Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / NewStats: 3,162,742 members, 7,851,557 topics. Date: Wednesday, 05 June 2024 at 10:45 PM |
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? (24271 Views)
Why Are So Many Christians Against Jehovah Witnesses ? Why ? / Are Blood Transfusions Sinful? / Five Things You Never Knew About Jehovah's Witnesses. (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ... (15) (Reply) (Go Down)
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by AutoElectNG: 1:00am On Sep 05, 2018 |
Hairyrapunzel: The distinction between eating and injecting is a moot point. True the technology of injecting blood was nonexistent when the Bible was written. But if you carefully study these bible commentaries, you will appreciate that the fine distinction between eating and injecting does not align with God's intended use of blood. see the following non Witness Bible commentaries https://biblehub.com/commentaries/genesis/9-4.htm They basically align with the position of the witnesses that blood is life in the sight of God and the use of blood must be as directed by its maker and Giver and not as suggested by creatures. That eating human flesh did not make sense is clear from the reaction of the crowd to his comments about eating his flesh and drinking his blood....although if you study the greek words he used, he didn't mean it literally,but even the thought was so unnerving, he lost disciples. Assuming but not conceding that the passage is limited to animal food, the issue is not about animal or human as food or nutrients, but about blood as nutrients or as medicine. Since the religious group believes everything they do should honor God, they cannot fathom doing something that appears minimize God's right to lead man while also claiming to be worshipping the same God, and that sort of explains their position on taking blood via any channel.
Please do me the favor of highlighting in bold or via quotes the lie or lies in my previous post so I can do justice to the accusation. Thank you. Until then the above statement will be treated as an unsubstantiated accusation. Is this how you guys cook up stories just to make your doctrines look like it was mentioned in the bible? Please do me the favor of pointing to any story or stories I cooked up in the above post. Thank you. Is this yet another figment of your vivid imagination at work or are you actually referring to what I said? Please provide references. And take the time to study https://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/28/why-do-jehovahs-witnesses-abstain-blood, it would clarify a few issues for you. Do you as an ardent student of the Bible remember that Jesus once said I have many things to tell you but you are not able to bear them at the moment? Or you also recall that Jesus once instructed not to go with money pouches and provisions, but later on changed his stance? Do you realize or have you forgotten how initially there was confusion whether circumcision was a requirement to be a true Christian and how subsequently that position was clarified? The common thread? Time changes things, the principles remain the same, but the understanding and or application can change. Did the Bible not talk of the light getting brighter over time?
You are being mischievous and you know it. What did the Bible speak of? Blood or blood fractions? What do the witnesses refuse to take whole blood and main blood components. What is the stand of the witnesses on blood fractions and derivatives? Take? Don't Take? Or let your conscience lead you? You know the position is decide for yourself after weighing the facts and listening to the leadings of the inbuilt compass for determining right and wrong your conscience. Why is this additional clarification necessary? You admit those derivatives did not exist when the Bible was written, in the same way as gentile christians did not exist when God required circumcision from his people. Changing circumstances requires applying the scripture to new developments such as has been highlighted here. It took a while for the oversight body to apply christian principles to chamging times. All in all what you despise is what God has always valued and protection, where there is no express prohibition, individual choice reigns supreme. There is NO list of fractions to be accepted....there is a list of fractions that you may apply your understanding of the scriptures and the proddings of your conscience to determine if you can accept or not in the absence of an express injunction against the use of blood components. The BMJ link addresses the issue of blood donations adequately.
It seems my point was lost in translation. I never ever said that the US Army stopped using blood transfusion. I said and the article made it clear that there are distinct advantages of bloodless surgery/medicine that were so outstanding that the US Army committed almost 5 million dollars to pursuing it further. If bloodless surgery and medicine was as worthless of you make it seem, would they do that especially in the presence of according to you a more viable alternative....the holy grail of blood transfusion? Maybe it is you who had problems distilling this subtle point from the article because of ingrained bias. Thank Goodness you used you express they adopted....so you got my point afterall. Now do me and your followers the favor of pointing to where I said or insinuated or even suggested talk less of hinting that they had abandoned blood transfusion for my education and further enlightenment. Thank you in anticipation.
Unless my memory has failed, for those who believe in bloodless medicine transfusion is not an option.....so the question of its being a last resort does not even arise.
