BMJ  2003;327:E16 (4 October), doi:10.1136/bmjusa.01030003 (published 5 September 2002)

BMJ USA: Letter

RAPID RESPONSES FROM BMJ.COM

This article originally appeared in BMJ USA

The paper by Muramoto provoked a spirited debate on bmj.com. As of February 13, 44 e-letters had been posted on bmj.com in response to the paper, a few of which are published below (in whole or in part).—Editor

---

 

Choosing to take blood: you can't hide it from God

Editor—I understand the fear of the vast majority on the issue of blood, since I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses. The question is not, "How can I hide my choice of taking blood or blood products from the congregation"; it is "How can I hide it from God?" The Holy Scriptures, the Word of God, states that all true worshipers of Jehovah God must abstain from blood. If one makes the choice to ignore this command from God, one makes the choice to disassociate oneself from those who do follow the command. There are many scriptures that can be cited in this matter. Everyone must make a personal decision based on the information they have.

tonyb_72432{at}yahoo.com

---

 

Which part of the blood does God want you to abstain from?

In reply—Mr Barrett's response as a Jehovah's Witness raises important questions. He reiterates the Watchtower Society (WTS) policy, but he does not address the fundamental issues raised in my paper and by reform-oriented Witnesses: Which part of the blood is it that the "Word of God" tells one to abstain from? Whole blood or parts of blood? If you must abstain from only certain parts of blood and not the other parts, which command from God tells you to do so? He wrote that there are many scriptures that can be cited in this matter. Which scripture can he cite to show that you should abstain only from certain parts of blood?

I agree with him that this is a matter of personal choice and decision. Suppose a Jehovah's Witness believed that there is no "Word of God" to pick and choose which part of blood to abstain from, and therefore he personally decided to take one part of blood for his medical treatment. If the part of blood he chose happened to be not included in the parts of blood the WTS determined to be acceptable, is he ignoring God's command? If he does not believe he is ignoring God's command, since there is no such "Word of God," he does not need to hide it from God. Yet, if he is forced to disassociate himself from the community, to be ostracized and shunned by family and friends, is it not understandable that he would want to hide it from the congregation?

muramoto{at}aracnet.com

---

 

The changing word of God

Editor—Before July 1, 1945, there was no restriction on the acceptance of blood by Jehovah's Witnesses. After that, the biblical phrases "no soul of you shall eat blood" and "abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication" were interpreted to mean that blood transfusion was sinful.

The WTS has had a hard job reinterpreting the "Word of God" ever since. For example, in the not-too-distant past, vaccinations and aluminum cookware were campaigned against by the WTS as sinful but are now fully accepted.

It seems that not all components of blood are sinful now, although who has made that decision seems uncertain. What is the betting that in another decade, the WTS will have abandoned this untenable and intellectually dubious position, and this will be an issue of historical interest only?

Newcastle, UK iannesbitt{at}yahoo.com

---

 

Dissident Jehovah's Witnesses

Editor—Since 1997 the Associated Jehovah's Witnesses for Reform on Blood (AJWRB) has lobbied on behalf of dissident Jehovah's Witnesses who believe that there is no biblical basis for banning the use of blood or certain blood products. We believe that Jehovah's Witnesses should have a free choice in their medical care, without the threat of controls or sanctions (disassociation) from the WTS that would separate them from their Jehovah's Witness family members and friends.

AJWRB (www.ajwrb.org) leeelder{at}ajwrb.org

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?