Appreciating the Sacredness of Life and Blood

“The Lamb, who is in the midst of the throne, will shepherd them, and will guide them to fountains of waters of life.”​—Rev. 7:17.

1, 2. How do many persons show lack of appreciation for the value of life? (Ps. 115:17)

WHAT is more precious than your life? Without it, you could not enjoy anything. Yet, there is evidence all around us that many today have little real appreciation for the value of life​—either their own or that of others.

² Can we not see such evidence in the reckless driving habits of many? Or, what about those who drive under the influence of alcohol or another drug, bringing death to thousands annually? Then there are those who seek thrills in dangerous sports that admittedly take many lives each year. And how about the millions of persons who know that they may be impairing their health and shortening their lives by using tobacco or by gluttonous eating?

3. Why should we seek God’s view of life? (Ps. 25:4, 5)

³ But in the face of such attitudes, we each can ask, ‘Do I really have an appreciative outlook on life?’ A key to having real appreciation for life that even affects one’s thinking and actions is to recognize that life is a gift from Jehovah. He is “the living God” and the “source of [our] life.” (Jer. 10:10; Ps. 36:9) When speaking to some Greek philosophers, the apostle Paul testified about the Supreme One: “He himself gives to all persons life and breath and all things. . . . For by him we have life and move and exist.” (Acts 17:25, 28) Logically, our view of life should conform to God’s. Does it? To answer that, we need to know how he views life. We can then compare our view with his.

4. What evidence shows that Jehovah considers life to be sacred?

⁴ Jehovah considers life sacred, not something to be squandered. We can tell that from his repeated condemnations of murder and the emotions that often lead to it. (Ex. 20:13; 1 John 3:11-15; Rev. 21:8) Moreover, in ancient Israel, Jehovah arranged for cities of refuge to which a person could flee for sanctuary if he unintentionally caused another’s death. Why did an accidental manslayer have to take the major step of leaving his home and remaining, for perhaps years, in the city of refuge? Because he had caused loss of life, sacred life. You can see that the divine provision of these cities would promote further respect for the sanctity of life.​—Num. 35:9-29.

5, 6. Why is blood appropriately linked with life?

⁵ After outlining that provision, God told the Israelites: “You must not pollute the land in which you are; because it is blood that pollutes the land.” (Num. 35:33) Why was that? The “blood” here mentioned stood for the life of the victim. God thus called to the fore the vital link between our life and our blood.

⁶ Even though blood may not be a common subject of conversation, who of us does not know that we need blood to keep alive? It plays a role in every one of our major body activities. Blood carries life-sustaining oxygen to our cells, removes wastes from these cells, helps us to adapt to varying temperatures and is a key part of our defense against disease. But most persons view blood as a mere necessary fluid. To others, it is business. It is bought from derelicts or the poor and sold to blood banks or hospitals. And much animal blood is processed for food, fertilizer and other commercial products. Clearly there are many persons who do not view blood as sacred.

7, 8. (a) Why should we look into what God’s Word says about life and blood? (b) What questions arise as to Ephesians 1:7 and the ransom?

⁷ God’s Word, however, helps us to appreciate that blood is much more than a necessary natural fluid. What our Creator says about life and blood should influence our present outlook and our actions. And it can have an effect even on our eternal destiny. How so? As an aid in seeing the answer, compare these quotations of Ephesians 1:7 from two modern Bible translations, noting particularly what we have italicized:

“By means of him we have the release by ransom through the blood of that one [Christ], yes, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his undeserved kindness.”​—New World Translation.

“For by the death of Christ we are set free, that is, our sins are forgiven. How great is the grace of God.”​—Today’s English Version.a

⁸ From either translation we can learn that God is interested in us, in our lives. To that end he sent his only-begotten Son Jesus as a ransom sacrifice that could free persons of sin, releasing mankind from condemnation. (1 Tim. 2:5, 6; John 3:16, 17) Jesus himself said: “I have come that [you] might have life and might have it in abundance.” (John 10:10) But does it make any difference that some Bible translations say that this is by means of Christ’s death rather than by means of Christ’s blood? And what bearing could the difference have on our life​—on our thinking, actions and future? Let us see.