I never ever said that John Hopkins stopped using blood transfusion, if I did, would you be kind enough to point to it? Thanks. There is almost no medical procedure without both....and that includes blood transfusions which is why the US Army even gave attention to bloodless surgery in the first place since it appeared that the post surgery complications of bloodless were fewer than blood. Even malaria medicines have been withdrawn or suggested as being inappropriate over time by the WHO, these things happen. Question is are there alternatives....if yes then substitute.
This is so true of blood transfusions as well. https://academic.oup.com/bjaed/article/14/3/112/341048 As time permits, I will address your other mentions of me.... |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by OneJ: 1:04am On Sep 05, 2018 |
Seun: Seun, "Jesus declared all foods to be clean" , if U were served a tasty dish of jellyfish & jollof rice, U go eat ? |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by OneJ: 1:21am On Sep 05, 2018 |
chiommy123: It goes more than that . Between obedience to God & saving his son's life,which did Abraham choose? The injunction "Abstain from blood" has no clause attached. Acts 15:20,29. Yes or no. pls reply. Is intravenous injection of dextrose & saline /ringers solution , the same as intake of food ? Yes or no. pls reply. |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by OneJ: 1:24am On Sep 05, 2018 |
chiommy123: It goes more than that . Between obedience to God & saving his son's life,which did Abraham choose? what's the lesson u learnt from Abraham's action? The injunction "Abstain from blood" has no clause attached. Acts 15:20,29. Yes or no. pls reply. Is intravenous injection of dextrose & saline /ringers solution , the same as intake of food ? Yes or no. pls reply. |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by OneJ: 1:36am On Sep 05, 2018 |
tintingz: Blood transfusion gives high chances of surviving" What a fantastic assumption ! No proof. U no fit eat your favorite dish rice & beans, because of typhoid fever, doctor come put drip for your body, na your feeding be that? yes or no. reply |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by alBHAGDADI: 6:31am On Sep 05, 2018 |
OneJ: What a lame comeback. You ended up saying nothing. We showed you guys times without number that the blood to abstain from is animal blood which we must not eat. Yet you guys are still clutching on straws by saying it involves human blood as well. Did the Israelite ever eat human not to talk of its blood to make God make such law? No. You gave no answer concerning exchange of blood during sexual immorality and sex in marriage. You only said one sex is approved by God while the other isn't. Does that mean the exchange of blood during that sex is approved? |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by alBHAGDADI: 6:43am On Sep 05, 2018 |
OneJ:You keep saying the injuction "abstain from blood" has no clause attached. But when I bring up the fact that you touch blood when you slaughter chicken, doctors touch blood when a baby is delivered or when treating an injured person, you immediately bring up a clause. Abstain from blood, yet you bring up a clause that allows you take some components of blood. Isn't that madness? I showed you that the blood spoken of is about the blood of animals which we must not eat, yet you still keep on ranting lies. I showed you countless verses which we can use to understand that verse in the book of Acts, still you don't want to listen. You just want to keep holding on to the weak belief that it is about human blood. You are too embarrassed to admit the false doctrine of jw GB Abraham's case is a clear command from God. The case of blood transfusion is a command from 8 old men in New York who twisted the Bible to say what it doesn't say. 1 Like |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by alBHAGDADI: 6:51am On Sep 05, 2018 |
OneJ: The tonnes of people who have survived after the process is enough proof. But I know you don't keep track of that. You only keep track of the few people in your organization that survived even after refusing blood transfusion. 2 Likes |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by blezzy080: 7:22am On Sep 05, 2018 |
Seun:This is a religious issue rather than a medical one. Both the Old and New Testaments clearly command us to abstain from blood. (Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 17:10; Deuteronomy 12:23; Acts 15:28, 29) Also, God views blood as representing life. (Leviticus 17:14) So we avoid taking blood not only in obedience to God but also out of respect for him as the Giver of life. 1 Like |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by homesteady(m): 8:01am On Sep 05, 2018 |
eyinjuege: When your choice is totally imposed on you by a a set of fickle-minded people called a governing board, then that choice can be questioned. Just like how people question Islamic terrorists beliefs. |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by blezzy080: 8:11am On Sep 05, 2018 |
The Bible commands that we not ingest blood. So we should not accept whole blood or its primary components in any form, whether offered as food or as a transfusion. Note the following scriptures: Genesis 9:4. God allowed Noah and his family to add animal flesh to their diet after the Flood but commanded them not to eat the blood. God told Noah: “Only flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.” This command applies to all mankind from that time on because all are descendants of Noah. Leviticus 17:14. “You must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood. Anyone eating it will be cut off.” God viewed the soul, or life, as being in the blood and belonging to him. Although this law was given only to the nation of Israel, it shows how seriously God viewed the law against eating blood. Acts 15:20. “Abstain . . . from blood.” God gave Christians the same command that he had given to Noah. History shows that early Christians refused to consume whole blood or even to use it for medical reasons. Why does God command us to abstain from blood? There are sound medical reasons to avoid blood transfusions. More important, though, God commands that we abstain from blood because what it represents is sacred to him.—Leviticus 17:11; Colossians 1:20. |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by blezzy080: 8:12am On Sep 05, 2018 |
