through the system of the patient, becoming mixed with his own. Again, if one's own blood would have to be withdrawn at intervals and stored until a sufficient amount had accumulated to set a machine in operation, this too would fall under Scriptural prohibition. The ones involved in the matter are in the best position to ascertain just how the blood would be handled and must bear responsibility before Jehovah for seeing that it is not handled unscripturally.
w61 1/15 63-4
Questions from Readers
In view of the seriousness of taking blood into the human system by a transfusion, would violation of the Holy Scriptures in this regard subject the dedicated, baptized receiver of blood transfusion to being disfellowshiped from the Christian congregation?
The inspired Holy Scriptures answer yes. About the middle of the first "Christian" century the twelve apostles of Christ met with the other mature representatives of the congregation at Jerusalem to determine what should be the Scriptural requirement for the admission of non-Jews into the Christian congregation. The twelve apostles and other representative men of the Jerusalem congregation as met together on this occasion to decide this vital question were Jews or circumcised proselytes, and, as such, they had been up until Pentecost of A.D. 33 under the prohibition contained in the Mosaic law against eating or drinking the blood of animal creatures. In that Mosaic law at Leviticus 17:10-12 God said to the Jews: "As for any man of the house of Israel or some temporary resident who is residing for a while in your midst who eats any sort of blood, I shall certainly set my face against the soul that is eating the blood and I shall indeed cut him off from among his people. 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. That is why I have said to the sons of Israel, 'No soul of you should eat blood and no temporary resident who is residing for a while in your midst should eat blood."'
Those Jewish Christians had now come under the new covenant that had been validated by the pouring out in death of the blood of Jesus Christ, the Mediator between God and men. What, then, was their decision as to the requirements to lie imposed upon Gentile believers for admission into the Christian congregation? The decree setting forth their decision replies: "The apostles and the older brothers to those brothers in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia who are from the nations: Greetings! . . . For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep yourselves free from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things killed without draining their blood and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!" (Acts 15:23-29) Thus for all Christian believers the apostolic decree under the guidance of God's holy spirit declared that among the things necessary for them was the keeping of themselves free from blood and from things killed without draining their blood. Years later that decision was still in force upon Christians according to Acts 21:25. That decision has never been revoked, because it is God-given and still applies to Christians today who are dedicated, baptized believers, faithfully following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ, who was born a Jew over 1900 years ago.
Under God's law as mediated by the prophet Moses toward the nation of Israel those Jews or circumcised proselytes who violated God's prohibition against eating or drinking animal blood were to be cut off from his chosen people. According to the apostolic decree as handed down by that conference in Jerusalem, the Christian congregation was under obligation to do a similar thing toward those who ate or drank animal blood. Blood transfusions were not in vogue in apostolic days. Nevertheless, although the twelve apostles and their fellow members of the Jerusalem congregation may not have had such a thing as the modern blood transfusion in mind, yet the decree handed down by them included such a thing in its scope. The medical profession today admits that blood transfusion is a direct feeding of the blood vessels of the human body with blood from another person or other persons that the practitioner of blood transfusion says is necessary for the survival of the recipient.
God's law definitely says that the soul of man is in his blood. Hence the receiver of the blood transfusion is feeding upon a God-given soul as contained in the blood vehicle of a fellow man or of fellow men. This is a violation of God's commands to Christians, the seriousness of which should not be minimized by any passing over of it lightly as being an optional matter for the conscience of any individual to decide upon. The decree of the apostles at Jerusalem declares: "If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper." Hence a Christian who deliberately receives a blood transfusion and thus does not keep himself from blood will not prosper spiritually. According to the law of Moses, which set forth shadows of things to come, the receiver of a blood transfusion must be cut off from God's people by excommunication or disfellowshiping.
If the taking of a blood transfusion is the first offense of a dedicated, baptized Christian due to his immaturity or lack of Christian stability and he sees the error of his action and grieves and repents over it and begs divine forgiveness and forgiveness of God's congregation on earth, then mercy should be extended to him and he need not be disfellowshiped. He needs to be put under surveillance and to be instructed thoroughly according to the Scriptures upon this subject, and thereby be helped to acquire strength to make decisions according to the Christian standard in any future cases.
If, however, he refuses to acknowledge his nonconformity to the required Christian standard and makes the matter an issue in the Christian congregation and endeavors to influence others therein to his support; or, if in the future he persists in accepting blood transfusions or in donating blood toward the carrying out of this medical practice upon others, he shows that he has really not repented, but is deliberately opposed to God's requirements. As a rebellious opposer and unfaithful example to fellow members of the Christian congregation he must be cut off therefrom by disfellowshiping. Thereby the Christian congregation vindicates itself from any charge of connivance at the infraction of God's law by a member of the congregation through blood transfusion, and it upholds the proper Christian standard before all the members of the Christian congregation, and keeps itself clean from the blood of all men, even as the apostle Paul did who promulgated to the various Gentile congregations the apostolic decree handed down at Jerusalem.-Acts 20:26.
w61 8/1 480
Questions from Readers
Is there anything in the Bible against giving one's eyes (after death) to be transplanted to some living person?-L. C., United States.
The question of placing one's body or parts of one's body at the disposal of men of science or doctors at one's death for purposes of scientific experimentation or replacement in others is frowned upon by certain religious bodies. However, it does not seem that any Scriptural principle or law is involved. It therefore is something that each individual must decide for himself. If he is satisfied in his own mind and conscience that this is a proper thing to do, then he can make such provision, and no one else should criticize him for doing so. On the other hand, no one should be criticized for refusing to enter into any such agreement.
w61 9/15 553-9
Respect for the Sanctity of Blood
"Flesh with its soul-its blood-you must not eat."-Gen. 9:4.
LIVING as they do in a world that turns a deaf ear to the Word of God, Christians are daily confronted with situations that test their faith in God and the rightness of his law. God requires respect for the sanctity of blood. But the world has strayed so far from his paths that many are not aware that there is a divine law governing such matters as the use of blood, and those that do know the law often violate it without any feeling that they have done wrong. With the blessing of the religious clergy they have spilled the lifeblood of countless persons on the battlefield, and as they do it they pray for God to be with them. When they hear that in many parts of the world blood of animals is regularly consumed as food, or when they see blood products sold in stores where they do business, they see nothing out of the way in it. And when they hear reports of the tremendous increase in the number of blood transfusions-now well over five million in a year-they view it as a mark of medical progress.
2 In sharp contrast to the world's indifference is the record of nearly a million persons in all parts of the world who do obey God's law on the sanctity of blood. They have met the test of their faith and stood firm. But the public press has taken advantage of the ignorance of the people to misrepresent them as religious fanatics, particularly as regards their rejection of blood transfusions. And the religious clergy of Christendom and Jewry have added their voices, declaring that the law of God is not applicable in these cases where an individual's life is involved. The result is that many uninformed persons have been turned against God and his Word as unreasonable and unloving. But how can the Source of all wisdom himself be unreasonable? How can God, who is love and who endowed man with the capacity to love, himself be unloving? He cannot and he is not! His is the right way, and a careful consideration of his Word helps us to get matters in proper focus. As the Life-giver he tells us what we must do in order to continue to live. By his laws he lovingly protects us from doing things in ignorance that might result in injury to ourselves, even the loss of life. The facts show that this is true in regard to his law on the matter of blood.-Prov. 2:6; 1 John 4:16; Ps. 25:4.
DIVINE LEGISLATION ON BLOOD
3 The issue is not new; it is not something peculiar to this twentieth century with its research into the medical use of blood. It was over 4,300 years ago, when Noah and his household, the only human survivors of the global flood, came out of the ark, that God stated to them his law on blood. Before this, man had eaten only the soulless vegetation and fruits, but now, for the first time, God granted permission for man to add meat to his diet, saying: "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. Only flesh with its soul-its blood-you must not eat." (Gen. 9:3, 4) The law is clear. Meat can be eaten, but not with the blood still in it, because the blood represents the soul or life of the creature. Man must show respect for the sanctity of blood and, so doing, show his respect for the Life-giver, Jehovah God.
4 Some eight centuries later, when the Israelites, who had recently been spared from annihilation in Egypt, were gathered at the foot of Mount Sinai, Jehovah again emphasized the restriction on blood. "It is a statute to time indefinite for your generations, in all your dwelling places: You must not eat any fat or any blood at all." (Lev. 3:17) No distinction was made as to the source of the blood; whether animal or human, it was not to be taken into the body as food. It was not even to be stored, as shown when God went on to say: "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. For the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood by the soul in it." (Lev. 17:13, 14) The reason was clearly stated. The soul or the life of the flesh is in the blood, and obedience to God's law on blood would show proper regard for the sanctity of life and for the Source of life.
5 Even in times of emergency it was recognized that there was no justification for setting aside the divine law concerning the sanctity of blood. This is shown by an occurrence when the army of Israel under King Saul was fighting the Philistines. It had been a hard fight and the men were at the point of exhaustion. "And the people began darting greedily at the spoil and taking sheep and cattle and calves and slaughtering them on the earth, and the people fell to eating along with the blood." This was no insignificant thing, excusable because of the physical condition of the men. It was reported to Saul: "Look! The people are sinning against Jehovah by eating along with the blood." (1 Sam. 14:32, 33) They did not view the matter as do certain rabbis today who theorize that any of the requirements of the Law can be set aside when the saving of a specific life is involved. What the men were doing was a sin against God, and immediate steps were taken to put an end to it.
CHRISTIAN OBLIGATION
6 Of course, Christians are not under the law covenant made with Moses as mediator. That law covenant passed out of existence, having fulfilled its purpose, when the new covenant was made over the blood of Jesus Christ. Does this mean that the restrictions on the use of blood have passed away too? Not at all! Because what the law covenant had to say about refraining from the eating of blood merely emphasized the requirement that is set forth in the law God gave to Noah, and that is binding upon all mankind. To set this matter straight in the minds of all Christians, both Jews and Gentiles, none of whom were any longer under the Law, the Christian governing body at Jerusalem directed their attention to the obligations that devolved upon them in this matter, saying: "The holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep yourselves free 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."-Acts 15:28, 29.
7 However, various theological commentators on this text say that this is nothing that concerns us. 'It was only a temporary thing,' they say, 'designed to prevent giving offense to Jewish converts. And the need for such a prohibition having passed away, the repeal is understood even though not stated.' But we ask, What need has passed? There are still natural Jews associated with the Christian congregation, so it cannot be said that their absence has removed the need. The Scriptures make clear that man was to abstain from blood because the life is in the blood. Is it any less true now than it was then that the life is in the blood? And if it is argued that respect for the sacrificial use of blood is no longer binding because Christians are not called on to offer up animal sacrifices, then let it be noted that such use of animal sacrifices among the followers of Christ had come to an end sixteen years before the apostolic decree was issued. Furthermore, those who contend that Jesus' teaching, that 'not what enters into the mouth but what proceeds out of the mouth is what defiles a man,' has made obsolete the ruling on blood are, in effect, arguing that the ruling on Christian abstinence from blood, which decree was delivered under direction of God's holy spirit, was repealed before it was issued; because Jesus made his statement here referred to seventeen years before the decision on blood was sent out by the council at Jerusalem.-Matt. 15:11.
