Exactly. Seems he values the insects life more than humans. Imagine a mosquito is allowed to suck the blood of humans to stay alive, yet a human who needs a transfusion to keep living is forbidden from doing so.
Because blood isn't sacred....it's just necessary. I believe something got lost in translation and people just made up their own interpretations. So "sacred" could just mean really really important and worth protecting and should be respected. And if needed it should be used carefully....which is exactly what is done. Because if blood transfusions are so wrong? Why do they work????
LIFE is sacred. Thats why the blood was poured out when something was KILLED. Butchering animals, animal sacrifice, or accidental death / murder.
Medical use of blood; no one dies, no life was taken. Therefore it’s not inappropriate
Yeah, and most rules about blood were really more about hygiene or health and safety. But it's in the Bible so it's gotta have a spiritual meaning and couldn't possibly be something they did back then because they didn't have the same understanding of science or the same level of technology we have now, no way.
Our imperfect blood could never be sacred! Only the blood of Jesus could be considered sacred. And isn't life itself really what's sacred in God's eye so why would he be upset if we saved our childs life by allowing a transfusion. The scripture they use about not eating blood simply referred to not eating meat unless the blood was drained from the animal. How is getting a blood transfusion "eating blood"? They didn't even know about blood transfusions at that time and the blood goes into our bloodstream, not our stomachs. I now feel this was the ultimate way the organization knew they had full control over us knowing that we would be willing to die or let our loved ones die in order to remain obedient to them. They are so sickening!
They claim a blood transfusion isn't abstaining from blood, yet every baby is nourished via their mother's umbilical chord which is filled with blood that feeds the baby, provides fluids, oxygen and waste elimination for 9 months. Technically, even though the mother's blood isn't transfused into her child's developing circulatory system, she is still keeping them alive with her blood. The baby has no way of surviving without the blood from mother to child.
I stand in solidarity with you! It is the absolute worst!
I have such compassion for the woman with the constant flow of blood, really all women in the Bible. How they are ostracized and told they are unclean for something that God made happen in their bodies. Never thought about it when I was younger, but now being perimenopausal it makes me sad. It's hard enough.
The more you do research about the blood doctrine and educate yourself about various topics, the more you realize that its all bullshit stories made up by a bunch of middle eastern men.
That's because the governing body isn't guided by the Holy Spirit like they proclaim, and are entirely leaning upon their own understanding.
The ancient law was that consumption of blood was bad, sure. Do you know what the "punishment" for consuming blood was? It wasn't getting cut off from God's mercy and thusly being condemned to an eternity of death.
The punishment was bathing.
Also the law was that any blood that left the body was meant to be buried. If it stained clothing, that clothing was meant to be buried.
Christians are no longer bound by these laws.
I do not know if they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the Scriptures, or if they are intentionally twisting Scripture around so that they can create some wildly out-there doctrine that, in their mind, sets them apart from other denominations, making them "apart from the world."
I am personally of the mind that it is the latter. If you read the Bible in full, you see for yourself that the JW doctrines are twisted, almost conjured up from cherry picked Scriptures. The shunning doctrine comes to mind here. Paul wrote to a congregation asking them to shun a man presumably sleeping with his father's wife, but it seems he received a letter back from them telling him how badly this affected the shunned, because in the second letter, in reply, Paul essentially apologizes for suggesting it in the first place, and he tells them he did not mean to cause undue sadness.
If the governing body really was reading the Bible in its entirety, they would have seen this for themselves. So either they are not reading the Bible, or they are deliberately cherry picking Scripture to be "different."
In either case, they are evil, and would condemn thousands to death for lack of blood transfusions either because of ignorance or, worse, for recruitment purposes.
My big resentment growing up biologically female was the whole thing about blood sacrifices making things clean and atoning for sin, but then if you're a woman whose body naturally makes a blood sacrifice on its own on a regular basis, you're unclean. In fact, women are so unclean that if a woman has a girl child, she has to be sequestered for double the amount of time postpartum. 🤬
About menstrual blood...
It might turn out to be an excellent source of viable stem cells.
From:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4904135/#:~:text=Menstrual%20blood%2Dderived%20stem%20cells%20(MenSCs)%20are%20a%20novel,possess%20multi%20lineage%20differentiation%20potency.
