What is the teaching about those JWs who want to accept the blood transfusion against the WTS teachings?

Are they going to be disfellowshiped?
What about salvation, do they lose thier salvation if they accept blood transfusion ...according to the WTS teachings?

Polly for prez: Sorry for that. If anyone wants to have me as contact, it would be nice if they introduced themselves especially if the account is new. :)

Here is an article from the Journal of Medical Ethics, dated December 1999 Volume 24 Number 4. This is a peer-reviewed medical journal, not an 鈥渁postate web site.鈥? The article reports that Jehovah鈥檚 Wittnesses in Bulgaria now have "have free choice" to receive blood transfusions "without any control or sanction on the part of the association."

Source: http://www.ajwrb.org/jme/jmee.htm

Here is a scan of the document (legal settlement). You鈥檒l find the key information at the bottom of page 22 and the top of page 23. Unfortunately, this is an apostate website, run by Jehovah鈥檚 Witnesses who want a reform on the blood doctrine. So you might not want to read the scanned (original) article.

http://www.ajwrb.org/bulgaria/app22.jpg
http://www.ajwrb.org/bulgaria/app23.jpg

JWs do not want to accept blood transfusions. This is not because of the Watchtower, Bible and Tract Society, it is because of what the Bible says. Anyone who is a JW and ignores the Bibles commands of abstaining from blood and actually accepts a blood transfussion is no doubt NOT a true JW. I don't know if they would be dissfellowshipped or not. I think it would have to be discussed seriously by their assigned congregation elders. Going against any command in the Bible, especially one so specific and straight forward as abstaining from blood is taken seriously and handled with much prayer and reasoning. Disfellowshipping isn't something that is taken lightly either. It isn't something that happens to anyone who makes a mistake or commits a sin even, we are all imperfect and sin every day, however, someone who is a baptized JW, who willfully disregards and Bible laws and principles and commits and practices a wrong doing, (such as immorality or drug abuse) without any repentance or refuses to change their ways could be disfellowshipped for THEIR actions, THEY make that decision themselves when they refuse to live by Bible standards. Again, it has NOTHING to do with the WBTS, it has everything to do with the Bible and the JWs dedication to live as closely to it's laws and principles as we can, this includes not taking "blood" into our bodies in any form.

As for salvation, that isn't up to any humans, or group of humans like the WBTS but is up to God alone. The WBTS NEVER states that they have authority to decide on someone's "salvation" or not.

Forbidding blood transfusions is an example of legalistic Western minds formulating doctrine without an understanding of the native spirit behind ancient Eastern Biblical texts. A blood transfusion is not the same as eating blood. For one, blood transfusions do not involve digesting blood. Secondly, blood transfusions do not result in the death of the donor. Biblical commands on blood, such as given to Noah at Genesis 9:4 was that the blood was to be poured out of a slaughtered animal. Blood law was given to show repect for life during the ritual of killing for food.

It is pertinent that Jew's are allowed to have blood transfusions. Strict Orthodox Jews soak meat in water, salt it, then drain it in order to draw out all the blood. Yet no Jewish groups forbid blood transfusions. (Likewise, Muslims forbidden to drink blood are allowed transfusions as a life saving procedure.) This is because Jewish kosher probation's are waived in regards to life-saving medical use. Sustaining life overrules the Mosaic Law; a principle referred to as pikuach nefesh.

Jesus showed that Christians are to follow this principle when he healed and harvested on the Sabbath. He used David as an example to show that that acts of mercy, such as saving a life, are more important than strict adherence to regulation. Consider the following:
Matthew 12:11 "Who will be the man among YOU that has one sheep and, if this falls into a pit on the sabbath, will not get hold of it and lift it out? All considered, of how much more worth is a man than a sheep!"

Mark 3:4-5 "Next he said to them: "Is it lawful on the sabbath to do a good deed or to do a bad deed, to save or to kill a soul?" But they kept silent. And after looking around upon them with indignation, being thoroughly grieved at the insensibility of their hearts, he said to the man: "Stretch out your hand." And he stretched it out, and his hand was restored." - see also Luke 6:7-10

"According to pikuach nefesh a person must do everything in their power to save the life of another, even donate bodily organs. Ovaday Yosef, the former Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel, ruled that one may donate an organ to a person in critical need, so long as it does not put the donor's life at risk. It is also permissible to travel on Shabbat to save a person's life. Maimonides declared that a Jew should take the individual, even if a gentile is present, in order to encourage "compassion, loving-kindness and peace in the world" (Mishneh Torah, 2:3). The laws of the Sabbath may be suspended to provide any necessary medical care to a critically ill individual or to an individual in the likelihood of danger to life." Pikuach Nefesh, Ariel Scheib (April 22 2007) (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsou...
As respect for life is the most important issue for a Bible student, blood should be transfused in life-and-death situations. This raises the question, "is a blood transfusion ever necessary to sustain life?"

Blood transfusions are essential at times to sustain life. There is merit in not taking blood in many medical situations, just as there is merit in not taking antibiotics for every illness. Just as antibiotics have been harmfully over prescribed so has the use of blood. However, antibiotics are essential in certain life and death situations, as is blood. Non-blood volume expanders, are as yet not able to substitute for the oxygen carrying capabilities of red blood cells. When red blood cell count becomes low your organs suffocate and die from lack of oxygen; in this situation survival demands a blood transfusion.

With the stance that the Witnesses take, are they "blood guilty"? Many Jehovah's Witnesses have died needlessly to protect an ideal or concept that is unbiblical. This organization has taken their interpretation of the bible to an extreme as to cause the needless deaths of it's members. Jesus would have done it and would have done it on the Sabbath to save a life. This is the lesson of Matthew 12, it is more important to save a life then to keep strict adherence to regulation of Mosaic Law.

Can we say they are blood Guilty? Only God can judge that.

Yes, they are subject to being disfellowshipped and they can't have salvation without the Organization. Does not matter if they have Jesus, God or Michael the Archangel, they have to have the organization to get thier free gift from Jesus.

Yes, there are a number of reasons for disfellowshipping. Check out the link for all of them. Knowingly accepting a blood transfusion is one of the reasons.

Hi, Nina, Remember me? it use to be lady of liberty...i was canned a long time ago...came back and playing fair now..lol..i added u but u havent added me back...hope all is well..Paula
Edit; Karen the Bible DOES mean eating blood if u read all the verses before and after

The Bible teaches to "abstain from blood". Can you not figure this one out? People sat that that scripture means eatng blood. Would it be ok for an alcoholic to take alcohol through their veins? Look up the meansing of abstain.

The punishment levied against Jehovah鈥檚 Witnesses for accepting a blood transfusion who by the judgment of men are unrepentant sinners. Sinners deserving of a social and spiritual death by disfellowshipping.

Yes

No

Yes absolutely

Likely

Probably not

Who knows for sure

God is wishy washy on this one.

salvation? well its up to Jehovah in the end :)