8 The governing body that sent out the decision on blood did not have in mind that it was merely expedient in view of the situation then and could later be dispensed with. If the prohibition of blood was temporary, then the rest of the decision must fall into the same category, which would mean that abstinence from idolatry and fornication were also temporary and designed to avoid hurting the feelings of new converts. But has the necessity for these prohibitions passed, so that fornication and idolatry are now permissible to Christians? Definitely not! The terminology of the decree indicates no time limitation; the restrictions are "necessary things" now even as they were then. As Clarke's Commentary, in discussing Genesis 9:4, well observes: "That the prohibition has been renewed under the Christian dispensation, can admit of little doubt by any man who dispassionately reads Acts xv. 20, 29; xxi. 25, where even the Gentile converts are charged to abstain from it on the authority, not only of the apostles, but of the Holy Ghost, . . . not for fear of stumbling the converted Jews, the gloss of theologians, but because it was one . . . of those necessary points, from the burden . . . of obedience to which they could not be excused."
9 The facts of history confirm this understanding of the matter. Early Christians did not view the prohibition on blood as of importance only in avoiding offense to Jewish converts. They did not feel that it could be set aside if it would endanger their lives to insist on it. It was well known, even among their persecutors, that Christians would not eat blood, and they would test a person to see if he was truly Christian, not only by urging him to offer incense to the pagan gods of Rome, but on occasion by urging him to eat blood sausage. So crucial was the matter that eating blood was viewed as a denial of the Christian faith. Tertullian, who lived at the beginning of the third century, referred to this when addressing his writing to the Roman world. He said: "Let your error blush before the Christians, for we do not include even animals' blood in our natural diet. We abstain on that account from things strangled or that die of themselves, that we may not in any way be polluted by blood, even if it is buried in the meat. Finally, when you are testing Christians, you offer them sausages full of blood; you are thoroughly well aware, of course, that among them it is forbidden; but you want to make them transgress." Origen, too, another Christian writer, in his defense of Christian teachings, declared: "As to things strangled, we are forbidden by Scripture to partake of them, because the blood is still in them."
10 Even as late as the year 692, a religious council in Constantinople (the Synod of Troullos), in its 67th canon, declared: "We suitably rebuke those, who in some way prepare a meal with the use of the blood of any animal and they thus eat it in order to satisfy the gluttonous belly. If, therefore, anyone will henceforth attempt to eat the blood of any animal in whatsoever way, he will, if a priest, be unfrocked and excommunicated if a layman." Belief in the importance of the apostolic decree on blood still continues in the Eastern Orthodox Church.
11 In the West, however, disregard for the divine law on blood grew most notably from the fourth century onward. Augustine, through whom Plato's teaching of inherent immortality of the soul was also popularized, argued that the decree had lost its importance since its purpose had been accomplished. Finally, in the fifteenth century the church of Rome had swung so far away from the viewpoint of the early Christians that the blood, not of animals, but of three young boys was appropriated in an unsuccessful attempt to revive the ailing pope of Rome, Innocent VIII, and that at the cost of the lives of all three blood donors. So it is evident that the indifference of modern-day Christendom toward the sanctity of blood is not a reflection of Christian faith, but is the result of a falling away from the faith.-1 Tim. 4:1.
MISUSE OF BLOOD AS FOOD
12 This makes it vital for true Christians in this time of the end to be on the alert if they are to show proper respect for the sanctity of blood. They must avoid the world's misuse of blood. For example, in Africa there are some native peoples who supplement their diet by drinking blood from the jugular vein of their cattle. In many places men line up at slaughterhouses to drink the blood of freshly slaughtered cattle, in the belief that it is a cure for certain ailments. In the Far East there are many lands where blood is used as a basic ingredient in certain soups and gravies. In South America a dish that is quite common consists of pig's blood mixed with rice or potatoes and condiments, and blood is even sold and eaten as candy. Blood sausage, under various names, is available almost everywhere. All of these practices show rank disregard for the sanctity of life because they violate the law of the Life-giver on the matter of blood.
13 The law on blood also rules out the eating of anything that has died of strangulation, because the blood would not have been drained. So any animal found smothered or dead in a trap and animals that have been shot but not immediately bled are not fit for food. The practice in many lands of killing chickens by strangulation, breaking the neck but not cutting it, also makes these unfit for consumption by Christians. Some butchers, with no regard for the divine law on these matters, do not properly bleed the animals they prepare for food; in fact, they may deliberately impair drainage to add weight to the meat. If a Christian learns that his butcher does not give attention to the draining of the blood, then he will look for another place to do business or even refrain from eating meat if nothing else is available. Likewise, a conscientious person will not eat meat in a restaurant if he knows that it is customary locally not to give attention to proper bleeding. Under such circumstances, a Christian who wants to eat meat may have to buy a live animal or bird and arrange to have the killing done himself.
14 Disrespect for God's law is so rampant that whole blood, blood plasma and blood fractions are used freely in numerous products that are sold for food. For example, it is reported that some meat packers include blood as a part of their regular recipe for wieners, bologna and other cold-meat loaves. They may not all call it blood; but, regardless of what they call it, if it is blood or part of the blood it is wrong. Not all meat packers do this by any means, but some do. In certain localities it is also known that hamburger is made up largely of fat with blood added. In Russia blood bakeries were put in operation years ago where seven parts of rye flour are mixed with three parts of defibrinated ox blood in the bread. In other lands some bakers use dried plasma powder in pastry as a substitute for egg white. And various tonics and tablets sold by druggists show on their labels that they contain blood fractions such as hemoglobin. So it is necessary for one to be alert, to be acquainted with the practices in his community, to make reasonable inquiry at places where he buys meat and to read and understand the labels on packaged goods. As the old world becomes more careless in its attitude toward God's law on blood it is important for Christians to exercise increased care if they are to keep themselves "without spot from the world."-Jas. 1:27.
BLOOD TRANSFUSION
15 Over the centuries man's misuses of blood have taken on many forms. Ancient Egyptian princes used human blood for rejuvenation; others drank the blood of their enemies. But not until after William Harvey's research into the circulation of the blood, in the seventeenth century, was there any extensive effort made to transfuse blood into the circulatory system of another creature. After having suffered severe setbacks due to fatalities, blood transfusion finally came to be viewed with more favor at the beginning of this twentieth century, when research made it possible to identify certain blood types. The two world wars and the Korean war gave doctors ample opportunity to experiment with the therapeutic use of blood, and now the process has been developed to the point that doctors use not only whole blood and blood plasma, which is the nearly colorless liquid in which the blood cells are carried, but also red cells apart from the plasma, and the various plasma proteins as they feel the need.
16 Is God's law violated by such medical use of blood? Is it wrong to sustain life by infusions of blood or plasma or red cells or the various blood fractions? Yes! The law that God gave to Noah and which applies to all his descendants makes it wrong for anyone to eat blood, that is, to use the blood of another creature to nourish or sustain one's life. Even as Tertullian in his Apology showed how the early Christians reasoned on the matter, so today it is recognized that if this prohibition applies to animal blood, it applies with even more force to human blood. It includes "any blood at all."-Lev. 3:17.
17 Arguments to the effect that the prohibition on the use of blood issued by the early Christian governing body did not deal with human blood, but only with animal blood, show ignorance of the facts of history. In ancient Rome, which dominated the Mediterranean world in the first century, spectators at the gladiatorial contests would rush into the arena after the fight and suck the blood streaming from the neck of the vanquished gladiator. Some from among the Scythians reportedly ate their dead relatives. Treaties were made among some peoples by mutually drinking a portion of each other's blood; and human blood caught in the hand and eaten was used to seal initiation into the rites of the pagan goddess Bellona. So when the apostles, under direction of the holy spirit, said that Christians were to keep themselves from blood, they did have in mind human blood too.
18 It is of no consequence that the blood is taken into the body through the veins instead of the mouth. Nor does the claim by some that it is not the same as intravenous feeding carry weight. The fact is that it nourishes or sustains the life of the body. In harmony with this is a statement in the book Hemorrhage and Transfusion, by George W. Crile, A.M., M.D., who quotes a letter from Denys, French physician and early researcher in the field of transfusions. It says: "In performing transfusion it is nothing else than nourishing by a shorter road than ordinary-that is to say, placing in the veins blood all made in place of taking food which only turns to blood after several changes."
19 In view of the emphasis put on the use of blood in the medical world, new treatments involving its use are constantly being recommended. But regardless of whether it is whole blood or a blood fraction, whether it is blood taken from one's own body or that taken from someone else, whether it is administered as a transfusion or as an injection, the divine law applies. God has not given man blood to use as he might use other substances; he requires respect for the sanctity of blood.
20 What a fine example in respect for this law was set by God-fearing King David! Before the enemies of God's people had been driven from the land, the Philistines had a garrison in Bethlehem near Jerusalem, and on one occasion "David showed his craving and said: 'O that I might have a drink of the water from the cistern of Bethlehem, which is at the gate!'" Yes, he wished that the Philistines were gone and that he could be free to go to that cistern and be refreshed by its water. But on hearing his expression, "three [valiant men] forced their way into the camp of the Philistines and drew water from the cistern of Bethlehem, which is at the gate, and came carrying and bringing it to David." What they brought was nothing more than water, but they did it at the risk of their lives, and David knew it. "And David did not consent to drink it, but poured it out to Jehovah. And he went on to say: 'It is unthinkable on my part, as regards my God, to do this! Is it the blood of these men that I should drink at the risk of their souls? For it was at the risk of their souls that they brought it.' And he did not consent to drink it." (1 Chron. 11:16-19; 2 Sam. 23:15-17) David respected the law of God. Not only did he abstain from animal blood; he avoided the far more gross wrong of consuming human blood. Yes, he avoided doing anything that even resembled violation of that law. He was a man after God's own heart. It is a like course of obedience from the heart that moves mature Christians today to abstain from any practice at all that involves misuse of blood. Out of love for God they show respect for the sanctity of blood.
[Footnotes]
Apology, translated by T. R. Glover (1931).
Origen-Contra Celsum, Ante-Nicene Christian Library, Vol. 23 (1872).
Great Greek Encyclopedia, of Paul Drandakis, pp. 708, 709.
A History of the Councils of the Church, From the Original Documents (1896).
[Study Questions]
1. (a) What attitude on the part of the world calls for Christians to demonstrate faith in God and his law? (b) What has been the world's record as regards blood?
2. (a) What have the public press and the clergy said about those who show respect for the sanctity of blood? (b) What attitude toward God's law on the part of uninformed persons has resulted from this misrepresentation, but how should we view the matter?
3. When was God's law on blood first stated, and what does it require of mankind?
4. How was the ruling on blood emphasized to the Israelites, and what reason for the prohibition was given to them?
5. Does an emergency that involves human life warrant setting aside the divine law on the use of blood, and why?
6. Why does the law on blood apply to Christians who are not under the law covenant?
7, 8. What arguments are set forth by theological commentators in an effort to limit the effect of the apostolic ruling on blood, and what shows that these arguments are not sound?
9, 10. (a) What facts of history show that early Christians recognized abstinence from blood to be a serious matter? (b) In the third century what did Christian writers have to say about it? (c) As late as the year 692 what is shown to be the attitude of the Eastern church on the matter of blood?