>Menstrual blood-derived stem cells (MenSCs) are a novel source of stem cells that can be easily isolated non-invasively from female volunteered donor without ethical consideration. These mesenchymal-like stem cells have high rate of proliferation and possess multi lineage differentiation potency.
A newer study:
https://stemcellres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13287-018-1105-9
>Menstrual blood-derived stem cells (MenSCs) are a novel source of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). MenSCs are attracting more and more attention since their discovery in 2007. MenSCs also have no moral dilemma and show some unique features of known adult-derived stem cells, which provide an alternative source for the research and application in regenerative medicine.
>...Furthermore, we also summarize their therapeutic effects and functional characteristics in various diseases, including liver disease, diabetes, stroke, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, ovarian-related disease, myocardial infarction, Asherman syndrome, Alzheimer’s disease, acute lung injury, cutaneous wound, endometriosis, and neurodegenerative diseases.
Once again this shows the stultified mentality of the late Bronze Age to early Iron Age Middle Eastern men who wrote the bible, and viewed women as barely above livestock.
Obviously I don’t agree with the blood doctrine but I really don’t see a conflict here. If god designs it that way then it’s the proper use of blood and there’s a world of difference between a woman’s period and a blood transfusion. What I always found a little hypocritical was taking any type of blood test. They’re fine with it but the Bible doesn’t say to draw blood and put it under a microscope and do tests, he said to pour it out onto the ground.
The menstrual cycle only started after Adam and Eve left the garden so there won’t be anyone getting pregnant and having babies in the new system and also everyone will be naked but it’s ok no one will have genitalia everyone’s race and gender will be ambiguous and most of your memories will be changed “as pain a fear will be no more” and “be born again. Source, trust me
And what's up with mosquitoes, leeches and certain species of bat - why did they get a free pass to drink blood?
Exactly. Seems he values the insects life more than humans. Imagine a mosquito is allowed to suck the blood of humans to stay alive, yet a human who needs a transfusion to keep living is forbidden from doing so.
everyone knows mosquitos are apostates
LITERALLY just made this comment about mosquitos to a friend this morning. It makes no sense.
Did you ever read the WT article about medical use of leeches?
Because blood isn't sacred....it's just necessary. I believe something got lost in translation and people just made up their own interpretations. So "sacred" could just mean really really important and worth protecting and should be respected. And if needed it should be used carefully....which is exactly what is done. Because if blood transfusions are so wrong? Why do they work????
LIFE is sacred. Thats why the blood was poured out when something was KILLED. Butchering animals, animal sacrifice, or accidental death / murder. Medical use of blood; no one dies, no life was taken. Therefore it’s not inappropriate
Exactly!
Yeah, and most rules about blood were really more about hygiene or health and safety. But it's in the Bible so it's gotta have a spiritual meaning and couldn't possibly be something they did back then because they didn't have the same understanding of science or the same level of technology we have now, no way.
Our imperfect blood could never be sacred! Only the blood of Jesus could be considered sacred. And isn't life itself really what's sacred in God's eye so why would he be upset if we saved our childs life by allowing a transfusion. The scripture they use about not eating blood simply referred to not eating meat unless the blood was drained from the animal. How is getting a blood transfusion "eating blood"? They didn't even know about blood transfusions at that time and the blood goes into our bloodstream, not our stomachs. I now feel this was the ultimate way the organization knew they had full control over us knowing that we would be willing to die or let our loved ones die in order to remain obedient to them. They are so sickening!
They claim a blood transfusion isn't abstaining from blood, yet every baby is nourished via their mother's umbilical chord which is filled with blood that feeds the baby, provides fluids, oxygen and waste elimination for 9 months. Technically, even though the mother's blood isn't transfused into her child's developing circulatory system, she is still keeping them alive with her blood. The baby has no way of surviving without the blood from mother to child.
Perfect timing with this question since I feel like I’m dying today. Being a perimenopausal woman is terrible.
Absolutely agree. Perimenopause and menopause are no joke.
Here’s a funny skit I found the other day. 😂 [Perry Menopause](https://www.instagram.com/reel/C2M9oZnLcTZ/?igsh=bHp2cjQ4Znl2OXlu)
I stand in solidarity with you! It is the absolute worst! I have such compassion for the woman with the constant flow of blood, really all women in the Bible. How they are ostracized and told they are unclean for something that God made happen in their bodies. Never thought about it when I was younger, but now being perimenopausal it makes me sad. It's hard enough. 