WHAT GOD SAYS ABOUT LIFE AND BLOOD

9. How do we know that Jehovah views blood as representing life?

⁹ At the time when Jehovah first granted humans permission to eat animal flesh, he gave a noteworthy indication as to his thinking about life and blood. God said to Noah and his family, from whom all of us have descended:

“Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to you. Only flesh with its soul​—its blood—​you must not eat. And, besides that, your blood of your souls shall I ask back. . . . Anyone shedding man’s blood, by man will his own blood be shed, for in God’s image he made man.”​—Gen. 9:3-6.

All humanity then alive was thus put on notice that, from God’s standpoint, blood represents life. Man’s blood would stand for his “soul,” or, as many Bible versions render it, his “life.” (TEV; Catholic Jerusalem Bible; translation by Rabbi Isaac Leeser) The divine Life-Giver later added to this picture, giving details that aid us to see the vital moral significance that he attaches to life as represented by blood.

10, 11. What was done with the blood of animals sacrificed by Israelite priests, leading to what question?

¹⁰ This especially was so in the covenant that God made with Israel, the Law covenant. At its inauguration animals were sacrificed and their blood employed in ratifying the covenant. (Ex. 24:3-8; Heb. 9:17-21) And among the covenant’s provisions were laws dealing with sin offerings; in such sacrifices, blood was shed, representing the life being offered to God to cover sins. (Lev. 4:4-7, 13-18, 22-30) Because of its sin-atoning power in the sight of God, the blood of animal sacrifices was used on the annual Atonement Day. First a bull and then a goat were sacrificed as sin offerings. The high priest took some of the blood of each into the Most Holy of the tabernacle (later, the temple) and sprinkled it before the Ark, or chest, that represented the presence of God. (Num. 7:89; Ex. 25:22; Lev. 16:2) Afterward he also put some of the blood on the altar of sacrifice.​—Lev. 16:11-19.

¹¹ ‘What does all of that have to do with me?’ some persons may wonder. It might seem to describe merely an ancient ritual that even the Jews no longer follow. How does it relate to our hope for the future and our appreciation of life and blood?

12. Jehovah stipulated what exclusive use of blood? Why? (Deut. 12:20-27)

¹² In Leviticus chapter 17, Jehovah God himself explained the underlying principles of those sacrificial requirements; what he there stated has important meaning for us. God said: “The soul [or, life] of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for you to make atonement for your souls, because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul in it. That is why I have said to the sons of Israel: ‘No soul of you must eat blood.’” (Lev. 17:11, 12) Yes, our Creator and Life-Giver plainly stated his decision: Blood (representing life from him) was to be put to one use only​—in sacrifice. God thus put a value on blood, setting it aside as sacred. Under the Law, it was not to be eaten or drunk, or put to any other use that men might devise. When an animal was killed just for food and not for sacrifice, the blood was to be poured on the ground; the animal’s life was thus in a sense given back to God, the Israelite hunter keeping only its flesh. (Lev. 17:13, 14) But how does this involve us since neither Jews nor Christians now have a divinely approved temple where animals could be sacrificed?

OUR PROBLEM​—GOD’S SOLUTION—​LIFE AND BLOOD

13. How do we know that we are burdened with sin?

¹³ All of us must admit that we are imperfect and sinful. The apostle Paul confirmed this and explained how it came about. “Through one man [Adam] sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men [including us] because they had all sinned.” (Rom. 5:12) This fact has a direct bearing on our appreciation of life and blood.

