This is really interesting.
I wonder whether it truly is compatible with every single person, e.g. even RH-null etc?
I also wonder whether religious groups who don't accept blood would potentially accept this.
I wonder whether it truly is compatible with every single person, e.g. even RH-null etc?
I also wonder whether religious groups who don't accept blood would potentially accept this.
I understand they don’t accept blood from other people because they believe the blood is tightly related to the soul. So if the blood is 100% artificial I don’t think they would have a reason to not accept it, unless they find another reason, and I’m sure some obscure group will find a reason to not accept artificial blood either.
Some people's spiritual rejections lie more in the "we're playing God we shouldn't do x" whereas what you are describing is something in regard to the sanctity of the blood.
Actually to further my understand, would you be permitted to receive blood that you yourself had donated and had been stored for your personal use in the advent of a medical emergency? Again, I'm not trying to pry or question the validity of your beliefs, just seeking to understand.
This is a complex question. Some things are clear, some are less so. Basically in the Christian Greek scriptures I believe this is only mentioned once: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/study-bible/books/a...
Here is more info: https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/bible-about-...
Our feelings are that blood is sacred, and once it leaves the body it should return to the ground. Basically, blood is life, and life belongs to Jehovah.
Cloning blood would be wrong because its misusing something that has specific guidelines around its use. If you could clone the blood without like actually drawing blood from someone for the procedure, I guess that would be OK. This is weird and I am not totally sure.
We would not be OK with storing our own blood for future use, as this would be a kind of usage, and is contrary to the instructions to pour it out. And this would also be considered consumption/not abstaining.
As I think about this, though, it makes me think about using blood in the contexts of blood testing. Hmm.
Anyway I mean the scriptures give some instructions and we are doing our best to extrapolate to other situations. Things aren't always cut and dry. We just do our best to understand.
I appreciate you clarifying this. I think I understand a bit more, that there are some aspects of medical science construed as idolatrous, as perhaps glorifying an institution of man and not God.
Have you ever heard of any talk of a ceremony that would somehow reconcile these elements? Again I'm ignorant of JW doctrine and priests don't seem as prevalent, but I'm wondering if there could ever be room for some type of transfusion ceremony that allowed for this, in the precense of correct scripture and religious authority, that was "in the service to Jehovah." Sort of a "Deo volente" thing.
To your other question, no, we do not have any sort of ceremony like that. But tbh avoiding blood transfusions is nbd nowadays. There are alternatives.
Wait, really?
But, already existing blood volumizers are normally sufficient to save a person who suffered extreme blood loss; restoration of flow is more important than restoration of all the blood contents.
Religion is a disease on its own.
If it actively hinders your survival and well-being, what else would you classify it as? It belongs with depression, schizophrenia and all the other psychological disorders.
This is from someone from a religious country.