11. What events showed mounting disregard for the restrictions on blood in the church of Rome?
12. What are some of the modern-day practices that violate the sanctity of life and that Christians avoid?
13. Why must care be exercised in proper killing of animals to be used for food, so what might this call on a Christian to do?
14. How else is blood misused in food products, so what should Christians be careful to do?
15. What have been the developments in the use of blood in medical treatment?
16. Is use of blood in medical treatment to sustain life a violation of God's law?
17. How do the facts of history prove that human blood was misused in ancient times and so was included in the prohibition set forth by the early Christian governing body?
18. What shows that the transfusing of blood is a "feeding" on blood?
19, 20. (a) In view of the constant developments in medical therapy, how can one determine whether treatment involving the use of blood is to be accepted or rejected? (b) What fine example in this regard did David set, showing respect for the sanctity of blood?
w61 9/15 559-66
Using Life in Harmony with the Will of God
THE only way the life-blood of any creature can properly be used is in harmony with the will of God. It is forbidden as food. It is not authorized by God for administration to another person under the guise of medical treatment to sustain life. Apart from its life-sustaining role in the body of the creature to whom it belongs, only one use of blood is sanctioned by God. This came to light in the days of Cain and Abel, the sons of Adam. "Abel came to be a herder of sheep, but Cain became a cultivator of the ground. And it came about at the expiration of some time that Cain proceeded to bring some fruits of the ground as an offering to Jehovah. But as for Abel, he too brought some firstlings of his flock, even their fatty pieces. Now while Jehovah was looking with favor upon Abel and his offering, he did not look with any favor upon Cain and upon his offering." (Gen. 4:2-5) Cain's offering was from the soulless vegetation. Abel's sacrifice represented a life and called for the pouring out of blood. By his accepting Abel's sacrifice Jehovah gave the first indication that shedding of blood was required in sacrifice. But Cain did not accept God's leading in the matter; instead, he violently murdered his brother Abel, the one man on earth who was using life, both his own and that of his flock, in harmony with the will of God.
2 Faithful servants of God recognized that the pouring out of the lifeblood of animals in sacrifice to Jehovah was God's will, and Noah, Abraham and others are mentioned in the Bible as having done so. (Gen. 8:20; 22:13) When their offspring, the Israelites, were gathered at the foot of Mount Sinai, where they were organized as a nation, Jehovah God told them in unmistakable language that there is only one proper use to which the shed blood of any creature can be put. He said: "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." (Lev. 17:11) Since the blood is so intimately involved in the life processes, and since sin leads to loss of life, God requires as a sacrifice in atonement for sin that which represents life, namely, the blood. "Unless blood is poured out no forgiveness takes place."-Heb. 9:22.
3 These animal sacrifices all foreshadowed a much grander one, a sacrifice that could lastingly remove sin and that would open up opportunities of eternal life for servants of God. This sacrifice was not selected from the flocks or the herds of Israel; it was Jesus Christ the Son of God, the one whom John the Baptist identified when he exclaimed: "See, the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29) This was Jehovah's own provision on behalf of mankind; it was his Lamb, his Son, whose life was given in sacrifice. By means of this loving arrangement it has been possible for men and women on earth to have opened to them the privilege of service in the heavenly courts with Christ the King, because these "have been declared righteous now by his blood." (Rom. 5:9) In addition to this "little flock" of one hundred and forty-four thousand members, a "great crowd" of others who serve God before the throne on his footstool earth have availed themselves of this ransom sacrifice, washing their robes and making them white in the blood of the Lamb, and as a result they enjoy the forgiveness of their sins and are righteous persons in the sight of God.-Rev. 7:14, 15.
4 The perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ has completely filled the need for a sacrifice to God on behalf of sinful mankind. It does not have to be repeated. No longer are animal sacrifices required; in fact, they are now detestable to God because they show disregard for the sacrifice that he himself has provided. Therefore, the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ is absolutely the only arrangement that God has authorized among his Christian witnesses by which the blood of one creature may be used on behalf of another to save life. "By means of him we have the release by ransom through the blood of that one, yes, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his undeserved kindness." (Eph. 1:7) Our lives depend on our acceptance of this provision, hence on acceptance of the divine arrangement as to the proper use of blood. Wisely, those who want to receive life at God's hands refrain from using blood in any way that has not been authorized by him as the Life-giver.
LOVING GOD WITH ONE'S WHOLE SOUL
5 On one occasion a certain man versed in the Law inquired of Jesus: "Teacher, by doing what shall I inherit everlasting life?" In his reply Jesus set out a guiding principle that helps us to determine what to do with our present lives in order to gain the reward of everlasting life. He said: "'You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole strength and with your whole mind,' and, 'your neighbor as yourself.'" (Luke 10:25-27) Now just what is included in this matter of loving God with our whole soul? It means giving our life to God in dedication, yes, devoting our life to the performance of any work that God may give us to do. Since we have given our life to God in dedication, we ought to realize what the Bible uses to represent life. It is blood, which is the seat of life or soul. So when a life has been taken, it is said that blood has been shed. So fundamentally is blood involved in the life processes that the Bible says that the soul or the life of a person is his blood. When speaking to Noah, God paralleled the expressions soul, or life, and blood, saying: "Only flesh with its soul-its blood-you must not eat." (Gen. 9:4) And to the Israelites he said simply: "The blood is the soul," or, "The blood is the life." (Deut. 12:23, margin, 1953 Edition) Consequently, when we dedicate our lives to God we must certainly take care to use that which represents life, our blood, in harmony with his law.
6 This greatest of commandments therefore indicates that a dedicated Christian is not at liberty to donate his lifeblood for use by someone else. Life belongs to God, and we are free to give it only to him in his service. Nor would it be proper to argue that love of neighbor calls for one to give blood. It is not love of neighbor to collaborate with him in violation of the law of God. And since God's Word indicates that it is wrong to take a blood transfusion, it is also wrong to give one's blood for transfusion.
7 Obedience to God is required of his servants; it is also a blessing to them, because it protects them from harm. It is interesting to note that, while the general impression given by organizations that are anxious to have blood donated is that the procedure is perfectly safe, the opinion is not unanimous. For in the book Physiology and Clinic of Blood Transfusion, among others, the statement is made: "As the latest research shows, considerable health disorders can arise on the part of the blood donor." Faithful Christians are spared such hazards that might impair their service to God.
DANGERS AVOIDED BY OBEDIENCE
8 The position of Jehovah's witnesses in regard to blood transfusion is not one based on the approval or disapproval with which the practice meets in medical circles. It is not the safety or danger of the procedure that governs their decision, but the Word of God. However, knowledge of some of the effects from which one is protected by obedience to God's law on blood does enhance one's appreciation for the rightness of Jehovah's ways.
9 The general practice among medical doctors in recent years has been to give blood in the belief that it may do some good. Sometimes it is given because of the insistence of patients or to satisfy relatives who want to be sure that "everything possible has been done." Concerning this the Director of the Blood Bank at New York University-Bellevue Medical Center said: "Blood transfusions have been administered on the theory that they can never do any harm and might possibly benefit the patient. This idea is wrong because there are dangers inherent in blood transfusion." Says the journal of the American Academy of General Practice: "It is unfortunate that many have lost the fear of transfusion and now order a transfusion as blithely as ordering a bottle of saline." Over four thousand years ago Jehovah God told man that he should not take the blood of other creatures into his body; and modern medical practice confirms the fact that violation of that law is fraught with grave dangers.
10 One of the immediate dangers that faces anyone who is given a blood transfusion is the possibility of a hemolytic reaction, that is, the rapid destruction of the oxygen-carrying red blood cells. This may result in bursting headaches, pains in the chest and back, and the backing up of poisons into the system due to kidney failure. Death may come within a few hours or a few days. Medical knowledge has not removed this danger. "Try as we may we can only reduce the incidence of the reactions. We cannot eliminate them, and patients will continue to be damaged as a result of blood transfusions." So says W. H. Crosby, chief of the Department of Hematology at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. Even when such a hemolytic reaction does not occur as the result of naturally occurring antibodies in the blood stream of the patient, antigens in the blood transfused into the body can stimulate the production of antibodies so that a severe reaction will occur if ever blood containing those factors is given again. With reported possible combinations of known blood factors now numbering 15,000,000, the likelihood of being given blood that matches one's own and that will not have some adverse effect is remote almost to the point of impossibility.
11 There are other perils. Since it is difficult for a doctor to know exactly how much blood has been lost, he may try to transfuse more blood than there is room for, which, as reported by the journal Medical Science (July 25, 1959), is a frequent and disastrous occurrence. Also, air can get into the blood stream during transfusion, again with deadly effects. Then, too, blood removed from the body readily becomes contaminated, and certain bacteria found right in the air are of such a nature that they reproduce in stored blood even at refrigerator temperatures, making even small amounts of such blood deadly to the recipient. How can such treatment be viewed as truly lifesaving?
12 Ominous as the picture is, it is not the full extent of the hazards to which a patient is subjected when he is given blood. The doctor who gives the transfusion may never know how much harm is caused, because diseases transmitted by transfusion may not strike at once. But medical authorities all recognize that syphilis, malaria and hepatitis can be transmitted by blood transfusion. Not only can they be transmitted; cases are regularly reported in which they are transmitted. With the world-wide upsurge of immorality and the resultant venereal disease, the danger of syphilis is increasing-a disease that can result in premature childbirth, blindness, deafness, paralysis, heart disease, insanity and death. The test used to detect syphilitic blood does not reveal the danger in its early stages, and the patient pays the price. In February of this year the Japan Times reported the case of a woman who had won a suit against the Government-managed Tokyo University Hospital, on the grounds that she had been transfused with syphilitic blood that resulted in loss of eyesight and divorce by her husband. The financial compensation ordered by the court was small comfort for the damage done. And what about the risk of contracting malaria? Carriers of malaria do not always know they have it in their system; blood tests seldom reveal it; but anyone who receives blood can be the victim. The danger is not decreasing; to the contrary, anyone who has ever lived or visited in a malarial area is a possible carrier, and international travel assures that the number is increasing every day. By no means last among the disease dangers, but demanding attention because of its frequency, is serum hepatitis. So real is the danger of crippling and death from hepatitis that Dr. Alvarez, Emeritus Consultant in Medicine, Mayo Clinic, has said that he would never permit anyone to give him a transfusion unless he felt it was absolutely necessary.
13 As if the harm to the patient himself were not enough, it does not stop there. In the case of a woman, the damage may involve even her unborn children. Due to factors some of which are known and others of which are not yet understood, a woman given an incompatible blood transfusion may find that her opportunity to give birth to normal, healthy children has been taken from her.
14 How much better it is to listen to the Word of God when it tells us to keep ourselves from blood! How much happier we are if, as children listen to their father, we heed the counsel of God and live in harmony with it! "My son, to my words do pay attention. To my sayings incline your ear. May they not get away from your eyes. Keep them in the midst of your heart. For they are life to those finding them and health to all their flesh."-Prov. 4:20-22.