14. The sacrifices on Atonement Day foreshadowed what?

¹⁴ As the apostle Paul was inspired to explain in the book of Hebrews, the animal sacrifices of the Law covenant could not completely cover sin, or else they would not have had to be offered year after year. Those sacrifices, especially the ones on the Day of Atonement, were but a “shadow of the good things to come.” (Heb. 10:1-4; 8:5, 6; 9:9, 10) The reality that was foreshadowed was the ransom sacrifice of Christ that could fully atone for all our sins. In commenting on this, Paul wrote:

“When Christ came as a high priest of the good things that have come to pass, . . . he entered, no, not with the blood of goats and of young bulls, but with his own blood, once for all time into the holy place [heaven itself] and obtained an everlasting deliverance for us. For if the blood of goats and of bulls . . . sanctifies to the extent of cleanness of the flesh, how much more will the blood of the Christ, who through an everlasting spirit offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse our consciences from dead works that we may render sacred service to the living God? So that is why he is a mediator of a new covenant, in order that, because a death has occurred for their release by ransom from the transgressions under the former covenant, the ones who have been called might receive the promise of the everlasting inheritance. . . . Unless blood is poured out no forgiveness takes place.”​—Heb. 9:11-15, 22.

15. How is God’s view of blood involved in our hope of everlasting life?

¹⁵ Does this not help us to understand more fully why it is so vital to have God’s view of blood, representing life? One of the central themes of the Bible is that Jesus came to earth to give his life as a ransom sacrifice. Only by that ransom can we have the prospect of forgiveness of sin and the hope of “everlasting life.” (Matt. 20:28; Rom. 3:23, 24; 6:22, 23; 1 Tim. 1:15, 16) To receive those blessings, we must exercise faith in Jesus’ ransom, which involves having accurate knowledge of and appreciation for his giving up his life represented by his blood.​—1 Tim. 2:3, 4; Gal. 3:22.

16, 17. In what way have some Bible translators changed verses that mention blood? (Rom. 5:9; Col. 1:20)

¹⁶ With a background of these points concerning sacrifices, atonement, blood and Jesus’ ransom, let us turn our attention again to Ephesians 1:7. Most English translations of this verse show that it says, “we have the release by ransom through the blood of” Christ. Yet some modern versions substitute “death of Christ.” Does it make much difference?

¹⁷ In the original Greek, Ephesians 1:7 uses the word haima, which means “blood.” Why, then, do some translations render it here and elsewhere as “death”? The translators understood that in certain texts mentioning “blood,” the death or the responsibility for the murder of someone is implied. (Luke 11:50, 51; Acts 5:28; Rev. 6:10) For example, in front of Jews clamoring for Jesus’ execution, Pilate went through the gesture of washing his hands, and then declared: “I am innocent of the blood of this man.” The Jews replied: “His blood come upon us and upon our children.” (Matt. 27:24, 25; compare Revelation 7:14.) But some versions have taken the liberty of rendering these verses: “I am not responsible for the death of this man,” and, “Let the punishment for his death fall on us and on our children.” (TEV) What, though, is the effect when “death” is substituted for “blood” in verses where Jesus’ sacrifice is involved? Could something possibly be missed that God wanted to convey to us?

18. Why is Christ’s death important? (1 Cor. 11:26; Heb. 2:14)

¹⁸ There is no denying the emphasis that the Bible places on the death of Jesus. Paul wrote: “God recommends his own love to us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” Also: “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.” (Rom. 5:8; 1 Cor. 15:3) His dying, willingly giving his perfect human life, paid back or balanced what Adam had lost for us and which led to our sinful state.

19, 20. What features, beyond just the death of Jesus, are included in references to Christ’s blood? (Heb. 4:14-16)

¹⁹ However, the Bible’s references to the “blood of the Christ” should convey to us important things that might not be appreciated in speaking of just his death. (Eph. 2:13) Christ did not, and could not, simply die and remain dead.b In fulfillment of the Atonement Day pattern that Jehovah originated, Jesus then had to enter heaven, into the very presence of God. There Christ could present the value or merit of his lifeblood, just as on Atonement Day the high priest took the sacrificial blood into the Most Holy. Paul clearly sets out this parallel: “Christ entered, not into a holy place made with hands, which is a copy of the reality, but into heaven itself, now to appear before the person of God for us.”​—Heb. 9:24, 11, 12; 13:11.

²⁰ Furthermore, in heaven Jesus Christ is alive and able to plead for all who exercise faith in his ransom and assist them toward salvation. Accordingly, Paul wrote: “For if, when we were enemies, we became reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, now that we have become reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.”​—Rom. 5:10.

