Posted by Nicodemus [Nicodemus] on November 24, 1999 at 13:32:28 {BlpRHB6gpcmL9KjZpLewbTrVtUivFs}:
In Reply to: **Blood Transfusion posted by Friend on November 23, 1999 at 17:25:17:
Friend,
Yes, I believe your presentation was easy to follow.
First of all, my experience has been that the "average" JW has a very simplistic understanding of our present blood doctrine. For many, I believe the main scripture that they could recall, if challenged, is "somewhere in Acts." Some might be able to remember the combination of Genesis 9, Leviticus 17 and Acts 15. However, many of even these likely lump all 3 texts into one unified whole, failing to consider the differences between that stated to Noah, that decreed under the Law, and the circumstances of the apostolic decree.
Further, in the course of my interactions with the brothers, I find that many are largely unaware of most of the recent "technicalities" with respect to blood fractions, "acceptable" vs. "unacceptable" procedures, and the like.
Now, some specific comments, with paragraph references:
6, 7: Good introduction to the concept of not viewing blood casually. Nothing changes as far as our respect for God's Law on blood. I like what you wrote here because I believe it is crucial to laying a foundation for acceptance of what is to come. It bolsters the belief the brother likely holds that obedience to God's Law is important, it's not a frivolous topic. We are merely reconsidering the scope or specific application of God's law
10 - 12: Here's the first truly "new" concept. I don't believe the average Witness has considered a distinction such as you are proposing. Since, as mentioned earlier, there tends to be a "lumping together" of Gen 9, Lev 17, and Acts 15, I believe for most it's a simplistic "don't take in blood in any form," based on the reasoning they have been exposed to their entire lives. Paragraph 12 should make many stop and think.
14, 15: This would probably be something foreign to most Witnesses. Again, back to the idea that the majority of our brothers are familiar with, at most, Gen 9-Lev 17-Acts 15. I don't know how many are acquainted with the Society's reasoning on this passage. (w3/1/50 79-80; w7/1/51 414-6; w9/15/61 559). I think that these paragraphs might not be readily understood at first, however they would very likely be a catalyst for later discussion, during which those more versed in the issue could share clarifying information with those less familiar.
16, 17: Nice extension of 14 and 15.
18: Here is where I'll state what I consider to be a possible weakness. Much of our current position (including the disfellowshiping rationale presented in 1961) is built around the stipulations in Leviticus 17. For an individual who respects God's law, the specific statements made in Leviticus 17 regarding not eating blood may carry a tremendous amount of weight in their mind. I believe it possible that some might feel the presentation was trying to "sidestep" this, ignoring it. Perhaps a little more needs to be said in this area to give a certain percentage of our brothers a level of comfort.
19-21: I love the conclusion. One suggestion: Perhaps there is room for some acknowledgment that some individual Christians might still conscientiously feel that acceptance of any form of blood therapy is wrong. Some might even do so at the risk/cost of their present lives. It might be good to clarify that this, if done, constitutes a remarkable display of conscientious adherence to an understanding of Jehovah's law, and that such would certainly not go unrewarded in the resurrection to come. If such was truly a Christian's uncoerced, conscientious decision, that should be supported and respected.
It is my sincere hope that these comments are of some benefit to all our brothers struggling with this very important issue.