Seun:The Bible commands that we not ingest blood. So we should not accept whole blood or its primary components in any form, whether offered as food or as a transfusion. Note the following scriptures: Genesis 9:4. God allowed Noah and his family to add animal flesh to their diet after the Flood but commanded them not to eat the blood. God told Noah: “Only flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.” This command applies to all mankind from that time on because all are descendants of Noah. Leviticus 17:14. “You must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood. Anyone eating it will be cut off.” God viewed the soul, or life, as being in the blood and belonging to him. Although this law was given only to the nation of Israel, it shows how seriously God viewed the law against eating blood. Acts 15:20. “Abstain . . . from blood.” God gave Christians the same command that he had given to Noah. History shows that early Christians refused to consume whole blood or even to use it for medical reasons. Why does God command us to abstain from blood? There are sound medical reasons to avoid blood transfusions. More important, though, God commands that we abstain from blood because what it represents is sacred to him.—Leviticus 17:11; Colossians 1:20. 1 Like |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by tintingz(m): 8:31am On Sep 05, 2018 |
OneJ:What a messed up logic. I'm talking about critical situation, e.g accidents, CS childbirth, deep cuts etc where there are lose of blood, blood transfusion is necessary! But believing in God will make life meaningless, your anthropomorphic fairy daddy in the sky didn't state any medical treatment in your fairy book yet he hates what could give high chances of surviving. What a delusion! |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by chiommy123(f): 11:39am On Sep 05, 2018 |
OneJ:Abraham obeyed God which is still our duty here on earth. The bible wasn't even talking about accepting or giving out blood in Acts 15:20 that you quoted. Its talking about things sacrificed to idols, formication, staining your hands with blood I.e killing/ murder. To me its not cos its not every food they can take with that. Thou the medics may see it differently |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by Seun(m): 1:27pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
OneJ:Don’t ask me, ask Jesus, the author of your salvation. He is the one who declared all foods to be clean. Do you follow Jesus, or do you follow the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses? 3 Likes 6 Shares |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by OneJ: 1:42pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
chiommy123: "The Bible wasn't even talking about accepting or giving out blood in Acts 15:20". "Abstain.... from blood" Acts 15:20 U dey smoke weed ? |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by OneJ: 1:44pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
tintingz:Deluded bigot, dey form atheist. |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by OneJ: 2:16pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
alBHAGDADI: Your. tonnes of people who transfuse blood only succeeded in playing with a double edge sword. It's no guarantee of eternal longevity. Many JWs don't take blood transfusions, yet they survived & recovered faster than those who transfused blood. Many have died after blood transfusions just as some JW died with out taking blood . JWs faith in Jehovah word "Abstain from blood" is solid & Jehovah's promises is assured. Abraham offered his son , Isaac on the altar, his faith was considered righteous by God. James 2:18-23. John 11:23-25. Make una atheist & fairweather churchianity label it any how U want, we JWs dont bother. My God Jehovah& his son Jesus Christ, has guaranteed our firm hope of resurrection, that's all that matters. Isaiah 25:8. Rev 21:3-5. 1 Like |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by chiommy123(f): 2:28pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
OneJ:the type your Church smoke and will be interpreting the bible upside down and when you try to make them see the truth they result to insults and name calling just like you're doing here. Big shm 1 Like |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by tintingz(m): 2:37pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
OneJ:Show me medical treatments on how to treat a patient in need of blood from your bible. |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by OneJ: 2:40pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
alBHAGDADI: Married sex is signed & sealed with approval from the exalted throne of the Almighty God Jehovah. No law against whatever transpires in their sexual life. But alBAGHDADI (the Senate President without office )done put law against "exchange of blood" during marital sex. A mere mortal playing God ! However "Abstain from blood" is an explicit command. Is the blood of animals & humans performing similar function? Yes. Same law applies to them. Receive sense. |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by Hairyrapunzel: 2:46pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