21, 22. How are our lives involved in the expression “blood of the Christ”?

²¹ With good reason, then, the work “Religion in History and in the Present” states that in most instances “one cannot substitute Blood of Christ with death. The Blood of Christ means more than this. It stresses the close links between the death of Jesus and both his life and his triumph in his resurrection and exaltation.” The book adds that the expression “Blood of Christ”

“adopts the Old Testament Jewish concept of the atoning power of blood, which is the basis for the way sacrifices are viewed and for the idea that the death of the righteous one has atoning power. . . . On one hand this term reminds us of the fact that we have been bought with a high price, of the one who paid the ransom and of what it consisted. On the other hand, we are freed from sin and death forever by faith in the covenant concluded over his blood. The Blood of Christ encompasses the effect of his death and resurrection.”c

²² How meaningful, then, how full of blessed implications for us, are many of the Bible passages mentioning Jesus’ blood! By means of it our sins can be forgiven. (Rev. 1:5; Heb. 10:29) It is possible to be delivered from fruitless conduct. (1 Pet. 1:18, 19) We can be among a congregation of people whom God approves of and guides. (Acts 20:28) And there is the hope of perfection and everlasting life under the rule of a kingdom incorporating persons bought with that blood.​—Rev. 5:9, 10; 12:10, 11; Col. 1:20.

23. What should be our view of blood?

²³ All who have an appreciation of the value of their own life thus need to appreciate what God says about blood. He views it as sacred. He determined its exclusive usefulness and acceptability for sacrifice on the altar. And he clearly showed in his Word that all our hopes for a lasting future rest on the sacrificial blood of his Son. But how can we personally manifest our appreciation for and recognition of the sacredness of blood? These are important matters to be taken up in the following article.

[Footnotes]

Firmly Resolved About Life And Blood

1, 2. Questions about blood occasionally come to the fore in what way?

‘JUDGE Authorizes Transfusions of Blood,’ declared a recent newspaper headline in Virginia, U.S.A. The article began:

“A federal judge Thursday morning authorized the Portsmouth Naval Hospital to administer blood transfusions to a critically ill woman who had refused them for four days, allegedly at the risk of her life, . . .”

² Reports of this sort occasionally appear and focus much attention on the value of both life and blood. Before we find out what resulted in the above case, we might think about some fundamental questions: What profound beliefs lead persons such as this one to refuse blood transfusions? Does God’s Word really require this of all Christians? If so, how firm would our religious convictions be if a doctor said that we needed a transfusion? Also, might there be aspects aside from medical use of blood in which our view of life and blood is important and could even affect our future?

LIFE FROM BLOOD

3. Based on Revelation 7:14, what reason do we have to regard blood highly?

³ The book of Revelation illustrates an appreciation for blood that is held today by hundreds of thousands of persons. After seeing in vision the 144,000 prospective heirs of the Messianic kingdom, the apostle John saw “a great crowd, . . . out of all nations,” who have the prospect of living forever on a restored earthly paradise. But how can humans live forever, and that free of sin and imperfection? Appreciatively the “great crowd” cry: “Salvation we owe to our God, . . . and to the Lamb,” Jesus Christ. They recognize that this salvation is possible only because they “have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb,” Jesus.​—Rev. 7:9, 10, 14.

4, 5. (a) Why does the proper attitude about life and blood involve more than belief? (b) How does the Bible bear this out?

⁴ As noted in the previous article, from the very first book in the Bible, God pointed toward the sacrificial shedding of Jesus’ blood so humans could gain everlasting life. (Gen. 3:15; 22:2-10; Isa. 53:10-12) While that sacrifice was yet in the future, Jehovah made it clear that his worshipers should consider life and blood to be sacred. But he also required that their actions harmonize with that divine view. Was not conduct implied in what God told Noah and his family when first permitting them to eat animal flesh? God said: “Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to you. Only flesh with its soul​—its blood—​you must not eat.” (Gen. 9:3, 4) So, if they killed an animal for food, they would have to take deliberate steps to drain the blood from the animal so that blood would not be eaten.