PERSONALITY INFLUENCED
15 Those who are more inclined to rest their confidence in the learning of men than in the wisdom of God may feel that the care exercised in the selection of blood donors makes it possible to avoid all these dangers. But consider the facts. It will probably shock you to learn that the blood of dead people is being transfused into the bodies of hospital patients, but reports from Russia and Spain show that it is exactly what is done there; and even in the United States of America experiments have been conducted with transfusion of cadaver blood! Of course, that probably is not the practice in your community. But the magazine Time as of May 26, 1961, reports the case of a 49-year-old woman in the Pontiac General Hospital who was given two pints of blood from the cadaver of a 12-year-old boy who had drowned in a nearby lake and who had been dead from two and a half to three hours. Also, that as long ago as 1935 a doctor in a Chicago suburb had used a technique like that of the Russians, and that this American doctor accounted for about thirty-five cadaver-blood transfusions in two years. Perhaps the donor is one's own living relative, a reputable, clean-living individual. Does that assure safety? No; it will not remove the danger of a reaction due to incompatibility; nor does it guarantee that the individual may not be the carrier of some disease, perhaps even unknown to himself. In most cases, however, one who receives blood has no idea who the donor is. Some of it may come from healthy persons; some from alcoholics and degenerates. Criminals in jail are given the opportunity to donate their blood. For example, the New York Times of April 6, 1961, reported: "Inmates of Sing Sing Prison at Ossining will give blood to the Red Cross today." A commendable act? Perhaps not as beneficial to their fellow men as the community is led to believe.
16 When the Israelites were preparing to enter the Promised Land, Jehovah moved Moses to repeat to them his law forbidding the consumption of blood. As recorded at Deuteronomy 12:25, he said: "You must not eat it, in order that it may go well with you and your sons after you, because you will do what is right in Jehovah's eyes." An edition of the Pentateuch edited by J. H. Hertz has a footnote on that expression "that it may go well with you," which says: "Ibn Ezra suggests that the use of blood would have a demoralising effect upon the moral and physical nature, and pass on a hereditary taint to future generations." The point is an interesting one, and that it may apply in the matter of blood transfusions is testified to by medical doctors. For example, in his book Who Is Your Doctor and Why? Doctor Alonzo Jay Shadman says: "The blood in any person is in reality the person himself. It contains all the peculiarities of the individual from whence it comes. This includes hereditary taints, disease susceptibilities, poisons due to personal living, eating and drinking habits. . . . The poisons that produce the impulse to commit suicide, murder, or steal are in the blood." And Dr. Américo Valério, Brazilian doctor and surgeon for over forty years, agrees. "Moral insanity, sexual perversions, repression, inferiority complexes, petty crimes-these often follow in the wake of blood transfusion," he says. Yet it is acknowledged in the public press that organizations whose blood supply is considered reliable obtain blood for transfusion from criminals who are known to have such characteristics. Certainly no one who is trying to depart from the works of the flesh and use his life in the way that God directs through his Word is going to lay himself open to such a ruinous future.-Rom. 12:2; Eph. 4:22-24.
DEMONSTRATING FAITH IN THE GIVER OF LIFE
17 What do these facts mean in the case of a Christian who has suffered severe blood loss and is in need of treatment? Is there nothing that can be done? Must he simply wait to die? Not at all! Jehovah's witnesses have no religious objections to any treatment that does not conflict with the law of God, and the fact is that other treatments are available. Doctors who recognize man as a creation of God, instead of a product of evolution, are usually more inclined to realize that the human body has been endowed by God with marvelous recuperative powers, and they co-operate with these instead of feeling that the prohibition on the use of blood is a barrier to recovery. Our own bodies are marvelously equipped to meet emergencies, even those occasioned by blood loss. (Ps. 139:14) According to The Encyclopćdia Britannica: "Besides the blood which actually circulates in the arteries, veins and capillaries, the body possesses reserves which can be mobilized. One such is known to be located in the spleen. On the onset of haemorrhage the spleen shrinks, squeezing blood as from a sponge into the circulation." In view of this, many doctors recognize that it is much safer to co-operate with the body's own blood-manufacturing system than to try to take the place of it by transfusing foreign blood. Even the highly respected medical publication The Surgical Clinics of North America (February, 1959) has said: It is not to be forgotten that, not blood transfusion, but "iron therapy is the treatment of choice for blood loss anemia." In emergency cases, where the body's fluid loss has been excessive, there are "plasma volume expanders" that can be used without violating God's prohibition on blood, and, according to the testimony of many doctors, these have proved to be much safer than blood transfusions. While it is true that they cannot do for the body what one's own blood does, yet they help to keep the remaining red cells in circulation so that oxygen will reach the various organs during the time needed by the body to replace the blood loss. So Christian patients, instead of being pressured into accepting blood on the plea that it is the only hope, seek out a doctor who has sufficient skill, patience and respect for their religious conscience to be willing to treat them without blood.
18 Lifesaving efforts by unscriptural means can never produce results of lasting good. How foolish it is to think that one can save life by violating the laws of the Life-giver! While it may produce seemingly beneficial results at the moment, it may ultimately take its toll in disease and stillborn children as a direct result of such an ill-advised course. Even if no physical harm results to the patient or to one's offspring, violation of the law of God seriously jeopardizes one's opportunity to gain eternal life in God's new world.
19 In the case of Job, Satan contended that man would do anything, even turn on his God, to save his present life. "Everything that a man has he will give in behalf of his life," he argued. (Job 2:4, margin, 1957 Edition) But he was wrong. Job proved him a liar, and Jesus Christ outstandingly did so. On one occasion Jesus had been speaking about pursuing a course that would mean his death in the service of God. "At this Peter took him aside and commenced raising strong objections to him." But Jesus rebuked him. "'Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me, because you think, not God's thoughts, but those of men.' Then Jesus said to his disciples: 'If anyone wants to come after me, let him disown himself and pick up his torture stake and continually follow me. For whoever wants to save his soul will lose it; but whoever loses his soul for my sake will find it.'" (Matt. 16:21-25; Mark 8:31-35) May none of us ever become like Satan to our Christian brothers, urging them to sell out their confidence in God in favor of the wisdom of the world! There is only one way to gain life and that is by living in harmony with the will of God. Confidence in God is never misplaced. As the Divine Physician he can do what no human doctor ever could: he can extend the life of his servants, not merely for a few troubled years, but for all eternity-if necessary, by a resurrection from the dead-in his glorious new world now so near at hand.-Ps. 23:4; Acts 24:15.
20 With such marvelous prospects before us, let us be careful to live our lives in harmony with the will of God. Let us not grow careless, like the world, in our attitude toward the blood of our fellow men. Now is the time to show the greatest concern for their lifeblood by urging them to exercise faith in the blood of Jesus Christ, the only blood that has any real value in the eyes of God toward the saving of life. Point them to his kingdom; help them to learn its laws; encourage them patiently as they move along on the way to life. Make it your determination to be able to say, as did Paul: "I am clean from the blood of all men, for I have not held back from telling you all the counsel of God."-Acts 20:26.
[Footnotes]
Published in Jena, Germany, 1960.
Bulletin of the American Association of Blood Banks, June, 1960.
Cięncia Médica, Vol. xx, "Moral Deficiencies and Blood Transfusion."
1946 Edition, Vol. 3, page 743.
[Study Questions]
1. (a) Whose will must govern our use of blood, and what practices does he forbid? (b) What occurred in the days of Cain and Abel that gave indication of the proper use to which shed blood might be put?
2. What one proper use of shed blood did God permit, to whom was this made known, and how?
3. What greater sacrifice did those animal sacrifices foreshadow, and how does its blood benefit mankind?
4. Upon the acceptance of what do our lives depend, and why?
5. (a) In answer to an inquirer, what did Jesus say one must do to inherit everlasting life? (b) What is involved in loving God with one's whole soul, and why?
6, 7. Is a Christian free to donate his lifeblood for another person, and is it safe from a medical point of view?
8. Upon what do Jehovah's witnesses base their attitude toward blood transfusion, so why consider medical evidence on the matter?
9. What is the general viewpoint in the world as to blood transfusion, but is this medically sound?
10, 11. (a) What are some of the dangers that face one who receives a blood transfusion, and are doctors able to eliminate these dangers? (b) In view of these facts, would you say that blood transfusions are truly lifesaving?
12. Name the disease dangers that might arise from a transfusion of blood, and show what these might result in to the patient.
13. What further price might a woman who is given blood have to pay as regards childbearing?
14. How does God protect his people from such calamities?
15. How do some worldly-wise men reason on these transfusion dangers, but what facts as to the sources from which blood is obtained raise serious questions?
16. (a) What interesting observation on blood is made in a Bible footnote on Deuteronomy 12:25? (b) What do modern-day doctors have to say on this same matter, and why is this of interest to Christians?
17. (a) Do Jehovah's witnesses object on religious grounds to all medical treatment? (b) Is there anything that can be done on behalf of a Christian if he suffers severe blood loss?
18. Why is it foolish to attempt to save life by violating God's law?
19. (a) Who was it that argued that man would do anything, even forsake God, to save his present life? (b) How can we benefit from reproof that Jesus gave Peter on this matter? (c) What reward will God give to those who obey him even in times of stress?
20. What should we do now so that we will be using our lives in harmony with the will of God?
w61 11/1 669
Questions from Readers
How can one tell if meat purchased from a butcher or in some other market has been properly bled? Also, how can one tell if cold-meat loaves, pastry or preparations sold by druggists contain any blood or blood fractions?-A. R., U.S.A.
This is of concern to God-fearing persons, because Jehovah God, in his law stated to Noah, which applies to all mankind, said: "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. Only flesh with its soul-its blood-you must not eat." (Gen. 9:3, 4) The first-century Christian governing body, too, being directed by God's holy spirit, pointed out that it is necessary for Christians to 'keep themselves free from blood.'-Acts 15:28, 29.
If the bleeding of butchered animals is not the regular practice in your locality, or you are not sure what is the customary handling of the matter where you live, the best way to find out if meat has been properly bled is to make personal inquiry. In most cases, even if the one who sells the meat does not personally do the slaughtering, he is acquainted with the men with whom he does business and he knows their practices or at least the laws that govern them. If he is confident that the meat is properly prepared, the Christian may feel free to use it. However, if the one selling the meat does not know, simply ask: "Who can give me the information? It is important to me for religious reasons." Then write a letter, if that is the only way to get in touch with the one who can answer your question. If for some reason one does not feel that he is being told the truth, he can always do business elsewhere, or he can buy live animals and arrange for the slaughtering himself, if he feels that is necessary.
Simply the fact that meat appears to be very red or even has red fluid on the surface does not mean that it has not been bled. There may remain in the meat some very small amounts of blood even after proper bleeding has been done. Then, too, the fluid that runs out of the meat may simply be interstitial fluid. The important thing is that respect has been shown for the sanctity of blood, regard has been shown for the principle of the sacredness of life. What God's law requires is that the blood be drained from the animal when it is killed, not that the meat be soaked in some special preparation to draw out every trace of it.
In the case of other products, a similar procedure may be followed. If you have reason to believe that a certain product contains blood or a blood fraction, ask the one who sells it. If he does not know, write to the manufacturer. Sometimes labels show whether a blood fraction is used, but not always. For example, a label may say that a certain product contains albumin. Does that mean that it contains a blood fraction? Look up the word albumin in a good reference book, perhaps an encyclopedia in your local library or even a good dictionary. You will learn that albumin is found, not only in blood serum, but also in milk and eggs. The only way to find out the source of the albumin in the particular product in question is to make inquiry of those who prepare it. However, if the label says that certain tablets contain hemoglobin, similar checking will reveal that this is from blood; so a Christian knows, without asking, that he should avoid such a preparation. Clearly, these are matters that each individual can best check on locally.
w61 11/1 669-70
Questions from Readers
How can we harmonize the Scriptural counsel, "Everything that is sold in a meat market keep eating, making no inquiry on account of your conscience" (1 Cor. 10:25), with the advice recently contained in The Watchtower, to make reasonable inquiry at places where one buys meat to be sure that it has been properly bled? (The Watchtower, September 15, 1961, page 557)-N. Q., U.S.A.
