Subject: Why not eat blood/why accept transfusion |
Bible Note: JWs ORIGINAL INTERPRETATION OF ACTS 15:20,29 Christian commentaries show that abstaining from these "necessary things" was necessary to maintain peace between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians. If Gentile Christians were to eat blood with their food it would offend Jewish Christians. In 1892 the first president of the JWs, C T Russell, agreed with this Christian interpretation. (Zion’s Watch Tower 1892 November 15) In 1909 Russell showed that the 4 prohibitions were part of the Law of Moses, didn’t really apply to Gentiles, but were necessary for peace. He wrote: "These prohibitions had never come to the Gentiles, because they had never been under the Law Covenant; but so deeply rooted were the Jewish ideas on this subject that it was necessary to the peace of the church that the Gentiles should observe this matter also." (The Watch Tower 1909 April 15 pp. 116-117) A DIFFERENT AND CHANGED VIEW: In 1939 the 2nd president of the JWs, J.F. Rutherford, wrote: "…… the life is in the blood and that blood must not be eaten. That would be true of a clean animal or an unclean one just the same. ……and if an animal is killed and the blood is not poured out, but eaten, then the man who does it is guilty of death, for the reason that no man shall drink blood without dying." (The Watchtower 1939 February 15 p.62) ANOTHER, CHANGED, AND I ASSUME CURRENT VIEW: The Watchtower 1944 December 1 stated: "Not only as a descendant of Noah, but now also as one bound by God’’s law to Israel which incorporated the everlasting covenant regarding the sanctity of life sustaining blood, the stranger was forbidden to eat or drink blood, whether by transfusion or by mouth." (complete article at www.adam.com.au/bstett/JwBloodDoctrineOrigin10.htm) My question to a JW on this would be, what happened to all the JW followers before 1944 who were led astray by the false prophet called The Watchtower, who lead them to believe a blood transfusion was OK, and now it says no man shall take blood without dying? I would not even discuss the blood issue with them. Even if they agree with you, it will accomplishment nothing if they refuse to recognize Jesus for who He is. Their mis-interpretation of Acts 15 won’t send them to hell, so let them believe what thy want. However, their mis-interpretation (and mis-translation) of John 1:1 will. Remember, when they step on our porch, they are on our territory, and it is our responsibility to give them the Gospel. Use the blood issue, as the Holy Spirit leads, to show them the lies they have been fed, so maybe they will accept the truth of the Gospel. Jesus was with God and He was God! Merry Christmas, retxar |