AutoElectNG:Then why create a distinction for God when he was mute on what eating blood meant at that time? It's like your leaders love making laws for their jehovah because when he is silent on issues your religious group will always find a way to assume what he was thinking at that moment. At least you now agree that everything you believe ain't even in the Bible. You just speculated and made it your belief. You are uncertain about the belief sef First time a Jw has admitted that their blood transfusion ban is based on a comment they are uncertain about. A good start True the technology of injecting blood was nonexistent when the Bible was written.At least you have agreed that the blood transfusion was non existent during the bible times. So why lie that early Christians refused blood transfusion when medically prescribed then? What did you stand to gain by deceiving people viewing this thread? But if you carefully study these bible commentaries, you will appreciate that the fine distinction between eating and injecting does not align with God's intended use of blood. BUT AND IF again? So much uncertainty in your statement. Don't put injection of blood there. No bible commentary has ever talked about injection of blood only watchtower magazines. You still want to lie on bible commentators head so as to fuel your belief in your non biblical doctrines? Stop lying on bible's head cos it never for once mentions injection of blood. Let's stick to what's in the Bible not something your leaders assume in their head. Let's stick to the words seen in the Bible biko see the following non Witness Bible commentaries All the commentaries talk about lives of animals being used for food according to the verses exact words. It's like you guys never read the Bible. If God sees animal life the same as human life why will he allow humans slaughter animals and eat them? It should mean also that humans can slaughter humans and get away with it. Because you want me to believe that non witness bible commentaries say blood is life you remove the fact that the all commentators talked about the life of the animals killed for food. What are you guys even hiding? Are you an animal meant for food? Is your blood more important than your life? So if God said your life is important why did he ask humans not to take life of other humans? I no fit laugh. That eating human flesh did not make sense is clear from the reaction of the crowd to his comments about eating his flesh and drinking his blood....although if you study the greek words he used, he didn't mean it literally,but even the thought was so unnerving, he lost disciples. Assuming but not conceding that the passage is limited to animal food, the issue is not about animal or human as food or nutrients, but about blood as nutrients or as medicine. Since you kill animals for food and since your jehovah values the life of animals just the way he values the life of humans they should still kill humans for food too. You guys will choose the one that is literal and figurative. If to you David poured water on the floor and it meant that we should pour/discard blood because of its sacred nature that means Jesus giving us a command to drink his blood means we can drink blood. You cannot say David's water is literal blood and Jesus wine is figurative blood. Do you think we are daft? It's like your jehovah loves cherry picking. When he sees that one thing he said in a place is the same with another one he said in another place, he tries to make one literal and the other figurative. Since the religious group believes everything they do should honor God, they cannot fathom doing something that appears minimize God's right to lead man while also claiming to be worshipping the same God, and that sort of explains their position on taking blood via any channel. So at the end of the day their beliefs are based only on speculation not the actual word of God. At the end of the day they are doing what they feel like and not what the Bible said. Please do me the favor of highlighting in bold or via quotes the lie or lies in my previous post so I can do justice to the accusation. Thank you. Why will you say early Christians refused whole blood even for medical purpose? Why lie about it? Until then the above statement will be treated as an unsubstantiated accusation.You that made a claim that early Christians refused whole blood for medical purposes. I no fit laugh You think we are daft? We are not jws that gb will tell that early Christians refused whole blood and will swallow the lie o. Please do me the favor of pointing to any story or stories I cooked up in the above post. Thank you You said early Christians refused whole blood for medical purposes. Is this yet another figment of your vivid imagination at work or are you actually referring to what I said? You want to lie that you didn't say early Christians refused whole blood even for medical purposes without any biblical or worldly secular reference? Please provide references. And take the time to study https://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/28/why-do-jehovahs-witnesses-abstain-blood, it would clarify a few issues for you.You said that you are uncertain about a medical procedure. And why you guys don't take it is based on speculations that your jehovah may not like it. In fact he prefers you die rather than take the symbol of life because the symbol is very sacred to him Do you as an ardent student of the Bible remember that Jesus once said I have many things to tell you but you are not able to bear them at the moment? The disciples were not able to bear them that moment then Nathan knorr in 1945 felt he could bear them then? What are you trying so hard to prove? That God did not show them blood transfusion then and since blood transfusion is present now it is bad? Is it what you are trying