Both of these statements of counsel must be viewed in their context. First Corinthians, chapter 10, contains a discussion concerning foods that have been offered to idols. It points out that Christians cannot "become sharers with the demons" by participating in religious ceremonies in which the worshiper shares a meal in common with some demon god. (1 Cor. 10:18-21) In fact, it would be wrong for the Christian to eat the meat anywhere if he ate it "as something sacrificed to an idol," that is, with any feeling of reverence for the idol. (1 Cor. 8:7) So it was to protect Christians from idolatry that the command was given to "keep yourselves free from things sacrificed to idols." (Acts 15:29) However, the offering of food to an idol does not bring about any change in the meat itself that would make it unfit for use. So if part of an animal that was offered in sacrifice were sold in a meat market it would be just as good as any other meat. Certainly a Christian would never ask for this meat in preference to other meat, feeling that it was "holy meat," but, on the other hand, he was not under obligation to make inquiry to find out if the source of supply was a religious temple or a regular slaughterhouse. So the point under discussion in 1 Corinthians 10:25 was the purchasing of meat in a market that obtained some of its supplies from a religious temple.
Christians are also commanded to abstain "from blood and what is strangled." (Acts 21:25) The Scriptures do indicate that one may eat meat but that he must not do it as an act of idolatry; however, nowhere does the Bible say that believers may eat blood under any circumstances. Furthermore, the prohibition on the consumption of blood is directed, not only to those who do their own slaughtering, but to all "the believers." Therefore those believers who do not do their own slaughtering may have to make inquiry to find an acceptable source of supply if they want to eat meat. If you know from your own experience or from inquiry that it is customary in your locality to drain the blood from butchered animals and from fowl killed for food, and you are doing business with a reliable person, then it may not be necessary to ask further specific questions on the matter when meat is purchased. However, one who purchases meat from worldly persons in those communities where Caesar's laws do not specify that blood must be drained from slaughtered animals would not be able to avoid eating "blood and what is strangled" without making inquiry.
So the points of counsel are harmonious and are in agreement with the rest of the Word of God.
w61 11/1 670
Questions from Readers
In view of the Bible command on abstinence from blood, how are fish and insects to be prepared in order to be acceptable for food?-B. F., U.S.A.
Fish was a common food among the Jews. Jesus himself ate it, and on different occasions he directed successful fishing operations, both with a net and with a hook. (Num. 11:5; Matt. 14:17; 17:27; Luke 5:1-11; 24:42, 43) Some insects, too, were used for food. (Lev. 11:21; Mark 1:6) Of course, the amount of blood contained in these creatures may be very small, so that it is impossible to pour out their blood; yet that is what was required to make the meat of a creature acceptable for food. (Lev. 17:13) It was not required that the meat be squeezed or that it be soaked; simply that the blood be poured out. If there is not enough blood to pour it out, Christians are not under obligation to take extreme measures to be sure that some blood is extracted. Of course, if, on cutting the creature open, an accumulation of blood is clearly in evidence, this can easily be removed, and it would be proper to do so.
w61 11/1 670
Questions from Readers
Since the Bible forbids the eating of blood, how are Christians to view the use of serums and vaccines? Has the Society changed its viewpoint on this?-J. D., U.S.A.
The Bible is very clear that blood could properly be used only on the altar; otherwise it was to be poured out on the ground. (Lev. 17:11-13) The entire modern medical practice involving the use of blood is objectionable from the Christian standpoint. Therefore the taking of a blood transfusion, or, in lieu of that, the infusing of some blood fraction to sustain one's life is wrong.
As to the use of vaccines and other substances that may in some way involve the use of blood in their preparation, it should not be concluded that the Watch Tower Society endorses these and says that the practice is right and proper. However, vaccination is a virtually unavoidable practice in many segments of modern society, and the Christian may find some comfort under the circumstances in the fact that this use is not in actuality a feeding or nourishing process, which was specifically forbidden when God said that man was not to eat blood, but it is a contamination of the human system.
So, as was stated in The Watchtower of September 15, 1958, page 575, "It would therefore be a matter of individual judgment whether one accepted such types of medication or not." That is still the Society's viewpoint on the matter.-Gal. 6:5.
However, the mature Christian is not going to try to find in this a justification for as many other medical uses of blood substances as possible. To the contrary, recognizing the objectionableness of the entire practice, he is going to stay as far away from it as he can, requesting other treatment where such is available.
w63 2/15 121-5
Carry Your Own Load of Responsibility
IN ANCIENT Babylon when three Hebrews were ordered to fall down and worship an image or be thrown into a burning furnace, they had to make a decision. They had no time to ask the prophet Daniel what to do. Theirs was the responsibility to determine the course to follow. Despite the danger of death, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego refused to break God's law against idolatry. Their decision was right and Jehovah delivered them. (Daniel 3) Would you have been able to carry their load of responsibility?
Not every Christian is mature enough to choose right from wrong on the basis of Bible principles. Some lack sufficient knowledge, others fail to employ their thinking ability. One might ask others to make important decisions for him because of laziness or the desire to have someone else share the responsibility. Perhaps he really would like to take a certain course of action and hopes the other person's conscience will approve it, even if his own does not. Whatever the reason, failure to carry your own load of responsibility is to your disadvantage.
For one thing, the habit of getting others to do your thinking leaves your own perceptive powers untrained and weak. Answers obtained simply by asking someone else are not likely to make a deep impression, certainly not as deep as when you do the research yourself. There is also the possibility that a friend's impromptu answer may be somewhat incorrect. Then, too, if true worship is ever banned in your land, as it is behind the Iron Curtain, occasions might arise when you would need to know how to determine right and wrong when you could not consult someone else. To do so requires accurate knowledge of Bible principles and the ability to apply them.
Here it is well to distinguish between a principle and a law. A law asks that you simply obey. A principle asks that you do your own thinking and apply or extend the principle to your own case. This calls to mind Paul's words at Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their perceptive powers trained to distinguish both right and wrong." To carry our load of responsibility more capably, let us examine some areas where mature application of Bible principles is involved.
ASSOCIATIONS
When one first comes to a knowledge of the truth he may take a bold stand for Bible principles, such as separateness from the world and seeking right associations. (John 15:19; Jas. 4:4; 1 John 2:15; 1 Cor. 15:33) He sees the obvious need to have no fellowship with fornicators, thieves and the like. Later on he appreciates more fully the ramifications of those principles. He sees that the whole world is under Satan's influence, not just its baser elements. (1 John 5:19) He comes to appreciate that, even though an acquaintance may not be immoral, if that one does not worship Jehovah he is not really a good associate. Likewise his discernment in applying Bible principles helps him to realize that it can be just as harmful to spend three hours with an adulterer on a movie screen or an evening with killers on television as to fellowship with them elsewhere. Soon he begins to apply the same discernment toward books and magazines. It is not a matter of someone telling him a certain thing is wrong. It is a matter of getting God's mind on things, growing to maturity and applying Bible principles to the full extent, which is our individual responsibility.
Of course, we cannot get out of the world altogether. We have daily contacts with unbelievers when engaged in such necessary activities as preaching, shopping or secular work. In addition, a Christian wife whose husband is an unbeliever may be required to make more worldly contacts than others do. But all mature Christians are living for the new world, not cultivating ties with the old world. A mature Christian recognizes the difference between going to school for an education, for example, and participation in school sports, dances or other activities that are not compulsory. The Christian appreciates that he must be employed to make a living, but this does not require him to attend dinners and parties with worldly employers or fellow employees. He realizes that even though such worldly persons may not have lost all moral sense, they are not the associates for a worshiper of Jehovah to seek. As he gets God's mind on things he sees how Bible principles extend into many areas that he did not think about at first. When he becomes mature he would not want such worldly associations even if someone else did tell him that he thought it was all right. As a mature Christian he knows how to apply Christian principles, carrying his own load of responsibility.
EMPLOYMENT
This mature application of Bible principles also affects his employment. While he knows that God expects him to provide for his family, he realizes that Bible principles must be applied to the work he does. (1 Tim. 5:8) So when he becomes a Christian he readily sees that, even if his employer demands it, he cannot lie or cheat others. (Rev. 21:8; Eph. 4:28; Deut. 25:13-16) He may even find that he is engaged in a business that is in direct conflict with the Word of God; so to be able to serve God acceptably he may have to leave that occupation and seek employment of another kind, even though it may not be as rewarding from a financial standpoint.
Others may find that, while their work is generally not out of harmony with Bible principles, there are certain things that they are expected to do that give rise to a conflict of conscience. They may at first reason that they are not advocating these things, that they are only supplying goods or services that others request. But as one grows to maturity and applies Bible principles to their full measure one may find greater happiness by arranging to shift one's work to some other branch of his profession or by seeking work elsewhere. (1 Tim. 1:18, 19; 1 Pet. 3:21) Who is to decide? Neither the Watch Tower Society nor others of his Christian brothers can decide for him. It is his load of responsibility, and he should be allowed to carry that load free from criticism.
HEADSHIP
Other responsibilities must be faced at home. In many parts of the world people are inclined to be very independent. Wives have worldly attitudes about women's rights, children are disrespectful of their parents and bossy husbands are not too inclined to do what the Bible says. Things change when the family gets a knowledge of Jehovah God. The husband sees that he must submit to the headship of Christ and do a preaching work. (1 Cor. 11:3) But at first other Bible counsel on headship may seem to escape his notice or he may regard home affairs as his personal business. He may listen when Jesus says, 'Go preach,' but not when the Scriptures say, 'Love your wife as your own self.' He needs to accept the responsibility of applying Bible principles in every aspect of his life.-Eph. 5:28-30; Col. 3:12-14, 19; 1 Pet. 3:7.
A similar thing may take place with his wife. On becoming a Christian she realizes that she must be in subjection to her husband and she submits in many matters. (Eph. 5:22-24) But one day the husband may make a major decision without asking her opinion. He simply announces that the family is going to move. Now a test develops. She does not agree with him; her relatives live nearby. Will she still apply the Bible principle of subjection, carrying her load of responsibility, or will she try to take over her husband's load? If she lacks maturity she may stage an emotional demonstration to win her way or simply refuse to submit to her husband's decision. But one who is mature in the application of Bible principles does not discard them even when others fail to do what may seem right.
Sometimes youngsters come to know Jehovah ahead of their parents, who strongly object to the children's new religion. The parents order them to stop preaching from house to house and attending meetings. Shall the youngsters become rebellious? Not if they apply the Bible principle of honoring their father and mother. Although they will not quit worshiping Jehovah God, they will continue subject to their parents, doing what they can do to advance true worship. As they grow in love of God they will realize that what Jehovah says is best. They will rely patiently on him until they come of age or until their parents gain an understanding of Jehovah's will. In fact, by continuing in subjection they may bring about that happy result sooner than they would by taking things into their own hands.-Eph. 6:1-3.