⁵ This was not a mere dietary regulation nor a pointless religious ritual. Such conduct involved a highly important moral principle: Blood represented life that was from God. And it is noteworthy that he went on to say that, though an animal could be killed for food, man could not be. Hence, if animal blood representing life was to be viewed as sacred and not to be taken in to sustain life, obviously human life and blood were to be viewed and treated as even more sacred.​—Compare Matthew 6:26.

6, 7. (a) Genesis 9:3, 4 applies to whom? (b) How did the Law covenant back up the requirement in Genesis 9?

⁶ Since Noah was the forefather of all humans, conduct consistent with the sanctity of life and blood was expected of all humans. Many Bible scholars have realized this connection. For example:

“Blood was recognized to be the seat of life, and therefore something sacred. . . . The prohibition of blood became one of the dietary laws of the Mosaic code, but because of its inclusion within the provisions of this covenant with Noah the later Jews considered it to be binding on all mankind.”​—A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, p. 187.

⁷ As this commentary noted, when God later provided a law code for Israel, he also forbade them to consume blood. He commanded: “Simply be firmly resolved not to eat the blood, because the blood is the soul and you must not eat the soul with the flesh. . . . You should pour it out upon the ground.” (Deut. 12:23, 24; Lev. 17:10, 13) God did not then enforce on the rest of mankind his law against taking in blood any more than he did his law against idolatry. (Acts 17:30, 31; 14:16) So a Gentile might buy and choose to eat meat with blood in it. (Deut. 14:21) But a worshiper of the Creator could not do so. In fact, if an Israelite, evidently unaware at the time that the blood had not been drained, did eat flesh containing blood, he had to take steps to cleanse himself of his unintentional error.​—Lev. 17:15, 16.

8. Is it animal blood that is prohibited, or is it human? (2 Sam. 23:14-17)

⁸ If animal blood, representing life, was not to be taken in for sustenance, that would be even more so of human blood. We can easily see this from what occurred when Jesus once spoke figuratively about eating his flesh and drinking his blood. Some Jewish disciples who did not discern that he was using only symbols were shocked and left him. (John 6:60-66) Yes, the thought of taking in blood, whether animal or human, was abhorrent to those concerned with God’s view.

A CHRISTIAN REQUIREMENT

9. How could it be shown that this applies to Christians also?

⁹ Perhaps, though, you have heard the claim that the Bible’s prohibition on blood does not apply to Christians. What are the facts? This matter was ruled on in 49 C.E., during a conference of the apostles and other Christian elders at Jerusalem. With the assured guidance of God’s holy spirit that council concluded that Christians did not have to keep the Mosaic law. But what of things that were shown to be wrong even before the Law code was given to Israel? The council wrote to the Christian congregations:

“The holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled [so as to leave the blood in them] and from fornication.”​—Acts 15:19, 20, 28, 29.

10-12. What evidence shows that Acts 15:28, 29 was not just for temporary observance?

¹⁰ In “Origin and Beginnings of Christianity,”a Professor Eduard Meyer commented that the meaning of “blood” in Acts 15:29 was “the partaking of blood that was forbidden through the law (Gen. 9:4) imposed on Noah and so also on mankind as a whole.” And, even though many clergymen say that the requirement in Acts 15:28, 29 was just a temporary step to avoid offending Jews, Professor Meyer reports that more than a century and a quarter later the ‘prohibition on partaking of blood was being observed generally’ by Christians. As a proof he cites what happened in 177 C.E., when religious enemies accused Christians in Europe of eating infants. One young woman responded: “How can we eat infants​—we, to whom it is not lawful to eat the blood of beasts?”

¹¹ Numerous writings from the second and third centuries prove that Christians in that period realized that the prohibition was not a thing of the past; it applied to them. In fact, The Works of the Rev. Joseph Bingham makes this point:

“It was the custom of the Catholic Church, almost till the time of St. Au[gustine], to abstain from eating of blood, in compliance with the rule given by the Apostles to the Gentile converts: therefore by the most ancient laws of the Church all clergymen were obliged to abstain from it under pain of degradation [removal from office].”