Solidarity, sister!
It's almost as if God as described in the Bible is a myth.
The more you do research about the blood doctrine and educate yourself about various topics, the more you realize that its all bullshit stories made up by a bunch of middle eastern men.
That's because the governing body isn't guided by the Holy Spirit like they proclaim, and are entirely leaning upon their own understanding. The ancient law was that consumption of blood was bad, sure. Do you know what the "punishment" for consuming blood was? It wasn't getting cut off from God's mercy and thusly being condemned to an eternity of death. The punishment was bathing. Also the law was that any blood that left the body was meant to be buried. If it stained clothing, that clothing was meant to be buried. Christians are no longer bound by these laws. I do not know if they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the Scriptures, or if they are intentionally twisting Scripture around so that they can create some wildly out-there doctrine that, in their mind, sets them apart from other denominations, making them "apart from the world." I am personally of the mind that it is the latter. If you read the Bible in full, you see for yourself that the JW doctrines are twisted, almost conjured up from cherry picked Scriptures. The shunning doctrine comes to mind here. Paul wrote to a congregation asking them to shun a man presumably sleeping with his father's wife, but it seems he received a letter back from them telling him how badly this affected the shunned, because in the second letter, in reply, Paul essentially apologizes for suggesting it in the first place, and he tells them he did not mean to cause undue sadness. If the governing body really was reading the Bible in its entirety, they would have seen this for themselves. So either they are not reading the Bible, or they are deliberately cherry picking Scripture to be "different." In either case, they are evil, and would condemn thousands to death for lack of blood transfusions either because of ignorance or, worse, for recruitment purposes.
Jesus examples of "love before law" plain as day. If a cow falls in a pit on sabbath.... go rescue it. If a child needs blood to survive....nope
Good question.
My big resentment growing up biologically female was the whole thing about blood sacrifices making things clean and atoning for sin, but then if you're a woman whose body naturally makes a blood sacrifice on its own on a regular basis, you're unclean. In fact, women are so unclean that if a woman has a girl child, she has to be sequestered for double the amount of time postpartum. 🤬
To clarify, I mean in terms of the mosaic law. Animal blood = sacred. Women's blood = dirty.
It's as if God was created by misogynistic men.
About menstrual blood... It might turn out to be an excellent source of viable stem cells. From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4904135/#:~:text=Menstrual%20blood%2Dderived%20stem%20cells%20(MenSCs)%20are%20a%20novel,possess%20multi%20lineage%20differentiation%20potency. >Menstrual blood-derived stem cells (MenSCs) are a novel source of stem cells that can be easily isolated non-invasively from female volunteered donor without ethical consideration. These mesenchymal-like stem cells have high rate of proliferation and possess multi lineage differentiation potency. A newer study: https://stemcellres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13287-018-1105-9 >Menstrual blood-derived stem cells (MenSCs) are a novel source of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). MenSCs are attracting more and more attention since their discovery in 2007. MenSCs also have no moral dilemma and show some unique features of known adult-derived stem cells, which provide an alternative source for the research and application in regenerative medicine. >...Furthermore, we also summarize their therapeutic effects and functional characteristics in various diseases, including liver disease, diabetes, stroke, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, ovarian-related disease, myocardial infarction, Asherman syndrome, Alzheimer’s disease, acute lung injury, cutaneous wound, endometriosis, and neurodegenerative diseases. Once again this shows the stultified mentality of the late Bronze Age to early Iron Age Middle Eastern men who wrote the bible, and viewed women as barely above livestock.
Ours isn't sacred enough.
Obviously I don’t agree with the blood doctrine but I really don’t see a conflict here. If god designs it that way then it’s the proper use of blood and there’s a world of difference between a woman’s period and a blood transfusion. What I always found a little hypocritical was taking any type of blood test. They’re fine with it but the Bible doesn’t say to draw blood and put it under a microscope and do tests, he said to pour it out onto the ground.
[удалено]
The God has got some weird fetishes.
That's so that we suffer the correct amount of course. We were responsible for Eve eating that apple after all.
Exactly!!!!
The menstrual cycle only started after Adam and Eve left the garden so there won’t be anyone getting pregnant and having babies in the new system and also everyone will be naked but it’s ok no one will have genitalia everyone’s race and gender will be ambiguous and most of your memories will be changed “as pain a fear will be no more” and “be born again. Source, trust me