to say? Or you also recall that Jesus once instructed not to go with money pouches and provisions, but later on changed his stance? No bible reference of Jesus changing his stance on something? What are you guys afraid of sef? You just blow lie and think you will get away with it? Shame no let you bring out bible verse Do you realize or have you forgotten how initially there was confusion whether circumcision was a requirement to be a true Christian and how subsequently that position was clarified? So since apostles in the Bible told the gentiles that whether they are circumcised or not it doesn't matter so your leaders who are imperfect, uninspired and fallible now feel it is their duty to assume a doctrine and say God said blood is very sacred to him so blood transfusion is against his will? In fact it is better to choose death than be transfused? Since circumcision didn't matter why would you think the medical procedure called blood transfusion which is prescribed by doctors only will be a problem to God? The common thread? Time changes things, the principles remain the same, but the understanding and or application can change. Which principle remain the same? Everything human is prone to change but God remains the same yesterday today and forever. Numbers 23:19 19 God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill? Hebrews 13:8 8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. James 1:17 17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows. If your jehovah can direct people who in future will correct a mistake they said God told them to believe in before that means your jehovah is definitely a liar. Did the Bible not talk of the light getting brighter over time? The Bible never talks about doctrines or beliefs. It was referring to behavior of the righteous person. Read the whole chapter. That's the only passage you can hold on to to your ever changing beliefs. Lol it's called having to think for myself aka independent/critical thinking. Something you lack because you are constantly told by gb that if you think something contrary to their views you are an apostate What did the Bible speak of? Blood or blood fractions? What do the witnesses refuse to take whole blood and main blood components. What is the stand of the witnesses on blood fractions and derivatives? Take? Don't Take? Or let your conscience lead you? You know the position is decide for yourself after weighing the facts and listening to the leadings of the inbuilt compass for determining right and wrong your conscience. So now it's the bible did not say blood fractions rather it said blood. Lol. Then you should allow red blood cell and plasma because they are fractions of blood just like the rest you allow. I just can't laugh. Conscience ke? So after Paul said you should abstain from blood you guys say blood fractions should be a conscience matter. Lol Is blood fractions not from blood donated by worldly people? I thought the blood was meant to be discarded just like David discarded the water and not to be drank like Jesus told his disciples to drink his blood. Rotflol Why is this additional clarification necessary? You admit those derivatives did not exist when the Bible was written, in the same way as gentile christians did not exist when God required circumcision from his people. Changing circumstances requires applying the scripture to new developments such as has been highlighted here. It took a while for the oversight body to apply christian principles to chamging times. Since blood transfusion didn't occur in the Bible, why is it a problem to God? If blood transfusion which didn't occur in the Bible is a problem to God according to jws then blood fractions only gotten from blood of worldly people should also be a problem to God. You don't get to Cherry pick. Abi your god loves cherry picking? A ll in all what you despise is what God has always valued and protection, where there is no express prohibition, individual choice reigns supreme.Which individual choice is there? If you take blood transfusion in the face of imminent death, and are lucky to survive you will be disfellowshipped and shunned whereas if you refuse and are unlucky to die you will be hailed as strong in Jw faith. Lol choice ke. If you take blood and you live you will be shunned. If you take blood and you die your family will be shunned. Does this sound like choice to you? There is NO list of fractions to be accepted....there is a list of fractions that you may apply your understanding of the scriptures and the proddings of your conscience to determine if you can accept or not in the absence of an express injunction against the use of blood components. Which blood fractions did bible ever mention? Don't call applying Scriptures to list any kind of blood fraction when bible didn't mention anything about it. Just say is humans in your religion that decided the fractions of blood from blood donated by worldly people they would accept or reject. You want to lie that all blood components you guys accept are in the Bible. No dey lie again. It's only written in your website. The BMJ link addresses the issue of blood donations adequately Blood of worldly people can save you when you desire their blood fractions whereas you say your jehovah hates blood donation and he prefers you discard your blood instead while the blood of worldly, wicked, unrighteous and evil people are not discarded so as to provide provide blood transfusion for Jehovah's people. Isn't your jehovah a legend? It seems my point was lost in translation? I never ever said that the US Army stopped using blood transfusion. So since they didn't stop blood transfusion what's the big deal about looking into bloodless medicine? Abeg e You were stylishly implying that us army is using bloodless medicine so blood transfusion isn't important.