MISUSE OF BLOOD
Another field in which decisions must be made involves the misuse of blood. Today the world misuses blood in so many ways that it is not always easy to discern what products contain it. The Christian may feel that it would be fine if the Watch Tower Society would make up a list of all the food products and medical preparations that contain blood. But the Society has not done so for good reasons. There are many substances found in blood that are also found elsewhere. This is to be expected, since human and animal bodies are not the only creations produced from the earth. For example, while lecithin is found in blood, it is also derived from soybeans, which happen to be the common commercial source of most lecithin. If there is doubt about a product, it is up to the individual to investigate by inquiring of the manufacturer. He cannot expect a brother in the congregation to rule on the matter for him; the brother did not make the product and neither did the Society. The substance may have been derived from blood or it may not. He must bear his own load of responsibility.
As to blood transfusions, he knows from his study of the Bible and the publications of the Watch Tower Society that this is an unscriptural practice. (Gen. 9:4; Acts 15:28, 29) Now it is up to him to carry his own load of responsibility in applying what the Scriptures have to say on this matter. One day he may go to the hospital for surgery. There he explains his position to the doctor. "All right," the doctor says, "then we will use plasma." Or the doctor may tell him, "What you need is red cells to carry oxygen. We have red cells that we can use. How about that?" The Christian may not be well versed in medical matters. Shall he call his congregation servant or the Society? That should not be necessary if he is prepared to carry his own load of responsibility. He need only ask the doctor: "From what was the plasma taken?" "How are the red cells obtained?" "Where did you get this substance?" If the answer is "Blood," he knows what course to take, for it is not just whole blood but anything that is derived from blood and used to sustain life or strengthen one that comes under this principle.
Someone may argue with you that the Scriptures are referring to the "eating" of blood but that blood is not taken into the digestive system during a transfusion. True, but the fact is that by a direct route the blood serves the same purpose as food when taken into the stomach, namely, strengthening the body or sustaining life. It is not the same as a vaccine given to a healthy person to ward off a disease. Blood is given to a weak or sick person to build him up, just as food is given to nourish him.
To carry this load of responsibility that goes with respect for the sanctity of life, it is important for one to think out the matter in all its aspects before a crisis arises. When one has been in an accident and is weak from loss of blood, this is no time to be making decisions that should have been made when one could think clearly and had time to ascertain the Bible principles involved. A mature person makes it a practice to meditate when he studies, considering the application of the information at hand to his own life even though he may not at the moment be faced with the circumstance under discussion. In this way he knows what course to take when confronted with an urgent situation and he has clearly in mind the governing principles from the Scriptures.
SEEKING GODLY WISDOM
Being a Christian involves everything one does in life. It is not just a matter of believing and preaching certain doctrines and cherishing certain hopes. At first one who is learning the truths from God's Word may be particularly concerned with doctrinal matters, because he finds that what the Bible says exposes false religious teachings that he had been taught from childhood. But as he grows in knowledge and appreciation, he sees that what the Bible outlines is more than a set of doctrines; it is a way of life. Now he begins to grasp what the scripture means when it says: "Trust in Jehovah with all your heart and do not lean upon your own understanding. In all your ways take notice of him, and he himself will make your paths straight."-Prov. 3:5, 6.
As a result, no matter what the problem with which he is faced, he first endeavors to ascertain the Bible principles involved and lets them guide his course. Even when deep emotional problems arise, he does not turn for counsel to men who may be highly educated in worldly psychology but who lack true faith in Jehovah God. He does as counseled at James 5:13: "Is there anyone suffering evil among you? Let him carry on prayer." Yes, he turns to God, regularly communing with him in prayer and taking time to meditate on the portions of his Word that help him to get his problem in proper perspective. If necessary, he may also talk to the overseer of his congregation or some other mature Christian to make sure that he is taking into consideration all the scriptures that bear on his situation. But then, bearing his own load of responsibility, he does not ask someone else to make his decisions for him. He faces up to the situation, determining which course he as a dedicated Christian ought to pursue. Then, trusting in Jehovah to uphold him, he courageously walks in the way that will keep him close to God.
DISCERNMENT, NOT FANATICISM
All such fine application of Bible principles is a matter of discernment, not fanaticism. At Proverbs chapter 2 Jehovah promises to give us discernment and wisdom if we hunt for it as we would for hid treasure. Through his "faithful and discreet slave" organization God has provided rich spiritual food, and we should regularly use the publications that contain that food. (Matt. 24:45-47) It is recommended that every Christian household have its own reference library containing Bibles, each year's copies of the Watchtower and Awake! magazines, the Watch Tower Society's current bound books, and other such information as is provided for those who are regularly engaging in the ministry. It might also be helpful to have a good dictionary, a Bible concordance and perhaps a Bible dictionary. Also on hand should be the Watch Tower Publications Index and its annual supplements. These are basic tools for seeking wisdom and discernment from God's Word.
When a question or problem arises, get in the habit of carrying your own load of responsibility. Turn to your Index or the index contained in the back of others of the Society's publications and locate the subject or text involved. If you do not have a certain publication to which you are referred, put forth the effort to locate it in the local Kingdom Hall library or at the home of a friend.
Do your research and come to the best conclusion that you are able to reach. Youths should check their conclusions with their parents. Wives may verify their findings by asking their dedicated husbands. Anyone can check an important matter with his congregation overseer. While offering the needed help, the overseer will also do well to inquire if the individual has done any research and thinking of his own on the question. At times it may be necessary to write to the Society about a matter if it is important in one's ministry. But all are urged to learn to discern the Bible principles involved in a matter just as the Society would.-Ps. 119:105.
By carrying your own load of responsibility you will enjoy greater use of your perceptive powers as you grow to maturity and in usefulness to Jehovah God and his organization. In time of crisis you will be able to determine what God's will for you is, just as Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego did in their own case. And, like them, you will find Jehovah's protection and favor in faithfully carrying your own load of responsibility.-Gal. 6:5.
w 64 11/15 680-2
Employment and Your Conscience
THROUGHOUT life a Christian must make decisions. Some he finds hard to make, others easy. Some decisions relate to what kind of employment he will accept in compliance with 1 Timothy 5:8, which points out that it is a Christian responsibility to provide for one's own household. First of all, he should view his problem objectively, making sure that he knows just what is involved in the kind of employment in question. Then he should consider any Biblical law or principle that may be involved. Though at times it may be difficult to do so, he should decide in favor of Scriptural laws or principles, when applicable to his situation, because a Christian is dedicated to Jehovah and must do His will. Certainly if a Christian willfully breaks the law of God he cannot consider himself guiltless, for God does not take such a view. Solomon said: "The conclusion of the matter, everything having been heard, is: Fear the true God and keep his commandments. For this is the whole obligation of man."-Eccl. 12:13.
Commandments of God do come into consideration by a Christian when choosing his employment. Exodus chapter 20 lists ten of God's commandments, and the second one forbids the making of images for worship. In 1 John 5:21 Christians too are urged to guard themselves from idols. Hence, a Christian could easily decide not to accept employment in the manufacture of images or medals for false religious use. Related to this is the inspired statement of Revelation 18:4, 5, which, when considered by the Christian, would cause him to refuse regular employment in a false religious organization.
Other commandments of Jehovah are: You must not murder; you must not commit adultery; you must not steal. (Rom. 13:8-10) Therefore, a dedicated Christian can easily decide that he cannot let himself be employed by organizations whose business is murder, illicit sex relations or theft, nor would he individually engage in these practices. Regarding involvement in political affairs of the world, he will maturely consider such texts as John 17:14; John 15:19 and Daniel 2:44. Considering Isaiah 2:2-4 and Micah 4:3, a Christian can determine whether his associations or conduct would give any support to a violation of such principles of peacefulness. Also, in the light of Isaiah 65:11, 12 and 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10, the Christian could not conscientiously work for an enterprise, the entire function of which was gambling or a lottery, or any other form of extortion. Obviously, the Christian could not properly be employed in any manner that would conflict with the righteous laws and principles of God's Word.
KEEPING FREE FROM BLOOD
Christians are told to abstain from blood. (Acts 15:20, 28, 29) Just how far-reaching is that? What do the Scriptures require of a dedicated servant of God? If you are killing an animal or a bird, then, to comply with God's law and to render that creature suitable for food, you must drain the blood. According to God's law you must refrain from eating blood or taking it, as in a transfusion, to sustain life. Genesis 9:3, 4 and Deuteronomy 12:23, 24 contain Scriptural commands. Leviticus 17:10 points out that those in ancient Israel who willfully took in blood would be cut off by Jehovah. However, if an Israelite happened to eat the flesh of a clean animal that died of itself or was torn by a wild beast, he was declared unclean until the evening, provided he cleansed himself. (Lev. 17:15, 16) With Christians too, if someone partook of the meat of an animal that had not been properly drained of its blood when slaughtered, and it was not deliberate on his part and he repented when it later came to his attention, avoiding a recurrence of such wrongdoing, Jehovah would mercifully forgive him.
Various uses of blood today are objectionable from the Biblical standpoint. Blood could be used on the altar under certain circumstances in ancient Israel, and if it was not used in that manner it was to be disposed of. (Lev. 17:11-14) Not only is blood being used in connection with modern medical practices, but it is reported that blood is now being used in a variety of products, such as adhesives for making plywood, particle board, hardboard, bottle crowns, furniture and musical instruments. Blood is also being used in polymerization of rubber compounds, insecticidal binder, settling compound for industrial waste treatment, clear water purification (paper industry), uranium purification, foaming agent for lightweight cellular concrete, fire foaming agent, wine clarifying agent, paper coatings and binders, paper flocculants and sizes, replacement of casein in latex emulsions, emulsified asphalt, cork composition, photoengraving platemaking solutions, leather-finishing operations, water-resistant binder of pigments for print dyeing on cotton cloth, fertilizers, animal foods, and amino acid production, such as histidine and histamine, for example. Perhaps additional uses of blood will come to light in the future. In the world the uses of blood are numerous and none of these is in accord with the Biblical method of handling blood, which is to be spilled on the ground. However, the Christian is not responsible for the worldly misuse of blood, what other people do with it, and he cannot spend all his time undertaking detailed research regarding the various misuses of blood in the world of mankind, especially when it comes to nonedible products. If he did so, he would have less time left for preaching the good news of God's kingdom. To some persons, it may be a hard decision to make as to where one should be employed. It resolves itself to a matter of conscience.
The Israelites were told: "You must not eat any body already dead. To the alien resident who is inside your gates you may give it, and he must eat it; or there may be a selling of it to a foreigner, because you are a holy people to Jehovah your God." (Deut. 14:21) So whether a Christian who works in a store will dispose of blood goods, such as blood sausage, by selling such goods to persons of the world who are willing to pay for them is a matter of conscience. It is also a personal matter as to whether another Christian will sell blood items to worldly persons in a drugstore or will spread blood fertilizer on the field of a worldly employer at his request. Naturally, a Christian could not properly encourage persons to obtain blood goods rather than those free from blood and he could not advocate any misuse of blood. However, we must leave it up to the conscience of the individual Christian as to what he will do when it comes to matters of this nature in handling such products. One Christian should not criticize another Christian for the decision he makes, just as one Israelite could not reasonably criticize another Israelite for selling to a foreigner an animal that died of itself and hence had not been properly drained of its blood.