Why, then, are not Christendom’s churches today holding to this “rule”? Comments by Martin Luther point to the answer. Though personally inclined to reject all councils, Luther said about Acts 15:

“Now if we want to have a church that conforms to this council (as is right, since it is the first and foremost council, and was held by the apostles themselves), we must teach and insist that henceforth no prince, lord, burgher, or peasant eat geese, doe, stag, or pork cooked in blood, . . . [and] must abstain especially from red sausage and blood sausage, . . . Well, then, begin, anyone who wants to or can, to bring Christendom into conformity with this council; I shall then be glad to follow.”

He felt that, because obeying the decision in Acts 15:28, 29 was difficult and ignoring it was so common, it would be impossible to require all churchgoers to follow it. So he himself would not either.

¹² Martin Luther and many in his day may have been unwilling to obey God’s law, and most people in Christendom today may be unwilling to do so. But not Jehovah’s Christian witnesses!

BLOOD IN THE MEDICAL FIELD

13, 14. (a) How could you help someone to see that the Bible’s prohibition covers human blood transfusions? (b) Why would rejecting a transfusion be in harmony with examples recorded in the Bible?

¹³ As we saw at the outset, the field of medicine is one area in which obedience to God’s law on blood sometimes becomes an issue. The millions of blood transfusions given annually are considered by many to be a necessary and lifesaving part of modern medicine. However, rather than guiding their thinking and conduct by the recently prevailing view of men in medicine, true Christians need to keep first in mind what God commands: ‘Abstain from blood.’

¹⁴ True, when the Bible was written, blood was not being transfused. However, what God’s Word says certainly covers the practice of transfusing blood. A doctor who forbids a certain antibiotic to a patient allergic to it would thus not only rule out his taking it orally but also forbid his taking it by injection. Similarly, God’s command to ‘abstain from blood’ rules out ingesting it by the mouth as well as through injections into the veins. Furthermore, the Bible makes it clear that the divine law was not to be ignored even during an emergency that could threaten life. (1 Sam. 14:31-35) Many of God’s approved servants have been willing to face dangers and even death rather than violate Scriptural principles and their integrity to Jehovah. (Dan. 3:8-18; Heb. 11:35-38) They have had full confidence in God’s power to restore life, and believe the words of Jesus Christ: “I am the resurrection and the life. He that exercises faith in me, even though he dies, will come to life.”​—John 11:25; 5:28, 29.

15. Why is one’s declining transfusions not medically unreasonable?

¹⁵ It might surprise many persons to learn that refusing blood and requesting alternative therapies may have medical advantages. This is so because there is increasing evidence of many and varied risks associated with transfusions.b Note, for example, a doctor’s reply to a letter from a woman who, after open-heart surgery, developed hepatitis, a disease from which thousands die annually. Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, a newspaper medical columnist, said that he was not surprised, and added:

“In some major medical centers, [a] rather significant number of open-heart operations using blood substitutes have been performed with good results on Jehovah’s Witness patients who reject human blood transfusions. . . . Perhaps all of us who need surgery that appears to require blood transfusions should ask our surgeons if they are familiar with these scientific reports. Perhaps this can give all of us the same lower incidence of post-transfusion hepatitis and other advantages now enjoyed exclusively by the Witnesses.”​—The Idaho Statesman, Feb. 15, 1978, p. 8C.

16. What does experience show as to the performing of surgery without using blood?

¹⁶ Open-heart surgery is just one of many operations that courageous doctors have found to be possible without blood. For example, recall the case brought up at the outset, the 52-year-old Witness needing abdominal surgery because of a bleeding ulcer. When her blood count fell to the critical low of 4, a federal judge authorized a transfusion. But her husband transferred her to another hospital whose policy was to respect the patient’s wishes. What was the outcome? Newspaper headlines later announced: “Faith Triumphs for Couple Who Rejected Blood Transfusion.” She recovered!