The same way bloodless surgery has advantages is the same way blood transfusion has advantages too. What's the big deal? Did it stop us army from using blood transfusion even with the advantages of bloodless medicine? So let me ask this questions What's the moral lesson of telling us that the us army is looking into bloodless medicine? What conclusion did you want us to draw from telling us that us army is now into bloodless medicine? If bloodless surgery and medicine was as worthless of you make it seem, would they do that especially in the presence of according to you a more viable alternative....the holy grail of blood transfusion? When did I ever make it seem bloodless surgery is worthless? You want to lie on my head abi? You that thinks everyone who receives blood transfusion dies or gets a problem Nko? Have I ever told you you make blood transfusion seem worthless? Be very careful.
You did not say anything after telling us us army is looking into bloodless medicine. We are not daft. We can read in between the lines. Thank Goodness you used you express they adopted....so you got my point afterall.So what conclusion should we now make from us army looking into bloodless medicine?
I asked a question. Has the US army abandoned blood transfusion? Unless my memory has failed, for those who believe in bloodless medicine transfusion is not an option.....so the question of its being a last resort does not even arise. They will be dead by then. So there won't be need to proceed to blood transfusion. I never ever said that John Hopkins stopped using blood transfusion, if I did, would you be kind enough to point to it? Thanks. Did john Hopkins having a blood less medicine centre stop them from doing blood transfusion? There is almost no medical procedure without both....and that includes blood transfusions which is why the US Army even gave attention to bloodless surgery in the first place since it appeared that the post surgery complications of bloodless were fewer than blood. Reference please What kind of cases? Was it planned surgeries? Was it emergencies? Was it done in children? Was it done in severe anemic? In what country did they do these studies? How rich are these countries? Was it done on pregnant women who had severe anemia or DIC? You people will just be yarning nonsense because some illiterates in new York are spewing lies. Even malaria medicines have been withdrawn or suggested as being inappropriate over time by the WHO, these things happen. Question is are there alternatives....if yes then substitute.Malaria drug isn't bloodless medicine. If its to lie that receiving blood transfusion has caused more deaths for those who receive it than those who don't you guys will open your wide mouth. Polyheme and hemopure caused more deaths amongst Jw Guinea pigs when it was used than when it was not used so fda had to ban these substitutes. Don't try to water down the side effect of your jehovah right treatment. It won't work This is so true of blood transfusions as well.Yet FDA has not banned blood transfusion. Interesting Well I never said blood transfusion doesn't have adverse effect. If you remember I said all medical procedures and drugs have the propensity to cause adverse reactions. Stop hiding the fact that jw blood substitute has been banned by FDA (worldly man made group) because it has killed so many jws. Worldly people helping jws. First worldly people donate their blood so jws can get blood fractions Next they banned substitutes championed by jws which caused the death of jws. That is they are pained when jws die. Worldly people are so nice 2 Likes |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by Hairyrapunzel: 2:48pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
blezzy080:When did the Bible say you cannot take whole blood or its primary components but take other components? |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by Hairyrapunzel: 2:51pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
blezzy080:Why are you people always ashamed to state that Genesis and leveticus was talking about blood of animals used as food? You guys always quote a phrase. It's like you people are hiding something. |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by Hairyrapunzel: 2:55pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
blezzy080: So out out respect for god as the giver of life you choose death instead of taking a symbol? You loose what a symbol represents instead of accepting the symbol? Your God must really love suicide. 1 Like |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by alBHAGDADI: 5:29pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
OneJ: I doubt you understood my post which you replied to. Now, let me ask you a question which will make you understand it. Since we both agree that there is no problem with blood exchanged between couples during sex in a marriage approved by God, why should there be problem with a husband giving his wife blood through transfusion in a marriage approved by God? Hope you understand now. 1 Like |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by alBHAGDADI: 5:32pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