The use of blood in adhesives for manufacturing plywood and other commonly used materials has now come to the attention of Christians, and we use plywood as an example. Much plywood is made using blood glue, but some plywood is blood-free. A Christian purchaser or contractor may seek to obtain blood-free plywood if he can do so; however, if he decides to use all types of plywood, it must be left to his conscience. It is not always possible to determine just how the plywood has been made. Because blood may be used in some plywood, this does not mean that a Christian could not buy, sell or rent a home or purchase a trailer in which plywood is found. The extent to which he would check on such matters is for him to decide.
Also, if a Christian is working for a company that uses blood glue in some of its plywood or other products, he would not necessarily have to quit his job. He may work in the woods, cutting down the trees. Part of the lumber is used one way and part another. The employee is not responsible for what happens to the wood after he has done his job. Of course, if a Christian worked in a plywood plant and it was required that he prepare the blood glue or apply it to the plywood, he might feel he could not conscientiously do this. He might request that his employer give him some other kind of work not handling blood. But even this is a personal matter. By doing other work for the same company, such as working as a truck driver, salesman, and so forth, the individual may feel he is free from responsibility for any misuse of blood. Since blood is used in the manufacture of so many common products, it becomes almost impossible for the Christian to avoid all contact with them-leather goods, furniture, bottle tops, cotton cloth, and so forth. So just what the Christian will do is a matter of conscience, and others should not criticize him. Certainly it would not be fitting to disrupt the unity of a Christian congregation in a certain locality by becoming involved in detailed discussions and contentions over the personal decision in this respect on the part of some Christian associated with that congregation.-Ps. 133:1; Prov. 26:21; Jas. 3:16-18.
The Society does not endorse any of the modern medical uses of blood, such as the uses of blood in connection with inoculations. Inoculation is, however, a virtually unavoidable circumstance in some segments of society, and so we leave it up to the conscience of the individual to determine whether to submit to inoculation with a serum containing blood fractions for the purpose of building up antibodies to fight against disease. If a person did this, he may derive comfort under the circumstances from the fact that he is not directly eating blood, which is expressly forbidden in God's Word. It is not used for food or to replace lost blood. Here the Christian must make his own decision based on conscience. Therefore, whether a Christian will submit to inoculation with a serum, or whether doctors or nurses who are Christians will administer such, is for personal decision. Christians in the medical profession are individually responsible for employment decisions. They must bear the consequences of decisions made, in keeping with the principle at Galatians 6:5. Some doctors who are Jehovah's witnesses have administered blood transfusions to persons of the world upon request. However, they do not do so in the case of one of Jehovah's dedicated witnesses. In harmony with Deuteronomy 14:21, the administering of blood upon request to worldly persons is left to the Christian doctor's own conscience. This is similar to the situation facing a Christian butcher or grocer who must decide whether he can conscientiously sell blood sausage to a worldly person.
MAKING YOUR DECISION
These few examples of how Christians may go about deciding on their employment may be helpful when it comes to considering types of employment mentioned here. The Christian should always consider God's laws in everything he does; and whatever he does, he does unto Jehovah. (1 Cor. 10:31) If what he does is not contrary to God's law and "Caesar's" just laws, he is within his rights in doing it, and no one should criticize him. When a Christian is in doubt about what he should do, he should pray to Jehovah God. (1 Pet. 5:6, 7) He should read the Bible and consider Christian publications that deal with his problem. (The Watch Tower Publications Index contains many references under "Employment.") He can talk to the congregation overseer. However, after doing these things it is the individual who, knowing all the circumstances and consequences, must analyze matters and then decide. Others cannot make his decision, if it is a matter of conscience.
When faced with a decision, you may feel in advance that your conscience would bother you if you decided in a certain manner. The thing to do, then, is to avoid that which will cause you to have a troubled conscience. Christians desire to please Jehovah and so, whatever their employment, it should be the kind of work they can do with a clear conscience before Jehovah. "Whatever you are doing, work at it whole-souled as to Jehovah, and not to men."-Col. 3:23; 1 Tim. 1:18, 19; 1 Pet. 3:16.
[Footnotes]
Concerning these matters please see The Watchtower of September 15, 1958, page 575, and November 1, 1961, page 670.
See The Watchtower of February 15, 1963, pages 122-124.
w66 7/1 398-404
Exercising Maturity-A Safeguard
"You will walk in security on your way, and even your foot will not strike against anything . . . For Jehovah himself will prove to be, in effect, your confidence, and he will certainly keep your foot against capture."-Prov. 3:23-26.
POSSESSING mature thinking and judgment is of great value to the person who seeks to do God's will, enabling him to thwart the continual bombardment of temptations that are constantly striking him in this old order of things. The threats to Christian integrity in these wicked days at the end of this system of things are materialism, backbiting, reviling, extortion, immorality and misuse of blood. The rising emotional floods of nationalism bring increased political demands on the Christian to direct his worship to national standards and his loyalty and life to the State. In addition to this, there is the barrage of commercial inducements to seek a life of ease, luxury, to trust in materialism, to make money rapidly by sharp practices, on the borderline between legality and outright cheating. 'The question immediately arises, "What will be my decision when these temptations confront me?" Does the one giving thought to these matters always know what he would do, or, at times, are there some doubts in his mind, be they ever so small?
2 In view of the pressures we must endure, it is necessary to use every faculty to maintain integrity. Jesus showed this principle in these words: "If you love me, you will observe my commandments." Obviously, then, to overcome temptations of the world, love and obedience to Jehovah are vitally essential. Continually wanting to come into harmony with Jehovah's Word will constitute a safeguard. One's thinking ability has been enhanced by continual study and advancement to maturity. It "will keep guard over you."-John 14:15; Prov. 2:11.
3 Exercising maturity will be a safeguard if we continue acquiring accurate knowledge, analyze it and compare it with what we already know, drawing proper conclusions from this analysis, storing it up in our memory and putting it all into practical use at the proper time. Can we not, therefore, readily see the importance of continual study throughout our lives? Yes, our thinking and decisions are conditioned on such knowledge and wisdom. How apropos are Jehovah's words of counsel given to safeguard us, as illustrated in these words: "My son, to my wisdom O do pay attention. To my discernment incline your ears, so as to guard thinking abilities; and may your own lips safeguard knowledge itself"! (Prov. 5:1, 2) This brings us back to the importance of the thought that we should safeguard practical wisdom; and notice how valuable this is, as stated in Proverbs 3:21, 22: "Safeguard practical wisdom and thinking ability, and they will prove to be life to your soul and charm to your throat." Cultivating and developing thinking ability develops maturity, and it is important that this be done now, rather than to wait until a crucial moment demands a vital decision.
4 If as parents, for example, we are pressured by a doctor and family members who do not have accurate knowledge, to permit a blood transfusion, stating that the child's life depends on it, can we make the proper decision at that time and give a reason for it? Or will we have to say, "I don't have the proper explanation just now, but I'll read up on the subject and advise"? It is important that under such times of harassment one never discounts the power of emotion to becloud mature thinking. Mature judgment can be exercised only when the mind can clearly analyze the problem or situation, draw sober conclusions and reach decisions unfettered and unhampered by outside influence. Through prior study we will have God's mind on the matter in harmony with his spirit, and a resolve should be made to carry out God's will, come what may. Let the waves of emotions of others dash themselves in vain against the rocklike structure of your faith!
CREATURE WORSHIP-IDOLATRY
5 Thinking on divine principles will help to meet situations as they come up during one's lifetime. You will know why the course is right or wrong. But suppose circumstances may be somewhat different. Take, for example, doing acts of worship before symbols. Immediately scriptures such as 1 John 5:21 come to mind: "Little children, guard yourselves from idols," and Jehovah's words in the Decalogue: "You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form that is like anything that is in the heavens above or that is on the earth underneath or that is in the waters under the earth." Diagnosing the matter, then, what is an idol? What is idolatry? We see that an idol can be an image or symbol of anything created. Do not national emblems have symbols on them? Stars? Animals? Colors that represent qualities? Do not they stand for what Peter referred to as "every human creation"? May they be revered? Jehovah's own words answer: "You must not bow down to them nor be induced to serve them, because I Jehovah your God am a God exacting exclusive devotion." Therefore, bowing down would be an act of worship. Is the principle any different if some other motion is indulged in? Is standing up when a patriotic song is sung any different from bowing down when an idol passes? Or removing the hat? Or extending the hand or putting the hand over the heart?-Ex. 20:4, 5; 1 Pet. 2:13.
6 But yet, what is so bad about it? Well, bear in mind that Jehovah says he exacts exclusive devotion, and this is all due propriety. Remember, Jehovah is our Judge, Lawgiver and King. (Isa. 33:22) His jurisdiction embodies the entire government of the universe. Therefore, to do an act of worship to any other personage or thing created would be idolatry. We can readily see why Satan would have been most satisfied and triumphant with just one small act of worship from Jesus. (Matt. 4:9, 10) Such would be treason and deserving of death. This is universally recognized, even among the nations. How much worse, then, is treason that brings into jeopardy the eternal life of others and dishonors Jehovah! If confronted with such a compromising situation when commanded to worship (salute) some national emblem or commit an act of obeisance, one may take immediate comfort from Jesus' words at Matthew 10:28, when he said: "Do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; but rather be in fear of him that can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna." Let mature judgment safeguard your life by recognizing that you will encounter many trials and tribulations, and it could mean death, as shown in Revelation 2:10, where we are admonished: "Prove yourself faithful even to death, and I will give you the crown of life." It is true that men and nations could take away your life now, but can they give it back to you? Can they give you everlasting life? Can they prevent Jehovah from giving you life? Because we are in a position and have opportunity to acquire mature judgment, embedding it deeply in our minds and hearts at this time, let it be so strongly entrenched that, on our part, it will develop a hatred toward any act of disobedience or treason against Jehovah.
ABSTAINING FROM BLOOD
7 In the matter of blood, we must start basically at the initial pronouncement against it, where eating blood was forbidden to mankind. (Gen. 9:4) Jews were prohibited from eating the blood of any sort from any flesh. (Lev. 17:14) Probably the strongest expression was given to the Christians at Acts 15:29, where the unequivocal statement is made: "Keep yourselves free . . . from blood." But without having full knowledge of such a statement as this, the average individual might possibly reason, "Wouldn't it be all right to sacrifice just a little of one's blood to preserve the life of another, especially if the one in need is one's own flesh and blood?" No, because this goes against another Bible principle that Jehovah stated through his prophet Samuel: "To obey is better than a sacrifice." (1 Sam. 15:22) Add to this the fact that rebelliousness and presumptuousness are as bad as using divination, uncanny power and teraphim. The unacquainted mind might say, "Well, that would be saving a life." But is it really, when we resort to sober mature thinking and principle? By full and complete obedience, our souls and those of our children are preserved to everlasting life. It goes without saying that we love our children, and true love works to their best interest. Certainly one would never jeopardize one's own child's hope for everlasting life by compromising with worldly principles or by sentimentality! No, Jesus' words at Matthew 10:37 apply here, when he stated: "He that has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and he that has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me." So, then, is it best for you and your child to have a few short years of life now, or eternal life in the new order of things? Weigh the alternatives, then make your decision. Are you one to whom disobeying God's law is repulsive? Then the taking of blood is just as despicable to you as cannibalism. Think of eating of the flesh of another human creature! It is shocking! Is drinking human blood any different? Does bypassing the mouth and putting it directly into the veins change it? Not at all!