17. What moral aspects of blood transfusions should be considered?

¹⁷ Many thoughtful doctors are also coming to appreciate the moral aspects of the matter, concluding that patients have the right to decide whether to accept a certain treatment. Dr. D. Goldstein wrote: “No matter how certain he is that the therapy he recommends is the only one that will preserve life, no physician has the moral right to over-ride a patient’s religious scruple.” Some doctors who had treated Witness children having cancer explained:

“Our decision to abide by their requests to limit our therapy by withholding the use of transfusions was based on two factors. First, each of these children had a potentially fatal disease, and we could not predict a successful outcome without significant doubt. Second, we acknowledged that at the time of life-threatening illness, the parents’ need for an unshaken faith is magnified.”​—Pediatrics, Dec. 1977, p. 919.

18. How does faith come into the picture in connection with transfusions?

¹⁸ The faith that true Christians have, and in harmony with which they are firmly resolved to live, involves faith in the saving power of Christ’s blood. (Rom. 3:25; Heb. 13:12; 1 John 5:5, 6) No other blood will ever be available from which they can gain everlasting life. (Heb. 10:29-31) So their everlasting destiny is tied up in their faithfulness to Jehovah. This includes their being obedient to what he says about blood.

STRIVE TO BE FREE OF BLOODGUILT

19. Christians should have what attitude toward bloodguilt? (Ps. 26:9; 55:23)

¹⁹ It is altogether right for Christians to strive earnestly to avoid any overstepping of God’s law on blood, whether medically or otherwise. Violation of that law would make one guilty before God. King David manifested the attitude that we need to cherish. He prayed: “Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God the God of my salvation.”​—Ps. 51:14.

20. What are some ways in which bloodguilt could be incurred?

²⁰ Many persons think of bloodguilt solely in terms of deliberate murder. God certainly is on record as hating such bloodshed. (Ps. 5:6; Prov. 6:16, 17) But the Scriptures show that because life is sacred a measure of bloodguilt could result even from causing someone’s death unintentionally. (Deut. 22:8; Num. 35:15-33; Ex. 21:29) Do we personally evidence high regard for life and blood in our daily affairs? Such regard should, for example, move us to be moderate and careful when driving vehicles, to obey safety regulations and to keep our vehicle in a safe driving condition. Similarly, reasonable care ought to be exercised to eliminate hazards in the home or in one’s business so as to minimize the likelihood of a fatal accident occurring either to oneself or to others. Is that your view?

21. How might one today indirectly become bloodguilty, this calling for what self-examination?

²¹ Another feature of avoiding bloodguilt relates to organizations or institutions that are bloodguilty in God’s eyes. For instance, God specifically charges Babylon the Great, the world empire of false religion, with guilt for shedding the blood of true worshipers. (Rev. 17:6; 18:24; 19:2) She has also endorsed political and military institutions that have shed seas of blood over the centuries. A sincere desire to be free of bloodguilt requires our separating ourselves from and our being careful not to support present-day organizations that God thus judges adversely. Do we reflect this in all aspects of our life?

22, 23. (a) What other aspect of bloodguilt should we be concerned about? (Acts 18:6) (b) What, then, should our resolve be regarding life and blood?

²² We can likewise display our determination to be free of bloodguilt by actively, enthusiastically preaching the Kingdom message. (Mark 13:10) Consider in this connection God’s counsel to the prophet Ezekiel before Jerusalem’s fall in 607 B.C.E. Ezekiel was told by God that if he, as a watchman, failed to sound the warning message, he would be held accountable for the blood of the Israelites who perished. (Ezek. 3:17-21; 33:2-16) Yet, what satisfaction we can find in discharging our Christian responsibility to spread the truth about the coming end of this wicked system and about the paradise to follow! Doing that allows one to feel as did the apostle Paul, who told Christian elders: “I am clean from the blood of all men, for I have not held back from telling you all the counsel of God.” (Acts 20:26, 27) What a privilege! While personally avoiding bloodguilt, we can aid others to gain life everlasting by their exercising faith in Christ’s blood.

²³ Hence, though most persons may be unaware of what God says and may look on blood as just something to sustain human life temporarily, not so with true Christians. Based on God’s Word we appreciate Jehovah’s view on life and blood. Let us be resolved to uphold that view and to live in accord with it.

[Footnotes]