OneJ:Look at the way you reeled out statistics without any credible stats. If blood transfusion doesn't guarantee longetivity, how come you take medicine which also doesn't guarantee the same? I repeat, the doctrine against blood transfusion is man-made which you people are teaching as commandment of God. 1 Like |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by Barristter07: 7:18pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
alBHAGDADI: A young man and a woman reads Abstain from fornication, the Lady is a virgin . so they believe so far her virginity is intact they haven't commit fornication , but continues to engage in Anal or MouthAction . You would agree with me that they are deceiving themselves ? but to them, so far they are not doing it through her main private part , it's not fornication. Likewise , either orally or intravenously . Accepting blood into ones system violate the commandment to Abstain from Blood Act 15:29 To think otherwise is to deceive oneself. 1 Like |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by eyinjuege: 7:19pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
homesteady: Are you really calling JW terrorists or even comparing them to terrorists? I'm really surprised at the way you want to rationalise that Remove sentiments, remove bias and remove prejudice from your story. Only then can you start seeing things clearly. Blood transfusion is a medical treatment. Life saving. But these people don't want it. They have a right to chose, afterall its their life. I'm very sure there must be some JW who have had blood transfusion before, and they still continue in their worship. Life is all about choices. They can choose to follow their doctrines or not. I believe in the use of blood and blood products for people that need it. I can never preach against blood transfusion. I have being called JW because I chose to see things differently. I have even being called some borderline names by people one would assume are not blinded by religion, but unfortunately have both eyes obviously blinded by bias and prejudice. Jokers. The story of animal farm comes to mind. Terrorists choose to take the lives of others.JW don't do that. They have simply refused to receive certain medical help, and most importantly the LAW stands with them on that. It may be seen as stupidity, foolishness but it is theirs and not anyone else's. It's as simple as that. If you really care so much about transfusion as a life saving procedure, and really genuinely want to save lives of those that want to be saved there are more practical ways of doing that. Donate blood regularly, it's a noble act. Many non JW people need it, and some places still don't have access to such transfusion services. |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by Hairyrapunzel: 7:45pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
eyinjuege: Jws too need the donated blood for blood components/fractions. |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by homesteady(m): 7:52pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
eyinjuege: The extra story wasn't necessary. My post specifically addressed a point you made in your post about questioning people's choices. If i suddenly wake up and decide not to take blood products, it's entirely different from I not wanting to take blood products because the leader of my religious sector said I shouldn't. You saying we shouldn't question their choices would also mean we don't have the right to question the choices made by anyone. Please don't try to whip up sentiments by telling me to donate blood again because I'm hell sure you would. I'm not eligible to donate. 1 Like |
Re: Jehovah's Witnesses: Why Are Blood Transfusions So Bad? by Hairyrapunzel: 7:53pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
Barristter07: Abeg which fractions of fornication are acceptable? Is it the whole fornication or primary components of fornication or is it smaller components of fornication that are acceptable? Whether you like it or not, intravenously no dey Bible you are just assuming/speculating that Paul meant both oral and intravenous ly when there was nothing like intravenously in Paul's time. All these one is just to pacify yourself and give yourself hope that your non biblical doctrines which has killed so many jws even more than Hitler, may be correct. Last last you believe in an assumption. Fornication isn't blood transfusion. Anyway since you now equate it to blood transfusion which fractions of fornication are acceptable? Which type of fornication is acceptable is it self fornication or fornication with other people? Since your jehovah/gb is now equating fornication to blood transfusion answer these questions. 2 Likes |
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ... (15) (Reply)
Pope Francis Washes Prisoners' Feet On Maundy Thursday / Archbishop Valentine Obinna Tears Posters Of Politicians In Owerri. Photos / The Evil Apple: Did Adam And Eve Really Eat An Apple?
(Go Up)
Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 213 |