MATURITY AND IMMATURITY
8 We might look to the example of David, who was acquainted with God's law on blood and analyzed it, and he came to the conclusion that he would not consider even a seeming violation of God's law. This is told to us at 1 Chronicles 11:19: "It is unthinkable on my part, as regards my God, to do this! Is it the blood of these men that I should drink at the risk of their souls? For it was at the risk of their souls that they brought it." Again, mature judgment was a safeguard to David.
9 It may be well for us to consider another occasion concerning David, when his decision was not predicated on mature thinking, when he let physical passion overshadow and dim mature judgment. Looking too long at an attractive woman, Bath-sheba, led him into a course of direct violation of the Seventh Commandment, forbidding adultery. Apparently he had not given the same careful thought in this case as he did in the previous one. Here is an instance where David was overreached by personal desire, and there is little question of David's having had knowledge that adulterous violators were to be stoned to death.-2 Sam. 11:2-5.
10 The same Bible principle is held out to Christians today, inasmuch as at 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10 it states: 'Adulterers will not inherit God's kingdom.' In actuality, they must be expelled (disfellowshiped and put in a deathlike condition) from the Christian congregation. Prohibition of fornication was one of the requirements for Gentile believers as well, as Paul admonishes against fornication and adultery. Some people exercise immature judgment by consoling their own consciences in such thoughts as, "It doesn't really hurt anybody, does it?" "Isn't it rather extreme to stone people to death just for doing what comes naturally?"
11 By proper enlightenment through careful study one will recognize that Jehovah's purpose for sexual relationship was to transmit life, under the marriage arrangement of parents, who were to provide security for proper growth, development and education for their offspring. Children reared outside this arrangement suffer because of being born outside the divine pattern. It must be recognized, then, that by applying the perfect standard of justice, sexual immorality is a perversion or wrong and receives God's adverse judgment.
12 A good example of immaturity was the nation of Israel who fell away, from time to time, to outright, bald-faced, unquestioned idolatry. They just did not think. Is not that the most usual reason when we get into trouble? We just do not think. If we do not think before acting, very likely we will think regretfully afterward. Hosea rebuked the Israelites with the words of Jehovah: "Because the knowledge is what you yourself have rejected, I shall also reject you from serving as a priest to me; and because you keep forgetting the law of your God, I shall forget your sons, even I." (Hos. 4:6) Where there is lack of knowledge, the retrospect of a creature will not safeguard him, but, rather, lead him into wrongdoing. Either they did not take in right knowledge for a safeguard or they did not keep it in memory.
13 Splendid examples of those who took the wise course were the three companions of Daniel. Maturity of thought is illustrated to us in Daniel 1:4, as Nebuchadnezzar asked that a search be made for captives "having insight into all wisdom and being acquainted with knowledge, and having discernment of what is known." Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego qualified as men of mature thought. This is what gave them strength under later temptations. In fact, when severe pressure was brought upon them to bow to a political image on the plain of Dura, their mature answer to Nebuchadnezzar was manifested when they declared: "O Nebuchadnezzar, we are under no necessity in this regard to say back a word to you. If it is to be, our God whom we are serving is able to rescue us. Out of the burning fiery furnace and out of your hand, O king, he will rescue us." Notice their continuation of expression: "If not, let it become known to you, O king, that your gods are not the ones we are serving, and the image of gold that you have set up we will not worship." Of course, we know the thrilling outcome in the miraculous deliverance from the fiery furnace that was theirs.-Daniel 3.
14 Daniel was also adamant in his thinking. He did not wait until he was confronted with temptation, because the foundation of his decision was made ahead of time, as noted at Daniel 1:8: "But Daniel determined in his heart that he would not pollute himself with the delicacies of the king and with his drinking wine. And he kept requesting of the principal court-official that he might not pollute himself." Even though Darius signed the edict that whoever would petition (pray to) another for thirty days would be thrown into the lions' pit, Daniel continued praying to his God three times a day as had been customary for him. Such faithfulness was recompensed by Jehovah with His closing the mouth of the lions.-Dan. 6:7-22.
15 On one occasion Saul was intent upon attacking the Philistines. He waited seven days for Samuel to come up and offer burnt sacrifice and communion sacrifices and, when he failed to show patience, he said: "'Bring near to me the burnt sacrifice and the communion sacrifices.' With that he went offering up the burnt sacrifice." He did not continue to wait upon the Lord. What a lamentable thing it is to rely upon one's own judgment, which is so shallow compared to the instruction of Jehovah! When Samuel approached him then, he said: "You have acted foolishly. You have not kept the commandment of Jehovah your God. . . . And now your kingdom will not last." The record continues: "Jehovah will certainly find for himself a man agreeable to his heart; and Jehovah will commission him as a leader over his people, because you did not keep what Jehovah commanded you."-1 Sam. 13:9, 13, 14.
16 In contrast, notice the mature thinking of another man, one that obeyed God's command even though it meant the life of his son, in whom all his hopes rested. Yes, God commanded Abraham actually to sacrifice his own son. This is something that Jehovah has never commanded another man to do, before or since. Abraham had all confidence in Almighty God and his purposes. The covenant that Jehovah had made with him was burned indelibly in his memory, and he KNEW that the blessing of all nations was to come through his son Isaac. Abraham was prepared to carry out the instruction to kill the only one through whom the seed of promise could come. There was only one possible conclusion that Abraham could have drawn from this reasoning. Had he carried through and killed his son, it is stated at Hebrews 11:19: "he reckoned that God was able to raise him up even from the dead; and from there he did receive him also in an illustrative way."
17 Another classic example of those who disregarded the counsel of God by thinking as natural men to the point of despising God's law was the case of the two sons of the high priest Eli, Hophni and Phinehas. Not only were they greedily taking the best of the sacrifices for themselves, but they committed adultery with the women who served at the tabernacle. They were overreached by their own selfish desires, disregarding Jehovah's laws and not thinking about Jehovah. Jehovah was thinking of them and observed their conduct and compared it with his righteous law. He came to this conclusion in regard to their continuing on as priests and producing offspring to serve as priests: "It is unthinkable, on my part, because those honoring me I shall honor, and those despising me will be of little account." Jehovah remembered this decision regarding them, and they died in battle as a divine judgment.-1 Sam. 2:22-26, 30, 34; 4:11.
18 There was an occasion where a young man was most cognizant of Jehovah's law and principles because as a youth he had a knowledge of the right moral standards of Jehovah. His mature judgment safeguarded him from committing immorality when tempted by the enticements of Potiphar's wife, who repeatedly invited Joseph to commit fornication when she asked him to "lie down with me." His decision was made in these words: "How could I commit this great badness and actually sin against God?" His reaction? Joseph "left his garment in her hand and took to flight and went on outside." He would rather spend years in prison, charged with what he refused to do, than violate the dictates of his decision to be faithful to God's requirements. (Gen. 39:7, 9, 10, 12) Joseph was actually committed to prison under false charges placed against him. As a result of his uncompromising stand he was used as a provider for his people. Faithfulness under this trial was a requisite for such approval.
CONCLUSION
19 It is certainly discernible that theocratically trained minds will render like judgment and will not let down guard and fall into the error of sin leading to pain, sorrow, suffering and eternal death. Why not let our course imitate that of faithful men who protected and guarded their souls carefully and remained in the favor of Almighty God even under trial? Maintaining integrity to God constitutes a safeguard of life. The joys and blessings of obedience bring security, contentment and self-sufficiency. Yes, it will enable one to build up a powerful shield of faith, as Paul described: "Above all things, take up the large shield of faith, with which you will be able to quench all the wicked one's burning missiles." Even though Satan may take away all our literature and even our Bible and put us into solitary confinement or subject us to vicious persecution, we will have a protection that he cannot penetrate. If we have taken in complete and accurate knowledge of Jehovah's purposes as found in the sacred Word the Bible, if we have compared and analyzed it carefully with the help of mature brothers in association with the congregation, if we make decisions in advance on what to do under the varying circumstances that may come upon us, if we recall them and make practical decisions, we will safeguard ourselves against temptations that confront us continually.-Eph. 6:16.
20 How true is the proverb that tells us to depend always on Jehovah, as stated in Proverbs, chapter 3, verses 5 and 6: "Do not lean upon your own understanding. In all your ways take notice of him, and he himself will make your paths straight"! Wisely, then, put all your faith and trust in Jehovah, predicated upon mature judgment. This will guard you, and Jehovah himself will be your everlasting shield.
[Study Questions]
1. Why is mature thinking and judgment of such great value to us today, and what will it enable us to do?
2. How will observance of Jesus' words at John 14:15 'keep guard over us'?
3. (a) Why is study so vital throughout our entire lives? (b) Why is it so urgent now?
4. How will prior study help us under trying conditions to make decisions based on right conclusions and not sentiment?
5. What circumstances could arise that lead to compromise in an idolatrous act?
6. (a) What, basically, constitutes idolatry? Why is such equivalent to treason? (b) Why should we not fear man or earthly governments?
7. (a) What does God's Word have to say regarding the use of blood? (b) How should one reason on the use of blood when one's own children are involved? (c) Why should the misuse of blood be repulsive to a Christian?
8. How did David view drinking water when men risked their lives to procure it for him?
9. On what occasion did David show immature judgment?
10. (a) What is the penalty for Christians if they commit adultery (or fornication) today? How may some immature person salve his conscience?
11. What is Jehovah's purpose for sexual relationship, and when is it proper?
12. What happened to Israel regarding idolatry? Why?
13. Describe the maturity of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego.
14. How did Daniel manifest his maturity on two occasions?
15. How did Saul demonstrate a lack of mature judgment? With what ultimate result?
16. Describe how Abraham displayed mature judgment and utmost faith in Jehovah.
17. How did Eli's sons manifest complete disregard for Jehovah's Word? With what results to them?
18. What tempting situation confronted Joseph, and what resulted to him immediately, and ultimately, for maintaining integrity?
19. (a) Whose course should we imitate for protection? (b) How will maturity protect us even under trying circumstances?
20. What will provide our everlasting safeguard?
w67 11/15 702-4 Questions from Readers
Is there any Scriptural objection to donating one's body for use in medical research or to accepting organs for transplant from such a source?-W. L., U.S.A.
A number of issues are involved in this matter, including the propriety of organ transplants and autopsies. Quite often human emotion is the only factor considered when individuals decide these matters. It would be good, though, for Christians to consider the Scriptural principles that apply, and then make decisions in harmony with these principles so as to be pleasing to Jehovah.-Acts 24:16.
First, it would be well to have in mind that organ transplant operations, such as are now being performed in an attempt to repair the body or extend a life-span, were not the custom thousands of years ago, so we cannot expect to find legislation in the Bible on transplanting human organs. Yet, this does not mean that we have no indication of God's view of such matters.
When Jehovah for the first time allowed humans to eat animal flesh, he explained matters this way to Noah: "A fear of you and a terror of you will c |